“Investing in the Future: Sharing Responsibility for Higher Education Attainment” New Report

Final report of the National Commission on Financing 21st Century Higher Education national-com-fin-he-21st-centreleased
[download full report (PDF) ] [download Executive Summary only (PDF) ]

The Report is the work of the 14-member National Commission on Financing 21st Century Higher Education led by two former governors and includes two state legislators, five university presidents and five private sector CEOs.

The Miller Center is a nonpartisan affiliate of the University of Virginia that specializes in presidential scholarship, public policy and political history and strives to apply the lessons of history to the nation’s most pressing contemporary governance challenges.

The project director is Raymond Scheppach, Economic Fellow at the Miller Center of Public Affairs and Professor of Public Policy at the Batten School of Leadership and Public Policy.

The commission produced ten white papers and a final report with recommendations. The Ten Reports Include:

“Crowded Out: The Outlook for State Higher Education Spending” (PDF) by Dan White and Sarah Crane, Moody’s Analytics

“Transformations Affecting Postsecondary Education” (PDF) by Jeffrey J. Selingo, author and columnist

“State Higher Education Finance: Best Practices” (PDF) by Martha Snyder, Brian Fox, and Cristen Moore, HCM Strategists

“Financing American Higher Education in the 21st Century: What Can the United States Learn From Other Countries?” (PDF) by D. Bruce Johnstone, professor, Higher and Comparative Education, University at Buffalo

“State Strategies for Leveraging Employer Investments in Postsecondary Education” (PDF) by Robert Sheets and Stephen Crawford, George Washington Institute of Public Policy, The George Washington University

“Understanding State and Local Higher Education Resources” (PDF) by Sandy Baum and Kim S. Rueben, Urban Institute

“New Directions in Private Financing” (PDF) by Andrew P. Kelly, American Enterprise Institute

“Higher Education: Social Impact Bonds and Income Share Agreements” (PDF) by Carlo Salerno, higher education economist and analyst

“State Support for Higher Education: How Changing the Distribution of Funds Could Improve College Completion Rates” (PDF) by Bridget Terry Long, Harvard Graduate School of Education

“The Federal Role in Financing 21st-Century Higher Education: Effectiveness, Issues, and Alternatives” (PDF) by Gabriel R. Serna, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

Understanding Accumulated Student Debt, Rising Tuition, Public Policy

ASDThe impact of accumulated debt on federal financial aid policy/funding, state financing of higher education, institutional enrollment strategies, and student college going decisions is complex and difficult to unravel. The New York Federal Reserve Bank has released a staff report contributing to the understanding of the complex intertwined dynamics that deserves a thorough read and discussion at the institutional strategy level. I have some issues with causal inference and conclusions but the issue is of paramount importance. There are significant implications and ramifications to their findings. I have selected a couple of resources that help focus the dialog on strategic issues.

Consider the finding “We find that institutions more exposed to changes in the subsidized federal loan program increased their tuition disproportionately around these policy changes, with a sizable pass-through effect on tuition of about 65 percent.”

  • What does this actually mean? Does it infer that institutions’ adjusted tuition is based upon aid formulas rather than true labor and compliance costs? How does this play across sectors, types, regions and states? What are the political ramifications of this finding and what will happen in the hands of politicians in a national election cycle?

Consider the data published in the Chronicle of Higher Education that indicates “just 20 universities are responsible for a huge share of graduate-student debt, amounting to more than $6.5 billion in a single year (2013-14).” and goes onto show that Walden University ranked first with $756,336,024 in graduate student debt. (Walden U. Responds to Report on Graduate-Student Debt)

  • Billions spread over 20 institutions gets everyone’s attention. Is this an expose on exploitive strategy or does the data need to be contextualized? Contextualizing the data is something that needs to be done more adroitly by the higher education community. Again what are the implications and political fall out?

Consider the intensifying focus on the earnings to accumulated debt ratios being examined at the programmatic level as examined in the Brookings study included below.

