CO Financial Aid Could Be Reduced by 30% 2012-2013

In a recent article published by Education News Colorado, higher education in Colorado could be facing a $50-$100 million budget cut in 2012-2013. At a recent CDHE meeting, it was stated that approximately 30% of Colorado’s financial aid funding could be cut. According to Joe Garcia, Lt. Governor and Director of the state Department of Education, these potential financial aid cuts could be “significant and regrettable” and that “the state need-based aid is a relatively small pot.” This is somewhat ironic given that Colorado is the 12^th richest state in the US, Coloradans rank 49^th in taxes paid (as per percentage of income), and Colorado ranks 48^th in the US for spending in higher education.

Tuition already supplies 75% of the colleges and universities revenue. What will this mean for colleges and universities in 2012-2013? I suspect that if these budget cuts come to fruition, we will all be experiencing another tuition increase. What does this mean for future students in Colorado? Furthermore, what does this mean for community colleges in Colorado that heavily rely on financial aid for reduced tuition costs for their students?

Proposition 103 could be what Colorado needs to be help band-aid the immediate need. According to this article, proposition 103 provisions and revenue use are as follows:

Provisions

· State income tax rate would rise to 5 percent from 4.63 percent

· State sales tax rate would go to 3 percent from 2.9 percent

· New rates are same as those in effect in 1999

· Higher rates would end in 2017

Revenue use

· Proposition would raise an estimated $3 billion over five years

· Additional revenue could be spent only on preschool programs, K-12 schools and state colleges and universities

· Legislature would decide how to split revenues

· Spending would have to be in addition to levels of 2011-12

CCHE is official endorsing proposition 103 due the critical predicament Colorado faces with funding in education. Neither the governor nor lieutenant governor have stated that they are backing proposition 103 and many republicans have stated that they cannot support any measures to increase taxes. Proposition 103 will only allow 5 years of tax increases. What happens after the 5 years is over? We will be back to the drawing board on this issue and trying to find another way to fix education in Colorado.

The potential budget cuts in Colorado’s education are worrisome. As someone who works in a community college, for the past 2 or 3 years we have come to depend on enrollment growths to help subsidize our budget needs (not a good dependency for obvious reasons). According to a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education, after record growth, community colleges are beginning to face a decline in enrollment, which in combination with financial aid cuts, could be devastating for the institutions and for the students who have been seeking out affordable educational options. Community colleges in CO could be facing the perfect storm. As one of the most educated and richest states in the country, it blows me away that taxpayers are so non-supportive of education in Colorado. If I were a potential student looking at colleges to attend, I would seriously consider attending a college or university in Colorado. State support, including merit support for students, should be a large consideration for potential students. Taxpayers need to consider what they are doing to the future Coloradan generations.

Basics of Supply and Demand in Job Markets and American Higher Education Majors

Think back, if you will, to the decision to choose your undergraduate major. What were the factors that influenced your decision? Interest? Demand for the field? Salary? To please your adviser or parents?

Now, reflect on what your experiences were upon the last few months prior to graduate with this degree. Were you looking at entry-level jobs? Career tracks? Graduate school? Or something that had nothing to do with your major? Was where you ended up different than expected?


An interesting article was posted in the Chronicle of Higher Education today. It is titled, "High Demand for Science Graduates Enables Them to Pick Their Jobs, Report Says." What caught my attention initially was the title. Specifically, the piece suggesting "freedom" in the job market upon graduation. How wonderful would that be!?

The article discusses a current trend in science and engineering majors in the United States. More than half of the graduates from these programs (specially, native-U.S. born students), are taking positions in other fields...by choice, not because of economic hardships, higher requirements for entry-level positions, low demand, low position availabilities, or anything related to being "forced" into another field. Fewer than half of students are making the decision to enter a science or engineering position after graduation.

What is even more interesting to me is the salary component of this choice. The article explains that science careers are paying more money for Bachelor's level employees than Master's level non-science areas. In turn, salaries are higher for post-Bachelor degree experience for science and engineering students, than others earning a Doctorate degree in a non-science field.

So, why are students jumping ship with so much promise in store? The article attributes this to the traditional "American" view of science careers as being "too socially isolating," and instead turn to jobs in health care, sales, and marketing. Students who tend to stretch their education in science into a similar career tend to be non-English speaking, ESL, or international students.

So, does this mean we are a country who complains about money-promising occupations lacking in "social value," yet also we complain about a poor job market? I'm obviously not going to speak for the nation, but I see higher educators as providing a "do what you are interested in" mentality while giving much less attention to the other side of the equal sign--what's out there for our graduates from these programs?

