Higher Education

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education December 21, 2016

Want college to be affordable? Start with Pell Grants

Donald E. Heller, University of San Francisco

In her speech accepting the Democratic presidential nomination, Hillary Clinton talked about free college and student debt relief.

Convention speeches are not normally known for providing details of policy proposals, and keeping with tradition, Clinton offered few details of her own. Now that we are past the conventions and into the campaign, presidential nominees Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are likely to speak in more detail about their specific policies.

What is missing in the debate about free college, however, is a discussion of the role of Pell Grants, the centerpiece of the federal government’s student aid programs. These grants, which used to cover almost the entire cost of a college education for poor students, today cover less than a third. The current Republican budget proposal would erode it even further, threatening the ability of students from poor and moderate-income families to attend and graduate from college.

From my perspective as a researcher who has studied questions of college access for two decades, any discussion of free college has to include the role of Pell Grants in college affordability.

What are Pell Grants and why are they important?

Pell Grants were created in the 1972 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. This coming academic year they will provide grant aid of up to US$5,815 to students from low- and moderate-income families.

Last year, over eight million undergraduates across the nation received a total of about US$30 billion in Pell Grants.

In 2011-12, 41 percent of undergraduates received a Pell Grant. Dollar image via www.shutterstock.co

Data from the U.S. Department of Education show that in the 2011-12 school year (the most recent data available), 41 percent of all undergraduate students received a Pell Grant, almost double the 22 percent of students who received them in 1999.

For most students, the funding they receive from the Pell program outstrips what they receive in aid from either their state or the institution they attend.

Using data from the U.S. Department of Education, I calculated that the average Pell Grant recipient received an amount from that program that was five times greater than what they received in state grant aid and 2.6 times greater than the amount of scholarship assistance received from the institution attended.

Without Pell Grants, in other words, many low-income students would not be able to attend college, or would not be able to attend full time and make good progress toward earning their degree.

Pell Grant value dips, tuition increases

In a book I edited a few years ago, I demonstrated that back in the 1970s, a student attending a public, four-year university and receiving the maximum Pell Grant would have approximately 80 percent of the price of her college education – tuition, housing, food, books and miscellaneous costs – covered by the grant.

If the student had no resources of her own to contribute, the remaining 20 percent of the cost was often made up through state grants, scholarships from the university, work study and perhaps a small amount of student loans.

Today the maximum that a Pell Grant covers is only about 30 percent of the price of attending college for that same student. The erosion in the value of the grant is due to two reasons: 1) the rising price of college attendance and 2) a drop in the real value of Pell Grants.

Since 1985, average tuition prices at public, four-year colleges and universities have increased 222 percent after adjusting for inflation. The situation at private four-year colleges and community colleges is only slightly better – average prices in the two sectors have increased more than 130 percent in real terms during the same three decade period.

Pell Grants, in contrast, have grown much less rapidly. The average grant increased only 30 percent in inflation-adjusted dollars during this same period.

Former U.S. President George W. Bush after he signed a bill on Pell Grants. Larry Downing/Reuters

In the latter half of the 1980s and through most of the 1990s, Congress and a series of presidents – Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton – allowed the purchasing value of Pell Grants to decline even further.

The maximum Pell Grant actually dropped 19 percent in real dollars between 1985 and 1996. While federal funding over the last two decades has allowed it to regain some of its value, the maximum Pell Grant today is still below the 1975 level in inflation-adjusted dollars.

Impact of GOP proposal

As bad as this situation is, it could get much worse. The current Republican spending plan in the House of Representatives proposes to place a cap on the maximum Pell Grant. What this means is that it would stay at its 2015-16 level for the next 10 years.

While it is hard to predict for sure what will happen to tuition prices over the next decade, it is fairly certain that prices will continue to rise. This will cause the value of the Pell Grant to erode even further during this period.

Students protesting against rising college costs. Max Whittaker?Reuters

For example, again, based on my calculations, if college prices increase 3 percent per year over the next decade, and Pell Grants are held at their current level, its purchasing power at public four-year institutions would drop from 30 percent of total college costs today to only 21 percent in 2026.

At private four-year institutions, the Pell value would drop from 17 percent of costs today to only 12 percent 10 years from now.

The Republican proposal, if enacted, would undoubtedly have an impact on the college access and success of students from low- and moderate-income families. Constraining the grant aid available to them from the federal financial aid programs could force more students to drop out of college. Or, students could take longer to earn their degrees, or could afford to attend only a community college rather than a four-year institution.

The impact on college access for these students would be detrimental to the nation as a whole. As President Obama noted in his first address to Congress in 2009, the future growth of our economy will depend on having more workers with post-secondary credentials. Without a Pell Grant program that keeps pace with college costs, we will be unable to attain this goal.

Clinton and Trump should be talking about the issue of college affordability on the campaign trail. But they need to address all of the policies that help make college affordable for students and their families.

Funding for the Pell Grant program is a critical component of that.

Donald E. Heller, Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs, University of San Francisco

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education December 20, 2016

Diversity in Higher Education: The Issues Most People Don’t Think About

Colleges used to be for the elites only…but now student bodies are no longer composed of primarily male, white students. Some estimates show that half of America’s current workforce now passes through college first and 75 percent of students in high school spend at least some time studying in a higher education setting. That number is up from an elite four percent in 1900. What’s more – the number of college students from low-income and minority families continues to rise. When it comes to diversity in higher education, in this article, we will talk about the issues that most people don’t think about.

Of course, the increased diversity of student bodies comes with its own quirks. Read on and find out:

What’s helping so many more students go to school
Why men and Asian Americans might get the short end of the stick
The shocking fact about faculty in higher education

Two tools that are changing the face of higher education

Young people who choose to pursue more education after high school are often encouraged by the idea of more attractive career prospects. However, let’s be honest. College can have a hefty price tag. This is enough to keep many from attending.

Fortunately, however, there are ways to get around the fact that college (and other post-secondary training programs) is just plain expensive. Let’s just talk about two.

First, there are online courses. Each year online learning becomes less of a fringe movement and more mainstream. More than 6.7 million people took at least one online class in the fall of 2011 and 32 percent of college students now take at least one online course during their matriculation. It is even becoming common for high schools to require all students to take an online class before graduation as a way to prep them for the “real world” of secondary education.

Online learning is flexible and convenient. This is well-known. But less discussed is the way distance education promotes diversity of the college population. With less red tape than the traditional college format, online students are able to earn credits while still working full time, maintaining families and dealing with illnesses. Whether students take just one course remotely, or obtain an entire degree, they are able to take on the demands of college life more readily – leading to student populations with more variety.

The Babson Survey Research Group recently revealed that while online college student enrollment is on the rise, traditional colleges and universities saw their first drop in enrollment in the ten years the survey has been conducted. This drop is small – less than a tenth of one percent – but its significance is big. A trend toward the educational equality of online curriculum is being realized by students, institutions and employers across the board. The benefits of a college education are more accessible to students that simply cannot commit to the constraints of a traditional campus setting.

A controversial experiment that could lead the way to even more college credit accessibility is MOOCs, or massive open online courses. As the name implies, these classes are offered to the general public at a low cost, or no cost, in the hopes of earning their students college credit. California-based online course provider Coursera recently had five of its offerings evaluated by the American Council on Education for college credit validity. Four of the courses were recommended for college credit by ACE, and one was endorsed for vocational credit, providing student work verification through a strict proctoring process.

These credits are not earned through community colleges or online-institutions; Duke University, the University of California at Irvine and the University of Pennsylvania are on Coursera’s list of places the courses will earn credit for students that pay a nominal fee. Students that obtain these credits through Coursera can approach any higher education institution and seek their inclusion in a degree program, but the final discretion is up to the particular school.

MOOCs are certainly in an infancy stage and do not provide a “sure thing” yet for students that participate. In the Babson survey mentioned earlier, only 2.6 percent of schools offer a MOOC, but an additional 9.4 percent are building a MOOC plan. This form of online learning means that students do not have to commit to an entire course of study to receive credits. They don’t even have to commit to a particular institution upfront.

MOOCs will further eliminate the socio-economic barriers that keep promising students from seeking out college credits. Students are given more flexibility in scheduling at an affordable price. Though the MOOC trend has its dissenters, I believe it will win over even the most skeptical and increase accessibility for all people that seek higher education. After all, at one time the mention of online courses raised a few eyebrows in the educational community and look how far the concept has come. Further development of online initiatives, specifically in the area of MOOCs, represents the next big step for enriching the diversity of the college student population in America.

Another option that makes college more accessible, not quite so new and exotic as online courses, is community college.

According to Dr. Alicia Dowd, associate professor of Higher Education at the University of Southern California, about 7 million students are enrolled in community colleges. As she says, “[I]t’s not an overstatement to say that community colleges are an integral part of the national narrative in the United States about the ‘American Dream.’ Sandwiched between high school and four-year colleges and universities, they are an important rung in the ladder of our very stratified society and educational system.”

Community colleges are important to many students because of the increased opportunities for success provided by conveniences such as price, flexibility for those with busy work schedules, proximity, and accessibility for non-traditional students.

Promoting Diversity: Are men and Asian American students getting the short end of the stick?

That more women, underrepresented minorities, and low-income students have been attending college over the past several decades is rather encouraging.

But sometimes, in paying attention to certain groups, other groups are neglected. It’s worth looking at what this might mean.

If you have been following education hot button issues for any length of time, you’ve likely read about the nationwide push to better encourage girls in areas like science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The thought is that by showing young women that these topics are just as appropriate for them as their male peers, more women will find lasting careers in these traditionally male-dominated fields.

I’m all for more women in the STEM workplace but with all this focus in one area, are educators neglecting an even larger gender gap issue?

Nationally, over 57 percent of college attendees are female when public and private school stats are combined. Females have been consistently edging ahead of their male classmates since the late 1970s when the percentages flip-flopped. Aside from all-female schools, there are others that have marked disproportionate numbers. Pacific Oaks College in Pasadena has nearly 96 percent females in attendance, and the University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center in Memphis has over 93 percent.

There are a few reasons why more young women than men are choosing a college education. The first is that there are more trades that do not require a college degree that appeal to men. The second is that economically speaking, women earn a better living with a college degree than without one in comparison to men. Though there is still a wage gap (in 2012, women earned just 80.9 percent of the salaries of their male counterparts), women see the value their earning potential can gain from achieving a college diploma.

I hear people asking this question all the time: What are K-12 educators doing wrong when it comes to preparing young women for STEM careers? It’s a valid one.

But based on the statistics I’ve listed here, shouldn’t we also be asking this question: What are K-12 educators doing when it comes to preparing young men for a college education?

