News for State Colleges and Universities

Balancing Student Privacy, Campus Security, and Public Safety: Issues for Campus Leaders

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:04:00 +0000

Overview

The complex issues of promoting student mental health, privacy and public safety—and the delicate balance among them—weigh heavily on the minds of institutional leaders, educational policymakers, and local, state and federal officials. American campuses have a proud history of intellectual freedom, openness and public accessibility to their communities. However, the Virginia Tech shootings on April 16, 2007 marked a grim watershed in American campus violence, casting light on wide-ranging areas of concern including:

* The number of students with mental health issues on college campuses and the resources available to campuses to assist them;
* Gaps in mental health treatment nationwide;
* The legal role of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and the Health Insurance and Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) in campus policies and procedures;
* The state of uncertainty on campus regarding the legality of sharing information about students with mental health issues both for students’ own good and that of the campus;
* The role of families and loved ones in students’ mental health treatment and how much information can legally be shared with them by campus officials;
* Gun control laws as they pertain to people with psychiatric treatment histories;
* College and university emergency procedures, including “lock-downs” and communication methods, and;
* College and university administrative procedures regarding disturbing student behavior and the legal ramifications thereof.

Top 10 State Policy Issues for Higher Education in 2008

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:01:00 +0000

Along with the continuation of some long overdue attention at the federal level, 2007 witnessed increasing recognition of the link between higher education and state economic competitiveness. These acknowledgements collectively elevated higher education as a public priority in many states. Evidence of the importance of increasing the quality of, and access to, state colleges was abundant across the U.S. Legislators and governors – given plenty of support from the business community – provided increases in state operating revenues (in most cases), as well as proposed and enacted policy recommendations aimed at creating greater economic stimulus via state colleges.

What lies ahead for 2008? Presented here are the top 10 state issues most likely to be at the forefront of discussion and action that will affect public higher education across the 50 states, in the view of the state policy analysis and research staff at AASCU. While numerous topics shape state higher education policy, each affecting the issues of affordability and quality, our focus is on the overarching issue of college access. This synopsis is informed by an environmental scan of state policy activities of the past year, trend analysis, and events that will continue to shape the policy landscape. Some issues are perennial in nature, while others reflect attention to near-term actions in state policy and public discourse. The influence of any given issue across individual states will, of course, vary.

Domestic Partnership Benefits: Equity, Fairness, and Competitive Advantage

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 24 Oct 2007 20:27:00 +0000

As the American public becomes increasingly supportive of equity and fairness in the workplace, employers are discovering that domestic partner benefits programs make good business sense. Evolving social and economic pressures in support of these programs are contributing to their increased use as a competitive lever to attract a diverse, top-caliber workforce.

Context

When the Village Voice newspaper in New York City first offered benefits to non-married domestic partners of its employees in 1982, this represented a radical departure from tradition. Twenty-five years later, some 9,300 employers in the United States, including many of the nation’s largest and most successful companies, have extended their benefits programs to the domestic partners of employees and their dependents. Though such benefits are far from universally available, it is clear that a shift has taken place in American society, moving domestic partner benefits programs from the margins to the mainstream.

This development is consistent with growing public opposition to discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. It represents a new middle ground in society’s culture wars. At one extreme, there are those who wish to preserve the traditional definition of marriage as between one man and one woman and to deny recognition of any legal status for same-sex couples. At the other extreme, there are those fighting for full marriage equality for same-sex couples. Between them, there is a very large group of individuals who support legal recognition through civil unions or domestic partnerships, but who oppose same-sex marriage. While both sides have intensified their efforts to achieve victories in statehouses, courts, ballot boxes, and Congress, domestic partner benefit programs have grown in popularity as a compromise solution that is acceptable to a large proportion of the American public. The term “domestic partner” itself is still in flux, but in general, it refers to an unmarried couple (same- or opposite-sex) who live together and who are committed to each other, certifying through some formal means that they are financially and legally interdependent.

The Path to Prosperity: A Policy of Investment

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Mon, 14 May 2007 20:08:00 +0000

Creating a talented workforce is a key strategy in gaining a competitive advantage for regional economies in the United States and abroad. With heightened competition for public resources, an invigorated federal-state effort investing in human capital-building enterprises will increase states' capacity while enhancing personal and societal prosperity.