  • The emergence of the relationship between debt, funding and earnings will intensify. The rate of return and schedule of payback, the value to society not just the individual will be asked again and again, and the focus on outcomes will become more intense and more heated.

The New York Federal Reserve Bank in their July 2015 Staff Report examines the

Credit Supply and the Rise in College Tuition: Evidence from the Expansion in Federal Student Aid Programs

 When students fund their education through loans, changes in student borrowing and tuition are interlinked. Higher tuition costs raise loan demand, but loan supply also affects equilibrium tuition costs—for example, by relaxing students’ funding constraints. To resolve this simultaneity problem, we exploit detailed student-level financial data and changes in federal student aid programs to identify the impact of increased student loan funding on tuition. We find that institutions more exposed to changes in the subsidized federal loan program increased their tuition disproportionately around these policy changes, with a sizable pass-through effect on tuition of about 65 percent. We also find that Pell Grant aid and the unsubsidized federal loan program have pass-through effects on tuition, although these are economically and statistically not as strong. The subsidized loan effect on tuition is most pronounced for expensive, private institutions that are somewhat, but not among the most, selective.

Huffington Post published the Average Student Debt Burden In Each State

Published data from the Department of Education, College Board, and The Institute for College Access & Success bringing student debt burden to the state level.

The Chronicle of Higher Education Reported “As Graduate-Student Debt Booms, Just a Few Colleges Are Largely Responsible

Published data focused upon graduate student debt burden as a separate issue. According to their table just 20 universities are responsible for a huge share of graduate-student debt, amounting to more than $6.5 billion in a single year (2013-14). Walden University ranked first with $756,336,024 in graduate student debt.

Brookings Reported in November 2014 an analysis of Graduates’ Earnings Growth and Debt Repayment

Brookings published an analysis of accumulated debt ratios for students enrolled in specific program types. The report also provides an interactive feature, Undergraduate Student Loan Calculator, to calculate the share of earnings necessary to service traditional loan repayment for 80 majors.

In closing

The relationships between accumulated student debt, graduates earning potential,  the earning to payback cycle alignment, and managing tuition price and discounting ratios, form a major issue stream that weighs heavily on the future of higher education. Institutions who understand this will focus on embedding as much value in their curricula as can be achieved. Then they will create a value narrative to guide implementation and align their institutional effectiveness model to close the loop and provide evidence of value. The context involved in achieving a higher value narrative requires we recognize the paradigm shift now underway. To align with the paradigm shift we must examine ways to future proof strategies within the broader context of how higher education is evolving.

Join us at one or more of our Institutes to more deeply explore critical issues facing higher education and strategies to address them.

NASA’s Evolving Technology Strategy: What can Higher Education Learn?

The three foundational elements of NASA’s evolving technology strategy include Roadmaps for 15 Technologies, a Strategic Technology Investment Plan (STIP), and a software system to integrate and manage it all called TechPort.


In 2010, NASA developed a set of Technology Roadmaps to guide the development of space technologies. The draft 2015 NASA Technology Roadmaps expand and update the original roadmaps, providing extensive details about anticipated NASA mission capabilities and associated technology development needs. NASA believes sharing the roadmaps with the broader community will increase awareness, generate innovative solutions to provide the capabilities for space exploration and scientific discovery, and inspire others to become involved in America’s space program. The promising new technology candidates that will help NASA achieve its extraordinary missions are identified in the draft 2015 NASA Technology Roadmaps. The roadmaps are a foundational element of the Strategic Technology Investment Plan (STIP), an actionable plan that lays out the strategy for developing technologies essential to the pursuit of NASA’s mission and achievement of National goals. The STIP prioritizes the technology candidates within the roadmaps and provides guiding principles for technology investment. The recommendations provided by the National Research Council heavily influence NASA’s technology prioritization. NASA’s technology investments are tracked and analyzed in TechPort, a web-based software system that serves as NASA’s integrated technology data source and decision support tool.

