Higher Education

The HBCU Advantage, Part II: Or How to Win When the Competition is Tough

HBCUs came into existence in vastly different times, when they were necessary for black students to attend college. Today, they have to be savvy if they want to stick around. Let’s take a look at the shift HBCUs are making to become prominent in today’s integrated culture.

There are many different business models out there, but in general, some serve the mass market and some appeal to niches. When it comes to today’s colleges, it’s easy to see PWIs (or predominantly white institutions) as “mass market” and HBCUs as “niche” schools.

HBCUs have also had long histories, were created to give a healthy university experience to specific populations of students, and are facing closures today as more and more students choose to attend mainstream colleges.

The question stands. How will HBCUs compete against PWIs that now accept and actively recruit minority students and have more resources to serve them? To stick around, HBCUs need to find solutions.

We’re seeing a lot of these solutions in action today. Here is how they are handling situations where the deck is stacked against them.

A solution for when affordability is no longer a good selling point

Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders wants to help students by giving them a free ride to college. Sanders’ plan calls for making public colleges and universities tuition free. It is, to him at least, a way to make American students the most educated in the world by making the way to college easier.

But some are criticizing Sanders for his plan because it would force states to pick up the extra tab; something that many states are struggling with currently. State legislatures have cut k-12 and higher education for years and don’t seem to be slowing down, even with improvements in the economy.

Another criticism being levied towards Sanders and his plan for college is that it will potentially destroy HBCUs. Representative James Clyburn (D-S.C.), who is supporting former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for president, has taken issue with Sanders’ free college plan.

Talking to the press earlier this week, Clyburn said that private HBCUs will begin to shut down because states will start to offer free tuition to public colleges. He continued his hits on Senator Sanders by saying that nothing in life is free including college.

For what it’s worth, Clyburn said that he believes in making college more affordable for anyone who wants to attend, just not free.

Clyburn’s assessment of Sanders and his plan for college was devoid of what it will cost as he is attempting to bolster Clinton’s stock with black voters.

To the point of what it may cost to make college free, Sanders has said that he will have to raise taxes to pay for covering college tuition. He wants to place a larger tax on Wall Street speculators which is likely to be a tough sell.

But for what he’s at least attempting to do, it’s not a bad idea. The cost of college has spiraled out of control, and many students have been priced out of even thinking of going to college. But he’ll have to deal with the potential consequences of what this may do to private colleges, including HBCUs.

A solution for when the state isn’t on your side

Issues with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) in Maryland continue as the Maryland HBCU faculty caucus put forth a protest at the state’s capitol in March 2016.

The group is demanding equality for HBCUs in the state as they claim that PWIs (Predominately White Institutions) receive better treatment from the state’s lawmakers.

From academic programs to funding, the caucus believes that the state is mistreating its HBCUs and demands better.

The divide runs so deep that a group of former students who attended the state’s four HBCUs filed a lawsuit that claimed that the state gave cover for Maryland PWI’s to commit academic segregation.

In essence, the state allowed for duplicate program offerings at Maryland PWIs when the state’s HBCUs already offered the same coursework.

A judge sided with the former students in their claim that segregation had indeed taken place.

Although the legal wrangling continues as neither side has been able to compromise on a solution that will satisfy either party, the protest leads its way back to the merits of the lawsuit: HBCUs receive improper treatment from the state.

To gain equal footing with Maryland’s PWIs, the caucus wants to eradicate all duplicate programs that are already offered at HBCUs within the state. Secondly, the group wants programs that are in high demand to be offered at Maryland’s HBCUs.

This will partially satisfy its needs, but there is still work to be done.

No resolution has been found, and there is no word on if the group’s suggestions, or demands, will be acted upon.

If anything, this shows just how fragile the relationship may be between state lawmakers and leaders at HBCUs. Some struggle financially, and because of that, those issues may show up in how the schools perform academically.

Hopefully, both sides may soon find a solution to an almost decade-old legal issue.

A solution that may lead to mixed results

In 2015, Historically Black College and University (HBCU) Albany State University (ASU) was forced to merge with Darton State College, a predominately white institution.

The merger was presented as ASU faced mounting financial issues. The school’s enrollment was declining as it dropped nearly 11 percentage points last year, and 15 academic programs were canceled due to money and enrollment issues.

Albany State had problems, and one way to fix them was to merge the HBCU with another school.

That’s where we find Darton State College; a predominately white institution (PWI) of higher education that focuses on two-year degrees.

But no matter, this move was seen as a way to eventually save a struggling ASU from itself. Bleeding money and students, the merger gave some students and leaders hope for the future.

That was until the school’s new mission statement was released. Operating under the banner of Albany State University, students were under the impression that the school would still be considered an HBCU and have that distinction noted in the mission statement.

Darton State’s student body is more diverse as just 45 percent of its student body is black. To accommodate, the state Board of Regents of the University System of Georgia proposed, and approved, a new mission statement that does not include Albany State University as an HBCU.

The old statement notes ASU’s status as an HBCU in the first sentence, while the new one only mentions that the school has historical roots.

Upset over the missing nomenclature, more than 300 ASU students protested the altered mission statement and walked out of the school’s Honor’s Day festivities as ASU President Dr. Art Dunning prepared to speak.

He promised those remaining that while HBCU is missing from the mission statement that ASU will remain an HBCU. Dunning was careful to note that ASU isn’t the only HBCU that doesn’t explicitly note that in its mission statement as seven other HBCUs fail to do so as well.

Dr. Dunning makes good points, but students there are likely feeling that their school is being taken away from them. Many black students choose to attend HBCUs because of the rich history and cultural significance that cannot be found on the campuses of PWIs.

Some probably feel that that experience may be taken away from them if even the smallest things–like a mission statement–is changed.

On the one hand, it’s great that ASU is here to stay. On the other hand, will moves such as the new mission statement dilute the HBCU experience and message? Could this school’s roots and purpose be forgotten in the long run now that its mission statement does not explicitly state that it is an HBCU?

A solution that fills a desperate need

Actor Nate Parker, best known for his work in movies Red TailsThe Great Debaters, and The Birth of a Nation, has started a new film school at Wiley College, a Historically Black College, and University.

The name of the program will be the Nate Parker School of Film and Drama and will open this fall.

Parker launched the school to increase opportunities for persons of color, specifically black people, who are interested in working in film. Parker said that that he wants the new school to cover everything involved in the filmmaking process including sound and lighting.

Familiar with Wiley College, Parker filmed the move The Great Debaters with actors Denzel Washington and Jurnee Smollett-Bell there nearly ten years ago.

In addition to creating the new school, Parker recently sold his newest and latest independent project, The Birth of a Nation, to Fox Searchlight for nearly $18 million.

The movie is based on Nate Turner’s slave rebellion in Southampton County, Virginia in 1831. Parker directs and stars in the film about Turner. Still, in production, The Birth of a Nation has a scheduled release date of October 7th, 2016.

The good news continues for Wiley as the state of Texas honored the school with three historical markers. Professor H.B. Pemberton, Matthew W. Dogan, and the man responsible for coaching the debate team known as the Great Debaters, Professor Melvin B. Tolson.

Between Parker starting a new film school at Wiley, and three figures that were vital to the success of the school, history continues to be made at Wiley College.

With varying news about the health and viability of HBCUs, Wiley College’s ability to remain innovative while attracting new talent is important and worth celebrating. This shows just how much America, and black students, needs HBCUs — for new opportunities like the new one that Nate Parker is creating on the campus of Wiley College.

A solution that promotes an interdisciplinary experience

North Carolina Central University (NCCU) is set to offer a new minor in the fall of 2016. Women and Gender Studies will make its debut at NCCU, and the school will be the first historically black college and university (HBCU) in North Carolina to introduce such a minor.

Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences Carlton Wilson believes that the minor will allow students new chances to research how events– current and in the past — are identified with women and gender.

In essence, this minor may be viewed as a subtopic of intersectionality where as one theory or subject may not be properly studied without the other. While the two words women and gender are certainly separate, it is tough to dismember each because of the power structures that are connected to them.

For example, we cannot gain context of what it is to be a woman without examining how hyper-masculinity, or just masculinity in general, has affected women. The same goes for gender.

The minor will delve deeper than what I just mentioned as African diaspora, women and their global experiences, equality, and more will also be studied by students who choose to select Women and Gender Studies as a minor.

Women and Gender Studies will be available to all students to select, and hopefully many will choose to do so. Courses attached to minors like this will teach students to think critically about issues and areas that impact them or their social structures directly. Race, class, sexism, religion, and so much more will be better understood once students successfully move through the coursework associated with Women and Gender Studies.

It will also give men who take the course a better understanding of just how privilege and masculinity create avenues of opportunities for them that may not be the same for women. I look forward to hearing more about the program once it launches.

A solution where companies are created just to serve HBCUs

Four former Historically Black College and University administrators have partnered with the Thurgood Marshall College Fund to start a new executive search firm.

Titled TM2 Executive Search, the goal of the new company is to pair candidates with administrative jobs at HBCUs.

Former president of Howard University, Sidney Ribeau; Dorothy Yancy, former president of Shaw University; John Garland, former president of Central State University; and Wayne Watson, former president of Chicago State University have all come together to form the aforementioned TM2.

What’s interesting and intuitive about the new venture is that it is the first of its kind for HBCUs. No other company will focus on the needs of HBCUs by searching for prospective employees to fill positions at these schools.

Getting into an arena that will surely help HBCU graduates, and help HBCU schools in the process, is a plus for those who support HBCUs and would like to continue that support post-graduation.

But one reason the effort was started was because many search firms that help colleges find administrators rarely focus on the need of HBCUs. There was an opening in the marketplace to address a specific need, and TM2 did just that.

Because HBCUs are steeped in history and have a deep culture that some may find intimidating or hard to read, the positions may be hard to fill through a traditional head hunting firm.

That may no longer be the case as TM2 gets started.

While the company is certainly focused on servicing HBCUs, one does not have to be a graduate of a Historically Black College and University to be considered for a position found through TM2.

More companies of this nature will hopefully be created in the future as the needs of HBCUs can be vastly different than those of predominately white institutions of higher learning.

A solution where HBCUs diversify their student bodies

Institutions of higher education have the felt the sting of budget cuts due to cramped state budgets. None more so than Historically Black Colleges and Universities as many black schools have turned to creative means to remain viable.

Some HBCUs are looking to their student bodies as a means to find new revenue. Recruiting students that aren’t traditional may eventually save some of the nation’s HBCUs.

Non-black students are starting to litter many HBCU campuses due to educational opportunities but also because so many schools are strapped for cash.

From students who are white to Asian, to Latino, HBCUs have to recruit non-traditional students to keep its doors open.

While this isn’t necessarily a discovery as HBCUs have always welcomed students who aren’t black, the number of non-black students on HBCU campuses is starting to rise.

As recent as 2014, the University of Pennsylvania reported that the non-black population of students at HBCUs is at least 20 percent.

It’s also worth noting that many colleges that have a traditional student population of white students have stepped up efforts to diversify its campuses with black students, which has decreased the enrollment at many HBCUs.

Of course, without a steady flow of students, schools are unable to keep its doors open, and with state legislatures continuing to cut money from education, HBCUs have to find new avenues of revenue.

But this news hasn’t come without controversy or concern. Some alumni at HBCUs that are turning its focus to welcome more non-traditional students on campus are concerned that their school’s changing demographic will upset the history and culture that many alumni and black students enjoy about HBCUs.

It is unlikely that HBCU campuses will be so overrun with non-black students that some will have to drop the HBCU moniker, but without a diversifying campus population and new ways to make money, HBCUs will be unable to remain open if the trend of tightening state budgets continues.

When you look for solutions, others notice

Take Presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders, for instance.

Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) has kicked off a tour of Historically Black Colleges, and Universities called “Feel the Bern.”

The presidential candidate will tour a host of HBCUs including Howard University, South Carolina State University, Jackson State University, Alabama State University, Florida A&M University, and many more.

Sanders is attempting to connect with young black voters by talking about issues that matter to them, such as income inequality and criminal justice reform.

According to nbcnews.com, Sanders, and his team face an uphill battle in states where black voters will be crucial, such as South Carolina.

