Creeping Commentary

My expertise is in education and I have tried hard to keep my blog focused on just that topic.  I know from reading other blogs that many authors feel qualified and empowered to comment on almost any imaginable topic.  These authors are certainly empowered, they certainly have the right, and for the most part they write well.  It’s just that the expertise isn’t there and therefore for me the comfort level isn’t there.  And yet, I am about to violate my own guideline and talk about an area where I certainly have strong feelings but limited technical expertise.

For the last few weeks, before or after the start of almost every meeting and often also during casual conversation, colleagues have been talking about the new airport screening/scanning devices and the manual “pat down” alternative.  Major newspapers and national news broadcasts are continuously focused on airport security.  Invasion of privacy (both high tech and low tech) is a recurring theme.  And righteous indignation is the usual tone.  Even in casual conversation with friends and neighbors, the same topic keeps coming up.  Perhaps the additional holiday related travel is the reason.  Perhaps a few YouTube videos are the reason.   Perhaps it is the discomfort with what the screening device makes visible or what a “pat down” feels like.  And perhaps we are also encountering a fear of big brother.

I have just recently flown to Hawaii and will be flying to Hawaii again before the end of the year.  Airports don’t thrill me and standing on line waiting for a security screening while at the same time removing my shoes, my belt, and taking my computer out of my carryon bag, thrills me even less.  I imagine we would all agree that airport check-ins don’t quality as a wonderful experience.  But I do place a premium on being safe.  If that safety involves being scanned, I will willingly go through the scanner.  A “pat down” for me is not as desirable or comfortable but if that is the only “safe” alternative, I will comply and accept that alternative.

In a world where unfortunately there are some individuals who are crazy or misguided, we need all the help we can get to prevent their misdeeds from happening.  I would rather have some uncomfortable moments during check-in and a safe flight than an alternative which makes for a more pleasant check-in with much more vulnerability. In the trade-off between safety and comfort, knowing that “all of the above” is not an option, I will always opt for safety.

I feel better for having written this blog; however, my next blog will get back to a focus on education.

Undermatching

The phrase was new to me but the concept and the consequences are very familiar.  William G. Bowen, in giving the keynote address at the recent TIAA-CREF Higher Education Leadership Conference, talked about students and their families underinvesting in higher education. Given the important economic and social benefits of higher education, why would there be underinvestment and how does this work? The reason for the underinvestment is simple—many families are looking for a bargain. They are looking to get the degree at a lower cost or possibly at the lowest cost possible. The bargain priority skews the decision making process; instead of going to the best college or university that you can get into, students are going to the schools that offer the most attractive financial aid packages. Until the 2008 economic meltdown, my impression is that the decision making worked as it had for many years – families and their college bound children attended the (academically or academically and socially) best school they could get into assuming the finances could be worked out.

Now college-bound kids and their families are consciously rejecting the best schools for the best offer.  President Bowen gave the example of a young woman who had gotten into Princeton but without a scholarship.  This college bound student had gotten scholarship offers from all 10 other institutions she had applied to, and the family expected the same response from Princeton.  Princeton’s response was to ask the young women to decide what she wanted—did she want Princeton or did she want a scholarship?  Did she want a Princeton or a school with a lower (or no) net tuition?

There is nothing wrong is seeking out a bargain if the bargain provides the same quality education as the alternatives.  But is that what is happening in higher education?  Much of private higher education is engaged in an escalating tuition discounting (increasing scholarship) race.  Scholarships are increased so as to make one institution more attractive than another.  And the other institution typically responds by increasing its scholarships.  As more money is allocated to scholarships, less money is available for the others costs involved in providing higher education.  As this continues for an extended period of time, what is the end result?

For public higher education, more and more colleges are being asked to educate more students with fewer resources. Educate more but spend less?  Initially there are likely efficiencies to be realized. But when this has happened and the number of students still increases or the budget continues to decline something has to give. And when this happens for an extended period of time, what is the end result?