I could list at least 20 classmates from my high school class who went to college and chose their major quickly--K-12 education. When asked why, it was a simple answer, "Because I want to work with kids." While seemingly valid and admirable at the time, I can say that at least half of these people are now working in an unrelated field, but for the opposite reason as the article above stated. They just can't find a job!

This leads me to a broader question. Are we having these conversations with students in higher education? Beyond basic, "What do you want to do when you grow up?" and into "What do you know about this field or that field?" and "What kind of salaries are you looking to obtain within you first year, 10 years, and beyond?"

These questions can strike students as "beyond their scope" or difficult to answer, but my question is why are we hesitant in asking students what they already know about the future they're choosing before they go through 2-4 years of specific education to get there?

The Princeton Review lists it's currently viewed "Top 10 College Majors" online. Before going into the listings, in the introductory paragraph, it states, "Be warned that these are not necessarily the degrees that garner the most demand in the job market." While the intent behind this statement was explained to be to provide a "wide range of skills," I still struggle with this concept. Mostly, I react to the major collecting the #2 vote: psychology. I was a psychology major. I chose my major because I had taken a high school psychology class, and it interested me. As I progressed through the rigorous program, at no point did anyone tell me what I was looking at in terms of a career as a "psych major." Wide range of skills--absolutely. Employment opportunities in the field of psychology with a BA--slim to none.



Not a single one of my colleagues (that I keep in contact with) in my undergraduate psychology program works in the field of mental health, besides myself. Why me? I went to graduate school. Did anyone at my undergraduate university talk to me about graduate school when I was choosing a major? No. Not one. After I received my Master's degree, did anyone talk to me about out of state licensure or market demands for school counselors? No. Not one. Maybe that was my job to ask, but how much of this should be talked about by my educators?

I feel that as employees in the field of higher education, we are not (as a nation), providing students (and parents for that matter) with the practical knowledge, understanding, and thorough discussion about major and career choice. Perhaps we are mostly interested in graduation rates, GPA, and pushing students through and out of remedial programs. Maybe we're just not being fully mindful of what we're preparing students to encounter after they receive their diploma. Is that no longer our business? Well, I believe it should be.

Kylie

MULTIRACIAL IDENTIFICATION IS HERE

Here’s a spin on changing numbers how about adding multiracial to the equation. Beginning last year, the Department of Education has required colleges and universities to comply with a federal edict to collect more information of students regarding multiracial identity. Students now have the option to select more than one type of race or ethnicity identification. Consequently, it has become easier for students to identify as multiracial and the number of multiracial applicants has increased significantly. To the extent that institutions are dealing with issues such as whom are they more inclined to accept to diversify their campus. So in terms of adding diversity, which student is more preferable, the student that is applying as a black and Latino or the student applying as white and Vietnamese?

Other issues that have risen are, would the growth of multiracial applicants assist in dissolving affirmative action? Which for one reason was created to help people of color enter institutions of higher education that have historically discriminated against them. For example, a student with one black parent and one white parent is considered to be more affluent than the student with two black parents, so colleges could be more inclined to admit the multiracial student because he or she would need less financial aid, but still be abiding by affirmative action guidelines. There are many more questions still to be answered such as how do institutions include multiracial students, but to the extent of not excluding other disadvantaged groups for establishing an egalitarian society? And, should students be limited to checking the box of their parents’ ethnicity or can they extend it to their grandparents? Meanwhile, admissions directors need to be on the look out for those applicants who increase their status of one ethnicity to multiple ethnicities just for sake of college acceptance.

Some applicants abuse the resources available to them such as a high school college counselor writing an essay for them; however, the freedom to select more than one race is up to the student. For applicants whose test scores and AP courses seem very similar, the decision may come down to the ethnicity of an applicant regarding who will be admitted. Chances are the admissions officers are going to admit the student of color before the white student according to vice president of enrollment at Rice University in Houston, Chris Munoz. Admissions officers note the value students of color bring to the campus environment with their rich cultural heritage and various backgrounds—their peers have an opportunity to gain a global perspective. Rice University, who ended its segregation in the late 1960s, has been on a mission to comprise itself as a diverse institution. Rice University has been offering the multiracial category for sometime now, that in the past five years the number of applicants who identify themselves as multiracial has gone from 8 to 564. The article noted that nationally about 3 percent of Americans identify as mixed-race.

