Changing Higher Ed

Tier two (R2) research and smaller institutions, including two-year, minority-serving, and tribal colleges, can now build solid research infrastructures and perform groundbreaking discoveries through research enterprises on the same scale as larger R1 and flagship universities. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Drumm speaks with Sethuraman Panchanathan, Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF). They discuss how his organization helps democratize ideas in higher education, enabling all colleges and universities to solve real-world problems and revitalize their communities. The NSF achieves this through programs like the Nationally Transformative Equity and Diversity (GRANTED) and Enabling Partnership to Increase Innovation Capacity (EPIIC). Dr. Panch also discusses NSF's mission and vision. He talks about its recent $44 million program that helps fund projects across the US. Additionally, Drumm refers to another NSF program as "a tech transfer on steroids." Moreover, they explore what smaller institutions with few resources need to do to start conducting research.   Podcast Highlights NSF's Regional Innovation Engines is a $44 million investment that partners with communities to utilize regional potentials like the Hazleton pilot converting hemp into carbon-negative building materials through collaboration with Penn State University and community colleges. The cross-cutting TIP Directorate pulls discoveries into the industry, creating impactful solutions by fostering partnerships and bringing back new ideas to address real-world problems. GRANTED and EPIIC programs support the growth of research infrastructure and capacity at national and minority-serving institutions, enhancing access to resources and regional innovation ecosystems. NSF's strategic focus includes research, education, partnerships, and research infrastructures, with initiatives like BP Innovate, EDU Racial Equity in STEM, and the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program to promote inclusion and quality in STEM education.   NSF partners with organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Schmidt Futures, and the Walton Family Foundation to improve the quality of US STEM education for all students. GRANTED provides investment in research infrastructure, and institutions can reach out to the program coordinator to present competitive ideas and connect with successful participating institutions.    Read the transcript →   About Our Podcast Guest The Honorable Sethuraman Panchanathan is the 15th director of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), nominated by the President in 2019 and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2020. With over three decades of experience, he is a leader in science, engineering, and education. Before joining NSF, Panchanathan served as the executive vice president of the Arizona State University (ASU) Knowledge Enterprise, where he significantly advanced research innovation and strategic partnerships. His scientific contributions have earned him numerous awards, including Honorary Doctorates and the IEEE-USA Public Service Award. Panchanathan's leadership extends to various interagency councils and committees, including the National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship and the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee. He is also known for his extensive publication record and mentorship of over 150 graduate students, postdocs, and research scientists. Panchanathan is a fellow of multiple prestigious academies and societies, including the National Academy of Inventors and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He is married to Sarada "Soumya" Panchanathan, an academic pediatrician and informatician, and they have two adult children, Amritha and Roshan.   About the Host  Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #ChangingHigherEd #HigherEdResearch #HigherEdPodcast

It is well known that public perception of post-secondary education is at an all-time low, as politics, rising tuition, and higher student debt is saddling students and graduates with more stress. And, despite reports showing that people with student debt can negatively affect society, the Supreme Court recently ruled that the $1.7 trillion in student debt cannot be forgiven despite what the HEA clearly states in the statutes.   Research shows that students who must incur debt to attend college have lower GPAs, more health issues both before and after graduation, are less likely to buy a house, will get married and have children later in life, are less likely to start a business, and are less entrepreneurial. The problems are real and are affecting society as we know it.   In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with economist and investment manager David Linton about his findings from his upcoming book, Crushed: How Student Debt Has Impaired a Generation and What to Do About It. David shares how much the cost of education has risen from 1969 to 2020, why most college and university managers plan to budget, why this doesn’t help address the problem, and what higher ed can do to improve this.   Podcast Highlights   §  The cost of higher ed in terms of percentage of household income has risen dramatically in the past 50 years. In 1969, the cost of public college education was $1,545 per year, 19% of the median household income. In 2020, it was just under $29,000, or 42% of the median household income. That's about two and a half times more expensive as a function of household income. On an inflation-adjusted metric from 1969 to 2020, it’s between 3 ½ - 4 times as expensive. In other words, the cost of four years in 1969 was the same as that of one year in 2020.   §  A driving force behind this rise in tuition is that some administrators and presidents prioritize rankings and performing well vis-à a-vie their competitors. They know what colleges the other students are applying to and want to ensure their students have a similar or better college experience, including more physical and mental health services, nicer campus facilities, larger research departments, more public services for the community, and other ancillary services. There are also more administrators per student than before.   §  Another theory as to why tuition is so high is because state support has dropped from 50-70% of the tuition a student pays to around 12%. However, in 2017, Professor Douglas Webber of Temple University roughly found that for every $1,000 in state budget cuts, students pay an extra $300 – $315 more per year in tuition and fees. This addresses only 30% of the problem.   §  Adding to the rising tuition costs, most administrators discuss expanding departments or hiring new faculty versus cost-cutting and reducing tuition—many plan to construct a new building once a year or every other year. Very few or no administrators say that one of their top five priorities is to adopt the Six Sigma approach, which involves constantly getting incrementally better over a very long period. This can include delivering the same quality education or same quality experience but with 2% fewer resources every single year. Higher ed leaders respond, “No, we have a budgeting process, and each department has to fit within their budget.” John Katzman, who founded Princeton Review, says up to a third of overall university expenses could eventually be cut without damaging the education experience.   §  One solution to rising tuition costs would be that a large consortium of schools, e.g., PAC-12 schools or all Midwest liberal arts schools that happen to compete with one another, should announce they are not going to raise tuition by more than inflation each year for the next ten years. These savings could go back to the school departments to figure out how to do more with less every year.   §  Higher ed presidents need to know the average debt per student upon graduation and the degree to which they've been able to pay it off in five or ten years. If they don’t, the first step is to figure out what that is. Boards need to establish the objective. If boards discover that 30%, 40%, or 50% of students ten years out cannot repay their debt, one objective can be for the president to improve that somehow.   §  Campuses must identify if certain types of students cannot pay, specific academic thresholds that make it unlikely for students to graduate, or more likely to take on more debt if they don’t cross them. Also, if there are certain areas of study where students are more or less successful when repaying their debts or not having debt. Then, institutions must establish a clear objective. For example, possible goals could include that within five years, graduates’ student debt delinquency rate will drop from 20% to 10%, the graduation rate will increase from 70% to 80%, or the debt upon graduation will decrease from $30k to $20k.   §  Cust-cutting must be included in prioritization. Most schools have an annual or semi-annual process whereby they look at objectives, whether it's new facilities for staff or a department, and then rank them in order. But cost-cutting is rarely ranked in the top five. Reducing tuition and cost-cutting doesn't have to be dramatic. It can be to freeze, maintain, or have budgets increase at inflation, minus 1%, every year and then force the department heads to figure out a way to work within that framework.   §  Bring in a consultant or have faculty figure out ways to increase revenue without raising tuition. Identify where the campus is getting other resources if they are selling their services to other areas, utilizing their facilities and research more efficiently, or partnering with other businesses.     Read the transcript →   About Our Podcast Guest   David E. Linton is an author and economist.  A former adjunct professor at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business, he taught Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management.  His first book, Foundations of Investment Management, has become a mainstay among aspiring professionals who want to bridge the gap between an academic understanding and the practical application of investment management strategies.    Mr. Linton’s second book, Crushed, was researched and written after his tenure as a professor at USC.  While wondering about the beautiful campuses of USC, University of Chicago, UT Austin, and several others, Mr. Linton couldn’t help but wonder: why are college campuses so nice?  Why is college so expensive?  How can I possibly afford to send my three kids to college?  Is a college degree even worth it?  And how can I balance what’s in the best interest of my kids without mortgaging their (and my) future?   If you want to know the answers to these questions – don’t do what Mr. Linton did, which is spend the next two years and ~2,000 hours researching the topic.  Just read the book.  It’s a better return on time.   Mr. Linton works at a multinational technology firm managing corporate and customer cash when he's not teaching or researching.  He is a seasoned economist and asset manager, previously working as the Director of Portfolio Construction and Manager Research at Pacific Life and a Vice President and Portfolio Manager at PIMCO.  Mr. Linton is a CFA® charter holder, has a BS in Business Administration from the University of Southern California, graduating magna cum laude, and an MBA from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, graduating with honors.  He enjoys reading with his oldest child, playing chess with his middle child, and wrestling with his youngest child.  He thinks they enjoy those activities, too.   About the Host   Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #studentdebt #crushed #HEA

The recent hack of MOVEit has serious implications for higher education. MOVEit, an application used by the National Student Clearinghouse and many other institutions to move large files, directly affects numerous higher ed institutions and solution providers. This, coupled with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act going into effect in early June of 2023, has (should have) put cybersecurity at the top of mind for college and university decision-makers.   In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton once again speaks with virtual chief information security officer Brian Kelly, who this time returns to Changing Higher Education to discuss the ramifications of MOVEit getting compromised, tools that can help higher ed institutions protect themselves, all nine elements of the GLBA that colleges and universities must be in compliance with to receive financial aid, what GLBA enforcement could look like, and an online hub that states and higher ed can emulate to ensure students enter the cybersecurity field.     Highlights   §  MOVEit, a third-party tool used by the National Student Clearinghouse and others to move large data pieces, was recently compromised, compromising institutional data. This is having a downstream impact on higher ed since many institutions engage with the NSC.   §  In addition to performing triage and internal assessments, higher ed institutions must reach out to all of their vendors and contractors and ask if they use MOVEit and, if they are, what they are doing to protect their data.   §  It is important to have a process in place for vetting third-party risk. EDUCAUSE’s HECVAT can help address this and future problems. It’s a standard set of questions that institutions can ask third-party vendors about security and privacy. Over 150 colleges and universities use HECVAT version 3.0’s questionnaire in their procurement process. Large vendors like Microsoft and Google have completed it.   §  HECVAT makes it easier for vendors since they don’t have to answer bespoke questionnaires from numerous institutions that might have their nuances and differences. It also allows the community of CISOs and cybersecurity privacy practitioners in higher ed to have a conversation around a grounded standardized set of questions.   §  The Federal Trade Commission’s Safeguards Rule, which changed the standards around safeguarding customer information, went into effect on December 9th, 2021. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that took effect in early June of 2023 required higher education institutions to meet the elements of those rule changes. There are nine elements.   §  The primary rule change is designating a CISO or a qualified individual responsible for protecting customer information or student financial aid data. The second is to perform a risk assessment at least annually by a third party or internally.   §  The third involves access review controls. Institutions must annually vet employees granted access to information and ensure more people haven’t been granted access. Institutions must know where all data resides and that all incoming data is identified. Institutions must ensure data is protected and encrypted when it's being stored and in use, ensure the coding or development of any software that interacts with the Department of Education’s data follows secure practices, ensure data that institutions should no longer have or that has aged out has been properly disposed of, and ensure change management has been implemented. Institutions must identify who has access to customer information and annually review their logs.   §  The fourth ensures that institutions annually validate that these controls are in place and working as intended. The fifth mandates that the individuals who interact with the Department of Education and use customer information are appropriately trained and aware of the risks involved. The sixth ensures institutions have a program and process to address and test for third-party risks. Seventh mandates having a prescriptive plan for responding to incidents, regularly testing and validating the plan to see if it’s working, and identifying the lessons learned. The ninth mandates that the CISO annually reports to the board or president.      Read the podcast transcript →   About Our Podcast Guest   Brian Kelly supports the safeguarding of information assets across multiple verticals against unauthorized use, disclosure, modification, damage, or loss by developing, implementing, and maintaining methods to provide a secure and stable environment for clients' data and related systems.   Before joining Compass, Brian was the CISO at Quinnipiac University and, most recently the Cybersecurity Program Director at EDUCAUSE. Brian is also an Adjunct Professor at Naugatuck Valley Community College, where he has developed and teaches cybersecurity courses.   Brian has diverse experience in information security policy development, awareness training, and regulatory compliance. He provides thought leadership on information security issues across industries and is a recognized leader in his field.   Brian holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Connecticut and a master’s degree from Norwich University. He has served in various leadership roles on the local boards of the ISSA, InfraGard, and HTCIA chapters. Brian is also a retired Air Force Cyber Operations Officer.   About the Host   Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #HigherEducation #HigherEdCybersecurity #MOVEitHack  

The recently filed and highly publicized Florida versus the Department of Education lawsuit could change the face of higher education across the US. At stake is the ability of accreditors to set standards in the accreditation versus how much state governments can be involved in accreditation affairs. Essentially the lawsuit is pushing to allow institutions to change their accreditors without being restricted by the Department of Education and that, as the owner of state schools, the state has control over what these institutions can do. In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton once again speaks with higher ed legal expert Michael Goldstein of Tyton Partners, who returns to Changing Higher Ed to discuss the background behind the lawsuit, its reasons, and its implications for higher education institutions and accreditation. Podcast Highlights Florida’s Gov DeSantis directed his attorney general to file a lawsuit against the Department of Education. The case, Florida v. Department of Education, questions the authority of the Department to have a third party certify the quality of education, require independent boards, and a host of other things. Florida’s complaint was filed in federal district court on June 21. The US Department of Justice has yet to file a response. Before the lawsuit, Florida passed a law at Gov DeSantis’ direction that would require every institution in the State to change its accreditor in a relatively short cycle. The intent was to get Florida institutions out of the purview of SACSCOC and move to more conservative accreditors. This also had the intention of applying pressure on accreditors to back away from protecting the independence of institutional boards to allow states to take a more affirmative role in what they want to do. The legislation basically asked, “Why doesn't the Department of Education have an accreditation process for determining what institutions are qualified for the same way that the federal government decides what drugs are suitable for use in medical treatment through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration?" After a harsh reaction, the state changed its stance to say that within two years, the State required that all public institutions in Florida change their primary institutional accreditor. In the current accreditation process, states authorize institutions to grant degrees by their criteria, and then the school must be accredited by an accrediting agency that the Department has determined to be a reliable arbiter of institutional quality. Then, if the Department of Education determines that the institution has the financial stability and the administrative capability to manage the student aid programs, it could enter into a participation agreement, give Pell Grant loans, and be in the Federal Family Education Loan [FFEL] program, and in the direct loan program, enabling it to access trillions of dollars of student aid. The lawsuit says state governments are the owners of state institutions and that, as creatures of the state, these schools are responsible to the state legislature and the state government. So, if the legislature or the state government directs that these schools should act in a particular way, they should not be prohibited from doing so. This is analogous to an accreditation standard rule that was made to allow for-profit institutions to participate in student aid programs. The rule says that the board must be independent, and a majority of the members of the board are required to be independent of ownership to provide some level of insulation between the financial interests of the parent company, who is the owner, and, by law, the conduct of the institution. This supports the lawsuit’s theory that the state owns state institutions. The Florida lawsuit first asks the court to determine that outsourcing institutional assessment of institutional quality to a non-governmental entity is an unconstitutional delegation of governmental authority. If that argument is rejected, the lawsuit asks to prevent the Department of Education from restricting the ability of institutions to change their accreditor. Because institutional accreditors are no longer restricted by region or country, Florida winning the lawsuit could result in the creation of different rules regarding the kinds of issues that the institutions are dealing with in Florida. There are also questions on how this could impact how NACIQI and the Department of Education approve accreditors. This accreditation lawsuit is similar to the ongoing question of whether states have too much authority in SARA. If an institution is accredited, approved by a state, and that state is a participant in NC-SARA, SARA says that the state can offer its online courses anywhere in the US (except California, which is not a signatory to the SARA agreement) without further approval. About Our Podcast Guest Mike Goldstein Michael Goldstein has a long history of close engagement with higher education.  