It all comes down to the weight we assign to the worth of a college education. If a diploma is simply a way to earn more money over a lifetime, then perhaps men are doing the intelligent thing by launching into the workforce early and without student loan debt. That logic is flawed, however, when taking into account the fact that blue-collar jobs are declining in favor of white-collar ones. A young man making a lifelong career decision today simply cannot predict what educational demands will be placed on his field in another 10, 20 or 30 years.

Money aside, there are other pitfalls in a disproportionate number of men going to college. Statistics show that marriages where the couples have differing education levels more often end in divorce than couples with the same educational achievements. And even before divorce is an option, women who set college educational goals may not want to settle for men with less motivation – at least when it comes to academics. If this trend continues, social dynamics may be impacted.

And it’s not just men who might be left in the dust.

One complaint with the United States Department of Education and another lawsuit against Harvard University claims that Harvard, along with other elite universities, are levying unfair admission standards against Asian-Americans based on their race.

The groups, which consist of at least 60 coalitions, state that Asian-Americans are held to a higher standard because they have higher test scores and better “overall academic achievement” than other racial groups.

According to the Washington Post, the complaint with the Dept. of Education states that Asian-American students “have the lowest acceptance rates at Harvard University…despite having some of the highest test scores.”

The lawsuit, filed by Students for Fair Admissions, alleges that Harvard violated Title VI of the Civil Rights Act. That section bans prejudice based on “race, color, and national origin.” The group says that the discrimination happens at all Ivy League higher education institutions and that data suggests that Ivy League schools were being discriminatory based on the number of Asian-Americans applying to those schools, specifically Harvard, and “the number of Asians Harvard was admitting.”

A lot going on with both claims as they seem to be based on a sort of reverse discrimination. Asian-American students are seen as over achievers, and if the complaint alleging that their test scores are among the highest of student applicants, then the accusations are at least worth exploring.

Defining racial discrimination in case where minority students are claiming inequity because of academic achievement sounds almost outlandish. It may also be tough to prove without sound proof and stringent data.

But a case where any set of minorities feels left out of the possibility of attaining a post-secondary education due to their skin color or heritage will likely solicit strong reactions from those against any form of Affirmative Action and legal counsel from the accused institutions.

With this situation, the waters may be a little murky because Harvard is a private institution of higher education. Attempting to force the rationale of adding diversity for the sake of variety may not work out so well. Harvard, for its part, has, of course, admitted Asian-American students and will continue to do.

The question is are they admitting too little a number, and if so, is there a racial quota?

Either way, watching this play out shall be interesting because of the implications that it may have for other private schools and their admission policies.

The shocking truth about diversity in college faculty

As I mentioned before, college campuses are more diverse now than ever. Nearly 30 percent of undergraduate students around the nation are considered minorities. However, that diversity mainly happens in the student bodies of schools.

Diversity in college professors and faculty? That’s, unfortunately, not as common.

According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, only 16 percent of full-time professors at post-secondary institutions are minorities. That means that 84 percent of those in full-time professorships are white, 60 percent are men and 25 percent are white women.

Those numbers decrease slightly with faculty. 79 percent of the “instructional faculty” within this nation’s colleges and universities are white and just six percent are black.

Considering the hiring boom that many schools have experienced since the start of the 1990’s, it’s surprising that not many minorities were included in that growth.

“The Condition of Education: Characteristics of Post-secondary Faculty” shows that there was a 42 percent increase in the number of instructional faculty hired from 1991-2011. During that 20 year period, not many institutions hired minorities to fill their vacant positions.

Outside of ethnicity and growth, the study also found that the wage gender gap between men and women professors was well north of $16,000. Less than half of America’s private and non-private post-secondary institutions had tenure systems, faculty at for-profit colleges and universities make far less than those at non-profit schools, and less than 10 percent of all faculty within higher education are employed at for-profit institutions.

What’s striking is the gross under-representation of minority professors at America’s higher education schools. While many may be concentrated within Historically Black Colleges and Universities or schools who have a high number of black students, that percentage makes barely a dent in the overall number of black, Asian, Hispanic, American indigenous who may teach at America’s best schools of higher learning.

So what’s going on here?

Faculty positions are extremely competitive. Colleges and universities often value professors that have publishing ability, or a strong past of publication, over actual teaching methods. This is not to say that there are not women and minorities with high qualifications but rather to point out that sometimes sex and race are simply not part of the hiring equation. Facts and figures on a resume are tangible ways to show what a particular candidate can bring to the job. It is more difficult for higher education decision makers to gauge the benefit of a person’s background or life experience on the students that pay good money to learn at a particular institution.

And then sometimes there are biases that affect professors who do not fit the traditional mold—both before they are hired and after they have broken into the field. For example, a study published by Vanderbilt University found that black faculty members are not only wanted for intellectual purposes but to entertain as well. Apparently being an expert in a field is not enough; these professors must step it up to pass the general public’s test for being a “good” teacher.

“Black faculty members are expected to be ‘entertaining’ when presenting academic research to mostly white peers, according to a new Vanderbilt study.”

The survey shows that black academics are expected to tell jokes and keep their presentations loaded with levity.

It gets worse for black women who are academics.

“Black females additionally noted being subject to their colleagues’ preoccupation with their clothing choices and hairstyle, and reported being admonished to play down their ‘passion’ and ‘smile more.’”

Many black men and women face these issues in the workforce in general—but they are amplified in higher education, where African Americans represent only nine percent of the field.

One of the authors of the study, Ebony McGee, is hopeful that the study will be used as a way to potentially train others in accepting workplace diversity.

“Our hope is that this study will offer novel and useful insights to those who organize presentations and those who give them, so they will be able to understand, appreciate and provide an improved experience for black and other minoritized scholars.”

Here’s the good news

Many colleges are stepping up their diverse hiring game. Schools like the University of California, Harvard and the University of Washington both study faculty diversity issues and try to piece together the most well-represented group of educators possible. Even Historically Black Colleges and Universities are trying to bring in students and faculty members outside the traditional population, especially since the original mission of those schools has changed. Certainly there are strides being made, but in order to best serve each generation of college students, the push for faculty diversity needs to continue on an upward path.

Looking at the big picture, diversity in faculty should not only be sought out for the students’ advantage. The college legacy as a whole benefits when many different perspectives are represented. Yes, it is important to have diversity in student populations, but those groups are temporary college residents. Faculty members have the long-term ability to shape the campus culture and make it more in sync with the rest of the real world.

And even more good news: the newest wave of college presidents is ready to retire.

What does this mean? It means there’s a chance to introduce diversity in the highest ranks of higher education.

As the latest wave of college presidents looks towards retirement, the higher education community has the opportunity to promote a more diverse presidential core. The next five years will set the tone for college leadership at the highest level for the coming decades and really for the entire student population too.

Here are the facts:

61. Average age of college presidents in 2011.
• 92. Percentage of college presidents aged in the mid-50s to mid-70s.
• 14. Average number of years that retiring college presidents serve in the role.
• 40. Normal number of new college presidents in the American Association of State Colleges and Universities every year.
• 109. Actual number of new college presidents from April 2011 to August 2012.
• 6. Number of new college presidents this school year in the California State system alone.
• 13. Percentage of college presidents who are racial or ethnic minorities, as of 2012.
• 14. Percentage of college presidents who were racial or ethnic minorities in 2006.
• 26. Percentage of women college presidents.

What makes someone qualified to be a college president?

In the past, college presidents from other schools and college vice presidents have most often ascended the ranks to fill empty presidential seats. While this still happens about 19 and 25 percent of the time, respectively, other leaders like provosts and deans are increasingly being considered to fill the college president vacancies. Some schools even search outside the college community to find leaders from other industries that fit the bill. There is really no hiring formula that applies to all college president spots and a “qualified” candidate could feasibly jump several levels of hierarchy to claim the spot.

How to encourage diversity in presidential ranks:

The first step to building diversity at the highest college administrative level is simply recognizing the opportunity at hand. American institutions of higher education often consider how a diverse student, and even faculty, population should look but do not extend that to top-tier leadership roles. Colleges need to rethink that strategy. I believe the trickle-down diversity effect works well in college settings. Instead of starting with the largest group (students), start cultural change at the top of the pyramid. If a school has a well-balanced student population already in place, chances are that the faculty and administration reflect that fact too.

The next step is to actively include diversity in the search process. I’m not saying that white men with the right qualifications should be excluded from the running; I just mean that colleges with open president seats should make sure the short list of candidates has some variety in experience, ethnicity, sex and race. The Rooney Rule, established in 2003 by the NFL, mandates that at least one minority candidate be interviewed for all head coaching spots. I think colleges need to do that same with their academic leaders.

Those in lower to middle-level leadership roles in colleges that have presidential aspirations should get ready now. Make sure your name is associated with talks about the future of the college by getting yourself involved in the action. Get published. Envision yourself on the same plane as the college presidents that went before you but realize that you have a unique voice to lend to the college community you want to lead. Embrace the turning tides. Be an active part of the changes in college administration and you will in turn be part of the progress.

For the rest of us, who are not in leadership roles in colleges, but who want to see more diversity in professors and college presidents, now is the time to push for change, and to bring awareness to the lack of diversity in higher education faculty.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education December 20, 2016

What Professor Esolen Gets Right about Diversity, Faith

History professor Anthony Esolen recently came under fire when he penned an article for Crisis magazine that questioned the push for diversity at his workplace, Catholic institution Providence College. The piece “Ideology is the Enemy of True Faith” criticizes Providence College and the entire Catholic community when it comes to enthusiasm for the rights of the LGBTQ+ community and more.

Among other accusations, Esolen said that the college is on the diversity bandwagon (to paraphrase) and that the popular views its taking run directly against Catholic doctrine. Specifically, Esolen mentions the need to uphold traditional heterosexual marriage because that is truly what moves diversity forward through reproduction.

Needless to say, Esolen’s words have triggered a firestorm of criticism, launched a petition against him from the Black Studies department at Providence, and even incited a public rebuke from the college president. In interviews with other news sources, Esolen has defended his position, saying that those who disagree aren’t really Catholics anyway (another paraphrase).

Esolen’s position certainly rings of prejudice when first read and of course, he won’t be leading any diversity workshops anywhere any time soon. His bold statements though may do more to advance diversity on college settings than harm it. Here’s what his stance, and the response against it, can teach us about our own campus diversity programs:

Diversity IS a buzz word.

