Using Data to Tell Your Story

Posted on April 28, 2023May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

With a few exceptions, staff from all colleges and universities use data to complete regulatory compliance and accreditation work on a regular basis. Much of the time these tasks are routine, and some might say, mundane. Once programs are approved, staff typically only need to submit an annual report to a state department of education or accrediting body unless the institution wants to make major changes such as add new programs or satellite campus, change to a different educational model, and so on.

And then typically every 7-10 years a program or institution must reaffirm their program approval or accreditation. That process is much more complex than the work completed on an annual basis.

Regardless of whether an institution is simply completing its annual work or if they are reaffirming its accreditation, all strategic decisions must be informed or guided by data. Many institutions seem to struggle in this area but there are some helpful practices based on my experiences over the years:

Tips for Using Data to Tell Your Story

Know exactly what question(s) you are expecting to answer from your assessment data or other pieces of evidence. If you don’t know the question(s), how can you know you can provide the information accreditors are looking for?
Be selective when it comes to which assessments you will use. Choose a set of key assessments that will inform your decision making over time, and then make strategic decisions based on data trend lines. In other words, avoid the “kitchen sink” approach when it comes to assessments and pieces of evidence in general. Less is more, as long as you choose your sources carefully.
Make sure the assessments you use for accreditation purposes are of high quality. If they are proprietary instruments, that’s a plus because the legwork of determining elements such as validity and reliability has already been done for you. If you have created one or more instruments in-house, you must ensure their quality in order to yield accurate, consistent results over time. I talked about validity and reliability in previous articles. If you don’t make sure you are using high-quality assessments, you can’t draw conclusions about their data with any confidence. As a result, you can’t really use those instruments as part of your continuous program improvement process.
Take the time to analyze your data and try to “wring out” all those little nuggets of information they can provide. At a minimum, be sure to provide basic statistical information (i.e., N, mean, median, mode, standard deviation, range). What story are those data trying to tell you within the context of one or more regulatory standards?
Present the data in different ways. For example, disaggregate per program or per satellite campus as well as aggregate it as a whole program or whole institution.
Include charts and graphs that will help explain the data visually. For example, portraying data trends through line graphs or bar graphs can be helpful for comparing a program’s licensure exam performance against counterparts from across the state, or satellite campuses with the main campus.
Write a narrative that “tells a story” based on key assessment data. Use these data as supporting pieces of evidence in a self-study report. Narratives should fully answer what’s being asked in a standard, but they should be written clearly and concisely. In other words, provide enough information, but don’t provide more than what’s being asked for.

Let’s face it: Compliance and accreditation work can be tricky and quite complex. But using data from high-quality assessments can be incredibly helpful in “telling your story” to state agencies and accrediting bodies.

###

About the Author: A former public school teacher and college administrator, Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher provides consultative support to colleges and universities in quality assurance, accreditation, and competency-based education. Specialty: Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP). She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Top Photo Credit: Markus Winkler on Unsplash

Interrater Reliability Ensures Consistency

Posted on April 14, 2023May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

In a previous article, we focused on determining content validity using the Lawshe method when gauging the quality of an assessment that’s been developed “in-house.” As a reminder, content validity pertains to how well each item measures what it’s intended to measure and the Lawshe method determines the extent to which each item is necessary and appropriate for the intended group of test takers. In this piece, we’ll zero in on interrater reliability.

Internally Created Assessments Often Lack Quality Control

Many colleges and universities use a combination of assessments to measure their success. This is particularly true when it comes to accreditation and the process of continuous program improvement. Some of these assessments are proprietary, meaning that they were created externally—typically by a state department of education or an assessment development company. Other assessments are internally created, meaning that they were created by faculty and staff inside the institution. Proprietary assessments have been tested for quality control relative to quality indicators such as validity and reliability. However, it’s common for institutional staff to confirm these elements in the assessments that are created in-house. In many cases, a department head determines they need an additional data source and so they tap the shoulder of faculty members to quickly create something they think will suffice. After a quick review, the instrument is approved and goes “live” without piloting or additional quality control checks.

Skipping these important quality control methods can wreak havoc later on, when an institution attempts to pull data and use it for accreditation or other regulatory purposes. Just as a car will only run well when its tank is filled with the right kind of fuel, data are only as good as the assessment itself. Without reliable data to that will yield consistent results over multiple administrations, it’s nearly impossible to draw conclusions and make programmatic decisions with confidence.

Interrater Reliability

One quality indicator that’s often overlooked is interrater reliability. In a nutshell, this is a fancy way of saying that an assessment will yield consistent results over multiple administrations by multiple evaluators. We most often see this used in conjunction with a performance-based assessment such as a rubric, where faculty or clinical supervisors go into the field to observe and evaluate the performance of a teacher candidate, a nursing student, counseling student, and so on. A rubric could also be used to evaluate a student’s professional dispositions at key intervals in a program, course projects, and the like.

In most instances, a program is large enough to have more than one clinical supervisor or faculty member in a given course who observe and evaluate student performance. When that happens, it’s extremely important that each evaluator rates student performance through a common lens. If for example one evaluator rates student performance quite high or quite low in key areas, it can skew data dramatically. Not only is this grading inconsistency unfair to students but it’s also highly problematic for institutions that are trying to make data-informed decisions as part of their continuous program improvement model. Thus, we must determine interrater reliability.

Using Percent Paired Agreement to Determine Interrater Reliability

One common way to determine interrater reliability is through the percent paired agreement method. It’s actually the simplest way to say with confidence that supervisors or faculty members who evaluate student performance based on the same instrument will rate them similarly and consistently over time. Here are the basic steps involved in determining interrater reliability using the percent paired agreement method:

Define the behavior or performance to be assessed: The first step is to define precisely what behavior or performance is to be assessed. For example, if the assessment is of a student’s writing ability, assessors must agree on what aspects of writing to evaluate, such as grammar, structure, and coherence as well as any specific emphasis or weight should be given to specific criteria categories. This is often already decided when the rubric is being created.

Select the raters: Next, select the clinical supervisors or faculty members who will assess the behavior or performance. It is important to choose evaluators who are trained in the assessment process and who have sufficient knowledge and experience to assess the behavior or performance accurately. Having two raters for each item is ideal—hence the name paired agreement.

Assign samples to each rater for review: Assign a sample of rubrics to each evaluator for independent evaluation. The sample size should be large enough to ensure statistical significance and meaningful results. For example, it may be helpful to pull work samples from 10% of the entire student body in a given class for this exercise, if there are 100 students in the group. The samples should either be random, or representative of all levels of performance (high, medium, low).

Compare results: Compare the results of each evaluator’s ratings of the same performance indicators using a simple coding system. For each item where raters agree, code it with a 1. For each item where raters disagree, code it with a 0. This is called an exact paired agreement, which I recommend over an adjacent paired agreement. In my opinion, the more precise we can be the better.

Calculate the interrater reliability score: Calculate the interrater reliability score based on the level of agreement between the raters. A high score indicates a high level of agreement between the raters, while a low score indicates a low level of agreement. The number of agreements between the two raters is then divided by the total number of items, and this number is multiplied by 100 to express it as a percentage. For example, if two raters independently score 10 items, and they agree on 8 of the items, then their interrater reliability would be 80%. This means that the two raters were consistent in their scoring 80% of the time.

Interpret the results: Finally, interpret the results to determine whether the assessment is reliable within the context of paired agreement. Of course, 100% is optimal but the goal should be to achieve a paired agreement of 80% or higher for each item. If the interrater reliability score is high, it indicates that the data harvested from that assessment is likely to be reliable and consistent over multiple administrations. If the score is low, it suggests that those items on the assessment need to be revised, or that additional evaluator training is necessary to ensure greater consistency.

Like determining content validity using Lawshe, the percent paired agreement method in determining interrater reliability is straightforward and practical. By following these steps, higher education faculty and staff can use the data from internally created assessments with confidence as part of their continuous program improvement efforts.

###

The Path to Academic Quality

Posted on April 11, 2023May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

All colleges and universities want their students to succeed. That requires offering current, relevant, and robust programs. But what is the path to academic quality? How can faculty and administrators know for sure that what they are offering is meeting the needs of students? Here are five recommendations:

Embrace Technology: With the advancement of technology, universities can adopt innovative approaches for data collection, analysis, and program evaluation. For instance, leveraging artificial intelligence to analyze large data sets can help identify patterns and trends that may not be apparent with traditional methods. This can lead to more insightful recommendations for program improvement.

