Higher Education

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

HBCU Insights: How college ratings reversal could benefit HBCUs

A column by Dr. Larry J. Walker

In 2013 President Obama outlined a plan to introduce a college ratings system to provide prospective students and their parents with the tools to make informed decisions. The proposed system was consistent with the President’s view that students from under-served communities encountered obstacles that hindered their effort to attend college. Based on comments from the President, colleges throughout the country would be judged based on criteria including loan debt, graduation rates and after college income. Supporters believed the ratings system would hold post-secondary institutions accountable by creating transparency. However, some policymakers, college administrators and stakeholders raised concerns including: (1) the government exceeding their right to evaluate schools and (2) the impact the system would have on institutions that serve predominantly students from under-served communities including historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). Concerns from the HBCU community regarding the proposed system would continue throughout the development process.

Members of the HBCU community were apprehensive because of complications relating to 2011 changes to the PLUS loan program, which impacted school attrition rates. Several HBCUs experienced a drop in enrollment because of new loan guidelines that disqualified low income and middle class families. Subsequently, some HBCUs implemented cost cutting measures including eliminating staff and curtailing programs. Traditionally HBCUs enroll low income and first generation college students. Consequently, regulatory or statutory changes can have a long-term impact on their ability to increase graduation rates.

Throughout the development process HBCU administrators and supporters lamented that the ratings system would have an equally devastating impact as the PLUS loan change. According to a study by the National Center for Education Statistics HBCUs were disproportionately impacted by the loan requirements in comparison to other post-secondary institutions. HBCUs were fearful that implementing a college ratings system would unfairly penalize universities dedicated to educating students from under-served communities.

The administration asserted that the new system would ensure all students had access to important information relating to cost, retention rates and student debt. Throughout his tenure President Obama has sought to level the playing field for first generation, minority and low-income students. For instance, the President outlined a free community college proposal that would likely increase college completion rates. However, despite the President’s record of supporting pathways to success for under-served students’ members of Congress opposed the college ratings system.

Senator Lamar Alexander, Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee along with Congressman John Kline, Chairman of the House Education and Workforce Committee indicated they did not support a ratings system. Both members believed the plan was intrusive and would unnecessarily burden post-secondary institutions. In fact, Senator Alexander included language in a bill that would have blocked the Obama administration from implementing the system.

The controversy surrounding the system caused the U.S. Department of Education to announce that they will abandon the use of certain metrics. Post-secondary institutions will not be compared to other colleges based on graduation rates, student debt along with other measurables. As a result, HBCUs won’t have to worry about fighting comparisons to large post-secondary institutions with significant endowments. Holding HBCUs to the same standard as predominantly White institutions (PWIs) that educate students from middle class and affluent backgrounds would be difficult. Throughout their history HBCUs have encountered several obstacles including inequitable funding, which hinders their ability to fund scholarships and offer certain programs.

HBCUs continue to educate students from under-served communities. Their mission to enroll Black students with limited resources is consistent with President Obama’s call to open opportunities for all students. Without HBCUs students with limited social capital would not have the opportunity to attend college. HBCUs continue to play a critical role in preparing Black students to compete in the global marketplace. Thus, expanding opportunities for students from under-served backgrounds should include implementing policies that ensure HBCUs remain viable.

 

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

____________

Dr. Larry J. Walker is an educational consultant focused on supporting historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs). His research examines the impact environmental factors have on the academic performance and social emotional functioning of students from HBCUs.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, HBCU's, Higher Education

Have for-profit schools preyed on minorities?

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?

All the right words

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 piques 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, are 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.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

5 trends in college diversity to look for in 2016

Student protests. Strikes by football teams. High-profile officials resigning. In 2015, equality and fair representation on college campuses saw the media spotlight and people across the nation took note. The past year set the foundation for potentially big strides in diversity, inclusion and equality on college campuses in 2016 – but only if advocates take advantage of the spotlight for good.

Take a look at five ways I think diversity can, and will, improve on college campuses in 2016:

More student input.

2015 was a pivotal year of college students being vocal about their treatment, and that of their peers, by university administration. An interesting (yet obvious) lesson emerged: Colleges that do not take the complaints of their students seriously will face the consequences.