He was the founding Director of New York City Urban Corps, the nation’s first large-scale student intern program designed to support access for less affluent students through the use of the Federal Work-Study Program.  He went on to lead a Ford Foundation-supported effort to establish similar programs in cities across the U.S.  He returned to New York City government as Assistant City Administrator and Director of University Relations.  From there, Mike joined the then-new University of Illinois Chicago campus as Associate Vice Chancellor for Urban Affairs and Associate Professor of Urban Sciences.  In 1978 Mike joined the Washington, DC, law firm of Dow Lohnes to establish a new legal practice focusing broadly on issues confronting higher education. By 2014 when his firm merged with the global law firm Cooley LLP, the higher education practice he headed was the largest and one of the highest regarded in the country.  Mike has been a pioneer in developing alternative mechanisms and institutional structures for delivering high-quality postsecondary education, including helping to accomplish substantial regulatory reforms that made telecommunicated and then online learning broadly available.  He is the recipient of the WCET Richard Jonsen Award, CAEL’s Morris Keeton Ward, the President’s Medal from Excelsior College, and USDLA’s Distance Learning Hall of Fame Award, as well as an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Fielding Graduate University for his contributions to the field of adult learning.  He graduated from Cornell University and New York University School of Law and was a Loeb Fellow at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design.  He and his spouse Jinny, an education and media consultant and former head of education for the Public Broadcasting Service, live in Washington, DC. About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/. The Change Leader’s Social Media Links LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #FloridavsBoardofEducation      

Higher ed needs to provide more accessible, high-outcome internships to meet the current demands of the workforce and students. A recent McKinsey report finds that more than 85% of companies feel there is a skills gap between education and industry, and the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) has identified several career readiness skills students must have upon graduation but can only obtain through internships. Meanwhile, more than a third of entry-level jobs require three years of work experience, and students who aren’t getting employed after graduating are already questioning the ROI of their degree. In his latest podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the characteristics of a well-set-up intern program and how they can benefit students and higher ed with Daniel Nivern of Virtual Internships. This ed-tech company runs online internship programs across 18 career fields. Daniel discusses the pros and cons of each type of internship, what presidents should discuss with employers before creating internship opportunities, how internships should be structured to garner the best results, what communication should look like between the company and intern, how interns can become more part of a company’s work culture, and how to better promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.   Podcast Highlights Universities need to ensure that the company and intern are both happy, which requires aligning the objectives of all parties involved. Identify what both sides seek regarding set criteria, tasks, and skills. What skills are companies looking to gain? What skills do they already have? What skills would the intern like to offer the company? Verbal communication must occur before the program begins and should involve identifying projects that the intern must complete by the end of the program. For example, three to five mini-projects can be devised for the intern so they feel they've accomplished something by the end of the program. Ad hoc and spontaneous assignments can be beneficial, but more structure is recommended.  Integrate two-way feedback to encourage strong communication throughout the internship. The host company supervisor needs to provide structured, formalized feedback so the intern knows how they are progressing and what tasks they've accomplished. Likewise, the intern needs to give feedback to the company to get accustomed to communicating upward and understanding what it means to show off what they've done. These communications are preferred daily, but must be done weekly at the very least. The company should help integrate the intern into the workplace, and the intern should also make an effort. This involves speaking to as many employees as possible in an in-person setting. In a virtual setting, it may mean being part of the online communication channels, such as Slack groups, the all-hands town halls the company may run, etc. This needs to be considered well in advance of the programming. It is encouraged to have these points agreed upon in writing, signed off by the company, and seen by the student before the internship. Failure to ensure alignment can result in a breakdown in the middle of the partnership. In addition to costing the employer extra money, only providing in-person internships can limit the number of students who can participate in the program while diminishing diversity, equity, and inclusion. Many students cannot dedicate additional commuting and in-person time outside of school by having to juggle family and work commitments, etc. Virtual internships are a more scalable, accessible, and equitable approach with many of the same advantages as in-person programs. Higher ed is highly encouraged to create credit-bearing internships. Data has shown that students feel much more satisfied with their university course when embedded into the curriculum and believe they have a higher return on investment.    Read the transcript on our website →   About Our Podcast Guest Dan Nivern Daniel is the Co-Founder & CEO of Virtual Internships, an ed-tech company that runs online internship programs across 18 career fields, bridging the gap between education and industry and helping learners from all backgrounds to gain global work experience. Virtual Internships is one of the top 100 EdTech startups in Europe in the Holon IQ Europe EdTech list and was named the 23rd best remote company to work for in the world in 2022. Through partnerships with institutions including ASU, Aston University, Botho University, and Kaplan, Virtual Internships has supported thousands of students undertaking remote internships. A graduate of Oxford University with a Master’s in Management and Chinese, Daniel has been featured on CNBC, BBC News, and Bloomberg for his work in developing global employability programs. He is also the founder of CRCC Asia, a company that has helped over 10,000 students to complete internships in Asia.   About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.    The Change Leader’s Social Media Links LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #Internships #WorkforceReadiness #HigherEdROI