TA1 Launch Propulsion Systems TA2 In-space propulsion technologies TA3 Space power and energy storage TA4 Robotics and autonomous systems TA5 Communications navigation and orbital debris tracking and characterization systems TA6 Human health life support and habitation systems TA7 Human exploration destination systems TA8 Science instruments observatories and sensor systems TA9 Entry descent and landing systems TA10 Nanotechnology TA11 Modeling simulations information technology and processing TA12 materials structures mechanical systems and manufacturing TA13 Ground and launch systems TA14 Thermal management systems TA15 Aeronautics

TA1 Launch Propulsion Systems TA2 In-space propulsion technologies TA3 Space power and energy storage TA4 Robotics and autonomous systems TA5 Communications navigation and orbital debris tracking and characterization systems TA6 Human health life support and habitation systems TA7 Human exploration destination systems TA8 Science instruments observatories and sensor systems TA9 Entry descent and landing systems TA10 Nanotechnology TA11 Modeling simulations information technology and processing TA12 materials structures mechanical systems and manufacturing TA13 Ground and launch systems TA14 Thermal management systems TA15 Aeronautics

So what can Higher Education Learn?

As NASA did in 2010 and renewed in 2015, recognize the influence that the development and adoption of mission critical technologies have on the future. For higher education, I believe it means recognizing the inexorable influence of how the emerging Global Digital Learning Ecosystem and the technologies that it rest upon influence learning, learners, educators and the business of higher education. A technology strategy is not about technology, but rather about learning and creating value in the learning marketplace through the learner’s learning experience.

Recognize the need for a long-term forward-looking view that extends out 20 years into the future. This means focusing upon long-term sustainability despite short-term crisis and limited resources. Concepts such as course scalability, embedded assessment, community of practice curricula, proficiency based curricular models and architectures, lifelong learning markets, and differentiating the academic portfolio are key to future plans. Such strategies are a long-term investment and can take years to develop and perfect, but surprisingly can result in immediate benefits.

Recognize that a technology strategy means managing and integrating Multiple Mission Critical Technologies. The future is not one vendor or one system, but rather multiple technologies woven into an integrated strategy. Like NASA’s multiple roadmaps, higher education must plot a technology evolutionary path for Learning Management Systems, Assessment Methods, Curriculum Development Platforms, and a host of other focused categories. It means accommodating the fact that technologies are rapidly changing and rapidly evolving, so being nimble is important.

Recognize the future is one of market impotence unless the long-term technological capacity of the institution is enabled by an ongoing long-term investment plan. Academic leaders must look beyond the crisis of the minute or term and invest to develop a future. Wasting time and resources on quick fixes and sure things is the pathway of decline. Capacity translates into value that must be substantiated, delivered relentlessly over time, and positioned competitively in the learning marketplace. Each requires technology capacity in the era of the Global Digital Learning Ecosystem populated by digital natives (now 35 years old and younger).

Above all of the lessons the NASA Roadmaps can teach higher education, we must recognize that short-term actions must aggregate to pave the pathway to long-term sustainability. Optimize each and every resource, manage the calendar carefully and strategically, use resources (especially human capital) to focus on high yield, high impact results. This requires a multi-year, forward-looking vision that frames and informs the decisions that propel an institution forward. (We must recognize that higher education, where technology is concerned, lags generally far behind.)

The future is not about technology taking over learning, it is about learning systems optimizing technology and for that we need Roadmaps to the future…

Federal Financial Aid: 3 Part Documentary Available

Looking Back to Move Forward: A History of Federal Student Aid

The Lumina Foundation has posted a three part documentary on the policy and the political origins of U.S. federal financial aid programs. These resources are a great background training for student affairs professionals, academic leaders, and enrollment management professionals.

In addition to the three videos below, you may wish to explore:

How Did We Get Here: Growth of Federal Student Loans (Part 1)

Where Financial Aid Began: Partnering with Campuses and States (Part 2)

Pell Grant: Building Block of Student-Based Aid (Part 3)

Lumina ReportDownload the companion PDF to the series.

Academic SEM Looking Ahead: Three Years from the peak in enrollments, May 1, 2015 looms large

I promised a recent class of Education Graduate Students some links to tracking the roller coaster ride of enrollments over the last few years. Below are some useful links tracking trends in enrollment issues.

