Jan 282017
 

University Enrollments

University Enrollments – FEWER POOR STUDENTS ARE BEING ENROLLED IN STATE UNIVERSITIES. HERE’S WHY

=======================================

University Enrollments – Tom’s Comments:

university enrollments

This Was Originally Titled “Employees Stay Where They Are”, But is Applicable to Students

University Enrollments – Performance Based Funding (PBF) makes nothing but sense. The problem with this, historically,  in traditional, higher education, is two fold:

(2) They maintain the current flawed, ineffective, inefficient, inconsistent, expensive, one size fits all teaching paradigm and habitually/erroneously defer the lack of student performance improvement blame, for ALL students, away from themselves onto others: Students, lack of grit; Parents, lack of involvement; Funding, lack of resources; Class size, too many students to manage, et.al.

  • By ignoring the research on how students must learn to advance performance improvement outcomes, the core student/university deliverable is routinely not achieved

The result of this behavior is that nothing changes for the better, for their student outcomes. Talk, money spent, going through the motions, but no advanced, student success, performance improvement outcomes.

Long story short, the real systemic, strategic, problem is ignored/sidestepped, which maintains the current teaching paradigm, which does not and will not, advance, sustained, student success, performance improvement outcomes, for ALL students.

When will this change?

ONLY when collectively, educators directly and measurably are held accountable for advanced, sustained, student success, performance improvement outcomes. They will then be forced to replace flawed teaching paradigms, with research proven, best practice, 21st century, learning pedagogy.

We MUST be able to collectively see the forest from the trees. Currently this is NOT the case and the success of ALL students is not achieved.

Since students = institution revenue and student success = more students, which = more revenue, this is a strategic institution problem that won’t go away without real student success, performance improvement, outcomes change.

Tom

University Enrollments – Supporting Information:

AN OPEN LETTER TO COLLEGE MARKETING DIRECTORS

Empowering Students with Success

Paradigm Paralysis

Research

Results: Districts Schools

Teaching to the Middle

You Can’t Manage What You Don’t Measure

-=======================================

university enrollments

Robert Kelchen, Seton Hall University and Luke J. Stedrak, Seton Hall University

States have traditionally provided funding for public colleges and universities based on a combination of the number of students enrolled and how much money they were allocated previously.

But, in the face of increasingly tight budgets and pressures to demonstrate their effectiveness to legislators, more and more states are tying at least some higher education funding to student outcomes.

As of 2015, 32 states have implemented a funding system that is based in part on students’ performance in at least some of their colleges. In such states, a portion of state funding is based on metrics such as the number of completed courses or the number of graduates.

Research shows that performance-based funding (PBF) has not moved the needle on degree completions in any substantial way. Our research focuses on the unintended consequences of such funding policies – whether colleges have responded to funding incentives in ways that could hurt disadvantaged students.

We find evidence that these systems may be reducing access for low-income students at public colleges.

Just a popular political strategy?

What is performance-based funding (PBF)? And does it improve college completion rates?

Performance funding, the idea of tying funding to outcomes instead of enrollment, was first adopted in Tennessee in 1979. It spread across the country in waves in the 1990s and 2000s, with some states dropping and adding programs as state budget conditions and political winds changed. In this decade, several states have implemented systems tying most or all of state funding to outcomes.

By basing funding on outcomes such as course completions and the number of degrees awarded, PBF has become a politically popular strategy to improve student outcomes. It has received strong support from the Bill and Melinda Gates and Lumina Foundations – two big players in the higher education landscape.

However, the best available evidence suggests that PBF systems generally do not move the needle on degree completions in any substantial way.

For example, a study of Washington state’s PBF program by Nick Hillman of Wisconsin, David Tandberg of Florida State and Alisa Hicklin Fryar of University of Oklahoma showed no effects on associate degree completion at two-year colleges. The study found positive effects on certificates in technical fields that took less time to complete, but those were the ones that were not as valuable in the labor market.

University Enrollments – Read the Entire Article, Here

======================================================

Tom McDonald, tsm@centurytel.net; 608-788-5144; Skype: tsmw5752 university enrollments

Be Sociable, Share!

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)