With intense competition at the forefront of the global knowledge-based economy, the United States must embrace a strategy of building a skilled workforce. In the New Economy, the flow of capital - in all its forms- coalesces around regions that have high concentrations of talent. Despite evidence that skilled workers are a vital element of regional economic prosperity, access to and the affordability of quality higher education has eroded. This is due to reduced investment by states and the federal government, as well as heightened cost pressures of college and university operations. More visibility must be raised of the connection between state and regional workforce capacity and economic and social prosperity, and the cycle of growth that is created by public investment in higher education.

Update on Advanced Placement

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Thu, 12 Apr 2007 12:47:00 +0000

As Advanced Placement coursework emerges as an instrument of public policy, educators and policymakers need to understand the facts, to set realistic expectations, and to engage in activities that promote positive outcomes.

Context

When the College Board initiated the Advanced Placement (AP) Program in 1955, its potential as a public policy tool was yet to be imagined. For much of its history, the program focused on academically accomplished high school students who were college-bound. It offered these students the opportunity to earn college credit, be placed in advanced-level college courses, or both—if they could demonstrate sufficient knowledge through AP exams.

Though the basic AP approach has remained the same, societal changes have catapulted the program into the public policy arena. The emergence of a global economy and the rapid pace of technological change have beckoned the need for a far greater number of workers with postsecondary credentials in the United States. Among the most critical variables that contribute to postsecondary success is the completion of a rigorous high school curriculum. Growing concerns about the shortcomings of the nation’s K-12 system have led educators and policymakers to implement a variety of strategies to promote academic rigor and success for all high school students.

Tuition Discounting at AASCU Institutions

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Mon, 05 Mar 2007 20:12:00 +0000

As states continue the trend of providing postsecondary institutions with smaller shares of state funds, public colleges and universities are forced to rely more heavily on tuition and fees as a source of revenue. While this trend is well documented, little is know about how colleges use institutional aid to provide tuition “discounts” to certain student populations. In 2006, The College Board published Tuition Discounting: Not Just a Private College Practice that examined the extent to which public colleges are using tuition revenue and institutional aid to offset the cost of attendance for some students. Tuition discounting has important policy implications for public colleges and universities primarily because most of the discounts are awarded to students who do not have critical financial need. Colleges often utilize tuition discounts to attract talented students who will help their institutions improve college rankings, athletic programs, and demographic profiles. This policy brief helps answer some basic questions about the extent to which AASCU institutions engage in tuition discounting and how institutional discounting policy can leverage resources for students with the greatest financial need.

...more

Wrestling Rising Costs with Innovation

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 02 Feb 2007 21:35:00 +0000

Although higher education leaders cannot fully control the price of a college degree, many institutions and policymakers are looking at creative ways to deal with the rising cost of educating students.

Context
While tuition costs are likely the most talked about topic in higher education, focusing on the institutional finance is equally important. The growing expenses associated with educating students is often a catalyst for rising tuition and fees, and they play a large role as educators plan for the future of their institutions.

To assess the overall outlook of higher education costs, economists and education leaders often look at the annual Higher Education Price Index (HEPI), a calculation that measures inflation for college and university goods and services. In 2006, higher education institutions saw prices jump 5.0 percent, compared to the Consumer Price Index that rose just 3.8 percent. The 2006 calculated HEPI included significant price increases in several areas, such as utilities, where prices soared 27.1 percent in one year alone. Also noteworthy are the price increases of supplies and materials, rising more than 8 percent while administrative salaries and fringe benefits both grew 5.0 percent. These high costs often saddle institutions with tough budget decision, like delaying capital projects, canceling classes, laying off staff and faculty and raising tuition and fees.

more....

State Colleges and Universities and the 2006 Elections

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 17:39:00 +0000

Looking ahead from the 2006 elections, higher education will be an important topic in public policy discussions at the federal and state levels. State colleges and universities will need to pay attention as discussions about access, affordability, and accountability play out in the coming year.

