Higher education system

Higher education must not leave working families behind

Andy Van Kleunen

By: Andy Van Kleunen.

Why short-term training programs make sense for both careers and budgets

 

The promise of education in America is a promise of opportunity. A promise that education — especially higher education — can offer a pathway to the middle class and an opportunity to build a successful life for yourself, your children and your grandchildren.

The unfortunate reality, though, is that our higher education system isn’t delivering on that promise of opportunity for far too many families, particularly those who choose to pursue career-focused learning in fields that require less than a four-year degree. A major barrier is the bias against working students in our current federal financial aid system.

The conventional view of a college student is someone who just graduated from high school, who is on the verge of turning 18 and moving to a college campus to pursue a full-time, four-year degree. Today’s students, however, tend to be older — nearly 7.6 millioncollege students in 2018 were 25 years or older. And of the 12.1 million students enrolled in community colleges in 2015-16, about 900,000 were 40 or older.

Many are parents — more than one in five, with nearly 4 million raising children while in college. The majority are already in the labor market. Sixty-two percent of all community college students attend on a part-time basis, and nearly three-quarters of them are working either full- or part-time.

All of this means that these students are pursuing higher education while balancing work and family obligations for the explicit purpose of climbing the ladder to prosperity in the job market.

Federal education funding, such as Pell Grants, primarily supports traditional, full-time students pursuing degree programs, leaving out working families who enroll in short-term job training programs — that is, courses that are connected to a local industry, a job and higher wages, but that may not meet the Pell-eligible standard of 600 clock hours set 40 years ago.

The labor market challenges that today’s working families face are dramatically different from what they were four decades ago. Back in 1973, only 28 percent of jobs required postsecondary education or training, which meant that entering the higher education system to acquire additional skills to grow in a career wasn’t a necessity for most workers.

Today, a majority of U.S. jobs require some form of postsecondary education or training. Not to mention the nearly two-thirds of jobs in the United States that are expected to change significantly in the coming years because of new technologies.

That’s why short-term training programs, particularly at community and technical colleges, are expanding today. Millions of workers are seeking non-degree credentials that teach skills they need to keep pace with a rapidly changing economy. It’s why a clear majority of Americans — 82 percent — wish to see more classes that teach job and career skills.

If we truly want to fulfill the promise of opportunity in our higher education system, it’s only fair that we extend federal financial aid to working students who choose to pursue skills training, just as we do to “traditional” students seeking four-year college degrees. This idea is supported by 86 percent of Americans.

The good news is that two lawmakers in Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Rob Portman (R-OH), co-chairs of the Senate Career and Technical Education Caucus — have introduced legislation to address this issue: the JOBS Act, which would extend Pell Grants to high-quality short-term programs of at least 150 clock hours of instructional time over a period of eight weeks.

To be clear, federal financial aid for working students isn’t a silver bullet. It’s a necessary — but not sufficient — step toward meeting the needs of working families. It’s not enough simply to provide access to affordable skills training programs. We must also ensure that students get the support they need to succeed in and complete those programs. That means providing more dedicated federal funding for support services — like child care, transportation and comprehensive career counseling — which tend to be obstacles for working students.

More federal support is also needed to sustain existing partnerships between local businesses and community and technical colleges. Investing in these partnerships would help ensure that local training prepares workers for well-compensated local jobs.

Finally, students deserve access to secure, transparent and easily accessible data that lets them know exactly what educational institutions and training programs will give them the best return on their investment. College is the biggest financial investment that most students make aside from buying a home. They have a right to more information about student outcomes, including data on enrollment, completion and post-college success across colleges and programs.

These are a few of the meaningful solutions that we can pursue to modernize our higher education system and help America fulfill its promise of opportunity for all students, not just those pursuing four-year degrees.

Source of the article: https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-higher-education-families/

Comparte este contenido:
Leer más »

Australia should start planning for universal tertiary education

Noticias

Oceania/ Australia/ 19.03.2019/ Source: theconversation.com.

Australia is often characterised as having a mass higher education system. In fact, it could be called near-universal. According to the 2016 Census, 56% of Australians aged 15 years and over – 9.6 million people – hold a post-school qualification, up from 46% in 2006.

Universal education does not mean every Australian should attain a higher education or tertiary qualification. It means every Australian should be given the opportunity to get one if they want.

The distinction between “mass” and “universal” is not just an academic one. Viewing higher and tertiary education as universal could help an incoming government better design policy. All Australians need to be prepared for, informed about and able to make a choice that is right for them about whether or not to pursue post-school education.

Needs-based funding of schools

If the government could do one thing to improve post-school education outcomes, it needs to happen in our primary and high schools. Prior academic achievement is one of the main predictors of higher education aspiration and success. In some studies it’s the main factor.

Needs-based funding puts more money into education. In particular, it puts more money into the schools and students who need it most.

