Skip to content
Blog

Category: Higher Ed News

Recent Grads Affirm Value of College Education

Posted on

Mirroring previous findings, the American Council on Education (ACE) released results from a survey of recent college graduates that confirms a high level of satisfaction with the quality and utility of American higher education, but also reflects a growing sense that students and families should take more responsibility for paying for higher education.

Among the findings:

  • 89 percent believed their education was worth it—even after considering the time and money required to attend.
  • 28 percent said that preparing a student for a career was the primary goal of a higher education, while 31 percent said that learning to think critically was the most important role.
  • 40 percent stated that the student and family should be primarily responsible for funding a higher education, followed by the federal and state governments.

Op-Eds Call for Increased Flexibility for Public Higher Ed in WA

Posted on

Three op-eds published recently by local newspapers outline the changing relationship between Washington State and its public higher education institutions. All three op-eds call for the state to increase institutional flexibility in the face of large budget cuts.

The Governor will release her initial state budget for the 09-11 biennium this morning. Stay tuned to the Office of State Relations and the Office of Planning and Budgeting for information about how higher education and the UW are affected.

Americans Believe Higher Ed Drives Economy, Unwilling to Pay More Taxes

Posted on

The results of a Stanford University/AP education poll conducted in September were released yesterday. The representative group of respondents confirmed earlier data on the same topic, mainly that Americans believe strongly that higher education is a vital economic engine and that more Americans should participate in it, but that they are not very willing to pay higher taxes to increase public support for institutions.

Some of the most compelling findings included:

  • 88% believe that higher education has a very large or large impact on the overall prosperity of the country.
  • 79% believe that the US economy would improve if all Americans had at least a two-year degree.
  • 74% believe that the quality of education provided by four year public institutions in their state is excellent or good.
  • Survey respondents primarily blame students and parents for graduation rates, whether high or low.
  • Only 42% favor or somewhat favor raising taxes to increase support for higher education, while 46% oppose raising taxes.

Protests Continue as Britain Approves Sharp Fee Increases

Posted on

The Chronicle reports that British Parliament has approved controversial higher education reforms that are expected to skyrocket college prices by as much as three times current rates (see previous post: Britain Rethinks Higher Ed Financing). Elsewhere, the Chronicle details ongoing student and faculty protests across Europe in response to these and similar proposals in other European countries.

As state budgets in the US continue to face growing deficits, another year of sharp tuition increases may also be likely in this country.

UC Commission Proposes Familiar Strategies for Cutting Costs

Posted on

The University of California Commission on the Future recently released its final report addressing potential solutions for keeping public higher education in California vibrant in the face of declining resources.

A group that included regents, administrators, faculty and students, the Commission’s 50 page report recommended a host of actions for UC to consider, including:

  • Expand on the somewhat controversial UC Online Instruction Pilot Project
  • Develop and offer three year degree programs where feasible
  • Increase nonresident student enrollment from 6% to 10% to generate additional tuition revenue
  • Ease the community college student transfer process

The Commission also acknowledged that in extreme financial circumstances the UC system might need to consider raising both tuition and nonresident enrollment even more sharply, and consider decreasing resident enrollment and/or financial aid.

The Commission rejected other popular proposals such as differentiated tuition by major or class status, and the practice of cohort tuition pricing.

The UC Commission’s recommendations are familiar to anyone keeping up with current discourse on higher education reforms. While the recommendations may have considerable merit, none constitute the re-imagining recently proposed by one of UC’s own, John Aubrey Douglass.

Federal Scrutiny of For-Profit Colleges Turns to Recruitment of Veterans

Posted on

Senator Tom Harkin, Chairman of the US Senate HELP Committee, has released another report on the practices of the for-profit higher education industry, this time focusing on whether or not such institutions are taking advantage of US veterans in an effort to capture newly increased GI Bill education benefits (read our earlier posts on this issue: Senator Tom Harkin and the HELP Committee Continue to Investigate For-Profit Colleges, and  Under Federal Fire, For-Profit College Point Finger at Publics).

The New York Times published Wednesday a detailed article on this topic, Profits and Scrutiny for Colleges Courting Veterans, that included a host of primary source documents.

Senator Harkin has moved a hearing on the topic from early December to a yet to be determined day in early 2011. Because the Senate will remain in Democratic control, Harkin will continue as Chairman of the HELP Committee and is expected to carry forward his investigation of this rapidly expanding sector of higher education, which relies almost entirely on federal student aid dollars to generate large profits for shareholders while many students drop out  and face high levels of education loan debt. Some speculate that recent Republican gains in the Senate and House may hamper the likelihood of passing strong regulatory legislation in the coming year.

Meanwhile, the US Department of Education is in the process of implementing new regulatory rules aimed at tightening oversight on the sector (see previous post: New Federal Higher Ed Regulation Published Today).