Context
With public dissatisfaction of the war in Iraq at an all-time high, Democrats made significant gains in the mid-term elections of 2006. They will control Congress for the first time since 1994 and will occupy the majority of governor's mansions and statehouse seats. High on their domestic agenda are increasing the minimum wage, removing barriers to stem cell research, making college affordable for all, and reforming health care.
It is impossible to predict how successful the Democrats will be in achieving their legislative priorities. Many elected Democrats were middle-of-the-road or conservative candidates, the U.S. Senate is evenly divided, and there is a Republican in the White House. With a divided government for the first time in a dozen years, almost any outcome is possible. State colleges and universities have much at stake and they need to stay informed.

more

Teacher Induction Programs: Trends and Opportunities

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 20 Oct 2006 19:10:00 +0000

State-level policy support for teacher induction programs can help teachers realize their full potential, keep them in the profession, promote greater student learning, and save money. Higher education institutions and school districts must work together to provide high-quality and well-designed induction programs.

Context
The traditional “sink-or-swim” model for beginning teachers has not worked very well. Facing challenging work conditions and insufficient support, nearly half of new teachers leave the classroom within the first five years. Among those who stay, it can it can take years to develop the skills they need to be most effective in the classroom. These factors have a negative impact on student learning, particularly in poor and low-performing schools where new teachers are often assigned. The financial cost of teacher turnover adds to the problem, draining resources from already tight budgets.

The Spellings Commission and the States

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:18:00 +0000

This month the Secretary of Education Margaret Spelling’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education issued its final report, calling for systemic changes at the nation’s colleges and universities. Declaring “we must not be blind to the less inspiring realities of postsecondary education in our country,” the 19-member panel issued six primary recommendations.

The commission report makes clear that progress in these areas will require action from a wide range of stakeholders—K-12 and postsecondary leaders, state and federal policymakers, and accrediting agencies, to name a few. Less clear is who should lead in which areas, especially given the complex network of shared roles and responsibilities in areas such as student financial aid and institutional accountability. For public colleges and universities, the role of state policy in leveraging a reform agenda is particularly important, even though states are playing a smaller role in financially supporting their institutions of higher education.

Student Debt Burden

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:47:00 +0000

College student enrollment across the United States has steadily increased over the past decade, with more than 17 million citizens participating in higher education today. The good news is that thousands of newly trained workers are moving our social and economic enterprises forward each year. The bad news is that tens of thousands more students are accumulating record levels of debt. As state and federal support for higher education continues to tighten, students are increasingly picking up the slack. This trend is not slowing down; in fact, student debt has risen significantly over the past decade.

These rising debt levels present important policy implications related to access and affordability. To keep higher education as the primary means of upward mobility and to keep our economy competitive, colleges must remain affordable and accessible to all students. Higher education officials must be aware of the long-term impact borrowing has on students’ futures and students need better information to help them graduate with manageable debt levels.

AASCU endorses the recommendations in the report of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education.

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 15:11:00 +0000

The recommendations are solid and worthy of our support; they are good for higher education and good for the country. AASCU acknowledges the Commissions’ concerns and will work to address them.

The recommendations are:

1. Improve student preparation and persistence, address non-academic barriers and provide significant increases in aid to low-income students to expand access to and success in higher education.

2. The entire student financial aid system needs to be restructured and new incentives put in place to improve the measurement and management of costs and institutional productivity to address the cost of a college education and the long term ability of government’s financing higher education.

3.Higher education needs to create and embrace a robust culture of accountability and transparency thereby changing from a system primarily based on reputation to one based on performance.

• More and better information on the quality and cost of higher education need to be collected for the database. A privacy-protected information system that collects, analyzes and uses student-level data is needed to help consumers determine how colleges and universities are serving their students. Through accurate retention and graduation rates and net tuition prices for different categories of students, institutions that serve the growing proportion of nontraditional students will be more accurately portrayed.

4. Colleges and universities need to embrace a culture of continuous innovation and improvements through pedagogies, curricula and technologies to improve learning, especially in science and mathematics. Institutions should share educational resources among institutions and use distance learning to meet the needs of rural students and adult learners.

5. A national strategy for lifelong learning needs to be developed so that all citizens understand the importance of higher education throughout their lives. Institutions need to offer more distance learning, workplace learning and alternative scheduling programs to reach out to adults.

6. Federal investment in areas critical to global competitiveness must be increased and a renewed commitment to attract the best and brightest to lead American innovation.

High School Coursework: Policy Trends and Implications for Higher Education

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 12 Jul 2006 20:52:00 +0000

A new wave of national attention has been directed to beefing up the high school curriculum and statewide policy changes are taking place with or without the involvement of the postsecondary community. To assure that the changes move in the right direction, higher education leaders must be involved.

