Changing Higher Education

About this site

The world is changing rapidly, driven by powerful forces such as economics, politics, demographics, religion and technology.  We have seen enormous increases in globalization over the past few decades that have transformed how we do business, how we live, and how our governments function. 

American universities have been affected only marginally by these powerful forces thus far, but it is difficult to imagine that they will not be changed in significant, perhaps radical, ways  over the next few decades.  This website is dedicated to discussion and analysis of the forces coming to bear on higher education, and of ways in which higher education might proactively and effectively use these forces to increase its impact.

I am Lloyd Armstrong, University Professor and Provost Emeritus at the University of Southern California (USC). I was Provost from 1993 until 2005, a period in which USC very significantly improved in quality and reputation, and greatly increased its international scope. During that period, I lead the creation of the 1994 Strategic Plan and its 1998 Four Year Update. These documents outlined a new set of directions for the university, and their implementation was instrumental in the improvements that occurred.  I also led the writing of the 2005 Plan for Increasing Academic Excellence, which described the strategic capabilities that needed to be built in order to enable the university to continue to improve in rapidly changing times.  I am now studying issues of the future of higher education in the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis of the USC Rossier School of Education.
 

Through my blogs, I will let you know where my work is leading me. I will also connect you to some other fascinating work in this area. Since my focus is on the ways in which powerful global forces are shaping higher education, much of the work I find useful is not in the education field at all, but rather in the political, economic, and philosophical arenas.  Among the entries you will find here will be some brief reviews of books from these areas that I have found particularly thought-provoking.

I look forward to your input.

The world is changing rapidly, driven by powerful forces such as economics, politics, demographics, religion and technology.  We have seen enormous increases in globalization over the past few decades that have transformed how we do business, how we live, and how our governments function. 

American universities have been affected only marginally by these powerful forces thus far, but it is difficult to imagine that they will not be changed in significant, perhaps radical, ways  over the next few decades.  This website is dedicated to discussion and analysis of the forces coming to bear on higher education, and of ways in which higher education might proactively and effectively use these forces to increase its impact.

I am Lloyd Armstrong, University Professor and Provost Emeritus at the University of Southern California (USC). I was Provost from 1993 until 2005, a period in which USC very significantly improved in quality and reputation, and greatly increased its international scope. During that period, I lead the creation of the 1994 Strategic Plan and its 1998 Four Year Update. These documents outlined a new set of directions for the university, and their implementation was instrumental in the improvements that occurred.  I also led the writing of the 2005 Plan for Increasing Academic Excellence, which described the strategic capabilities that needed to be built in order to enable the university to continue to improve in rapidly changing times.  I am now studying issues of the future of higher education in the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis of the USC Rossier School of Education.
 

Through my blogs, I will let you know where my work is leading me. I will also connect you to some other fascinating work in this area. Since my focus is on the ways in which powerful global forces are shaping higher education, much of the work I find useful is not in the education field at all, but rather in the political, economic, and philosophical arenas.  Among the entries you will find here will be some brief reviews of books from these areas that I have found particularly thought-provoking.

I look forward to your input.

The world is changing rapidly, driven by powerful forces such as economics, politics, demographics, religion and technology.  We have seen enormous increases in globalization over the past few decades that have transformed how we do business, how we live, and how our governments function. 

American universities have been affected only marginally by these powerful forces thus far, but it is difficult to imagine that they will not be changed in significant, perhaps radical, ways  over the next few decades.  This website is dedicated to discussion and analysis of the forces coming to bear on higher education, and of ways in which higher education might proactively and effectively use these forces to increase its impact.

I am Lloyd Armstrong, University Professor and Provost Emeritus at the University of Southern California (USC). I was Provost from 1993 until 2005, a period in which USC very significantly improved in quality and reputation, and greatly increased its international scope. During that period, I lead the creation of the 1994 Strategic Plan and its 1998 Four Year Update. These documents outlined a new set of directions for the university, and their implementation was instrumental in the improvements that occurred.  I also led the writing of the 2005 Plan for Increasing Academic Excellence, which described the strategic capabilities that needed to be built in order to enable the university to continue to improve in rapidly changing times.  I am now studying issues of the future of higher education in the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis of the USC Rossier School of Education.
 

Through my blogs, I will let you know where my work is leading me. I will also connect you to some other fascinating work in this area. Since my focus is on the ways in which powerful global forces are shaping higher education, much of the work I find useful is not in the education field at all, but rather in the political, economic, and philosophical arenas.  Among the entries you will find here will be some brief reviews of books from these areas that I have found particularly thought-provoking.

I look forward to your input.

