In the mid-1800s, during the
creative rush of the early Industrial Revolution, it became apparent that the
United States needed a better educational system. The innovations of the Industrial Revolution required new
kinds of leaders for industrial innovation: scientists, engineers, and managers, to name a few. It also needed new kinds of
professionals to ensure that the broader society could support an
industrialized economy: social
scientists, teachers, and civic leaders, as examples. At the same time, we needed universities where research was
on an equal footing with teaching, so that new knowledge would freely enter
into the thinking of new professionals.
The
result was a revolution in education—one that we take for granted today. In an era where most universities were
church-related or private, our forefathers invented the public university. This included state universities
created by the sale of federal land grants to the states, where research,
teaching, and technology transfer in the “mechanical and practical arts” fed
innovation in industry while securing the increased agricultural productivity needed to support
immigration and urbanization. It
also included creation of public “normal schools”—teacher colleges, the
antecedents of today’s state colleges—that trained the teachers necessary to
staff public grade schools and high schools which were seen as a key to
assimilating the millions of immigrants who had come to our shores to work in
the mines and mills and to ensure that a goodly percentage of them (25% was an
early goal) were prepared to go on to college for professional training. A bit later on, we also created
community colleges that could better respond to local workforce needs and feed
students to four-year colleges.
Today,
we are in another creative rush as the Information Revolution matures into a
global information society, and the question, once again, is how do we prepare
the workforce for this new environment? This time, the question contains another: how do we as a country compete in an
industrial supply chain whose workforce is distributed globally? Over the past couple of decades, the
nation has been pretty much silent on this issue. Higher education, once seen as a national priority,
had lost its place in the public discussion. Increasingly, it was seen as a private good—preparing
individuals to make their livings--rather than a public good that prepared
citizens to live and prospect in and with our communities. As government funding declined,
the direct cost to students rose.
Corporations, the most direct beneficiary of an educated workforce,
looked the other way, focused more on short-term profit than on long-term
investments in their workforce.
That
is now changing. The Obama
Administration has proposed America’s College Promise, a new initiative that
would allow responsible students (both traditional-aged and adult) to earn an
associate degree or the first two years of a baccalaureate degree at no direct
cost to them. Just as high school
graduation—once something students paid for themselves—became a universal
expectation early in the 20th century—America’s College Promise is a
step toward making a college degree a realistic expectation for tomorrow’s
workforce.
The
ACP is not a give-away. Funding
comes with some very real requirements for both students and community
colleges:
·
To be eligible, students must attend college at
least half-time, recognizing that some students will be working adults.
·
Students must also maintain a 2.5 average and
make steady progress toward their degree.
·
Participating community colleges must offer
academic programs that are fully transferrable to local public four-year
colleges and universities OR offer occupational training programs that are in
demand among employers.
·
Colleges must also adopt institutional reforms
to improve student persistence and degree completion.
The
federal program will be a partnership with participating State
governments. Federal funding will
cover 75% of the community college costs; states will be required to provide
matching funds (the specific percentage varying based on the state’s current
contributions to its community colleges).
The
America’s College Promise initiative could be a major step in positioning the
United States for long-term success in the global information economy. It will plant the seed of a public
expectation that all responsible students should have access to undergraduate
education just as they have access to high school graduation. In the process, it will demonstrate the
idea that higher education should be a normal expectation of citizens in a
global information society. In the
process, it could very well break the longstanding barriers between high school
and college curricula and create new relationships between community colleges
and their four-year public colleges and university counterparts. In the process, it could give four-year
colleges and universities a heightened focus on professional education and
research. Its impact may be far
reaching, indeed.
As
one might expect, there are many questions to be asked at this early stage in
the consideration of the ACP proposal.
One that arose quite early was funding: how will the federal government pay for this new
service? What other government
projects will be scrapped to allow the government to realize the ACP
vision? There are many ways to
answer that question. President
Obama suggested one in his 2015 State of the Union message: close the tax loopholes that currently
allow many corporations to avoid paying their due taxes. Another would be to re-direct funds
that are now spent on maintaining our military presence in other
countries. In short, money can be
found.
Another
question is how to make the Promise a reality in states that have weak
community college systems.
Pennsylvania is a good example of this. For many years, Pennsylvania’s land grant university—Penn
State—has maintained a network of 17 community-focused undergraduate
campuses. Other schools in
the State System of Higher Education have done the same. As a result, while Pennsylvania has 14
community colleges, many potential students live outside the range of a
community college. As America’s
College Promise is implemented, this imbalance will need to be taken into
account.
A
third question speaks to the supply side of increasing community college
graduates: the need to ensure that
enough high school students graduate with the skills they will need in order to
go on to higher education.
This may inspire new “dual enrollment” partnerships between high schools
and colleges to allow talented high school students to earn both high school
credit and college credit, preparing them to move quickly into college while
also reducing their total time to degree.
These
are not reasons to abandon America’s College Promise. They simply are examples of the kinds of issues that will
surely arise as folks get down to brass tacks and start to construct the means
by which to realize the potential of ACP.
It is an incredibly exciting initiative, one that might just help us
build a new public consensus around higher education as a key societal
investment in this new economy.
No comments:
Post a Comment