Case in point: The University of Oklahoma versus the University of Missouri. At Oklahoma, when students publicly called out a fellow student for chanting racial slurs in an online video that went viral, the university’s president acted quickly to expel the student and speak out publicly against what the video portrayed. At the University of Missouri, however, there were months of unrest after racial slurs were allegedly used by some white students, that launched other accusations of university discrimination. It took student protests, hunger strikes, and a threatened strike by the football team before some peace among students was reached. As a result, two administrators (including university president Tim Wolfe) resigned.

Colleges have to find the balance between acting too quickly and simply appearing to not care. The University of Missouri was guilty of the latter. Expect student complaints regarding equality on campus and other student-treatment issues to be taken more seriously in 2016 and for diversity to improve as a result.

Broader definition of diversity.

Cultivating diversity on college campuses is not just about race and ethnicity. It encompasses gender, age and life stage. Colleges will continue to increase the recruitment of first-generation, LGBTQ+, non-traditional, out-of-state, and international students to create a more diverse atmosphere. This will include a more conscious effort on the part of admitting officials but will also require more targeted recruitment.

Chief Diversity Officers.

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.”

Earlier recruitment.

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.

Expect more colleges to join the Coalition for Access, Affordability and Success which replaces the Common Application with a portfolio process for college acceptance that starts in 9th grade.

Data for retention.

Getting a diverse group of students on campus is just the first step in maintaining a multi-faceted population. Retention, especially among at-risk groups, is a big problem for universities. 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.

 

What trends are hoping to see in college diversity in 2016?

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Equity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Diverse Conversations: Mentoring Minority Faculty

Minority faculty find themselves at a huge disadvantage at institutions controlled by people of European descent. To discuss some of the ways in which institutions can ensure that minority faculty members are properly mentored and guided, I recently sat down with Olympia Duhart, Co-President of the Society of American Law Teachers (SALT), which has been hugely instrumental in promoting programs to address this important issue.

Q: Minority faculty have a particularly hard time in traditional universities – what has been your experience in terms of the specific reasons for this?

A: Difficulties experienced by traditionally underrepresented faculty members can often be traced to the lack of both institutional and informal support systems in place. Both schools and faculty members should be intentional and explicit about offering support for minority faculty. Often, colleagues with good intentions have no perspective or context for the additional difficulties faced by faculty of color. Someone has to start the conversation.

Q: What are some of the specific challenges for minority faculty and some of the symptoms of their struggle? There was an article recently in Diverse (in 2012) that suggested minority faculty experience higher levels of job related stress. Have you observed these kinds of trends in your experience? If so, what strategies have worked to combat these types of problems?

A: Given the multiple responsibilities imposed on faculty members and the increasing workload many of us are juggling today, it is not surprising that faculty members are often struggling with job-related stress. Adding an extra layer of otherness to those duties – and the especially low numbers of faculty of color in the law school arena – makes things even more challenging. Even faculty members who do not deal with institutional bias are coping on a regular basis with microaggressions in the form of bias in student evaluations, slights by colleagues and an expectation that we have to be more qualified than our non-minority counterparts. In my own experience, I have also struggled with “imposter syndrome” – fueled in large part by the novelty of being a woman of color from a low socio-economic background without so-called fancy credentials. Thanks in large part to mentoring and support I’ve received from colleagues – of all backgrounds – I’ve reframed my story. I take great pride in bringing a unique perspective to the table, and I am even more proud to do my part to inspire students who share my background.

Q: Shifting emphasis slightly, what are some of the strategies used at the Society of American Law Teachers to mentor minority faculty?

A: One of SALT’s core values is diversity. It informs our work within and beyond the classroom. It also drives us to create programming that will increase minority representation on both sides of the podium. We strive to promote education equality in all arenas. This translates to our formal mentoring program, “Breaking In” programs designed to increase the numbers of minority law teachers, tips for new teachers at our teaching conference, programing for diversity in law school leadership and BA to JD Pipeline Programs held throughout the country to increase access to law school for students of color. After all, a diverse law school student population is the foundation for more diversity among law faculty. But one of our most successful strategies has been the network we sustain through our members. Each SALT member is committed to offering support to underrepresented faculty members. Sometimes the support means advocating on their behalf to protect tenure and security of position. Other times that support means sharing a syllabus. And sometimes it means taking the time to listen and offer some advice.