Currently enrolled students, as well as people who stopped out or never attended a higher ed institution, are sharing what will keep them enrolled, re-enroll, or enroll for the first time, in addition to what could make them leave, not come back, or never attempt to enroll at all.   In the second half of his two-part podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton continues his conversation with Dr. Courtney Brown of the Lumina Foundation about the Foundation’s State of Higher Ed 2023 study that was conducted over three years in partnership with Gallup. Dr. Brown shares her findings on the top three barriers to continuing or starting education for all three segments, how important student loan forgiveness is to them and how much of their loans would have to be forgiven for them to return to school, what students of color value, and how important access to reproductive rights and divisive topics are in higher ed.   Podcast Highlights   Reasons for stopping out. For the third study in the Fall of 2022, the top two reasons students are considering stopping out are emotional stress at 69% and personal health reasons at 59%. The cost of the degree is third at 36%.   About half of those who have never enrolled in higher ed say they’ve considered enrolling in the last two years, and 47% of all enrolled students say they’re considering coming back. About 60% of people who stopped out are considering coming back, versus those who have never enrolled at just under 40%.   Cost of degrees. The number one reason why those who have never enrolled still haven’t tried is due to the cost of a degree at 55%. The second highest reason was due to inflation and work conflicts. Emotional stress came in third.   Student loan forgiveness. Of students asked how likely they would reenroll if some of their student loans were forgiven, 80% said “very likely” or “somewhat likely.” Of bachelor’s degree students who were asked the same question, 75% said “very likely” or “somewhat likely.” Overall, the minimum percentage of their student loan that would have to be forgiven for them to re-enroll is 70%. For those specifically enrolled in certification programs, students needed about 66% forgiven. For those enrolled in bachelor’s degree programs, students needed about 74% forgiven. Although high numbers, these students shouldn’t be considered low-hanging fruit. The system didn’t work for them, so a lot will have to be done to get them back.   For students of color, the feeling of belonging is highly important. When they don’t feel like they belong, they are more likely to stop out. When there's a great deal of diversity, people feel like they belong more.   Diversity of faculty and administration. Colleges or universities shouldn’t just try to increase the diversity of the student body but of their faculty and administration. When students of color see people who look like them and who have had the same experiences as them in leadership roles, they will feel like they belong. If the only people who look like them are working in the cafeteria, that won’t.   Reproductive rights and health laws are important to students. Overall, 72% of currently enrolled students and 60% of people who have never enrolled said reproductive rights and health laws related to them are important. When asked if they would be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled in a college that had greater access to reproductive rights, 81% of currently enrolled students and 85% of unenrolled students said they would be. If a college was located in a state that allowed greater access to reproductive rights, 81% of all enrolled and 85% of unenrolled said they would be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled.   Political leaning and reproductive rights. Meanwhile, 86% of currently enrolled Democrats said they'd be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled if the college gave them greater access to reproductive rights, and 65% of currently enrolled Republican students said they'd be more likely to for the same reason. Additionally, 89% of Democrats who are not enrolled said they'd be more likely to enroll if the college was located in a state that allowed greater access to reproductive rights, and 74% of Republican people who are not enrolled in college said they'd be more likely to enroll for the same reason.   Diversity of thought. Overall, 77% of people said they'd be more likely to enroll in a college and in a state that allowed the instruction of all viewpoints on divisive topics such as race, gender, or racism. Similarly, 82% of Democrats and 66% of Republicans said they wanted those same divisive topics presented.     Read the transcript →   About Our Podcast Guest – Courtney Brown Courtney Brown, Ph.D., is vice president of impact and planning for Lumina Foundation, an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. As the chief data and research officer, Brown oversees the foundation’s efforts in the areas of strategic planning, learning, impact, and effectiveness. She also leads Lumina’s international engagement.   She joined the foundation in 2011 with a strong background in performance measurement, research, and evaluation. Before 2011, Brown was a senior research associate at the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University. There, she led studies and evaluations focused on education and post-high school programs within the United States and across Europe.   Brown is a frequent speaker and panelist in the United States and other countries regarding postsecondary strategy, student success, data-driven decision-making, and evidence-based practices. She has developed and shared manuals, working papers, articles, and books related to undergraduate research, performance measurement, randomized-control trials, and other evaluation methods, as well as conducted webinars and workshops on topics such as evaluation, performance measurement, and success in education beyond high school.   About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