Without action, diversity is just a pointless word that is slapped on college promotional materials for appearances. A college or university that uses diversity for shallow reasons or out of obligation is not one that is doing its part to really further the opportunities for all students. Esolen says that promotion of diversity of certain groups of students run afoul to Catholic ideology and he’s right. Can Catholic colleges, then, truly claim that they provide diverse options for all students if certain ones – like those in the LGBTQ+ community – are marginalized in the basic doctrine of the church that sponsors the school? Schools cannot gloss over the facts when it comes to diversity. If you foster a spirit of acceptance and believe in opportunities for all, spell it out specifically in your mission statement. If those college beliefs don’t match the sponsoring institution (a church for example) then clearly outline how you are separate from that set of convictions.

Professors should hold opposing views.

At least some of them. Higher education institutions are the premiere spots for advanced thought in our nation. It’s why so much innovation comes from these campuses and why students who enter as young, naïve adults leave as educated and aware ones. A professor who doesn’t agree with campus policy has the right to dispute it. Does Esolen deserve the criticism coming his way from his colleagues and students at the college? Absolutely and he likely expected it. Does he deserve to lose his job over it? I’d argue no, he does not.

If we start taking away peoples’ livelihoods because they question things, then what sort of precedent are we setting? I think a university can denounce the words of a professor like Esolen but still keep him employed. As long as he is teaching the subject at hand (Western Civilization and Renaissance English Literature, in his case) and following the benchmarks of his job then he’s fulfilling those duties. We cannot silence or punish every person who says things we don’t like. Learning to dig in more deeply with our own beliefs, however, is a valuable lesson that lasts well beyond college years.

Religion can fuel discrimination.

While the church community, particularly in America, does much to benefit the lives of citizens worldwide, it’s important to acknowledge the parts of different doctrines that do not align with diversity. The role that religion (of all kinds) plays in world view of its members matters on college settings. Even public institutions must face the ramifications of this learning that is embedded over nearly two decades before students strike out on their own as adults. Religion plays a role in how students view their peers – and how professors view their students. Colleges must be aware of that fact and work to unite students, faculty and the greater community beyond religious lines.

Sometimes something unexpected brings out the best in people – which I think will be the case ultimately with Esolen’s article. His views have already called to action people who disagree and brought about an important conversation about diversity at Providence College and throughout the nation. What we do with that conversation determines its positive impact, despite the negativity associated with the original words.

Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education December 19, 2016

Are HBCUs Under Attack? How Historically Black Colleges and Universities Can Stay Afloat in Today’s Landscape

If you haven’t been paying much attention to the debate concerning the relevance and effectiveness of historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs), now is the time to sit up and take notice. If you don’t, there is a chance it could soon be too late. Over the last two decades, we have seen the number of HBCUs in the United States sharply decline.

This greatly concerns me. We need to take a moment to look at why people should pull together, rally around them, and help them make it through turbulent economic times. HBCUs have helped to educate some of the most prominent African American figures in this country’s history, including Jesse Jackson, Samuel L. Jackson, Martin Luther King Jr., Spike Lee, and Thurgood Marshall, among many others.

HBCUs provide cultural benefits, as well as providing an affordable education. This cultural foundation has been important to the African American community for over a century. HBCUs were there, supporting the community and educating many hardworking and productive citizens, long before other colleges would even let them through the door.

If you believe in the benefits of HBCUs, you need to stand up and let your voice be heard, before these important institutions are gone forever.

What’s happening, exactly?

HBCUs are coming under fire for everything from not improving their failing infrastructures to producing lower graduation rates, and more. Let’s take a closer look at some of the issues that HBCUs are currently facing.

Why HBCUs are underfunded—and why this matters

By way of a study published in Newsweek, “fundraising is a major problem for HBCUs.”

The study gives a comparison of the two of the nation’s “richest” schools regarding how they are sectioned. Howard University receives nearly $590 million from the government, which on the surface, seems like a lot of money.

But compared to the funding that Brown University receives, Howard is dwarfed. Brown is on the receiving end of over $3 billion in government funding each year.

Brown has a bustling alumni base that donates generously. Not saying that Howard doesn’t as they certainly have proud alumni. The differences are hard to miss.

Note that the lack of funding goes beyond alumni donations. Until she later amended it, presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton’s education plan would have undermined the funding of some HBCUs and would likely force a few to close.

“Free tuition to any community college and reduced tuition to public institutions, will expedite the extinction of several HBCUs. Without federal and state investment in public historically black campuses which lack unique programs, modernized facilities and marketing resources, students of all races will flock to larger, more developed predominantly white colleges.”

In essence, plans presented by Clinton and other candidates who lean left would take federal and state money used to aid HBCUs and refocus the dollars towards a general fund that will help schools that traditionally serve the general population.

Hypothetically, schools that aren’t necessarily in need of more federal assistance would receive extra dollars, and some HBCUs would be left in the cold.

Another issue that affects the amount of money HBCUs gets? In October of 2011, the U.S. Department of Education adjusted its lending policies for these popular, and in many cases necessary, loans to align more closely with what a traditional bank would require in the way of income and credit worthiness. All colleges took a hit with these changes, but HBCUs lost an estimated $50 million in the first full year these changes took place. For many HBCUs, the college population is made up of first-generation students with parents who often have not set aside the funding for a college education, but want to contribute financially. When PLUS loan eligibility changed, it felt like a blow directed at HBCUs.

And sometimes, the problem is just plain money mismanagement

Take Cheyney University, for example. In 2015, the country’s oldest HBCU owed the federal government nearly $30 million, according to nonprofitquarterly.org.

“[A] review conducted for the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education found that the school may have mismanaged the financial aid it receives from the U.S. Department of Education to assist students and, as a result, may owe the federal government more than $29 million.”

The article goes on to state that the school gave grants and loans to students who weren’t eligible. They also gave out too much money.

News for Cheyney isn’t getting better. The school currently carries a deficit of at least $15 million with an annual budget of $30 million. Paying back $29 million would bring the school to its knees.

Pennsylvania’s Auditor General Eugene DePasquale issued a report on the school’s future last year, and it was rather bleak.

“The size of its debt that is deemed not collectible is growing. The amount of state support it receives is on the decline. And its enrollment has hit a 31-year low.”

The report also noted that just nine percent of students who enroll at Cheyney stay for graduation.

Simply put, Cheyney is in deep trouble

Without serious financial help from alumni, the state, or the federal government, Cheyney’s 177-year history will soon come to a quick close.

All these financial issues cause a ripple effect, which leads to other issues, such as…

School closures. Lately, it seems there are just too many HBCUs in the news for the wrong reason: financial and accreditation woes that threaten, or deliver, closure.

For example, on June 3, 2014, Saint Paul’s College officials announced that it planned to close its doors – at least temporarily. The news followed a proposed merger with Saint Augustine’s University that fell through. After 125 years, the rural school that employs roughly 75 people in the community of Lawrenceville, Virginia had no choice but to close its doors to new students and help current ones find placement elsewhere.

After several years of highly-publicized financial problems, Morris Brown College turned down a bailout from the city of Atlanta in June that would have eliminated its bankruptcy troubles. In August, Morris Brown filed for federal bankruptcy protection to prevent foreclosure. Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed and other city officials were more than a little surprised when the school rejected the $10 million offer that was designed to benefit the city too. A Morris Brown lawyer said the rejection is due to the school receiving an undisclosed, better offer from somewhere else. For now, though, Morris Brown is still $35 million in over its head, by some accounts.

Mergers. It’s not at all unusual to hear governors and former governors like Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and Mississippi’s Haley Barbour announce plans to merge HBCUs with each other or other predominantly white institutions in moves that are intended to slash state operating costs.

In less than stunning news, the Georgia Board of Regents has decided to merge Historically Black College (HBCU) Albany State University with Predominately White Institution (PWI) Darton State College.

The new school will boast close to 9,000 students and will retain the name Albany State University.

While the move to combine two state colleges isn’t shocking, it did take some by surprise that the board decided to merge an HBCU and a PWI. In recent years we’ve seen HBCUs merging to keep their cultures intact, but not shutter their doors, but the move in Georgia doesn’t follow that path.

According to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the move was partially made because of declining enrollment at both institutions.

“Both schools have faced enrollment declines in recent years. Albany State’s enrollment has dropped 25 percent in five years; Darton has seen a 14 percent enrollment decline since its peak in 2012.”

The Journal also reports that the school will become Southwest Georgia’s largest college.

Even without the declining enrollment figures, some have concerns that Albany State will lose its culture and identity by merging with a PWI. Hank Huckaby, chancellor of University system of Georgia, says that Albany State’s history and culture will not be compromised due to the merger (but he didn’t give specifics on how that will happen).

This announcement is not the first on merger in the state

A merger between Kennesaw State and Southern Polytechnic State universities was finalized earlier this year. The largest merger between Georgia State University and Georgia Perimeter College is in the works now.

Treating any two HBCUs as institutions that are alike enough to merge without incident is flawed, though. Planning to merge an HBCU with a predominantly white schools is even more off-base. These individual schools have their histories, their student cultures. Perhaps it makes financial sense to merge HBCUs with others similar in size or scope, but it undermines the collective institutions, undercutting their autonomy and what they can offer to potential students.

When students can no longer afford to go to school

And the consequences for lack of financial support HBCUs are receiving continue.

Take the general lack of affordability for students, for example. HBCUs have a legacy of providing affordable education to students. However, with many of the funding issues, HBCUs have been suffering. Lately, it’s harder for these colleges and universities to offer students the financial aid that they once generously provided.

Then, when it turns out that college graduates from HBCUs cannot make a return on their investment, the situation seems even worse.

According to a report, the starting salary for a new college graduate from an HBCU may not be enough to cover student loan debt.

By way of an article on Chron.com, the class of 2015 was projected to have about $35,000 in student loan debt upon graduation. That’s $7,000 more than what the class of 2013 will owe.

Of course, to pay back the loan, students have to have jobs that will afford them that opportunity.

So to look at how debt and income will factor into the financial success that students may have post-graduation, Edsmart.org found that some students who attend HBCU’s may struggle economically. It is a recipe for disaster when students can’t afford college when they start OR afford to pay it back when they graduate.

Not all students from HBCUs suffer this fate, however. The report shows that the average starting salary for new graduates out of Bethune-Cookman University comes in at just $38,700. That’s just $3,000 more than the average debt that students may carry. However, the in-state tuition and fees for BCU is a reasonable $14,410.

It gets even better if students attend Florida A&M University. Tuition for in-state students is just $5,785, $17,725 for out-of-state, and students project to make a little over $42,300 after graduation.

Other schools where students can expect to earn more include Xavier University, Howard University, Hampton University, and Tennessee State University.

