Comments on Carrying Out the Commission's Ideas

• location of regional hearings
• Posted by Carolyn on August 17, 2006 at 9:10am EDT

• Department of Education officials intend for the hearings to serve as public meetings in various parts of the country to discuss issues related to the recently enacted Higher Education Reconciliation Act (HERA) prior to the actual negotiated rulemaking sessions, which will be in Washington, DC this December, January, February, and March.
  The regional hearings are set for September 19, 2006 at the University of California at Berkeley; October 5, 2006 at the Loyola University in Chicago, Illinois; November 2, 2006 at the Royal Pacific Hotel Conference Center in Orlando, Florida; and November 8, 2006 at the Department in Washington, D.C.

• great, the feds are so good at messing things up!
• Posted by superhiker on August 17, 2006 at 11:30am EDT

• Now that they've fixed the K-12 schools, have FEMA humming, have Iraq on the mend, witnessing the birth pangs of a new Middle East in fact, they're going to bring the same benefits to higher education!

• Posted by AC on August 17, 2006 at 12:05pm EDT

• Yeah, watch out, superhiker. They're coming after you.

• Another Nattering Nabob of Negativity
• Posted by Jim on August 17, 2006 at 12:25pm EDT

• I guess it shouldn't surprise me that those who are most quick to add their comments to IHE stories are individuals who see the world crumbling about them - those who are eager to complain but who never add anything constructive. "Superhiker" is a just another supercynic, taking topics as diverse as K-12 reform, Katrina and Iraq, then performing the e-mail equivalent of wrapping them in an "ain't the Feds terrible" paper bag, and tossing them on the side of the road while nobody is looking. Come out of your cave, and suggest some ideas of your own. Show up at a commission hearing, write an op-ed piece, do something or anything besides the incessant whining that is the trademark of you and others of your ilk.

• Assessment in the National Commission's report
• Posted by W. Robert Connor , President at The Teagle Foundation on August 17, 2006 at 12:25pm EDT

• The final version of the Commission's report backs away from some of the negative rhetoric in earlier drafts and public statements, but when it comes to assessing student learning the report still leaves the impression that higher education is engaged in a rear guard action, protecting the status with no concern for student learning. That message can do a lot of damage to higher education.

  But the real question is this: Is that message true? Surely it is in some quarters but at the Teagle Foundation we have been seeing an increasing recognition on the part of faculty in the liberal arts and sciences that assessment, properly crafted, can be their ally, not their foe. Faculty from over a hundred institutions are now working with us to implment assessment plans designed to increase student engagement and learning on their campuses. None of this is imposed from above, but we're convinced it will achieve a lot more than injunctions from Washington DC.

• Jim, thanks for the uplift!
• Posted by superhiker on August 17, 2006 at 1:05pm EDT

• You're so positive! You want a constructive suggestion before I head for my morning outing? Here's one: let the feds butt out and let the states run the public schools, the private university trustees to run the private schools.

• Ha ha ha ha...
• Posted by AC on August 17, 2006 at 1:25pm EDT

• Thanks, superhiker! See, this is the kind of intellectual debate that I absolutely enjoy and which Bernie Fryshman talked about in his piece. Who needs a college education when we can resort to third-grade tactics to get our points across?

• Regulatory Rules vs The Legislative Process
• Posted by Daryl , Student Affairs Professional on August 17, 2006 at 4:30pm EDT

• 1) It seems funny to me that the Department of Education would almost immediately engage in the federal regulatory process. Are they worried about the potential change of guard at the US Capitol?

  These recommendations can easily be considered within the development of new higher education reauthorization bills during the 110th Congress. Why not give stakeholders, and those who write our laws, the opportunity to develop and consider long-term changes to higher education in our country?

  2) The recommendations contained in the report urges, “institutions to make a commitment to embrace new pedagogies, curricula, and technologies to improve student learning.” Many campuses across this great land of ours are already engaged in such commitment. Divisions of Student Affairs at colleges and universities are equal partners in the personal, intellectual, and leadership developments of students. Academicians and student affairs professionals, day after day, engage students in becoming involved with activities that enhance and supplement the learning that occurs within classroom walls.

