Skip repetitive navigational links
View: Next message | Previous More Hitsmessage
Next in topic | Previous More Hitsin topic
Next by same author | Previous More Hitsby same author
Previous page (December 2008, 1) | Back to main LRNASST-L page
Join or leave LRNASST-L (or change settings)
Reply | Post a new message
Search
Log in
Options:   Chronologically | Most recent first
Proportional font | Non-proportional font

Subject:

(Not Really) Measuring Up

From:

Dan Kern <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

[log in to unmask]

Date:

Wed, 3 Dec 2008 07:24:07 -0600

Content-Type:

multipart/related

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (258 lines) , image001.gif (258 lines)

Dec. 3, 2008


(Not Really) Measuring Up




There are bright spots in Measuring Up 2008,
<http://measuringup2008.highereducation.org/>  the biennial "report card" on
higher education that the National Center for Public Policy and Higher
Education is releasing today. The proportion of students graduating from
high school prepared to do college-level work is on the rise, for instance,
and the percentage of high school freshmen who go on to enroll in college is
also climbing. Even the rate at which those who enroll in college go on to
get a degree is edging up.

But as has become a tradition for the report and the center's director,
Patrick M. Callan, a longtime analyst who has long taken a bearish view of
higher education, the positive developments in the latest iteration of
Measuring Up are overwhelmed by the "buts" (small gains in college
preparation are mitigated by drops in high school graduation, increased
enrollment among traditional college-age students offset by declines in
enrollment of adult students) and, Callan and the report argue, by the
increasingly global context in which American higher education's performance
must be viewed.

Taken together, the performance of colleges, states and, ultimately, the
country in educating its citizens is inadequate to the current needs. "In
most of our categories, we see some very modest progress, but the progress
does not begin to match the magnitude of the challenge we face, or the
progress other countries are making," Callan said during a news briefing
about the release of the report.

The report's results would be troubling enough, Callan suggested, without
the specter of the country's current economic turmoil. But with it - given
that troubled financial times historically lead to reductions in state and
federal support for higher education - the implications of the report's
findings are even more serious, he said.

"Our previous reports have been significant, but this one comes out at a
very significant time," said Callan. "This is not a propitious time to have
a level of higher education decline. If we respond to this recession, when
the potential students we most need to get into the system are those who can
least afford it, in the way we usually do" - by raising tuitions - "we will
set ourselves back quite a ways."

Rating the Results

Measuring Up has been controversial since its inception in 2000, seen by
some critics as overly alarmist and unfairly critical. (Cliff Adelman, a
longtime Education Department researcher and now an associate at the
Institute for Higher Education Policy, calls the series "an annual ritual,
complete with its own liturgy of grey noddings and self-flagellation." More
from Cliff later.)

And indeed, Callan and his national center have at times aligned themselves
with aggressive critics of higher education; Callan informally advised
Charles Miller, who headed Education Secretary Margaret Spellings'
Commission on the Future of Higher Education, which argued that American
higher education's best days were behind it unless it could reinvent itself.

Callan shares that view to some extent; at the news briefing, he described
as an "American myth" the notion that just because the country is home to
many of the world's leading universities, that automatically means that its
higher education system as a whole is the world's best. "If you measure
higher ed that way, we look pretty good," he said. "But if you say a good
higher education system is one that meets at least international standards"
on things like college completion, "then we're not leaders any more."

But writing Measuring Up off as the work of cranks - or at least of cranks
without power, potentially - would be a mistake. The foreword of the report
was written by James B. Hunt Jr., the former North Carolina governor and
chairman of the national center's board, whose name has been bandied about
as a potential candidate for education secretary in the Obama
administration. And its advisory board
<http://measuringup2008.highereducation.org/about/advisory.php>  is an
august body of researchers and policy makers (Gordon Davies, David Breneman,
Emerson Elliott) well-respected for their knowledge of and advocacy for
higher education, even if many of them (Peter Ewell, Jane Wellman, Margaret
A. Miller) are seen as being hawks rather than doves on the need for
colleges to change the way they operate.