While the salaries vary, and so will the debt per student, knowing that your earning potential fresh out of college may hover around $50,000 per year may take the sting away from having to pay the government back for your education.

It’s not just about the money, though…

There are other problems that may keep HBCUs from thriving in today’s world.

And, certainly, although HBCUs have fallen on hard times, they cannot completely play the role of victim, either. I’m a Dean at an HBCU and completely believe in the message – but even I can see that there are things we do collectively that are hurting our student populations and chances for longevity. We need to change that, together, and that starts with recognizing where we have made mistakes.

Slow adaptability. We’ve spent too much time wringing our hands and not enough time looking for solutions. Why were predominantly white institutions better prepared when the PLUS loan changes took place? Could we not have come up with our solutions too? When it comes to online schooling – most HBCUs are just finally implementing full-degree online programs and embracing the idea that our students don’t need to be on a physical campus to benefit. Yes, the campuses of HBCUs are their biggest advantages, steeped in history and a palpable air of shared struggle. This doesn’t mean we should force our students to set foot on our campuses, or not come at all. The inability to move quickly and keep up with the higher education times has hurt HBCUs but hopefully not permanently.

Lack of diversity. HBCUs are getting better at recruiting all students to their campuses and programs, but this is another area where we’ve done too little, too late. HBCUs are no longer the only option for students of color and haven’t been for decades. So why have we spent so little time rebranding ourselves as institutions that welcome all students and help those students succeed? The number of Latino, white and Asian students on HBCU campuses is rising slowly, but relying on our historically largest segment of students (after it became clear they did not need us as much as we needed them) has hurt us.

Lack of stability in administration. Over the past decade, too many HBCU presidents have seemingly disappeared in the middle of the night without explanation. South Carolina State University, for example, has seen 11 different presidents since 1992 but why? Often the answer lies in the fact that a board of trustees clings to the past, or spends too much time micromanaging and not enough looking at the future and big picture of the HBCU landscape. Such instability at the top cannot inspire confidence for faculty or students. To plant roots for the future, there needs to be consistent leadership that aligns with the long-term goals of the HBCU.

Not appreciating students. This may sound petty, but alumni who do not feel that their universities gave them a world-class education, or at the very least an adequate one, are less likely to give back financially. This hurts HBCUs more than PWIs, I think. An essay was written by an HBCU graduate who declined to name her school specifically expressed shock at the under-sophisticated classrooms and technology resources at her HBCU. While she points out the social atmosphere was top-notch and ultimately the reason she stayed until graduation, she says she would rather see her former school be shuttered than donate money to it. This is only one story, of course, but it rings true with other graduates I’ve met and read who believe they received a sub-par educational experience at an HBCU (sometimes on very basic levels) and who have no desire to donate money back. This is no way to maintain long-term student pride or bring in future students.

How can we bring HBCUs back to prominence?

Fortunately, there are many solutions that can help HBCUs rise to prominence once again. But those of us who support the continued existence of HBCUs will need to seek radical solutions so that we can see these institutions thrive again.

One of the most impactful ways we can help HBCUs thrive is by making sure they have the funds to do so. And how might that work? The solution is simple: alumni giving.

HBCU graduates are some of the proudest in the country, often with a stronger sense of social responsibility than their PWI-graduate peers. HBCUs aren’t doing a strong enough job tying that pride back into alumni giving programs. Case in point: Harvard raised a record-breaking $752 million in alumni and other gifts in the fiscal year 2013. At HBCU “Black Ivy League” Spelman College saw just $157.8 million ($20 million from alumni) during its Every Woman Every Campaign in 2013 that was a special, targeted campaign beyond normal annual endeavors.

Perhaps comparing Harvard’s financial gifts to any other school isn’t completely fair, but it does give an idea of what HBCUs are up against in the non-elite college market. If Spelman, considered the “best” HBCU, can only bring in one-fifth of the giving of Harvard in a year when Spelman aggressively went after donations, what does that say for every other HBCU?

An even better question is this: What can HBCU alumni giving campaigns improve upon to bring in more dollars to benefit their current crop of students?

Make college affordable

Even the best college education will come with resentment attached once a student has to start paying back those burdensome loans. HBCUs have a better shot at alumni giving back once a college education is paid off, so why not make that debt burden lighter? HBCUs have some of the best statistics when it comes to financial aid in the form of Pell grants and scholarships, and these institutions should continue to push for the funding to make obtaining a degree affordable – particularly for minority and first-generation college students. More money in these graduates’ pockets will translate into more alumni giving in the early years following graduation.

Personalize giving

I don’t know about you, but getting standard alumni giving form in the mail with a return envelope does not usually inspire me to pull out my checkbook. The same is true of emails without much personality. Instead of just asking for the money, HBCUs need to put faces and causes along with the requests. What are some of the upcoming projects that this money could go towards? Who will receive scholarships from this giving? Even non-glamorous giving campaigns that go towards basic infrastructure have a better shot of meeting goals if alumni are informed of what money is being solicited to do. HBCU alumni who can associate their positive memories with money-making campaigns are more likely to want to be a part of making those things happen.

Get alumni involved before they leave campus

Don’t wait until students are off campus to solicit them for help with facilitating the college experience of the classes who follow them. Cash in on the good feelings that accompany graduation time from both the students earning degrees and their families. Even those who don’t have much may be willing to give a little to keeping the college dream alive for other students who are still trying to accomplish their academic goals. Set up a table outside commencement with giving forms and other alumni information. Have literature that explains to students how alumni giving dollars have facilitated what they’ve enjoyed while on campus. Send out an email blast to soon-to-be graduates inviting them to visit the alumni website, like its Facebook page, and join its official club. Don’t wait to chase alumni down after they’ve left; rope them in before they leave and keep them active in the coming years.

Just as HBCUs have a responsibility to get their student’s workforce-ready, alumni have a responsibility to give back to their institutions. HBCUs need to do a better job of conveying that, though and encouraging former students to step up to the plate.

Another way to build up HBCUs is to embrace diversity and innovation

When HBCUs began popping up in America, they were a necessity to higher educational paths for African American young people. Benefactors like John Rockefeller founded Spelman College in Atlanta (named after his wife, by the way) to give black students shot in a nation still very much in the throes of Jim Crow law domination. Most of the 105 HBCUs were founded in former slave areas that still presented steep challenges for African Americans that aspired to higher education but faced discrimination in dominantly white college settings.

The original intent of HBCUs worked. Some of the nation’s brightest and most influential minds came out of HBCUs. Langston Hughes was a Lincoln University graduate. Martin Luther King Jr. earned his degree from Morehouse College. Talk show queen Oprah Winfrey, education expert Marva Collins and Brown University President Ruth J. Simmons all earned degrees from HBCUs (from Tennessee State University, Clark Atlanta University, and Dillard University, respectively). These powerful pillars of the African American community were able to achieve optimal success in life because of the education they received from HBCUs.

But what about now? With white students quickly becoming one small aspect of on-HBCU settings, do ambitious African American students need an HBCU to achieve success? Perhaps a more poignant question is this: does it help or hinder the African American community when its members attend an HBCU today?

I think the answer is grounded in the particular student’s intent. Young African Americans today do not NEED an HBCU to obtain a general education, but they may find particular programs at individual schools meet their career objectives. Some may even find academic inspiration in the original founding purpose of an HBCU, and that feeling of carrying on tradition may fuel them to graduate, make an impact in the world and give back to their college or university.

The original purpose of HBCUs is no longer the only reason–but that does not mean that these institutions lack other attractive qualities. In fact, many students with white European, Latino or Asian roots are choosing HBCUs because of the strength of the academic programs and lower tuition costs. During the 2011 – 2012 school year, West Virginia State, Kentucky State and Delaware State universities all reported that more than 25 percent of their populations were made up of white Americans. A continued push for diversity on HBCU campuses is the only way these schools can transition from the necessity of the past to the potential of the future. This means implementing more online course options and flexible degree programs so that all students can picture themselves succeeding at an HBCU. Gratitude for the original intent of HBCUs combined with forward educational thinking for students of all heritages will carry HBCUs to the next level of achievement in higher learning circles.

One school that decided to use online course options to strengthen its program is North Carolina Agricultural & Technical. These online programs are geared towards growing the school’s enrollment figures.

According to Insidehighered.com, NC A&T’s online offerings will be cheaper than “face-to-face” courses for in-state students, and they plan to go after students outside of their traditional demographic.

“To help enrollment grow, we have to look at different mechanisms to engage students in general. We can’t solely focus on the traditional 18- to 22-year-old,” said Joe Whitehead, vice president for academic affairs.

By non-traditional students, A&T plans to market the online programs towards adults who work, military members, and “students who left college before they could graduate.”

Another marketing tool the school will use is that A&T is now the nation’s largest Historically Black College and University as it recently surpassed Florida Agricultural & Mechanical University in enrollment.

“Florida A&M’s enrollment has fallen; North Carolina A&T’s has hovered below 11,000 students for nearly a decade. This fall, once again, enrollment sits at 10,875, a slight increase of 141 from the previous year.”

Some HBCUs have attempted to offer online programs in the past but have fallen short. As of 2014, just 33 HBCU’s offered online programs and all aren’t jumping on the bandwagon.

By way of Edcentral.org, Spellman College has no interest in offering online courses now or in the future.

HBCUs are still attempting to navigate the terrain of online education, and are rightfully taking the time to ensure that student success is a top priority before going all in. Still, if HBCUs are places that cater to traditionally disadvantaged students, a move towards online programs seems to be the right direction.

Are HBCUs a lost cause?

In my home state of Mississippi, I grew up attending athletic and cultural functions at Tougaloo College, Alcorn State University, Mississippi Valley State University and Jackson State University. These universities are sources of great pride and a part of the African American intellectual tradition. Now is the time when people who support HBCUs, including advocates, organizations, faculty, students, and alumni, need to rally together to help save this historical piece of African American history. If these groups come together and make their voices heard, we will be able to save these institutions. But make no mistake, if there is no rally, if there is no coming together to let the powers-that-be know that we want them saved, then I predict that they will be gone in 50 or so years. And they will not return. Nobody is going to turn back the hands of time and open another historically black college or university because it wouldn’t be historic. Right now, they are historic, and they need our support and rescue!

Many people are currently asking whether HBCUs are worth saving in the first place. I ask, how can these historical institutions, which represent African American culture, tradition, and struggle for educational equality, not be considered worth saving? If they are not worth saving, then it makes it very difficult to find any other piece of African American heritage that is worth saving. These educational institutions are symbols of our people that must not be ignored.