Ten years ago at Emory University in Atlanta, students did not have the option to select more than one ethnicity, so for a student who is African American and white or a student who is Latino and African American the admissions office had no choice but to consider the student black. Now, students can feel comfortable to include both ethnicities. Furthermore, high school college counselors advise students to check multiple boxes if they are not sure what to put down if they are of mixed race. What’s more, is currently there is no standard definition in higher education of what it means to be mixed race. I’m sure this is just the beginning of multi-complex issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/14/us/14admissions.html?ref=us

Words Hurt! ~Changing the way we speak

Language is powerful. Words allow us to work/connect, write stories, convey history, educate, become educated and much more. Words also have the ability to create prejudice, disrespect, distance, and hatred between us and others. Cultures seems to have a way of transforming the original meaning of words into phrases conveying very different messages than what was originally intended. Sometimes these phrases can be used intentionally to disrespect or degrade another. Often times, however, these phrases can be used out of ignorance, perhaps unintentionally hurting another. Even those who use words as a way to poke fun or "mess around" with another can attempt to soften the statement by following the phrase with "I'm kidding!" However, what is done is done. There are many phrases or words that we have misconstrued overtime and are commonly used. I often hear students saying things like "That is so gay" or "That is retarded." Students say these phrases without even considering the literal meaning and how incredibly hurtful they can be.

An article on the Chronicle of Higher Education discussed the use of "anti-gay" language often used in the "ultra-macho" world of professional football. The article commends a NFL fan website moderator for speaking out against hurtful attacks. Unfortunately, these personal attacks happen in many other realms as well.

In 2007, Don Imus made racially charged comments about the Rutgers Women's basketball team. In response to this incident, Maya Angelou spoke about the vulgarity that Don Imus, and others, use. She described feeling sorry for Mr. Imus, herself, her grandchild, and the world and also sent a powerful message that incidences like these give us all a chance to talk and get to know one another as humans. In another video also highlighting Maya Angelou eloquently describing the power of words. She says: "You must be careful about the words you use...They are things and they are a part of you."

When thinking of our positions within each of our institutions, we have influence on co-workers and students whether we know it or not. We must analyze how we are using words. How does your use of words impact, inspire, hurt or degrade others? This topic is extremely important in higher education for numerous reasons. As practitioners in higher education we must be aware of what we say and the meaning our words hold as we are not only models for our students, we are also educating our students. The first step each of us can take is to reduce then eliminate the ignorant phrases we use. The second, and possibly the most powerful step we can take is to educate those around us. It takes courage to speak up and go against the grain and stop others when we witness them saying hurtful phrases, unintentionally or not. I believe most people do not intend to hurt others, rather they do not step back and fully consider what their words actually mean and how hurtful they can be to another. Because most are generally caring, I believe by continuously deconstructing such messages with students will lead to a change in the way they speak. Do students really understand that when they say "That is so gay" that they are placing a value or prejudice on homosexual people? We can help raise this awareness.

We are, attempt to, or want to be inclusive of all individuals but how do the words we use match our mission?

Readings

If you have not received the readings for tomorrow evening please let me know immediately so I may send them to you. It is critical for tomorrow's class that all students have completed them.

Endowment Money a New Necessity?

The Recent article in the Chronicle Top Fund-Raising Organizations Expect an Uptick in Giving but Still Face Struggles really made me think about institutional funding due to the current economic state and what the future holds for institutions, especially public colleges and universities. The article explained that of the 400 non-profit organizations that appear on the The Chronicle of Philanthropy's ranking, 112 of them are institutions of higher education. In 2010, donations to the 400 organizations rose 2.5 percent on average while institutions of higher education saw a loss of one percent. The groups expect donations to go up slightly in 2011. What really started me thinking about the change in higher education funding was when the article spoke about Amherst College which started a large fund-raising campaign and raised $60 million in 2010, a $31 million increase since 2007.

I’ve been part of several conversations in the last few months about institution’s endowments and how the money they receive through donations affects rankings, recruitment, scholarship money, etc. What really fascinates me about endowments and donations is the cycle that a large amount of money seems to create. Granted this is simplifying a much larger situation but take rankings, recruitment and scholarships as an example; higher endowment equals more scholarship money which makes it easier to recruit, easy recruitment leads to a higher caliber class, higher caliber class leads to higher rankings and higher rankings can lead to higher prestige and potentially larger endowment. Again, this is simplifying an idea that has many more pieces but one gets the idea.

