Funding Georgia public colleges not only on how many students start, but how many finish

Should we fund colleges not only on how many kids enroll, but how many graduate? (AJC/file photo)

Should we fund colleges not only on how many kids enroll, but how many graduate? (AJC/file photo)

We discussed the issue of linking college funding to completion rates a while back after I saw a presentation on the Tennessee higher ed reform plan that uses completion as a funding criteria for its public campuses.

Now, Gov. Nathan Deal wants to bring that strategy to Georgia in hopes of boosting the attention colleges pay to helping students finish.

Held to that new standard, I suspect that colleges will start echoing the complaint of high schools: They can’t be held responsible for individual choices or failings of students and that the students at Georgia Tech start college at a more advanced level than the students at Clayton State and gaps in grad rates reflect those different starting points.

According to the AJC:

Deal is in the final process of selecting members to serve on a commission that will recommend changes that would allow Georgia to join a growing number of states that have moved away from funding colleges based solely on how many students they enroll. Instead, states are experimenting with tying the money to outcomes such as graduation and retention rates. The idea is to reward colleges for success, not for chasing enrollment.

States further along than Georgia have learned changing the funding formula is a lengthy and difficult process sure to provoke sharp political and emotional debates. While the discussions may start with a committee, it needs buy-in from lawmakers, college presidents and others.

The Tennessee Higher Education Commission has discussed its challenges with officials from the University System of Georgia and the State Board of Regents. Tennessee has used performance funding since 1979, but the amount of incentive money was small and resulted in little improvement in graduation rates. Officials overhauled the program in 2010 and now enrollment plays no role in how much money colleges receive. Colleges earn state money by reaching benchmarks in graduation, retention rates and others areas.

“We’ve moved away from the entitlement mentality,” said Russ Deaton, the commission’s associate executive director of fiscal policy. “If you don’t do well by your students you will lose money to colleges who are doing well.”

Some worry a focus on completion may lead to grade inflation and could punish community colleges, such as Georgia Perimeter College, that enroll more part-time students who start college less prepared. Tennessee and other states tried to solve that problem by designing benchmarks tailored to each college’s mission. Research institutions, such as University of Georgia, have different expectations than Georgia Perimeter.

When Deal announced his plans for the commission in August he said the state is spending a lot money on colleges and “it doesn’t do a lot of good” if students don’t graduate. About 44 percent of university system students graduate within six years. Rates vary widely, with about 80 percent graduating within six years from University of Georgia and Georgia Tech, compared with less than one-third getting a degree on time from Augusta State and Clayton State universities.

–From Maureen Downey, for the AJC Get Schooled blog

70 comments Add your comment

Cindy Lutenbacher

October 10th, 2011
9:12 am

From the perspective of widgets, this plan makes perfect sense. Students are products to be sold.

I think this idea is problematic in many ways, one of which is that it will likely cheapen higher ed. That is, if professors don’t give passing grades, the institution may well suffer financially.

Many of us in higher ed work sixty to eighty hour weeks because we are passionate about our students as people and we are passionate about our students learning not just skills, but also important values, such as deep questioning and thinking for themselves and finding their own commitment or purpose beyond material acquisition.

For me, the question is how to make sure that our colleges are staffed by teachers and administrators whose sixty to eighty hour work weeks are focused toward the students in these ways. Then the graduation issue will largely take care of itself. I don’t mean that every student will graduate, but that those who can and should be college graduates will have what they need to get there.

carlosgvv

October 10th, 2011
9:14 am

Over the years, educators and politicians have been, in effect, saying that college should a worthy goal for all students. This has pushed more and more students into colleges. The problem is that many of these students should have gone to a trade school instead. In fact, college is not for everyone and this helps to explain the high dropout rate among college students. Worse, many of those who do graduate cannot find employment and wind up living at home with their parents. Educators in high school would do far better to instruct their students as to where and what the jobs are and give all their students extensive apptitude tests. This would allow students to more honestly evaluate their true talents and go to colleges or trade schools accordingly.

