faculty

The racial implications of California's proposed online university (opinion)

Ten years into the current round of austerity in public higher education, state funding levels remain 17 percent below their per-student levels of 25 years ago and 15 percent below their fiscal year 2008 level, adjusted for inflation. Public colleges and universities have on average managed to make up for these cuts with tuition increases: in adjusted dollars, net tuition has doubled since 1991 and is up by one-third since 2008. And yet in the process we have reduced public confidence, social impacts and student expectations.

Nonetheless, politicians often tell university officials that previous levels of funding will never return. Just as often, they explain that universities don’t really need the missing funds because of the money-saving role and educational benefits of new educational technology. This solution has re-emerged in this budget year. Our example is California, where we are again hearing claims that online will soon be as good as face-to-face instruction, and therefore public colleges can do more teaching with less money.

Another Point of View
Eloy Ortiz Oakley says California’s
online community college will be a
better public alternative to for-profit
colleges for the “stranded workers”
traditional college systems struggle
to serve. Read more here.

In January, Governor Jerry Brown proposed giving the California State University and the University of California even less than the inadequate 4 percent the systems thought they were getting -- a nominal 3 percent, 2.1 percent after subtracting one-time money. Nor did the governor propose a tuition increase to compensate for a state allocation that barely meets consumer price inflation. The two university systems have 33 campuses between them, and Brown’s budget insures the continuation of structural problems and everyday squeezes at all 33.

Why do the governor and most of the Democratic establishment think UC and CSU can do more with less, and that state cuts don't hurt quality? In a press conference following the release of his 2018-19 budget, Brown offered a kind of explanation.

It is enough. You're getting 3 percent more and that's it. They're not going to get any more. And they've got to manage. I think they need a little more scrutiny over how they are spending things. It's just because the university is a good they say “we've got to have more good” -- but if you have too much good it -- in certain circumstances -- it becomes a bad. So they're going to have to live within their means. And what will happen here is when the next recession [comes] they'll have to put everything in reverse and lay people off and raise tuition and that's not a good thing. So, they've got to lower the cost structure and there are tools to do that and they need to step up and more creatively engage in the process of making education more affordable.

We leave aside the standard charge of administrative bloat. Bloat is real but arises in large part from efforts to replace funds lost to public cuts: staffing grows to manage expanded fund-raising, industry and foundation partnerships, customer-friendly student services, continuous publicity and brand management, and real estate development and other auxiliary enterprises. Bloat functions here as a mode of finger-pointing rather than reform.

More importantly, Brown categorically assumes that money can be saved by shifting face-to-face instruction to online. Last year, he and California Community Colleges (CCC) chancellor Eloy Ortiz Oakley, whom Brown had also appointed to the UC Board of Regents, announced a fully online CCC degree program called the Flex Learning Option for Workers (FLOW). His budget proposes that this become a new “online campus” for the community colleges. The idea is similar to what then dean of Berkeley Law Chris Edley suggested for the University of California almost 10 years ago -- an 11th UC campus that would be all online. The background assumption has remained the same: ed tech has moved the cost-quality curve, so online college is both better and cheaper than face-to-face.

True believers in online cost miracles were tested toward the end of 2013, when the massive open online course wave crashed on revelations that MOOCs were neither better nor cheaper. The famous Brown-brokered deal between Udacity and San Jose State was suspended after an National Science Foundation-based study showed Udacity's online courses actually reduced remedial education outcomes, prompting Udacity founder Sebastian Thrun to call MOOCs a lousy product.

In addition, those of us who tried to find cost savings were unable to. Georgia Tech's online computer science master’s program -- Udacity's flagship program -- continues to run with multimillion-dollar subsidies from AT&T. (Also see the ambiguities of the University of Florida's online programs.) In short, online had not suspended the economics of education, in which institutions lower costs by lowering quality. After 2013, MOOC companies retreated from their initial claim to be replacing college, instead offering professional retraining and credentialing.

In focusing on adult re-trainers, Brown's current online proposal seems at first to follow the arc of retrenchment. But it comes with a renewed MOOC-style claim that online is "as good or better" than face-to-face. George Skelton quotes CCC chancellor Oakley, making a categorical assertion of the online program's value because its technology is directed at "social network kids."

A further example appears in Teresa Watanabe's coverage in the Los Angeles Times.

In Watanabe’s article, Laura Hope, a California Community Colleges executive vice chancellor, said improved classes and tools for online orientation, counseling and tutoring have significantly narrowed the performance gap between online and traditional classes. Nearly two-thirds of online students completed their courses in 2015-16, compared with just over half a decade earlier. Over the same period, the percentage of students who completed traditional classes stayed roughly the same, at about 71 percent.