Context
It is common knowledge that quality high school coursework is critical to college and workplace success. A Nation at Risk pointed this out in 1983, arguing that high school students need to complete a more rigorous curriculum if the nation is to remain competitive in the global economy.Since then, research has confirmed the wisdom of this recommendation. Longitudinal studies by the U.S. Department of Education have found that the academic intensity of high school courses counts more than any other pre-collegiate factor in predicting college success, and that the highest level of mathematics is a key marker in “pre-collegiate momentum.” Research by ACT, Inc. has documented that students who take the ACT-recommended core curriculum, particularly Algebra 2 and beyond, as well as biology, chemistry, and physics, have a greater chance of enrolling in college, succeeding in first-year college courses, and persisting in college.

Tuition at Public Colleges and Universities: Policy Trends and Projections

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 19:44:00 +0000

Context
The advent of summer brings a renewed round of tuition setting for public colleges and universities nationwide. This year’s round takes place against the backdrop of continued strength in states’ finances translating into further moderation in tuition/fee increases for students and their families. At the same time, upward price pressures on salaries and infrastructure are acting as a counterweight against more softening in rate hikes. Additionally, state policymakers face a growing list of demands for their budget surpluses meaning that higher education leaders must keep their funding expectations in check.

Even with the improved fiscal situation, campus and system leaders, legislators, and governors are viewing tuition and fee policies with ongoing concern and continue to explore policy alternatives to contain rate increases and leverage pricing policies to achieve student access and success. The rising prominence of this issue stems in part from long-standing concerns over state and national competitiveness, but also from political considerations, as college costs and prices are quickly becoming a key “checkbook issue” for middle-class voters. All of this points to a window of opportunity for campuses and systems to review or revise policy and to take steps on the funding front that will make short- and long-term improvements regarding predictability and stability in pricing. That window may not be open for long, though, and policymakers must be prepared to move quickly—and thoughtfully.

Enrollment Trends at AASCU Campuses, 1994-2004

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 19:42:00 +0000

As K-12 schools and the nation continue to expand, state colleges and universities are facing the task of educating a growing number of students. The importance of understanding how our student communities have changed and how they will evolve is unquestionable as leaders in both higher education and legislatures set the foundations for building tomorrow’s colleges and universities.

Context
College enrollment continues to jump leaps and bounds, as the number of students attending public four-year higher education institutions reached 6.8 million in the 2004 academic year. Fueled by significant enrollment increases by minority and female students, as well as recent high school graduates and adult students, the number of students at AASCU campuses across the country increased 13.7 percent over the past 10 years, reaching 3.7 million.

AASCU analyzed the latest year of available data from the U.S. Department of Education to identify enrollment trends among its member institutions. While AASCU institutions differ in size, mission and composition, they can be seen as a bellwether of change for American higher education.

Faculty Trends and Issues

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Fri, 23 Jun 2006 19:39:00 +0000

The time is past for a "one size fits all" approach to faculty. If American colleges and universities are to remain strong, they must commit to making academic work financially viable and attractive to the next generation of scholars.
Context
In an issue paper released earlier this month by the U.S. Secretary of Education’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education, Robert C. Dickeson offered harsh criticism of “the unique culture and extraordinary power of the faculty” in higher education. The systems of tenure and shared governance, he argued, run counter to sound business practices and contribute substantially to rising college costs.

The same week, Michael F. Middaugh, director of the National Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity, presented a different picture at the annual meeting of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. “Faculty instruction has been managed and managed well. It’s the other stuff that’s killing us.”

For their part, four-year college presidents weighed in last fall in a Chronicle of Higher Education survey. While inadequate faculty salaries ranked highest on their list of faculty concerns, a majority of presidents surveyed also foresee change in the tenure system.

Because of the unique characteristics of the academy, namely, its labor-intensive nature and its tradition of shared governance, faculty issues are always a matter of great interest and high emotion. As such, it is important for campus and system leaders to understand current faculty trends and their implications.