Seasoned educatord

October 10th, 2011
9:16 am

It’s about time. We should be far more concerned about how many students finish college than how many start. While many factors contribute to student success in college, the preparation level of students who enter college is among the most important. So, if we really want to broadly improve performance in college – K-12 better get their act together. That means parents and communities had better get their acts together as well. The fact is many students leaving Georgia’s high schools are prepared, academically or otherwise, to succeed in college.

Marie

October 10th, 2011
9:29 am

@carlosgvv – I could not agree with you more. I teach part-time at a major university and the quality of students being accepted is dismal. I have had students in my online classroom who could not write a complete sentence if their life depended on it. Others could not spell simple words — importance was spelled as “import ants” was a real kicker for me.

There is this insane idea in this country that everyone should go to college. And we have promoted college as “the only way” means of getting a decent paying job. In reality, many jobs in this country could be performed with a high school diploma if we were producing students who were highly functional in math, science, reading/comprehension, and writing when they receive a diploma.

Since that is not the case, colleges across the board need to toughen up their admission process so they are only accepting students who have a reasonable chance of earning a degree. Those who want to kick the tire need to be eliminated and encouraged to go to trade school. And no one should be admitted to any institute of higher learning (trade, junior college, college/unversity) if you cannot read, write, and perform basic math because such individuals are just not employable.

Ashley

October 10th, 2011
9:34 am

The main reason student are dropping out or fail to graduate in 4 years is because this one size fits all mentality. It use to be students could learn a trade to make a living. A Phi Beta Kappa graduate does me no good if I need a plumber or electrician. When you car breaks down …do you want an accountant under the hood? No, you want a highly skill mechanic, someone who works with his hand. Keep in mind these gigantic corporate buildings were built by draftsmen and construction workers. An architect may have design the building,but it was built by manual labor; as a matter of fact this country was builted on the backs of men and women and not CEOs and bigwigs. College should be an option and not the only solution for the average 18-year old.

Cindy Lutenbacher

October 10th, 2011
9:42 am

I also encourage all of us to work diligently for the respect and decent salary deserved by those whose gifts lie in, for example, ably repairing our cars, taking the x-rays of our broken bones, and sewing the seams of our shirts.

A few years ago, I read that almost eighty percent of future jobs will not require a college degree. More recently, President Obama noted that forty percent of future jobs will not require a college degree. So…perhaps somewhere between forty and eighty percent of future jobs will be filled by people whose talents are not served by higher ed.

As the mother of one daughter who is most definitely not college-bound and another who most likely is, I want both my girls to be respected and capable of living on whatever salary each earns.

Is my desire unreasonable?

teacher who cares

October 10th, 2011
9:51 am

I agree! Not everyone is college material – however the CHOICE to go should never be taken from anyone. In high schools now, we are losing the vocational aspect. Perhaps this is one of the problems with our economy. If we still trained people for “trades- plumbing, welding, woodworking, mechanics, etc” we might see less people in the unemployment office or governmental assistance.
Being a tradesperson is not a stigma – you should see the house my plumber lives in, the salaries welders can bring in and the payments my shade tree mechanic gets!!!

Don't Tread

October 10th, 2011
9:53 am

It’s amazing that we give college degrees to people who can’t spell or use the correct word in a sentence. This is what happens when social promotion reaches the college level.

Toughen up the entrance requirements to weed out the stupid. (Oh, but wait…that contradicts the business angle, which is to make as much money as possible.)

Another Math Teacher

October 10th, 2011
9:57 am

Grade Inflation vs Tenure

Fight!

Old school girl

October 10th, 2011
9:57 am

I understand the concept, but as an instructor in higher education, this is going to lead to exactly what has happened to the Atlanta Public Schools. Instructors are going to be ‘pressured’ into passing students because of the push to improve the graduation rates. Remember, we are already getting students who are ill prepared for college in the first place, because of ‘mommy and daddy’s pressure on the instructor to pass Little Johnny or Little Amy, so that he/she can keep their Hope Scholarship. Now, these two ill prepared students must do well in college, and these students are pressuring the instructors regarding their grades. Now we have the pleasure of adding the institution’s pressure to the mix, because the college/ university needs to keep the funding, which will be tied to graduation rates. So down the line, these institutions of higher learning will be awarding students degrees for which they probably bought…one way or the other. Once again, the short sighted perview of developing a comprehensive educational expectation that is not based upon merit, but based on economics…which we know is doomed to fail. Take a look at the for-profit universities and the quality that they are producing in their effort to increase their graduation rates….that is our future with this new emphasis.