Create a Culture of Continuous Improvement: The culture of the university should be centered around continuous improvement. All stakeholders should be encouraged to provide feedback on the programs regularly. This feedback should be analyzed and acted upon to ensure that the programs are up-to-date, relevant, and of high quality.

Involve All Stakeholders: All stakeholders, including faculty, students, alumni, industry professionals, and accrediting agencies, should be involved in the quality assurance process. Each of these groups can offer unique perspectives and insights that can help improve the academic programs.

Develop Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): KPIs are essential metrics used to measure the success of an academic program. These metrics can include student outcomes, faculty satisfaction, and retention rates. Universities can leverage KPIs to monitor and improve the quality of their programs continually.

Invest in Faculty Development: Faculty members play a crucial role in program quality. Therefore, universities should invest in their professional development to ensure they are equipped with the latest knowledge and skills to deliver quality instruction. By providing faculty with ongoing professional development opportunities, universities can enhance program quality and ensure that students receive a high-quality education.

By having a comprehensive quality assurance system, colleges and universities can be assured that they are on the right path to academic quality.

###

Top Photo Credit: Nathan Dumlao on Unsplash

Exceptional Academic Programs

Posted on April 4, 2023May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Exceptional Academic Programs.

If you look at their mission statements, nearly all colleges and universities strive to serve students and support their success through innovation and high-quality course offerings. But how do they know what they offer is truly exceptional? Here are five innovative tips for how colleges and universities can ensure that they have outstanding academic programs through their quality assurance system:

Focus on student learning outcomes: The ultimate goal of any academic program is to help students learn and grow. To ensure that your programs are meeting this goal, it’s important to focus on student learning outcomes. This means regularly collecting data on student learning, such as grades, test scores, and surveys of student satisfaction. You can then use this data to identify areas where your programs are succeeding and areas where they could be improved.

Engage in continuous improvement: Quality assurance is not a one-time event. It’s an ongoing process of collecting data, analyzing it, and making changes to improve student learning. To be successful, you need to create a culture of continuous improvement within your institution. This means encouraging faculty and staff to be constantly looking for ways to improve their teaching and learning practices.

Use data to drive decision-making: The data you collect through your quality assurance system can be a valuable tool for making decisions about your academic programs. For example, if you find that students are struggling in a particular course, you can use this information to make changes to the course content or delivery. Or, if you find that a particular program is not meeting the needs of its students, you can use this information to make changes to the program or to discontinue it altogether.

Involve all stakeholders: Quality assurance is not just about the faculty and staff who teach the courses. It’s also about the students who take the courses, the alumni who graduate from the programs, and the employers who hire the graduates. To be successful, you need to involve all of these stakeholders in your quality assurance process. This means getting their input on the goals of your programs, the data you collect, and the changes you make.

Be transparent: Quality assurance should be an open and transparent process. This means sharing your data and findings with all stakeholders, including students, faculty, staff, alumni, and employers. It also means being willing to discuss the challenges you face and the changes you make to improve your programs.

By following these tips, higher education personnel can create a quality assurance system that will help ensure that the academic programs they offer are truly exceptional.

###

Top Photo Credit: Element5 Digital on Unsplash

Survey: Nonprofit vs. For-Profit Colleges

Posted on March 7, 2023May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

A fascinating survey has just been released by Public Agenda, a nonprofit research and public engagement firm. Investigators collected data from a representative sample of graduates from both nonprofit and for-profit colleges. They received a total of 413 responses, including 217 nonprofit online alumni and 169 for-profit online alumni. Questions focused on respondents’ at-large perceptions about their chosen institution and were not program-specific.

Major Takeaways

There were three big takeaways for me in the survey results:

Affordability, accreditation, and whether or not their credits would transfer played more of a role in choosing a college for nonprofit alumni than for graduates of for-profit programs, the survey found.
The only factor in which for-profits exceeded nonprofits was providing hands-on financial aid application support to students.
About half of nonprofit online alumni (52 percent) enrolled in college in order to get ahead in their current job, compared to 25 percent of for-profit online alumni.

Survey Leads to More Questions

This leads me to ponder some additional questions to consider:

Were students who chose a for-profit college so enamored by the personalized, hands-on support in securing financial aid that the institution’s accreditation status became less important?
Related, did all of attention they received from the for-profit institution overshadow the affordability factor?
Why didn’t those choosing a for-profit institution consider transfer credit policies when making their decision where to attend college? Was this the result of a “hard sell” approach from for-profit enrollment counselors, or some other reason?
Survey data indicate twice as many students who chose a nonprofit institution were already employed as those who chose for-profit institution. Does this suggest that for-profits may be targeting and recruiting prospective students who are already underemployed, less financially secure, and thus potentially more receptive to the personalized financial aid assistance they receive?
Would survey results be consistent if disaggregated by academic program?
If nonprofit institutions stepped up their game and provided more direct support in the financial aid application process, would this further diminish the appeal that for-profits hold?

More Research Needed

The higher education community needs to make data-informed decisions about how best to serve students. It would be great to see institutions include formalized research in annual goals as part of their strategic plan. Anecdotal information abounds, but there doesn’t appear to be a repository for quality research that compares the nonprofit vs. for-profit space. It’s time we made that happen.

###

Top Graphic Credit: pxhere.com

Competency-Based Education: One Key to Higher Ed’s Future

Posted on January 8, 2022May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Education writer and administrator Matt Reed recently published a review of a recent book that focuses on the uncertain future of United States higher education. Published by Johns Hopkins University Press, The Great Upheaval provides a comprehensive examination of the institution of higher education. Authors Arthur Levine and Scott Van Pelt successfully mesh historical foundations with implications for the role that our colleges and universities will play over the next several decades.

Something Reed zeroed in on caught my eye. As a consultant who supports institutions in both accreditation and competency-based education, I was intrigued that he noted the implications for both in a single observation:

“The most intriguing prediction, to my mind, was around accreditation. They predict that the object of accreditation will shift from the institution to the student, with something like accreditors verifying that students have achieved certain defined competencies. Where they achieved them is much less important.”

This is spot on. In years past, the traditional model of post-secondary teaching and learning was established and unquestioned. Faculty taught from a lectern at the front of a classroom. We “imparted our knowledge” to students in the form of lectures. They came to class, sat passively feverishly taking notes, and regurgitated what they had heard in lectures on an exam.

Exams comprised what were typically low-level objective items with a predominant blend of true/false, fill-in-the-bubble or short essay questions. In many cases, they were scored by machine for convenience. Student grades were based on attending class and passing exams. There was never any assurance that students were actually learning on a deep level. In other words, as long as they played by the rules, they progressed in their program and eventually graduated.

Traditional Regulatory Oversight

Accrediting bodies have embraced that traditional educational model. Credits were assigned according to the Carnegie unit. Course content was easily understood by reviewing a course description or syllabus. Institutional quality was measured by metrics such as faculty qualifications and scholarly activity; student retention; and low student loan default rates.

While these factors are each important there is one metric that’s been mostly overlooked: To what extent are students actually learning? Enter the competency-based education (CBE) model.

Competency-Based Education (CBE)

This approach to teaching and learning has gained traction over the past decade. I’ve written on CBE several times before. As I explained in my piece The Time Has Come for Competency-Based Education:

Competency-based education isn’t an easier way to learn or to earn a college degree–it’s just different.

With this model, teaching and learning are completely different from that of traditional classrooms. Students must actually demonstrate what they know and are able to do against a set of standards-based, measurable competencies. Faculty serve more as mentors and learning resources, as opposed to providing direct instruction. CBE requires everyone – students, faculty, and departmental staff to think very differently.

In order to survive and thrive, I really do believe that we will see a greater emphasis from regulatory agencies on measurable student learning. Authors Levine and Van Pelt spoke to this in their book. This transition will require institutions to critically reexamine their long-held practices and likely make programmatic and infrastructure modifications. Some will be up to the challenge. They will gradually start building a competency-based design lean heavily toward making data-informed decisions. Sadly, other higher education institutions will not make this transition, from either a lack of desire or a lack of know-how. Those institutions that cannot adopt a more student-centric model will fail.

###

Top Graphic Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Consultants Aren’t Necessary. Until They Are.

Posted on August 19, 2021May 8, 2023 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

“We really didn’t think we needed a consultant.”
“We thought we could handle it in-house.”
“We just didn’t have the money to pay for a consultant.”
“We’re a small institution. Surely ____ will take that into consideration during the site visit.”

I’d venture a guess that very few higher education institutions build external consulting fees into their annual budgets. Administrators make sure all the essentials are covered, such as hiring faculty and staff, facility and grounds maintenance, advertising, travel, IT infrastructure, legal fees, and the like. But hardly any ever plan for needing to hire a consultant to help with compliance and accreditation matters.