“A recent Monmouth University poll showed Hillary Clinton’s lead at 69 to 21 percent over Sanders and other major polls show Clinton with a sizable lead over the Vermont senator.”

Sanders will need to ensure that his reach goes farther than just black students, but he also understands that the youth vote helped to welcome President Barack Obama to the Oval Office.

But Sanders has a radical message that resonates with college students. He has a plan to make college free for anyone who wants to attend and also wants to change America’s healthcare system over to single-payer.

That’s radical enough to bend the ear of any first-year political science major. While most believe Sanders isn’t a true contender for President, his messages are stirring up a lot of debate, particularly what some feel is a socialist view on what American life should be. His free college plan isn’t so radical, though, as President Obama has proposed the same for the first two years of community college for students who can keep their grades up.

It will be interesting to see how the young vote, and the minority vote, stacks up for Sanders. Will it be enough to elect him to the highest office in the land?

HBCUs are in the business of looking for solutions

There are many ways to react to the fact that PWIs are taking over. Giving up is one way, and as I’ve discussed on my website, some schools have. Fortunately, many schools are finding ways to serve the students of today. The HBCU advantage in 2016 is finding and providing the “missing link” for its students—and it’s different from what students needed in 1956.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Public universities have “really lost our focus”

Q&A with Christopher Newfield
Christopher Newfield

Since the 1970s, a “doom loop” has pervaded higher education, writes Christopher Newfield in his new book The Great Mistake: How We Wrecked Public Universities and How We Can Fix Them. Newfield, a professor of American Studies at the University of California, Santa Barbara, calls this loop “privatization” – the hidden and overt ways that “business practices restructure teaching and research.”

It’s a cycle in which colleges spend more and more money chasing research projects, building luxury dorms and academic centers to attract wealthy students, and engaging in activities that compel them to compete against each other, rather than focus on their own students. Newfield says he saw this first-hand while serving on the University of California’s planning and budget committee.

One consequence, according to Newfield: After decades of public universities raising tuition, legislatures have learned to rely even more on tuition increases to enable them to cut funding for public higher education.

Families suffer, of course, but the long-term impact transcends that. “The converting of public funding into higher tuition focuses the student on assuring her future income to cover higher costs and debt,” he writes. At stake, he believes, is a citizenry that sees college not as a place for in-depth learning and inquiry, but as a means to economic security, forcing colleges to conduct themselves more like a business, and less like a public good that all students can afford.

The Hechinger Report spoke with Newfield to learn more.

Society – culturally, economically and socially – gets the majority of the benefits. Here I’m using the work of some economists, particularly Walter McMahon, who has actually tried to count up all of the non-market benefits that universities generate.

My parents are first-generation college people, and they probably wouldn’t have gone if it hadn’t been free for them. The benefit of that was that society got two more productive, also politically more thoughtful, more complex people that had better health, people that were able to make contributions to their community, because they had incomes that allowed them to work only one job.

What’s happened since is, it’s just kind of an arrangement of convenience for state governments, for taxpayers, for business taxpayers, who’ve gotten a cheaper deal. But, it’s economically and socially less efficient to save money this way [by reducing state funding and relying on tuition plus businesslike revenue from research]. It’s also philosophically and economically incorrect.

Q: What’s one example of the way colleges have been behaving like businesses at the expense of students?

A: They had to look for multiple revenue streams really starting in the 1980s, and some of those were very high-value and glamorous … like technology-transfer revenues through patenting, increasing contracts and grants revenues, and increasing fundraising.

The national statistic is that universities have to put in 19 cents of institutional funds to make up, to get to a full dollar of their research expenditures. [And] this number is higher at public universities than it is at private universities. The last numbers that I saw are about 25 cents on the dollar of overall research expenditures at publics, and something like half that at privates. So there’s a public subsidy that’s going on at these institutions, through ongoing general fund contributions, that means that they’re just paying more of their own money … and not paying for what the public thinks it’s paying for, which is instruction, and some other kinds of core things.

There’s actually one article that was published on this in the general press that said on $3.5 billion in gross contract and grant revenues [at the University of California], they lose $720 million [in one year].

Q: Why were states increasing tuition – your book notes public colleges raised tuition by about 50 percent in the 1980s and 38 percent in the 1990s – even though, as you point out, state funding was growing slightly?

Because they were adding prestigious activities. And after U.S. News came in with [college] rankings in the late 1980s, it just really took off. Because they were having to compete for revenue, for overall amount of R&D expenditures, for selectivity rates, which were tied to the prestige of the faculty. … Bayh-Dole [legislation], in 1980, which is the door opening [for universities] to keep patenting revenues, was a driver that we haven’t talked about enough.

But I think some of it is just that it was more important to have a kind of a national profile than it was to do really good regional service. Shifting from regional service to national profile created competitive costs; you just tend to duplicate a lot of things that other people have. Then later, in the 1990s and 2000s, when you’re starting to compete for blue chip out-of-state students, the arms race in facilities accelerates, and just re-accelerates after 2008.

Q: What’s the most glaring example of privatization at work that you saw on the UC planning and budget committee?

A .We just started prioritizing private revenue streams, and energy and brains and additional positions were created in order to go after that other stuff. The Regents were pitched fundraising statistics and contracts and grants, gross statistics – always with the gross numbers, never with net. Undergraduates and academic graduates students became more of an afterthought at the senior management level. They were kind of the revenue source, in terms of tuition and general funds per capita, but then, after that, they were not at the center of policy. We really lost our focus.

Q: Let’s say there’s a reformer who’s sympathetic to the arguments in this book. Does she sit down with President-elect Trump? Or with her state’s governor? And what will that elevator pitch sound like?

She would say to Trump, you ran on making America great again. And to make America great again, you have to make the economy great again. And to make the economy great again, you have to bring all the non-college workers of the country into it. And to do that, to include the non-college, you have to rebuild open-access, high-quality, public universities. There is no other way. It can’t be job training. It can’t be political rhetoric. It can’t be browbeating a few companies to not off-shore their workers.

This has to be liberal arts and sciences. Rebuild high-end cognitive skills, so that these folks don’t just go down the street to the machinist shop that’s still open if they lost their factory job. They can be eligible for a whole range of jobs, or build jobs and businesses on their own with these skills.

This interview was conducted by telephone and lightly edited for length and clarity.

This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Read more about higher education.

America’s Nobel success is the story of immigrants

This article was written by Adil Najam

If it were not for Bob Dylan – the singer, songwriter and now Nobel laureate – 2016 would have become the first year since 1999 without a Nobel winner born in the United States.

Since World War II, the U.S. has dominated the four research Nobels (in medicine, chemistry, physics and economics). It did so this year too. But there was a difference: None of the nine scholars who shared the four research Nobel Prizes in 2016 was born in the United States. However, as many as six of the winners work at U.S. universities and now call the United States as their home.

In other words, this year, as in so many others, America’s Nobel success was a story of immigrants. At a time when immigration has become a hot-button issue, this fact did not go unnoticed, including by the White House.

So why does this matter?

I have been associated with U.S. academia for a quarter-century – first as a student from Pakistan and then as a researcher, a teacher and more recently a university administrator. I have experienced the magical embrace of U.S. higher education firsthand.

I believe the diversity of the Nobel winners is a testimony to the spectacular exceptionalism of U.S. higher education: U.S. academic institutions attract, welcome, embrace and ultimately benefit from the best intellectual talent from all corners of the world.

Race to the top

There are many things that make American higher education truly exceptional. Immigration, and the ease and openness of U.S. academia to scholars from across the world, is certainly not the only one.

But, it is an important one.

In fact, many other countries are trying hard, though less successfully, to replicate the U.S. experience. For example, countries such as Singapore, South Korea, even Saudi Arabia, which are investing heavily in building their own research universities, begin by trying to attract top researchers from across the world. They offer them incentives such as outstanding facilities and lucrative salaries.

Nobel Academy in Stockholm. William Marnoch, CC BY

Such incentives help. But they are not enough. U.S. universities are quite unique in the way they welcome and embrace talent, which helps attract the best in the world.

The journey of Nobel laureate Ahmed H. Zewail (who received the Nobel for chemistry in 1999) is illustrative of the exceptionalism of U.S. higher education and the culture of openness. Writing about his journey from his native Egypt to U.S. academia, Zewail describes how he was embraced by all the universities he was part of – whether as a student at University of Pennsylvania, as a postdoc at University of California, Berkeley or as a professor at California Institute of Technology.

“My science family came from all over the world and members were of varied backgrounds, cultures, and abilities. The diversity in this ‘small world’ I worked in daily provided the most stimulating environment, with many challenges and much optimism.”

America’s research excellence

The history of the Nobel awards is, in fact, a rather neat lens through which we can see this play out.

The very first American to win a Nobel in the sciences was Albert A. Michelson. He was awarded the prize in 1907 for his research on the measurement of the speed of light. Michelson’s parents had immigrated to the United States from Strzelno in then Prussia, now Poland, when he was only two years old.

Since its inception in 1901, the Nobel Prizes and the Prize in Economic Sciences have been awarded 579 times to 911 people and organizations. The U.S. alone has had more than 350 Nobel winners. More than 100 of these have been immigrants and individuals born outside of the United States.

No other country comes close. The two countries apart from the U.S. that can claim more than 100 laureates are the United Kingdom and Germany. What is noteworthy is that a number of winners of both these countries were living and working in the U.S. when they were awarded their Nobel.

In fact, if it were to be a category of its own, immigrants to the U.S. who won the Nobel, would would come second only to the U.S.-born laureates group. Their number exceeds that of laureates born in any single country.

The point is the global movement of intellect and ideas is often necessary and perhaps central to the creation of knowledge and production of great research. The United States has both immensely contributed to and benefited from the excellence of such research.

With increasing globalization, this trend will not slow down. If anything, this trend is on the rise and is likely to continue. Consider, for example, the research Nobels awarded to those in the United States in the last two years. Of the ten laureates who live, teach and work in the United States, all but one were born outside the U.S, and six studied in U.S. universities.

Attacks on openness are misguided

Great research is a truly global enterprise. In context of current conversations on immigration – and the notion that somehow immigrants might be thwarting America’s “greatness” – it is instructive to note just how much of America’s great success in Nobel Prizes has come because of immigrants.

Attacks on American openness are not just misguided, they are self-defeating.

Trump supporters in the United States – much like Brexit supporters across the Atlantic – seem worried that this embrace of the outsider is making America less great.

As America’s Nobel success testifies, they could not be more wrong.

The Conversation

Adil Najam, Dean, Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University

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

University transformation: the wrong research questions are being asked

This article was written by Anné H. Verhoef

“Transformation” is a word regularly in global higher education research. It normally implies deep change in knowledge and curriculum. It often entails questions about inclusion, identity, diversity, power, intellectual traditions and intellectual justice.

In South Africa, the word means something quite different in higher education. Its definition is rooted in the country’s apartheid history. The transition to democracy in 1994 gave impetus to transform the higher education system into one that was open, relevant and non-discriminatory.

The problem is that transformation is often loosely defined. There’s no clear consensus about its scope and aims. This lack of clarity means that research in South Africa about a wide variety of themes under the umbrella term of “transformation” may not actually be asking the right questions.

And asking the wrong questions means getting the wrong and irrelevant answers. It also sets back policy changes. Eventually this may discourage much needed transformation in higher education.

To understand what questions are and are not being asked, two of my colleagues and I analysed 1050 articles published in the South African Journal of Higher Education between 2005 and 2015.

We found four main patterns in how authors engaged with issues of transformation. We also identified a few shortcomings in their engagements. If these are addressed, it could help ensure that this crucial topic is properly understood. This can then be translated into solid, realistic policy and changes.

Research trends in South Africa

Only 30 of the 1050 articles we examined used the words “transformation”, “transformative” or “transforming” in their titles. We then analysed the 30 in more depth. Four quite distinct approaches to understanding transformation emerged.

These were transformation through curriculum; transformation through structures; transformation through redressing equity; and transformation through access.

1. Transformation through curriculum

Twelve articles positioned transformation in the higher education curriculum. They suggested that transformation takes place through what is taught and how it is taught, how results are measured and, for instance, how technology is integrated into teaching.