There is no doubt that distance learning can be more convenient than traditional, face-to-face course taking. This convenience likely explains the growth of online learning over the years. Looking at data available from the California Community College Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO), in the 2006-07 academic year 68,546 full-time-equivalent students (FTES) enrolled in for-credit distance education (DE) course work. By the 2016-17 academic year, this number grew to 164,966, an increase of roughly 140 percent. As a proportion of total for-credit community college full-time-equivalent enrollment, distance education has grown from 6.6 percent in 2006-07 to 14.7 percent in 2016-17. In contrast, for-credit nondistance education shrank by nearly 2.5 percent over this same period.

Convenience granted, the real question is educational: Is online "as good or better" than face-to-face, as good or better in a way that justifies using online courses to replace face-to-face instruction or to launch an entirely online community college campus? CCC's own data analysis is now making this claim, summarized in this slide, which refers to success rates in all types of CCC courses for the past 10 years.

Line graph shows 17 percent difference in success rates of traditional face-to-face instruction (70 percent) and distance education (53 percent) in 2005-06. Difference is 13 percent (72 percent for face-to-face and 59 percent for distance) in 2010-11 and 7 percent (71 percent for face-to-face and 64 percent for distance) in 2015-16.

In the email that accompanied this figure, a CCC official claimed it showed that distance education success rates are on track to match the results of face-to-face. So, via CCC, "better" is back. And "cheaper" (though dubious and unproven) never went away.

When this figure appeared, we were working on a paper about what the underlying CCC data said about racial disparity in online courses. Our overall question has been, does moving students of color from face-to-face to online help or hurt their education? In other words, how does online learning impact success rates across racial groups?

We were able to reproduce the CCC-provided figure above with the publicly available data we've been using (give or take a percentage point). However, we had been disaggregating outcomes by type of course and by racial category. Here are two examples of face-to-face/online comparisons, using two types of courses that are likely to resemble the "retraining" courses offered by the FLOW program.

Two line graphs under the heading Success Rates in Basic Skills Courses, 2006 to 2016. First graph shows in-person success rates broken down by racial group. Black students had the lowest success rate from 2006 (44 percent) to 2016 (50 percent), followed by Hispanic students (55 percent in 2006 and 59 percent in 2016), the state average (57 percent in 2006, 64 percent in 2016), white students (64 percent in 2006, 68 percent in 2016) and Asian students (68 percent in 2006, 75 percent in 2016). Second graph shows online success rates. Black students again had the lowest success rate from 2006 (33 percent) to 2016 (37 percent), followed by Hispanic students (37 percent in 2006 and 45 percent in 2016), the state average (46 percent in 2006, 50 percent in 2016), white students (53 percent in 2006, 56 percent in 2016) and Asian students (56 percent in 2006, 66 percent in 2016).

As Figure 2 illustrates, distance education continues to deliver a significant drop in success rates in basic skills courses. The convergence trend CCC claimed on aggregate is much weaker here. In addition, online makes the racial disparity of in-person courses somewhat worse. The success rates of underrepresented minority students, to use the standard classification, are poor. In addition, they are not improving much in basic skills, as CCC claims for the aggregated results.

One reasonable policy conclusion would be quite the opposite of Brown's and Oakley's. Black and Latino basic-skills students should never be placed in online courses -- not until researchers are given the time (and data) to explore and overcome the mechanisms underlying the racial disparities. And even though white and Asian students outperform the state averages, a face-to-face/online gap also exists for these student groups. Consequently, it seems reasonable that even they should use them sparingly.

Brown and Oakley would likely push back against the use of basic skills distance education course success rates as projections for future success rates of students enrolled in the FLOW program. This is a fair point if, in fact, FLOW will draw the kinds of nontraditional, older, working students the program intends to. But will the FLOW program really only serve students who are “college ready” and not in need of some developmental education?

So far it is unclear. But let’s assume that students in the FLOW program will resemble current “vocational” education students. These students are, in the aggregate, often older, more career focused and arguably more reflective of the FLOW program target demographic.

Two line graphs under the heading Success Rates in Vocational Courses, 2006 to 2016. First graph shows in-person success rates broken down by racial group. Black students had the lowest success rate from 2006 (61 percent) to 2016 (67 percent), followed by Hispanic students (73 percent in 2006 and 76 percent in 2016), the state average (74 percent in 2006, 79 percent in 2016), white students (76 percent in 2006, 83 percent in 2016) and Asian students (77 percent in 2006, 84 percent in 2016). Second graph shows online success rates. Black students again had the lowest success rate from 2006 (40 percent) to 2016 (48 percent), followed by Hispanic students (47 percent in 2006 and 64 percent in 2016), the state average (55 percent in 2006, 66 percent in 2016), white students (57 percent in 2006, 73 percent in 2016) and Asian students (58 percent in 2006, 76 percent in 2016).