That’s because higher education administrators never think they need outside guidance. Until they realize that they do.

And many times, they come to this realization very late in the accreditation game. I’ve received calls from frantic department chairs, deans, and presidents whose anxiety you could literally feel through the phone.

They thought they had things under control, and then something happened that threw their plans out of orbit. Over the years, I’ve been brought in when a key faculty member, assessment coordinator, or department chair has taken a job with another university. I’ve also been called when the institution’s dean had been incompetent for many years and executive leaders allowed him to stay in that position. Those leaders thought the path of least resistance was to stay the course and it worked for a while with others providing cover, but then they discovered by accident that the institution was scheduled for a national accreditation site review in a few months.

I’ve also been called on to help when the horse has already left the stall – when an institution actually had lost their accreditation and by default, their state program approval. They had students enrolled in multiple programs, but were unable to recommend them for state licensure because they were no longer authorized to do so.

As one might imagine, those situations are messy. They are uncomfortable. But these are when an experienced consultant is well worth their fee. Of course, no consultant can ever guarantee a positive end result–that’s impossible–but someone with the right skill set and expertise can get an institution back on solid footing and headed back in the right direction.

CHEA fellow Rachel Smith recently penned a thoughtful piece that presents the benefits and drawbacks of hiring independent contractors. She also offers some alternatives for higher education administrators to consider if for whatever reason a paid consultant just isn’t feasible. It’s a useful guide to keep handy.

In this ever-changing landscape of state, regional, and national regulations, it can be a comfort to know that when the chips are down and the stakes are high, an experienced consultant’s fees can be money well spent.

###

Top Graphic Credit: Dan Dimmock on Unsplash

Gainful Employment: The Saga Continues

Posted on May 21, 2021 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

The Gainful Employment Rule is back in the headlines, at least within the higher education sphere. According to a fact sheet provided by the Institute for College Access & Success (ICAS), the current Higher Education Act requires that all career education programs receiving federal student aid — many of which are for-profit institutions — “prepare students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation.”

Watching all the changes connected to this Rule has been akin to watching a tennis match over the past six years, and it looks like there’s more to come.

Obama Enacts Gainful Employment Rule

In 2015, the Obama Administration enacted the Gainful Employment Rule to protect unsuspecting students from unscrupulous for-profit predatory institutions.

Needless to say, for-profit institutions hated the Gainful Employment Rule. Why? Because they could no longer rake in huge sums of tuition money, much of which came directly from the federal government, without accountability.

In other words, they could no longer enroll unsuspecting students, issue a diploma that often wasn’t worth the paper it was written on, and leave bewildered graduates out in the cold and unable to find work. To make matters worse, these graduates were then saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in student loan debt.

Data generated from the Education Department and crunched by the ICAS confirm that more than 350,000 students who graduated between 2010 and 2012 fell prey to predatory, low-quality for-profit institutions. These institutions could be categorized as the “bottom of the barrel” in terms of academic quality. They were dangerously close to losing their accreditation, meaning they could no longer qualify to receive federal financial aid money.

Just how much taxpayer money did those for-profits rake in from those unsuspecting graduates who had worked so hard to make a better life for themselves and their families? Nearly $7.5 billion. The result was 350,000 men and women who found themselves strapped down in student loan debt and unable to find work. These individuals were often first-generation college students and people of color.

Keep in mind that these figures are only for program completers (graduates). The data would be far higher if we included those who began programs and then for whatever reason had to drop out.

New Administration, New Policy on Gainful Employment

The for-profit world was ecstatic when Donald Trump appointed Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary. Because of her background in the for-profit education business, they already viewed her as a friend. It took very little lobbying to convince her that higher education institutions shouldn’t be held accountable for their graduates’ success.

As a result, in 2019 the Trump Administration rescinded the Gainful Employment Rule and immediately allowed schools to stop complying. It’s now as if the rule had never existed. In fact, when running a search for Gainful Employment here’s a screenshot of what you will currently find on the Education Department website:

As a result, predatory for-profits have been allowed to play in the sandbox unfettered for two years without any gainful employment accountability.

To sweeten the deal even more, the Trump Administration’s Education Department also rolled back another Obama-era decision to shut down the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS). This particular accrediting body caters to for-profit predators who can’t earn accreditation from other bodies. Their efforts are mostly rubber-stamped and institutions aren’t held accountable for outcomes. I’ve written previously about ACICS and the institutions it has granted accreditation in ACICS: It’s Time to Pull the Plug and The Dominoes That Didn’t Have to Fall: Vatterott College, the ECA, and Others Like Them.

Rescinding the Gainful Employment Rule and ACICS went hand-in-glove.

Another New Administration, Another New Policy

According to reporting in the Chronicle of Higher Education, the Biden Administration will likely take steps to reverse the damage caused by the rescission of the Gainful Employment Rule, but it won’t happen overnight.

The process will require a lengthy rule-making process and if approved, won’t take effect until at least mid-2022.

That gives the predatory for-profit world enough time to mount a defense through highly-paid lobbyists. Their efforts can sway public opinion and lawmakers’ minds.

If reinstating the Gainful Employment Rule was as easy as it was to rescind it, we could protect the lives of hundreds of thousands of victimized students. We could also save billions of taxpayer dollars that continue to fatten the bank accounts of for-profit presidents.

###

About the Author: Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher has expertise in higher education quality assurance, educator preparation, and competency-based education. A former public school teacher and college administrator, Roberta is now an educational consultant specializing in the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP).

Twitter: @RRossFisher

Email: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Top Graphic Credit: princess on Unsplash

Unforced Errors Could Derail For-Profit Deal

Posted on May 3, 2021May 21, 2021 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Updated May 5, 2021: The Higher Learning Commission removed Walden’s governmental investigation designation from their website. The University and Laureate are likely breathing a big sigh of relief because of this decision, but they still have a long way to go before this is put behind them.

A series of alleged unscrupulous practices at one institution could end up derailing three for-profit companies within the higher education sector.

Students, faculty, and investors in Walden University, its parent company Laureate Education, and potential buyer Adtalem Global Education could all be negatively impacted as a result of ongoing governmental regulatory investigations brought about by allegations that Walden was less than honest about one of its programs.

Cash-Strapped For-Profit Laureate Education

Apparently, Laureate has been bleeding cash for quite some time and has been strategically trying to quietly sell off low-hanging fruit that weren’t money makers. According to its 2020 3rd Quarter SEC report, they ceased operations in Europe, Central America, Asia, and Saudia Arabia back in 2017-2018.

Those divestitures didn’t make a big enough impact on their debt load so they started looking around to see what else they could sell. In 2020, they found buyers for their operations in Chile, Brazil, Australia, and New Zealand. The company briefly considered operating in Chile as a non-profit but that idea was nixed due to a changing political and regulatory climate.

As a result of these sell-offs, only Mexico and Peru currently serve as Laureate’s principal foreign markets.

COVID-19’s Not the Cause for Laureate’s Financial Woes

In its SEC report, Laureate wrote about the global impact COVID-19 has had on higher education operations, both domestically and around the world. While that’s certainly true, Laureate’s financial woes can’t be blamed on COVID because they started long before the virus reared its ugly head. The company admitted as much, but tried to make the argument that the pandemic could potentially further impair its future financial health if its ability to enroll students, raise tuition, and collect student debt was hampered.

Every higher education institution in the world could make that statement.

Selling off operations in foreign countries helped Laureate’s debt load, but not significantly. The sales from Brazil, New Zealand, Australia, and others only brought in a few hundred thousand dollars apiece. Laureate’s in need of some serious cash.

Walden University: A Potential Game Changer for Laureate’s Bank Account

In a purchase finalized back in 2004, Laureate Education owns Walden University, based in Minneapolis. Walden has operated within the higher education space for quite some time. The institution has about 50,000 students and has generally held a good reputation.

A significant part of Walden’s success can be attributed to the fact that it has been regionally accredited by the Higher Learning Commission since 1990. Many of their programs also hold highly coveted specialized accreditation:

Business (Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs)
Counseling (Council for Accreditation of Counseling and Related Educational Programs)
Education (Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation)
Nursing (Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education)
Project Management (Global Accreditation Center for Project Management Education Programs)
Public Health (Council on Education for Public Health)
Social Work (Council on Social Work Education)
Technology (Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology)

According to its SEC report, Laureate has a buyer for Walden. It plans to seal the deal by the end of 2021.

