Key education issues dividing public, college presidents, study finds — from the WSJ by Kevin Helliker

The general public and university presidents disagree about the purpose of college, who ought to pay for it and whether today’s students are getting their money’s worth.

But university presidents and the average American agree that the cost of higher education now exceeds the reach of most people.

Those are broad findings from a pair of surveys released late Sunday from the nonprofit Pew Research Center. The surveys took place this March and April, one posing college-related questions to 2,142 American adults, the other to 1,055 presidents of colleges large, small, public, private and for-profit. The two surveys contained some identical questions and some peculiar to each group.

Excerpt of report:

As is the case with all Center reports, our research is not designed to promote any cause, ideology or policy proposal. Our only goal is to inform the public on important topics that shape their lives and their society.

Higher education is one such topic. The debate about its value and mission has been triggered not just by rising costs, but also by hard economic times; by changing demands on the nation’s workforce; by rising global competition; by growing pressures to reduce education funding; and by the ambitious goal set by President Obama for the United States to lead the world by 2020 in the share of young adults who have a college degree.

 

The New 3 E's of Education: Enabled; Empowered; Engaged -- May 2011 from Project Tomorrow

 

Excerpt from introduction (emphasis DSC):

Three factors are driving this new interest and enthusiasm for digital learning by educators. First, teachers and administrators are increasingly become technology-enabled themselves, using emerging technologies such as mobile devices, online classes and digital content to improve their own productivity. This development of a personal value proposition with the technology is propelling educators to think creatively about how to leverage these same tools in the classroom. Second, students and increasingly parents are demanding a different kind of learning experience and that is forcing even the most reluctant teachers and administrators to re-evaluate their perspectives about the value of technology within learning. As noted in prior Speak Up national reports, students have a very clear vision for 21st century learning. Their preference is for learning environments that are socially-based, un-tethered and digitally rich. Parents are also supportive of this new learning paradigm and as we noted in our first Speak Up 2010 report (released in April 2011) the emergence of a new trend of parental digital choice is an indication of this unprecedented support level. And schools and districts are waking up to this new trend. Concerns about parents’ capability to, for example, enroll their children in non-district provided online classes are compelling many districts to start virtual schools themselves. The third factor, the economy, and its resulting financial pressures on school and district budgets, has created a sense of urgency to more fully investigate how technologies can help educators meet their instructional goals with less expense.

All three factors converging at the same time has opened up a new window of possibilities for achieving the promise of technology to transform education. Evidence of this shift in perspective and vision by educators is noted in some comparative Speak Up findings over the past few years.

This report is the second in a two-part series to document the key national findings from Speak Up 2010.

In this companion report, “The New 3E’s of Education: Enabled, Engaged, Empowered – How Today’s Educators are Advancing a New Vision for Teaching and Learning,” we explore how teachers, principals, district administrators, librarians and technology coordinators are addressing the student vision for learning around three key trends. These trends have generated significant interest in the past year at conferences, in policy discussions and within our schools and districts: mobile learning, online and blended learning and digital content.

While each of these trends includes the essential components of the student vision of socially-based, un-tethered and digitally-rich learning, they also provide a unique backdrop for investigating the role of educators to engage, enable and empower students through the use of these emerging technologies.
• Role of Librarians and Technology Coordinators: To enable student use of the emerging technologies through their planning, support and recommendation responsibilities.
• Role of Classroom Teachers: To engage students in rich, compelling learning experiences through the effective use of these technologies in the classroom.
• Role of School and District Administrators: To empower both teachers and students to creatively envision the future of digital learning, and to provide opportunities for exploring the elements of a new shared vision for learning.

 


From DSC:
I submitted the following comment to the solid article “Fixing accreditation, from the inside” (from today’s InsideHigherEd.com posting by Doug Lederman)


Thank you for the article/posting here.

Re: the committee:

  • Where are the students?
  • Where is the representation from those outside academia?
  • That is, can more parties who pay the bills for education be represented?

Re: higher ed as an industry:
I am a liberal arts grad and I work at a liberal arts college; as such, I believe in the value of liberal arts. However, I’ve been reflecting upon why the teaching and learning environment has been changing so much and why higher education has become more of a business.

Actually, I think it’s always been somewhat of a business, but even more so these days. The key reason for me involves the *cost* of obtaining an education.

It’s one thing to charge $3000/yr for tuition and it’s another to charge $25,000+/yr for tuition. If it means essentially having to pay the price of a house to obtain an education for your children, doesn’t the set of expectations change for students? For the parents of those students? For businesses who are helping pay the tuition of their employees?

If the accreditation bodies don’t respond to the growing suspicion towards them — and towards higher education as a whole — it will be like water going around a rock in a stream. People will flow right by them — whether the government assumes control or not.