Q: Which of these strategies has been the most successful?
A: The national network of law professors available through the engagement with SALT has been invaluable for many people. For me, it truly opened up a world of mentors, advisors and friends who have made this profession rewarding. It’s also given me a chance to play my part in honoring the special social responsibilities that come with the practice of law. Furthermore, I was also very lucky to have so many people in place at my home institution (Nova Southeastern University) who embraced me. One of the most important lessons I’ve learned is to take advantage of the mentoring opportunities available to you. And it is very important to think about the mentor you select. For me, it has always been important to connect with people who engage with the world around them.

Q: What do you feel are the most effective strategies for mentoring minority faculty in general? Would you say what works at Nova Southeastern University is representative and consistent with what works at most other types of institutions?

A: It’s not a mystery. We need more representation. Isolation can have a negative impact on anyone’s ability to thrive. The “critical mass” we talk about among the student body is also important among faculty. A diverse faculty is essential for a robust classroom and effective legal advocacy. Most importantly, it is a crucial component of training students to succeed in a diverse society. At Nova Southeastern University’s Shepard Broad Law Center, we are very fortunate to have a Director of Faculty Development who provides a structured support system for all faculty members through scholarship critique, one-on-one advice and a no-risk environment for teaching development. In my role as Director of the Lawyering Skills and Value Program, I have also worked deliberately to showcase diversity in our skills program. For instance, for the first-year oral arguments we made a dedicated effort to reach out to voluntary bar associations to judge the competition. It was important to expose the students to practicing attorneys from the Muslim Bar, the Gay and Lesbian Lawyers Network, the Cuban American Bar Association and the Caribbean Bar Association, among others, to dispel their assumptions about what a lawyer looks like. This type of support serves the students, but it is also empowering to minority faculty. In addition, faculty members benefit tremendously from informal support. People have helped me by talking me through a tough time, dropping an email and treating me with me respect. They have invited me over for dinner, collaborated with me in the classroom and challenged me when I needed it. I also do my best to mentor others by reaching out to junior faculty, offering to moot a presentation, read a paper or work through a teaching idea. We get to carry each other.

Q: What advice would you give to administrators and those in charge of mentoring minority faculty?

A: First, start a conversation. It is important to keep the discussions open about the hurdles that still exist. Until we can talk honestly about the barriers still in place because of racism, sexism, homophobia, and other types of bigotry, we can’t even begin to start thinking critically about correcting those disparities. But more importantly, follow up the talk with action. Place minority faculty members in leadership roles. Confront the biases that still infect the classroom. Support efforts to educate faculty about the importance of cultural competency. Connect diversity in the classroom to the broader issue of social justice. Create a culture in your institution that encourages diverse viewpoints.

Q: What are some of the strategies for recruiting minority faculty and helping them integrate into the existing faculty and administrative organization of an institution?

A: It always surprises me when people say they can’t find any minority faculty members or administrators. I see excellent candidates for teaching and leadership positions all the time. However, one constant obstacle I’ve observed is the need for “experience.” That, of course, is key. But elevating traditional experience into a super-factor is often a tool for eliminating stellar candidates to teach or lead. Exclusions based on factors that appear to be race or gender-neutral often operate to the exclusion of underrepresented minority groups. Until the academy becomes more diverse, the over emphasis on traditional experience will often eliminate large segments of the population. Institutions should challenge themselves to think more expansively about the type of faculty and administrators they want to support. And what kind of experience they want to value.

Q: What resources have you found to be most useful to support the mentoring of minority faculty?

A: Just talking about diversity is never enough. The best resources move beyond messaging into movement. At the university level, there are a few avenues to consider. Is there an organized, concerted effort to promote inclusion? Is there a financial commitment to diversity initiatives? Is diversity a recognized and promoted value for the university? Is there training for minority faculty? Is there education of the larger faculty, students and community about the value of diversity? Is there a culture that encourages mentoring? Is there a sense of community and collaboration in the university setting? On the broader level – such as through organizations such as SALT – those avenues change. Through volunteer efforts by dedicated law teachers who are willing to give up their valuable time to mentor others, we have made great strides in supporting minority faculty. We are proud of the progress we have made, but there is still so much work to do. The most useful tools to advance the mentoring of minority faculty bolster diversity through specific acts, creative ideas and hard work.