The articles in this pattern also presented a curriculum as something that’s flexible and constantly evolving. The authors explored the ways that professional development and student feedback could be used to test, critique and apply curricular reforms.

Some of the articles in this pattern presented teacher education as a space in which to start transforming the curriculum.

2. Transformation through structures

Nine articles related transformation to structures in higher education. There were three key aspects in these articles: ideas, practices and the role of structure in nation building; broader national trends such as higher education policy evaluation and reform; and the structures within institutions that influence transformation.

These structures include institutional culture underpinned by hegemonic forces that shape institutional transformation. That is: university education with whom, by whom and for whom. The research in this pattern explored how an institution’s leaders can emerge as sceptics or advocates for transformation. It also looked at transformation emanating from the institutional mergers of the mid 2000s.

3. Transformation through redressing equity

Six of the articles viewed transformation as redressing equity in higher education. In a post-apartheid South African context the expectation – as outlined in the Education White Paper of 1997 – is that

the higher education system must be transformed to redress past inequalities, to serve a new social order, to meet pressing national needs … to overcome the fragmentation, inequality and inefficiency which are the legacy of the past.

These articles viewed equity redress as being embedded in race, gender and class. They took the view that once universities open up access across class, race and gender – for students and staff – they’re on the road to transformation. These researchers referred specifically to the inclusion and exclusion of academic staff within institutions, including through recruitment policies.

So transformation was viewed as occurring through employment equity, the reconfiguration of power structures and alternative ways of conceptualising an institution’s staff diversity profiles.

4. Transformation through access

Three of the articles argued that access is a prerequisite for successful transformation in higher education. These articles contended that access was shaped by contextual and personal forces. In these arguments, specific reference was made to the access of black women academics. The articles also discussed the access to tertiary education of underprepared students.

These students struggled with language barriers or literacy challenges. They often battled to read and write in the language of instruction.

Shortcomings in research

These national research trends give close attention to the structural and ideological dimensions that shape transformation. This focus echoes the issues articulated in national policy.

The research trends we uncovered address some crucial aspects of transformation. But they fall short in three critical ways: internationalisation, interdisciplinary contributions and embracing transformation’s inherent complexity.

In higher education, internationalisation refers to universities crossing borders to attain certain academic, economic, political and cultural aims. It is the process of integrating an international and intercultural dimension into the core activities of higher education – teaching, learning, research and community engagement.

Internationalisation is necessary to broaden the discourse around transformation.

It’s also crucial that research in higher education should look beyond the education discipline alone. It needs to include input from other disciplines. The value of interdisciplinary research and education is that it increases competitiveness: knowledge creation and innovation frequently occur at the interface of disciplines. It also helps to ensure better educational programmes, which then improves students’ ability to work in a problem-oriented way.

Finally, embracing the complexity of transformation – understanding it as as a fluid open-ended construct rather than a static notion that is only focused on demographic changes – would help to bring about profound changes in the higher education domain.

If these approaches are given more attention in future research, South Africa’s policies can be greatly improved. This could make transformation in higher education tangible rather than just a pipe dream.

The Conversation

Anné H. Verhoef, Associate Professor in Philosophy, North-West University

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

Will “school choice on steroids” get a boost under a Trump administration?

A policy that Betsy DeVos, a voucher and charter advocate, might favor as education secretary

It’s called “Course Access” or “Course Choice.” Under such plans, the funding for a course taken by an individual student goes to the school or online company offering the course, often away from the student’s local district. In Nevada, in fact, parents can spend state education dollars any way they please — on private, public, online, part-time and full-time schools, on tutoring and extra books — through education savings accounts, which an advocate for them calls “the purest form of educational freedom.”

As they have emerged in some states, these programs have been assisted by conservative groups such as Jeb Bush’s Chiefs for Change and the Koch Industries-backed American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC). It remains to be seen whether a Trump Administration will boost them further, using federal policy.

The growth of “Course Choice” initiatives in various states was chronicled in depth by The Hechinger Report last year, in this story from our archives.

— The editors

Thanks to a relatively new state policy, all spring Clarke went to the school library during second period for an online sociology class.

“It was very cool,” said Clarke, noting it lived up to his psychology teacher’s description: “It was a very interesting topic with some things that will tie back to psychology.”

This initiative, often called “Course Choice” or “Course Access,” is, as one proponent described it, like “school choice on steroids.”

Proponents count at least 10 states that have adopted a collection of policies they began promoting as Course Access — policies that allow students to take classes part-time online (and sometimes in other off-campus classrooms) by choosing from a variety of providers, including charter schools and other districts, instead of being limited to their local course offerings or to one state virtual school. And the Course Access movement is gaining momentum as it expands across the country, with eight states adopting or considering such laws in just the last four years, according to a comprehensive report on Course Access sponsored by the conservative group the Foundation for Excellence in Education and the lobbying firm EducationCounsel.

For Clarke and other students, online schools mean options, but for school district officials, they can mean less revenue, as education dollars flow toward charter schools or other districts that offer the online courses.

And, not unlike what often happens with charter schools and vouchers, the Course Access policies can set up a competition for limited education dollars.

States generally allocate money per student to districts, but in states with Course Access, districts have to share that funding based on the number of courses a student takes elsewhere. Much of the money can end up in the hands of for-profit companies that supply the curriculum, directly provide the classes or run the online schools in which students enroll part time.

“What is possible is the exploding wiring — if you will — of money across district lines or even state lines,” said Patricia Burch, associate professor of education and policy at the University of Southern California. “That can have a very immediate funding implication for a district.”

“It is a significant cost,” said Randy Paulson, Chatfield High’s principal. His school, with 400 students, can manage it partly because no more than 40 students a year are taking an online class. In Chatfield’s case, nearly all the classes are provided by the Minnesota Virtual Academy, run by the Houston Public School District about 40 miles away, with help from the for-profit company K12 Inc.

“What we want to do is serve our own students the best we can,” said Paulson, noting that adding an online class or two sometimes helps keep students in school. “We don’t want to lose students. If we lose students, we’re not able to provide students those opportunities.”

Similar to efforts to open charter schools or offer vouchers for private schools, Course Access aims to allow students (usually in high school) and their families to make choices — in this case, about where to go for individual classes. Advocates believe that the programs have the potential to appeal to all students, even those who would never consider leaving their local schools or don’t have the option of a charter school.

“We think the market is infinite,” said Mary Gifford, senior vice president of education policy and academic affairs at K12 Inc., the nation’s largest virtual school operator, which provides the curriculum and some management for the school where Clarke and his classmates enrolled. She said that although no more than 1 or 2 percent of U.S. students will ever enroll in virtual schools full-time, the company is now working closely with districts to help them start online programs as part of Course Access policies.

So far, only a tiny fraction of eligible students have enrolled for online classes. For example, in Minnesota, which began allowing part-time online enrollment in 2006, roughly 1 percent (5,520) of the state’s secondary school students enrolled during the 2013-14 school year, according to the Minnesota Department of Education.

But the policy has powerful backers, including at least three Republican presidential candidates — former Florida Governor Jeb Bush, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal and Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker — along with conservative groups such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC, the Koch Industries-backed association of state legislators and businesses), not to mention allies in the for-profit education business.

“If you rewind and go back to the last election cycle, you had at least two governors campaigning on Course Access,” said John Bailey, vice president of policy at the Jeb Bush-founded Foundation for Excellence in Education, referring to governors Bruce Rauner of Illinois and Greg Abbott of Texas.

And the reform-minded group Chiefs for Change, also founded by Jeb Bush, is pushing to include a provision in the update to the federal No Child Left Behind Act to set aside 5 percent of Title I dollars to be used, among other things, for Course Access. (The House version of the bill already sets aside 3 percent, or roughly $410 million, mostly for outside tutoring services; changes could be made when the House and Senate versions are reconciled in conference committee.)

Many of these backers prefer the term Course Access to Course Choice, to distinguish it from school choice and the controversies surrounding it, and also as a way of indicating its focus on addressing many schools’ lack of course offerings.

As states around the country try to prepare more students for college and careers, they are working to provide more students with access to advanced classes, particularly in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The widespread lack of access to some key courses — only half of all high schools nationwide offer calculus and just 63 percent have physics — has become a rallying cry for Course Access supporters.

“Having a high-quality education must no longer depend on location,” wrote Jeb Bush in the introduction to last year’s Course Access policy brief. “For the next generation of students, the international stakes are too high to restrict access to great courses based on ZIP code.”

Yet at least so far, the program may not be living up to its promise of creating greater access for the very kids who might need it most. The students using the program in Texas are wealthier and whiter overall than the public school population as a whole, suggesting that gaps in access persist online. Data on the Florida Virtual School show a similar trend; in Utah, a stunningly low 6.15 percent of students participating in the state’s Course Access program are officially listed as poor enough to qualify for a fee waiver, though officials said course providers might not be filling out the information correctly.

Utah the model legislation and its aftermath

When Utah passed the law creating a Course Access program in 2011, school districts panicked over what it would do to their budgets.

“We were fearful because those who were pushing it were pretty intense,” said Ken Grover, now the principal of Innovations Early College High School in Salt Lake City, describing billboards that advertised free online courses.

The program — officially called the Statewide Online Education Program — has been phased in over time. High school students this fall will be able to take up to five classes online during the school year while remaining enrolled in their local high school. This past school year, when students could take four classes online, it cost districts up to $366 per student per semester, according to the Utah State Office of Education.

In the fall of 2016, students will be able to take up to six online classes (usually considered a full load of coursework) while remaining enrolled.

Utah’s Course Access legislation also allows kids in private schools and home-schooled kids to participate through a separate funding stream.

The Utah policy was the model for what conservative backers of the program had imagined. In fact, Utah’s legislation is one of two officially approved by the Koch-backed ALEC. (The other, which contains two possible funding options, is based on a law passed in Louisiana, though later overturned by its state court, and on the law passed in Texas.)

The disaster that public school districts in Utah anticipated never materialized — partly because, within a few months, many districts in the state had established online schools to compete for dollars with the online charter schools.

Canyons School District, for example, went from having no online students in 2011 to 1,900 this past year. They are all enrolled part time, and all but 400 come from within the district, said Darren Draper, who runs what he’s been told is the largest of the district’s part-time schools, the Canyons Virtual High School.

“That’s huge,” said Draper. “If we didn’t build CVHS, we would have many students going elsewhere, without question.”

In fact, just 1,367 students in the entire state took an online class outside their district in 2014-15, according to preliminary state figures, meaning district budgets were largely spared.

In the end, advocates of the change and public school officials who balked at the measure can both claim victory in Utah — at least so far.

Course Access backers, however, claim credit for creating the competition that spurred the public schools to change.

“We changed the landscape in the state entirely,” said Robyn Bagley, board chair for Parents for Choice in Education, a Utah group that advocated for the law locally. “The amount of options skyrocketed in some form or another.”

Bagley maintains that the program has already grown dramatically in its first four years and will expand further.

But Grover said he doesn’t expect to see a spike in numbers. “Most parents want their kids to go to school,” he said. “They want them at school learning. It’s their identity.”

(In perhaps a reflection of where online learning is headed, both Bagley and Grover now run blended-learning schools that they say offer the best of both worlds — the personalization of an online school with the in-person interactions of a traditional school.)

Although rural Texas districts depend on Course Access, statewide its enrollments have dropped

Rural school districts across the state of Texas are using its version of Course Access to offer courses to fulfill basic high school requirements and even to save money.

In the tiny Dell City Independent School District, with fewer than 100 children enrolled in kindergarten through 12th grade, every single middle and high school student was enrolled in an online social studies class after the district’s teacher left mid-year. Algebra II and Spanish classes were also offered virtually, said Veronica Gomez, a physical education teacher who doubles as the liaison to the Texas Virtual Academy Network, as the statewide program is officially called.

“We live in a rural area; it’s out in the middle of nowhere,” she said. “We don’t have the staff. Because we don’t have the staff, we have to go online.” The district hadn’t found a good candidate to teach Spanish, she said, but added that the online program has other advantages: “It’s cheaper for us. We don’t have to pay benefits or anything like that.”

Most Texas districts, however, appear to be taking a different route — they are opting to spend money on their own schools and teachers instead of paying for online classes.