Perspectives n2: Value-Added Assessment

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 19:06:00 +0000

For most of its history, American higher education has operated according to a “trust the academy” philosophy for gauging academic quality, specifically, the value added to students’ knowledge by institutions. The faith of universities’ stakeholders is required, because the existing quality assurance system is built largely upon input measures (e.g. SAT/ACT scores, spending per student), rather than metrics related to educational outcomes. While efforts to develop more robust assessments of student learning in higher education are underway, they exist at the margins rather than mainstream. Progress in this area has been stymied by a lack of consensus on how or even whether to pursue student learning assessment, aided by an implicit sense that the United States, as a world leader in higher education, does not need such an initiative.

It is time for states and their colleges and universities, in conjunction with regional accrediting agencies, to lead the development of a consensus model for assessing the value added from undergraduate student learning. Public institutions are the logical leaders for such a movement, because they educate the vast majority of the nation’s undergraduate students, thus providing a “critical mass” for examination and best practice cultivation. Also, a value-added system could better reflect their contributions to student learning, as the prevailing philosophy of “quality = price + selectivity” does not fit the admissions profile of many public institutions. Public higher education arguably has the longest and most substantial history of “first steps” in the area of public accountability. What would such a model entail?

States’ Finances Strong Today, But Big Tests Loom

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 16:08:00 +0000

Policy Matters, v3n3

Over the past two years, the big headline in state capitals has been the return of strong revenues and expanding budgets. After a spate of mid-year spending cuts, layoffs, and tax/fee hikes, states are once again boosting spending and even putting tax cuts on the table, illustrating the boom/bust cycle of state fiscal conditions. Looking ahead, though, governors and legislators face a potent combination of internal and external forces that will test their ability to maintain and expand services such as higher education. Campus and system leaders and policymakers need to understand and carefully monitor these factors so that they can anticipate the potentially difficult choices ahead.

Addressing the Needs of Adult Learners

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 21:21:00 +0000

In today’s workplace, lifelong learning has become a fact of life. As the American economy evolves to become more knowledge-based, a growing number of its citizens are turning to college in order to expand their skills, earning potential and career paths. A third of these students are 25 years of age or older, a group that possesses a distinct set of goals, views and needs.

Context
Today’s workforce is distinctly different from a generation earlier. Rapidly changing technology, greater job instability and higher industry expectations that workers be more flexible require adults to continue learning throughout their careers. Almost one in 10 adults (9 percent) were enrolled in a college degree program for work-related reasons in 2002-03, according to the U.S. Department of Education. Forty percent of all adults participate in some type of work-related formal education and about half is provided by business or industry. Colleges, universities and vocational/technical schools educate just one-fifth of them, leaving a great opportunity—and responsibility—for public postsecondary institutions to provide continuing learning to more adult students.

Policy Priorities

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Tue, 24 Jan 2006 20:56:00 +0000

AASCU’s advocacy efforts in 2006 will focus around the idea of “Delivering America’s Promise”—promoting public policy that honors long-standing commitments to the nation’s students and their families. Following are key public policy priorities for the Association in the year ahead.

Student Financial Aid
Pell Grants
Increase Fiscal Year 2007 appropriations to fund the $4,500 maximum grant.

Student Loans
Support the maintenance of both the Federal Family Education Loan (FFEL) and Direct Loan programs and oppose the establishment of policies that would impose artificial disadvantages for the efficient operation of each.

Promote more realistic first and second year undergraduate borrowing limits within the existing aggregate limit.

Support flexible repayment terms and incentives for timely repayment for borrowers, and oppose increases in borrower fees.

National Security
International Exchange
Support the implementation and full funding of the recommendations of the Commission on the Abraham Lincoln Study Abroad Fellowship Program.

Aid Benefits for Students Called to Active Duty
Hold students called to active duty harmless from aid repayment requirements.

Tax Policy
Federal Reform Proposals Affecting Students and Institutions
Support proposed changes in the HOPE and Lifetime Learning Tax Credits that make them more accessible to the neediest students, including expansion to non-tuition expenses.
Oppose proposed changes in federal tax policy that will adversely impact institutions in demonstrating or maintaining their eligibility for tax-exempt status.

Science and Technology
Undergraduate Programming
Support increased funding for undergraduate programming by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF).

Technological Assistance for Law Enforcement
Support changes in the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) that promote the timely provision of necessary information to law enforcement officials and reasonable compliance costs for colleges and universities.

Teacher Preparation, Development, and Support
Higher Education Act (HEA) Title II—Partnership Grants
Provide adequate resources to state-based partnerships that include higher education institutions (Teacher Quality Enhancement Grants and Centers for Excellence), with a special focus on high-quality clinical experiences, aiding “high need” and “hard to staff” schools, and preparation of school leadership and paraprofessionals.

