Red Balloon Resources

"July 1, 2011 As Costs of New Rule Are Felt, Colleges Rethink Online Course Offerings in Other States By Kelly Field Bismarck State College, a two-year institution located in the capital of North Dakota, offers something few colleges do: online degrees in power-plant technology. Utilities across the country send workers to the community college for specialized training in electric power, nuclear power, and other fields. "We're pretty darn unique," said Larry C. Skogen, the college's president. "I don't think we have any competition out there." Though other colleges offer similar programs on campus, "we deliver nationwide online," he said, with students in all 50 states. That could change soon. Under federal rules that take effect on July 1, Bismarck State will have to seek approval to operate in every state where it enrolls students, or forgo those students' federal aid. With some states charging thousands of dollars per application, the college is weighing whether it can afford to remain in states where the cost of doing business outweighs the benefits, in tuition terms. Though the college hasn't made any decisions yet, "the reality is that if we run into a state where we have few students and it's expensive [to get approval], it's probably not going to be cost-effective to continue," Mr. Skogen said. Such cost-benefit calculations are being conducted on campuses across the country, as college leaders struggle to make sense of a patchwork of state rules that were written in an era when "college" was synonymous with "campus" and online learning was in its infancy. Gregory Ferenbach, a lawyer who advises colleges on regulatory compliance, said he has heard from a "couple dozen" colleges, most of them nonprofits, that are considering withdrawing from some states because of the cost or burden of obtaining approval. Their decisions could have a significant effect on college access. If enough colleges steer clear of states with expensive approval processes, or s

"July 10, 2011 A College Education for All, Free and Online By Kevin Carey All around the world, people have been waiting for someone like Shai Reshef to come along. Reshef is the founder and president of the University of the People, a tuition-free online institution that enrolled its first class of students in 2009. UoPeople strives to serve the vast numbers of students who have no access to traditional higher education. Some can't afford it, or they live in countries where there are simply no good colleges to attend. Others live in rural areas, or identify with a culture, an ethnicity, or a gender that is excluded from public services. UoPeople students pay an application fee of between $10 and $50 and must have a high-school diploma and be proficient in English. There are also small fees for grading final exams. Otherwise, it's free. The university takes advantage of the growing body of free, open-access resources available online. Reshef made his fortune building for-profit higher-education businesses during the rise of the Internet, and he noticed a new culture of collaboration developing among young people who grew up in a wired world. So UoPeople relies heavily on peer-to-peer learning that takes place within a highly structured curriculum developed in part by volunteers. The university plans to award associate and bachelor's degrees, and it is now seeking American accreditation. Rather than deploy the most sophisticated and expensive technology, UoPeople keeps it simple-everything happens asynchronously, in text only. As long as students can connect their laptops or mobile devices to a telecommunications network, somewhere, they can study and learn. For most of humanity, this is the only viable way to get access to higher education. When the university polled students about why they had enrolled, the top answer was, "What other choice do I have?" Some observers have wondered how effective such an unorthodox learning model can be. But UoPeople's tw

I wonder how the University of the People will evolve compared to the fledgling Open Educational Resources University that is being founded by a few key institutions around the world. OERU has its business model roots in Web 2.0 as the foundation for collaboration. A group within OERU is also participating in Ray Schroeder's EduMOOC. For more info on OERU see http://wikieducator.org/images/c/c2/Report_OERU-Final-version.pdf