When the state originally started up the Texas Virtual School Network Course Catalog, in 2009, students could take courses online without the districts having to cover the costs; the state had allocated a separate pool of money for the program.

But after the state stopped covering the cost, the number of spots filled in the semester-long online classes dropped precipitously, from 22,899 in 2010-11 to 5,757 in 2013-14. The wording of the state law may have been a major factor.

The law says that districts can turn down a student’s request for a state-vetted online class only if their school offers a “substantially similar” class. Backers of Course Access said they think many districts are using a generous interpretation of that concept (they tried unsuccessfully this spring to get the legislature to close that loophole).

Louisiana’s new source of funding for college and career classes

In a striking innovation, Louisiana adopted a program, officially called Course Choice, that includes not just online courses but off-campus classes as well. As the law was originally written in Louisiana, for-profit companies and other outside groups could compete to directly provide the online or in-person classes, with parents and students choosing among them and funding going to the winners.

The political opposition to the program was initially fierce, and the law was challenged successfully. The state Supreme Court ruled that the funding approach was unconstitutional because it didn’t provide local school boards a say. Lawmakers revamped the program, removing the competition for resources, allowing schools to control what classes their students enrolled in and adding additional money — in essence, guaranteeing extra funding for the extra classes.

The revised program has expanded rapidly, according to the Louisiana Department of Education, with 19,068 semester-long Course Choice enrollments in 2014-15, just its second year. While the state has been championed as the model for Course Access policies, state superintendent John White said the program hasn’t lived up to his original vision.

The program was originally conceived as a way to bring new and inspiring classes to high school students preparing for life after graduation, White said, with “things that would not have existed without Course Choice.”

Although a welding program, an elite private college’s associates degree program and an ACT-preparation program have successfully flourished as prime examples of innovation under the revised program, schools across the state are most commonly using the program to prepare high school students for life after graduation, specifically allowing students to earn college credit through the state’s four-year universities, technical and community colleges. More than two-thirds (13,000) of the course enrollments have been in these so-called dual-enrollment classes.

“That’s an important thing,” White said, but added, “much of that would exist — not all of it, but much of it would exist without Course Choice.” (Significant numbers of students already took dual-enrollment classes before Course Choice ever started.) He had also hoped, with the initial bill, to put decision-making control in the hands of parents instead of school boards, and argues that the program now has less innovation as a result.

White, who heads the Chiefs for Change group, said federal funding of Course Access, if changes are made to the No Child Left Behind Act, could drive further innovation, with outside groups essentially guaranteed a chance at significant funds. “You’re going to attract a lot of actors that you wouldn’t otherwise attract — creative actors,” he said.

Despite the wide consensus that the program is now working, critics still aren’t happy about how it was originally conceived in Louisiana. “I think it was an ALEC-driven, an American Legislative Exchange-driven, initiative that Superintendent White felt would work in Louisiana,” said the Louisiana School Boards Association executive director, Scott Richard, who helped launch a lawsuit against the state program as it was initially conceived.

“I think it’s all part of the national reform, so-called reform, from the national think tanks,” he added, arguing that the new form of Course Choice had provided districts with resources to make important changes.

White said his inspiration was the online experience in Louisiana and with charter schools and school choice generally, but acknowledged that, because schools are happier with the revised version of the program, principals and teachers are collaborating with the state on everything from scheduling problems to reaching students who hadn’t had access to courses in the past.

Some proponents of Course Access now say that a program that doesn’t start off as competitive for funding may be best.

“I don’t see one system as better than the other; they’re just very different,” White said.

Other options besides Course Access

Of course, for many advocates of Course Access, the program represents just one possibility for changing the public education system — their goal is to put more power in the hands of students and parents to decide where state education dollars are spent.

Nevada passed a law in June that allows parents to spend state education dollars any way they please — on private, public, online, part-time and full-time schools, on tutoring and extra books — through education savings accounts, or “vouchers on steroids,” as they were called in one news story about the legislation. (Four other states have similar laws, but they limit the savings accounts significantly — to students with special needs, in foster care and/or from high-poverty households.)

“I think Course Choice is sort of evolving, just as a policy area, into what you may know as an educational savings account,” said Lindsay Russell, the director of the ALEC Task Force on Education and Workforce Development. “We’re evolving as a country, and I think students continue to need to be competitive, not only within the United States, but globally as we continue to slip. I think educational savings accounts are the purest form of educational freedom.”

Course Access in its current form, while seemingly less radical than Nevada’s approach, appeals to some of its more conservative backers because it can be set up to pay schools and other course providers only when students complete a course (or potentially pass an outside exam).

Proponents call this a step toward accountability and paying for the right thing — results, instead of student attendance, especially given the dismal completion rates for online classes. (In Louisiana and Utah, providers of courses receive half on enrollment and half when the course is completed, for example.)

“Nevada is the poster child for seeing a different way to approach this,” said Michael Horn, co-founder and executive director of the Clayton Christensen Institute. “We need to step back and start learning what policy environments work in terms of incentivizing the right behavior. Course Access is this intriguing place to play with a lot of policies that move away from seat time toward competency-based learning and measuring individual student growth and things like that.”

This story was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Read more about blended learning.

Diversity in Higher Education: How to Get American Colleges to Catch Up to the 21st Century

As we become more fully entrenched in the 21st century, the American workplace becomes more diverse. But American colleges and universities still have a way to come before they can fully serve the changing demographics of the American labor market. How do we increase diversity in higher education. Stick around and find out:

  • Which schools reflect the diversity of our country and workforce
  • What colleges and universities can do to attract talent from all backgrounds
  • The shocking truth about diversity on the faculty level in most American colleges

The world we live in now

For many Americans, a shift is well underway.

HBCUs, for example, have served the purpose of adding greater diversity to the workforce by graduating more students of color. Yet, even today, inequalities exist in the workforce, and HBCUs need to prepare their students for this reality. Let’s look into this a little deeper.

Historically Black Colleges and Universities have always been places that encourage greater diversity when it comes to higher education, both on their campuses and in the greater college landscape. From their origins as being the only places people of color could go for a college education to their role today as welcoming all students and instilling cultural awareness, HBCUs stand as models of multicultural learning at its best.

Are HBCUs doing enough to prepare their students for the real workplace, though?

The reason so many college administrators, myself included, stand firmly by the necessity of HBCUs in contemporary college education is this: HBCUs provide a heightened diversity-centric environment that is not able to be duplicated in other settings. This is why these schools are so fantastic. But is all that idealism blindsiding our students later on? Do HBCUS give students a false sense of what to expect in the real workplace? There has to be a blending of what is actually happening in the workplace with what the ideal CAN be with the right people who work for it.

So how can HBCUs promote diversity while still preparing their students for the reality of the American workplace today?

Tell the truth.

Start with the facts of the workplace reality right now, today, this moment. This is so vital to students’ understanding of what they are going to face in the workplace. Yes, diversity is increasing in most fields (thanks in part to better college recruiting and minority programs) but things like the wage gap between minorities (including women) and white men have to be addressed. It’s okay to present these facts and not have a concrete solution in place. It is the responsibility of HBCUs to let their students know what they are up against – and inspire these students to make changes when given the opportunity.

Promote leadership.

Instead of teaching our students how to work for someone else, we should be training them to be leaders. This is true in every field and in every classroom. Have a group of education students? Encourage them to take that next step and become administrators. Students in health care? Set them up to be accepted to medical school. If you have a class of students who are interested in computer science, suggest pairing it with a business or entrepreneurship double major or minor. We should show our students the path to the next level, one step above what they are hoping to achieve, so that they can become the diverse decision-makers of tomorrow’s workplace.

Teach legal rights.

Our students should know what the boundaries are in workplaces when it comes to discrimination and how to recognize unfair treatment. We need to tell them how to report it, file lawsuits and hold their employers (or potential employers) accountable. At the same time, we should be sure our students aren’t wasting too much time in their careers looking for problems. It is important to know when something is unfair, but to put energy into building up careers for their benefit too.

Empower them with knowledge.

As cheesy as it may sound, an education is everything when it comes to breaking through workplace barriers. Minorities and women have to work twice or three times as hard as their peers to earn as much respect and money in the same roles. It’s not fair, but it is a fact – at least at this point in our country’s history as an economic powerhouse. What is learned in classrooms can’t be taken away, or denied. We have to encourage our students to be lifelong learners and love knowledge for the sake of it. That excitement about learning is what will keep them ahead in their fields and help them impart that empowerment to the next generation of students.

There is no way to completely change diversity in the workplace overnight but I truly believe that HBCU graduates have the best shot at improving it significantly. As instructors and administrators, we need to make sure our students are taking the best of diversity practices with them when they leave our campuses, but not entering the American workforce completely blind to its realities. It is our responsibility to teach our students what they can expect, but also how to be the change that they want to see.

But tomorrow will be different…

…And “tomorrow” is happening right before our eyes. The truth is that, while minorities will need to be prepared for a challenging workforce, the American workforce also needs to be prepared for increasing diversity. And that attention to diversity should begin in college, where many students train for their future careers.

Every college or university holds a diverse student population as a value and goal, at least on paper. Institutions of higher education have written ideology that seeks the best and brightest from all backgrounds to attend their classes. Here’s the thing though. Achieving diversity is hard. A balanced campus, either physically or remotely, takes more than words on paper. It takes the conscious, aggressive effort by the decision makers at a college or university to even stand a chance of reaching reality status.

I was recently looking over a list compiled by College Factual of the most diverse college campuses in the U.S. Factors like ethnic, geographic and gender diversity were taken into account to come up with an overall diversity score and ranking. I skimmed through the top 10 overall schools and noticed something interesting: three of them are located in Hawaii. More specifically, all three are located in Honolulu.

  • Hawaii Pacific University, ranked #1. This private school has an overall diversity score of 91.4 percent, with ethnic diversity at 92.1.
  • Chaminade University of Honolulu, ranked #2. This school has a ranking of 86.3 for overall diversity, with 100 percent ethnic diversity.
  • University of Hawaii at Manoa, ranked #4. This public university has an overall diversity ranking of 78.6 percent, with a 93.2 percent male to female ratio (higher by several points over the other two schools on this list).

Now what’s especially important to note on this list is that geographic diversity plays a role in overall score. So this means that the variation of these students does not simply stem from people of Hawaiian descent who go to these schools. There are diverse people from all over the nation and world who grace these campuses. Of course there is a geographic advantage – Hawaii is one of the most beautiful places in the world – but aside from that obvious point, what are these schools doing right to bring in diverse students?

Strong International Programs

Hawaii Pacific University has students from 80 nations that attend, landing it on U.S. News and World Report’s list for universities with the most international students. This is not accidental. The school, and the others on this list, work hard to bring in students from all corners of the world. Strong international programs ensure that an inclusive culture is part of the college experience and the schools with the highest levels of diversity know this and implement it.

Strong Master’s Programs

Another area where these Hawaiian schools excel is in education programs that go beyond basic undergraduate programs. Hawaii Pacific University, for example, is recognized by the Institute for International Education as one of the top thirty most diverse master’s programs in the world.

Strong Connections with the World Economy

These Honolulu-based schools are all located in the Pacific Rim – one of the fastest growing economic regions of the world. These schools do an excellent job of tapping into that through expert faculty, job placement and partnerships with businesses in the region. The University of Hawaii at Manoa’s Shidler College of Business consistently lands on “top” lists, mainly for its connections with other universities and businesses in Asia. The students can also participate in immersive study abroad programs. An understand of what is happening in economies outside the immediate needs of a university not only attracts a more diverse student body, but leads to a wider scope of graduates.

So what can every other college learn from these diverse campuses in Honolulu? The first thing is that diversity should never be limited to the swath of people who live in the geographic area of that school. Yes, colleges (particularly public ones) have a responsibility to educate their immediate populations, but the search for diverse students should always be looked at from a global perspective.

The second takeaway is that more and more students are looking for a higher level of education than an undergraduate degree. There are also many non-traditional students who return to graduate school and need the welcoming atmosphere of a diverse, inclusive campus to feel comfortable.

Finally, if institutions of higher education really want to make a mark on diversity, it’s imperative to find ways to connect all students with the diverse workforce. For some schools, this may mean international connections and for others, it may mean just contacting local businesses and looking for a variety of partnerships. Making the connection between a diverse campus and a diverse workforce is imperative to creating students bodies that are varied, and represent many different cultures, socioeconomic backgrounds, and ethnicities.