Inside Higher Ed

From Inside Higher Ed Survey: Student Populations That Will Be Target of More Attention in the Next Year

Population % of Publics Agreeing % of Privates Agreeing
Recruited with non-need-based scholarships 53% 58%
Full-time undergraduates 81% 84%
Part-time undergraduates 40% 15%
International students 53% 63%
Transfer students 63% 72%
Minority students 73% 63%
First generation students 71% 50%
Out-of-state students 60% 64%
Full-pay students 35% 57%
Veterans and military personnel 70% 42%

Survey of College and University Admissions Directors  2014

Survey of College and University Admissions Directors  2013

Survey of College and University Admissions Directors  2012

College Board

College Board Trends in Higher Education

US Census Bureau Reports

College Enrollment Declines for Second Year in a Row, September 24, 2014

Higher Education Research Institute

The American Freshman: National Norms Fall 2014 – With Past Reports back to 1966

OECD Report: Success of global education reforms threatened by lack of oversight.


Released January 19, 2015 – Governments around the world are under growing pressure to improve their education systems. Rising spending is increasingly being matched by reforms to help disadvantaged children, invest in teachers and improve vocational training. But a widespread lack of evaluation of the impact of these reforms could hinder their effectiveness and hurt educational outcomes, according to a new OECD report.

Education Policy Outlook 2015: Making Reforms Happen finds that once new policies are adopted, there is little follow-up. Only around one in 10 of the 450 different reforms put in place between 2008 and 2014 were evaluated for their impact by governments between their launch and the publication of this report.

Measuring policy impact more rigorously and consistently will prove more cost-effective in the long-run, says the OECD. It will also ensure that future reforms are built on policies proven to work over a timeframe independent of political cycles or pressures.

“Too many education reforms are failing to measure success or failure in the classroom,” said Andreas Schleicher, OECD Director for Education and Skills, at the launch of the report at the Education World Forum in London. “While it is encouraging to see a greater focus on outcomes, rather than simply increasing spending, it’s crucial that reforms are given the time to work and their impact is analyzed.”

“Education represents 12.9% of government spending, with total expenditure across the OECD exceeding 2.5 trillion dollars a year, equivalent to the GDP of the United Kingdom,” he added. “This valuable investment must be deployed in the most effective way. Reforms on paper need to translate into better education in our schools and classrooms.”

The report finds a trend of reform priorities converging across the OECD. Of the reforms analyzed, most focused on: supporting disadvantaged children and early childhood care; reforming vocational education systems and building links with employers; improving training and professional development for teachers; and strengthening school evaluation and assessment.

Adult Learning Achieves Primacy Across Global Societies

The number of adults engaged in formal learning around the globe in any giving year is astounding. Increasingly adult participation in learning is enabled through the robust emerging Global Digital Learning Ecosystem. Globally this is  nurtured by such applications as universal language translation. Together these factors help define the rapidly evolving Learning Age. There are a number of sources for global data on adult participation rates in education and formal learning. Global efforts are not directly comparable but together they illustrate the massive investment people from around the world are making in continuous learning. The questions for higher education are a matter of Academic Strategy and are learner-centric in nature. Seven framing questions focus attention on the learner and learning:

  1. Who are the engaged learners?
  2. What objectives do engaged learners seek?
  3. What learning provider models and curricula are available to the learners?
  4. What learning theories and methods are appropriate for specific learners and the objectives they seek?
  5. What is the optimum curriculum architecture for an institution or educational entity in the 21st Century?
  6. What specific curriculum can be configured to meet the learning needs of the learner population(s) an institution has chosen or been charged to serve?
  7. What support services are necessary to enable specific learner population(s) to successfully complete the curriculum and meet their objectives?

In this post we will focus on the numbers of learners in the adult learning marketplace. We begin in Europe.