Staying Relevant

From DSC:
Is there any doubt anymore that we are in a game-changing environment? This is but one of the storm fronts creating the perfect storm within higher education. The graphic I created below lays out some of the other storm fronts
(and I’m sure I missed some of the other pieces, but these are some of the key drivers of change).

NOTE:
I don’t mean to be a chicken little here or a doomsdayer — rather what I’ve been saying is not speculation. It is reality. Those who choose not to deal with things as they really are — and will be — will be the ones most likely to be broadsided in the months/years to come.


 

Universities slash budgets nationwide — from ABC News by Teresa Lostroh

Colleges across the country are facing layoffs, program cuts, tuition hikes and possible campus closings as they brace for major reductions in state funding — again.

The leaders of Penn State University are wondering if they’ll have to close some of their branch campuses next year, and more than 400 faculty positions may be on the chopping block.

In California, class sizes are swelling while class offerings are shrinking. One community college district in San Diego has cut 90 percent of its summer courses. And in Washington, universities are increasing the enrollment of out-of-state students, who pay about three times as much as in-state students, while considering trimming resident enrollment.

Colleges and universities, which can levy revenue through tuition hikes, are a primary target for cuts when states are in a budget bind.

“This year is going to be the hardest year on record,” said Dan Hurley, director of state relations and policy analysis for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, which has 420 member institutions. “Any new revenue at the state level is being gobbled up by Medicaid and K-12 education,” he said, and much of the federal stimulus money expires this year, setting up the perfect storm for higher education.

 

(9/10/10) Graphic from DSC:

Also see:

 

 

The “Pedagogy of Poverty” in the Learning Age — from NCTAF

Excerpt:

Test results. Student achievement. These are mainstays of the conversation about what education “reform” is trying to achieve. But are they useful proxies for teaching and learning?

Testing cannot be the sole aim of education because test scores don’t tell the whole story of what is going on in classrooms around the nation. Higher test scores do not equate to deeper learning, which goes beyond “competence” to synthesis and analysis across disciplines. And deeper learning is not a luxury in the learning age; it’s a necessity and a right.

 

From DSC:
We are all in this together – let’s find ways to help each other and to learn from each other.

Higher education’s toughest test — from by Jon Bischke and Semil Shah

In the debate sparked by Peter Thiel’s “20 Under 20 Fellowship” (which pays bright students to drop out of college), one fact stands out: the cost of U.S. post-secondary education is spiraling upward, out of control. Thiel calls this a “bubble,” similar to the sub-prime mortgage crisis, where hopeful property owners over-leveraged themselves to lay claim to a coveted piece of the American dream: home ownership.

Today, however, the credentialing provided by universities is becoming decoupled from the knowledge and skills acquired by students. The cost of obtaining learning materials is falling, with OpenCourseWare resources from MIT and iTunes U leading the charge. Classes can be taken online on sites like Udemy and eduFire, either for free or a fraction of the cost to learn similar material at a university, and sites like Veri, which recently launched at TechStars NYC Demo Day, aims to organize and spread one’s accumulated knowledge.

The fresh cadavers from the shakeouts in the music and publishing industries should provide motivation to presidents, chancellors, and provosts to look seriously at this problem, as many of the same dynamics that disrupted those industries are now at play in higher education. As students around the world start preparing for their year-end exams, it will be interesting to see how seriously leaders of universities prepare for one of the toughest tests that they’ll ever face.

 

From DSC:
I have been trying to get these trends/warnings/messages across to others for years — more people are starting to raise the same red flags on some of these same topics as well.

There is great danger in the status quo these days. Don’t get me wrong — I’m a firm believer in education, especially liberal arts education. But the traditional model is simply not sustainable it continually shuts more people out of the system and/or puts such a burden on students’ backs as to significantly influence — if not downright limit — their future options and experiences.

But as the saying goes, “Change is optional — survival is not mandatory.”


Addendum:

 

 

This disturbing trend in the United States will have far-reaching implications.

 

Addendum #1 – 4/18/11:


and

 

Addendum #2 – 4/18/11:
Finally, here are some potentially-effective ideas on how to fix Congress:

Congressional Reform Act of 2011 (If passed, this will eliminate many current problems).

1. Term Limits.

12 years only, one of the possible options below..

A. Two Six-year Senate terms
B. Six Two-year House terms
C. One Six-year Senate term and three Two-Year House terms

2.  No Tenure / No Pension.
A Congressman collects a salary while in office and receives no pay when they are out of office.

3.  Congress (past, present & future) participates in Social Security.
All funds in the Congressional retirement fund move to the Social Security system immediately.  All future funds flow into the Social Security system, and Congress participates with the American people.

4. Congress can purchase their own retirement plan, just as all Americans do.

5. Congress will no longer vote themselves a pay raise.  Congressional pay will rise by the lower of CPI or 3%.

6. Congress loses their current health care system and participates in the same health care system as the American people.