More strategies colleges can use to welcome students of diverse backgrounds.

Improving campus diversity is a multi-level effort, and the solutions for doing so are as creative as they are targeted and highly structured. Here are just a few of them:

  1. Full-ride scholarships

The cost of going to college can be a deal-breaker. Even with Pell grants, scholarships, and some student loans, the overwhelming ticket price of higher education is a major deterrent. This is especially true for minorities, first generation college students, and those coming from low socio-economic backgrounds. There is both a legitimate concern over what that college degree will cost, as well as a cultural barrier that often tells these students a college education is just not for them (both within their circles, and outside them).

But what if colleges were to take away cost as a factor – completely? Throughout the country there are schools that are combatting low diversity numbers with a novel idea: full-ride scholarships for those who qualify.

Now full-ride scholarships are certainly nothing new. They’ve been given out to promising students, and those in financial need, and athletes for decades. What’s so different about this new slew of full-ride initiatives is that they acknowledge a lack of diversity and are targeting minorities, women and underserved students.

The University of Michigan recently rolled out a full-ride scholarship program that targets students as young as 7th grade. The Wolverine Pathways initiative seeks to find students of academic promise from racial and socioeconomic disadvantage and give them a chance to earn a full ride to the university by the time they graduate from high school. Students will be paired with tutors and mentors in three academic sessions per year. If they complete the sessions successfully, and are then accepted to the university, they will be given a scholarship for four years.

It’s certainly needed at Michigan, where only 12.8 percent of the 2015 freshman class are minorities. The school saw a dip from the height of its minority representation (which was only 13.8 in 2015) after affirmative action was struck down for college admissions. Since then, the university claims it has looked for ways to boost its diversity – and the Wolverine Pathways program could finally do just that.

Arizona State University also announced a full-ride program for new MBA students in the fall of 2016 that is designed to improve diversity. Based on the student’s residency, the scholarship could be valued as high as $94,000.

But will these and other full-ride programs actually work?

Finances are certainly an obstacle when it comes to creating diverse college campuses but it is not the only issue. College freshman from homes with no college graduates are at a higher risk of dropping out that first year. Students who have never learned basic life skills, including how to budget and pay bills, often get overwhelmed at college and drop out to start earning immediate money instead.

Then there is the whole idea of young people being handed something they don’t truly understand the value of – and squandering it. It’s usually a decade or more later when college dropouts of all races and backgrounds look back and realize that they probably should’ve stayed in school. That’s around the time their college-educated peers are finally paying off those student loans, advancing in their careers, and finally cashing in on the quality of life that a college education provides. It’s very difficult to explain to an 18 or 19-year-old student the total value of a college education, both in the immediate and over the long term. Not having to pay for that value could translate into students who do not respect that education the way they should. This is not a point specific to minorities, but to young people in general.

So how can colleges and universities bring in diverse students, retain them, and graduate them debt-free?

It starts with the teaching and mentorship structure, like the one Michigan has in place, but needs to continue to college campuses. Students who we know are statistically more likely to drop out need hands-on guidance counselors, and mentors, and professors who work hard to keep them engaged and learning. There needs to be retention programs in place that actively check in on progress and don’t simply offer an open-door policy. All of this is vital if colleges are serious about having a diverse student population that succeeds on its grounds.

For programs like the one at Arizona State, it also means more targeted recruitment. If you say you are lowering financial barriers in order to bring in a more diverse student group, then you must find that student group and offer them spots. That takes a lot of dedication but is well worth it.

The bottom line is this: Simply giving students free access to a college degree is not enough for those students to succeed. Colleges and universities offering these types of programs need to recognize how the financial constraints of college are simply one issue on the road to attaining a degree. Academic support, mentorship, cultural inclusion and so many other factors must also play a role in these incentives for them to truly be successful at boosting campus and workplace diversity.

  1. With athletes

And not in the way you might think, either.

This isn’t about getting more athletes on college campuses, though.

Think of what having strong minority role models can do for students. Successful people who look like the students a particular college or university is trying to graduate, and who come from a similar background, can leave a lasting impression and inspire students to similar heights.

One particular group of minority mentors that I feel should be getting even more involved in the minority recruiting and mentorship process is student athletes. Whether still athletes at the school, or alumni, this particular subset of minority mentors should play an important role in graduating other traditionally disadvantaged students.

Maurice Clarett as mentor

Maurice Clarett, an Ohio State University alum, is a college-athlete-turned-minority-mentor. The former college running back has taken on a new role as both a cautionary tale, and inspiration, to other young people. If his name sounds familiar, it is because his claim to fame was not just on the football field or as a national champion in the sport. Clarett served four years in prison for aggravated robbery and carrying a concealed weapon. It was behind bars that he started reading up on personal development and ways to grow beyond a delinquent and even ways to rise above his association with being a football star.

Today he talks with other college athletes about things like personal responsibility and being accountable for actions, no matter what their upbringing. Clarett has visited athletes at Alabama, Notre dame, Tennessee and Mississippi State. He recently spoke with the national champion Florida State football team and acknowledged that many minority college athletes come from home environments that leave them “undeveloped” and without the skills needed to function successfully in life. Taking advantage of the resources available on college campuses and determining to be better than life’s circumstances are two lessons that Clarett tries to pass along to the people he mentors.

A story like Clarett’s is so much more powerful than the seemingly-empty warnings from adults on college campuses, many of whom look nothing like the students they are trying to influence and have no shared life experiences. By finding ways to tap into the stories of athletes, colleges can give their students a more impactful way of committing to success.

Mirroring smart mentorship

Traditionally getting into college on an athletic scholarship has been a way that minorities have been able to break onto college campuses, particularly if they came from educational environments that simply did not offer the same resources as advantaged peers. I’d argue that getting these athletes to graduation day is simply not enough; a whole other realm of life skills is needed to ensure that they are successful long after their athletic playing days have passed. When the cheers die down and the attention turns to the more practical things in life, these student athletes need ground to stand on. Pairing them up with mentors, or at the very least bringing in former athletes to share their after-college success stories, is a great way to inspire greatness that lasts a lifetime.

Leadership. Teamwork. Hard work. Earning a “win.” Losing gracefully. All of these are lessons that college athletes know in the context of their respective sports. Translating that to life beyond college can be challenging but can be made much easier with the help of mentors that have a common understanding with the students they address. Schools should make this as much a priority as recruiting minority students to sports and academic programs. Colleges and universities have a responsibility to their students to prepare them for all aspects of life and proper mentorship can be a necessary building block in that process.

  1. Without athletes

We’ve all heard the fairytale stories before: a minority kid from a tough neighborhood gets a shot at a college career because he or she is recruited for a particular sport. Not only do these athletes get to show off their physical talent, but they get a college degree and a more promising future in the process.

Listen, I’m all for athletes landing athletic scholarships if it means that more minority students earn a college degree. But I also know that stories like these, while intentionally heartwarming and media friendly, do not represent the vast majority of minorities with college aspirations. Athletes get a lot of the attention, but if colleges and universities are truly committed to diverse populations of students then they need to put the steps in place to make it easier for all minorities to earn a college degree.

A few of the areas where I think universities could improve on minority programs and recruitment include:

Arts recruiting.

Just as scouts go out and recruit the best basketball or football players for teams, the same should happen with minority students who show promise in the arts. Theater, musical performance, sculpting, painting, film studies and even creative writing – minority students who have talent in these areas should be given attention and invited to college programs. Why arts programs over more practical careers in STEM or healthcare? Minority students with arts passions often feel forced to abandon them in favor of immediate jobs or things that are simply not their passions. Arts careers are considered “silly” for white peers, but almost irresponsible for minority students. This should change and colleges should take the lead on it.

Mentorship programs.

There are some minority students who come from a home where one or both parents are college graduates but those odds are lower than their white peers. All first-generation college students face different challenges and expectations than those for whom college acceptance, success and graduation has always been expected. During the recruiting process, colleges should tout their mentorships programs and make sure minority and first-generation students are aware of the support they will receive when they decide to attend. As much as possible, these mentorship programs should work on matching students based on race, gender and career industry – though aligning all of that is admittedly difficult. Using the same mentor for several students is an option. Particularly in the case of minority students, mentors are generally overjoyed to be able to help a young person succeed. Colleges just need to be asking for that help and then expressing that it exists to their potential minority students.

Creative financial aid.

College is expensive and for students who have to pay for it on their own while supporting themselves, it can be overwhelming. There are no shortage of loans that students can take out to help finance their college careers, but saddling them with debt before they even set foot in the work world can be a recipe for disaster. Colleges that truly want a diverse population of students who succeed after graduation should look into adding more minority scholarships. The “pay it forward” college payment system that is implemented in certain states like Oregon should be considered for wider adoption, especially when it comes to attracting minority and first-generation students to college campuses. College does not need to be completely free in order for more minorities to attend and graduate. It does need to be affordable, though, and that takes some thinking out the normal financial aid box.

Athletes who earn college degrees are certainly inspirational but they are only a small portion of the minorities who want the type of education a college or university can provide. If we really want equality on our college campuses then it will take more than touting the success of our minority football, basketball and track stars. We need to find ways to translate that same success across interests and disciplines, and to give those students the support they need to truly succeed. Part of that process is to make college more affordable for all students. Another piece of that puzzle is targeting areas that are often overshadowed by athletics, like the arts. By understanding the true picture of what potential minority college students are like, colleges and universities can get more of them on campus or enrolling online.

  1. With heavy-duty recruitment efforts

Recruitment strategies have become more important than ever.

Why? Recently, Michigan banned affirmative action for admittance to public universities and the U.S. Supreme Court may rule on it on a federal level soon. The process that was created during the height of the Civil Rights movement in America may soon be officially considered outdated, and even unfair, by the higher judicial powers.

With affirmative action on its way out, what can colleges do to ensure their campuses still have enough variety in race, ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic backgrounds?

Targeted high school recruiting.
The demographics of high schools are readily available, along with the socioeconomic status of them. Colleges that are serious about recruiting a diverse population should target schools with students in the particular demographic they would like to see more of on their campuses. This will not automatically translate into more of those students, but it will mean more consideration from these high schoolers of the colleges that seem to want to help them succeed the most.

Non-traditional student programs.
Many young people who cannot afford college tuition directly after high school end up in the workforce, often in a job that is not their passion or one that does not highlight their talents. By the time these students consider going to college, life has usually taken over in the form of rent, medical and other family expenses. Though colleges are starting to warm up to these adult, “non-traditional” students, there is still much more room for improvement. Launching full-fledged college recruiting programs for non-traditional students will bring in more talent to the college, and will also bring in more diversity in the students who take courses and graduate from there.

Legacy entry.
By giving preference or priority spots to legacy students, colleges can ensure spots for minority students without the use of affirmative action. Of course no student should be allowed entry to a particular college or university without putting in the actual time and work required of other students. But if all things are considered equal when it comes to academic records, using legacy priority could give minority students the leg up to land that college entry spot.

Targeted marketing campaigns.
If a college knows that it needs to improve the number of Latino students on campus, then a marketing campaign that appeals to those students needs to be developed. This includes visuals that show students like the ones being recruited, along with other cultural and language specifications. Traditional brochures and mailers should be secondary to social media campaigns that target students where they are already consuming content.

Since its inception, affirmative action as it relates to college admittance and graduation numbers for minorities and women has had a strong showing. If that tool is taken away from the college entry process, schools should modify the same concepts to other programs taking place in order to continue recruiting the most diverse college population possible. Without some forethought when it comes to what sorts of students need to be represented, colleges risk a student body that is not actually representative of the greater community. If that happens, all of the triumphs of affirmative action will be lost.

  1. By reaching future students when they’re still young

Colleges are realizing that if minorities, first-generation students, and other pupils who are considered at-risk are target demographics for their upcoming graduating classes, then recruitment needs to start early. Think middle school, or even earlier. Waiting until junior or senior year of high school presents the risk that the students have already ruled out the possibility of college. Guiding younger students through what it takes to get into college, from grade expectations to community service requirements, ensures that more of the students who give up on college before they have even tried get a real shot at going, and graduating.