I haven’t been in the field of higher education prior to the economy being at the low it has been in the last few years. In the time that I have been working on a college campus, it is nothing to hear about a college and university starting a fundraising campaign. I Googled “university fundraising” and chose stories from the last 24 hours and the result was everything from fundraising job postings to companies who provide fundraising support and most importantly, institutions announcing their fundraising campaigns. Just over a year ago, Rutgers announced their largest fundraising campaign ever in light of state budget cuts to “fund scholarships, endowed chairs for professors, new buildings and other projects.”

Shortly after I graduated from my alma mater they started a fundraising campaign in which they have boasted will contribute millions of dollars in scholarship money to help students attend college. Colorado State University’s RAMp it Up project web site explains that endowment dollars aid in a higher ranking in the U.S. News and World Report and “high rankings not only increase the value of your Colorado State University degree, they also help attract high-caliber students, renowned faculty, and grant money from foundations and businesses.”

Rutgers and CSU are just a couple examples of the huge efforts being made by public institutions to increase their fundraising efforts and endowments. In a time where money is limited across the board and public institutions are quickly losing state funding, this is just one way colleges and universities are trying to make up for loss. I can’t help but wonder how far this goes and what the implications are. Is this an effect of higher education becoming a mature industry? Are alumni and donors going to become a primary source for funding education? If this becomes the standard, will endowments affect rankings in the future like they currently do?

For-Profit or Not For-it, that is the question

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/09/how-for-profit-colleges-can-save-themselves-and-higher-education/244595/

The Atlantic published a great article in September about the changes in For-Profit education in comparison to proprietary schools. I found this interesting after our topic discussions on Friday night, especially focussing in on the financial aid sector. The discussions that ranged from how much for-profit colleges charge for learning compared to that of public schools, and leaving their education with a degree, but with a huge amount of financial debt. This article links into with other political issues attached to these issues like Perry from Texas and his plan to of getting the major Texas schools to deliver degrees for $10,000. This is creating a mass hysteria of controversy of who and how it is going to get paid for. It also attaches an article about President Obama and how he wants there to be 8 million college graduates by 2020.

The idea of this article talks about how 25% of students from for-profit institutions began defaulting their loan payments after 3 years. This is more than doubled what the public college default numbers are showing. One of the reasons is because of how much more expensive for-profit institutions are charging for degrees, in a shorter amount of time. Up front it seems like a good idea, but on the tail end, people are realizing that there is more debt attached than seen originally.

There is a saving grace to this though. Proprietary colleges have learned a great deal from for-profit institutions because of the increased number of students that have enrolled int he last 10 years. Proprietary colleges have opened up their campuses to try and meet the needs of the students that are moving towards for-profit institutions, mostly because from 2000-2009 the number of students enrolling in for-profit institutions have gone from 400,000 to 1.58 million. The article does say the numbers have dropped 14% in 2010, but to have your numbers quadruple in 10 years is substantial. Proprietary colleges are seeing the opportunity, both financially and student driven, to modify their traditional modes of education and open their campus to more mainstream ideas, like on-line learning.

For the for-profit schools, there are some goods that are coming out of this. They have set the foundation for most public colleges to focus on labor market demand students. Focus on the working individuals who want higher degrees, and make education an feasible opportunity in a reasonable amount of time and cost. Also, even though the numbers have dropped 14% in 2010, to have the numbers of enrollment quadruple in 10 years is a great sign and shows what the population wants and values as far as higher education is concerned. People want to further their education, as long as it is convenient and cost effective for them. And most importantly, from this article, this is the first time that "non-traditional" students have outnumbered "traditional" students. Non-traditional students being students with GED's, on-line learners, etc. while traditional students are classified as full-time, first-time students. That sparks quite an interest in public colleges to adjust where the numbers are.

The downside to this is that the cost of for-profit schools are now being seen as too much for students. Even though students are getting a degree in 2 years, they are paying much more than their community college counterparts in financial aide and after three years, there are more for-profit students defaulting on paying off their loans.

I see this as a great opportunity for proprietary schools to advance and further what their philosophies are. I believe in the public college idea and 4 year institutions, however, even right now, UNC offers this cohort opportunity to for a working stiff to go back to school which would not have happened a few years ago. I could have gone to a for-profit institution, and paid a lot more for it (and I even had the paperwork filled out to do so until I saw this program), but I believe more in the system of public colleges and what they stand for. Now that the public schools have opened their doors to people away from Greeley, it is giving them more revenue, but also allowing for more adults to have the opportunity to return back to school and further their education.