7. Congress must equally abide by all laws they impose on the American people.

8. All contracts with past and present Congressmen are void effective 1/1/11.
The American people did not make this contract with Congressmen.  Congressmen made all these contracts for themselves.

Serving in Congress is an honor, not a career.  The Founding Fathers envisioned citizen legislators, so ours should serve their term(s), then go home and back to work.

 

Berners-Lee calls for higher purpose of Web — from cnet.com by Martin LaMonica

CAMBRIDGE, Mass.–Tim Berners-Lee, who invented the underpinnings of the World Wide Web, isn’t just concerned about getting browsers on more mobile devices. Architects of the Web need to consider how it will affect all humanity as it evolves.

But even as engineers hammer out the next version of HTML, they have a duty to fulfill a weighty social purpose of the Web, he said. As the way that people connect in society, the Web supports justice, government transparency, and human rights to freedom, he said.

The anti-Blockbuster way: Disrupt your business rituals before someone else does — by Martin Lindstrom

 

 

Excerpt:

Over the years, I’ve worked with many companies who stubbornly believe their product couldn’t be beat. Some were right. Most were wrong. Very often, some of the world’s most iconic brands wake up to an extraordinary industry shift that takes them by surprise–but which, looking back, could have been predicted. The question is: wouldn’t it be better to intuit what the future may resemble before market forces and innovations “suddenly” wreak havoc with your company a few years down the line?

My advice? Throw a live-wire idea–or two, or three, or four–onto your boardroom table now. Get speculative. Get futuristic. Put on your Spock ears. Grab your TED microphone. There’s no other way to uncover how poised you are for a radical change in your industry’s future. If you’re a technology company, spend some time surfing the web in search of intriguing and even jarring slogans that could smash your entire category–such as Skype’s “The Whole World Can Talk for Free,” or Compaq’s “Has it Changed Your Life Yet?” Now try one or another of these slogans on for size. Do they transform the near and far edges of your business? Next question: Who got there first–you or someone else?

Which is why I recommend that you pre-order your own wake-up call today.

 

From DSC :
This goes for higher ed as well…

 

Tagged with:  

From DSC:
The first article/item I want to comment on is:

A Potential Market for Courseware Developers — from Brandon-Hall.com by Richard Nantel

First of all, thanks Richard for tackling this subject and for putting a posting out there regarding it. For years, I’ve wondered what the best way(s) is(are) to pursue the creation of professionally-done, interactive, personalized/customized, multimedia-based, engaging content. It is expensive to create well-done materials and/or the learning engines behind these materials. Also, as at the faith-based college where I work, some colleges would want a very specific kind of content or take a different slant on presenting the content.  So the content would have to be modified — which would have an associated cost to it.

Some options that I’ve thought of:

  • Outsource the content creation to a team of specialists — at educationally-focused publishing companies out there
  • Outsource the content creation to a team of specialists — at other solution providers focused on education
  • Develop the content in-house with a team of specialists
  • Don’t create content at all, but rather steer people to the streams of content that are already flowing out there. Some content may be changing so fast that it may not be worth the expense to create it.
  • Have students create the content — that’s what school becomes. Learning enough to create/teach the content to others. (This would require a great deal of cross-disciplinary collaboration and cooperation amongst faculty members.)

As a relevant aside, I have held that if an organization could raise the capital and the teams to develop this type of engaging, professionally-done content — and scale the solution — they could become the Forthcoming Walmart of Education. The attractive piece of this for families/students out there would be that this type of education will come at a 50%+ discount.


The second article/item that caused some additional reflection here was the article at The Chronicle of Higher Education by Marc Parry entitled, Think You’ll Make Big Bucks in Online Ed? Not So Fast, Experts Say

What if the United States could reallocate even the cost of 1-2 high-end planes in the United States Air Force? Our nation could create stunning, engaging content that could reach millions of people on any given subject — as online learning has the potential to be highly scalable (though I realize that much of this depends upon how much involvement an organization wants to integrate into the delivery/teaching of this content in terms of their instructors’/professors’ time).

Anyway, Marc highlights some important points — that creating content, marketing that content, etc. can be expensive.

But I have it that if you don’t get into this online learning game, you won’t be relevant in the years to come. People want convenience and students’ expectations will continue to rise — wanting to learn on their own pace, per their own schedule, from any place and on any device; finally, they will want to have more opportunities to participate/collaborate/control their own learning experiences. (And this doesn’t even touch upon whether it will become even more difficult to get through “the gate”  — that is, getting the student’s attention in order to make it into their short-term memory, in hopes of then moving the lesson/information into long-term memory.)