Those of us in higher education need to more forcefully make the compelling case for higher education.  At the same time we need to make sure we are operating as efficiently as possible.  Our students and their families expect and deserve no less.  We need to also draw the line on excessive tuition discounting or else we will begin to see a strong correlation between tuition discounting and quality discounting.  We need to remind public officials that doing more with less, can ultimately result in doing less with less.  And we need to be forthright in indicating to students, that one danger in undermatching is that if the quality has not remained constant, what appears to be a bargain is really second best.

Athletics on a Smaller Scale

I was at the last soccer match of the season and the tension level was very high.  Team “Blue” had won the last time “Blue” met “Purple” and now “Purple” was vocally calling for revenge while “Blue” wanted to make their superiority  even clearer by also winning this game. All around me the fans were in a state of heightened excitement yelling at the top of their lungs.   Behind me I could clearly hear “Go Blue” as well as “Go get them Purple.”  Next to me on the right, there was a fan yelling “Defense!!!” continuously at the top of his lungs, while on my left there was a fan yelling “Move the ball !!!”    I heard “Defense” and “Move the ball” so often that I’m surprised that I didn’t start saying it in my sleep. Various spectators also called players by name encouraging them to do more and especially to score more.  And if a player seemed reluctant, inevitably that person would be yelled at from the sidelines to get more involved and “PLAY THE GAME!” The coaches were also in a heightened state of tension and excitement.  Each team had multiple coaches working the game.  One advising the goalie of each team, one prompting the defense, and one prompting the offense.  This was clearly serious athletics.  And clearly serious pushing from the fans  who were encouraging  their team in the clearest and loudest ways possible.

I enjoy watching college soccer and I enjoy watching most college sports but this was different in that it wasn’t at the college level.  Actually, it wasn’t at the high school level either and it wasn’t middle school.  What’s left?  The pros?  A senior league?  Neither one.  This was a 4th grade girls’  community soccer match and my daughter was part of the “Blue” team.  Both my daughters played soccer from first grade on, and typically I am sitting on the sidelines watching the matches.  First grade soccer was more a social experience than a game with the kids often not yet fully understanding the concept of a goal or of teamwork.  By fourth grade many are good players and watching the matches is an enjoyable sports experience.  And for the kids involved the experience can also be invaluable—developing skills, the importance of practice, following the rules, being part of a team all teach key life lessons.  But if winning and coming in first becomes paramount, the kids lose.  Tension on the  4th grade soccer field is not a helpful experience and if we push that hard, that early what happens by the time the kids enter high school or college.  Competition is part of life and clearly kids should understand that.  We want our kids to compete effectively on the athletic field, in school, in their chosen profession and in life.  But we need for kids and for their parents to understand, that there is more to life and learning than just competition.

This game ended in a tie.  It was a great game but I am sure that some parents were disappointed.  I  couldn’t help but think about how this situation relates to the level of testing in our schools.  Testing is more and more prevalent in K-12 education.  We know it matters and for those of us in higher education we want our entering students to be as well prepared as possible,  We just need to make sure that in education at every level as well as on the 4th grade soccer field, there is a proper balance.

Technology Trumps Collegiality

Last night I had the pleasure of attending the drama department production of Cabaret.  I thought our students did a terrific job and the production was without doubt at a professional theater level.  During the intermission, I went over to a senior faculty member in drama and we had a chance to catch up for the first time since last spring.  The faculty member commented on how much harder it has become for faculty from throughout the University to just get a chance to talk.  And he talked with fondness about on-site registration.  Up to about 15 years ago, every semester just before the semester began, on-site registration took place.  During this registration, students who had not yet registered and those who wanted a change in program had the opportunity to do so by coming to a large room that had at individual tables, faculty representatives from every department.  For much of the time, the faculty in the room were busy advising students.  But there were periods of time before, after and during when the faculty had moments of time to mingle with other faculty.  It was a good opportunity to catch up with colleagues and inevitably you would also get a chance to meet new colleagues.   You would also interact with administrative colleagues, and in every administrative position I have had, I always made sure I attended at least part of the on-site registration. Every semester you could count on on-site registration to provide the opportunity for faculty from all areas to spend time together.  That opportunity ended when on-line registration began.  Much more convenient and a real improvement for students but the mingle factor was lost.

Also long lost is the social interaction that took place at the University Club when I first started teaching.  At the end of the day and especially at the end of the week, many faculty met for a drink. I don’t miss seeing my colleagues drink, but the socialization was welcome.  I know that faculty still have many opportunities to interact. There are department meetings, school or college meetings and full faculty meetings. The department meetings tend to bring together most if not all the full time faculty in that department.  The school or college meetings often bring together a substantial minority of the faculty in that unit (with smaller units tending to attract a larger percentage to these meetings) and the full faculty meetings at their fullest often attract just a fraction of those eligible to attend.  There are other meetings that attract faculty, most often along political or philosophical lines.   But the regular opportunity to have a large number of “random” faculty just meet—not united by a discipline, not united by a school or college, not united by politics or a philosophy, and not united by a drink, in fact often just united  by being assigned to registration duty, is sorely missed.

Add to this that as scholarly and family obligations have increased, faculty are much less likely to spend extra time on campus and you have a clear sense of the collegiality divide that now exists on most colleges and universities.

I have a very high regard for my colleagues.  Faculty tend to have a high regard for other faculty. We should all look for more opportunities to spend time together.

Parking Revelation

In coming back to my office from a University Lecture, I cut through a main administrative parking lot. The lot has three rows of cars and a total capacity of approximately 60 cars.  Though I don’t normally take much notice of cars in a parking lot, for whatever reason that day these cars caught my attention. In the entire first row of the parking lot, there was one American car.  In looking at the remaining two rows, there was perhaps one more American car. The American cars were not new models and the other cars varied from relatively old to new looking.

In a totally unscientific survey after this experience, I have been looking over the cars in whatever parking lot or street I happen to be in.  The proportions are very similar.  American cars seems always to be a minority, sometimes a small minority while foreign cars—especially Japanese cars—are an overwhelming majority of the cars in any garage, parking lot, strip mall, city street, or neighborhood I come in contact with.  And when there are a significant number of American cars, they tend to be SUV’s.

Given the difficulties that American car companies have encountered, given the American car brands that have disappeared (just recently Saturn, Pontiac, Hummer, Mercury) this is not that surprising. When I grew up, everyone I knew who drove a car drove an American car. The style, the power, the convenience features, the American cars had it all. Foreign cars existed at the fringes; American cars dominated the market.  But as I learned when I purchased a Chevrolet Vega, American cars are not always a solution and are sometimes part of the problem.  The Vega was a totally inadequate car and it took almost two decade before I returned to an American car.

American companies dominated the automobile industry for decades.  But then because the car companies were not listening to the consumer, or because they took the consumer for granted, or because build quality and/or gas mileage did not satisfy the consumer, or because the cost structure of building an American car was no longer competitive, the market for American cars disappeared.

American higher education is still the best in the world.  We deliver quality education on a large scale to a broad range of our college age population as well as or better than anyone.  But just as our dominance of the automobile industry eroded to a mere shadow we should not take for granted that our dominance of higher education will continue.  We have a series of challenges ranging from the increasing importance of distance learning, to the increasing impact of for-profit higher education, to the cost of higher education, to the lack of full appreciation regarding the importance of higher education to our society.  We also face the challenge of increasing foreign competition in the years ahead both for international students as well as our own students.  We need to formulate comprehensive responses to the issues that are confronting us.  And assuming we will always be fine, since it always has been fine, will prepare us as well as GM, Ford, and Chrysler were prepared for their competitive world.