Higher ed leaders can learn what 6,000 current students, 3,000 people who stopped out, and 3,000 more who never enrolled in a U.S. college or university say their barriers have been to finishing their education over three years. The results come from a study by the Lumina Foundation called “The State of Higher Ed” in partnership with Gallup. In the first of a two-part podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with one of The State of Higher Ed’s leading architects, VP of Impact and Planning Dr. Courtney Brown of the Lumina Foundation, an independent private foundation that increased the number of states with attainment goals from one in 2008 to 48 today. It has also played a significant role in boosting the percentage of people in the U.S. with post-secondary credentials from 38% to 84% during the same period. Dr. Brown discusses how “The State of Higher Ed” was conducted, what questions were asked, and why students wanted to stop out in 2020, 2021, and 2022. Other discussion topics include how to access Lumina Foundation’s attainment tool and the Foundation’s three concentrations. Podcast Highlights The Lumina Foundation partnered with Gallup for The State of Higher Ed and conducted the research in Fall 2020, 2021, and 2022. Early in the pandemic, participants were either unsure if they wanted to stay enrolled or still thinking about enrolling, but health and COVID concerns were at the forefront. People still valued post-secondary education and wanted to come back. In 2020, health concerns were the top reason for students thinking of stopping out. In 2021, a large percentage of students said they were still thinking about stopping out, but the top reason was emotional stress. That number almost doubled from the year before. Reasons for the emotional stress included working full time, worrying about their family, and struggling to make ends meet. In the fall of 2022, a high percentage of students still considered stopping out because of emotional stress. The Lumina Foundation, which ensures more people of color have opportunities not just to pursue but successfully complete a high-quality credential, releases an annual online tool called Stronger Nation, which breaks down where every state is regarding attainment by race and ethnicity. Since 2008, the Lumina Foundation has increased the number of states with an attainment goal from one to 48. The Lumina Foundation has three different concentration areas: getting more people to enroll in post-secondary education, keeping them enrolled, and ensuring they complete a post-secondary credential that is high-quality, employment-aligned, and not dead ends. Read the transcript → About Our Podcast Guest – Dr. Courtney Brown Courtney Brown, Ph.D., is vice president of impact and planning for Lumina Foundation, an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis committed to making learning opportunities beyond high school available to all. As the chief data and research officer, Brown oversees the Foundation’s strategic planning, learning, impact, and effectiveness efforts. She also leads Lumina’s international engagement. She joined the foundation in 2011 with a strong background in performance measurement, research, and evaluation. Before 2011, Brown was a senior research associate at the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University. There, she led studies and evaluations focused on education and post-high school programs within the United States and across Europe. Brown is a frequent speaker and panelist in the United States and other countries regarding postsecondary strategy, student success, data-driven decision-making, and evidence-based practices. She has developed and shared manuals, working papers, articles, and books on undergraduate research, performance measurement, randomized control trials, and other evaluation methods. She has also conducted webinars and workshops on evaluation, performance measurement, and success in education beyond high school. Dr. Courtney Brown on LinkedIn → About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/. The Change Leader’s Social Media Links LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com #changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast  

A lot has been happening up on the Hill that affects higher education. In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton catches up on the latest news with Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies, who advocates before Congress, federal agencies, and state governments on behalf of private institutions of higher education and post-secondary education companies.   Tom discusses the parts of the infamous debt ceiling bill that are important to the higher ed community, the two-year cap on discretionary spending that will impact the Department of Education, the House and Senate voting in favor of disapproving the Biden administration's proposal for student debt cancellation, income-driven repayment changes being proposed at the regulatory level, and the return to the repayment, the Department’s reaction to the Biden administration’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Second Forum on NC-SARA, when the upcoming Neg Reg will likely take place, Title IX and short-term Pell eligibility updates, and the Department’s strong look at the definition of a third-party servicer.   Highlights   The McCarthy-Biden compromise codifies student loan repayments resuming since Congress and the president have recognized that the pandemic is over. The bill proposes that 60 days after June 30, the student loan repayment process begins anew, including the requirement for interest to start accruing, for collection agencies to connect, and for servicers to reconnect with the borrowers. The Department is once again beginning to discuss with servicers how to implement contact with borrowers to reeducate and refresh their memory of these responsibilities. The transition won't start right on September 1. There'll be some lag time for borrowers to get back into the transition.   The two-year cap on overall discretionary spending in the broader context of the McCarthy-Biden compromise will affect higher ed policy and likely complicate the ability to expand Pell Grants. Other spending programs will probably have to be reduced to expand Pell Grants. The two-year cap will worsen the Department of Education’s situation since it did not receive the money it requested in the fiscal year 2023 appropriations process for more staff.   Over the last three to four weeks in May and into the first week of June, the House and the Senate voted in favor of disapproving the Biden administration's proposal in the actual joint resolution for student debt cancellation, income-driven repayment changes being proposed at the regulatory level and the return to the repayment. The Biden administration will undoubtedly veto the disapproval, and there won't be enough votes to override the veto. So the Biden administration will continue to pursue these endeavors. But the Supreme Court will also weigh in on this process and the two pieces of litigation it heard on February 28, sometime in June. The Supreme Court will decide on race equality and admissions this month. The Court will likely reject it.   The Biden administration released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that addresses gainful employment, administrative capability, financial responsibility, certification procedures, and the ability to benefit.   For gainful employment, the Department came up with a new metric, which they're calling an Earnings Premium Test or Earnings Premium Metric. This attempts to assess the earnings potential of individuals shortly after they graduate from programs below the associate's degree level and up to associate’s, baccalaureate, and master’s degree offerings to determine whether the earnings potential is comparable to or literally more than the average of individuals aged 24 to 35. Schools will have their eligibility for their programs based on this metric and the prior borrower defense to repayment metrics. From the school's perspective, the ability for a cohort going all the way to individuals age 34 versus an individual two to three years after graduation doesn't seem to be a direct corollary.   