EdWeek’s 2011 Technology Counts — from The Future of Education by Jesse Moyer

 

Also see the report at:

K-12 seeks a custom fit -- Ed Week's Technology Count 2011

Disrupt – Think the Unthinkable: A Book Review — from Gartner by Mark McDonald

There are many books that say you need to ‘disrupt’ your business to remain competitive.  There are almost no books that describe how you create disruption in a clear, concise and step-by-step manner.  Luke Williams’s book Disrupt – think the unthinkable to spark transformation is exactly this type of book.

It’s rare that a book discusses a complex issue, one with such potential for consulting jargon and confusion, and produces a clear, concise and actionable set of advice.  Rather than try to cloud the issue, Williams tackles it head on by giving you the tools and discussion how you think differently and turn that thought into action.  In a way this approach is disruptive in itself and that is a good thing.

Highly recommended as a useful and valuable book that takes the idea of disruption and gives you a way to think through it and put it into practice.  In less than 200 tightly written pages, Williams provides clear and compelling tools that you can use to help identify, classify, and find the opportunities for disruption in your products, services and organization.

Blockbuster’s largest shareholder calls Blockbuster worst investment ever made — from FastCompany.com by Austin Carr

.

After years as Blockbuster’s largest shareholder, Carl Icahn, who at one point amassed some 17 million shares of the now-bankrupt company, has called Blockbuster “the worst investment I ever made.”

In a candid piece written for the Harvard Business Review, Icahn opens up about the rental giant’s struggles and failures in an ever-changing industry.

“[Blockbuster] failed because of too much debt and changes in the industry. It had too many stores, Netflix created a better business model, and then Redbox kiosks and the whole digital phenomenon eliminated the need for consumers to go to a separate DVD store,” Icahn wrote. “Maybe the board did make a mistake in picking Jim Keyes as [John] Antioco’s successor—Keyes knows retailing and did an excellent job with the stores, but he isn’t a digital guy.”

From DSC:
I write about Blockbuster — and I emphasize the items above — because Blockbuster did not respond to the changes that were occurring around them.

.

What about those of us in higher education?
How’s our response(s) coming along?

.

The pace has changed -- don't come onto the track in a Model T

.

Staying Relevant

 

5/2/11 addendum:

4/7/11 addendum:


MBA Curriculum Changes: Wharton, Yale, and Stanford Lead the Pack — from knewton.com by Christina Yu

Excerpt (citing article from a  U.S. News article):

“Rather than consider pre-digested summaries of company situations, students tackle ‘raw cases’ packed with original data. Instead of being presented with an income statement, for example, they must mine the considerably bulkier annual filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission for data. The raw cases ‘push us to understand,’ says second-year Yale student Jason Hill. ‘They purposely put in more material than you could ever look at, but you have to learn where to look.’” (emphasis DSC)

From DSC:
I found this to be a good, interesting post. I just had a couple of thoughts that I wanted to throw out there re: it.

In looking at trends from an 80,000-foot level, I’d vote for MBA programs integrating much more of the tech-know-how — and/or appreciation of what technologies can bring to the table — as well as teaching grad students about some of the tools/technologies that are emerging these days (and I’d bet that the leaders/schools mentioned in this article are already doing this) .

I remember an instructor years ago — at SFSU’s MSP Program — saying that bots and agents will be the key to making decisions in the future, as there will be too much information for a person to sift through. The streams of content need to be tapped — but in efficient ways. So perhaps the logical step here is for MBA students to learn what bots/agents are, how to use them, and what their applications might be in making business/strategic decisions.

The most successful organizations of the future will be well-versed in technologies and what the applications/benefits of these technologies are. My bet? If you don’t have a technologist at the power table of your organization, the outlook doesn’t look very bright for your organization in terms of surviving and thriving in the future. Organizations will also need to be willing to take risks and move forward without having a full cost-benefit analysis done — as many times these don’t work well or are not even possible when implementing tech-based endeavors/visions.

Also relevant here:

 

From DSC:
In my recent class at Capella University, one of the last discussion board questions asked:

  • Do you think learning theory should be more explicit in official discussions of policy?

What a great question! My answer was yes, as it makes sense to me to guide educational reform by what is best for the students…for learning. Hopefully, we can make informed decisions. Though I’ve learned that there is no silver bullet when it comes to learning theories, each learning theory seems to be a piece of the puzzle for how we learn. Graphically speaking:


If viewing the above graphic on the Learning Ecosystems blog (vs. in an RSS feed/reader):
You may need to right-click on the above image and save it, then open it.

Such theories should have a place when policies are drafted, when changes are made. But I don’t often hear reference to the work of Thorndike, Bandura, Vygotsky, Gagne, Kolb, etc. when legislative bodies/school boards/or other forms of educational leadership are exploring future changes, directions, strategies. What is it that these people were trying to relay to us? What value can we gleam from them when we form our visions of the future? How does their work inform our selection of pedagogies, tools, organizational changes?



© 2025 | Daniel Christian