The basic goal of the Measuring Up report (this is the fifth biennial
report) hasn't changed: to evaluate "the progress of the nation and all 50
states in providing Americans with education and training beyond high school
through the bachelor's degree." In that way, it focuses not on the overall
health and status of American higher education as some might define it -
including the research enterprise - but squarely on how successful colleges
are at educating undergraduates, primarily from a quantitative rather than
qualitative standpoint.

This focus represents the emerging consensus - embraced not only by the
Spellings Commission but by numerous other reports and groups - that the
biggest challenge facing American higher education is the need to ratchet up
the number of educated young people and adults to replace the masses of baby
boomers who will be retiring (perhaps a little later than they might
previously have been, given the shrinkage in retirement savings) in the
coming decade. This task is made more difficult by the fact that the
fastest-growing segments of young people coming into the educational
pipeline are from groups - such as underrepresented minorities and
low-income families - that have historically been least prepared for college
and least well-served by the higher education enterprise.

In Measuring Up, states are evaluated and graded on six basic categories -
preparation for college, participation (opportunities for education and
training beyond high school), affordability, completion (persistence in and
completion of certificate and degree programs), benefits (contributions by
college-educated and trained residents to their states' economic and civic
well-being) and learning (college-educated residents' performance on a
variety of measures of knowledge and skill).

States receive grades based on their relative performance against one
another, benchmarked against those that perform best each year. The report
also includes indicators that show states' performance over time.

A Report Card Not to Take Home to Mom

The states performed best on preparation and completion, worst on
affordability (49 F's) and learning (all incompletes). Highlights are below:

*	Preparation: 6 A's (Colorado, Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts,
New Jersey, Vermont), 18 B's, 21 C's, 5 D's, and no F's. Thirty-four states
showed improvement or stayed the same on the number of 18- to 24-year-olds
with a high school credential, but the high school graduation rates of black
and Hispanic students in many states lagged badly (82 percent of black young
adults in Illinois had a high school credential compared to 95 percent of
their white peers; 56 percent of Hispanic 18-24-year olds in North Carolina
had a high school degree, compared to 92 percent of whites.) 
*	Participation: 2 A's (Arizona and Iowa), 8 B's, 22 C's, 15 D's, and
three F's (Alaska, Louisiana, and Nevada). Forty-three states improved or
stayed the same on the number of 18- to 24-year-olds enrolled in college,
but a majority of states showed decreases in the number of 25- to
49-year-olds in college-level education or training. On this and other
measures, the gaps by racial and socioeconomic status are significant. 
*	Affordability: 49 F's and one C grade, for California. "The whole
country has gone south on affordability," said Callan. He called the picture
a "national disaster" as tuition continues to outpace family income,
increasing the burden of paying for college particularly for low- and
middle-income families. The states are graded on families' ability to pay
(percentage of income needed to cover the students' costs minus financial
aid) at different types of institutions, the states' emphasis on need-based
aid (their own investment in such aid as a percentage of the federal
investment in their states' students) and lower-cost colleges, and students'
reliance on loans. Two states improved or stayed the same on the percentage
of family income needed to pay for a four-year public college, while 48
states fell on that measure. 
*	Completion: 11 A's ( Iowa, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire,
North Dakota, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin,
Wyoming), 20 B's, 16 C's, one D and two F's (Alaska and Nevada). All but
those two states improved in the number of college degree completions per
100 students, but the caveats here, in the eyes of the Measuring Up crew,
are that the rates remain low, especially as measured against those in other
countries. "The United States' world leadership in college access has eroded
steadily," he wrote in an analysis of the report
<http://measuringup2008.highereducation.org/commentary/callan.php> . "In
college completion, which has never been a strength of American higher
education, the U.S. ranks 15th among 29 countries compared." While older
Americans still fare well in international comparisons of degree holders,
"the U.S. population has slipped to 10th in the percentage [of 25- to
34-year-olds] who have an associate degree or higher. This relative erosion
of our national 'educational capital' reflects the lack of significant
improvement in the rates of college participation and completion in recent
years." 
*	Learning: Here's what the report had to say on this front: "All
states receive an 'incomplete' in learning because there are not sufficient
data to allow meaningful state-by-state comparisons," a point made in by
Ewell in an  <http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2008/11/11/ewell> Inside
Higher Ed essay last month. 

