The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education conducts research and provides reports on the public policy issues affecting higher education. The report Good Policy, Good Practice II updated a report published in 2007. Historically, there was an assumption of the “iron triangle” which infers that education is constrained by three areas, costs, quality and access and changing one affects the other. (The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 2010, p. 8). This report disputes that assumption and states policies and institutional practices can work together to achieve educational attainment goals. The 2010 report provides information to state policy makers on how their policies can improve the effectiveness and affordability of higher education. In particular, the 2010 report attempts to connect actions and practices of institutions with public policies in support of the institutions. This report attempts to influence both law makers and institutional leaders.
The first part of the report focuses on improving the preparation of students to attend college. It focuses on actions that states can take to ensure that high school students are ready for college. A major emphasis is to improve the rigor of the high school curriculum. As the report indicates, high school students can take all required courses and still not be prepared for college coursework and find themselves having to take remedial courses in college. Aligning high school requirements so that students enter college prepared to begin college level work is an emphasis of the first strategy. Another emphasis is to provide high school students with the opportunity to take advanced courses and receive college credit while still in high school. All of these practices serve to increase the readiness of high school students to enter college prepared to assume college level courses.
The second strategy focuses on adult readiness. The report discusses several states that need to increase college attendance and graduation rates if they want to effectively compete economically. For example, the report mentions that Tennessee cannot compete effectively internationally until it improves the skill level and college attainment level of its adults. The report suggests that institutions include practices that account for the differing nature of the adult student. For example, institutions should consider offering three year degree programs, providing varying delivery methods, such as online delivery, and offering college credit for work experience.
The third strategy addresses administrative effectiveness. This section discusses a few ways to reduce administrative costs, such as, establishing quality benchmarks and eliminating redundancy in programs.
Part II of the report addresses policies that states can implement to support the practices outlined in part I of the report. Specifically, part II covers planning and leadership, finance, accountability, governance and regulatory policies. The authors of this report provide direction and counsel to state legislators that they have must step up and take responsibility for leading post-secondary education. The report indicates that states focused on post-secondary education up to 1990s and then began to focus on K-12 public education and shifted the responsibility of post-secondary education to the institutions. It is suggested that now is the time to refocus state policies to achieve improvements in graduation rates at public institutions of higher education.
The report offers direction to state policy decision makers. It indicates that the appropriate finance policies can be the key to achieving education achievements. Finance policies can serve as the link between educational achievements and state appropriations, tuition and financial aid policies. Tennessee is one state that has tied state appropriations to student progress and degree attainment versus just based on enrollment formulas (The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, 2010).
Regarding tuition, the report suggests that many institutions still use tuition to fill the gap caused by a reduction in state appropriations. It is suggested that many institutional presidents believe they need to continue to raise tuition to fill the gaps or the quality of education will decline. The report takes issue with this assumption and suggests that quality may not go down if the gaps are not closed. The report indicates that states should take more responsibility regarding the affordability of higher education because they do control state budgets, tuition increases and student financial aid. State student financial aid policies can assist institutions with achieving educational attainment goals. Targeted financial aid can increase institutional productivity. Examples of targeted student financial aid include providing aid for part time students, requiring high students to take college preparatory classes in order to be eligible for student financial aid, making loans available to students during the last half of the college experience when they are close to graduating, and establishing lifelong learning accounts.
To improve accountability, states are encouraged to seek data regarding student progress towards graduation. The report suggested that few states have the data to link college preparedness to college achievement to transitioning to the work force. A solution to this problem is the investment in systems that provide the capabilities to acquire the data necessary to monitor progress and track results.
Finally, states should participate in policy audits to ensure that their policies serve to assist with achieving their goals and do not hinder the goals. For example, certain policies such as lengthy hiring policies and restrictive procurement procedures may serve to slow down educational goal attainment. If policies or other procedures restrict the attainment of educational goals, states should consider restructure of the state’s governance of the institution. The report indicates a change in governance should be used as a last resort mechanism but it does exist to support achievement of educational goals.
Reference
The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (2010). Good policy, good practice II. Retrieved from http://www.highereducation.org/reports/Policy_Practice_2010/index.shtml.
2nd attempt to post *** DALE***
ReplyDeleteBeing prepared for college is important, but sometimes the problem is not readiness. The problem is that the curriculum is not designed for adult learners and the course scheduling does not work. "For example, the report mentions that Tennessee cannot compete effectively internationally until it improves the skill level and college attainment level of its adults. The report suggests that institutions include practices that account for the differing nature of the adult student."
That comment is exactly what we need to share. I work with incarcerated adults and very little is done to account for their learning differences. The report findings are very challenging for those not willing to offer more creative solutions.