An Overview from OECD

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) is an international economic organization of 34 countries founded in 1961 (with roots back to 1948) to stimulate economic progress and world trade. OECD maintains the Indicators of Education Systems (INES) program that provides data on the performance of the education systems in the OECD’s 34 member countries and a set of partner countries, including non-member G20 nations. In a report Skills Beyond School they report adult participation in Education and Learning in OECD Member countries. Combined the European population covered by OECD is a little more than the U.S. at just under 400 million. Findings include:

  • Across the OECD, more than 40% of adults participate in formal and/or non-formal education in a given year. (This is the same range as U.S. adult participation rates.) The proportion ranges from more than 60% in New Zealand and Sweden to less than 15% in Greece and Hungary.
  • On average in the OECD area, an individual can expect to receive 988 hours of instruction in non-formal education during his or her working life, of which 715 hours are instruction in job-related non-formal education.
  • Overall, 27% of adults in OECD countries have looked for information on learning possibilities in the preceding 12 months, and 87% of those seeking information found some.
Figure 1: Participation rate in formal and/or non-formal education, (OECD Chart C5.4)

Figure 1: Participation rate in formal and/or non-formal education, (OECD Chart C5.4)


Figure 2: Participation rate in all and in job-related non-formal education, hours of instruction per participant and per adult in job-related non-formal education, 2007 (OECD Chart C5.2)

Figure 2: Participation rate in all and in job-related non-formal education, hours of instruction per participant and per adult in job-related non-formal education, 2007 (OECD Chart C5.2)


Figure 3: OECD Expected hours over the working life in all non-formal education and in job-related non-formal education, 2007

Figure 3: OECD Expected hours over the working life in all non-formal education and in job-related non-formal education, 2007


European Numbers from Eurostat Indicating Changes in Rates Over 20+ Years

Eurostat is the statistical office of the European Union situated in Luxembourg. It provides the European Union with statistics that enable comparisons between countries and regions. The Adult Education Survey (AES) is a household survey on lifelong learning. People living in private households are interviewed about their participation in education and training activities (formal, non-formal and informal learning). The target population of the survey is composed of people aged 25 to 64. The survey takes place every five years and its results are published on Eurostat website. Eurostat also provides Population Statistics of European countries.

Figure 4: Adult Learners Age 25 to 64 Who Reported Receiving Education

Figure 4: Adult Learners Age 25 to 64 Who Reported Receiving Education

 Source: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&plugin=1&language=en&pcode=tsdsc440

The variability in participation rates among the European nations is profound. The focus on assessing and enhancing participation in educational activities however, is universally among the highest priorities. For deeper insights a visit to the OECD Skills Outlook 2013: First Results from the Survey of Adult Skills, is worth the time.

U.S. Adult Participation Rates Numbers from NCES

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is the primary U.S. entity for collecting and analyzing data related to education. The National Household Education Surveys Program (NHES) provides descriptive data on the educational activities of the U.S. population, thereby offering policymakers, researchers, and educators a variety of statistics on the condition of education in the United States. The latest numbers for the U.S. Adult Participation Rates is for 2005.

Figure 5: U.S. Summary of All Adults Enrolled in Any Program 1991-2005

Figure 5: U.S. Summary of All Adults Enrolled in Any Program 1991-2005

 Participation Varies by Age Category

Breaking out the rates by age group highlights that Eurostat begins its age classifications of adult learners at 25 where as the U.S. NHES included 17-24 year olds.

Figure 6: U.S. Adult Participation in Education by Age Group

Figure 6: U.S. Adult Participation in Education by Age Group


The U.S. Undergraduate Demographic

Reflecting on the characteristics of enrolled college students informs a deeper look at adult learning strategies. The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation published an effective demographic infographic detailing what America would look like as 100 College Students.

Figure 7: Demographic Characteristics of American Undergraduate College Students

Figure 7: Demographic Characteristics of American Undergraduate College Students

Comparative rates from Canadian Study

Each nation exhibits a competitive concern over educational achievement by adult learners as a main component of their economic vitality strategy. The Conference Board of Canada has produced a  website that presents data and analysis on Canada’s national and provincial performance relative to that of 15 peer countries in six performance categories: Economy, Innovation, Environment, Education and Skills, Health, and Society.