Adtalem Global Education

The potential buyer is Adtalem Global Education, which used to be known as the DeVry Education Group until 2017. It turns out that the company’s name change came about after DeVry University agreed to pay $100 million to settle a Federal Trade Commission lawsuit alleging it misled tens of thousands of students about their post-graduation job and income prospects, according to the Chicago Tribune.

According to its website, Adtalem currently owns and operates eight institutions and companies and has a presence in 209 territories and countries.

Adtalem’s primary focus seems to be strictly on the nursing programs. According to a press release, the company’s goal after acquiring Walden is to become number one for total undergraduate and graduate nursing enrollment in the U.S. with 90,000 students.

In order to achieve this lofty goal, Adtalem plans to lay down a hefty $1.5 billion for the University. In cash. What will happen to the rest of Walden University’s academic programs that lie outside the healthcare professions remains unknown.

Giant Flies in the For-Profit Ointment

The deal between Laureate and Adtalem isn’t sealed just yet. On September 11, 2020, the two companies entered into a sale agreement. However, just three days later on September 14, 2020 the Civil Division of the US Department of Justice notified Walden the University of its investigation.

One month after that, the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) notified Walden they were planning to publish a public “Governmental Investigation” designation to the University on its website due to the DOJ inquiry. In a desperate move, Laureate filed a lawsuit against the HLC to force them to remove the public designation. The DOJ decided not to act and sent it back, according to a US District Court document released on April 23.

In addition, Higher Ed Dive reports that there are allegations Walden made misrepresentations about its Master of Science in Nursing program to the Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (CCNE), and that it falsely advertised aspects of the degree to students, including the availability of clinical site placements required to complete the program.

In other words, Walden University and Laureate Education are in hot water.

Even if all these allegations are disproved this sale may still not go through. It would then have to pass through a series of regulatory hoops. Any one of them could significantly delay or derail the transaction.

One major hurdle is getting the deal approved by the HLC. That accreditor must approve the university’s substantive change application for Adtalem to take ownership. This won’t be easy given the circumstances.

It turns out that these alleged unforced errors could potentially derail this for-profit deal within the higher education sector. Laureate Education could see its financial position weaken even further if it’s not able to make the $1.5 billion sale. Adtalem’s strategic goal of becoming the biggest dog in the park for healthcare enrollments could go up in smoke. And perhaps worst of all, Walden University could lose something that money cannot buy: Its good name and reputation.

###

Twitter: @RRossFisher

Email: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Top Graphic Credit: Vladimir Solomyani on Unsplash

Comprehensive Student Mentoring

Posted on November 17, 2020May 21, 2021 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Because of COVID, higher education institutions are facing huge financial challenges. Many students have cut way back on the number of credit hours that they’ve taken in the past, while many more have decided to put college on hold for now. There are very few college and university presidents who haven’t lost more than a few nights’ sleep over how they’re going to continue to pay for faculty, staff, and programs when Full Time Enrollment (FTE) numbers have dropped significantly.

Open Door Policy Can Lead to a Revolving Door Student Body

In order to keep the doors open, some institutions have tried creative ways to boost enrollment. One common way is to move to an open-enrollment model. Essentially, institutions are laying aside many of their traditional admission requirements in order to make it easier for new students to gain entry. Examples include passing entrance exams such as the ACT or SAT as well as high school GPA of at least 2.0.

This decision can be effective from a recruitment and enrollment perspective because it can give enrollment a “shot in the arm” when an institution needs it most. The upside is that employee furloughs or layoffs are reduced and in some cases even eliminated, and programs don’t have to be cut. However, the consequence is that those institutions admitted a sizable number of students who were not equipped for success.

Anecdotally, professors report decreased student participation–particularly in their online courses. In addition, the quality of work being submitted is noticeably lower than in previous semesters. When students aren’t actively engaging in their classes or perhaps not even logging in for days or weeks at a time, they likely aren’t going to be successful at the end of the semester. Subsequently, students who fail courses don’t continue to receive federal financial aid for very long. That means they aren’t able to pay for college and thus drop out, likely never to return.

Struggling Students Also Cause Institutional Challenges

Not only does this have a devastating impact on those students’ lives, but it also has long term effects on those colleges and universities that enrolled them. In order to maintain their accreditation and thus be able to receive federal financial aid, colleges and universities must collect data on metrics such as satisfactory academic progress, retention, persistence to graduation, and student satisfaction.

When institutions adopt an “open enrollment” policy that lasts more than a semester or two, it can have a lasting impact on those metrics. Consequently, when it comes time for an institution’s annual reports or next accreditation site visit, the damage caused by temporary stop-gap policies can potentially be devastating.

One Solution: Comprehensive Mentoring

I recently recommended to one university that they should consider adopting a comprehensive mentoring program to support students who aren’t able to demonstrate a propensity for success upon admission.

When they hear the term mentoring many people think it’s the same as academic advising. That’s simply not the case. I look at a comprehensive mentoring program to be academic advising on steroids: It must contain that important traditional academic advising piece, but it adds an important layer of support that helps students in a variety of other ways. For example, trained mentors can help students:

Stay on pace and complete their coursework on time
Navigate through the institution’s various departments or bureaucracy
Locate social, economic, or emotional support resources
Achieve their academic goals and attain success

Just having a strong mentoring program in place doesn’t mean all students will succeed in school. But it’s important for institutions to be able to quickly identify at-risk students and provide them with the kind of support they need. These safety nets can come in many forms, including remediation and intervention. To the greatest extent possible though, I believe a proactive support model is far better than waiting until a student is struggling to reach out to them.

Four Essential Mentoring Components

I just finished reading Dr. Jill Biden’s doctoral dissertation on Student Retention. Those who really know me should not be surprised to read that this brings me joy and I considered it “pleasure” reading! While it’s a bit light on statistical methodology and there are a few APA errors (my eyes always seem to land on them), the dissertation is very well written. The biggest takeaway is that relative to her conclusions, SHE IS RIGHT. While Bidens’ research focuses on the community college level, her recommendations are equally appropriate for four-year institutions. A recent article the Chronicle for Higher Education encapsulated Biden’s findings into four major categories:

Deep Advising Relationships: The old saying is true – people remember how you make them feel. It takes both time and effort to build a relationship based on trust and mutual respect, but this is a crucial aspect of an effective mentoring program.
Faculty Mentoring Programs: As I previously stated, a comprehensive mentoring program involves a whole lot more than just traditional academic advising with a staff member. There’s an important role that faculty can and should play. It’s also important to remember that all mentors need their own training and support in order to help students attain success.
Mental Health Services: Even under the best of circumstances, many college students struggle adjusting to a new environment, developing into adulthood, and making good personal choices. However, starting college during a pandemic amplifies student stress exponentially. Having the support of caring, competent mentors can help.
More Deliberate Thought to Student Pathways: At the P-12 level, teachers devote considerable attention to setting students up for success through appropriate curriculum, instructional methods, and assessments. Higher education is still in its infancy with regard to designing programs that are relevant, meaningful, and appropriate for student success. Historically, the approach has been to demand that students conform to an existing program model. As a result, we see high numbers of students who struggle and often drop out. We as an educational community need to greatly advance our thinking in this area.

Tracking Student Success is Essential to Effective Mentoring

Once an institution admits a student, it then takes on the responsibility for that student’s academic success. As I have tried to emphasize above, a comprehensive mentoring program can provide the kind of support at-risk students need to help them experience success and achieve their goals. However, just putting those four major components that Biden recommends in place doesn’t guarantee that students will be successful. In order to know for sure, we must have a way to track their success. That requires quality data.

In his commentary about using data to support student success in a competency-based education (CBE) model, Kurt Gunnell detailed his institution’s data-driven approach to carefully tracking student success. Western Governors University is not only a CBE institution; it’s also completely online. It’s one of the nation’s largest universities with more than 120,000 students, many of whom are first-generation college students or come from under-represented populations. While recruitment and enrollment aren’t challenges for WGU, faculty and staff work very hard to retain those students and support them from the point of admission to graduation. WGU can tout a first to second year retention rate of 86% for first-time, full-time students. That’s impressive, and it’s due in no small part to the institution’s mentoring program. But a successful mentoring program doesn’t just happen organically. It depends on an effective way to identify at-risk students, track their progress, and measure the impact of various types of support. Gunnell’s commentary details his institution’s new data tracking model.

The Time is Right to Consider Mentoring

As higher education professionals, we know that some students will always struggle more than others. Adopting a “sink or swim” policy has never been a good idea, but until recently many have given little thought to metrics such as student retention and persistence to graduation. Perhaps in this Age of COVID, at a time when colleges and universities are being forced to reexamine what they can do to adapt and survive, it would be a good idea to give serious consideration to a comprehensive mentoring program.