AlreadySheared

October 10th, 2011
9:57 am

Actually, I’m shocked that the Ga Tech graduation rate is @ 80%. They used to take their weeding more seriously!

Dekalb taxpayer

October 10th, 2011
10:01 am

Oh my. No Child Left Behind at the college level. Administrators will be pressuring professors to inflate grades for undeserving students. A college diploma may become as meaningless as a high school diploma has become in Georgia.

Write Your Board Members

October 10th, 2011
10:06 am

Maureen,

Many students don’t graduate because they lack the financial resources. What is Deal’s solution to this?

Atlanta mom

October 10th, 2011
10:07 am

Currently in Georgia, a college degree means something. Implement this and a college degree will have as much merit as a 3.0 GPA coming out of HS. And the pressure will be coming from the top and not the bottom.

LuLu Wheeler

October 10th, 2011
10:10 am

Students excell in my classes when they take responsibility for their own success. When they they think their success is up to the teacher and the college, they fail. This plan would actually hurt student success. Oh, sure, more might graduate but they won’t be educated college graduates. Just college graduates. “Excellence” used to be the word we wanted to describe higher education in Georgia; it is now “enabling.”

jd

October 10th, 2011
10:19 am

Maureen,

What do you mean “start”? Chancellor Portch raised admissions requirements in the 90’s to pressure K12 to produce better graduates — then a stream of complaints from the legislature came in “Why can’t Johnny, who can’t read, go to UGA?” “If you don’t let this student in, your funding should be cut!” This is another HOT lane story. Admissions will be restricted to those who can earn a degree — complaints will follow and admissions standards, and grad stds, lowered.

eduprin

October 10th, 2011
10:39 am

It’s about time. We have been doing this to public schools for a long time.

November 6, 2012

October 10th, 2011
10:43 am

Well, folks, if you do what is suggested, what you’re gonna have in our colleges and universities is the same thing we are experiencing in our high schools now. Thus, the finish to completely “dumbing down” our higher educational system……won’t be worth two hoots and a holler. We’ll be going to China then to get higher educated :)

Neil Murray

October 10th, 2011
10:50 am

A basic question: How are completion rates calculated? When I taught at Georgia Southern, a common complaint was that many students transferred after two years but were counted as non-completers at GSU, even if they later graduated from another school. Does the current system effectively account for transfers?

And, yes, as Write Your Board Members noted, running out of money sometimes forces students to drop out; I once worked for a features editor who tried to finance a master’s degree on her credit card and found out it didn’t stretch that far. Also, advisors need to be equipped with data showing that working full time and enrolling full time usually doesn’t work. Maybe even the data won’t work; my advice to students to work out a sensible balance of time has often fallen on deaf ears.

HS Public Teacher

October 10th, 2011
10:52 am

What a horrible, horrible idea! Who comes up with these lame-brain ideas?

Paying colleges like this will obviously lead to dummy downed colleges. They will pass everyone because they need/want the money. Can’t everyone see that?

thomas

October 10th, 2011
11:00 am

@ eduprin,

So, no matter how stupid the idea is, if we do something to K-12 schools, we should blindly go ahead do it for higher ed, too?

Richard

October 10th, 2011
11:01 am

I like this only if it toughens admission standards. In reality, this could lead to grade inflation.

If they really want to do something about cutting costs, base funding to the individual programs according to the average starting salary of the graduate.

Work with me on this. Colleges are essentially providing a service back to the state (the service being a future taxpayer). Why not have the state pay based on the revenue the program actually produces?