An undercurrent of the report is the significant gap that exists between the
haves and the have-nots on college access and affordability. "It has always
been an ethical and moral problem that we undereducate minorities and
low-income students," Callan said in an interview. "But for the first time,
we are going to pay an economic price as well" if more of those Americans
are not made ready to enter the work force and contribute to society.

Of rapidly rising tuitions, he added: "I don't know anybody who would argue
that we can do this for another 25 years and remain accessible."

A Critical Voice

Cliff Adelman has generalized criticisms of Measuring Up as well as specific
complaints about the latest iteration. Generally, he said in an e-mail
message, the series "never misses an opportunity to tell states how badly
they are doing, and it sure keeps state media outlets happy with copy and
occasions to groan. No grade inflation in this game: out of 250 grades
delivered on state performance by the authorities of "Measuring Up," only 82
are B- or better (to be sure, there are 49 Fs passed out on the
"affordability" criterion, but that's something that, in the middle of a
major recession, your grandma could have told you)."

Adelman takes particular issue with the report's dependence on the
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development's "population ratios"
to compare other countries' performance with that of the United States.
"OECD has used them to bypass a host of inconsistencies in the ways its 30
member countries report education data, but the 30 member countries also
have different census methodologies, so the components of the denominator
from Sweden are not identical with the components of the denominator from
Portugal," he writes.

"Why is this important? When denominators are flat or declining and
numerators remain stable or rise slightly, percentages rise; and vice versa
when denominators rise faster than numerators.... If you use population
ratios, and include the U.S., it's going to look like we're 'declining' -
which is Measuring Up's preferred story." That is especially true now that
half of European students are pursuing three-year degrees because of the
Bologna process, Adelman notes - something "I'm stunned that Measuring Up
didn't mention at all."

Adelman concluded his critique by saying he hopes that while the "Bush
Administration's Spellings Commission elevated 'Measuring Up' as its own
Bible, one can only hope the Obama administration will exhibit a healthy
dose of skepticism, and look instead to more constructive analyses that will
make a difference in the lives of students."

While much of Measuring Up is dedicated to showing the extent of the
problems in colleges and states as Callan and his colleagues see them, it
offers a conclusion of its own that very much aims to represent the
interests of students - particularly when, as recent headlines suggest,
states are preparing to respond to the current economic crisis in their
long-established ways.

"They can respond to their current budget crises in the usual patterns of
the past, by allowing tuition and student aid policy to play second fiddle
to institutional finance," the report states. "States that select this
course will most likely see precipitous tuition increases, cuts in student
financial aid, and drops in college access," widening the existing gaps in
access and completion and making college less affordable.

"But states have another option: to establish state policies for tuition and
student aid that balance the financial burden for higher education among
states, the institutions of higher education, and students and families.
This is both a short- and long-term strategy that makes state policy more
transparent, grounds it in the needs and financial circumstances of state
residents, establishes college affordability as a priority, protects
educational opportunity, and in the process helps to meet the needs of
states and the nation for a well-educated work force and citizenry."

- Doug Lederman <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 

The original story and user comments can be viewed online at
http://insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/03/measuring
<http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/12/03/measuring> .

C Copyright 2008 Inside Higher Ed

 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To access the LRNASST-L archives or User Guide, or to change your
subscription options (including subscribe/unsubscribe), point your web browser to
http://www.lists.ufl.edu/archives/lrnasst-l.html

To contact the LRNASST-L owner, email [log in to unmask]

