Regents Widen Presidential Search at Texas A&M Without Faculty Input

Up front the author notes that he has never heard anyone say they would send their
kids to WGU. He is correct. The average age of WGU students is 36 – hardly kids.
It has become a flexible alternative for working adults, and it is a very reasonably priced, regionally accredited online non-profit institution that awards its students degrees based on their competencies. WGU does not have a physical campus. Simply put, students fresh out of high school need to attend a physical campus.

In the third graph he imagines a world in which traditionalcolleges “would be reserved for the wealthy and gifted, and everyone else would navigate what is now a confusing and sometimes difficult road to a degree fromvarious providers.”  I have to respectfully disagree. I think traditional colleges include community colleges and four-year state colleges – both great alternatives and not confusing for anyone, wealthy or not wealthy, middle-class, and below middle class.  

In California, however, as the author correctly points out, things are pretty messed up because of state budget cuts and numerous other reasons that are too complex to get into here. Students – both transfer and new applicants out of high school – are getting turned away. Where will they go? The same is true in other states that have taken the ax of budget cuts, but California has become the poster state for being unable to meet the needs of
its incoming college freshmen.

The author then says that the transfer students turned away “will stay at their current institutions and earn more credits or an associate degree (further clogging the system for incoming students). Some will drop out, some of them short of credential, perhaps never to return.”  Well, earning more credits or an associate degree seems like the right thing to do in this situation, and the author did state that in California, as in other states, there are “extensive articulation agreements in place.”  I would like to see more solid proof of how students not transferring before earning their associate degree will ultimately clog the system.  As far as the dropouts, etc., regardless of budget cuts, they are a mainstay of higher education that I doubt will change much in the near future.

I think it is interesting to also note that perhaps due to enrollment caps (and other reasons), students from California who can afford it are increasingly attending schools in relatively nearby states, such as Arizona State University and the University of Oregon. As noted in a Chronicle article published on October 30, 2011: “Last year, Arizona State enrolled more
freshmen from California than six of California State University’s campuses, the traditional workhorses of the state university system. So did the University of Oregon, where admissions officials joke that their campus could be called the ‘University of California at Eugene.’ ” In addition, according to a Chronicle blog published in January 2012, “transfers from California community colleges to the University of Phoenix have increased by over 300 percent in the last ten years.” (However, the University of Phoenix figure was not referenced to any
kind of study, so I’m not sure about its validity.)

Nonetheless, for those students who can’t afford to move out of state, California does looks like a disaster. As also noted in the aforementioned blog post, California is experiencing a “public-policy catastrophe,” primarily affecting the under privileged, not those who can
afford to go out of state or to a private institution.  So, what’s the solution?

The author seems to suggest that StraighterLine can help ease the burden on community colleges. Well, StraighterLine, just like WGU, might be okay for adult learners, but both aren’t okay for those students fresh out of high school that need to be physically enrolled at a community college or other institution. The author also points to percentage estimates from a respected consultant on the “narrowing funnel of affluent well-prepared students.” The published funnel, however, does not specifically reveal where its percentages come from.

I do believe, perhaps to a fault, that enterprising high school graduates with good grades and average SAT scores will have no problem getting accepted into a state college or university. However, for those with not-so-good grades and lower than average to poor SAT scores, the great divide between the haves and have-nots that the author alludes to certainly does
exist.  

Academically sound students who are accepted into state institutions but can’t afford the tuition rely on Pell Grants that will hopefully remain intact for years to come.  They won’t be able to afford to live on campus too, but if they work hard enough and are not under too much stress from possible negative impacts related to their lifestyles and other unfortunate
circumstances, they can earn a degree and even figure out how to work and live
on or off campus on their own – a tough road for many who actually do it successfully,
but worth it in the end.

So the key message that I believe needs to be emphasized more steadfastly than ever, is that we, as parents, employers, and genuinely concerned citizens, need to be more supportive of young students in K through community college and show them how getting into and paying for college is not in the least bit an easy task. It requires that we all take a more active interest in helping students become information literate, develop both modern and traditional communication skills and computer literacy skills, and learn from the humanities as well as through STEM. It requires a lot of hard work, determination and sacrifice on the part of all of us.   