"Reframing College Completion October 28, 2010 The bigger and broader the objective, the more diffused the responsibility for achieving it can be. For instance, with a mammoth undertaking like the college completion goal that President Obama and like-minded foundations and associations have laid out for the United States over the next 10-15 years, saying that "the country" needs to increase its college-going rate to 60 percent is so general that it makes both everyone and no one responsible for doing the heavy lifting. To combat that vagueness, policy makers and politicians have tended to break down the job into discrete units, with a focus on states (where various sectors of public higher education can work together, with the guidance of governors and chancellors) and individual colleges (which can be held accountable for their own performance and improvement). But in a pair of reports to be released today, the postsecondary education program at the Center for American Progress -- which takes pride in reframing existing policy discussions -- points out that both of those approaches have inherent problems. Focusing on the states creates difficulties in those metropolitan areas where multiple states intersect, putting up unnecessary barriers (in the form of financial aid, tuition and credit transfer policies) that inhibit the flow of students. And viewing higher education completion through the prism of individual institutions' productivity -- judging them on how many graduates they produce -- ignores the rapidly increasing numbers of students who attend multiple colleges. "[A]n institution's graduation rate is not what we truly care about," three of the center's staff members write. "What matters more is whether a student completes a degree anywhere in the system -- regardless of that student's pattern of mobility." In the two papers, the center offers alternatives -- to complement, not replace, the existing approaches. In "Easy Come, EZ-GO," three research

"Measuring College-Teacher Quality January 13, 2011, 10:40 am By Kevin Carey David Glenn's Chronicle article on using course sequence grades to estimate teacher quality in higher education illustrates a crucial flaw in the way education researchers often think about the role of evidence in education practice. The article cites a recent study of Calculus grades in the Air Force Academy. All students there are required to take Calculus I and II. They're randomly assigned to instructors who use the same syllabus. Students all take the same final, which is collectively graded by a pool of instructors. These unusual circumstances control for many external factors that might otherwise complicate an analysis of teacher quality. The researchers found that students taught by permanent faculty got worse grades in Calculus I than students taught by short-term faculty. But the pattern reversed when those students went on to Calculus II-those taught by full-time faculty earned better grades in the more advanced course, suggesting that short-term faculty might have been "teaching to the test" at the expense of deeper conceptual understanding. Students taught by full-time faculty were also more likely to enroll in upper-level math in their junior and senior years. In addition, the study found that student course evaluations were positively correlated with grades in Calculus I but negatively correlated with grades in Calculus II."

Charles Kolb, President, Committee for Economic Development January 11, 2011 03:35 PM Reforming American Postsecondary Education Are we about to enter an era of postsecondary education reform comparable to what we've seen in the K-12 arena for almost 30 years? In 1983, the U.S. Department of Education released perhaps its most famous and widely read report, "A Nation At Risk." Referring to "a rising tide of mediocrity" in America's elementary and secondary school system, "A Nation At Risk" described the stark challenges faced by American elementary and secondary education. The report became an immediate catalyst for the school reform movement of the last 27 years. That reform movement included initiatives such as education secretary William Bennett's "Wall Chart of State Performance Indicators," the 1989 Charlottesville education summit between President George H.W. Bush and the nations' governors, the subsequent bipartisan national education goals effort that spanned the first Bush and Clinton Administrations, George W. Bush's "No Child Left Behind Act," and now President Obama's "Race to the Top" challenge for state structural reform. As with many K-12 education reform efforts, change has been hesitant, often rancorous, and has achieved mixed results. Nonetheless, there has been steady progress on standards, accountability, measurements and assessment, and a growing consensus about what our children need to know and how we should measure their achievements as they progress toward high-school graduation. What is strikingly absent is that throughout this period of K-12 activity, American postsecondary education has received a "pass." Not a passing grade -- just a pass. There has been precious little discussion about what our young people should be learning in their postsecondary education experience. The typical postsecondary-education debate in Washington and around the country has concerned access and funding. These topics are certainly important, but they h

"August 17, 2010, 06:00 PM ET Elite Institutions and Low-Income Students: A Story of Dismal Failure By Diane Auer Jones The hypocrisy in higher education is sometimes just astounding. I read Richard Kahlenberg's blog yesterday about the admirable efforts on the part of Washington University in St. Louis and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill to increase graduation rates among low income students who attend these institutions. In fact, Mr. Kahlenberg goes as far as to suggest that other universities should learn some valuable lessons from these institutions. Give me a break. Of course I applaud efforts to help those less fortunate succeed, but the idea that we should celebrate two highly selective, well-funded, elite universities that require even MORE funding to develop special programs to serve such a small, hand-picked population of students who, in the end, enjoy only slightly improved outcomes (at best), seems a bit outrageous to me. Instead, I would suggest that the stories of Wash U and UNC provide additional evidence to support what some of us have known for quite some time (and that academic researchers have concluded over and over again), which is that educating low income students requires a lot more than talented faculty and a rigorous curriculum - it requires a great deal of additional money at a time when there is precious little of that to go around."