I urge those who care about these institutions to speak out, show your support, and demand that adequate funding be provided to them so that they can make it through these turbulent economic times. It’s not just about saving a college or university. This is a metaphor for saving ourselves! With proper funding, these schools will thrive, carrying on our culture and traditions as they were meant to do.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, Special Report December 18, 2016

Are College Payments Stealing America’s Livelihood?: The Forces Behind Skyrocketing College Costs

If it seems like college is more expensive than ever before—and with less return on investment than in previous generations—it’s not your imagination. Why is this happening? Find out in this chapter.

Consider this: today; a degree is a requirement for more entry-level jobs than before. This will be even truer in the future. In fact, according to the Committee for Economic Development, in 1965, just 11% of jobs required post-secondary training, but by 2020, 65% of U.S. jobs will require post-secondary training.

The problem is that those degrees are much more expensive than the degrees of ten or twenty years ago. This is even after taking inflation into account.

What’s happening? Are colleges inherently worth that much more than they have been in the past? While it’s true that the demand is higher, the truth is that there are many factors driving the costs of higher education in America. Here, you’ll see some of what’s going on behind the scenes. You will find out exactly what’s leading more students (and their parents) to take on hefty loans for a chance at success in life.

Is the federal government behind the rising cost of higher education?

According to Senator Elizabeth Warren, the answer is yes.

In 2015, she wrote a blistering letter to the Department of Education’s acting Education Secretary John King regarding how the department handles student loan fraud.

In the letter, Warren accuses the department of not having a proper handle on student loan contractors and specifically cites its relationship with Navient, formerly known as Sallie Mae.

In 2014, the Department of Education and Navient reached a settlement of $100 million due to Navient’s role in violating a federal law that pinches interest rates at 6% for service members.

Warren’s issue isn’t necessarily with the settlement; it’s that the department has failed to oversee its relationship with Navient.

As the company holds millions of student loans, the department’s relationship with Navient hasn’t been impacted even as the company was found to have broken the law.

Moving forward, Warren not only wants the department to reassess its position with Navient but wants to know why the company hasn’t been penalized further.

To put some fears to rest, the department launched an internal investigation into Navient’s loan practices and found that a small percentage of those who borrowed were not receiving the federally mandated rate.

Warren notes the Department of Education’s Inspector General revealed that the department’s internal investigation into Navient was flawed and erroneous.

Towards the end of the letter, Warren writes that the findings of an independent review of the department’s handling of student aid are that companies that are responsible for supervising student loan debt receive protection from the Department of Education when they break the law.

As students and former students grapple with how to pay back student loans and are harassed by the likes of companies like Navient, the information presented in Warren’s letter is damaging and sad.

If the Department of Education is indeed offering protection to companies that break the law and are failing to properly shelter students from these organizations, it proves why so many students have little faith in college affordability and the government’s role in helping them.

That’s not the only time Senator Warren has called out the Department of Education.

The Senator isn’t one to shy away from controversy, which is why it comes as no surprise that she’s railing against the United States Department of Education.

According to the New York Times, Warren held a press conference to talk about student loan debt and a system of “external checks” that would govern complaints against the department.

“We don’t trust a bank to handle its complaints, and we shouldn’t trust the federal student loan program to do it either,” Warren said according to the New York Times.

Warren criticized colleges and universities, the U.S. Department of Education, state legislatures, and more.

She said that outstanding student loan debt needs to be refinanced and that “college affordability and student debt” are issues that need to be included in the re-authorization of the Higher Education Act.

While Warren isn’t running for president, her words will likely resonate with voters on the left as she attempts to galvanize liberal and progressive voters ahead of the 2016 presidential election.

Her colleague in the Senate, Bernie Sanders, has an ambitious plan to regarding higher education, and that’s to make it free by taxing Wall Street.

Both lawmakers are talking about issues that many students and young Americans care about: making college more affordable or just making it free all together.

We’re likely pretty far off from giving away access to colleges and universities, but in the interim, the discussion surrounding the price of higher education and the debt that students carry is certainly worth having. We just need to ensure that the talk eventually turns into action that will help students.

Or could it be the state governments’ faults?

Former Education Secretary Arne Duncan in 2015 said that higher education in the United States needs more accountability and for schools to “deliver what they promise to students.”

According to the Washington Post, Duncan gave a speech at the University of Maryland Baltimore County where he made the calls for accountability and states to discontinue the “pattern of disinvestment.”

““[T]he widespread cutbacks that states have made in their higher education budgets desperately need to be reversed,” he said. “In all, 47 states cut per-student spending between 2009 and 2014, by an average of about 13 percent. Over the past 25 years, state per-student spending is down 25 percent, after adjusting for inflation! For each dollar states put in higher education today, the federal government invests more than two.”

Duncan, in essence, was saying that the federal government cannot continue to invest lost state dollars back into higher education because many states weren’t focusing on higher education as they should.

He also mentioned in the speech that changing the system, or the culture, will be tough to accomplish.

Duncan is correct in noting that the system will not change overnight.

What’s stopping change from happening? Let’s look more closely at what states prioritize today.

According to a report by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, 11 states spend more money on correctional facilities than public research universities.

The report outlines how many states have cut spending on higher education while increasing budgets for jails and prisons.

Higher education spending didn’t start to fall once the recession started. Funding for higher education in many states begins toppling back in 1990 from 14.6 percent to just 9.4 percent in 2014.

Michigan, Oregon, Arizona, Vermont, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Delaware, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Colorado, and Connecticut all failed to make the cut. Each state has a higher budget for jails and prisons than public research universities.

Adjusted for inflation, spending on elementary and secondary education increased by nearly 70 percent while corrections saw an increase of over 140 percent between 1986 and 2013.

In Michigan, nearly 25 percent of the state’s spending from general fund expenditures went towards corrections compared to just 15 percent on higher education.

The percentages are much closer in other states like Rhode Island and Delaware, but corrections spending still gets a larger percentage.

Oregon seems to be the worst defender. Less than 5 percent of general fund expenditures are dedicated to higher education, but the state spends nearly 15 percent of that money on correctional facilities.

The bottom line is that too many states invest in faux rehabilitation methods and not enough on student engagement. Imagine if we invested that money upfront in our troubled youth instead of putting it towards locking them up. It takes a fundamental understanding that it NEEDS to happen, though – something that is lacking in the U.S. education system.

Another cause for concern? Rising health care costs.

According to a study, there is a correlation between the rising cost of Medicaid and declined to spend on higher education. Created by Moody’s Analytics for The National Commission on Financing 21st Century Higher Education, the study suggests that state budgets will constrict spending on higher education because of the high cost of Medicaid.

Because money from the Affordable Care Act will start to slow by 2020, many states will have to allocate more funds for Medicaid, which in turn will cause a decrease in discretionary spending.

So, many states that are struggling with budget deficits or have deeply cut funding for higher education will likely face more financial issues.

The study portends that Medicaid will outrun state revenues. If that potential trend holds, then higher education truly is in trouble.

When colleges are the problem

For-profit schools have earned a reputation, and it’s not a favorable one, either.

For example, California Attorney General Kamala Harris filed a lawsuit against the company that operates the now-defunct for-profit Corinthian Colleges arguing that the organization left its students out to dry by saddling them with massive amounts of debt that many could not afford to pay back.

As a result, Corinthian Colleges Incorporated received a judgment against it of $1.17 billion to be paid to the State of California for illegal practices.

The school rewarded students with worthless degrees that many companies refused to recognize, leaving students without the ability to repay their exorbitant student loans.

So a California judge ruled for the state of California and ordered Corinthian Colleges Inc. to pay over $800 million in restitution to former students with the remaining amount going towards penalties.

This seems to be great news for students as they’ll have the ability to potentially receive some financial relief from student loans received while attending a Corinthian College.

But there may be a problem as Corinthian filed for bankruptcy last year, and by way of information from the company’s former attorney, Corinthian may not have to pay since it is no longer in operation.

No matter for the state and Harris, though, as her office has set up a website for students to visit to receive help and to gain information about the judgment.

Schools run by Corinthian Colleges Inc. operated under the umbrella of career colleges where students who wanted a college degree but didn’t have the time to absorb a traditional college schedule, could attend and receive a degree to help them receive better employment opportunities.

The company went after people of poor financial means and profited off of those individuals’ ability to receive student loans from the government and private lenders.

Corinthian likely received up to 90 percent of its funding from federal loan programs, so many of the schools were being fueled economically by the government and poor students.

Hopefully, students in California will be able to collect what was lost.

Corinthian Colleges is not the only school guilty for its mismanagement of funds.

In fact, more than 500 schools in the U.S. are among colleges being investigated. According to Insidehighered.com, the United States Department of Education is “closely monitoring a greater number of colleges and universities over concerns about their management of federal funds…”

Many of the schools on the list of potential colleges being investigated are “for-profit beauty and cosmetology schools.” These types of institutions have come under increased fire for their collection of federal funds to allow students to enroll. But many students at some for-profit schools have complained that their degrees are worthless and that they are left saddled with piles of student loan debt and no gainful employment to show for it. That, to me, is certainly cause for colleges to be investigated by the U.S. Department of Education.

Other for-profit schools listed include ITT Technical Institute, The Art Institutes, and South University.

For-profit schools aren’t languishing alone on this list, though. Cheyney University, a Historically Black College and University (HBCU), was placed on the department’s “most stringent form of monitoring over concerns with the institution’s ‘administrative capability.’”

Cheyney has faced financial trouble as of late due to a rise in deficits, a decrease in enrollment and a campus that is falling apart. That institutional erosion is due in part to moves made by Cheyney’s administration.

Students at any institution on the list of colleges being investigated may want to monitor the progress of the list as schools are removed or added periodically. This shows that the Department of Education is serious about ensuring that the education of students at these types of schools isn’t wasted on loans and empty job guarantees. It’s important that predatory institutions that do not implement the proper job placement and degree-use policies are called out, and if necessary, shut down.

Finally, it’s worth noting that schools need to be accountable not just for managing their funds, but for ensuring that their students finish school.

There are a lot of metrics in place to measure the effectiveness of P-12 schooling in the U.S. Stats shine a particularly bright light on public schools, particularly when they are failing students. Dropout rates are just one of the factors taken into account when these numbers are calculated and tend to weigh heavily on the schools and districts who have low percentages.