How Canada Performs is a multi-year research program to help leaders identify relative strengths and weaknesses in the socio-economic performance of Canada and its provinces. It helps policy-makers, organization leaders, and all Canadians answer the following questions: How do the quality-of-life report cards for Canada and its provinces compare to those of peer countries? Is Canada’s quality of life sustainable? Has there been an improvement? What must Canada and the provinces do to provide a high and sustainable quality of life for all Canadians?

Figure 8:  Adult Participation in Education in Canada Compared to 15 Countries

Figure 8:  Adult Participation in Education in Canada Compared to 15 Countries

Source: Adult Participation in Education in Canada Compared to 15 Countries

Asia and Africa reflect a wide range of Participation

For Asia a great place to start is The State and Development of Adult Learning and Education in Asia and the Pacific report by UNESCO. Insights from the report help establish the climate for Adult Learners.

The history of adult learning and education is a hit-and-miss story – starting off with strong rhetoric, promises and expectation and concluding in limited success, and even neglect and disappointment in too many cases. Adult learning and education has been conflated into the broader agenda of education and development more at the level of discourse than in action. In the arena of action, it has been too often confined to a narrow interpretation of literacy skills. Hence, for most governments in developing countries where financial and human resources are limited, adult education is low in the pecking order when it comes to assigning priority to sub-sectors of the education system (Tanvir, 2008). Furthermore, NGOs are often the major providers of adult learning, although this is largely limited to adult literacy programmes, which then becomes a reason for the state not to fulfill its responsibility. (Page 7)

For Africa, the same source different publication: The State and Development of Adult Learning and Education in Subsaharan Africa.

After decades of sustained efforts to eradicate illiteracy in Africa, illiteracy rates of adults remain high with continuing gender and urban/rural disparities. Illiteracy has several correlations with low productivity, low incomes and poorer health (and susceptibility to HIV/AIDS). It hampers national development efforts. It is a bar to much adult education. The enormous growth in free universal primary education in Africa will gradually alleviate this problem, but drop-out rates from primary schooling remain high. The number of people needing adult basic education still grows and few resources are left over from primary education for children. The adult education sub-sector of state education systems remains relatively marginal and under-funded, in spite of the good economic progress in many countries since the mid-1990s.

So what does it mean?

It means the demand for curriculum among adult learners is huge and growing globally. The demand must be considered in addition to the focus on traditional 18 to 22 year old undergraduates. In order to translate that into place based learning one must define the place (the specific area in which learners reside), select the closest approximation of participation rate by curriculum category and calculate the theoretical demand. In the U.S. we begin with the U.S. and World Population Clock.  In the U.S. there is One Birth every 8 seconds; One Death every 12 seconds; One International In Migration every 33 seconds; for a Net Gain of One Person every 16 seconds. This establishes the context of rate of change over time.

Once a population and a rate is established, an adult learning population can be estimated. In the U.S. there are approximately 320.2 million people, and an estimated 180.7 million 21 to 65 year olds. Given a 40% participation rate there are an estimated 72.3 million adults in the U.S. Learning Marketplace Annually. Of course these are rough framing estimates but they indicate that adult learning is a well established and important strategic element of social and economic vitality. It must also be a strategic element of framing higher education strategies for the next millennium. To approach these markets new academic strategies must be developed.

2014 Global Digital Learning Ecosystem

Global Digital Account Penetration Defines Learner Access and Learning Markets


The foundation of the emerging new learning ecosystem is the global digital infrastructure and the level of access to it. This post is one element in the equation, the evidence of access to the digital realm and the utilization of communications systems that reside in it.

Global Distribution of Internet Users

Internet Users in the World (Chart)

Understanding the emergence of the Global Digital Learning Ecosystem is the first step in understanding the implications of this paradigm shift for education and learning.

Additional Resources

Use the following resources to explore digital learning environments a little deeper.

“University of the Future” a Global Survey of Students


Laureate International Universities is the world’s largest network of higher education institutions with 75 members located in 29 countries and enrolling more than 850,000 students worldwide. In an effort to look forward and develop a vision for the future of their members over the next 15 years they commissioned a large scale survey of their students.