  The commission failed to recognize the importance that colleges and universities play in developing the whole student. Out-of-classroom learning experiences play a large role in ensuring student development, as well as retention. The value added to a students collegiate career through such experiences helps prepare them to not only become active citizens, but to also increase their readiness to work and contribute to the economy of the United States of America.

• Posted by Barbara Honaker , graduate at Shimer College on August 17, 2006 at 9:30pm EDT

• Hey, Jim!
  Superhiker's ideas should at least be considered. The FEDS try to control all whether they are competent or not. With the FEDS now entering the realm of higher education, who knows just what the end results will be? We should all be scared, very scared. Also,what cave were you referring to - Plato's? However, I must agree with you on the point that instead of whining, we should all become involved to ensure that the FEDS do not overstep reasonable boundaries.

• Long Overdue
• Posted by kgotthardt on August 17, 2006 at 10:10pm EDT

• *calls for streamlining the federal financial aid programs, more disclosure of colleges’ performance on a number of fronts, and the creation of a federal database of students’ academic records*

  Government might not be the magic elixir of educational reform, but these initiatives are LONG overdue. If a school is spending tax payers' money, it MUST be held accountable. Unfortunately, there have been so many abuses of Federal Aid programs that the Federal Government is ethically and legally obligated to take action across all sectors. So if you don't like the upcoming efforts towards reform, you can thank those institutions that have created such a pressing need for it.

  I, for one, will be breathing a sigh of relief!

• Consistent Republcan
• Posted by Lamont Jaspers III on August 18, 2006 at 4:35am EDT

• I was born and Republican, and (as my children fear) I will likely die an aged Republican. I resent these federal efforts to regulate what I do in my Utah classroom. My teaching is the business of me, my university and my students, and why Washington governmental types think they should bring big government into my classroom life is beyond me. If they're looking for a fight, they've come to the right place.

• Lo00ng time coming, what's so "fast" about the reform?
• Posted by Disillusioned Doctoral Student , Doctoral Student at Land Grant U on August 21, 2006 at 4:35am EDT

• Dear colleagues in Higher Education, a few comments:

  1) Feds cannot butt out when it is federal dollars, there are responsibilities here. Duh.

  2) While I would like to think that the faculty themselves can fix things, I know better, and so should the rest of us.

  A) Because faculty can't enforce anything. Largely because they are working with colleagues, must remain collegial (otherwise known as go along to get along, first inculcated when approaching the disseration committee, and firmly cemented in place with the tenure review committee).

  B) Because of faculty unions, which proliferate like mushrooms in the musty and darkened corners of "lack of accountability"-U.

  C) Because they largely don't know how to manage, due to lack of experience, lack of education (in management), and more importantly lack of initiative and interest.

  D) Because what faculty are really good at is talking, writing articles (some faculty, anyway), attending committee meetings, authoring reports, and generally promoting their viewpoint. After all, they were usually hired to be independent thinkers and workers. Duh. Implementation? Well faculty don't really know what that is.

  What faculty are not good at is listening (beyond their own academic specialty), nor taking criticism (which is instead largely ignored, especially when it comes to student evaluations). Nor holding their own accountable.

  Of course this is a broad brush, and perhaps a majority of faculty are competent. But we are dealing with a problem that is not wholesale rottenness but a significant portion. Enough to cause enormous waste of money and opportunity.

  But for those who are competent, at what are they? Supposedly independent research, instruction, and service to the community. Accountable to whom? Their buddies of 10, 20, or 30+ years in the department.

  Who are you kidding? These are the creatures who will voluntarily submit to more work, who might, gasp have to change their behavior? When tenure has taught them that it is their right to do exactly as they please (beyond showing up during most of their scheduled classes)... the only response will be to fight, to put off the reform until they retire.

  To loudly proclaim that no one (besides themselves) is qualified to produce reform, and that, hey, we are doing that reforming thing already anyway... we promise... really... that is the reactionary strategy that we hear and read about and will continue to find in the op-ed pages and reports from well-intentioned groups of... faculty.

  Don't believe a word of it.