Figure 3 shows that success rates are generally higher in vocational courses relative to other course types (e.g., basic skills). This is true with online as well, where the convergence with in-person is more convincing. Yet racial disparities remain, and remain larger than with in-person courses. Again, a reasonable conclusion would be that a system that is serving a majority-minority student population needs to be very conservative with its use of these courses.

All of this leads us to advance the following points:

  1. Online education is valuable and important as a selective and supplemental approach to extending in-person higher ed. It helps students who cannot stop full-time work or family care. It is especially good at dealing with the repetition that is part of all learning. This is an area where it has a clear advantage over human teachers, as language labs (and books!) have been proving for generations.
  2. State leaders are wrong to continue to push online education as a categorical value. This current push depends on aggregating data in a way that conceals how online disadvantages African-American and Latino students. Online education is currently an engine of racial inequality. No good higher ed policy can be created by ignoring that fact.
  3. It is still unclear how learning in online environments compares to learning in traditional environments. The chancellor's office seeks to justify the growth of distance education by pointing to improvements in the success rates of students in these courses. But by reducing “success” to completion, the CCCCO masks the differential impact of DE course taking on traditional measures of successful education, including both cognitive (e.g., learning, retention) and noncognitive (e.g., interpersonal skills and attitudes) growth. It is doubtful that the prospective employers in the state will hold the same definition of success as the CCCCO. Consequently, we recommend a rigorous, longitudinal evaluation of the state’s extant online courses prior to the new construction of an entirely online campus.
  4. Online education should never be used to excuse state budgets that are too small to support the established features of educational quality. These features include the presence of fully qualified teachers working with classes that are small enough to allow individual feedback. Online courses that approach the quality of face-to-face courses are actually "hybrid" courses that involve structured personal contact. We know of no hybrid online courses that will save universities money. States should never budget by assuming the opposite.

In short, university officials, including faculty senates, should loudly oppose officials who let online reinforce the color line. The FLOW program should restart the discussion about the higher ed practices and investments that would actually reduce racial disparities in attainment, rather than cover them up.

Christopher Newfield teaches literature and American studies at University of California, Santa Barbara, and is the author of The Great Mistake: How We Wrecked Public Universities and How We Can Fix Them, first published by Johns Hopkins University Press. Cameron Sublett is associate professor of education at the Graduate School of Education and Psychology at Pepperdine University.

Editorial Tags: 
Image Source: 
iStock/izusek
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Newsletter Order: 
4
Diversity Newsletter publication date: 
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 
Email Teaser: 
Does Online Reinforce the Color Line?

Kids More Likely to Draw Scientists as Women

Ask a child to draw a scientist, and she’s more likely than ever to draw a woman. That’s according to a new study in Child Development. Researchers analyzed 78 “draw-a-scientist” studies dating back to the 1960s, involving 20,000 kids in kindergarten through 12th grade. Between 1966 and 1977, the paper says, less than 1 percent of U.S. kids chose to draw a woman when prompted to draw a scientist. But in studies from 1985 to 2016, 28 percent of children drew a female scientist, on average, with both girls and boys drawing women more often over time. Girls still drew female scientists much more often than boys, however.

“Our results suggest that children’s stereotypes change as women’s and men’s roles change in society,” co-author Alice Eagly, a professor of psychology at Northwestern University, said in a statement. “Children still draw more male than female scientists in recent studies, but that is expected because women remain a minority in several science fields.” Eagly and her co-authors also looked at how children form stereotypes about gender and science and found that they don’t begin to associate science with men until grade school.

Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 

Why professors need to learn from their students (opinion)

Teaching Today

What if we looked at not how much students learned from us, Paul F. Diehl asks, but how much we as instructors learned from students?

Job Tags: 
Ad keywords: 
Editorial Tags: 
Show on Jobs site: 
Image Source: 
iStock/Nikada
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 

Antioch College Furloughs Faculty and Staff

Another round of cost cutting is under way at Antioch College, with faculty and staff members who earn more than $40,000 per year being required to take mandatory furloughs and a de facto hiring freeze being put in place.

