img:is([sizes=auto i],[sizes^="auto," i]){contain-intrinsic-size:3000px 1500px} /*# sourceURL=wp-img-auto-sizes-contain-inline-css */

91探花

Skip to content
Blog

Tag: performance

This Week in Higher Ed News

Posted on

Student Exchanges Hit Record High.听 According to the on International Educational Exchange, the number of international students at U.S. colleges and universities and the number of American students studying abroad are at record highs. In 2012-13, 820,000 foreign students attended American higher ed institutions, a 55,000 increase (7.2 percent) from the previous year. Chinese undergraduates exhibited the biggest increase, 26 percent, bringing the total number of Chinese students studying in the U.S. (undergraduates and graduates) to 235,000. In 2011-12 (the most recent year for which data are available) 283,000 American students went abroad for credit university courses, up 3.4 percent from the prior year. 听For institutions hosting the most international students, the 91探花ranked 14th in the country.

New Studies Cast Doubt on Effectivenessof State Performance-based Funding.听 Now that economies are recovering from the Great Recession, state legislators across the country have been hurrying to adopt systems that link state funding for higher education to student outcomes like degree production and completion rates. However, several presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education question the effectiveness of these 鈥減erformance-based funding鈥� systems. See for a summary of the findings.

College Completion Rates See Little Improvement.听 College-completion rates remained largely unchanged this year, according to the . Of the first-time students who entered college in fall 2007, 54.2 percent earned a degree or certificate within six years鈥攗p 0.1 percentage points from the 2006 cohort. In the public sector, completion rates rose by 1.3 percentage points for students who started at public four-years and by 1.1 percentage points for those who began at public two-years. Unlike the federal government鈥檚 college-completion measure, the center tracks part-time students and students who transfer to a different college, sector, or state. Only 22 percent of part-time students earned credentials within six years, compared with 76 percent of those enrolled full time. The research center will issue its full report next month.

University of Michigan鈥檚 Shared Services Strategy Faces Opposition.听 The University of Michigan is the latest campus to implement 鈥渟hared services,鈥� a cost-saving strategy that has academic departments rely on centralized staff, rather than department-level staffers. Theoretically, employees in the central pool could become more specialized, and thus more efficient, than departments鈥� jack-of-all-trades staff. Administrators at Michigan hoped to save $17 million by moving 275 staffers from their campus offices to a single building on the edge of town. However, not only are faculty and students speaking out in opposition, the plan is no longer expected to save nearly as much as once hoped and may barely break even in the short term.听 at Inside Higher Ed.

91探花Federal Student Loan Default Rates Remain Very Low Relative to National Rates

Posted on

On Monday, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) released its annual update on federal student loan cohort default rates (CDRs), which measure the frequency with which student borrowers at all levels (undergraduate, graduate, etc.) default on their federal loans. Although both national and 91探花CDRs rose, the UW鈥檚 rates remain well below those of the nation.

As ED is in its second year of switching to the 听more accurate three-year CDR measure, this year鈥檚 report includes both the FY 2011 two-year and the FY 2010 three-year CDRs. These rates represent the percentage of student borrowers who failed to make loan payments for 270 days within two or three years, respectively, of leaving school.

The Department provides breakdowns of its data by , and . Here are some key findings:

:

  • The national three-year CDR increased from 13.4 to 14.7 percent overall鈥攑ublic institutions increased from 11.0 to 13.0 percent, private nonprofits increased from 7.5 to 8.2 percent, but for-profits鈥� whopping 22.7 percent rate decreased slightly to 21.8 percent.
  • The UW鈥檚 three-year CDR increased slightly from 3.1 to 3.9 percent, but this is still nearly 11 percentage points below the national average.听

:

  • The national two-year CDR increased from 9.1 to 10.0 percent overall鈥攑ublic institutions increased from 8.3 to 9.6 percent, for-profits increased from 12.9 to 13.6 percent, but private nonprofits held steady at 5.2 percent.
  • The UW鈥檚 two-year CDR increased from 2.1 to 3.2 percent, but this is still nearly 7 percentage points below the national average.听

While this is good news, many students still struggle to afford ever-increasing tuition fees and/or to repay their student loans. The 91探花reaches out to our former students at risk of default on their Stafford Loans and helps identify federal repayment options that could benefit them.听Former 91探花students who are in default or experiencing difficulties repaying their loans can contact the Office of Student Financial Aid for assistance (osfa@uw.edu, 206-543-6101). Students can also visit to explore their repayment options.