Price and cost in Higher Education: Price

The issue of the rapidly increasing price of higher education has been much in the news of late. Increasingly, one hears calls from Washington for limits on price increases in the name of accessibility.  One hears responses from university groups that focus on rising costs, and the necessity of reflecting those rising costs into the price. (See my comments and links in Report from the Secretary of Education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education, Aug 10, 2006)

In fact, I believe that the calls from Washington are but a part of a broader, long term political-economic trend that inevitably will lead to controlling price in higher education.  If this interpretation is correct, then there are serious issues to be addressed, because I do not believe that costs in higher education can be controlled in a significant way by making trivial administrative changes.

In this post, I review some data on this contentious issue of price. In a subsequent post,  I will place the issue of price of higher education in a larger context of changes in the global political-economic scene, and discuss some ways in which I believe that control of price might occur.  In a yet-later post, I will consider the question of cost, and brainstorm about possible ways it might be controlled.

More on private higher education globally

I commented recently on "A Tectonic Shift in Global Higher Education", by John Daniel, Asha Kanwar, and Stamenka Uvalic-Trumbic, which describes the inroads that for-profit higher education is making around the world.  I thought I should see what Daniel C. Levy and his excellent  Program for Research on Private Higher Education might have to say on the matter, and discovered that he has a recent working paper entitled An Introductory Global Overview: The Private Fit to Salient Higher Education Tendencies.  This paper concentrates on the non-profit side of private higher ed, but he notes “most of the findings we have identified as characteristics of private higher education are even more striking for the for-profit institutions.”.  I also note that Levy has a number of databases looking at private higher education available on his website.

I will not try to describe all of his findings from this report, but rather suggest that you go to his paper. Instead, I will comment on a few of his findings that I found most interesting and provocative.

Does the future of higher education belong to the for-profit sector?

My friend Joe Duffey very kindly called to my attention a very interesting article that I had somehow missed in Change Magazine.   It is  A Tectonic Shift in Global Higher Education, by John Daniel, Asha Kanwar, and Stamenka Uvalic-Trumbic.  Sir John Daniel is a person of wide experience in higher education, having headed Laurentian University and the Open University, and served as assistant director-general for education at NATO.  When he co-authors an article predicting a “Tectonic Shift” in higher education, it deserves some attention.

The authors point out that the number of higher education students worldwide is growing much more rapidly than was predicted, and will probably reach 120 million by 2010.  Not surprisingly, this growth is centered in developing countries.  For example, China passed the US in number of students enrolled in higher ed in 2005, and Malaysia plans to increase enrollments almost three-fold in the next four years.  This anticipated growth will require resources beyond those that developing countries can afford, and they will have to look for new approaches to the provision of higher education.  The authors point out that “developing countries will soon account for the majority of enrollments in higher education worldwide”, and that therefore the approaches adopted by these countries “will effectively define the global profile of higher education in the 21st century.” Daniel et al argue that the most likely provider - and therefore the group that most impacts the evolving global profile of higher education - will turn out to be for-profit higher education. 

More on International Students in the US

The ACE has just issued an excellent,  hard-hitting brief entitled Students on the Move: the Future of International Students in the United States . The conclusion of the brief says it all:

"The United States continues to receive the largest number of international students. However, recent trends indicate that this position is significantly challenged and may not be sustainable if current trends continue. Although potential demand is high, a redistribution of international students among host countries is underway. This change may be due to perceptions that the United States is unwelcoming, vigorous competition from other countries, and successful national strategies from competitor countries to recruit international students. As the student marketplace becomes increasingly globalized and competition intensifies, it may be difficult for some institutions to begin recruiting international students, if they have not done so already, and for others to substantially increase their numbers,particularly if there is no coordinated support at the national or regional level.

U.S. well-being is increasingly dependent on innovation and competitiveness in the global knowledgebased economy. International students and scholars have historically provided a source of new talent for innovation in the United States. Although the demand for education abroad is increasing, so is the global competition for the “best and brightest.” Declines in the number of international students, especially in the science and engineering fields so critical for innovation, will affect the ability of higher education, business, and government to engage in research and development. Additionally, international students represent an important means for strengthening U.S. cultural diplomacy around the world."

Better rankings - but do we need them?

Kevin Carey, author of the very nice Washington Monthly article Is our students learning?  that I discussed in Educational value added, Sept.1, 2006, has sent me a copy of his new report College Rankings Reformed: The Case for a New Order in Higher Education.  This report nicely fleshes out a number of arguments made in his shorter article, and adds some new recommendations on how to improve rankings.

Carey understandably focuses his discussion on the US News and World Report (USNWR) rankings of colleges.  He argues that one can catagorize what is actually being measured by the various components of these rankings.  When he does this categorization, he find that the USNWR rankings are based 25% on fame, 30% on institutional wealth, 40% on exclusivity, and only 5% on quality! That, indeed, does not seem to be the best way to measure the effectiveness of the colleges or the quality of their programs.

