Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Online colleges and states at odds over quality

From today's CHE

Responding to what they call unfair scrutiny from state and federal regulators, representatives from online colleges discussed a self-imposed quality-assurance framework at today’s Presidents’ Forum in Washington, convened by Excelsior College.

But state officials said they are still concerned that self-imposed standards are not good enough and that online programs are not consistent in providing students with high-quality education.

Echoing federal government concerns about the quality of online institutions (reflected in the “gainful employment” rule debated by the U.S. Department of Education earlier this year), a panel of education officials from four states and the Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education—which represents 15 states—said it was their responsibility to ensure that all students of online colleges received a good education, and they are skeptical that the institutions consistently deliver.
And now, for the rest of the story...

In return for $ to higher ed, Obama wants results

A thorough & informative story in today's CHE.

Since he took office, almost two years ago, spending on student aid has grown by nearly 50 percent, to $145-billion, while aid to colleges has exploded. Much of the new money has come with no strings attached, including $36-billion for Pell Grants in a student-loan bill he signed in March.

But the president has also sought to use federal funds as leverage, offering carrots to colleges and states that embrace his goals, and sticks to those that hinder them. More than any of his predecessors, he has demanded results in exchange for federal dollars, requiring grant applicants to set benchmarks for improvement and threatening to withhold aid from programs that fail to prepare students for jobs.

That approach has rankled some higher-education leaders, who accuse the administration of meddling in academic affairs, but it has won praise from advocates of greater accountability and assessment for colleges.
And now, for the rest of the story...

Monday, October 11, 2010

Without assessment, great teaching stays secret

From today's CHE.

Subjecting university teaching to the kind of public, widely shared standards of quality that we routinely apply to university research remains a bridge too far. Learning is too complex, we are told, and the available measures too crude. The specters of homogenization and government control are often invoked, and for good reason. It's not hard to imagine the consequences of assessment done wrong.

It is, by contrast, hard to fully imagine the consequences of assessment done right.

UMBC specializes in the task that every parent, pundit, and lawmaker in America most wants universities to accomplish: teaching young people to become great scientists and engineers. It may already be better at this than the Ivies and Research I universities that everyone knows.

But without reliable, public assessment information to prove that to the world, UMBC has few ways of elevating its standing to a level that matches the quality of its academic work.

Without a good measuring stick, great public universities can't prove their greatness. In the long run, that means we'll have fewer great public universities than we need. That shortage won't matter much to the institutions that control the existing higher-education power structure, or to the small number of privileged students who are allowed to attend them (that is, the groups that have the most to lose from shifting the terms of prestige toward learning). But it will be a slow-motion calamity for everyone else.
And now, for the rest of the story...

Wednesday, October 6, 2010

New issue of AAC&U News

AAC&U logoThe October issue of AAC&U News is now available.

Reviewers unhappy with portfolio "stuff"

From Campus Technology...

“Enough is enough,” say faculty members reviewing portfolio reports that resemble scrapbooks. “Where is the analysis?” they ask. “Where is the thinking?” Evidence-based learning concepts offer a way to re-frame the portfolio process so it produces meaningful and assessable evidence of achievement.
And now, for the rest of the story...