Washington Schools Leads Nation in Peace Corps Volunteers

Posted on

As reported today, 鈥淔or the first time ever, three Washington colleges swept the nation in their respective size categories for having the most participants in the Peace Corps.鈥� The 91探花topped the large-schools list with 107 volunteers (tied with the University of Florida), Western Washington University led the medium-schools list with 73 volunteers, and Gonzaga University came in first on the small-schools list with 24.

Carrie Hessler-Radelet, acting director of the Peace Corps, traveled from D.C. to attend a news conference here on campus today. She personally congratulated the three schools on their rankings and said the achievement reflects Washington鈥檚 dedication to innovation and helping the poor.

The 91探花also topped the large-schools list between 2007 and 2010.

Student Outcomes May Determine Fate of Online and For-Profit Programs in Wisconsin

Posted on

The Wisconsin Education Approval Board, which oversees all for-profit colleges located in the state and any online-learning programs offered to its residents, may require that those institutions achieve specific performance standards in order to operate within Wisconsin. Specifically, that board is proposing to require that at least 60 percent of a college鈥檚 students complete their studies within a certain time-frame and at least 60 percent of its graduates have jobs.听 Public universities and private nonprofit colleges are not under the board鈥檚 jurisdiction and would therefore be exempt from the requirements.

The board already collects and publishes data on its institutions. According to those reports, average completion rates fell from 82 to 59 percent over the last six years and the percentage of graduates who were employed during a given year dropped from 44 to 22 percent (in the same time frame).

reports that the board is basing its standards on what they believe “Wisconsin consumers would find ethical, responsible, and acceptable for institutions choosing to enroll them.” However, for-profit colleges have already submitted letters to the board arguing that the proposed standards are 鈥渁rbitrary and should not be broadly applied to a diverse set of programs, which often enroll underserved populations.鈥�

While the federal government鈥檚 鈥溾�� rule is similar to Wisconsin鈥檚 proposal, it is unusual to see a state attempt this type of regulatory system. Some states have increased their requirements for online and for-profit institutions鈥攂ut Wisconsin鈥檚 proposal is especially aggressive. For-profits that wish to operate in Washington must receive authorization from the , which considers institutions; 鈥渇inancial stability, business practices, academic programs, and faculty qualifications鈥濃�攂ut does not yet hold them to specific graduation or employment standards.

On Wednesday, Wisconsin鈥檚 board voted unanimously to postpone a final decision until a team made of board members, representatives from colleges and universities, and State legislators can review the proposal more thoroughly.听 The team is scheduled to make recommendations to the board in June of 2013.

Recent Higher Ed Headlines

Posted on

Here is a quick look at some recent happenings in the world of higher education:

  • , says a report released today by the Center for American Progress (CAP). 听The College Scorecard, which President Obama proposed last February, is an online tool to help students compare colleges鈥� costs, completion rates, average student-loan debt, and more.听 The CAP asked focus groups of college-bound high-school students for their opinions on the scorecard鈥檚 design, content, and overall effectiveness. Student responses indicated that they did not understand the scorecard’s purpose; they would like the ability to customize the scorecard according to their interests; they want more information on student-loan debt; and they would prefer seeing four-year graduation rates, rather than six-year rates. The CAP report includes recommendations for improving the readability and usability of not just the scorecard, but of government disclosures in general.
  • 听on Friday by a 245 to 139 vote. The bill would eliminate the 鈥渄iversity visa program,鈥� which currently distributes 55,000 visas per year to people from countries with low rates of immigration to the U.S.听 Those visas would instead go to foreign graduates from U.S. universities who earn advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering or mathematics (STEM). Proponents of the Republican-backed bill say it would keep 鈥渉ighly trained, in-demand鈥� workers in the U.S., boosting the nation鈥檚 economy and preserving its global competitiveness. While the White House and most Democrats support the expansion of STEM visas, they oppose the bill鈥檚 attempt to eliminate the diversity visa program. Consequently, the measure is unlikely to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate.
  • , says Inside Higher Ed. The three governors agree on cost-cutting strategies such as requiring some colleges to offer $10,000 bachelor鈥檚 degrees; limiting tuition increases at flagship institutions; linking institutions鈥� graduation rates to state appropriations; and letting performance indicators, such as student evaluations, determine faculty salaries.听 Although the governors鈥� proposed reforms appeal to some voters, 鈥渁ctions taken by all three have been sharply criticized not only by faculty members and higher education leaders in their states, but also by national leaders, who view the erosion of state funding and increased restrictions on what institutions can do a breach of the traditional relationship between state lawmakers and public colleges and universities.鈥�

American Council on Education Will Review Whether Some MOOCs Deserve College Credit

Posted on

Controversy has surrounded massive open online courses (MOOCs) since their inception.听 Some believe MOOCs will broaden access to higher education and bring down costs, while others fear the rush to embrace MOOCs may come at the expense of academic quality. To help settle this debate, the (ACE) revealed yesterday a 鈥渨ide-ranging research and evaluation effort鈥� of MOOCs鈥� academic potential, including a pilot project to determine whether some MOOCs should be eligible for college credit.听 The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation recently awarded ACE nearly $900,000 to pursue these activities鈥攐ne of the foundation鈥檚 13 .

ACE鈥檚 pilot project will examine 5 to 10 MOOCs offered by Coursera (one of the largest MOOC providers.) beginning next year. Teams of faculty will compare these MOOCs to traditional college courses, evaluating their contents, teaching methods, and student engagement. To pass the review and be recommended for credit, Coursera must find a way to authenticate its students鈥� identities鈥攁 difficult task considering thousands of students can register for each course. Coursera hopes to address this challenge by partnering with online proctoring companies that monitor tests remotely and verify students鈥� IDs via special software and webcams.

According to the , if ACE believes a course deserves academic credit, students who want to earn that credit would pay a fee for the proctored exam.听 If those students want a transcript that they can submit to other schools, they鈥檒l need to pay another fee (Coursera鈥檚 offerings are otherwise free).

It should be noted that even if ACE recommends a course for credit, individual colleges must still decide whether to accept those credits. While higher education institutions (as represented by ACE) and the Gates Foundation may believe in the potential of MOOCs鈥�, it is unclear whether colleges will actually welcome MOOC transfer credits.

Is It All About the Money?

Posted on

As a recent discussed, if you attend college, you are more likely to earn more money. But, as you might imagine, the financial value of higher education depends on what program you choose and where.

Information on the annual earnings of students from different programs and institutions is exactly what Sen. Ron Wyden, a Democrat of Oregon, and Sen. Marco Rubio, a Republican of Florida, hope to provide. Their recently-introduced “” proposes creating a state-based, individual-level data system linking the average costs and graduation rates of specific programs and institutions to their graduates鈥� accrued debt and annual earnings.

Although useful, Senator Wyden acknowledged that such information is limited and that focusing on financial indicators alone could undermine the importance of liberal arts鈥攚hose graduates may not earn large salaries right after college. He stated that the bill鈥檚 intention is 鈥渢o empower people to make choices.鈥� However, 鈥減eople鈥� include not just students, but policy makers鈥攕uch as Florida鈥檚 who sparked controversy last October when he asserted that state money should go to job-oriented fields, rather than fields like anthropology which, he said, do not serve the state’s vital interest.

Regardless of the bill鈥檚 success, about half of the states already have the ability to link postsecondary academic records with labor data. And some, such as , have already done so. Here in Washington, the is in the process of connecting certain employment and enrollment data for schools, such as the UW, to analyze in the coming months.

All this begs the question: Is college chiefly for personal economic gain?