###

Twitter: @RRossFisher

Email: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Top Graphic Credit: Clay Banks on Unsplash

Online Learning: The Future of Higher Education

Posted on March 24, 2020May 21, 2021 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Bloomberg reports that 2.4 million undergraduate college students took all their coursework online last fall–a mere 15% of the total number of students pursuing a baccalaureate degree at the time. Another 3.6 million took at least one online course in addition to taking classes on campus in a traditional face-to-face learning environment. That figure doubled in approximately two weeks.

Online Learning: 300 and Counting

Because of the COVID-19 crisis, college and university presidents across the United States have been scrambling to provide alternatives to traditional coursework. Currently, almost 300 higher education institutions have either shut their doors entirely or have transitioned to a distance learning format. That’s impacting nearly 4 million students. What’s more, the number could certainly go higher.

While many have resisted distance education for the past two decades, university administrators are transitioning to online learning at lightning speed for two reasons (1) so students can continue to meet degree requirements and (2) so they won’t have to refund tuition and fees, thereby placing their institutions in dire straits financially.

Higher Education Teetering on the Edge

Even before the COVID-19 crisis, many higher education institutions were already struggling financially. Small, liberal arts colleges have been particularly hard hit due to a combination of factors such as (1) an increased emphasis on workforce development in STEM areas, (2) a strong national economy, and (3) lackluster state funding.

USA Today reports that Moody’s credit agency recently downgraded its 2020 outlook for higher education from “stable” to “negative.” Even prior to COVID-19 30% of all public and private institutions were already operating in the red, and now this. Nicht gut.

Fortunately, higher education institutions aren’t alone. The USDOE, regional accrediting bodies, and state departments of education have essentially granted carte blanche to colleges and universities. That’s helpful in the short term, but it can’t be a long-term strategy.

Higher education institutions should start planning their future now.

Is higher education in the United States as we know it a thing of the past? Are colleges and universities doomed for failure? No. While it’s true that higher education leaders need to focus on getting students through this semester in the short-term, they also need to be eyeing a long-term strategy for the future.

Experts can continue to have their ideological differences regarding traditional face-to-face vs. online instruction, but today it’s a moot point. The fact is we are where we are, and we need to be pragmatic. In all reality, this won’t be the last time we are faced with a regional, national, or global crisis. Administrators need to get through this crisis, but they also need to think through a different lens moving forward.

Online Learning: Not Just a Strategy of Last Resort

Traditional higher education doesn’t have to end. Not by a long shot. However, college administrators need to avoid making rapid-fire decisions out of desperation.

Revisit short-term and long-term strategic goals.

If you don’t have a clear plan for dealing with crisis situations like the one we’re going through now, build one. If you don’t already have an innovative programming committee, create one. Being proactive rather than reactive is the better approach any day of the week.

Create a thought leader sandbox.

Every institution has a least one “out of the box” thinker–one who tends to speak up in meetings and challenges administrative decisions. Deans and department chairs often view these faculty or staff members as a pain in the neck. However, despite them coming across as negative or challenging every decision, those are the very people who should be tapped to lead a sandbox for thought leaders. They are the creative thinkers, and they should be tasked with building their institution for the future.

Hire distance learning experts who understand and believe in quality.

Let’s face it: Many institutions simply haven’t properly funded their distance learning departments. In some cases, a single person serves as the entire online learning staff. He or she creates the course shells, trains faculty, serves as Helpdesk support, and more. Moreover, those individuals may or may not even be trained in distance learning andragogy–they simply have strong technical skills to get things set up behind the scenes. That’s just not good enough.

During this time of crisis, institutions are creating online course shells feverishly en masse, and most faculty have never taught an online course and are trying to teach themselves how to use online learning tools such as Zoom, Blackboard, and VoiceThread.

An Opportunity for Higher Education Institutions

As strange as it may sound, this is actually a time of great opportunity for higher education institutions. College and university presidents should look at online learning as a way to build for the future.

For example, from this point forward each semester staff should automatically create an online course shell for every traditional face-to-face course. Moreover, those staff should populate the shells with current syllabi and learning resources. Professional development in effective online teaching techniques should be offered for all faculty every semester. The nonprofit organization Quality Matters is an excellent resource institutions can use to train faculty and ensure online course quality.

For those institutions still on the fence about distance education, administrators could consider adopting a hybrid model whereby courses are offered as a mix of both face-to-face and online instruction. Then, if a crisis should occur, it would be simple to transition courses to an exclusively online model.

Regardless, college leaders should work tirelessly to make sure that their faculty, staff, and students are never placed into such a stressful situation again.

###

Twitter: @RRossFisher

Email: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Top Graphic Credit: educationaltechnology.net

COVID-19 & Higher Education

Posted on March 24, 2020May 18, 2020 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Note: This article was updated on March 24, 2020 to reflect current closure data.

Nearly 300 colleges and universities across the United States have announced the decision to either shut their doors or transition their spring semester courses to an online format due to COVID-19 concerns. The number is rising, and quickly. It seems the most current list is being maintained by educator, researcher, and futurist Bryan Alexander, rather than official government agencies. Information is being crowd sourced and isn’t guaranteed to be accurate.

Normally, higher education institutions must get formal approval from their regional accrediting body in order to make such drastic changes. Staff must file a substantive change application; it’s thoroughly reviewed by the accreditor; and then a final decision is made by accreditation council members. This process can take 6-12 months. However, great latitude is being granted to institutions given the uncertainty and a landscape that seems to be changing daily.

Institutions Receive Unprecedented Approval

The US Department of Education released a letter “… providing broad approval to institutions to use online technologies to accommodate students on a temporary basis, without going through the regular approval process of the Department in the event that an institution is otherwise required to seek Departmental approval for the use or expansion of distance learning programs.” The Department has also permitted accreditors to “…waive their distance education review requirements for institutions working to accommodate students whose enrollment is otherwise interrupted as a result of COVID-19.” While this broad latitude has a shelf life and there are some limitations, this step is unprecedented.

And there’s more. For those institutions that may not already be well-equipped to move their face-to-face courses to a distance learning format, the Department says they may also enter into temporary consortium agreements with other institutions so that students can complete courses at other institutions but be awarded credit by their home institution.

It appears that even residency requirements that stipulate students must complete a certain number of credits at their home institution have been waived with the approval of the institution’s regional accreditor.

But Are They Ready to Deal with COVID-19?

Because of the COVID-19 crisis, the flexibility granted to colleges and universities by the USDOE and regional accreditors is huge. Without it, their hands would be tied and they’d be forced to close their doors leaving students in a lurch. However, that’s only the first step in what may seem like a marathon.

Granted, many institutions have been utilizing distance learning tools for several years and so while it may be challenging to transition and scale up quickly, they will be able to do so fairly successfully. However, for those institutions that up to now have only offered a few courses or even a single program online, they’d better be prepared to paddle upstream, and at lightning speed. Those 300 institutions currently slated to make the transition have a combined enrollment of approximately 4 million students.

Essential Factors for Higher Education Administrators to Consider

In order to make the best decision possible for students, university administrators should ask some essential questions before deciding whether to transition to a distance learning format, enter into a temporary consortium agreement with a sister institution, or close the doors completely until the Center for Disease Control gives the “all clear” sign for COVID-19. Examples include:

If the answer is “yes” to each question above, then leaders can feel fairly confident they will be able to successful weather the COVID-19 storm. If no, then administrators need to find another option. And quickly.

###

About the Author: Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher has expertise in educator preparation, competency-based education, online teaching & learning, accreditation and quality assurance. A former public school teacher and college administrator, Roberta is now a freelance writer and educational consultant.

Twitter: @RRossFisher

Top Graphic Credit: rawpixel.com

Higher Education & Political Views: There’s More Common Ground Than You May Think

Posted on March 7, 2019May 12, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

About six-in-ten Americans (61%) say the higher education system in the United States is going in the wrong direction, according to a new 2018 Pew Research Center survey. Political party affiliation seems to have an impact on their perceptions in many respects, but not in all. Here are some highlights:

How we think about politics shapes how we feel about higher education.

Nearly 3/4 of those with conservative views believe that higher education is headed in the wrong direction:
- Republican leaning: 73%
- Democrat leaning: 52%
There’s a big difference in the viewpoints regarding faculty influence: Professors are bringing their political and social views into the classroom, and it’s having a negative impact on higher education.
- Republican leaning: 79%
- Democrat leaning: 17%
Conservatives think there’s too much emphasis on being politically correct: Colleges and universities are too concerned about protecting students from viewpoints they might find offensive.
- Republican learning: 79%
- Democrat leaning: 31%

Our age influences how we view higher education faculty.