Recently 80 colleges and universities announced a new way to accept future students that strays from more mainstream admittance policies of the last few decades. Public schools like Purdue University and the University of Michigan, private schools like University of Chicago and Amherst College, and every Ivy League school are the founding members of the Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success. This group plans to allow portfolio systems for admittance to their schools.

The basic premise is this:  Starting freshman year, high school students can upload work and answer other prompts to prepare them for college admittance later on. Students could opt to share information, like completed projects or grades on report cards, with the colleges and gain some feedback during the high school process that will help them land a spot at a university after graduation.

Instead of using the Common Application, a watered-down non-customized but widely used process form, these 80 schools would also allow this comprehensive approach. It’s expected that many more schools will also want to join this coalition, but they must meet specific criteria.

Public colleges can join the coalition if they “provide sufficient financial aid” to those who need it within their respective states. Private colleges can join if they can prove their commitment to providing adequate financial aid to every domestic student. Colleges that have “gapping” problems (where they admit students that cannot afford the school, and give them no path for financial aid) will not be permitted to join the coalition. All schools, public or private, must have a six-year federal graduation rate of 70 percent.

How the new system benefits minorities

Perhaps the best part of this new approach to college admittance is the opportunity for college preparation long before senior year. For students from middle class and upper class families, thinking about colleges usually begins a few years early and happens in the way of picking classes and activities intended to pad a future application. Students from these families often go on college visits as well and meet with university guidance counselors – all coordinated by parents.

In homes where both parents work a lot to earn a living wage, or one parent is absent, it is a challenge just to get kids out the door and on the way to high school. Meticulously looking over next-semester class selections and carving out the time and money to make college visits is simply not an option for these families. In best case scenarios, an involved high school guidance counselor can step up to fill this gap – but too many bright students do not get the chance to go to college because they simply don’t know how to get there (or afford it). This coalition system adds in an extra support “staff” that not only gets kids interested in college early on, but guides them in the right steps to take to get into a program that makes the most sense for them.

This system for college admittance also follows a customized approach to developing student populations. An example given in a Business Insider article on the coalition said that instead of submitting the standard 500-word essay, students could submit something from their portfolio. This speaks more to the person submitting the application, and less to the formulaic ways that schools say “yes” or “no” to the people who want to attend them.

For minorities this means an admittance advantage, even if a particular student is not a strong writer or does not have someone looking over his or her shoulder and offering help with the application. The work that a student is most proud of, or that best represents the field he or she wants to go into, can shine on the application.

The needs-based component of this system will also benefit minority students, who traditionally have had a harder time paying for college. The schools who commit to help all students afford and pay for college, and who succeed in helping them graduate, can be part of this coalition. Predatory college programs that do not take the socioeconomic status of their students into account will be excluded – and therefore be required to offer the basic admittance application that has been in existence for the past few decades.

  1. By supporting students

For all of the strides college recruiting programs have made, there is still an overarching theme that recruiting new students is an isolated process. Get the kids on campus, then move on to the next batch. In reality, recruiting should be a very small part of a larger strategy that not only brings students of varied backgrounds to campus, but sustains them until graduation. Some schools are improving in this regard, but there’s still a lot of work needed to flip this mentality from one of solitude to solidarity with other student help groups.

Some schools are working on this. The University of Connecticut and Ithaca College made headlines in 2015 when they added a new position to their executive suite: Chief Diversity Officer. While universities have long had diversity task forces and even full-time staff members who work to improve diversity on campus, the move to add such a prominent position is promising.

As more colleges follow suit, the position needs to be more than a figurehead. An editorial for UConn’s The Daily Campus sums it up by saying:

“The hope is that these recommendations hit their mark and help increase diversity in both the student body and faculty. The effort the administration is employing is seen and appreciated. The expectation now is that these efforts are fruitful, and bring meaningful change.”

Another example of an initiative that serves students and promotes diversity is the idea of the Hispanic Serving Institutions.

Before I explain what those are, consider this. Hispanic Americans with dreams of a college degree face different challenges than their white, and even black, peers. For those who hold English as a second language, there are some inherent communication obstacles. For those who are first-generation Americans (or first-generation college students, or both), extra guidance is needed to keep them from feeling overwhelmed by the college journey. Every college student faces obstacles but the challenges in front of Hispanic ones are unique, and growing in importance.

Some colleges and universities have recognized these specific struggles of Hispanic students and found ways to address them. These Hispanic Serving Institutions (or HSIs) don’t just have the rhetoric in place; to qualify for this distinction, a college must consistently have a 25 percent Hispanic student population. These schools must also be non-profit and offer at least two-year degree programs. In other words, HSIs must actually work to serve the Hispanic students they recruit, and not prey upon them.

As HSIs grow in number (in 2013, there were 431), it’s important for all college educators to realize the effect these schools will have on everyone else and why we should embrace Hispanic-friendly college policies.

Hispanic higher education impacts us all.
The U.S. Census reports that by 2060, the number of Hispanic Americans will reach 31 percent of the general population. That’s nearly a third of Americans who will work, study, spend money and live within our borders. Earning a college education for Hispanic students will in turn raise the quality of life for the rest of us, too. On a global scale, America could take a big hit in advancements and innovations if one-third of its population was not educated on a higher level (or even one-tenth of it). The colleges and universities that will succeed in recruiting and graduating large numbers of Hispanic students are the ones that recognize the extreme importance of doing such a thing. This is a not a charity case or a trend in college education. Creating pathways for Hispanic students to go to college and earn their degrees is SMART for the country as a whole.

We can learn, too.
When approaching the best ways to serve and educate Hispanic college students, it’s important to avoid an assimilation stance. Yes, there is a lot these students can learn from our traditional college canon, but there is so much we can learn from them too. This is true for Hispanic students as well as faculty members. As a greater college community, we should recognize that from an educational standpoint, increasing the number of Hispanic students who study on our campuses and graduate with our degrees will expand our own knowledge base too. We shouldn’t only accept Hispanic students but should encourage their viewpoints and allow those to influence our policies and the things we teach.

Change starts on college campuses.
Traditionally, colleges have been recognized as progressive places. Even if the administration of a particular school isn’t forward-thinking, the students usually are. I write a lot about the progressive changes that need to be made on college campuses but not because I think they are failing. I think college campuses hold the most potential of any type of entity to stimulate positive change. That potential is what pushes me to speak out when I think we could be doing more – as administrators, as faculty members, as students.

That is especially true when it comes to turning our campuses into Hispanic Serving Institutions. Critics can argue all they want for assimilation and shout for Hispanic children to “learn English” but the truth is that we all lose a little with that mentality. Colleges are the jumping off points. The policies we put in place and the students who we graduate matter to the rest of the country. We are being watched, if subconsciously, to see how situations ideally should be approached. If we truly want to embrace Hispanic culture as a major part of our American story, present and future, it needs to start in our colleges and universities.

Now, here are a couple of other things to think about when it comes to student body retention.

Many are turning to technology to anticipate problems and reach out to students at risk for dropping out long before they do. Virginia Commonwealth University is one example of a school reaching out to a tech consulting firm to learn more about its students and help struggling students before they withdraw.

Data is used for so many aspects of college life – expect to see more schools tapping it to recruit and maintain diverse student bodies.

Finally, the need for an affordable college education is mentioned so often that it seems that we are all becoming desensitized to it. The reality is that having affordable college, not just providing loans to students, will go a long way towards helping close the achievement gap. Initiatives like providing the first two years of community college for free to qualifying students, and even student loan forgiveness programs for high-demand jobs, are a few ways that the dream of a college degree can become more accessible to minority, first-generation and other at-risk students.

Beware of those schools trying to capitalize on a trend

Turn on your television to any local station during daytime hours, and you’re sure to see a handful of commercials touting the amazing benefits of enrolling in for-profit colleges. These idyllic spots highlight flexible classes, accelerated programs, online classes available from the comfort of home, and more. Usually the information about the particular college is delivered by a once-uneducated person turned career success – often a working dad, or single mom, whose kids are clearly proud of what the parent has accomplished. Obtaining a college education, particularly from the school mentioned, looks so easy to do.

While the description above may seem like the stuff of marketing clichés, it’s a tactic that has worked for many for-profit colleges. Targeting minorities and other non-traditional college students through commercials like these has been the bread-and-butter of for-profit schools for at least the past two decades and those tactics are just now starting to see some legal pushback.

To be clear, not all for-profit colleges are created equal. There are some that boast high graduation rates and seem to have student success at the heart of their endeavors. The very fact that these colleges exist have actually progressed the entire university system in the U.S. by pushing innovative programs, like online degrees, and showing that there truly is a large market for non-traditional college students.

Let’s not kid ourselves though. The non-profit college push is a very thinly-veiled attempt to enroll a volatile market – often the most eligible for federal loan and grant assistance.

The financial facts speak for themselves:

  • As of 2014, for-profit colleges served just 13 percent of total higher education students but received 31 percent of federal student loans due to the minority, at-risk and low-income statuses of their students. Former veterans cashing in GI Bills also attend for-profit schools at higher rates than traditional colleges.
  • The same report from the U.S. Department of Education reports that half of all students who default on their loans attend a for-profit college.

Which leads to the unavoidable question: Have non-profit colleges preyed upon at-risk students for the sake of making a quick buck?

One of the reasons for-profit schools have seen such a surge in enrollment in the past two decades can really be pinned on the smart marketing of two words: flexibility and acceleration. For students who simply did not have the funds, nor desire to incur college debt, right after high school, for-profit schools have stepped up as a second chance, of sorts. These colleges are places where non-traditional students can continue to work and take flexible courses, many or all of which are online. Most for-profit schools also offer a faster route to degree attainment, which peaks the interest of students who don’t want to dedicate years of their lives to college aspirations but are looking for a way to advance their careers. The University of Phoenix, perhaps the most recognizable name in for-profit online colleges, recently announced a new initiative to count other course work and work experience towards degree attainment. This initiative, and others like it, is designed to recruit students who don’t want to start from square one and don’t have the time to commit to a traditional college experience.

So what is wrong with either of these options? Nothing, in theory. Flexibility and accelerated degrees are a good fit for many students who otherwise could not chase any sort of college degree. Where many non-profits fail their students, however, is in charging astronomical rates and not offering enough support to keep students enrolled until graduation. In essence, these schools market well enough to get the students enrolled in courses but don’t do enough to guide them to their degrees. All the flexibility in the world can’t help a student understand a difficult concept, or learn better time/study management skills. Accelerated programs without mentorship options run the risk of burning students out, especially if they have no inspiration or focus.

It’s clear that the recent outcry for accountability for non-profit colleges is long overdue. Students deserve better than what they’ve been served by these institutions, and quite frankly, so does the entire American population. It’s time for these schools to deliver on their promise of career success for those who enroll – and that starts with student support that extends beyond recruitment.

Don’t forget about diversity at the faculty level, too

Each year, colleges and universities pay professional search firms millions of dollars to find qualified candidates for vacant positions. Having the best and brightest on their staffs is important for student recruitment, growth and accolades. Recruiting the strongest faculty team possible is a vital goal of every college and university, as it should be.

Where these colleges and search firms miss the mark, however, is finding viable candidates from diverse populations. Need proof of this? Take a look at these stats:

Furthermore, the lack of diversity in college faculty is not merely because all the professors are white and of European descent (though that number is high). A recent report from Mother Jones found that:

At some schools, like Harvard, Stanford, the University of Michigan, and Princeton, there are more foreign teachers than Hispanic and black teachers combined.

So we are hiring diverse faculty members on a global stage, but not a national one. There are an estimated 41.7 Black Americans, and an estimated 54 million Hispanic ones, according to the 2010 U.S. Census numbers. That comes out to about 13.2 percent and 17 percent of the total U.S. population, respectively. To put this in perspective, there are student protests going on at Michigan public universities, demanding that 10 percent of faculty members be African American. When you take urban areas like Detroit (where 84.3 percent of the population is Black) into account, asking for 10 percent is a drop in the bucket – yet students are rallying to get the support to make it happen.

When you look at numbers like this, it’s tough to get all warm and fuzzy inside about diverse faculty at U.S. colleges and universities. Are schools even serious about hiring diverse individuals? Or is all this talk of having various populations just a horse and pony show?