This concludes our interview. Thank you to Professor Olympia Duhart, J.D., for participating in this interview.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education

False Positives: Low Student Loan Default Scores

**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.**

Guest post by Bob Hildreth

Ask the “best” colleges about the student debt crisis and they are likely to trot out the very low default rates of their graduates, only 1 to 2 percent. Most of the defaulting students, they point out, come from for-profits. They also believe that the national default rate at 11.8 percent is at a manageable level.

But these rates hide more than they reveal. Default rates are managed to be low. It is in the best interest of everyone involved to keep them low: the government wants to keep the lid on its troubled policy, the government’s collection agents want to earn their fees by keeping debtors current, and the colleges want to keep the mother’s milk of government subsidies flowing in their direction.

The “best colleges” have little experience with debt defaults. They either don’t know or are reluctant to admit that, when it comes to the government’s loan program, colleges are all bunched together. Even for a college with zero defaults the only default rate that matters in a crisis is that of all debtors from all colleges.

The government is lenient, letting 9 months of no repayments pass before calling a student in default. Compare that to only 90 days on car loans or 3 months on mortgages. Students are also allowed to clear their defaults by switching from stricter repayment plans to easier ones. College lobbyists have convinced the government to measure default rates after only three years knowing that defaults accumulate over time. In fact, one in five students with over $15,000 in debt defaulted on his or her loan in the 10 years after graduation. That’s a 20% default rate.

The Federal Reserve of New York has created its own measure to gage student debt stress. Using consumer data the Fed measures how long students go without paying their debts. By this calculation in 2014 past due rates on student debt reached as high as 63%. 

That leaves the government like the famous emperor without clothes. If the future of our children and the solvency of our colleges were not at stake the government might have already stopped lending. But there is probably no default rate so high that the government would abandon these priorities. At the same time it is easy to guess that changes are afoot. One of the most likely targets are controls on tuition increases. That will cause a fire storm on Washington’s DuPont Circle, the home of college lobbyists. If these lobbyists can suggest a way to put clothes back on the emperor, they should speak now.

____

Bob Hildreth is the Founder and Chairman of the Board of Inversant, a Boston-based non-profit that helps families learn about, apply for and save for college without incurring student debt.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Higher Education, Matthew Lynch, OpEducation

Diverse Conversations: Online Universities and Underserved Student Populations

College attendance has become a necessity for entry into the contemporary workforce. This shift is a direct result of President Obama’s goal of having the largest percentage of college graduates out of all the countries in the world by 2020. With this edict has come an influx of students that may not have attended college as early as a decade ago. That being said, online colleges are taking the president’s challenge to heart and paving the way for underserved students to earn degrees and a better living. To find out more about this trend, I sat down with Cynthia G. Baum, Ph.D., president of Walden University. Cynthia has more than 20 years of leadership experience in postsecondary education, during which she has served as a campus president and regional vice president for a number of institutions.

Q: How does online learning lead to success for first-generation and minority students?

A: Online education increases access to higher education, an attribute that is particularly relevant for first-generation and minority students. It provides an alternative for students who want to begin or continue their studies at any stage in their life, have family responsibilities to consider, or want or need to continue working while earning a degree. For many first-generation and minority students, an online learning environment helps make higher education possible.

As a first-generation college graduate myself, I know what my parents sacrificed to make sure that I could pursue the education I wanted. My parents were bright, hard-working people who had some college education but neither of them was able to complete their degree. There wasn’t a Walden University for them, where they could go to school and have a full-time job in order to support our family. Online institutions like Walden provide opportunities for students from all walks of life to get an education, advance their careers, and make an impact in their professions and communities.

Q: What are some of the benefits of online education for underrepresented populations?

A: The online learning environment allows students to network with classmates and faculty from across the country and around the world. In particular, for first-generation and minority students who may not have had the opportunity or experience to network with others beyond their local community, this presents an amazing opportunity to benefit from the practical experience and shared knowledge of their peers. Students learn to work with one another as part of a virtual team while gaining the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in the workforce. In many cases, students are given the opportunity to immediately put what they have learned into practice.

Another benefit is the asynchronous online environment. There is a saying in the online classroom—there is no back row. Due to the nature of online learning, greater emphasis is placed on participation. Students must participate in discussions through online postings in their classrooms. Because of the asynchronous environment, students don’t feel rushed and have time to think through and reflect on their responses. It also provides the opportunity to share ideas in a safe environment, which can be a confidence booster for minority and first-generation students.