Regardless of their political affiliation, more older Americans place blame at the feet of faculty for problems in higher education. However, those who are more Republican-leaning feel more strongly than their counterparts:

65+ years (Republicans 96%, Democrats 32%)
50-64 years (Republicans 85%, Democrats 15%)
35-49 years (Republicans 73%, Democrats 10%)
18-34 years (Republicans 58%, Democrats 19%)

Most agree that higher education needs to do a better job of preparing graduates for the workforce.

Regardless of our political party affiliation, Americans recognize the importance of a well-rounded education that includes career readiness: Students aren’t getting the skills they need to succeed in the workplace.
- Democrat learning: 73%
- Republican leaning: 56

We all agree on one thing: Going to college costs too much.

There’s lots of common ground when it comes to affordability: Higher education tuition costs are too high.
- Democrat learning: 92%
- Republican leaning: 77%

So what does all this mean?

Most would agree that the United States has some of the best colleges and universities anywhere in the world. Students from all around the world come to the US to attend our institutions because they want the benefit of an American education. However, despite all the positives we can place in the “plus” column, we know we can do a better job in providing exceptional learning experiences. Specifically:

We’ve got to find a way to reduce costs. Yes, there are some expenses that just keep rising, such as the cost of healthcare, utilities, or construction. However, there are areas where costs could be reduced, such as offering students the option of purchasing digital textbooks rather than hard copies, or groups of colleges partnering up to gain more negotiating leverage with publishers. We can also look at innovative ways to cut or freeze tuition and expand work study programs. Paid internships sponsored by workforce partners would be of tremendous value in making college more affordable.
Once they’re enrolled, the focus should be on helping students succeed. Colleges and universities should be truly committed to partnering with each student they admit–perhaps even to the point of a memorandum of understanding or part of the acceptance process–to support that learner’s success. Institutions should embrace the WIT model–Whatever It Takes–to help each student thrive and graduate. Students are achieving their goals in a timely way without incurring a lifetime of student loan debt. When that happens, college retention, graduation, and satisfaction rates all increase, which keeps accreditors happy. It’s a win-win for all concerned.
A well-rounded education includes workforce development. We must continue to provide a high-quality liberal arts education in our colleges and universities. However, there’s also a real need to connect theory and application so when a learner graduates, they should be workforce ready–meaning they should have received a broad preparation in a variety of subjects; they should have developed important communication, critical thinking and problem solving skills; and they should have had multiple structured opportunities to apply what they were learning in the context of their chosen profession.

So, let’s agree to work together on this.

While it’s certainly true that politics can influence how we view higher education, it’s also true that there are actually many areas where we can agree. Let’s start there. Let’s work together to strengthen our higher education system through reducing costs, supporting student success, and ensuring graduates are workforce-ready.

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in quality assurance, educator preparation, and empowerment-based learning. She supports educational institutions in areas such as accreditation, institutional effectiveness, competency-based education, and virtual teaching & learning. Roberta can be contacted for consultations, webinars, & on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com).

###

Uniqueness vs. Accreditation: Why Must We Choose?

Posted on February 2, 2018June 12, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

In the most recent issue of the New England Journal of Higher Education, Mark LaCelle-Peterson introduces the educator preparation community to a new way of thinking about quality assurance and accreditation of programs. In the piece, LaCelle-Peterson challenges the notion that measuring the quality of an education program through a compliance lens really isn’t necessary—in fact, it can sometimes inhibit quality by forcing programs to demonstrate adherence to a rigid set of standards and criteria that may or may not be an appropriate fit for all programs given the diversity of missions, visions, populations served, and instructional delivery approaches. For example, what may be appropriate criteria for measuring the quality of a program that serves 18-22-year-old students on a residential suburban campus may be quite different from one that serves learners whose average age is 39 and who pursue their academic studies online within a competency-based educational model. Both prepare educators. Both are committed to quality. But when it comes to making judgments about those programs, one size just doesn’t seem to fit all—and what’s more, why should it? Why is it necessary to have a single set of standards and criteria that all programs must adhere to?

It seems to me that as a community of educators we figured out a long time ago that creating one lesson plan and teaching to students in the middle was simply not an effective approach—nor was it ethical, because that model failed to consider the needs of students who did not fit into a pre-determined mold. Today we encourage our teacher candidates to not only acknowledge the differences in students, but to embrace that diversity, and to celebrate it—because we know that a diverse group of learners contributes to a dynamic and robust community—one that thrives because of its diversity, not in spite of it.

Quality assurance measures through an appropriate accreditation model can be instrumental to preparation programs’ success through data-driven decision making, continuous program review, and collaboration within the community. Program leaders should not have to put their uniqueness on a shelf in pursuit of accreditation.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in education transformation, teacher preparation, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter and writer, she currently supports educational institutions and non-profit agencies in areas such as educational systems design, online learning experiences, competency-based education, and accreditation. Roberta also blogs about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com).

###

Practical Ways to Meet the Needs of Adult Learners

Posted on January 23, 2018February 27, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

A huge chunk of college enrollments today is made up of adult learners—sometimes referred to as non-traditional students. Just as it’s not appropriate to teach all P-12 students in exactly the same way we must be careful to consider and address the unique needs of adult learners in our colleges and universities. In her article entitled, “4 Ways Universities Can Better Engage with Nontraditional Students,” Meghan Bogardus Cortez shares some tips for higher education programs, each of which can impact student enrollment, retention, graduation, and satisfaction rates. I’d like to add my own tips here:

Make what they are learning meaningful and relevant. Help adult learners to see connections between theory and practice. Show them why it’s important to be able to solve algebraic equations, or why they should know what the War of 1812 was all about. Try to tie it in to how key concepts and skills can be applied their current and future career goals.

Be respectful of them as adults. Non-traditional learners have very different needs than those 18-22-year-olds; treat them accordingly. Listen to them. Take them seriously. And don’t talk down to them.

Acknowledge that they are juggling a lot to go to school. Most adult students work at least one full-time job. They have a spouse and are raising multiple children. Perhaps they’re taking care of aging or infirm parents. Acknowledging that you know “sometimes life gets in the way” is not offering an excuse for them to fail but it’s important they know that you understand that sometimes other priorities must take precedence over their academic studies, and that’s OK.

Help them to set their own reasonable goals and support their efforts in attaining them. It doesn’t do any good to create a schedule for an adult learner or tell them how much they should read or complete in a week’s time—those decisions should be made by them, with some guidance from you. Help them avoid frustration and disappointment by steering them away from committing to too much at once. For example, most learners who are working full-time and trying to raise three kids while going through a divorce should probably not try to complete 18 credits in a semester or think they can read seven chapters and write a 15-page paper over a weekend. In some instances that kind of workload can be maintained for a while but eventually the stress builds up. It’s much better to take it a little slower and succeed than to let a student try to get through a program in record time and then fail.

Help them to see light at the end of the tunnel. Adult learners need an end game—they need to be able to know that their efforts will pay off for them when they are finished—and they need to know that this day will come sooner rather than later.

A dose of compassion and empathy works wonders: Sometimes you are the only positive, affirming, supportive person they will talk to in a give day or even a given week. Be a sounding board when things go wrong, and a cheerleader when things go right. You’re not their therapist nor their friend, per se, and yet so much of effective mentoring requires a dose of both.

These are all things that faculty members can do to help adult learners stay enrolled, graduate, and achieve their goals. Some students, particularly those who struggle or may be identified as “at-risk” could benefit from additional support through a mentoring model, which can be tailored depending on the structure of each college and university.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education, P-12 schools, and non-profit agencies in areas such as competency-based education, new program design, gap analysis, quality assurance, leadership, outcomes-based assessment, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She also writes about academic excellence and can be contacted for consultations through her blog site (www.robertarossfisher.com).

Is Being Accredited Really That Important When Selecting a College?

Posted on January 13, 2018May 12, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

We all hear and read about the benefits of earning a college degree: We make more money over a lifetime; we get better jobs; we receive company-paid benefits; we tend to be happier and healthier overall. However, choosing the right college or university can be quite daunting, and yet it’s terribly important, because not all institutions are alike, and the quality can vary widely. While there are lots of things to consider such as cost, degree programs, scheduling, and the like, one thing many college students often overlook is whether or not the university is accredited.