However, the same does not seem to be true once the high school years pass. Compared to P-12 institutions, colleges and universities seemingly get a pass when it comes to dropout rates – perhaps because in the past, higher education was considered more of a privilege and less of a right. A college dropout was simply walking away from the assumed higher quality of life that came with the degree but still had opportunity to excel without it

That’s not the case anymore. As of 2013, 17.5 million students were enrolled in U.S. colleges and universities. More than ever, colleges and universities have a responsibility to not simply admit students, but ensure they are guided properly to graduation. In other words, institutions of higher education should not be able to just take their student’s money and say “good luck.” They should provide the tools necessary for students to successfully achieve a college education and anticipate the issues that could prevent that.

Authors Ben Miller and Phuong Ly discussed the issue of the U.S. colleges with the worst graduation rates in their book College Dropout Factories. Within the pages, the authors encouraged educators at all levels to acknowledge that colleges and universities should share responsibility for successful or failing graduation rates and that the institutions with the worst rates should be shut down. Perhaps the most terrifying suggestion in the book (for colleges and universities) was that public institutions with low graduation rates would be subjected to reduced state funding.

The book was written based on findings from Washington Monthly that ranked the U.S. schools with the lowest six-year graduation rates among colleges and universities, including public ones like the University of the District of Columbia (8%), Haskell Indian Nations University (9%), Oglala Lakota College (11%), Texas Southern University (13%) and Chicago State University (13%). These stats were published in 2010, so they are not the most current available but a quick scan of the University of the District Columbia’s official page shows graduation rate numbers through the end of the 2003 – 2004 school year. The past nine years are nowhere to be found. The school boasts 51.2 percent underrepresented minorities in the study body, including 47 percent that are Black – but what good are those numbers if these students are not benefitting from their time in college because they receive no degree?

In the case of Chicago State University, the latest statistics show some improvement from the 2010 ones. The six-year graduation rate is up to 21 percent – but the transfer-out rate is nearly 30 percent. The school has 92 percent underrepresented minorities that attend – 86 percent who are black and 70 percent who are female – but again, what good does any of that do if these traditionally disadvantaged students are not graduating?

In all cases of college dropout factories, the P-12 institutions chalk up a victory on their end. They graduated the students and also saw them accepted into a college. What happens after that is between the students and their higher education choices.

This, to me, is a problem. The accountability for student success extends beyond the years that they are in P-12 classrooms. Graduation from high school, and acceptance into college, should never be the final goal of P-12 educators. That is not a victory. That is only halftime.

As far as the colleges and universities are concerned, higher accountability should be demanded from educators, students, parents and any Americans that want the best economy and highest-educated population. Public institutions, in particular, should be subject to restructuring or take over if dropout rates are too high. The lack of delivery on the college degree dream at many of these schools is appalling, frankly, and has gone on long enough.

They’re all making it worse

Evidently, it’s not just one person or one group causing all the issues. This is a multifaceted problem…and it is one that will, unfortunately, price a lot of lower-income people out of their number one ticket for social mobility in America. It will be a shame if we cannot figure out how to fix a broken system.

Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education, Special Report December 16, 2016

The HBCU Advantage, Part I: A Lesson in Thriving While in Dire Financial Straits

Today, most Historically Black Colleges and Universities fight financial ruin as they struggle to find their new position in today’s integrated world. Getting the funds to not only survive, but blossom, is an exercise in creativity—and HBCUs are up to the challenge. Want to know how? This chapter covers some of their latest undertakings.

Why HBCUs love donations (hint: it’s not the money)

Stephen A. Smith, best known for his work on the ESPN show “First Take,” plans to give $250,000 to his alma mater, Winston-Salem University. According to Journalnow.com, Smith is dedicated to aiding the school he loves.

Smith made the announcement during a fundraiser for Winston-Salem where he pledged to give $50,000 per year for the next five years to the school.

While speaking, Smith said that HBCUs need assistance and that he and other alumni should step up to the plate to help the schools thrive.

“A lot of HBCUs are hurting financially, but I’m here to tell you they are needed in a big way.”

Smith was a big hit at breakfast, and his announcement regarding his generous donation came as a shock to the university. Smith did not mention it ahead of his speech, apparently, and so the sounds of shock in the room were genuine. Elwood Robinson, the school’s chancellor, was left speechless because he was unaware that Smith planned to give so much back to the school at one time.

“But to do what he did and back it up like that and it’s just tremendous. It just speaks of the commitment he has to this university, and it goes back to what Big House Gaines taught so many of his players and students, and that’s to give back,” said Robinson.

Big House Gaines was Smith’s basketball coach when he attended Winston-Salem, and because of Smith’s generosity towards his former school, he was inducted into the Big House Gaines Hall of Fame.

I think what Smith did is admirable and will hopefully set the stage for other HBCU alumni to donate to the schools that helped them reach success. With so much competition for education available, it’s important that HBCUs are supported both in spirit and in tangible funds by the people they have graduated.

It’s not just alumni donations that are welcome. Donations from outside organizations seem to be popular as well.

One church was certainly generous with its gifts

Many students headed to Historically Black Colleges and Universities this fall received fantastic going away presents from Alfred Street Baptist Church in Alexandria, Virginia. It gave away more than $2 million in scholarships to high school students on their way to HBCUs later this year.

The event held at T.C. Williams High School, the school made famous by the movie Remember the Titans starring Denzel Washington, hosted the 14th annual HBCU College Festival where more than 3,000 students, parents, and volunteers attended.

More than 60 HBCUs were represented at the festival, and many students attained full ride scholarships to an HBCU.

Over $40,000 in application fees were waived, and in addition to the full scholarships given, close to 170 students received merit scholarships on site.

With over 5,000 students registered to attend, the event was the largest in the festival’s history. While students from Virginia were there, others came from areas such as Florida, New York, Illinois, and other places.

It was, to say the least, a resounding success. The event showed why HBCUs are so important and how the community may come together for a great cause.

Some students who received scholarships and money for college at the event may have received a once in a lifetime opportunity as the cost of college tuition, and fees continue to rise.

State legislators have cut into budgets for higher education, and Congress has attempted to curtail the available dollars for Pell Grants.

But the great news for students who may see a bleak future due to current events is that we still have organizations and churches that are willing to provide support for students who need it, and for those who deserve it.

Next year’s festival is likely to be just as successful, and with more than $2 million given out in scholarship money this year, hopefully, more is handed out in 2017.

Let’s look at another donation given to support HBCU excellence

Duke Energy is putting its financial support behind Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

By way of Prnewswire.com, the energy giant gave a grant of $35,000 to the North Carolina organization The Institute to supports its new HBCU Leadership Exchange.

A non-profit that supports business diversity, The Institute will soon launch the HBCU Leadership Exchange to help support and forge relationships between corporations and students enrolled at HBCUs in North Carolina.

In short, The Institute’s new program will look to connect students at HBCUs with jobs in corporate America. It’s not a bad program to build as diversity within the corporate field–specifically technology–is always a hot button topic.

The Institute has a track record of aiding minority business development as the group offers services to assist the growth of small businesses. As The Institute has been around for more than three decades, the HBCU Leadership Exchange is starting off with strong backing.

Also–Duke Energy gives close to $30 million in grants each year in areas such as education, economic development, the environment, and much more.

But this new program has potential to serve a grand number of black students. While the grant from Duke Energy isn’t substantial, it at least gives The Institute a portion of the starting funds needed to help launch the program.

With no reason to believe that the exchange will not have success, Duke Energy will likely to continue to provide financial support that will only grow in the future.

As mentioned previously, the goal of this new exchange is to foster relationships between corporations and HBCU students.

Students who are looking for jobs in a specific area will likely be paired with mentors or given the opportunity to meet and greet leaders from certain industries.

With growth and limitless potential on the horizon, students at HBCUs in North Carolina should be excited about this new venture.

Here’s something interesting about the nature of these donations: they’re not just about helping the schools stay afloat. A lot of money goes to help students go to school, preparing the next generation of students for the workforce. Notice also the donation to The Institute, where the eventual goal is better-represented leadership in corporate America. The money that is being used to further HBCU causes is an investment in tomorrow, rather than a means to survive today. There’s something admirable about this.

Is the government finally on board? Government support increases

In recent years, it seems like HBCUs have been dwindling into obscurity. They have been fighting potential obsolescence as more black students choose to attend predominantly white universities. To stick around, they have needed to rebrand themselves or establish the kind of reputation that keeps students dying to attend. Unfortunately, many schools have been unable to do this and have faced de-funding and closing.

But it seems as if recently, the government is realizing just how important these institutions are.

For example, to advance the goals of HBCUs, North Carolina Congresswoman Alma Adams has introduced the HBCU Innovation Fund Act. The bill would create a fund that would make the availability of $250 million in grants open to Historically Black Colleges and Universities.

To improve viability, student achievement, rates of graduation, enrollment figures, and more, the accessibility of grant money to HBCUs would help to push them towards modernization.

As HBCUs continue to receive press regarding how some schools are doing financially, and if segregation regarding offered programs occurs, it is refreshing to see that all HBCUs may receive a boost if this bill passes.

The legislation, H.R. 4857, was lauded by the United Negro College Fund as innovative and has over 15 co-sponsors in Congress.

If the bill passes, it will open HBCUs up to more than just money and opportunity. Grant money would be used to help remodel certain courses and create new programs. As with the new Queer and Cultural Studies program being offered at Bowie State University, more programs of this nature may be cultivated through HBCUs if H.R. 4857 is passed.

There will be more opportunities for inclusion and recruitment, and retention efforts will certainly increase.

Some HBCUs struggle to maintain strong enrollment numbers, particularly in a culture where online learning often replace on-campus initiatives. This bill would hopefully help many HBCUs create stronger programs to go after more students.

But more than anything, this legislation would make HBCUs more competitive in an educational environment that has changed. Some schools have failed to keep up, through no fault of its own, and some are beginning to fall behind.

Stemming that tide and keeping HBCUs around so that more students of color are served, and the cultural importance of each school is maintained, an HBCU fund for innovation and is needed and welcomed.

It may be a while before the HBCU Innovation Fund Act makes its way into law. Fortunately, there will also be more immediate funds available for HBCUs over the next fiscal year.

According to Salisburypost.com, funding for the federal program that provides financial assistance for HBCUs will increase nearly $400 million. That’s good news for some of the country’s oldest universities and trailblazers for providing a college education for everyone.

“The omnibus spending bill provides a $22 million increase for the Title III Strengthening Historically Black Colleges and Universities program administered by the U.S. Department of Education, providing the largest funding boost for the program in six years. As a result, total program funding will increase to $387 million in Fiscal Year 2016.”

The new money included in the spending bill will continue to help some of these schools recruit new students, replenish endowments, and perhaps most important, buy cutting-edge technology.