"December 12, 2010 Student Learning: Measure or Perish By Kevin Carey For the past three months, The Chronicle's reporters have been writing a series of articles collectively titled Measuring Stick, describing the consequences of a higher-education system that refuses to consistently measure how much students learn. From maddening credit-transfer policies and barely regulated for-profit colleges to a widespread neglect of teaching, the articles show that without information about learning, many of the most intractable problems facing higher education today will go unsolved. Failing to fill the learning-information deficit will have many consequences: * The currency of exchange in higher education will continue to suffer from abrupt and unpredictable devaluation. Students trying to assemble course credits from multiple institutions into a single degree-that is, most students-frequently have their credits discounted for no good reason. That occurs not only when students transfer between the two- and four-year sectors, or when the institutions involved have divergent educational philosophies. A student trying to transfer credits from an introductory technical-math course at Bronx Community College to other colleges within the City University of New York system, for example, would be flatly denied by five institutions and given only elective credit by three others. John Jay College of Criminal Justice, by contrast, would award the student credit for an introductory modern-math course acceptable for transfer by every CUNY campus, including Bronx Community College-except that BCC would translate that course into trigonometry and college algebra, not technical math. Students who emerge from this bureaucratic labyrinth should be awarded credit in Kafka studies for their trouble. Credit devaluation, which wastes enormous amounts of time, money, and credentialed learning every year, is rooted in mistrust. Because colleges don't know what students in

"September 14, 2010 Colleges May Be Missing a Chance for Change By Karin Fischer Speakers at an international conference here delivered a scathing assessment of higher education: Universities, they said, are slow to change, uncomfortable in dealing with real-world problems, and culturally resistant to substantive internationalization. Despite the global economic crisis, "large parts of the education sector have probably missed the opportunity for real change," Soumitra Dutta, a professor of business and technology at Insead, a French business school, told the audience at a meeting of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, "Higher Education in a World Changed Utterly: Doing More With Less." The gathering drew about 500 government officials, institutional leaders, and researchers, Mr. Dutta, who is also academic director of elab@INSEAD, a center for excellence in teaching and research in the digital economy, evoked the analogy of a frog: Place it in a pot of boiling water, and it will immediately jump out. Put the frog in cool water and slowly raise the temperature-it won't react to change and will be cooked to death. Even with a "dose of hot water" caused by the recession, Mr. Dutta said, most universities have tinkered at the margins, freezing faculty recruitment and reducing administrative expenses, rather than taking a hard look at how they do business. "Have we really jumped, have we really changed?" he said. "I look around, and I see honestly very little change." To meet growing and diversifying worldwide demand for higher education, Mr. Dutta and his fellow panelists said, colleges must embrace new models, transforming how they deliver education. For one, they argued, both education and research must become more relevant and responsive to society."

"September 5, 2010 Why Teaching Is Not Priority No. 1 By Robin Wilson With lavish recreation centers and sophisticated research laboratories, life on college campuses is drastically different from what it was 100 years ago. But one thing has stayed virtually the same: classroom teaching. Professors still design lessons, pick out the readings, and decide how to test-in many cases, in the same way they always have. In the last few years, however, a cottage industry has sprouted up in academe to measure whether students are actually learning and to reform classes that don't deliver. Accreditors now press colleges to show that they are teaching what students need to know. And as the Obama administration packs more money into student aid, it wants more evidence of educational quality. But a roadblock may emerge: faculty culture. Not because professors care little about quality or students-indeed, many care deeply-but because of what colleges tell them is important. "Faculty rewards have nothing to do with the ability to assess student learning," says Adrianna Kezar, an associate professor of higher education at the University of Southern California. "I get promoted for writing lots of articles, not for demonstrating learning outcomes.""