They commissioned Zogby Analytics to survey their students and 20,876 learners responded. The survey asked students about their vision of the optimum university  model 15 years in the future.

  • 52 percent of students who participated said most courses would be offered any time of day or night and 44 percent said most courses would have no fixed schedule
  • 41 percent of respondents said students would be able to earn specialized certificates to allow them to manage the pace of their academic career, rather than concentrating it into a two- or four-year span with a degree at the end
  • 54 percent said that collaborative courses focused on group projects will be offered, and 61 percent said that most courses will be designed by industry experts
  • 64 percent said courses will be offered in multiple languages Students will be able to access personalized instruction or tutoring online, according to 43 percent of those surveyed
  • 71 percent of survey respondents told researchers they think “career-oriented skills (not just subject matter) will be taught in future universities,” according to a summary of the findings
  • 43 percent of surveyed students said “their courses will include free content on the Internet to unlimited numbers of students,” according to the survey summary. That number increased slightly among students aged 18-24 and those in developing countries, to 45 and 44 percent, respectively
  • 55 percent saying that changes to how students take courses will benefit them, Asian students were both the most likely to tell researchers that future universities will be dominated by online content, and to say they think that’s a good thing
  • 44 percent of respondents said they think future instructors will be “part-time industry experts instead of full-time instructors,” according to the summary
  • 21 of respondents said they believe that grades will be based purely on academic performance and 64 percent said they would reflect a combination of academic performance and how much students contributed to teams

This is a must read. The study can be retrieved here.

An interview with John Zogby, Pollster and Founder, Zogby Analytics; Jonathan Zogby, President and CEO, Zogby Analytics; and Doug Becker, Chairman and CEO, Laureate Education, Inc. (Washington, DC June 9, 2014).


The Future of For Profit Higher Education: Scrutiny

For-ProfitThe for profit sector of higher education is experiencing significant increases in scrutiny. Given the current debt crisis facing U.S. students and the significant attention profits from the For-Profit-Sector gain in the press it is unlikely to subside soon. Below are a rash of current actions.

Education Department Names Seasoned Team to Monitor Corinthian Colleges

Former Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald Will Lead Oversight of Company’s Sale and Wind-Down

The press release stated

…the U.S. Department of Education took additional steps to ensure Corinthian Colleges’ students and the American taxpayer are protected by announcing that Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP & Affiliates, under the leadership of former U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, has been selected to take on the role of monitoring various aspects of the career college company. As part of an operating agreement reached earlier this month with Corinthian, the Department required that an independent monitor oversee Corinthian’s actions moving forward as the company begins to sell and wind down its campuses over the coming months.

DeVry under investigation by New York State

DeVry Education Group Inc. said in a corporate filing on Friday that it was under investigation by New York’s attorney general for possible “false advertising and deceptive practices” in its television ads and website marketing. A letter from the state office requested “relevant information from January 1, 2011, to the present,” the company said.

University of Phoenix under review by the U.S. Department of Education

The Apollo Education Group, parent company of the University of Phoenix, disclosed in a corporate filing on Monday that the U.S. Education Department would conduct an “ordinary course program review” of the university’s financial-aid administration and other areas. From the filing, with the Securities and Exchange Commission:

The review, which is scheduled to commence August 4, 2014, initially will cover federal financial aid years 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, as well as compliance with the Jeanne Clery Disclosure of Campus Security Policy and Campus Crime Statistics Act, the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act and related regulations.

National College, Kentucky fined for refusal to comply

A Kentucky judge this week affirmed a $147,000 fine against National College, a for-profit institution, over its refusal to comply with a subpoena from the state’s attorney general, the Lexington Herald-Leader reported.

ITT May Face Financial Restrictions

ITT Educational Services Inc. said in a corporate filing on Wednesday that it may face financial restrictions over its failure to file a set of documents with the U.S. Department of Education. A set of financial statements was due to the department by June 30 but was not sent, according to the filing.