United Negro College Fund CEO Dr. Michael Lomax believes that this funding will work towards making HBCUs more attractive to new students and said as much in the Salisburypost.com article. I share Dr. Lomax’s belief that HBCUs need to be protected as part of the important college landscape in America.

For the past couple of years, the HBCU category of schools has been under increased scrutiny due to financial reasons and because some schools have been forced to close. There has also been some criticism that the very roles HBCUs were created to take on are not as relevant in today’s diverse college population. I’d argue that the first problem can see potential improvement with federal funding and a bigger cash influx from alumni, private donors, and business partnerships. I’d also argue that though the primary role of HBCUs has evolved, they are more relevant than ever and we should continue to support them.

While increased funding will not cure each and every problem that HBCUs have, it will alleviate some of the financial pressure that some schools face – so I think this funding is a step in the right direction.

Creative ways HBCUs are generating revenue

Many institutions of higher education are looking to carve new avenues to create revenue.

Howard University is no exception—except that it has stumbled across something old to inject new money into the university.

Jair Lynch Real Estate has entered into a deal with Howard University to develop Meridian Hill dormitory into luxury rentals available to the general public.

The move will ease some of the financial pain the school has felt over the years. An idea first pitched by Howard President Wayne Frederick a couple of years ago; the school finally pulled the trigger on the deal this month.

According to Washingtonpost.com, Howard will still own the property and required Jair Lynch to pay an upfront fee of $22 million for the rights to redevelop the property.

Over the past few years, Howard’s financial health has come into question as the school’s credit has been downgraded twice and the school’s staff has been reorganized or cut.

To contend with those issues, Frederick identified the school’s real estate as a way to drive new income. Valued at over $1.5 billion, Howard has a lot to review regarding what it may sell or lease.

But Frederick and school officials aren’t ready to sell off everything. Taking their time to evaluate what’s in the school’s best interest, they don’t seem to be in a rush.

Every move hasn’t been met with open arms. The school has decided to enter into an FCC auction for its airwaves that may bring in upwards of $461 million. That would mean that Howard would rid itself of WHUT-TV; a sale that is sure to upset alumni and students.

The decision to enter into the auction isn’t final as the school has until March to decide if it still wants to participate. Howard may decide to opt-out as there is no guarantee that it will receive a value of $461 million for its airwaves.

I applaud Howard’s decision to tap the resources it already has to stabilize revenue, and it will be fascinating to see what sort of interest is sparked for the luxury apartments.

Conclusion

Overall, it’s great to see how much support HBCUs are getting, and how much effort the colleges themselves are putting into being their best yet. While it’s true that we are in challenging times for HBCUs, the moves HBCUs and their supporters are making will ensure that these challenges are merely growing pains, rather than the end of the road.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education December 16, 2016

How Colleges Can Maintain Diversity in a Trump-Led America

The shock of the Presidential election results is still sinking in across America, for both Trump supporters and anti-Trump voters. The thing that seemed outlandish and completely impossible just a year ago has now become the reality for Americans. The truth remains, however, that come January 20 the nation’s highest office will be helmed by Republican Donald Trump.

Based on his campaign rhetoric there is a lot of understandable fear regarding the state of diversity in the nation and what it all means for marginalized groups like minorities, LGBTQ+ individuals, and even women. What happens in the next four years remains to be seen but colleges, our nation’s hotbeds for diversity progress, can take some actions to ensure that they are just as inclusive and progressive in four years as they are today.

Here’s how to keep college and university campuses moving forward for diversity in a Trump-led America:

Talk about the issues.

Trump’s platform rose to popularity on issues like illegal immigration, tax-funded health insurance, and abortion rights. Facilitate conversations at the college-wide level about these issues, looking at the best outcomes for a more diverse America while truly examining the opposing views. This can take place in classrooms but should also happen at a college-wide level at forums or other university-hosted events. Don’t just dismiss xenophobia or white privilege as “bad” – talk about why people put their faith in those things and how to turn the tide from fear to understanding. Allow students to learn from each other in an organic way that doesn’t hand down a black-or-white decree on the issues. Colleges must lead the discussions on these issues so the next generation of educated graduates has a broader world view and deeper awareness.

Prepare for less student aid.

Under the Obama administration, plans for two years of free community college for all students who maintained the right course load and grade-point average were under way. It’s reasonable to assume that Secretary Clinton would have furthered that plan and also reasonable to assume that Mr. Trump will not. Things like Pell grants and federally-funded aid are likely to tank or at the very least, remain stagnant. Colleges and universities that want to keep increasing the diversity on their campuses must put actionable plans in place to make that happen. This includes more private scholarships, along with more reasonable costs for students and spending plans for attendance. Early high school recruiting will becomes more important than ever so colleges and universities can target a diverse population and get those students prepped for college costs and financial aid programs.

Prepare for funding cuts.

One of Vice President-elect Mike Pence’s claimed successes in his home state of Indiana was a fiscally stronger state (at least on paper). The reality of that was cuts to education, specifically public education, and the juvenile criminal justice system (among other areas). Public colleges and universities should expect to see less funding across the board in an attempt to “repair” national spending. Private colleges could feel the sting too when it comes to federal funds for student aid and other eligible campus spending. Every college campus has different needs but thinking ahead, right now, about ways to salvage diversity programs and support programs for disadvantaged students is vital to keeping those services afloat and thriving. How can your school continue to support the students that need diversity programs the most?

Tap alumni giving.

Most colleges and universities already have a robust alumni giving program in place but the urgency now for outside funds is greater than it was before this election. If there are programs that will see funding cuts, let alumni know the specifics. Share information about what funding is going down and how they can help boost it back up. If graduates know about the specific need they are more likely to give. Alumni who appreciate what a diverse campus and student support services did in their own lives will be more likely to give if they know a program is going to be cut or eliminated completely. Alumni are usually passionate about the place they earned their higher education, and will help to keep it successful if they can.

Fear is understandable – but preparation is smart. Trying to control what we can right now when it comes to protecting diversity on college campuses can make the difference in what we see regarding it when these four years are up.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, Policy & Reform December 15, 2016

Scholarly collaboration: it’s time for the global South to call the shots

This article was written by Clive Kronenberg

Collaboration is, without a doubt, a positive and important part of academic life. Scholars benefit enormously when they’re able to develop teamwork skills for conducting research jointly or in partnerships.

Scholarly alliances can lighten the heavy burden of publishing in high-class international journals. It makes investigative ground work and funding procedures far less intense. It enables more scholars to share in successes. It is also crucial to identifying and grasping seemingly intractable social problems. All of this can benefit entire regions and even nations.

But there are also pitfalls and problems. Scholars from the global north still tend to dominate such “partnerships”. With more capital in hand, they often call the shots. Over the past decade or so, there have been some attempts to change these power dynamics.

The South-South Educational Scholarly Collaboration and Knowledge Interchange Initiative – or S-S Initiative – fits into this mould.

I am among those who initiated this endeavour. Over the past 18 months or so, its work has yielded some valuable lessons, insights and results. We’re a small group of academics with a shared focus on rural education. We all come from areas in the global South: Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America. Together, we’ve set up good, effective working engagements.

A history of oppression

In 2014 I started developing a national data base of rural education researchers. My goal was to boost general awareness of, and possibly create linkages between, local scholars dedicated to producing new and improved knowledge of a globally neglected yet crucial area of public schooling.

This culminated in the S-S Initiative. Current participants and collaborators are from Cuba, Zimbabwe, Democratic Republic of Congo, Argentina, Mozambique, Rwanda, and South Africa. Scholars from Colombia, Mexico, Kenya, Malawi and the Ivory Coast have also expressed interest in getting involved. It’s clear, then, that participants have something in common beyond their interest in rural education: they all come from countries that have historically been the victims of acute colonial oppression, marginalisation and underdevelopment.

This history continues to negatively impact on the provision of good, quality education, particularly in the realm of rural schooling.

There are many potential approaches to the global problem of rural education. There currently exists a range of secluded, often insulated remedial measures and strategies concerning this sector. These must be shared to develop and increase knowledge that ultimately is mutually beneficial. It is important to create suitable spaces where such prospects can be presented, engaged, and eventually applied where feasible.

Broad goals

The initiative has several key aims. With appropriate interest and support, these will be expanded and developed over time.

First, we’re reaching out to rural education scholars from the global South to join the membership data base. This provides opportunities for the exchange of ideas and experiences, as well as the possibility of launching partnerships in future.

It also sets the groundwork for conference presentations as well as the constitution of review boards. The selection of postgraduate supervisors and external examiners are further opportunities under consideration. In this way, experts can come together and apply their insights and work in a collective manner. Such a course, we hope, will offer suitable prospects to initiate and advance meaningful change in the broader S-S educational field.

We have launched a call for book chapters on the topic of rural education. It is hoped this will eventually lead to the formal establishment of a South-South Educational Journal, with a duly-appointed international review board. There is a dearth of academic journals collectively or especially devoted to learning and teaching practices in the global South as a whole.

It is not a question of expertise: scholars in this initiative have deep knowledge and experience of academic publishing. While some occupy leading positions on editorial boards, others have played key roles in actually establishing and administering academic and scientific journals.

We also hope to merge DVD documentary production with educational field research. This has the potential to reach a wider audience, thereby bringing parents and communities more decisively into the research fold. Schools and children thrive more when parents are more engaged in education.

Together with a dedicated, supportive team, I have already produced one DVD of this nature. A second is close to completion. And, with a colleague in the S-S Initiative, plans are underway for a documentary about rural schooling in the Republic of Cuba.

Small, steady steps

Funding will always be an issue for academics, particularly those from less developed territories. Fortunately, the S-S Initiative was enriched and boosted with funding I received from South Africa’s National Research Foundation. This allowed us to organise a symposium hosted at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology’s Education Faculty.

This gathering brought together a range of educational research scholars from the global South. Established, emerging and postgraduate scholars presented their work with special attention devoted to rural education. It was, as such spaces can be, fertile ground for the exchange of ideas and knowledge. It also allowed us to discuss possible future collaborations.

At their best, these kinds of initiatives don’t just benefit individual academics. Our hope is that by drawing together experts from the neglected global South, rurally-based school children’s educational development can take centre stage.

Clive Kronenberg, NRF Accredited & Senior Researcher; Lead Coordinator of the South-South Educational Collaboration & Knowlede Interchange Initiative, Cape Peninsula University of Technology

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, International Education December 15, 2016

What would The UK government’s plans to cut student immigration by 50% mean for education in the UK?

The UK government is planning on slashing non-EU expat student numbers almost in half from 300,000 to 170,000 under tougher student visa rules. The threat is being greeted with dismay by university heads, who have claimed that some very good overseas applicants have already been refused visas on specious grounds.