Q: What types of support services do online institutions need to offer in order to help first-generation and minority students succeed?

A: As they enter their programs, students can benefit from a new student orientation that helps them understand how to engage in the online classroom, identifies university resources available to them, and helps them think through important life areas such as time management and how to solicit the support of their family and friends. Self-assessments in writing and math can also help direct students to the support they may need in those areas. Having access to a well-resourced virtual library, research support, and a career services center provides students with tools and resources they need to be successful, build their networks, and move into a thriving career.

At Walden, we find it valuable to have support teams available 24/7 through email, phone, and chat to guide students with technical issues and to answer questions in areas such as registration and financial aid. We also provide other resources—such as virtual communities where students can connect with other students with similar career interests, cultural and ethnic backgrounds, hobbies, etc.—to help create a sense of camaraderie and belonging to the institution. This can be extremely valuable for first-generation or minority students who benefit from connections with classmates who share similar experiences and challenges.

Q: How can online institutions help guide first-generation students or others who may be at risk for not graduating?

A: We know from research that the first year of any student’s program is critical to their long-term higher education success. Assigning an academic advisor to the student from day one provides them with guidance and the necessary tools and resources to support their long-term success. Programs of study that are sequenced help to “scaffold” learning—where later courses build upon the skills of earlier ones—and take the guesswork out of what courses to take next. With the flexibility of online programs, students can fit school into THEIR life, not the other way around.

Just like brick and mortar institutions, online institutions can also provide writing tutors, math tutors, academic advisors, and career services professionals to support students at every stage of their learning experience. Effective mentors and support staff not only help students adjust to the online classroom but also support them to be confident, active participants in higher education. And virtual communities help to provide peer support. These types of support may not be available in the day-to-day environments of many minority or first-generation students and could be the critical difference in their higher education success.

Q: What role should online institutions like Walden continue to play in providing quality higher education?

A: It is clear that the online environment offers flexibility and convenience that is critical to the ability of working professionals to pursue their dreams of higher education. But at Walden, we not only offer convenience, we develop our programs starting with the end in mind; that is, the knowledge and skills that are important not only in the discipline being studied but also to employers in the field. We seek employer input and involve both subject-matter and curriculum design experts in determining the curriculum and design of every course. By using standardized assessment techniques, we have a wealth of data on what our students are learning in order to make continuous quality improvements in how and what we teach.

By providing students with access to both higher education and a quality learning environment, online institutions can provide students the opportunity to pursue their dreams, reach their potential, and use what they learn to make a difference in their professions, communities, and society at large.

That concludes my interview with President Cynthia Baum. I would like to thank her for consenting to this interview and for her contributions to the field of higher education.

 

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Minority faculty revisited: Why is America so disproportionate?

If America is the land of opportunity, then earning a college degree is the key to really tapping the potential of that opportunity. In the last century going to college has transitioned from something reserved for the elite to something that everyday citizens can aspire to do (with enough financial aid). There’s certainly a case to be made for the need for more diversity on college campuses, but overall our nation’s university system is improving the variety of students on campus and making the experience attainable to all class levels. It’s not perfect; but there’s a push to improve.

One area where colleges and universities consistently fall short, however, is in the number of minority faculty they employ. There are not enough professors of color. There are not enough women. There are not enough who represent the LBGTQ+ community. If we truly want our student body to be diverse and feed into a diverse workplace, we need to start where those students are earning their educations.

Not an accurate representation

Compared to the general U.S. population, diversity in college faculty is much lower. This isn’t to say that all the professors are white, of European descent (though that number is high) though. 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.

Can we change?

So the real question in all of this is not so much “is this happening?” but “what can we do to change this?” The first part is awareness which it seems we are achieving.

The second part is for schools to take on the responsibility and step up to change it. That isn’t happening on as wide a scale as it should, but there are glimmers of hope that adding more minority faculty members is on the horizon for a good number of schools. A few good examples include:

  • Brown University, which 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.
  • Lewis & Clark College in Oregon planned a diversity forum for December 7 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 plans to hire a Chief Diversity Officer who will works towards improving 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.

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.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, HBCU's, Higher Education

Is there a conspiracy to destroy HBCUs?