Affected faculty and staff at the small college in Yellow Springs, Ohio, will need to take 10 days of unpaid leave before June 30, according to The Yellow Springs News. That’s the equivalent of an 11 percent pay cut over the next several months, or 3.8 percent of their annual salaries. No jobs are being eliminated.

Antioch has 118 staff members and 31 faculty members, not including adjuncts. The furlough requirement effectively covers all full-time faculty members but less than half of nonfaculty staff members. Adjuncts will not have to take furloughs.

The cuts will not completely eliminate a shortfall in the current budget, Antioch president Tom Manley told The Yellow Springs News. He did not share the size of the college’s current deficit, but it closed its last fiscal year with a $1.73 million gap in a budget of $17.6 million.

Last year’s deficit shrank from $7 million the year before as the college in 2016 put cuts in place that included the elimination of five positions and decreased salaries for 23 administrators.

Antioch enrolls just 133 students after struggling with admissions in the fall. The college, which is attempting to transition from a free model to one where students pay, netted $1.7 million in tuition and fee revenue last year. It relies on gifts for much of its revenue.

Antioch College was closed by Antioch University in 2008, but a group led by alumni purchased the rights to the liberal arts campus and its endowment, reopening the institution in 2011. The college offered full-tuition scholarships for several years after reopening.

Now, it is also looking for savings from its contracts and consultants. The college is searching for attrition opportunities, holding vacant positions open and not filling voluntary leaves and retirements -- implementing a de facto hiring freeze.

At the same time, Antioch leaders are attempting to grow revenue and diversify their sources of income. They will try to find the right balance between fiscal responsibility and reinvention, Manley told The Yellow Springs News.

Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 

Labor Groups Launch Effort on Grad Student Unions

The American Federation of Teachers, Service Employees International Union, United Autoworkers and Unite Here announced a joint initiative this week to get private institutions to bargain collectively with graduate student workers on their campuses. The National Labor Relations Board decided in 2016 that graduate student teaching and research assistants at private institutions are employees entitled to collective bargaining rights. But a number of private campus administrations have since refused to bargain with graduate students who have held successful union elections. In recent weeks, a group of those unions have withdrawn their petitions pending review by the NLRB, to avoid an unfavorable decision by the Trump-era board. 

As part of the new joint effort, graduate student workers at Boston College, Columbia University, Loyola University of Chicago, the University of Chicago and Yale University delivered letters to their administrations saying, “Despite clear votes in favor of unionization at your university, you have attempted to silence graduate workers by using the Trump NLRB to rig the system against them. Your refusal to bargain with a democratically chosen union both ignores the value of RAs and TAs as workers and contradicts the fundamental values for which your university stands. We urge you to join other university administrations by changing course and respecting the voice of graduate workers.”

AFT president Randi Weingarten said during a news conference that the unions plan to pool resources and expertise gained through decades of organizing graduate students on public campuses, which are governed by state laws on collective bargaining. As one example of the kind of strategies the unions will use, Weingarten cited Georgetown University’s recent decision to negotiate terms of a graduate student union election outside NLRB channels. Graduate students on that campus have since said such an election might provide graduate students more protection than one overseen by the NLRB, since its results could not be later overturned by the board of political appointees.

Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 

20 Scholarly Groups Question Stevens Point Cuts

Some 20 professional organizations, from the American Anthropological Association to the Society of Biblical Literature, on Thursday issued a joint statement opposing the University of Wisconsin at Stevens Point’s plan to cut 13 majors -- including those in English, history, political science, sociology and all three of the foreign languages offered. The plan has attracted widespread criticism in Wisconsin and outside the state, as the humanities-heavy cuts are linked to program expansions in what the university has described as more in-demand fields. They include business, chemical engineering, computer information systems, conservation law enforcement, fire science and graphic design. Stevens Point’s initiative, which will likely involved tenured faculty layoffs, is also shaping up to be the first application of controversial changes to state tenure law and University of Wisconsin System policies making it easier to terminate tenured professors. 

The professional associations’ letter of opposition says, in part, “We recognize the reality that effective university leaders today must not only make changes, but in some cases fundamentally reimagine their institutions in order to chart a sustainable course for the future. However, all colleges and universities benefit from strong programs in the humanities, and it is especially important for regional public institutions, which serve large populations of first-generation college students, students of color, and students from families of limited means, to provide access to in-depth education in the full range of humanities and social science programs.” By focusing on preparation “only for narrowly defined jobs,” the associations say, “Stevens Point administrators risk leaving students with considerably poorer preparation for the full range of careers most Americans will experience in a working lifetime.”

Stevens Point has previously defended its plan as one that makes the best of use of scarce financial resources and is most likely to stabilize enrollment. 

Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 

CSU Northridge professor says she hasn't returned to classroom after online threat because university hasn't made her feel safe

Cal State Northridge professor says she hasn't returned to the classroom after an online threat because the university hasn't made her feel safe.

Questions raised by withdrawal of invitation to National University of Singapore

Section: 

Amid reports of screening of visiting scholars, university apologizes for “oversight.”

Review of Alberto Manguel, 'Packing My Library: An Elegy and Ten Digressions'

Alberto Manguel has long since taken the title -- once held by Jorge Luis Borges -- of the bookworm’s bookworm. He is the voice of the species, or the closest thing we have to a celebrity at any rate. The opening pages of Packing My Library: An Elegy and Ten Digressions (Yale University Press) must elicit feelings of mingled envy and humility from anyone making do with a paltry few thousand volumes packed into any space that can be requisitioned as a shelf.

A critic and an editor of literary anthologies as well as an author in his own right, Manguel lived in rural France in a house next to “a barn, partly torn down centuries ago, large enough to accommodate my library, which by then had grown to thirty-five thousand books.” A private collection, its organization followed a private logic. The basic layout was “determined by the language in which the books were written,” which sounds straightforward enough: “without distinction of genre, all books written originally in Spanish or French, English or Arabic (the latter a language which I can’t speak or read) sat together on a shelf.”

But exceptions had to be made. Books have a way of arranging themselves by affinity sometimes: “Certain subjects -- the history of the book, biblical commentaries, the legend of Faust, Renaissance literature and philosophy, gay studies, medieval bestiaries -- had separate sections … I had on the shelves dozens of very bad books which I didn’t throw away in case I ever needed an example of a book I thought was bad. Balzac, in Cousin Pons, offered a justification for this obsessive behavior: ‘An obsession is a pleasure that has attained the status of an idea.’”

With Manguel, obsession has attained the status of a career: this is at least the 10th volume he has published concerning books, libraries and reading. He calls it an elegy, for the book barn is no more. Obliged to leave France for reasons he suggests it would be too tiresome to relive in writing, he had to box the books up and put them in a warehouse -- hence the book’s title, which also alludes to a well-known lecture by Walter Benjamin, the German critic and cultural historian.

Speaking in the early 1930s about the experience of unpacking his library after two years in storage, Benjamin used the occasion to reflect on being a book collector -- something that Manguel, however prone to hoarding he may seem, very definitely is not.

Benjamin, who was, among other things, one of the earliest and most perceptive critics to write about Kafka, was a very driven reader -- but he was willing to sell off his Kafka volumes in order to afford to add an item or two to his collection of rare children’s books. “The most profound enchantment for the collector,” he said, “is the locking of individual items within a magic circle in which they are fixed as the final thrill, the thrill of acquisition, passes over them.” To the collector, so defined, reading is at best irrelevant, at worst potentially damaging to the printed artifact itself.

Benjamin depicts unpacking his library as an emotional return to memories of finding and acquiring the items he has collected: “It is certainly not an elegiac mood but, rather, one of anticipation.” Manguel’s experience couldn’t offer a greater contrast. Packing up his library “is like playing a film backwards, consigning visible narratives and methodical reality to the regions of the distant and the unseen, a voluntary forgetting … If unpacking a library is a wild act of rebirth, packing it is a tidy entombment before the seemingly final judgment.”

And in cardboard coffins, at that. Manguel calls his books “packed and gone,” but the library’s fate is left unclear.

Implied here, I think, is that the Manguel had managed finally to put his books into an order that made sense -- that expressed something meaningful about what he had read and how he’d lived, a pattern that might never be restored.

Packing My Library is more essay collection than memoir. The division into “chapters” and “digressions” seems arbitrary; not even the slightly melancholic tone provides a viable commanding structure. For while the author admits feeling that his days as a writer are winding down, his final pages mark a rebirth of sorts: wherever his boxes of books end up, Manguel himself is now in Argentina, serving as director of the National Library (a position once held by Borges). Settling into the work, he felt at first “like those characters in a Jules Verne novel who find themselves on some faraway island and have to conjure up survival skills they never knew they had.” Packing My Library is a book about the past that seems likely to turn into a prologue.

Editorial Tags: 
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 

Assessing inequality in sociology (opinion)

Victor Ray explains why it is necessary to use our academic skills to analyze our own disciplines.

Job Tags: 
Ad keywords: 
Editorial Tags: 
Show on Jobs site: 
Is this diversity newsletter?: 
Is this Career Advice newsletter?: 
Disable left side advertisement?: 

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - faculty
Back to Top