I’ve written before about how truly instrumental a diverse faculty is to creating a diverse student population. It takes focus and hard work, though. That starts with the decision-makers and search committees on college campuses.

So what can universities do to take the ideology of diverse faculty and make it a reality?

Money Talks

Anyone who has worked on a college campus knows that it takes a lot of money to make things happen. It takes money to conduct research, to run departments, to have the right resources in the classroom, and to do anything, really. The same is true of developing a truly diverse faculty body. Instead of throwing money at outside hiring firms, some universities like Vanderbilt University are giving it to their departments. Financial incentives make it more attractive for departments to look for diverse faculty members to fill positions. Adding a financial component makes hiring diverse faculty members actionable. Is this the best way to attract diverse candidates? Probably not. But it is certainly effective.

Vanderbilt isn’t the only university throwing money at this problem either.  Brown University, for example, has announced that it is dedicating $100 million to look into diversity and race issues on its campus in the next decade. The faculty at the Providence campus is overwhelmingly white and male.

Targeting with Purpose

The University of Virginia approaches diverse faculty hiring from a few angles. The first is by establishing associate deans assigned to diversity within schools and programs. It is quite literally the job of these decision makers to recruit and hire diverse employees for the university. UVA also requires any members of faculty search committees to attend diversity training sessions. There are other universities like Westchester and Harvard that have established similar procedures that empower school employees to expand and maintain diversity in the ranks. A college should never assume that every hiring manager understands what is expected in the way of diversity; it must be expressly outlined and then decision makers must be trained.

Lewis & Clark College in Oregon planned a diversity forum after a Rwandan student reported being assaulted because of his skin color. The school’s president Barry Glasner has also said an action plan is being put in place to improve diversity in faculty and students, as well as race relations at the school.

The University of Connecticut hired a Chief Diversity Officer who works towards improving the diversity of the student population AND of faculty and staff. UConn’s president Susan Herbst has said publicly that she was disappointed in the lack of diverse faculty members when she first arrived on campus four years ago and that UConn is severely lacking in an area where it really should shine. The trend of hiring Chief Diversity Officers is a positive one, as long as these executives are really empowered to make changes.

Recruiting Smartly

It is not enough for a college or university to be located in a diverse area; these schools must also aggressively recruit their target population, within and outside the community. This includes students, of course, and long before they are filling out college applications. When it comes to faculty, universities should have a targeted message for candidates who are minorities. This should include the reasons why that particular school is a good fit for minority faculty members – and if that school is still working to balance its diversity, that should be mentioned. If a college or university is located in a multi-cultural or urban area, that should be part of the pitch. If not, colleges should find other ways to make themselves attractive to minority candidates.

Mentoring to Tenure

After the initial hire, minorities should be encouraged to stay on campus through tenure goals. Minorities need mentorship to make this happen though, and colleges need to have minority and women tenure-track programs. By immediately letting those goals be known to the new minority hires, there is a higher chance for retention and for those diverse faculty members to end up mentoring some new hires of their own.

In the end, more minorities on college faculty only serves the benefit of everyone. It gives minority students realistic role models and gives non-minority students the chance to work with professors who may not look like them. Even the colleges themselves benefit from the added life experiences these minority faculty members bring to the table. In order to tap into the potential of a truly diverse, truly experience-rich college experience, we need to pay just as much attention to the variety in our faculty as we do to our students.

Overall, it’s becoming clear to just about everyone how important it is to prepare our workforce for the diversity of our country, and to support ALL Americans in becoming prepared for the ever-increasing demands of the workforce. It’s time to make some changes to our colleges and universities, and turn them into training hubs that benefit everyone. Once we figure out how to serve our population, we can see the kind of prosperity that even this wealthy country has never seen before.

My College Is Being Blackmailed

**The Edvocate is pleased to publish guest posts as way to fuel important conversations surrounding P-20 education in America. The opinions contained within guest posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of The Edvocate or Dr. Matthew Lynch.**

A guest column by Professor Bryan W. Van Norden

My college is being blackmailed.

The story of the blackmail goes back to Margaret Spellings, Secretary of Education under Bush the Younger. Spellings (who has no classroom teaching experience, and no degree that would even qualify her to teach at the college or university level) has three claims to fame. First, Spellings is the only sitting member of a Presidential Cabinet to be on Celebrity Jeopardy. She came in a distant second to actor Michael McKean (best known as “Lenny” on the sitcom Laverne and Shirley). Second, she is responsible for the No Child Left Behind program. Nicknamed “No Child Left Awake,” this initiative forces educators to teach students how to pass standardized tests, rather than helping students to actually learn. Apparently concerned that she had not done enough damage to US education, Spellings also convened a Commission on the Future of Higher Education. One of the recommendations of the Commission was that colleges and universities institute a “robust culture of accountability” emphasizing “learning outcomes.”

So what is wrong with that? The basic format for teaching humanities goes back at least as far as the Roman Empire in the West and the contemporaneous Han dynasty in China. Students read challenging works. Students discuss those works. Students write about those works. The instructors lecture, guide the discussions, and give feedback on the writing. Thomas Aquinas was doing this in 13th-century Europe and Zhu Xi was doing this in 12th-century China. This basic framework has been unchanged for over two millennia for a simple reason: it is the only one that has ever worked.

However, the preceding is not good enough for advocates of “learning outcomes” and the related shibboleth “outcomes assessment.” They want outcomes that can be “measured” and “tested.” They are quick to explain that assessment need not be quantitative in the humanities. But we already have a qualitative vision of what outcome we want (that is what the major and general education requirements are about) and we already have qualitative measures for assessing outcomes (these are known by the arcane technical terms “comments on your essay,” “grades,” and “letters of recommendation”).

Since I am fortunate to be at a private liberal arts college with a long history of being a leader in higher education, why should I care about what some failed Celebrity Jeopardy contestant said about outcomes assessment? Here is where the blackmail is occurring. Every college and university that hopes to maintain its prestige and be eligible for certain kinds of funding must be “accredited.” Accreditation is done through NGOs that wield immense amounts of power, despite not being answerable to anyone. The NGO responsible for accrediting our school has been taken over by devout apostles of outcomes assessment, and they insist that we must institute a “culture of assessment” – or else.

Here is my assessment of the outcome (pardon the expression) of this situation: either our school’s educational practices will be perverted, or we will institute a purely formal version of outcomes assessment, lacking in any actual content. I am hoping for the latter. In a meeting with a representative of our accrediting body, I asked whether the philosophy department could develop a checklist based on our stated goals, and have instructors certify that essays written by senior majors met these goals. (“Good grammar? Check. Independent thought? Check. Take the best that has been thought and said and transmute it into wisdom in the smithy of your soul? Check.”) Incredibly, she said that sounded fine. It is not the worst result if we can find some bureaucratic trick that allows us to continue to teach in what is transparently the best way. (Apparently some other schools are also trying the “just write something to get them off our backs” approach. The following is from an actual outcomes statement at another college that we were given as a paradigm: “The goal of the political science department is to transmit the knowledge of the discipline by providing courses and instruction that are characterized by excellence.”) However, whatever approach we employ, we incur what economists refer to as a significant “opportunity cost.” In their incisive essay, “Is Outcomes Assessment Hurting Higher Education?” James Pontuso and Saranna Thornton note that “Ongoing assessment diverts teachers from teaching. Instead of preparing their courses, meeting with students, or grading papers – in short, executing their teaching duties – instructors must spend a substantial amount of time worrying about how to assess what they teach.”

I am not suggesting that higher education is perfectly fine just the way it is, either at my school or at other institutions. For example, I chaired a committee that recommended that my college work for greater clarity and consistency in its quantitative, writing, and foreign language requirements. But this will not result in “measurable” or “testable” outcomes. I say all of the preceding as a dedicated teacher. I can show you letters from students telling me that my classes changed their lives, three textbooks that I wrote specifically to meet the needs of my students, mountains of essays with my carefully written comments, and sheaves of handouts I painstakingly prepared to address confusions my students had. That is what teaching is about, not about pseudo-rational “outcomes.” As Pontuso and Thornton wrote: “Many people’s lives have been affected by good teachers, but no one’s soul has ever been touched by a committee of test writers.”

____________________

Bryan W. Van Norden is a professor at Vassar College.  He is the author, most recently, of Introduction to Classical Chinese Philosophy.  The views expressed in this editorial are his own, and do not represent those of his department, the Vassar administration, or other faculty

Making university admissions process more transparent is important, but won’t help improve equity

This article was written by Shane Duggan

Universities are being urged to make their admission process more transparent following the release of a report by the Higher Education Standards Panel, which was set up by the government to help with reforming areas of higher education.

The rapid expansion of the university sector has led to a disparity of admissions practices, with equivalent courses at different institutions potentially having wildly different admissions requirements.

Earlier this year, a Fairfax media investigation revealed up to 63.5% of students at some universities were being admitted to courses of study below the advertised Australian Tertiary Admission Rank (ATAR) “cut off” scores.

However, subsequent disclosure by a number of prestigious universities has illustrated that this practice tends to be isolated to particular institutions, and courses of study.

The review was careful to point out that offers to students with an ATAR of “50 or less” made up slightly over 2% of all offers in 2016 – and more than half of these students rejected their offer.

Across the sector, universities have been accused of being non-transparent about how they deploy “bonus point” schemes. The review found that almost all providers offer bonus points of some kind. These points are commonly allocated for:

  • high academic achievement in particular subjects;
  • participation in elite sport or arts;
  • students facing social, geographic, or economic disadvantage.

The review suggests that the opacity is at least in part the result of successive waves of expansion and diversification of the sector that have gone relatively unchecked since the 2008 Review of Australian Higher Education (the Bradley Review).

Report recommendations

The review highlights five key issues around the use of ATARs for admissions that it sought to address:

  • a lack of common language used between universities
  • unable to compare course admissions criteria between states and territories
  • availability of information from admissions centres
  • overemphasis on the ATAR as an admission requirement
  • potential inflation of “cut-offs”.

In response, the panel makes fourteen recommendations focusing on four priorities: transparency, accessibility, comparability, and accountability.

Combined, the recommendations seek to improve clarity of information for young people and their families in the selection of courses of study, as well as for providers in assessing prospective student applications.

As was anticipated, a number of recommendations concern the publication of accurate minimum ATARs and clearer articulation of non-ATAR requirements.

The review calls also for the adoption of a common language around admissions processes across all higher education providers.

In a diverse system of relatively autonomous providers and discrete state and territory admissions centres (TACs), this will be difficult.

Third, the review calls for the development of a national higher education admissions information platform.

This aligns broadly with the Turnbull government’s advocacy of the Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) website and was a key feature of the terms of reference for the panel to consider.

However, substantial research has shown that simply making information available does not necessarily address the challenges many young people face in completing secondary education and choosing higher education courses.

Too often, students from disadvantaged backgrounds are unaware of the options available to them. Commonly, they come from backgrounds with no history of higher education.

These students tend to have lower completion rates and report a poorer experience of higher education. Many do not feel that higher education is for “people like them”.

Is the ATAR still useful?

Four in ten students admitted to a course with an ATAR lower than 60 do not complete. from www.shutterstock.com

For many senior leaders, the ATAR remains an efficient and convenient tool for allocating Commonwealth supported higher education places.

However, researchers have suggested that the current policies contribute to “gaming” practices at some of the country’s most elite schools.

Research has shown how academic success concentrates in elite public and independent schools through subject and curriculum selection, intensive test preparation, and academic tutoring.

While debate continues regarding the effectiveness of the ATAR for predicting success for young people once they enter university, data does support the predictive power of the ATAR at a group level.

Data shows that four in ten students admitted to a course with an ATAR lower than 60 do not complete it.

Scholars have been at pains to point out, however, that ATAR performance and retention rates both correlate strongly with factors of disadvantage such as Indigenous, remote, part-time, and socio-economic status.

Transparency won’t necessarily help to improve equity

Equity of access to higher education remains an area of broad agreement between political parties.

Diversity schemes such as the Higher Education Participation and Partnerships Program (HEPPP) are currently being reviewed in line with the government’s intended shake up of the higher education sector.