By Matthew Lynch

There’s no denying that Historically Black Colleges and Universities have had a tremendous impact on the education levels of the black community. Since their founding, these campuses have served underdog students – first-generation, minority and other at-risk college attendees. The question of HBCU relevance is constantly floated in education circles but lately I’ve been pondering an even more poignant query: Is there a conspiracy to destroy Historically Black Colleges and Universities?

Of course the word “conspiracy” makes it sound like a top-secret, well-orchestrated attempt to eliminate these colleges from the higher education landscape. I don’t believe that is the case exactly, but there are certainly some factors that seem to hurt HBCUs more greatly than PWIs.

Policies that hurt HBCUs

For those who believe there is a conspiracy afoot, there are all sorts of reasons they believe so. Here are a couple of the most common:

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

Online schools targeting minorities. Perhaps the largest factor crippling HBCUs today is the prevalence of online college programs. From schools like the University of Phoenix which is completely online to individual programs offered by traditional campus schools, students who need college-work-family flexibility are finding it outside HBCU campuses. All demographics have flocked to online schooling, but minorities have been especially targeted. HBCUs have traditionally been viewed as places for underdogs, but online schooling programs have overtaken that description with the combination of convenience and a wide array of programs.

Policies to merge HBCUs. Governors like Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal and Mississippi’s former governor Haley Barbour have announced plans to merge HBCUs with each other or other predominantly white institutions in moves that are intended to slash state operating costs. Treating any two HBCUs as institutions that are alike enough to merge without incident is flawed though. Planning to merge a HBCU with a predominantly white schools is even more off-base. These individual schools have their own histories, their own student cultures. Perhaps it makes financial sense to merge HBCUs with others similar in size or scope, but it undermines the collective institutions, undercutting their autonomy and what they can offer to potential students.

Ways HBCUs hurt themselves

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

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

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

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

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

The combination of outside factors and internal issues has created a perfect storm when it comes to declining enrollment and revenue at HBCUs. I still believe these institutions have an important place in the U.S. college landscape but will have to fight just a little bit harder to stay relevant.

Read all of our posts about HBCUs by clicking here.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in HBCU's, Higher Education, Matthew Lynch

Which Election Issues Really Matter to Minority College Students?

There’s a lot of rhetoric in election years centering on young voters. What do young people want from politicians, and how can those politicians get those young people registered and to the polls? While voters who are older than college and young-adult age certainly outnumber this group, understanding what college students want from the people they elect matters a lot – both short term and long term.

So what do the college students, particularly minorities, want during the election of 2016?

Affordability.

If we’ve learned anything since Mitt Romney’s race for the Presidency in 2012 it’s this: Telling college students to have their parents “write a check” for their education just isn’t going to fly. Asking college students to take on heavy loads of debt is also a no-go. The students entering college today have the advantage of their not-so-much-older graduated peers who are more vocal than any other group in the past about why college attendance needs to be more affordable.

It makes sense, really. No one feels the squeeze of what college actually costs than the students who are actually living it and the young adults attempting to pay back high amounts of college debt on low salaries. Today’s college students saw their parents struggle through the latest recession. Some may have even lost homes. They are well aware of what the load of college debt actually means, and why it is imperative that affordable options be available to students from all life backgrounds.

President Obama’s proposal to have two free years of community college available for students who qualify academically has been met enthusiastically by young people all over the country, and their parents. Pay it Forward programs, like the one in place at Oregon state colleges, are being welcomed with open arms. The idea that hard work, not economic background, can help reduce the overall cost of obtaining a degree resonates with a lot of young people.

Today’s college students want a candidate who recognizes the significant financial sacrifice of earning a degree but who also believes it should cost less, period. This is an advantage particularly to Bernie Sanders, should he land the Democratic nomination, and even Donald Trump could be viewed favorable by young people for his public denouncement of federal loan programs that profit off of college students and parents. Hillary Clinton has also spoke out about not “saddling” students with decades of debt simply to earn an education.

Social issues.

When President Obama too office in 2008, the idea of legalizing same-sex marriage across the nation was a far-fetched one. It was an issue that had passionate discourse on both sides, but not one that appeared it would really move forward in the course of the President’s two terms. Thanks to very vocal supporters, and also to the rise of social media informing more people of the issue and hand and humanizing it, we all know that progress was made faster than anticipated.