We will continue to monitor this ongoing story, as well as some calls for the federal government to extend their scrutiny to traditional institutions.

Loss of Federal Stimulus Funds About to Hit State Budgets Hard

Posted on

The National Conference of State Legislatures released their November 2010 State Budget Update today. While the report notes that many states are experiencing some level of stabilization in revenue collections, and beginning to be more optimistic  about the general revenue outlook, they are at the same time facing unprecedented pressures on the demand for services such as healthcare and education, and also facing the withdrawal of the federal stimulus funding that has been critical in mitigating severe budget cuts for the last two years. Referred to as an impending ‘funding cliff’, the ramifications of the loss of federal fiscal support are expected to translate into painful budget cuts in states across the country starting in fiscal year 2012.

Inside Higher Ed provides some additional links to reports that echo these same facts. Meanwhile, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities continues to update their own report on state budget cuts.

Federal Maintenance of Effort Requirement Makes State Financial Aid Programs Vulnerable

Posted on

Both the American Recovery Act (ARRA) of 2009 and the 2010 Education Jobs Fund provided federal funding for education. In exchange for accepting federal funds, both fiscal relief vehicles came with Maintenance of Effort (MOE) provisions requiring states to continue financial support for higher education institutions at certain minimum levels. However, some forms of state support, such as capital projects, financial aid, and research support are exempt from MOE calculations.

The UW received ARRA funding in the state budget in the 2010 fiscal year. As a result, MOE requirements from both federal actions helped protect higher education funding in Washington State from what may have been even deeper budget cuts. Last year, the State reduced higher education spending down to the federally-required MOE floor for fiscal year 2011. Federal MOE requirements expire after FY 2011.

Due to a state budget deficit that continues to grow, the Governor has called a special session to achieve another round of mid-year budget cuts for the current fiscal year. If the state further reduces funding for higher education, it must choose to violate the federal MOE mandate, or reduce state support for higher education activities exempt from federal MOE, primarily the State Need Grant (SNG), Washington’s need-based financial aid funding program.

In her proposed special session cuts for FY 2011, the Governor chose the latter, recommending that the state delay $76 million of SNG funding until July 1, 2011 (start of FY 2012), with institutions temporarily funding the gap to protect students. The UW’s share of this funding shortfall would be $15 million. While the Governor’s proposal assumes reimbursement on the first day of the new fiscal year, delay of this payment would require the University to cut $15 million to balance its current FY 2011 budget. In addition, given the $5.7 billion state deficit that remains for the upcoming 2011-13 biennial budget, it is not at all certain that this delayed payment would be made to institutions in 2012, when the federal maintenance of effort provision will no longer be in effect.

Any option that reduces or delays funding for higher education will impact University of Washington faculty, staff and students. The Office of State Relations and the Office of Planning and Budgeting will work hard to keep the UW community up to date on special session, and important state budget related news in the coming days.

California Projects Annual Deficits of $20b Through 2016

Posted on

A new report from California’s non-partisan Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO), California’s Fiscal Outlook, details current California state budget projections through at least 2016. The LAO projects that CA will have to solve at least a $25.4 billion deficit for 2011-12, and will continue to face budget gaps of at least $20 billion per year through 2015-16.

While analysts are clear that doomsday scenarios threatening the collapse and/or bankruptcy of the state are not realistic, they do emphasize the importance of lawmakers and citizens making painful choices now to avoid placing a massive burden on future generations of Californians. The LAO recommends a multi-year approach to addressing the state’s structural deficits, including making difficult choices on increasing revenue while making additional spending cuts. Detailed estimates are provided for each major area of government spending– see pages 29-30 for higher education.

California is unique in many ways, but the choices facing the state and its citizens are, though perhaps grander in scale, very similar to those being faced by states across the country, including Washington.

APLU Releases Regional Meetings Report

Posted on

In advance of the 123rd annual meeting in Dallas on November 14, The Association of Public and Land-Grant Universities (APLU) has released the final report resulting from five regional meetings to discuss key concerns about the future of public research universities, one of which took place at UW Seattle on April 26, 2010.

The report, Ensuring Public Research Universities Remain Vital, outlines the important contributions that public research institutions like the UW make to knowledge, society and the economy. The report also reaffirms the need for institutions to remain committed to their public mission of providing world class education that is affordable and accessible, and for the states to remain committed to facilitating that mission by restoring and protecting the public investment in higher education.

Additionally, the report addresses ways that the federal government can help keep US public research institutions vital. First, by reforming indirect cost reimbursement rate setting policies and regulations associated with federal research grants. Second, by exploring ways that the federal government can partner with institutions to provide operating support, including endowed faculty chairs, funding for doctoral trainees, and new targeted research funding.