The earnings potential and debt-to-earnings assessments will now be part of the Financial Value Transparency List. All programs at all institutions will start seeing publicly provided information on how their programs fare under both metrics. It will only impact the eligibility of those subject to the short-term program cap, meaning less than an associate's degree or state colleges, universities, and others, but all proprietary programs. The Department acknowledges it has four years of earnings and debt data for all institutions and their programs. The Department, this administration, and prior administrations have said that the way in which the definitions of an institution of higher education are structured in the law doesn’t suggest that that's the intent of Congress.   NC-SARA is doing a policy revision of its entire set of standards, including distance education and enrollment criteria. In early January and into the first couple of months of this year, communities provided about 60 recommendations. NC-SARA is currently in forum two and phase two, where groups can respond to the 60 or so proposals. The deadline for that recently passed. NC-SARA’s goal is to have its policy revisions completed by the end of this year to go into effect next year.   The Department recently questioned NC-SARA about its misrepresentation and aggressive recruiting, advertising, and marketing changes to the regulations that go into effect July 1 of this year to see if significant revisions need to be done or to have it dismantled.   The Title IX discussions on the concerns about athletes’ eligibility and participation in sports have been delayed. What also hangs in the balance is the broader, comprehensive retooling and recasting of the regulations around Title IX, including all the VAWA regulations and all the issues related to sexual discrimination, such as the institutions’ responsibilities, the support services for and regulations protecting the rights and the concerns of the accuser and the accused.   On June 9, new safeguard rules and regulatory changes under the Federal Trade Commission and the protection of personally identifiable information, cybersecurity, and the like will be enacted. They will require more substantive assessment routinely on an annual basis in relation to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the development of plans, and the development of more than just an individual responsible for this. It will be integrated into the very culture and core of all institutions that have any relation to federal dollars, including all institutions of higher education. This is a stepping stone to get to NIST 800-171.   Higher ed needs to consider one bill on short-term Pell eligibility and the opportunity for individuals in blue-collar work to potentially have access to Pell Grants to meet the demand for skilled workers in fulfillment of the infrastructure bill.   The Department is taking a strong look at the definition of a third-party servicer and proposed a Dear Colleague letter with changes to those regulations earlier in the year and then walked back to different timelines for implementation. The Department has some concerns with OEMs. How the Department attempted to define the third-party servicer may have included too many entities.   Read the transcript →   About Our Podcast Guest Tom Netting Having spent all of his professional career devoted to higher education policy oversight and implementation, Tom Netting has an extensive knowledge of the laws and regulations governing all aspects of higher education. His considerable background and experience have afforded him the opportunity to view the development and implementation of federal higher education and workforce development policy in their entirety – including issues related to higher education and workforce development, health care, veteran affairs policies, and the procurement of federal appropriations.   About the Host   Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in the areas of governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #changinghighered #higherednews #washingtonupdate

A new study on what campus leaders can do to help their graduates move into good jobs by age 30 found that the most effective ways for young adults to succeed in the workforce generally involve attaining post-secondary education degrees. The Georgetown Center for Education in the Workforce (CEW)’s “What Works: 10 Education, Training, and Work-Based Pathway Changes that Lead to Good Jobs” determines how much the likelihood of young adults getting a good job can be improved by some specific changes they make with a high school diploma, community college education, and/or university credits.   In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with two CEW professors who worked on the study, Research Professor of Education and Economics Dr. Zack Mabel and Associate Director of Editorial Policy and Senior Editor/Writer Kathryn Campbell. They discuss how they conducted the study, the highlights, what the policy levers and interventions can be to help students make these top 10 pathway changes, some of the barriers campuses might face in achieving them, how higher ed can overcome these challenges, and some successful models.   Highlights   The study focuses on scenarios where one change with no predeterminations is introduced and identifies if it improved a young adult’s likelihood of having a good job by age 30. For example, what would happen if a person who started in a four-year program completed their degree instead of stopping out before their mid-20s? The study defines a good job as one that pays a minimum of around $38,000 in 2020 for workers younger than age 35. The median pay is around $57,000 annually. Good jobs also provide health care and retirement benefits, etc. Many of the top 10 effective pathway changes involve attaining post-secondary education. Young adults who enroll before their mid-20s see a 16% point boost in their likelihood of having a good job by age 30. Those who enroll in an AA or certificate program get a 6% point boost. Those who complete an associate's degree or certification instead of stopping out experience an 8% point boost. For each pathway change, the study asks what policy levers and interventions higher ed institutions can introduce to make them a reality. Examples include expanding recruitment efforts and creating stronger partnerships between high schools and colleges. More outreach and advising can demystify college for students. Providing more financial aid and more information about financial aid can help prospective students make a true risk assessment. Most families are turned off by the tuition price. What an institution's published or sticker price is and what the net price or out-of-pocket cost students will have to pay can be misleading. Providing more generous financial aid targeted based on need and simple to apply for has a strong positive impact on increasing enrollment and persistence.  For example, The Hill program at the University of Michigan makes students aware of how much financial aid they will receive when they're considering applying. This has increased the likelihood that students will apply to and enroll in the University of Michigan. Wraparound support programs and comprehensive student support programs like the CUNY ASAP program for the community colleges in New York City is a holistic program that works. The Dell Scholars Program at four-year institutions provides financial aid and individualized continuous advisement in real-time with a full-time staff member. Although expensive, countless studies have demonstrated that the impacts they have in terms of increasing persistence and graduation pay off. The college experience will not be linear for every student. Therefore, strengthen partnerships between two-year and four-year institutions, for example. Students who start off at a two-year institution will have a much easier means of making the leap to a four-year institution. Develop reverse transfer interventions and degree-reclamation policies where students who stopped out before obtaining a four-year degree can still get an associate’s degree if they completed enough credits. Colorado automatically grants associate's degrees to these students instead of waiting for them to apply or for a college administrator to make them aware of the opportunity. Build stronger and more effective college partnerships between institutions. Help students take advantage of the resources at another institution.   Read the transcript →   About Our Podcast Guests   Kathryn Peltier Campbell  Kathryn Peltier Campbell is associate director of editorial policy and senior editor/writer at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Kathryn has extensive experience writing, editing, and directing content development for publications focused on topics such as diversity and equity in postsecondary education and the workforce, higher education’s civic mission, and the value of education in contemporary contexts. Prior to joining CEW, she edited periodicals and reports at the American Association of Colleges and Universities, including the flagship periodical Liberal Education. Kathryn has an MA in English from the University of Virginia, where she also earned a BA with a double major in English and physics.   Dr. Zack Mabel Zack Mabel is a research professor of education and economics at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, where he leads research projects that leverage insights from labor and behavioral economics to promote educational opportunity, equity, and economic mobility. His work is motivated by the goal of improving college and later life outcomes for members of historically marginalized groups to achieve a shared vision of economic prosperity in the United States. Prior to joining CEW, he worked most recently as a policy research scientist at the College Board. Zack earned his BA from Brandeis University, MPP from the University of Michigan, and EdD in Quantitative Policy Analysis of Education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.   About the Host   Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in the areas of governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com   #changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

The liberal arts are currently under fire in higher education, with Marymount University in Virginia recently eliminating nine such undergraduate degrees. But should most colleges and universities follow suit, it would harm democracy in America, according to Jeff Scheuer, author of Inside the Liberal Arts: Critical Thinking and Citizenship. “There’s no way a democracy can function based on people who only have technical knowledge and no citizenship skills.”   In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Jeffrey Scheuer about what role the liberal arts should play in relation to STEM and vocational education, how liberal arts help graduates become better citizens, what courses fall within the jurisdiction of the liberal arts, and why the liberal arts are and should remain engrained in the American identity.     Highlights   Inside the Liberal Arts identifies the three main areas of citizenship: economic, civic, and cultural. Without the liberal arts, the cultural and civic aspects of citizenship would be lost. Citizenship is any transaction between the individual and society that includes both give and take. The civic domain includes voting, serving on juries, signing petitions, and anything performed in the civic arena that provides input. The cultural domain consists of the arts and religious and sports institutions because they are all part of the public arena.  The Liberal Arts isn't limited to the humanities. The social sciences, including economics and the natural sciences, especially when dealing with technology and climate change, are part of the liberal arts. Law courses should also be prerequisites since everyone is affected by and lives under the law and, therefore, should gain a sense of what the law entails.  Businesses are looking for liberal arts graduates, not necessarily people who studied business. Similarly, editors are looking for liberal arts majors, not journalism majors, because they have broader educations. Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, who founded the precursor to the University of Pennsylvania, believed that higher education was more than just a pre-professional exercise.  The US became a superpower in the last 170 years since the Civil War, with primarily a liberal arts model of higher education.  Another book that complements Inside the Liberal Arts is After the Ivory Tower Falls by Will Bunch, which is a history of the lost vision of the GI Bill.   #LiberalArts #ChangingHigherEd  #HigherEdPodcast  Read the transcript online →   About Our Podcast Guest   Jeffrey Scheuer   Acclaimed author and freelance writer Jeffrey Scheuer is an information ecosystem expert. Top press professionals and elite educators have sought Scheuer's insight on media, politics, and — most recently — higher education. He's on a mission to illuminate for society what it means to think critically and live as an educated citizen in a thriving democracy. His new book "Inside the Liberal Arts: Critical Thinking and Citizenship" is the only book to systematically relate the liberal arts to thinking rationally and critically. In under 200 pages, "Inside the Liberal Arts" outlines the history, conceptual core, and critical democratic role of liberal education. Scheuer takes liberal arts educators, students, media, and consumers through an exploration of the role of higher education in democracy. Scheuer writes mainly about politics, media, history, and education. His first book, The Sound Bite Society (1999) was named a Choice “Outstanding Academic Title.” He is also the author of The Big Picture: Why Democracies Need Journalistic Excellence (2007). He has published essays, articles, reviews and commentary in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and some two dozen other daily newspapers, and has also published in Dissent, The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Gettysburg Review, Potomac Review, Wilson Quarterly, Nieman Reports, Philosophy Now, Private Pilot, and elsewhere. He lives in pre-Civil War houses that he renovated in New York and West Tisbury, MA.   About the Host   Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in the areas of governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.   The Change Leader’s Social Media Links   LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com