I also think student loans should be based on the student’s major for the same reason. A student majoring in Engineering with an average starting salary of $50k should not get the same loan money as a English Literature major with an average starting salary of $20k.

thomas

October 10th, 2011
11:01 am

Colleges won’t care. It’s easy to deal with the completion rate – without resorting to the APS cheating strategy. Unlike the APS, colleges have the choice of not accepting students – like private schools do. They colleges will simply raise the admission requirement, and they won’t have to change much else to raise the completion rate.

the prof

October 10th, 2011
11:02 am

I have never been pressured to grade inflate in 13 plus years. My distribution of grades (after 15-20% withdrawals) is roughly 8-9% A’s, 19-20% B’s, 27-28% C’s, 24-25% D’s, and 22-23% F’s. I have never been afraid to give an F and will never be pressured to do otherwise!

Lori

October 10th, 2011
11:08 am

Wonderful!!!! We’ve already dumbed down our high schools, so why not dumb down our colleges too!! Stupid idea. And an excellent point was made above by a commenter…not everyone flunks out of school. Some quit because they can no longer afford to go and maybe they can’t get a loan. Schools shouldn’t be punished for losing good students who just ran out of funding!

HS Public Teacher

October 10th, 2011
11:10 am

@the prof….

You have “famous last words” there! Welcome to my world of public education. You WILL be forced to change your grade scheme if it would cost you your job. If your boss tells you to do this ‘or else’, then what would you do?

Remember that K-12 teachers lost tenure basically over this issue such that we are now REQUIERED to pass students even though they clearly have not learned the content. Either that, or we are quickly ushered out of the door.

Welcome to our world.

Note: when your graduates cannot perform in the real world, remember the motto echoed by the AJC and the rest of the general public…. “it is all of the teachers (professors) fault.”

Sallie

October 10th, 2011
11:22 am

The existing plan is for the University system to demand more and more money every year with no accountability for how it’s spent. If you don’t give into thier demands they go to the press and howl that you are dismatling higher education. Every year the goverment and the tuition payers pay more.
How is that system working?

zeke

October 10th, 2011
11:26 am

The problem with this idea is that after the morons are indoctrinated in elementary, middle and high school! You cannot place the burden on teachers or professors for the student lack of intelligence and more importantly integrity! Our kids are brain washed to believe the liberal and socialist agenda! Don’t believe me? ALL IT TAKES IS TO LOOK AT THE COMMIE MORONS DEMONSTRATING ON WALL STREET, IN ATLANTA AND OTHER PLACES! THEY SHOULD BE LOCKED UP AS SUBVERSIVES! PERIOD! NOT EVERYONE CAN BE RICH, BUT, EVERYONE IN THE USA HAS THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO SO! THAT IS NOT THE CASE ANY WHERE ELSE!

make my day

October 10th, 2011
11:37 am

This is a long overdue attack on the Diversity Privilege that advances unqualified blacks at the expense of merit Whites.

Deal is our best Gov. in decades, and he is extra special for keeping Phil Kent on the review board.

The Tea Party isn’t going away, but will get stronger and start making a real difference for White communities- we will finally have someone looking out for us, instead of giving everything we’ve worked so hard to save to the blacks and border jumpers.

Blazerilla

October 10th, 2011
11:39 am

I am completing a doctorate in higher ed from a USG institution. My dissertation deals with enrollment in GA colleges. I also teach at a college in Kansas. There are many intelligent comments on this forum about how this idea is problematic. I’d like to add one thought. The graduation rate metric is based on six-year graduation rates. Many people, especially in the regional universities and state colleges, work full-time to pay for college, so they have to enroll half-time, taking eight years to graduate. They are not dropouts and should not be excluded in measures of persistence. I would suggest using an eight-year persistence measure rather than a six-year measure.

Good Mother

October 10th, 2011
11:42 am

I’m afraid the governor’s initiative will produce one thing — grade inflation.

If colleges and universities are measured by and get money based on how many students graduate, then the professors will be pressured to give the students better grades.

…which means more crap will be graduating from Georgia’s universities and colleges than before.