The Gillard-led Labor government recognised the importance of this approach by adopting a needs-based school funding model. The Turnbull-led Coalition government reaffirmed this commitment, with the specific aim of helping under-achieving students focus on improvement.

This coming election, look closely at what positions the Coalition and Labor take on needs-based school funding. Both have signed up in principle, but there should be a clear commitment on how much extra money will be provided. This is not the same as simply spending more money to maintain standards in an ever-expanding system.

There also needs to be a clear explanation of how that money will be spread around, to ensure those furthest behind get the resources they need to catch up.

It’s not university or TAFE

Too many Australians – and successive governments – think in terms of students having to make a choice between university or vocational studies or neither. Tertiary education policy shouldn’t be seen this way.

For many people, the false trichotomy of degree-or-trade-or-job is locked in way too early by social and family expectations, and curriculum choices. Greater flexibility in how lifelong education is understood and explained (in terms of pathways and options) needs to be developed at the policy level.

This isn’t about merging the vocational and higher education sectors. That is neither necessary nor desirable. All tertiary education providers play a part in delivering lifelong education opportunities.

What is needed is more cooperation between state and federal governments. They need to be able to coordinate on how these various organisations will be funded and how students will be financially supported.

In many cases, there are fewer financial barriers to doing a university degree than a vocational course. This can lead some students to make a choice that seems right for them, but over the long term doesn’t work out.

The good news is all the pieces are there – even if they don’t quite fit together yet. The Coalition government has made great strides in how students can access loans for vocational courses. But the VET fee capmeans some vocational courses still result in the student having to cover the excess up front, which is not the case for higher education degrees.

For example, an Australian student studying a Diploma of Business in 2019 would have a loan cap of just over A$5,000. They would have to cover the rest of the cost of the course. Depending on the provider, this could be several thousand more.

If the same student chose to study a Bachelor of Business at a university, they would have access to a loan for the full amount, which would be more than A$30,000 for the entire degree.

Against this, students can be more sure they’re getting what they pay for from universities than from vocational education providers. The Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency is responsible for the registration and quality oversight of all higher education providers, public and private.

The vocational training sector could benefit from a similarly national and coordinated approach to quality assurance. Given there are more than 5,000 vocational providers, a more realistic approach might be to provide a similar oversight (or even expand TEQSA) to cover all courses offered by the public TAFES, to begin with.

Whoever forms the next government needs to finish the job of creating a more unified structure of financial support and pathway information. It should allow students to think first and foremost about what skills and knowledge are right for them and not about what the institution they’re going to or the degree they’re going to do is called.

Making Australian higher education look more like, well, Australia

The foundation of the Australian higher education system is built on two broad principles. The first is that they exist for the betterment of the nation. The second is that the doors of universities and other higher education institutions are open to everyone. This is actually written into the founding acts of our oldest universities.

The journey towards realising the second principle has been long, rocky and as yet uncompleted. Too many groups of students still remain under-represented. These include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, people with disability, those living in regional areas and those from lower socioeconomic backgrounds.

Progress has been made and much of the big policy picture has been painted. In particular, more institutions have been created to better meet demand, a demand-driven system of funding has been introduced so there is federal funding for each student place, and an income-contingent loan scheme has been provided to remove many of the upfront financial barriers to accessing university.

But finishing the picture requires a final push. Committing to a sustainable, needs-based funding of school education and harmonising the support structure for vocational and higher education would go a long way towards achieving this goal. It may be enough, but if not there is another thing that would work – quotas.

Quotas are contentious, as recent political debate shows. It’s likely the concern would be raised that quotas would ignore the very different institutional profiles that are in play. For example, a regionally based university is going to find it easier to recruit regional students than one in a CBD.

One solution would be to apply the quota at the sector level, rather than the institutional level. The government could then enforce the quotas in a number of ways. It could use performance-based funding to reward the universities doing the heavy lifting. Or it could allow the universities to virtually trade between themselves.

For example, a university with a below-average enrolment of regional students could “purchase” the excess from a university with an above-average enrolment. The students would not actually move institution, but the money would. This would mean the university with the extra enrolments would receive additional financial support to help with the costs associated with supporting these students.

 

Source of the notice: https://theconversation.com/australia-should-start-planning-for-universal-tertiary-education-110783

Comparte este contenido:
Leer más »

China to establish first nuclear research university

Noticias

Asia/China/universityworld

Resumen: China establecerá la primera universidad nacional dedicada a la investigación nuclear, la capacitación y el intercambio académico con el apoyo del desarrollador estatal de energía nuclear del país, haciéndose eco de la apremiante necesidad de talento especializado.  China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), el conglomerado líder que supervisa todos los programas nucleares militares y civiles de China, invertirá y construirá la Universidad de Tecnología Nuclear de China en Tianjin, en el noreste de China, anunció la corporación la semana pasada.  Como parte de un acuerdo estratégico entre la CNNC y el gobierno municipal de Tianjin, la nueva universidad funcionará como base para la capacitación técnica, los programas de posgrado y doctorado, así como para la investigación y el desarrollo de tecnología básica. Según el anuncio, también se está creando una base de desarrollo industrial de alta gama.