Over the next three years, HEPPP is marked for a A$152 million cut. Along with the shift to a demand-driven system, targeted HEPPP programs are thought to be partly responsible for the over 50% growth in low-SES participation in higher education since 2010.

More information needed for school leavers

The panel’s recommendations represent an opportunity to ensure young people have accurate information for making decisions about their intended courses of study.

They will not, however, address continued concerns about Year 12 completion rates. It is too late to begin the careers counselling process at the point of applying for courses, no matter how clear and accurate the information provided.

Helping students make an informed choice about higher education is critical. However, information about the admissions process itself is not enough.

Greater attention must also be given to ensuring that students are provided with the skills to navigate higher education.

It is increasingly likely that for the majority of young people, this engagement will be a lifelong activity.

Beyond this, helping students to develop a sense of belonging is key for boosting engagement and retention.

A successful reform must also include a more comprehensive approach to working with young people to identify a diversity of pathways and opportunities.

It must actively challenge and seek to redress the prioritising of university over technical and trade options.

It must be inclusive of broader questions of the benefits of having young people engage in education beyond school without reducing that discussion to one of “budget constraints”.

Despite recent concerns about the economic value of degrees, post-school qualifications are more important than ever.

These reforms must enshrine principles of student equity both in how young people are supported to access higher education, and in their experiences in those institutions once they arrive.

 

Shane Duggan, Lecturer in Youth Studies and Education Policy, University of Melbourne

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

Diverse Conversations: The Globalization of Higher Education

Visit the website of your favorite college or university, find the search box and type in the words “international programs,” “study abroad,” or something to this effect. What you will find out is that odds are, your favorite institution has a department that serves as the international arm of the university, developing partnerships with countries and organizations around the world. They are part of one of the biggest trends to hit today’s modern university. The trend that I speak of is commonly referred to as the “globalization of higher education.” For this week’s installment of “Diverse Conversations,” I interviewed Dr. George B. Forsythe, President of Westminster College, concerning the “globalization of higher education.” During his presidency, this private undergraduate liberal arts college has been transformed into a global leadership community nationally ranked for its diversity.

Q: What do scholars mean when they speak of the “globalization of higher education?”

A: There are several ways to look at globalization of higher education. (1) Academic Content—students need to know about and understand the world and American’s place in the global community. Colleges and universities respond by adding “global awareness” to their curricular outcome goals, including “global perspectives” across the curriculum, or adding specific programs in global studies, international studies, or transnational studies. (2) Educational Process—Colleges and universities provide a rich array of study abroad or study away experiences to students which are designed to immerse them in another culture. (3) Community Building—Colleges and universities recruit students from around the world in order to build the global community on campus where students live and learn together as global citizens. (4) Global Reach—Colleges and universities establish a physical and/or virtual presence in the international market. At Westminster, we are aggressively pursuing the first three, with major emphasis on creating a global community in America’s heartland, with 16% of our undergraduates coming from 75 different countries.

Q: What exactly is a global university?

A: I suspect when people use this term, they mean what I am suggesting in number 4 above. A global university is one that has a global presence, with physical campuses throughout the world and/or a virtual presence through distance learning. I also suspect it means the faculty and students are drawn from around the world.

Q: How can a U. S. college or university become a global institution while also staying true to its mission?

A: Westminster College was founded in Fulton, Missouri, to prepare citizens for useful service to the community through a high quality liberal arts education. We remain true to that mission, 162 years later, but our understanding of “the community” has expanded beyond the city, county, and state to the wider world. We have stayed true to our mission, but our sense of citizenship and community have become much broader, and for good reason.
The world is increasingly interconnected technologically and economically, and educated citizens today must understand the implications of these interconnections and must be able to respond effectively to this reality. Americans must be globally engaged if we are to preserve our democratic values and maintain the standards of living that continue to attract people of every nationality to our shores. Higher education, if it is truly “higher,” must help students develop a global understanding about current tensions and possible solutions. Staying true to our mission means we must help students look beyond the campus and see the world.

Q: What do students gain from being part of a global institution?

A: A college or university that is a global community opens students to new points of view, challenges their thinking about themselves and their world, and sets the stage for personal and professional growth. Exposure to people from different cultures helps students gain an appreciation for their own culture and equips them with the skills to succeed in a global economy. It also makes life more interesting and meaningful. It’s fun. I think Former Yale President, Kingman Brewster’s, comment about the value of a liberal education applies equally to the value of global learning communities: ”Perhaps the most fundamental value of a liberal education is that it makes life more interesting. It allows you to think things which do not occur to the less learned, it makes it less likely that you will be bored with life.”

At Westminster College, we have found that the global community we have assembled has enriched our learning environment in so many ways. International students and U.S. students work together in every area of campus life—academics, research, student government, Greek life, leadership and service, and athletics. Our students form friendships on campus that lead to many local and international service activities. In many ways, the community is the curriculum, as students from around the country and throughout the world live and learn together.

To illustrate our approach, in addition to traditional study abroad and international travel courses, which we offer in abundance, we also have created a program called Take-a-Friend-Home, which is designed to foster deep friendships between international and U.S. students and provide for significant cultural immersion. This program provides the funding for international and U.S. students to travel to each other’s homes during summer and winter breaks. Participation is limited, and students compete for this program by writing a curriculum that outlines what each will learn from the experience. Before they travel, they take a for-credit course that prepares them for cultural immersion; when they return, they write a reflection paper and share their experiences with the College community.

Q: What do you think other institutions can learn from what’s happening with the globalization of higher education?

A: In the 21st Century, “global education” is redundant—if it isn’t global, it isn’t an education. Both in terms of content and process, students will be better prepared for the challenges they will face after college if their education is global. College graduates must possess the knowledge, skills, and habits of mind that will allow them to thrive in a global community.

Well, that concludes my interview with President George B. Forsythe. I would like to thank him for taking time out of his busy schedule to speak with us.

 

Understanding Three Key Classroom Management Theories

By Tricia Hussung

How teachers manage their classrooms is an important part of achieving an effective learning environment. Educators know that all students learn differently, and choosing the right instructional style can mitigate behavioral issues and make good instruction possible. According to the National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality, a significant body of research also demonstrates that classroom organization and the ability to effectively manage student behavior “significantly influence the persistence of new teachers in teaching careers.” Within this context, it is clear that instructional theory and classroom management strategies are among the most important aspects of teacher education.

While classroom management theory is constantly evolving, there are three key theorists who stand out when it comes to modern education. Throughout the 20th and 21st centuries, experts like B.F. Skinner, William Glasser and Alfie Kohn revolutionized the ways that teachers deliver education. Understanding their theories can help educators define their own classroom management methods and make decisions about how to best approach interactions with students.

1200x75-classroommngment-subheader1-huss

B.F. Skinner’s contribution to learning theory can’t be overstated. His work is based upon the idea that learning is a function of change in overt behavior. According to Skinner, changes in behavior are a result of individuals’ responses to events, or stimuli, that occur in their environment. When a stimulus-response (S-R) pattern is rewarded, the individual is conditioned to respond similarly in the future. The key to Skinner’s theory is reinforcement, or anything that strengthens the desired response. This could include praise, good grades, a reward or even a feeling of accomplishment. Of course, negative reinforcement occurs when a stimulus results in increased response when it is withdrawn. The central tenet of Skinner’s work is that positively reinforced behavior will reoccur. This is why information is presented in small amounts. Responses can be reinforced, and reinforcement will be applied to similar stimuli.

Skinner’s work in operant conditioning has been integrated into both classroom management and instructional development. When applied to programmed instruction, the following should occur:

  • Practice should occur in a question-answer format that exposes students to information gradually through a series of steps.
  • The learner should respond each time and receive immediate feedback.
  • Good performance should be paired with secondary reinforcers like praise, prizes and good grades.
  • Instructors should try to arrange questions by difficulty so the response is always correct, creating positive enforcement.

There are many obvious ways that Skinner’s work has been directly incorporated into modern school systems. Though rewards were utilized for good behavior long before Skinner, many behavior management systems utilized in today’s classrooms are influenced by his theories. Teachers utilize immediate praise, feedback or rewards when seeking to change problematic student behavior, and some even use “token economies” to reward students in a systematic way.

1200x75-classroommngment-subheader2-huss

William Glasser coined the term “choice theory” in 1998. In general, this theory states that all we do is behave. Glasser suggests that almost all behavior is chosen, and we are driven by genetics to satisfy five basic needs: survival, love and belonging, power, freedom and fun. In choice theory, the most important need is love and belonging because connectedness with others is required as a basis in satisfying all other needs. The classroom should therefore be a needs-satisfying place for students.

Glasser’s work impacts learning theory in a variety of ways. It has been utilized in schools across the globe and has changed the ways that teachers deliver instruction.

First, Glasser identifies teachers as managers who need to work effectively if they want to successfully teach their students. The role of teachers as managers requires them to guide students in understanding that working hard and being obedient is worth it and will have a positive influence on their lives. Teachers can achieve this through developing positive relationships with students and creating active, relevant learning experiences that enable students to demonstrate mastery and success.

When it comes to developing lessons, teachers who practice choice theory work to make sure that student classroom activities are designed to satisfy the students’ needs. This allows learning to increase while diminishing disruption. Students are able to “connect, feel a sense of competence and power, have some freedom, and enjoy themselves in a safe, secure environment,” according to Funderstanding. There are three common characteristics of classrooms and schools that apply choice theory:

  • Coercion is minimized because it never inspires quality. Students aren’t “made” to behave using rewards and punishments. Instead, teachers build positive relationships with their students and manage them.
  • Teachers focus on quality. They expect mastery of concepts and encourage students to redo their work and try again until they have demonstrated competence and high-quality work. The emphasis is on deep learning through application.
  • Self-evaluation is common. Students are provided with helpful information and take ownership of their learning by evaluating their own performance. This promotes responsibility and helps students reach goals while becoming skilled decision-makers who are actively involved in their own education.

1200x75-classroommngment-subheader3-huss

Alfie Kohn’s work critiques many aspects of traditional education, namely the use of competition or external factors as motivation. Kohn maintains that societies based on extrinsic motivation always become inefficient over time. He questions the hierarchical structures at work in mainstream education. Positions of authority are “unnaturally scarce,” and such systems assume that all people have a competitive nature. He argues that positive enforcement only encourages students to seek out more positive enforcement, rather than truly learn. Kohn believes that the ideal classroom emphasizes curiosity and cooperation above all, and that the student’s curiosity should determine what is taught. Because of this, he argues that standards should be kept very minimal and is critical of standardized testing. Kohn also argues that a strict curriculum and homework are counterintuitive to student needs. When it comes to classroom management, Kohn believes that most teachers rely too heavily on extrinsic motivation rather than more intrinsic factors. He suggests teachers keep cooperation in mind because when curiosity is nurtured, rewards and punishments aren’t necessary.

To implement Kohn’s approaches in the classroom, teachers can allow students to explore the topics that interest them most. Students “should be able to think and write and explore without worrying about how good they are,” he suggests. In general, Kohn believes that there is too much emphasis on achievement rather than the learning process. He emphasizes that not all students learn at the same pace, and standards do not take this into account. In general, Kohn believes in classrooms where the student is at the center of everything. Ideally, such a classroom would feature:

  • Multiple activity centers with various classroom structures for group work
  • Displays of student projects
  • Students exchanging ideas
  • A respectful teacher mingling with students
  • Students excited about learning and actively asking questions
  • Multiple activities occurring at the same time

In terms of modern school systems, Kohn’s approaches are more consistent with those used in elementary classrooms. The key element is a “shift from a quiet, well-managed classroom to one that is lively and features an emphasis on student learning,” explains Thomas Hanson on OpenEducation.net.

1200x75-classroommngment-subheader4-huss

When educators are able to focus on classroom organization as a means of behavior management, they achieve better results for students. If you are interested in education topics like this, consider the online Master of Education from Husson University. Graduate-level education is ideal for teachers looking to advance their career and become leaders in the classroom and beyond. In addition, this degree program is ideal for individuals interested in becoming curriculum/instructional specialists, corporate trainers, course designers, education policy developers or adjunct faculty members.

Regardless of your professional focus, Husson’s program helps educators develop successful learning techniques through an inquiry-based approach. You can learn more about this fully online program here.