The North Carolina Community College System is poised to become a national leader in career and college readiness. At a time when there is a spotlight on both high schools and community colleges to do a better job preparing students for prosperous careers, the North Carolina Community College System has taken several key steps toward that goal.
Students on both sides of the Atlantic have declared war on the past.
Apparently, the more a school fusses over the inescapable fact that people are diverse, the more likely that it will experience campus turmoil—turmoil that will then be cited as the justification for still more diversity programs. Tennesseans are right to question whether the Office of Diversity and Inclusion at the University of Tennessee’s flagship campus produces educational benefits that are worth the cost.
The idea of free community college has become a topic of national debate in recent years, highlighted by Tennessee’s and Oregon’s enactment of statewide plans, and President Obama’s advocacy for a nationwide program. North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper, who last week won the Democratic nomination for governor, has laid out a lofty education plan that includes tuition-free community college for North Carolina students. How to pay for this plan and its overall structure remains uncertain, but the flaws of similar plans—and more innovative ideas to improve access and outcomes for North Carolina’s community college students—are worth discussion.
Our universities once only took in students who wanted an education. Now those who want an education find it a challenge to get one. We are more and more preparing our students to work at jobs in the economy, but we are less and less preparing them to create, discover, and understand. That is a loss to both our culture and society.
I have spent nearly twenty years teaching at the City University of New York and to keep my job I have had no choice but to pay dues to CUNY’s faculty union, the Professional Staff Congress (PSC). Organized in 1974, the PSC was one of the first public university faculty unions. Since it is located in pro-union New York City, the PSC has had every opportunity to work with politicians to improve CUNY’s reputation, its students’ outcomes, and its faculty’s working conditions. It has failed on each of those measures. The main reason why is that the union leadership prefers to maximize its power and inflow of money at the expense of the students’ education and the well-being of many faculty members.
UNC President Margaret Spellings has said that the North Carolina legislature’s proposed Guaranteed Admissions Program (NC GAP) has identified the right problem, but has come up with the wrong solution. Her vision is of a UNC system accessible to everyone and educating everyone—not just elites. That vision, however, should include NC GAP, which focuses on access—through the community college system—and success at many educational levels.
At the Pope Center we spend a lot of time recommending changes to higher education policy. It’s in our name. But there are ways you—as a citizen, parent, student, or employer—can pressure higher education to change.
Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah and Representatives Kevin Brady of Texas and Peter Roskam of Illinois wrote a letter on February 8 to the presidents of 56 private colleges and universities, who all hold endowments of more than $1 billion. In the letter, the Republican committee chairmen wrote, “Despite these large and growing endowments, many colleges and universities have raised tuition far in excess of inflation” and said they want to hear officials explain to their committees “how colleges and universities are using endowment assets to fulfill their charitable and educational purposes.” The presidents have until April 1 to reply. It will be interesting to see how many defend against the letter’s implication that they don’t properly use their endowments as they keep increasing tuition. Of course, the politicians don’t just want to satisfy their intellectual curiosity; they’re looking for a justification to change the law.
Federal, state, and local higher education laws seem to multiply by the hour. Bureaucrats now dictate campus policies regarding academics, sexual assault, athletics, dining, technology, employment, campus construction, and student health, among other areas. Meanwhile, schools devote millions of dollars and valuable resources to comply with those rules—many of which confuse and do little to improve student outcomes.