China will establish the first national university dedicated to nuclear research, training and academic exchange with support from the country’s state-owned nuclear power developer, echoing a pressing need for specialised talent.

China National Nuclear Corporation (CNNC), the leading conglomerate that oversees all of China’s military and civilian nuclear programmes, will invest in and build the China Nuclear Technology University in Tianjin in China’s Northeast, the corporation announced last week.

As part of a strategic agreement between the CNNC and the Tianjin municipal government, the new university will function as a base for skills training, postgraduate and PhD programmes, as well as core technology research and development. A high-end industry development base is also in the making, according to the announcement.

China is actively trying to fill a talent gap in nuclear technology as it rolls out dozens of reactor units and power plants, expected to come online within the next few years. According to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, China iswell on course to lead the world in nuclear power deployment, but Chinese experts say universities and colleges are now struggling to keep up with a rapidly rising demand for labour.

«China has many nuclear power projects and will continue to develop, which has led to a severe shortage of nuclear talent in power plant design, engineering construction, operations and security control,» says Wan Gang, director of the China Institute of Atomic Energy.

Earlier this year, Wan had urged that a nuclear tech university be built at the national level and by international standards, because existing programmes can only satisfy “less than half” of the demand for talent from the national developer.

“In 2016, only 20.29% of the 2,300 graduates CNNC hired majored in nuclear-related courses,” Wan said.

China has outlined an ambitious target for installed nuclear capacity in its blueprint for 2016-20, also known as the 13th Five-Year Plan. Many Chinese universities now offer nuclear technology related programmes, including Tsinghua University, Peking University and the University of Science and Technology of China.

Tsinghua University has the biggest nuclear research capacity among Chinese universities and colleges with a comprehensive research and development centre, the Institute of Nuclear and New Energy Technology, and three nuclear reactors. The institute now has about 500 faculty members and over 200 graduate students, according to Tsinghua University.

Institutions also recruit as part of the Thousand Talents Program, which lures top Chinese and foreign experts to scientific research and innovation in Chinese academia. However, international recruitment for nuclear programmes is difficult as the subject is “sensitive in nature”, says a report by CNNC highlighting talent cultivation on campus.

A lack of qualified and well-trained nuclear labour can come with dire consequences wherever safety is concerned. In 2016, for example, the National Nuclear Safety Administration made public 16 safety failures in nuclear plants nationwide, and all of them were caused by mistakes made by staff members.

«Not enough qualified personnel is threatening nuclear power security,” says Wang Yinan, a researcher at the State Council’s Development Research Center.

Experts say an estimated 30,000 to 40,000 additional nuclear professionals are needed in China within the next decade, when the nation could only produce “a few hundred” nuclear-major graduates every year.

Fuente: http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20180628130750547

Imagen tomada de: https://www.straitstimes.com/sites/default/files/articles/2018/06/21/bp_cnnc_210618_74.jpg

Comparte este contenido:
Leer más »

KENYA Falling student numbers – A shift in the High Education landscape

Noticias

Africa/Kenia/.universityworldnews.com

Resumen: Los inversores privados y el gobierno de Kenia están mirando millones de dólares en pérdidas ya que varias universidades registran una caída en el número de estudiantes, dejando a las universidades con una capacidad subutilizada significativa. Los datos de la encuesta publicados por el Ministerio de Educación del país recientemente indican que la mayoría de las universidades están luchando para atraer a los estudiantes a tomar algunos cursos bajo el programa regular financiado por el estado. Para empeorar las cosas, todos los estudiantes que se inscribieron anteriormente para los lucrativos cursos de auto patrocinado ahora están siendo absorbidos por el programa regular. Desde el año pasado, el número de candidatos exitosos que se gradúan de las escuelas secundarias ha disminuido sustancialmente después de que el gobierno endureció las reglas de examen para eliminar a miles de tramposos que se habían beneficiado a lo largo de los años de un sistema de supervisión descuidado. En términos de una directiva del gobierno emitida a comienzos de este año, las universidades públicas deben absorber directamente a todos los que abandonan la escuela secundaria y obtienen una calificación promedio de C + y superior. Los que están por debajo del límite ya no podrán inscribirse en los grados. Esto es una desviación del pasado cuando tenían la opción de ingresar a las universidades como estudiantes con financiación privada.

Private investors and the Kenyan government are staring at millions of dollars in losses as several universities record falling student numbers, leaving universities with significant underutilised capacity.