Heck, right now I get enough poorly resumes to fill an industrial waste can. I don’t need more poorly educated students with meaningless diplomas.

What we need to do is provide money so that good students (students who actually care about education) can afford college — more scholarships.

We don’t need to cheapen the diploma and dump more know-nothings into the work force.

Shawanda

October 10th, 2011
11:54 am

“…states are experimenting with tying the money to outcomes such as graduation and retention rates.”

I fear this kind of incentive will appeal to the dark side of human nature, a la the APS test cheating situation. If we pay colleges and universities to retain and graduate students you can bet that’s what they’ll do. Eventually their graduates will be so dumbed down that their degree won’t be worth a plug nickel.

Prof

October 10th, 2011
12:14 pm

Well, I guess I’m going against the current here. I don’t think it will lead to grade inflation…and I think that it’s a good idea.

At present, the legislative funding formula is based upon student enrollment figures. That has encouraged USG schools to accept many students who may not really be prepared because of K-12 grade inflation, which in turn has led to the real and expensive problem of providing remedial courses for Freshmen.

(When the Hurricane Katrina college students began turning up in Atlanta, GSU’s then-President Patton quickly accepted them although they clearly were not all going to settle in Atlanta, for it pushed up the student enrollment numbers for that year. Brilliant! More state funding followed.)

But this pressure to admit the unprepared will not be so strong if funding does not follow the initial enrollment but the 6-year graduation rate. I think that this change will improve the caliber of the student body, for the schools’ attention will shift to accepting students with the promise of finishing within 6 years.

I agree totally with “the prof” when he/she writes, “I have never been pressured to grade inflate in 13 plus years.” Same is true for me, in 25-plus years.

And “HS Public Teacher,” whatever do you mean by: “Welcome to my world of public education. You WILL be forced to change your grade scheme if it would cost you your job. If your boss tells you to do this ‘or else’, then what would you do?” Sorry, things don’t work that way in higher education. USG University Statutes and the Regents Policy prohibit that.

Another of many differences between K-12 teaching and college/University teaching.

thomas

October 10th, 2011
12:32 pm

@ zeke,

Are you H. Cain? You think people are brain washed? Those protesters are dummies? Lock them up? You mean like what they do in the Middle Eastern countries? Is that the system you want to live under?

thomas

October 10th, 2011
12:33 pm

@ HS Public Teacher,

Well, college profesors DO have tenure. K-12 teachers don’t – in Georgia.

thomas

October 10th, 2011
12:35 pm

@ make my day,

“The Tea Party isn’t going away, but will get stronger and start making a real difference for White communities- we will finally have someone looking out for us, instead of giving everything we’ve worked so hard to save to the blacks and border jumpers.”

So, you still want a government that looks out for us, just in a different way. I thought the whole idea behing the tea baggers are a small government that will leave us alone.

justjanny

October 10th, 2011
12:39 pm

both zeke and herman cain have issues…i guess we’re supposed to sit quietly and take it! even with a college degree ( that is somewhat the topic of this blog?), many, many people are out of a job while the fat gets fatter (big banks, big companies, etc.)

thomas

October 10th, 2011
12:50 pm

@ justjanny,

And they think closing any loophole in the tax code is the same as raising taxes…

HS Public Teacher

October 10th, 2011
12:52 pm

the prof (and others)….

TODAY professors in GA colleges have tenure. Who says that they won’t erase that just as they did for K-12? Do you really think that you are that safe during these times of idiotic politicans and the ultra conservative blame-it-on-the-teacher/prof mentalitiy?

Good luck with that…

HS Public Teacher

October 10th, 2011
12:57 pm

@ justjanny,

Yes, they do believe that. They believe that because they have FOXnews to continue spewing insults and names at you making you the ‘bad’ guy.

Look – you don’t want to work. That is why you are unemployed. There are jobs pulling onions out of the ground, so go get that job….. and be glad that you have it!

The fat cats deserve their $32 million dollar compensation package. Even if they destroy the company that they are supposed to be leading, it’s okay cause we’ll give them a $10 million dollar severance package then bring in their cousin that also sits on the Executive Board – then double his salary!