Amber Rudd, the home secretary, has pledged a crackdown on international student numbers at the Conservative party conference to include more stringent visa rules for “lower quality” universities. However, senior universities are warning that the cutbacks could be far more severe than predicted, with one route to cut the current 300,000 to 170,000 a year.

According to the vice-chancellors’ umbrella group, international students bring more than £10.7bn to the UK economy.

Judgments being made by UK Visas and Immigration have apparently altered considerably in the past few months, with Indian students, in particular, being targeted.

Heads of Universities are reportedly fearful of speaking out about these decisions in case it counts against future applicants to their institution. Below however are some examples that the Guardian online shared of expat students being denied visas:

– One applicant was considered not to be genuine because he did not know the university library opening times.

– One applicant was excluded for not knowing the name of the vice-chancellor of the university.

– One applicant was denied a visa for dropping below the amount specified in a bank account by a ‘couple of pounds’ on one day out of a 90-day period, despite his parents having huge funds and their account also being submitted.

Theresa May’s government is pursuing the target of reducing net migration into the UK to the tens of thousands, which has led it to this target non-EU student numbers. However, since taking office, net immigration has seen an increase. This is chiefly because several more students from outside the EU are coming to study at universities and language schools in the UK.

If the UK really want to be open to the world and a global leader in free trade, they can only do so by welcoming the fresh talent. If international students are going to study in the UK, they need to feel welcome, and so even a hint that students are unwelcome and they will go elsewhere. This isn’t about students claiming British citizenship, it’s about them feeling welcome enough to be able to complete their studies without anti-immigrant rhetoric from sending them elsewhere.

Members of the UK’s home affairs select committee have cautioned against these measures, claiming they could be hugely harmful to what is currently thriving and successful industry. These changes could potentially not only be economically detrimental to the UK, but also vital to the UK’s international relations.

Rebecca Harper is a freelance writing living in London. She writes about law, politics and immigration. When she isn’t writing, you can find her searching the cafes of London for the perfect flat white.

Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Equity, HBCU's, Higher Education December 15, 2016

After Fisher: affirmative action and Asian-American students

Michele S. Moses, University of Colorado; Christina Paguyo, Colorado State University, and Daryl Maeda, University of Colorado

After eight years, the Abigail Fisher case finally has been put to rest. In a landmark judgment on June 23, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of race-conscious affirmative action in university admissions.

Abigail Fisher, a white woman, had sued the University of Texas at Austin (UT Austin) for its race-conscious admissions policy after she was denied admission. She had argued that the university violated the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Supporters of race-conscious admissions programs are understandably gratified. But has the case resolved the larger moral and political disagreements over affirmative action?

Roger Clegg, president of the Center for Equal Opportunity, which supports colorblind policies, has already called the decision just “a temporary setback.”

Indeed, over the last 40 years, affirmative action opponents have repeatedly strategized anew after important Supreme Court decisions in favor of affirmative action. They did so after the 1978 decision in Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, when the Supreme Court, while allowing race to be one of the factors in choosing a diverse student body, held the use of quotas to be “impermissible.“

And they did so after the 2003 decision in Grutter v. Bollinger, when the high court again ruled that race-conscious affirmative action was constitutional.

We are scholars who study affirmative action, race, and diversity in higher education. We believe that the disagreement about affirmative action will not
end anytime soon. And it may well center on lawsuits on behalf of Asian-American college applicants.

Here is what is coming next

Through his organization, the Project on Fair Representation, Abigail Fisher’s advisor, Edward Blum, is currently engaged in a lawsuit challenging Harvard University’s race-conscious admissions policy.

What is different about the Harvard lawsuit is that the lead plaintiff in the case is not a white student. The plaintiff is an Asian-American student.

Asian-Americans participate in an Advancing Justice conference. Advancing Justice Conference, CC BY-NC-SA

“Students for Fair Admissions,” an arm of the Project on Fair Representation, filed a suit against Harvard College on November 17, 2014, on behalf of a Chinese-American applicant who had been rejected from Harvard. The lawsuit charges that Harvard’s admissions policy violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which bars federally funded entities from discriminating based on race or ethnicity.

The “Harvard University Not Fair” website greets readers with a photo of an Asian-American student accompanied by the following text:

“Were you denied admission to Harvard? It may be because you’re the wrong race.”

How it started

This controversy over how Asian-Americans are being treated in selective college admission was jump-started in 2005, when sociologists Thomas Espenshade and Chang Chung published findings from their study on the effects of affirmative action bans on the racial and ethnic composition of student bodies at selective colleges and universities.

Espenshade and Chung found that if affirmative action were to be eliminated, the acceptance rates for black and Latino applicants would likely decrease substantially, while the acceptance rate for white applicants would increase slightly. But more than that, what they noted was that the acceptance rate for Asian-American applicants would increase the most by far.

As the researchers explained, Asian-American students “would occupy four out of every five seats created by accepting fewer African-American and Hispanic students.”

Such research has been cited to support claims of admissions discrimination against Asian-Americans.

In the complaint against Harvard, Espenshade’s research was cited as evidence of discrimination against Asian-Americans. Specifically, the lawsuit cited research from 2009 in which Espenshade, this time with coauthor Alexandria Radford, found that Asian-American applicants accepted at selective colleges had higher standardized test scores, on average, than other accepted students.

Are elite institutions discriminating against Asian-Americans in their admissions process? Kevin Lamarque/Reuters

These findings, especially that Asian-American applicants seem to need a higher SAT score than white applicants or other applicants of color in order to be admitted to a selective college are being used as proof that elite institutions like Harvard are discriminating against Asian-Americans in their admissions processes.

The picture is more complicated

As we know, selective admissions processes are much more complicated than SAT score data can show. There are many factors that are taken into consideration for college admission.

For example, in the “holistic” admissions processes endorsed by the Supreme Court in Grutter v. Bollinger, standardized text scores are not the only, or even the main, criterion for admission. “Holistic” review takes many relevant factors into account, including academic achievement, of course, but also factors such as a commitment to public service, overcoming difficult life circumstances, achievements in the arts or athletics, or leadership qualities.

So, why would the plaintiff in the Harvard case conclude that the disparities in SAT scores shown by Espenshade and Radford necessarily indicate that Asian-American applicants are being harmed by race-conscious affirmative action?

Legal scholar William Kidder has shown that the way Espenshade and Radford’s findings have been interpreted by affirmative action opponents is not accurate. The interpretation of this research itself rests on the faulty assumption that affirmative action is to blame if an academically accomplished Asian-American applicant gets rejected from an elite institution.

Based on his analysis, Kidder concluded,

“Exaggerated claims about the benefits for APAs [Asian Pacific Americans] of ending affirmative action foster a divisive public discourse in which APAs are falsely portrayed as natural adversaries of affirmative action and the interests of African American and Latinos in particular.”

In our opinion as well, focusing on simplistic ideas about standardized tests as the primary evidence for who “deserves” to be admitted to elite institutions like Harvard may serve to stir up resentment among accomplished applicants who get rejected.

As the “Harvard Not Fair” website and accompanying lawsuit demonstrate, these findings have been used to fuel a politics of resentment among rejected Asian-American applicants.

When speaking with reporters, Espenshade himself has acknowledged that his data are incomplete – given that colleges take myriad factors into account in admissions decisions – and his findings have been overinterpreted and actually do not prove that colleges discriminate against Asian-American applicants.

Are Asian-American students a monolithic group? Charlie Nguyen, CC BY

Moreover, in using images of Asian-American students to recruit complainants against Harvard and other highly selective institutions of higher education, the Project on Fair Representation relies on the idea that Asian-Americans comprise a monolithic group. In fact, the term “Asian-American” refers to a diversity of Asian ethnicities in the United States, whose educational opportunities and achievements vary widely.

The 2010 census question on race included check boxes for six Asian groups – Asian Indian, Chinese, Filipino, Japanese, Korean, and Vietnamese – along with a box for “Other Asian,” with a prompt for detailed responses such as “Hmong, Laotian, Thai, Pakistani, Cambodian, and so on.”

In addition, by casting plaintiffs as meritorious and deserving of a spot at an elite university, it also conveys the stereotypical received wisdom about Asian-American “model” students who are wronged by race-conscious affirmative action programs.

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

At this time, Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard College, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts, is pending.

Now that Fisher has been decided, this case is the next front in the divisive politics surrounding race-conscious affirmative action in higher education admissions.

Relevant to the Harvard case is that a civil rights complaint alleging that Princeton University discriminates against Asian-American applicants was dismissed in 2015 after a long federal Office of Civil Rights investigation.

Although public disagreement about the policy continues, affirmative action is an imperfect, but as yet necessary tool that universities can leverage to cultivate robust and diverse spaces where students learn. June 23’s Fisher ruling underscores that important idea.

Related to the coming public discussions about the Harvard lawsuit, we are of the opinion that race-conscious policies like affirmative action need to be supported. The fact is that “Asian-Americans” have diverse social and educational experiences. And many Asian-Americans benefit from affirmative action policies.

Michele S. Moses, Professor of Educational Foundations, Policy, and Practice, University of Colorado; Christina Paguyo, Post Doctoral Fellow, Colorado State University, and Daryl Maeda, Associate Professor of Ethnic Studies, University of Colorado

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Want college to be affordable? Start with Pell Grants

What are Pell Grants and why are they important?

Pell Grant value dips, tuition increases

Impact of GOP proposal

Diversity in Higher Education: The Issues Most People Don’t Think About

What Professor Esolen Gets Right about Diversity, Faith

Are HBCUs Under Attack? How Historically Black Colleges and Universities Can Stay Afloat in Today’s Landscape

Are College Payments Stealing America’s Livelihood?: The Forces Behind Skyrocketing College Costs

The HBCU Advantage, Part I: A Lesson in Thriving While in Dire Financial Straits

How Colleges Can Maintain Diversity in a Trump-Led America

Scholarly collaboration: it’s time for the global South to call the shots

A history of oppression

Broad goals

Small, steady steps

What would The UK government’s plans to cut student immigration by 50% mean for education in the UK?

After Fisher: affirmative action and Asian-American students

Here is what is coming next

How it started

The picture is more complicated

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

What are Pell Grants and why are they important?

Pell Grant value dips, tuition increases

Impact of GOP proposal

A history of oppression

Broad goals

Small, steady steps

Here is what is coming next

How it started

The picture is more complicated

The Harvard lawsuit comes next

Main Links

Blog

Pedagogue

My Profile

Are you sure you want to delete post?