Spellings and transparency

Now that the Spellings Report is out, and the Secretary has announced a plan of action, the pundits and bloggers have made their opinions known (see, e.g. Lombardi’s column in Inside Higher Education and the subsequent comments, or Seery’s column in the Huffington Post and subsequent comments). The comments generally range from slightly neutral to quite negative. They run from discussions regarding the difficulty of measuring the important outputs of higher education, to claims that this report is simply part of a larger Bushian conspiracy against progressive thought.  Along the way are numerous statements that only academics have a right to judge the academy, and that government should stay out of it.

My take is a bit different from those of many commentators, as readers of this blog will recognize.  I believe that the concerns raised by the Report regarding the future global dominance of American higher education are very real, and supported by considerable data (see e.g.Measuring Up 2006:The national report card on higher education , or Education at a Glance 2006).   I believe that comments by various faculty (see blogs mentioned above) that learning in college is the responsibility of the student, not the faculty, are simply wrong, and that there is real joint responsibility for good outcomes. In general, we in the academy have not kept up our end of that joint responsibility because we have ignored research that shows how we could change our teaching to improve learning outcomes significantly. As a result, many of our students are not learning what they need for success in a knowledge economy. (see previous related posts How people learn May 1, 2006, A D- in science education April 14, 2006, How are we doing teaching cognitive skills? July 4, 2006)

Bangalore decides to opt out of the global economy!

According to an article in the  Oct. 2, 2006  Los Angeles Times, the state government of Karnataka, home of Bangalore, has decided that schools will have to cease offering courses in English immediately , and switch to Kannada, a local language.  The government seems to have decided to reject the (presumable unneeded/unwanted) economic growth that Bangalore has seen as a consequence of its rapid English-speaking-enhanced entrance into the global marketplace.  This far-sighted move reminds me of rather similar votes on creationism and intelligent design that occur in this country.  It is good to be reminded that worldwide, politicians are ready to sacrifice the well-being of the whole to pander to the prejudices of the part. 

Whither English?

These are great times for native English speakers and the universities of the English speaking world, right?  The rising tide of globalization has made English the new must-have skill, giving us native English speakers a major advantage, and assuring the Anglo-American universities of a never ending supply of students from around the world who want an English language college degree.  But before you relax and break out the Champagne, you may want to read a new book by David Graddol,  published by the British Council, called English Next.  He suggests that things are not completely as they seem.

Graddol begins with a very interesting analysis of the transition from modernity, in which language played a key role in defining the nation and its identity, to postmodernity, in which the forces of globalization are leading to more complex concepts of individual and national identity, and to new forms of multilingualism. Because so many of the drivers and enablers of globalization have a major “English factor”, English is playing a central role in this transition.  As Graddol notes, “On the one hand, the availability of English as a global language is accelerating globalisation.  On the other, the globalisation is accelerating the use of English.” (p.22).  English has become a key component of the took kit of skills that the postmodern worker must have, and English is being introduced as a required second language in grade schools in many countries of the world, including China.  Since older workers are also upgrading their English skills, Graddol reports that computer models show that within a few years “Nearly a third of the world population will be trying to learn English at the same time.” (!) (p.101)

Harvard forms a task force - improved teaching is in.

The news out of Harvard is that they are setting up a task force to study ways to improve teaching.  And, surprise, it is possible that the timing of the announcement has something to do with the fact that  Derek Bok is back as president. As reported in the Boston Globe, “The task force's chairwoman, Theda Skocpol, dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, said she was inspired to propose the idea by the book that Bok published just months before taking over after Lawrence H. Summers's resignation. The book is called Our Underachieving Colleges: A Candid Look at How Much Students Learn and Why They Should be Learning More.”

I have mentioned Derek Bok’s excellent new book in previous posts (e.g. How are we doing teaching cognitive skills?, July 4, 2006).  It describes a lot of  very humbling data on the effectiveness of teaching in colleges and universities of all sizes and shapes around the country. It also points out that research has shown us ways to make student learning much more effective, but that that research is quite generally ignored by faculty in their teaching.  Would he have written this provocative book had he known he was to resume the presidency of Harvard?  Who knows - but at least it is leading to some introspection at one of our great institutions.

Educational value added

Kevin Carey has written a very provocative piece for the Washington Monthly called Is our students learning?: The measurements elite colleges don’t want you to see.  In it, he addresses the issue of measuring the educational value added by an institution.  Although the article is addressed to the “elite” institutions, it is clear that his points apply to all of higher education.

Carey asks us to imagine reading a “best mutual fund” guide that does not include the bottom line of rate of return.  Most of us would find that an unacceptable guide for investing our retirement funds, but, Carey argues, that is pretty much the kind of guide we use when choosing a college. While acknowledging that finding the bottom line for education is more complex and difficult than finding the bottom line for a mutual fund, Carey makes a number of interesting proposals.