Really amazed

October 10th, 2011
1:06 pm

HOPE is good for reduced cost education. Not for quality education!!! More ways to fake parents into believing little Johnny is a genius. In the long run these parents learn this when it’s too late. GT and UGA are apples compared to oranges when it comes to rigours in academics. Engineering is a much tougher road than public relations or business degree. More students will just change their major when they can’t cut the mustard in the harder degree to keep HOPE, this in it self, is dumbing down one’s own self. Welcome to GEORGIA. This is why I kinda wish HOPE would just go away. The easy way out will be the harder way down the road for these students changing majors do to truly not being prepared from there wonderful public HS. The students that were truly prepared in HS will be the one’s sticking with the harder major and graduating in that major. Hopefully this will happen with a job through co-op program while attending college. I am very affraid that the better colleges in GA will follow suit with most public hs in GA and just grade inflate to keep funding. How could this not happen do the road with this plan??? This will lead to prof. like public hs teachers exiting the education field all together. Wish the gov’t would finally let these teachers just teach and let’s see what happens then. I bet they would be truly surprised. Perhaps that’s the problem, the gov’t would see they are truly NOT needed, meaning the GOVERNMENT IN EDUCAION!!!! Please remember the HOPE scholarship is NOT supposed to be a gov’t run program. Why do we allow the gov’t to even be a part of the decision process in how funds are allocated????

thomas

October 10th, 2011
1:09 pm

@ HS Public Teacher,

Yes, it is quite possible that the politicians – particularly those tea bagger type conservative wackos – would want to eliminate tenure at colleges because they think colleges are too liberal. Perhaps there is some connection between “educated minds” and “liberalism” – or the flip side, “ignorance,” “naivete,” “gullibility,” etc. and “conservatism.”

Anyway, one potential difference is that college/university administrators have much more experiences as faculty members compared to K-12 administrators as classroom teachers. Many administrators can (and some do) decide to step down their positions to go back to being regular professors. So, unlike in K-12 settings, it is much harder, I think, for politicians to “divide and conquer,” pit the administrators against teachers/professors.

Another difference is that high quality/reputable professors have much easier time locating another position somewhere else. So, unless they get rid of tenure from universities in a large number of states, those states without tenure will lose many quality professors – and much of grant money they bring in. I haven’t heard too many K-12 teachers who can bring in millions of dollars to an institution…

Prof

October 10th, 2011
1:19 pm

@ HS Public Teacher, 12:52. In a way, college teachers do have a national union, in the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) that was formed around 1915. Its professional resolutions about tenure and “shared governance” between the faculty and the administration have been upheld in several court cases over the years, from the 1990s and later.

AAUP “censure” of schools that abolish or revoke tenure only comes after an extensive investigation of the circumstances, and is taken quite seriously since it usually means difficulties in recruiting and keeping faculty. You would never find USG schools risking AAUP censure.

So we are NOT at the beck and call of Georgian legislators.

Also, “tenure” in higher education means something quite different from having Fair Dismissal Rights after 3 years, as with K-12 teachers. The original selection of “tenure track” professors (those who can be given tenure in 7 years) is very different from the original selection of K-12 teachers…and there are increasing numbers of “non-tenure track” positions at colleges and Universities. Not all college teachers are tenure-track or tenured, not by a long shot. But that’s a whole different subject.

Prof

October 10th, 2011
1:33 pm

@ HS Public Teacher. I should have completed my thought above. “Tenure” in higher education means that the professor cannot be fired except for certain restricted reasons listed in the state University Statutes, among them financial exigency of the hiring institution (the faculty member’s entire cademic program is being cut for budgetary reasons), moral turpitude (molesting a student, say), criminal conviction, plus some other equally serious grounds.

Once Again

October 10th, 2011
2:01 pm

Instead, how many can find jobs. Graduating into an empty job market is no mark of success. Far too many are encouraged by all the wrong things (society, low interest loans, etc.) to persue a college education through the traditional 4/5 year mechanism instead of focussing more on teaching kids how to educate themselves for what they want to do through a variety of mechanisms.