"While an undergraduate at John Brown University in Siloam Springs, Ark., Caitlin Getchell juggled 18 credit hours each semester. In an attempt to lighten her workload during the school year and still enjoy her summer vacation, Getchell turned to an online class one summer. Luckily for her, the American government class she selected mostly contained information she already knew, and she breezed through it. No research papers were required, and open book tests were allowed; there was also regular posting on a message board by students. But, Getchell says, if the class had been something different, she might not have done as well. "If it had been a subject I didn't know much about - Calculus or Chemistry for example - I think I would have really struggled," she says. Getchell, who received a bachelor's degree in history in 2007, adds that she was glad she took the class online. And she's not alone in finding the benefits of online learning irresistible. Enrollment in online courses is growing rapidly, and several universities are even offering degrees strictly online. In fall 2008, 4.6 million students at degree-granting higher institutions took at least one class online, a nearly 17 percent increase over fall 2007. Online enrollment accounted for 25 percent of total enrollment for fall 2007, according to the Sloan Consortium, which has conducted a survey of online education in the U.S. every year since 2002."

"Madison, Wis.-At a distance-education conference here, Wired Campus asked a half-dozen professors, technologists, and administrators to share the struggles of teaching online. Here's what they said. In the old days, you might have heard about the difficulty convincing professors of the value of online education. That can still be tough-some resisters, according to one online-training expert, fear they won't be able to display their expertise in online classes. But as acceptance of online education grows, with distance courses getting more popular and mainstream, colleges face new challenges. These run the gamut from coping with stress on student services to navigating the shift from developing courses alone to building them in teams. "

"Despite scandal, for-profit education offers valuable model By Steven Pearlstein Wednesday, August 11, 2010 Last week's revelations about the high prices, uneven performance and shady marketing practices of for-profit universities have now cast a dark cloud over what had been the fastest-growing segment of higher education. Giant companies that pay big bonuses and use high-pressure sales tactics to foist overpriced services on unsophisticated consumers who take on more debt than they can handle -- tell me if this doesn't sound like the educational equivalent of the subprime mortgage scandal. I have two reasons to care about this. The first is that one of the biggest for-profits, Kaplan University, is part of The Washington Post Co., to which it has provided the handsome profits that have helped to cover this newspaper's operating losses. Although we in the Post newsroom have nothing to do with Kaplan, we've all benefited from its financial success. The more important reason is that these revelations are a setback for the only serious challenge to a hidebound higher education establishment caught up in a self-destructive arms race for students, faculty, athletes, research funding and charitable gifts -- a competition that has driven up costs at twice the rate of everything else even as schools lag in meeting the educational needs of students and society. "

After noting that two major sources of support for postsecondary institutions - state appropriations and university endowments - are down, the report goes on to point out that the demand for public higher education is growing as more people seek skills needed for today's workforce. The report also finds while higher education generally saw declining state support in FY 2009, funds made available through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) allowed certain states to slightly increase spending on higher education in FY 2010. Even with ARRA funds, 23 states spent less on higher education in FY 2010 than FY 2009. State policy developments in response to revenue declines highlighted by NCSL include California's efforts to decrease enrollment, Florida's decision to tighten residency requirements, and the reduction or elimination of programs in North Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah. The report concludes with a table summarizing the significant higher education funding developments in the states over the past two years.

"Google to Dip Into Ed. App. Market By Katie Ash on January 4, 2011 5:53 PM | No comments | No recommendations An article on Bloomberg Businessweek reports that Google execs are currently in talks with education software companies about creating educational apps to be featured in Google Apps Marketplace, an online store that opened in March. Education software sales in K-12 and higher ed raked in about $4.6 billion in 2009, according to the article, and Google, which typically makes its profit from search advertising, is hoping to cash in on some of that revenue stream. Google already offers free apps, such as e-mail, word processing, and spreadsheets, to educators, so hooking up the Mountain View, Calif.-based company's 10 million users in schools with educational software apps could be a natural fit, says Google's business development manager for education, Obadiah Greenberg, in the article. For now, most of the software companies that create apps for the Google Apps Marketplace collect all the profit from sales through the site, but in the coming months, Google plans to begin taking about a 20 percent cut of the revenue, the article said."