The same is true of other issues now seeing greater awareness, in part again because of social media. Some of those include paid maternity/paternity leave, abortion and reproductive regulations, and the gender- and race-gap when it comes to wages. These are important to college students and boils down to their elected officials doing what is right by them, and their peers. The social issues that matter most to each individual college student will determine the particular candidate of choice, and a range of conservative and liberal stances are represented among front runners Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders, Donald Trump, Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz.

Environment.

College students today are hyper-aware of the issues surrounding sustainability on the planet. From oil fracking to water conservation to global warming – these young voters care what happens to the place they call home. Denial of such issues as problems is futile. Donald Trump’s recent comments that he wants to revive the coal industry are sure to turn off most young voters while Hillary Clinton has vowed to push comprehensive energy changes that support renewable sources and clean energy technology.

 

It’s almost surreal to think that by this time next year, we will have a new Commander in Chief. While college voters may not make the biggest impact at the polls, their voice will make a difference in who is chosen – and how that person is held accountable while maintaining the highest office in the land.

  • no reactions
0
Share
Matthew Lynch published in Diversity, Higher Education

What We Should Tell Our College Students, instead of “Toughen Up”

In a piece for The Washington Post, Ferentz Lafargue, the director for the Davis Center which explores positive social change at Williams College in Massachusetts, pushes back against the mentality that protecting college students from hate speech and discrimination “coddles them.”

Lafargue’s comments come on the heels of two cancelled speakers on the campus that had unpopular views. The first, conservative Suzanne Venker who has voiced her opinion that feminism has failed, and the second John Derbyshire, a mathematician who once wrote for the National Review until his writing revealed him to have racist views. Venker’s appearance was cancelled following student backlash and Derbyshire’s was cancelled by the university president himself.

Lafargue applauds the university’s actions in both cases. He counters that allowing such speakers at the expense of college students does not prepare them for the real world. It implies that wanting to change those attitudes is wrong.

In the piece, Lafargue writes:

The real culprits — on campuses and in the real world — are the persistent effects of homophobia, income inequality, misogyny, poverty, racism, sexism, white supremacy and xenophobia. When students refuse to accept discrimination on college campuses, they’re learning important lessons about how to fight it everywhere.

Larfargue’s spot-on analysis got me thinking a little more about the role of college campuses in changing the future “real world” that exists after students earn their degrees. Instead of telling these students to toughen up, perhaps we should tell them these things instead:

Your words matter.

Whether you are speaking out against injustice, or belittling a peer, what you say makes an impact on the larger world. This goes for verbal words that come directly out of your mouth and those that are written – in emails, in texts, on social media, and more. Use those words to lift others up and to further causes that benefit society and beyond. You do not need to tolerate the words of another that offend you – ever. Know who you are and speak those truths into existence.

You don’t deserve discrimination.

Hate, intolerance and judgement are not just acceptable parts of life. They are wrong, plain and simple. Just because they exist, and have since the dawn of time, does not make them a part of your life that you must simply deal with and move past. You cannot change the way a particular person thinks or acts but always recognize that the fault is with them, not you. It’s not your job to adjust to a world that discriminates you unfairly, nor is it ever your doing.

Progress is hard – but worth it.

The road to positive change is full of obstacles. Sometimes working towards that change is downright disheartening. This doesn’t mean to just accept the status quo. It means to work even harder to push back against the negative viewpoints and deep-rooted belief systems that are holding that progress back. It’s not an easy task to steer a ship a new direction, especially one that goes against the current, but it’s necessary to get to a new place. Never stop fighting the good fight. Eventually, with persistence and optimism, you will win.

Youth is not a disadvantage.

Don’t ever let anyone tell you that you that your lack of years lessens your importance. Your viewpoint matters just as much, if not more, than those whose opinions are more about hardened lines than true progress. Use your voice and all of that youthful passion to blaze new trails. Your inexperience in the ways of the world makes you an asset to it because your choices are based less on outside influence.

You are safe here.

At least while you are on this campus, and a student at this school, we will have your best interest at heart. Nowhere in our university mission does it say that we strive to toughen you up for the real world by allowing you to be attacked, verbally or otherwise. You matter to us. You are protected. You are a priority.

 

We can’t coddle our college students by insisting they demand fairness. Let’s stand behind them as they continue the good work to progress past discrimination and backward thinking. Let’s believe together that the next iteration of the real world ushered in by our best and brightest will be an even better one than what we see today.

  • no reactions
0
Share