There are many types of accreditation–you may likely hear terms such as regional accreditation, national accreditation, functional or programmatic accreditation, and sometimes even state accreditation. Each plays an important role in quality assurance for specific programs or an entire institution but here’s a strong recommendation:

Don’t ever take a single course from an institution that is not accredited. Never. Ever.

While no guarantee of perfection, accredited institutions have provided certain levels of assurance to respected bodies within academia that students will be taken care of. Non-accredited institutions have had no one looking over their shoulder, digging deep and looking in various academic or financial nooks and crannies; they can accept your money with absolutely no guarantee that the course or degree that you completed will be worth anything at all.

Plus, if you complete courses from an unaccredited institution, there is no guarantee that those courses will be accepted should you decide to transfer to another university later on. Even worse, if you go the distance and complete an entire degree from an institution that’s not accredited, you may find that many employers or graduate schools will not recognize that degree–in their eyes it will be like you don’t have a degree at all–but you’ll still have those student loans to pay back just the same.

Here is an entertaining yet informative video that clears up some of the confusion:

ASPA 2016 Explainer

You should be able to choose a college or university that fits your particular needs:

faith-based
public
private
traditional brick & mortar
online
non-profit
for-profit

Regardless of which you choose, make sure it’s a program that is accredited.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Meeting the Needs of Learners in Today’s Universities

Posted on January 9, 2018May 17, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

In a recent piece entitled Survey: American Confidence in Higher Ed is Waning, it appears that only about 25% of the sample thinks the current higher education system is fine the way it is, and among millennials, that number drops to 13%. First of all, why do 75% believe the system is NOT meeting their needs? And of the millennial group, why do they feel even more strongly about the current system? In other words, what do today’s learners need that our colleges and universities are not providing?

We need to take a deep dive into this survey data in order to learn more about exactly what questions were asked, and what the demographics of respondents were. For example, are we reading the results of a representative sample, or were most respondents within a particular age group? Were the questions focused on seeking a first college degree, or did they include advanced studies? That sort of thing…However, just speaking in general terms, I’d say we need to focus on two things:

First, we need to revisit the relevance of curriculum found in today’s college degree programs. Are they workforce-driven? Will what students are learning really help them develop better job skills? I see very little true collaboration between higher education institutions and specific industries; this is essential for modernizing the curriculum and ensuring that what graduates will know and be able to do upon graduation will prepare them to be workforce-ready.

Second, we need to provide more structured support for those who need it throughout their programs, from matriculation to graduation. Mentoring models work wonders–This is particularly true for first-generation college students but really can benefit all learners. The key is to have a formal mechanism in place for continually monitoring and evaluating the progress of each learner, and to provide a safety net for them all along the way. Regular phone calls, emails, academic outreach, and the like can work wonders to help learners stay focused, achieve manageable goals, and attain success.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Alternative Educator Preparation: A Viable Option, or a Non-Starter?

Posted on January 8, 2018February 27, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

There’s an interesting article about alternative teacher preparation programs entitled Analysis Finds Alternatively Credentialed Teachers Performed Equal to Peers in First Two Years–while the results are inconclusive on several fronts it does present some thoughtful information to consider, including:

Are traditional educator preparation programs the ONLY way to train future teachers successfully? Are they BEST way?
Can alternative (non-traditional) educator preparation programs support student learning in a positive way, whilst supporting supply and demand challenges faced by multiple school districts across the nation?
What are the long-term impacts of educator preparation on our country’s workforce? And, what are the long-term impacts of what we view as an educated society?
Will how teachers are prepared impact our standing in the world relative to student achievement?
How would we know? What research questions need to be posed?

An experienced consultant can help with these questions, and more. Reach out to me for program development, collaboration, accreditation, clinical partnerships, and other matters related to preparing educators with excellence.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: globaleducationalconsulting@gmail.com

Transition Points & Gateways: Stop Gaps Universities Should Consider

Posted on January 5, 2018June 16, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Each higher education institution’s program of study, regardless of major, contains specific phases of progression that each student must successfully complete before being allowed to graduate. In other words, there is a planned, purposeful order to completing a program or earning a college degree—an individual does not just apply for admission and have complete autonomy over the courses taken, the sequence of coursework, when/where/if practica or internships are completed, and so on. The institution makes those decisions after carefully designing each given program of study. They decide things such as:

Admission and enrollment criteria
General education requirements
# of semester hours required for graduation
Minimum GPA required to pass each course
Clinical experiences, internships, practica
Exit examinations required for graduation (or state licensure, depending on the program)

Transition points are sometimes referred to as “gateways”—they are specific points at which a student passes from one stage in his or her program to the next. As long as a student meets the stated expectations, the journey continues and he or she moves ahead toward graduation. If the student fails to meet one or more expectations in a given stage, the institution implements a plan for remediation, additional support, or in some case, counseling out of the program.

I have created a Transition Points framework that may be useful to some educator preparation programs. Of course, Transition Points must be tailored to fit each unique program but could include gateways such as:

Transition Point I: Applicant to Pre-Candidate Status
- Admission to the program
Transition Point II: Pre-Candidate to Candidate Status
- Completion of Block #1 Coursework & Preparation for Formative Field Experiences
Transition Point III: Candidate to Pre-Graduate Status
- Completion of Block #2 Coursework & Formative Field Experiences
Transition Point IV: Pre-Graduate to Graduate Status
- Completion of Block #3 Coursework & Culminating Clinical Experiences
Transition Point V: Graduate to Program Completer Status
- Pass Required Licensure/Certification Examination(s)

Do you see the progression? When detailed out, a complete Transitions Points or Gateway table should paint a portrait of a student’s journey from matriculation to program completion; the sequence should represent a logical flow with at least some detail relative to minimum expectations.

I hope this has been helpful to you. Need more ideas? Want to collaborate on a project? Feel free to reach out to me.

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at: www.robertarossfisher.com.

Educator Prep: There’s a Better Way.

Posted on January 4, 2018June 16, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

Numerous sources can point to a teacher shortage across the United States, with some areas having a much greater need than others. With some exceptions, Elementary and Social Studies teachers tend to be in greatest supply but in least demand, while the converse is true for Special Education, English Language Learning, Mathematics, and Science teachers. School districts typically have a much harder time filling teaching positions in urban districts, in Title I schools, and in remote rural areas. In many instances, a lack of experienced, qualified teachers in those areas forces districts to fill those classrooms with individuals who may be well-intentioned but lack sufficient training and cultural competence to be successful. Moreover, those districts often fail to provide adequate mentoring and support in the first two years of employment which results in new teachers feeling isolated and without tools to succeed. Consequently, we typically see a high turnover rate in those areas which has a negative impact on students and the local community at-large over time.

Various state departments of education have taken steps to address this problem. California has recently committed $25 million for scholarship money to help alleviate the teacher shortage by using a “grow your own” model. They are distributing this money to 25 school districts and county offices of education to help 5,000 support staff members earn their teaching credentials while continuing to work at their schools. While the idea has some merit, I see big gaps in the approach. Specifically, they are granting funds only to individuals who complete their teaching license requirements at one of the California State University campuses; this severely restricts the type of training these individuals will receive and it only supports the enrollment of those campuses. Moreover, EdSource reports 1,000 eligible employees can get stipends of $4,000 per year over the course of the five-year grant, which could cover all or most of the cost to enroll in those select institutions, depending on how many courses these employees take per semester. Acknowledging it could take up to five years doesn’t make a convincing case that these programs are innovative or cutting edge—in fact they are likely just serving as a feeder into their current programs. So, for continuing business as usual, these institutions are reaping the reward of 1,000 new enrollments and $25 million. The latest initiative proposed in California is to offer teachers who have taught at least 5 years in the state freedom from state income tax. While an interesting idea, I don’t see it encouraging sufficient numbers of individuals to enter or to remain in the teaching profession. Plus, it could have a negative impact on a state already short on cash.

The state of Nevada has attempted to alleviate the teacher shortage, most severe in the Clark County School District located in Las Vegas. School officials in that district, reportedly the third largest in the nation, face the daunting task each year of hiring approximately 2500 teachers. At the time of this writing, there are currently 672 openings for licensed teachers. The Nevada Department of Education approved an Alternative Route to Licensure (ARL) program designed to alleviate shortages across the state but it seems to be only a partial solution in its present form. What’s of equal concern is that once hired, districts struggle to retain teachers for a variety of reasons.

In addition to approaches that focus on state funding and providing paths to licensure through nontraditional means, the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education has recently begun looking at teacher preparation itself; staff have initiated statewide conversations amongst educators regarding how new teachers should be prepared. And of course, the National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) has established itself as a national leader on educator quality and preparation through research and rankings of educator preparation programs.