"January 2, 2011 6 Top Smartphone Apps to Improve Teaching, Research, and Your Life Academics describe going mobile to plan lectures, keep up with scholarship, and run classes "I used to use a piece of paper" for taking attendance in class, says David M. Reed, a computer-science professor at Capital U., but he kept losing the sheet. The smartphone app that he wrote to do the job has gained him about $20,000 on the iTunes store. By Jeffrey R. Young Not long ago, it seemed absurd for aca­demics to carry around a computer, camera, and GPS device every­where they went. Actually, it still seems absurd. But many professors (and administrators) now do just that in the form of all-in-one devices. Smartphones or tablet computers combine many functions in a hand-held gadget, and some users are discovering clever ways to teach and do research with the ubiquitous machines. For many on campus, checking e-mail on the go is the first killer app of the hand-held world. The downside: Having that ability can mean working more than ever-answering student e-mails while in line at the grocery store, responding to a journal editor during lunch. There can be benefits, though. Some professors say they find that carrying the Inter­net in their pocket helps them collaborate, teach, and collect data in new ways that include e-mail but go far beyond it. A handful of colleges are running expensive pilot projects in which they give out iPhones or iPads to students and professors to see what happens when everyone goes mobile. Some of the most innovative applications for hand-held devices, however, have come from professors working on their own. They find ways to adapt popular smartphone software to the classroom setting, or even write their own code. That's what I discovered when I put out a call on Twitter, as well as to a major e-mail list of college public-relations officers, asking about the areas in which professors and college officials are making the most of their mobile device

"Continuing Debate Over Online Education July 16, 2010 Online education has become a hot topic recently, with more and more institutions wanting to expand offerings. And that makes studies of the quality of online education important -- and controversial. A new paper by the Community College Research Center re-examined and challenged the studies that the Department of Education used in a meta-analysis that stated "on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction" - a conclusion that received much attention and applause among advocates for online education. But the Education Department's analysis was flawed, according to Shanna Smith Jaggars, lead author of the CCRC paper and a senior research associate at the Columbia University center. Based on its review of the data, the CCRC concluded that online learning in higher education is no more effective than face-to-face learning. The Education Department study "continues to be cited frequently by people as evidence that online learning can be superior," Jaggars said. "We just wanted to make sure that we were injecting a note of caution into how people were interpreting what they were seeing.""

"For-Profit Colleges on the Brink January 6, 2011, 1:04 pm By Peter Wood The for-profit sector of higher education is in the political spotlight these days. Last year an Obama administration official launched an attack on the legitimacy of for-profit colleges and universities. Although that official subsequently resigned his position in the Department of Education, the measures he promoted took on a life of their own. Now the for-profits are faced with what could be an existential crisis. The legal challenges have driven down the stock prices of the publicly-traded institutions and a daunting new regulation is about to take effect. The story has been well-reported in the Chronicle. The former official who got the anti-for-profit ball rolling is Robert Shireman, who served as deputy undersecretary of education, until his resignation in July. Shireman jawboned the accrediting associations to be tougher on for-profits; called for a new system whereby each individual state in which an online university does business would have the right to regulate the enterprise; and pushed for the now notorious idea that for-profit colleges and universities (but not non-profits) would have to show high levels of "gainful employment" for their graduates in the fields they studied. His animus against the for-profits didn't seem to sit all that well with the rest of the Obama administration. On May 11, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan went to a policy forum held by the for-profit DeVry University and declared that the for-profits play a "vital role" in educating underserved populations. A week later, Shireman announced his impending departure. Shireman had played a key role in the Obama administration's successful effort to abolish the role of commercial lenders in making Title IV federally-guaranteed student loans and replacing that system with direct lending managed by the Department of Education. So his decision to head for the exit had more an air of victory than o

"Beating the 'Not Invented Here' Mentality January 6, 2011, 5:15 pm By Josh Fischman Las Vegas-Linda Thor, chancellor of the Foothill-De Anza Community College District, started a session here at the Higher Ed Tech Summit with a startling statistic: In her previous job, as president of Rio Salado College, the college improved online-course completion rates from 50 percent to upward of 80 percent. Technology played a big role, she said. Adding 24/7 student support, detecting signals of classroom success and failure, and making things like library services available online when students needed them were aspects of this. So if such big gains are possible, why isn't everyone doing this? "It's the 'not invented here' issue," said Ms. Thor. "We have a boutique problem," said Mark David Milliron, deputy director of higher education for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, who joined Ms. Thor on the panel, which was about using technology to improve graduation rates. There are plenty of good ideas, the two said, but colleges are reluctant to adopt solutions that did not arise from their own campuses. There is an institutional mind-set, Mr. Milliron said, that if something was not invented on a particular campus, it is not appropriate for that particular campus. Ms. Thor added that there are many "best practices" in technology but few mechanisms for disseminating them to a wider community. So things that work are not picked up or are deliberately passed over. So how do we break down the resistance? asked Philip Regier, executive vice provost and dean of Arizona State University Online, who was also on this panel."

"July 23, 2010 Education Department Takes Aim at For-Profits With Student-Debt Rule By Kelly Field After a five-week delay, the Education Department will release a rule Friday that would penalize for-profit colleges that saddle students with unmanageable amounts of debt. The proposed "gainful employment" rule, which has been anticipated by for-profit colleges and short-sellers alike, would cut off federal aid to programs whose students have the highest debt burdens and lowest loan-repayment rates, while limiting enrollment growth at hundreds of other programs. For-profit lobbyists are calling the rule "unwise and unnecessary." In a conference call with reporters, the Education Department said it was seeking to protect students and taxpayers from the high costs of student-loan defaults. "While career colleges play a vital role in training our work force to be globally competitive, some of them are saddling students with debt they cannot afford in exchange for degrees and certificates they cannot use," said Secretary of Education Arne Duncan in a written statement. Department officials estimated that 5 percent of programs would become ineligible for student aid under the rule, while 55 percent would be subject to growth restrictions and required to warn consumers and current students about the dangers of excessive borrowing."

"For-Profit Colleges on the Brink, Part 2 January 7, 2011, 11:27 am By Peter Wood For several years prior to 2010, it was boom times for for-profit colleges and universities. Their enrollments soared, their profitability went through the roof, and investors rushed to get in on a good thing. The market capitalization of the for-profit sector of higher education shot up to dizzying heights. Much of the growth was due to the efficient way in which for-profit colleges and universities signed up students for federally guaranteed student loans. As a whole, the sector didn't much concern itself with the academic preparation of its prospective students. Federal loan eligibility was the key to admission. Beginning in 2009, the Obama administration's Department of Education began to float ideas for increased regulation of the for-profits, but in spring 2010, it seemed to decide enough was enough and began an all-out regulatory assault on the pro-profit sector that continues to this day. The assault spilled over to Congress as well. On December 8, for example, the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, chaired by Tom Harkin (D) issued a scathing report, Benefiting Whom? For-Profit Education Companies and the Growth of Military Education Benefits, that portrayed the for-profit sector as ruthlessly exploiting federal programs intended to help veterans. The report, based on an undercover investigation by the Government Accountability Office, turned out to be error-ridden with virtually all of the errors prejudicial to the for-profits, but that hasn't slowed the effort to rein them in. When the regulatory assault began, analysts predicted big drops in enrollment; stock prices plummeted; and some foresaw an industry that would be driven to the wall. In my last blog I summarized what happened. How much or how little should the travails of the for-profit sector of higher education matter to those of us concerned with the general future of American scholarsh