Drafts give glimpses into higher education report

Higher education institutions in the United States must improve in “a drastic way,” according to a draft version of the commission that has been given the task of assessing American higher education and its future. The final version of the report is expected sometime in August, but even the draft has sparked great interest.

The draft has been circulating since the end of June and is seen as a glimpse into the recommendations that will be included in the final version. The report is being produced by a national committee initiated by Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings. Among the members of the commission is former North Carolina governor Jim Hunt.

A second draft has begun to circulate. Missing from the second draft are some of the more hard-hitting criticisms of the current higher education system.

Among the key points in the original draft are that the commissioners believe many students are not prepared for college, that costs are too high, and that when students are in college they are wasting much of their time.

“In the face of such challenges, this Commission believes change is overdue,” the draft says. “But when it comes – as it must – it will need to take account of the new realities that are sometimes overlooked in public discussions about the future of higher education.”

The draft lists several goals the commission regards as important for our higher education system:

• A “world-class higher education system that educates its citizens and creates new knowledge
• An accessible system for all students regardless of age or financial status
• College and universities that are more productive and efficient
• A system that is more accountable and transparent in its operations
• A system that gives people workplace skills
• A system that contributes to “global competitiveness.”

“We have no illusions that the necessary adaptation, evolution – and in some cases, transformation – will come easily,” the draft says. “But we do have confidence, based on the rich history of post-secondary education in this country, that our nation’s colleges and universities are up to the challenge.”

The report is very specific on the problems that commissioners see in higher education and makes several recommendations for change. It has been criticized for painting too dark a picture of higher education, arguing that it is failing in its core mission of educating students.

Regarding access to higher education, commission members discussed a growing problem of students entering college unprepared for the rigors of higher education. The report states that while enrollment has increased from 1970 to 2004 as a proportion of high school students going to college there has also been an increase of students taking at least one remedial education course. Currently, 40 percent of four-year college students and 63 percent of two-year college students take at least one remedial education course. The report recommends that “States’ K-12 graduation standards must be closely aligned with college and employer expectations, and states should also provide incentives for post-secondary institutions to work actively and collaboratively with K-12 schools to help underserved students improve college preparation and persistence.”

To address the affordability problem, commission members believe an effort that focuses on cost cutting and productivity improvements is needed. “We believe that affordability is directly affected by colleges’ and universities’ failures to seek institutional efficiencies and by their disregard for improving productivity, since the current system provides institutions with few incentives to do either.” The report also advocates an increase in need-based financial aid and overhaul of the federal financial aid program.

The report has sharp words about the quality of higher education, especially the weakening literacy skills of college graduates and low graduation rates.

“[W]e urge post-secondary institutions to make a commitment to embrace new pedagogies, curricula, and technologies to improve student learning,” the draft says. “We also propose a concerted effort to eliminate existing barriers to transfer of credit between different kinds of post-secondary institutions. More broadly, policymakers and educators must work together to develop a national strategy to promote and facilitate lifelong learning, which is an ever more important component of keeping our nation at the forefront of the global knowledge economy.”

Commissioners also write that there is a “a remarkable shortage of clear, accessible information about crucial aspects of American colleges and universities.” This includes financial aid and graduation rates among information on other documents that would allow people to make better judgments about costs and educational value.

“While higher education prizes transparency of information, precision of data, and rigorous analysis in its own scholarship, as an enterprise it has failed to apply the same standards to itself,” the draft says. “Some colleges are beginning to experiment with new assessment tools, but most make no serious effort to examine their effectiveness on the most important measure of all: How much students learn.”

Despite all the effort that has gone into the report, the commissioners believe that higher education officials won’t “easily accept either our diagnosis or our prescriptions.” Most of the higher education establishment is set in its ways and will not welcome the commission’s rocking of the boat.