So what’s the answer?

The solution to having an adequate supply of qualified, well-prepared teachers who will positively impact the lives, learning, and development of their students is not simplistic—it is complicated, and that’s why no one has solved it yet. However, I believe one answer lies in how teachers are prepared. While many educator prep programs do a fine job, many do not and new teachers are simply not ready to enter the classroom, hitting the ground running. They have absolutely no idea how to effectively manage a classroom, deal with an angry parent, meet the needs of EVERY learner in their class, and so on. There is an apparent disconnect between what is being taught in colleges of education and the reality of teaching in today’s classrooms. Is one reason because those responsible for preparing those future teachers have little to no current teaching experience themselves? Have they stepped foot in a P-12 classroom in the past five years? Have they cleaned up vomit all over desks and the floor? Have they done before and after school bus duty? Have they had a student arrested in their class? Have they had to bring comfort to a child who is homeless? I think that while credentialed education faculty are well-intentioned, knowledgeable, and experienced, their skills may not be what’s needed in today’s classrooms.

I have been developing some specific ideas regarding how to train new educators some of which challenge the current preparation model. I’m working on creating an educator preparation program that could work for new teachers as well as new educational leaders that has features unique to any other program I’ve reviewed. Some would call it an alternative program, but I really don’t like that word and would love to see it disassociated with education preparation. Want to know more? Interested in partnering with me on a project of immense importance that is built from the ground level up on academic excellence? Let me hear from you…

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation, online learning, and academic quality assurance. An accomplished presenter, writer, and educator, she currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher preparation, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC. She can be reached at www.robertarossfisher.com

Supporting Learners in a Competency-Based Education Classroom

Posted on November 14, 2017February 27, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

This is the fourth installment in a series of blog posts on the topic of competency-based education. Previous posts included: There IS a Better Way to Teach; What’s Under the Hood; and The Basics of CBE Curriculum Development.

How we teach is just as important as what we teach. In other words, instructional methods are just as vital to the learning process as the content being taught. Very few students learn by simply reading or absorbing material—if they did, we really wouldn’t need teachers.

Just as with traditional learning models, there are many ways P-12 and higher education faculty can instruct students within the competency-based education (CBE) model. However, the key here is to provide academic support in a way that helps learners attain essential content and ultimately demonstrate what they know and are able to do. Facilitation, as opposed to direct instruction, has been proven to be an effective way of providing this type of academic support primarily because by its very nature the CBE model creates a space for flexibility for instructors as well as for learners. Of course, face-to-face and online learning environments may require use of different facilitation models, but some good options to consider include:

Flipped classroom
Simulations
Project-based activities
Student-led Socratic questioning
Group discussions
Webinars
Content-or competency-specific treasure hunts
Many, many others

Regardless of the facilitation model chosen, learning should be constant, and not time-dependent in a competency-based learning environment. In other words, learners should be actively engaged at all times but should not be forced to move in lockstep fashion with all other students. They should have the freedom and flexibility to learn at their own pace and in their own way—which is one reason why CBE is commonly referred to as personalized learning, although the two terms are not completely synonymous.

In the next blog installment, we will dive more deeply into the teacher’s role within a competency-based learning environment.

–rrf

The Drive-Thru Approach to Teacher Preparation

Posted on November 6, 2017May 15, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

The Drive-Thru Approach to Teacher Preparation

I read yet another article about national teacher shortages; this one was entitled Teacher Shortages Spur a Nationwide Hiring Scramble (Credentials Optional). As a result of their desperation to staff classrooms, school district officials are putting pressure on states to relax teacher licensure requirements. In some cases, this has led to the watering down of standards and expectations. Some are taking advantage of the current climate, smelling the sweet aroma of serious revenue by offering what is essentially a drive-thru teacher preparation program: The “customer” arrives at the window, attracted by the bright lights and yummy-looking food pics. Enrollment counselors take their order and send them on. Worker bees behind the scenes serve up a program that may be of questionable or untested quality and the customer is on their way in record time. They don’t know that their fries were cold or there was no straw until they are miles down the road. Programs know such a model is cheap to build and cheap to operate; it’s easy money and there are so many students rolling through the drive-thru lane that they can afford to have some unhappy customers and still turn a profit.

In the short term, school districts are happy because they have a less difficult time hiring teachers, and program completers are happy because they’ve gotten through their program at break-neck speed and haven’t had to “waste” their time on courses they perceive as useless. However, in the long term, a host of new cyclical problems are revealed, including:

Individuals are admitted to the programs who really shouldn’t be—they sometimes lack the academic preparation or the professional dispositions necessary for success in the classroom.
Program completers are often ill-prepared to enter the classroom; they require a great deal of on-site training by the school district.
Many new teachers quickly become disillusioned and leave the profession because they didn’t know how challenging teaching really can be. Some leave in the middle of a school year.
Students often suffer due to constant turnover and lack of consistency.
Test scores lag and fall behind state averages; impact outcomes tend to be dismal.

Not all for-profit alternative certification programs are of poor quality, but many are. While accrediting bodies have recently come under greater scrutiny for their standards and expectations, many of these programs fly under the radar and are not regionally accredited*, which is the foundational accreditation any legitimate institution of higher education should attain. Some are taking the easy path to accreditation through bodies that focus mostly on career schools** such as beauty schools, truck driving schools, at-home hypnosis training, etc. just to state on their program’s website that they are accredited. These programs use “sleight of hand” language with the lay public, saying they are “accreditation eligible” which in reality means nothing but it sounds very convincing to those who are not well versed in the lingo. Make no mistake: The drive-thru teacher preparation model is very real, and it is having a very real impact on our P-12 schools. The question is: Are we going to accept it as the new normal, or are we finally going to draw a line in the sand and insist on academic excellence for our children?

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in quality assurance, educator preparation, and empowerment-based learning. She supports educational institutions in areas such as accreditation, institutional effectiveness, competency-based education, and virtual teaching & learning. Roberta can be contacted for consultations, webinars, and on-site workshops through her site (www.robertarossfisher.com).

*The regional accreditation bodies in the United States include: (1) Higher Learning Commission (HLC); (2) Middle States Commission on Higher Education (MSCHE); (3) New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC-CIHE) Commission on Institutions of Higher Education; (4) Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC); and (5) WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC).

**The Distance Education Accrediting Commission (DEAC) awards accreditation to degree-granting, high school, military, and post-secondary schools. A search of accredited post-secondary schools, which would apply to alternative teacher certification programs, includes the Hypnosis Motivation Institute, At-Home Professions, and the Modern Gun School, to name a few.

Accelerating the Pathway to Initial Teacher Certification

Posted on November 2, 2017May 20, 2019 by Roberta Ross-Fisher

In an attempt to ease the shortage of more than 33,000 mathematics teachers over the next decade, the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing has given four state universities $250,000 each to create new preparation programs that will cut the normal time to earn math credentials and a degree from five and a half years to four. Cal State Los Angeles, San Jose State, San Diego State and Fresno State were selected to create curriculum and design accelerated (compacted) programs to encourage individuals pursuing a bachelor’s degree to consider becoming middle school or high school math teachers.

While this may sound good on the surface, I just don’t think it’s enough to really address the shortage in the long run—these prospective teachers will still have to jump through a lot of hoops just to earn their teaching credential, including all the requirements to earn a four-year bachelor’s degree.

I haven’t seen any emphasis on truly innovative training, or on measuring the longitudinal impact of graduates on their students’ learning—nor did I read anything about intensive mentoring support from the employing school district or the home university in the first two or three years following program completion. All those things, plus many more, are necessary for a teacher to be truly ready for the classroom. Otherwise, the likelihood of them being successful or of them staying for more than a year or two is greatly reduced. And—this grant program only focuses on mathematics—what about the critical shortages in sciences, special education, English language learning, and the like? And—why was this initiative focused only on those earning their bachelor’s degree? We mustn’t forget those who have already demonstrated a propensity for success in the classroom as well as strong ties in the school—those paraprofessionals and substitute teachers—many of whom already have a bachelor’s degree but just need their teaching credential.

I have built a preparation framework designed for this latter group. It’s innovative. It’s unique. It’s research-based. And it’s 10 months long. Care to learn more, California Commission on Teacher Credentialing?

–rrf

Dr. Roberta Ross-Fisher is a national leader in educator preparation, accreditation and academic quality assurance. She currently supports higher education and P-12 schools in areas such as competency-based education, teacher licensure, distance learning, and accreditation through her company, Global Educational Consulting, LLC.

Source: California colleges address math teacher shortage by accelerating pathway to credentials | Education Dive