Survey data released by the country’s Ministry of Education recently indicate that a majority of universities are struggling to attract students to take up some courses under the state-funded regular programme. To make matters worse, all the students previously enrolling for the lucrative self-sponsored courses are now being absorbed under the regular programme.

Since last year, the number of successful candidates graduating from secondary schools has fallen substantially after the government tightened examination rules to weed out thousands of cheaters who had over the years taken advantage of a sloppy monitoring system.

In terms of a government directive issued at the beginning of this year, public universities are to directly absorb all secondary school leavers who score a mean grade of C+ and above. Those below the cut-off will no longer be allowed to enrol for degrees. This is a departure from the past when they had the option of entering universities as privately-funded students.

The state, through the sector regulator the Commission for University Education, also barred universities from offering bridging courses, often taken by students who lacked sufficiently high grades to qualify for degree courses.

The changes have significantly drained universities of potential students, raising questions over the viability of costly expansion projects embraced by several higher education institutions over the past few years.

Statistics show that slightly fewer than 70,000 students qualified to join universities this year after attaining the requisite grades in the 2017 secondary examinations. Previously, at least half of these students were joining universities under the self-sponsored programmes while an equal number would be enrolled for regular courses. The number of those joining public universities is at least 18,000 lower than in 2017.

Of the qualified candidates, only 62,851 have expressed an interest in joining universities this year, which suggests that over 7,000 students have opted not to enrol in any of the available courses.

Data released recently by the Kenya Universities and Colleges Central Placement Service (KUCCPS) – the body that places qualified students in universities – show that universities had at least 132,686 slots available in 2018.

According to the data, one private university that had declared capacity for 50 students failed to attract a single one; another institution, which expressed interest in admitting at least 400 students, only received eight applicants; one of the newly-established constituent colleges, formed under the older public universities, attracted only four students in total; and a total of 14 of the universities vying for the available students attracted under 50 students.

Educationists are justifiably concerned about the sustainability of Kenya’s higher education system and predict it is set for a major restructuring.

“Many universities face a bleak future because they cannot attract students and may not survive if the trend continues. Even those that do survive will have to scrap several courses that have turned out to be unpopular and irrelevant,” said David Aduda, a Nairobi-based educationist.

 “What is emerging is that university education was built on quick sand. The exponential growth witnessed in the past 20 years was a mirage. It was not based on fundamentals. Now the chips are falling in place and the reality is that the country may not require so many universities after all,” he wrote in a blog in the leading Daily Nation newspaper.

The situation was not entirely unforeseen. Recently, as reported by University World News, government asked for a policy review that will see the rationalisation of institutions. In terms of the review, Education Cabinet Secretary Amina Mohamed directed the commission to justify the existence of the 74 universities in the country and asked all universities to defend their academic programmes and provide evidence of staffing levels.

“In the recent past, the quality of university education in Kenya has been under scrutiny, attracting great public attention. The time has come for drastic and bold steps to be taken to revive the university education sub-sector. This may be a painful, but inevitable, process for the growth and development of the sub-sector,” said Mohamed in March.

“There have been complaints from the public that are indicative of the failure of universities to provide a conducive learning environment for students to excel in their fields of study, produce graduates who have the knowledge, skills, attitudes and competencies needed for the world of work; and drive the national development agenda,” she said.

The data from the KUCCPS paints a dire picture in respect of course choices. There is growing disinterest in skills that were previously identified as key drivers of the county’s economic agenda. In most of the universities, courses related to agriculture, horticulture, food science and technology and environmental studies received the lowest number of applicants. There was also a general neglect of courses in social sciences.

The changing dynamics in the higher education sector is beginning to raise questions over the millions of dollars being pumped into universities annually.

For the coming financial year which begins in July, the National Treasury has allocated US$1.03 billion to the institutions of higher learning, up from US$961 million in the current fiscal year. This is the first time the allocation has crossed the billion dollar mark, raising hopes of increased funding in the coming years.

However, the amount is US$300 million lower than the amount the universities requested, according to budget documents released by the government. Funding is projected to rise to US$1.3 billion by 2020. Treasury, which funds a huge part of the public universities’ budgets, has over the years either cut allocations or failed to meet institutions’ needs.

Analysts believe that the declining student numbers will discourage investors who were previously falling over each other for opportunities in the sector. Kenya is seeking over US$200 million from foreign and local private investors to help build hostels in three public universities this year. The Treasury has called for potential bidders to present proposals to add 30,000 extra bed spaces across three of the country’s institutions: South Eastern Kenya University, Embu University College and Moi University.

For now, only time will tell the direction the country’s higher education sector will take.

Fuente: http://www.universityworldnews.com/article.php?story=20180502112909878
Imagen tomada de: http://otrasvoceseneducacion.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/FORM-1-STUDENTS-ARRIVE-1.jpg
Comparte este contenido:
Leer más »