Vox Populi

October 10th, 2011
2:01 pm

This is yet another silly idea. One doesn’t even need a college degree to realize the unintended consequences…not unlike the failed promise of the HOPE scholarship. Responsible parents should go back to the old-fashioned idea of SAVING money for their kids to go to college, not relying on some crooked lottery run by a bunch of crooked millionaires!

First high schools, soon Georgia colleges will simply continue dumbing down requirements and graduating ANYONE with a pulse. Heck. They’ll probably graduate their football players!

Here’s the crux of the graduation problem: many if not most students currently, hopelessly flailing through college–depriving academically qualified students of seats–should NEVER have been admitted in the first place. But with the HOPE scholarship and inflated high school grades, these poor students now expect to be spoonfed their worthless diplomas. Anything less than that is “racist”–right? Nonesense. The purpose of higher ed is…DISCRIMINATION. Separating the wehat from the chaff. These kids need to learn a trade and become mechanics, plumbers, etc. Not everyone can or should be a brain surgeon! Not everyone “has the right” to get a college degree.

And yes, the Regents should cut the salaries of every college administrator making over $100K. I’d say cut these salaries by ~20%. If they don’t like it, let them try to find another job in this Obamaconomy! Take these salary savings and give RAISES to the administrative staff making under $100K…the ones who actually do THE WORK.

The Regents should also ELIMINATE all Historically Black Colleges from the lexicon of higher Education in Georgia. These blatantly racist, Affirmative Action institutions do not prepare their “students” to live in the real world. We already have more than enough African Studies majors. Look at the brain trust in charge of the Atlanta Public Schools and tell me I’m wrong.

TiffTaff

October 10th, 2011
2:10 pm

This is not only farcical for universities but also for students. It would be foolish to believe this is not going to disproportionately affect rural and under privileged students. Not every Georgia student has access to the same materials and classes. With this model colleges are going to become more selective and the students with less access with always lose.

Another group of students that will lose are the students that want to study the performing arts or creative arts. There has been a large shift in our society to gear students toward science and math based careers/curriculum. With the incentives placed in similar programs, for students that graduate with degrees in science or math, students wanting a liberal arts degree might not gain acceptance in some of these institutions.

thomas

October 10th, 2011
2:11 pm

@ Vox,

Although I agree that many “administrative staff” are underpaid, if too many of them get paid $80,000, I think there is something wrong with the system.

I don’t think it is up to any state BOR to eliminate the label, “Historically Black Colleges.” The phrase simply describe what they are. You clearly do not understand those institutions or what roles they serve. Many of the institutions are open to non-blacks, and many non-blacks teach at those institutions as well. Moreover, they teach much more than African studies, and their graduates have contributed much to the society, probably much more tha you have ever done or hope to do.

Inman Park Boy

October 10th, 2011
2:11 pm

Do we have an understandable, cogent, cohesive and workable education policy in Georgia that would treat problems in all levels of education? No, we do not. From the Pre-K 4 program to the college level program we have one politician after another out-shouting his associates in their hurry to “trash” educators of all stripes. Teachers and school administrators don’t know wll there is to know about operating a school, but they know a darn sight more than most members of our General Assembly. But, that ain’t saying much, is it? Solution? Figure out SOME way to get politics out of the public school business. One reason (among several) why private schools generally do a better overall job in educating kids is that most of them DON’T have to deal with politicians and the bureaucracies they have constructed.

Tech '10

October 10th, 2011
2:13 pm

All this means is that colleges will now have a perfectly good excuse to turn down people that aren’t qualified. Graduation rates will only get higher as colleges become more selective about who they admit. Everyone else can learn a trade. Skilled tradesmen/women are going to be in increasing demand as we come out of this little recession and the careers are often much more exciting and flexible than working in a cube anyway. I got a degree that I thought would keep me out of cubes (building construction) and instead it put me in one anyway because apparently construction workers and computers don’t mix well… I hate cubes.