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011, Week 3
January 2011, Week 2
January 2011, Week 1
January 2011
December 2010, Week 5
December 2010, Week 4
December 2010, Week 3
December 2010, Week 2
December 2010, Week 1
November 2010, Week 5
November 2010, Week 4
November 2010, Week 3
November 2010, Week 2
November 2010, Week 1
October 2010, Week 5
October 2010, Week 4
October 2010, Week 3
October 2010, Week 2
October 2010, Week 1
September 2010, Week 5
September 2010, Week 4
September 2010, Week 3
September 2010, Week 2
September 2010, Week 1
August 2010, Week 5
August 2010, Week 4
August 2010, Week 3
August 2010, Week 2
August 2010, Week 1
July 2010, Week 5
July 2010, Week 4
July 2010, Week 3
July 2010, Week 2
July 2010, Week 1
June 2010, Week 5
June 2010, Week 4
June 2010, Week 3
June 2010, Week 2
June 2010, Week 1
May 2010, Week 4
May 2010, Week 3
May 2010, Week 2
May 2010, Week 1
April 2010, Week 5
April 2010, Week 4
April 2010, Week 3
April 2010, Week 2
April 2010, Week 1
March 2010, Week 5
March 2010, Week 4
March 2010, Week 3
March 2010, Week 2
March 2010, Week 1
February 2010, Week 4
February 2010, Week 3
February 2010, Week 2
February 2010, Week 1
January 2010, Week 5
January 2010, Week 4
January 2010, Week 3
January 2010, Week 2
January 2010, Week 1
December 2009, Week 5
December 2009, Week 4
December 2009, Week 3
December 2009, Week 2
December 2009, Week 1
November 2009, Week 5
November 2009, Week 4
November 2009, Week 3
November 2009, Week 2
November 2009, Week 1
October 2009, Week 5
October 2009, Week 4
October 2009, Week 3
October 2009, Week 2
October 2009, Week 1
September 2009, Week 5
September 2009, Week 4
September 2009, Week 3
September 2009, Week 2
September 2009, Week 1
August 2009, Week 5
August 2009, Week 4
August 2009, Week 3
August 2009, Week 2
August 2009, Week 1
July 2009, Week 5
July 2009, Week 4
July 2009, Week 3
July 2009, Week 2
July 2009, Week 1
June 2009, Week 5
June 2009, Week 4
June 2009, Week 3
June 2009, Week 2
June 2009, Week 1
May 2009, Week 5
May 2009, Week 4
May 2009, Week 3
May 2009, Week 2
May 2009, Week 1
April 2009, Week 5
April 2009, Week 4
April 2009, Week 3
April 2009, Week 2
April 2009, Week 1
March 2009, Week 5
March 2009, Week 4
March 2009, Week 3
March 2009, Week 2
March 2009, Week 1
February 2009, Week 4
February 2009, Week 3
February 2009, Week 2
February 2009, Week 1
January 2009, Week 5
January 2009, Week 4
January 2009, Week 3
January 2009, Week 2
January 2009, Week 1
December 2008, Week 5
December 2008, Week 4
December 2008, Week 3
December 2008, Week 2
December 2008, Week 1
November 2008, Week 5
November 2008, Week 4
November 2008, Week 3
November 2008, Week 2
November 2008, Week 1
October 2008, Week 5
October 2008, Week 4
October 2008, Week 3
October 2008, Week 2
October 2008, Week 1
September 2008, Week 5
September 2008, Week 4
September 2008, Week 3
September 2008, Week 2
September 2008, Week 1
August 2008, Week 5
August 2008, Week 4
August 2008, Week 3
August 2008, Week 2
August 2008, Week 1
July 2008, Week 5
July 2008, Week 4
July 2008, Week 3
July 2008, Week 2
July 2008, Week 1
June 2008, Week 5
June 2008, Week 4
June 2008, Week 3
June 2008, Week 2
June 2008, Week 1
May 2008, Week 5
May 2008, Week 4
May 2008, Week 3
May 2008, Week 2
May 2008, Week 1
April 2008, Week 5
April 2008, Week 4
April 2008, Week 3
April 2008, Week 2
April 2008, Week 1
March 2008, Week 5
March 2008, Week 4
March 2008, Week 3
March 2008, Week 2
March 2008, Week 1
February 2008, Week 5
February 2008, Week 4
February 2008, Week 3
February 2008, Week 2
February 2008, Week 1
January 2008, Week 5
January 2008, Week 4
January 2008, Week 3
January 2008, Week 2
January 2008, Week 1
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996
February 1996
January 1996
December 1995
November 1995
October 1995
September 1995
August 1995
July 1995
June 1995
May 1995
April 1995
March 1995
February 1995
January 1995

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTS.UFL.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager