It starts: Dept of Ed regulations for Colleges
October 28, 2010 at 8:32 am 12 comments
We’ve been hearing for a long time that, after health care, the federal government was going to start in on increasing regulation of higher education. New regulations announced today define what a “credit hour” is, and place new regulations on the for-profits (where a lot of IT education takes place). We’re seeing similar rhetoric to what I quoted yesterday: Paraphrased as “If we’re paying for college, we get graduates for jobs” as opposed to “If we’re paying for college, educate our students.”
The Obama administration plans to announce Thursday new regulations for colleges that participate in federal student aid programs, an initiative that aims to reshape how admissions recruiters are paid, how course credits are defined and how career training programs are launched.
The new package of rules “will help ensure that students are getting from schools what they pay for: solid preparation for a good job,” Education Secretary Arne Duncan said in a statement. Education officials say rules are needed because the government provides tens of billions of dollars each year in grants and loans to college students.
via Education Dept. expands oversight of colleges.
Entry filed under: Uncategorized. Tags: higher education, public policy.
1.
John "Z-Bo" Zabroski | October 28, 2010 at 9:33 am
This is the dumbest movement in American education history.
What is supposed to set apart out highest education system from our incredibly poor K-12 system is that it is privatized and forced to be competitive.
Auditing things like credit hours simply demonstrates a complete non-understanding of how to solve problems, and what the real problems are.
This is what happens when people far removed from the consequences of their actions are the ones making decisions.
2.
Alfred Thompson | October 28, 2010 at 1:53 pm
The same people who push this idea, which basically means that over time a degree becomes meaningless, are probably the same ones who would complain about HS diplomas being meaningless. At some point to have any value these pieces of paper have to mean that someone knows someting and not just that they paid money and did their time.
3.
Alfred Thompson | October 29, 2010 at 2:20 pm
Interesting blog post by Seth Godin that seems to adress some related ideas though more focus on learning than graduation – http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2010/10/pushing-back-on-professors.html
4.
Stephen Gilbert | October 31, 2010 at 3:12 pm
I think I’m coming at this from a different perspective than the others here. This year, I’m the department chair at a state supported community college. One of my jobs is to evaluate part-time faculty members and their courses. One of the courses I was asked to evaluate was an online class that consisted of 8 web pages (one for each week). These pages basically said “read the book and email me if you have any problems.” Since we (the taxpayers) were paying the instructor to perform 8 hours of instruction each week, I really didn’t think that was adequate. (Although, I suppose that the students could have been really, really slow readers.)
The only reason that I was able to make my case stick, though, was that we do have regulations about what a credit hour is (I believe through our state Department of Education). Instructors aren’t free to decide that their students need only 15 minutes a week to earn four units of credit.
5.
Bijan Parsia | November 1, 2010 at 9:11 am
Ok, is it just that the rhetoric is bad or is the idea of setting some norms for “credit hour” itself bad?
I like the latter, at least, when done right.
The rhetoric seems spot on for “career training courses” which, it seems, by definition, are about job prep.
6.
John "Z-Bo" Zabroski | November 1, 2010 at 10:49 am
Stephen,
How does government regulation actually improve things, though?
It seems like you are coupling internal quality standards at an evaluation level to the assessment level.
Evaluation should be based on professors performance.
Assessment should be based on departmental and university/college-wide standards.
7.
Stephen Gilbert | November 1, 2010 at 11:55 am
John,
I’m sorry, I just don’t understand what you mean entirely, but let me see if I can come up with at least one example.
Regulation improves things because it allows students to take classes at different colleges and have those classes “count”. When we have an articulation agreement with another college, that agreement is based on the understanding that the credit hours follow California’s Title 5, Standards and Criteria for Classes.
I’m just not sure how I could evaluate based on a professor’s performance (does she meet her class for the full class period, does she follow the state-approved course outline) without specific regulations and standards.
I’m not sure, but are you saying that each local government agency (that is, our department or college), should have regulations, but the state or the federal government shouldn’t? I find that kind of confusing.
–Steve
8.
Mark Guzdial | November 1, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Matriculation agreements of the kind you describe, easing the transfer of credit between schools, has been an important tool in Massachusetts and Colorado for diversifying computing. Community colleges are much more diverse than universities, so by easing the transfer of credit, students are encouraged to go on for a four year degree, rather than just stop with the Associate’s or a certificate.
9.
John "Z-Bo" Zabroski | November 1, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Regulating credit hours seems subject to Parkinson’s Law, and that work will expand to fill the time alloted to it. This could happen in many ways.
Your analysis of the problem seems rooted in defeat. You seem to want the responsibility for requirements offloaded from your shoulders and pushed to a higher authority. Generally, command and control should be placed closest to those with the right information to act upon it.
What *knowledge* does a state government have about the professors its institutions employs vs. what *knowledge* should you be able to have as the department head?
What you are really trying to ask me, I think, is “John, is it okay if I have these weak controls, better than nothing?” I am saying, Analyze the problem domain and come up with the correct pivot points for command and control, by finding what the appropriate context is for evaluating professor performance.
I really don’t think a college education needs to focus on transfering credits from one school to another. Caltech’s 1st course in its calculus course sequence might be 3 credits, but it blows away UCLA’s corresponding course. Transferring credits actually causes more trouble than it solves, and the real problem is that colleges have students pay for courses based on the credits they earn, and once the student has accumulated 128 or so credits plus 64 focused on their major, then they can graduate and the college gets its Bundy Money! This is a perverse feedback system that needs OVERHAUL. Tweaking it seems pedantic.
10.
John "Z-Bo" Zabroski | November 1, 2010 at 1:15 pm
More on transferring credit hours:
I also think if you want to discuss this, then you need to think about why these credits need to be transferred in the first place. Also, why is it such a big issue today and wasn’t an issue 50 years ago?
Probably the foremost reason I can think of, just a guess, is that we have more people continuing education in adulthood (I am just guessing, although I bet it wouldn’t be hard to dig up stats to prove this). A user story here is the 40 year old guy with a wife and two kids, who has been a successful software engineer but never graduated college before. His work schedule is such that the school’s course offerings and major requirements don’t accomodate his schedule. But if he can take one course at some other place, then he can actually get his degree in a reasonable time.
I have architect friends who have told me anecdotes like Notre Dame’s architecture major was 10x harder than the Duke master’s program, and that by the time they graduated Notre Dame, they were ready for anything any master’s program could throw at them. They said Duke was a cakewalk for them. But they also noticed that their peers at Duke didn’t necessarily feel the same way.
I have heard the same thing elsewhere. People getting their doctorates at Columbia University are allowed to take some courses at, say, Stony Brook University, because SUNY SB’s program blows away Columbia’s. Also, Nassau Community College’s math department blows away most 4 year colleges in the tri-state area. And it is a community college.
How does standardizing on credit hours help you draw this sort of picture?
11. EdNews this week : Circe Institute | November 8, 2010 at 11:51 am
[...] It starts: Dept of Ed regulations for Colleges (computinged.wordpress.com) [...]
12. edReformer: 90/10 Reconfiguration Needed, Says Quick and the Ed | June 16, 2011 at 2:59 pm
[...] It starts: Dept of Ed regulations for Colleges (computinged.wordpress.com) [...]