A recent by the College Board highlights both the financial and nonfinancial payoffs of college. Additionally, David A. Reidy, head of the philosophy department at University of Tennessee Knoxville, stated in a recent Chronicle that four-year degrees, particularly in liberal-arts, are not solely for job training. “The success of the American democratic experiment depends significantly on a broadly educated citizenry, capable of critical thinking, cultural understanding, moral analysis and argument,” he wrote. Philosophy and other core disciplines help nurture such a citizenry, he continued, “And the value there is incalculable.”

NRC Panel Publishes Report on Productivity Measurement in Higher Education

Posted on

A few weeks ago, the National Research Council鈥檚 Panel on Measuring Higher Education Productivity published its 192-page report on , marking the culmination of a three-year, $900,000 effort funded by the Lumina Foundation and involving 15 higher education policy experts nationwide.

In explaining the need for a new productivity measure, the Panel made several key observations:

  • It鈥檚 all about incentives: Institutional behavior is dynamic and directly related to the incentives embedded within measurement systems. As such, policymakers must ensure that the incentives in the measurement system genuinely support the behaviors that society wants from higher education institutions and are structured so that measured performance is the result of authentic success rather than manipulative behaviors.
  • Costs and productivity are two different issues: Focusing on reducing the cost of credit hours or credentials invites the obvious solutions: substitute cheap teachers for expensive ones, increase class sizes, and eliminate departments that serve small numbers of students unless they somehow offset their costs. In contrast, focusing on productivity assesses whether changes in strategy are producing more quality-adjusted output (credit hours or credentials) per quality-adjusted unit of input (faculty, equipment, laboratory space, etc.).
  • Using accountability measures without context is akin to reading a legend without looking at the map: Different types of institutions have different objectives, so the productivity of a research university cannot be compared to that of a liberal arts or community college, not least because they serve very different student populations who have different abilities, goals, and aspirations. The panel notes that, among the most important contextual variables that must be controlled for when comparing productivity measures are institutional selectivity, program mix, size, and student demographics.

The Panel also contributed a thorough documentation of the difficulties involved in defining productivity in higher education. From time to time, it is helpful to remind ourselves that, while it may be 鈥減ossible to count and assign value to goods such as cars and carrots because they are tangible and sold in markets, it is harder to tabulate abstractions like knowledge and health because they are neither tangible nor sold in markets鈥�. The diversity of outputs produced by the institutions, the myriad inputs used in its activities, quality change over time and quality variation across institutions and systems all contribute to the complexity of the task.

Despite these difficulties, the Panel concluded that the higher education policy arena would be better served if it used a measure of productivity whose limitations were clearly documented than if it used no measure of productivity at all. It proposed a basic productivity metric measuring the instructional activities of a college or university: a simple ratio of outputs over inputs for a given period. Its preferred measure of output was the sum of credit hours produced, adjusted to reflect the added value that credit hours gain when they form a completed degree. Its measure of input was a combination of labor (faculty, staff) and non-labor (buildings and grounds, materials, and supplies) factors of production used for instruction, adjusted to allow for comparability. The Panel was careful to link all components of its formula to readily available data published in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) so that its suggested measure may easily be calculated and used. It also specified how improvements to the IPEDS data structure might help produce more complete productivity measures.

The key limitation in the Panel鈥檚 proposal 鈥� fully acknowledged in the report 鈥� is that it does not account for the quality of inputs or outputs. As the Panel notes, when attention is overwhelmingly focused on quantitative metrics, there is a high risk that a numeric goal will be pursued at the expense of quality. There is also a risk that quantitative metrics will be compared across institutions without paying heed to differences in the quality of input or output. The report summarizes some of the work that has been done to help track quality, but concludes that the state of research is not advanced enough to allow any quality weighting factors to be included in its productivity formula.

While readers may lament the Panel鈥檚 relegation of measures of quality to further research, especially given the time and resources invested in its effort, the report remains a very useful tool in understanding the issues involved in assessing productivity in higher education and provides valuable food for thought for policymakers and administrators alike.