It sounds like an overly simple solution, but I feel that above all the politics of budgets and taxes and academic pontifications, it’s a message that seems to be getting lost and needs to be reinforced.

George Lorenzo
Writer, Editor and Publisher
The SOURCE on Community College Issues, Trends & Strategies
http://www.edpath.com/thesource.html

So much of the debate here seems to be connected with the value of the end results. A relevant question to ask might be: “Who determines the value?”
Ultimately the institutions of choice have to provide their would-be graduates with an end result that is satisfactory to both themselves and any people they seek to impress. If alternative for-profit institutions can give their graduates what they want/need and perhaps to enter the fields of their choice at a decent income level without straining the apparently no longer bottomless well of tax-payer based funding, then so be it.
If old school credibility is being successfully challenged in the education market place by new school viability, then perhaps it’s time to review just exactly what it is that’s being deemed as valuable. Higher education is a choice and privilege for both learner and educator. If an educational institution (public or private) doesn’t make the necessary choices to provide what is valuable to it’s prospective learners then perhaps it shouldn’t have the privilege to continue. An institution’s name becomes only as good as it’s last graduating class.
In the private sector this is usually self evident; when a private college fails to provide it’s graduates with the knowledge and skills necessary to impress and compete, it develops a bad reputation, businesses stop hiring from their ranks, local, state and federal lending institutions withdraw funding eligibility, accreditation is suspended and the doors shut. During this process their online and community credibility collapses and students find other colleges to attend.
Can the same be said of public institutions whose inception and continued existence/support is supposedly based on their ability to provide good quality post-secondary and higher education to the public at a reasonable cost? I would like to think so, unfortunately (in my own experience) I know this not to be the case.
I have taught in both public and private sectors for many years; I have experienced the frustrations of dealing with the all too common didactically opposed management versus union scenarios,,, and then the longing for a budget that would allow me to buy support tech (even from last year’s catalogues) and have an IT department at my beckon call to service it for me,,,  the guaranteed salaries plus PD and a benefits package (that even startled my physician) that cover a hardly ever worked 40 hour work week,,, and then the crushing pressure of having to take over a class just before finals and balance that with my existing work-load without compensation because a teacher got sick, we don’t have a list of auxiliaries on file and even if we did our budget is maxed out because property taxes sky-rocketed last year and we just got our first assessment… Public versus private (for profit)…
All of this ends up being reflected in the real costs of running a private business and the “exorbitant”  tuition that gets charged. I can understand that at first glance $8000 in tuition per year versus $15000 seems like an obvious and viable means of comparison, especially when the college charging the latter doesn’t have all of the extra bells, whistles and “freebies” as the former… I also have some understanding of where the money to pay for those extras comes from, how much of it comes in and where much of it goes (directly and indirectly).
I have recently chosen to spend my last few years (hopefully) in the sector that has to prove itself of value to every prospective, enrolled and graduating student, as well as financial agencies, accreditation agencies and employers on a daily basis. (Notice how I put the students first?)
Being a “for-profit” institution doesn’t guarantee that you make a profit; it does however mean you have to at least “break-even” to keep your doors open all the while competing with publicly funded counter-parts who also receive tax breaks and preferential purchasing agreements for supplies and  non union service contracts,,, and whose instructors and professors maintain their positions through a status recognition system that makes sense only themselves and to those who have come before them or want to come after.
Of course I can’t say that all (or any) of this holds true for every public or private post secondary education institution out there, and if this little diatribe seems to be completely ridiculous and uncalled for to you, you have my sincere apologies, sympathy and/or envy… *smile*
All the best;
G.J.Abbott

But the big question/problem is “Will anyone accept credentials from or education from any of these alternatives?”  Unless employers accept alternatives, they’re frankly not worth much.  And no employer I have ever had, in or out of academe, would accept a credential from a for-profit institution – and that’s just one kind of alternative.  For better or for worse, those were their rules.  It will probably depend on the employer and on the type of job, but still, I think the market for many of these alternatives may be uncertain at best.  Okay, the market for a BA is also pretty lousy these days, but still – I don’t have children, but if I did, I would strongly advise against attending a for-profit.