HEA Title II—Reporting
Advocate for the reporting of existing state-established scaled scores regarding program pass rates to the public.

Access and Inclusion
HEA Programs—Minority-Serving Institutions
Boost funding for Titles III and V of the HEA (Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic Serving Institutions, and Alaska Native and Hawaiian Serving Institutions) and remove unnecessary barriers to institutional participation in these programs.

Extend eligibility requirements in Title III and provide additional funding to public Historically Black Colleges and Universities that have created new graduate programs in the sciences and change funding restrictions to allow for the development of new qualified graduate programs.

HEA Programs—Students
Increase support for TRIO and GEAR UP, specifically for expansion of those programs to reach community-based institutions and other groups that serve underrepresented students.

Economic and Workforce Development
Workforce Investment Act (WIA)
Amend the law to include leaders of public four-year institutions in planning and decision-making processes.

Provide for the allocation of disaster relief grant funds to four-year institutions for education and training of displaced workers.

Welfare Reform
Remove student aid from eligibility determination for public assistance.

Increase time limits for education as countable work activity.

Governance and Accountability
Student Outcomes Data
Authorize a multi-state pilot test to explore the feasibility of a unit-record data system covering all institutions of higher education.

José Ramos-Horta Audio File

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 16:39:00 +0000

Opening General Session

Global Forces—Shaping Higher Education
Higher education leaders in the United States are keenly aware that the lack of international focus in our institutions is a deficit that must be corrected. There is a growing interest in the impact of globalization on higher education and the responsibilities we must shoulder in adequately educating our students. This keynote address will pose key questions and stimulate thinking and dialogue to position U.S. institutions better to prepare our students.
Sponsored by ARAMARK Education

Welcome: Patricia P. Cormier, President, Longwood University and Chair, AASCU Board of Directors
Keynote: José Ramos-Horta, Senior Minister, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Timor-Leste

HEA Reauthorization

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 18:12:00 +0000

AASCU is very concerned about the impending federal budget reconciliation process in the House and Senate. We are particularly concerned that the House budget reconciliation unfairly targets up to $15 billion in cuts from student loans over six years to meet arbitrary budget targets in pending reconciliation bills. These cuts will force students to work more or borrow more privately to reach their higher education goals--or forego them completely.

We believe that the share to be taken from the federal loan programs is grossly unfair and excessive. The budget must not be balanced on the backs of students. Similar budget cutting legislation is underway in the Senate but some of the funds cut from the loan programs are being plugged into new grant programs to assist needy students.

Publication: A Call for Values Congruence

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 12 Oct 2005 15:57:00 +0000

A Call for Values Congruence determines college and university presidents must:
- Reaffirm the primacy of an academic culture for the campus community. Some simple first steps include reestablishing a five-day academic week, and requiring an acceptable level of academic performance.

- Articulate collegiate expectations for student groups by enforcing clear policies addressing underage drinking, and establishing periodic dialogues between university officials and advisers to Greek chapters.

- Encourage the development of programs and policies addressing alcohol abuse based on research findings and oversee their implementation.

- Establish a periodic certification process for all recognized social fraternities and sororities. Preferably, the certification would be conducted by or include representation external to the campus. The focus would be on individual chapters’ records of abiding by policies, and should result in commendation, certification, probationary status or, when justified, closing of a chapter.

- Dedicate necessary resources to promote healthy lifestyles for all students.

- Consider the adoption of a policy whereby official campus recognition is given only to those Greek organizations that have adopted and implemented membership and behavioral standards congruous with those adopted by the North-American Interfraternity Council.

Graduation Rate Outcomes: Student Success in State Colleges and Universities

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:47:00 +0000

Executive Summary
The American Association of State Colleges and Universities Graduation Rate Outcomes Study is a collaborative effort to understand the reasons why some public four-year colleges and universities have an unusually good record of retaining and graduating students. The American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU), The Education Trust (Ed Trust), and The National Association of System Heads (NASH) sponsored the study to help campuses improve graduation rates.

Twelve institutions participated in this study. Each campus was visited by a study team that submitted a campus report. The campus reports were analyzed and the final report was written by Peter Ewell of the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, with assistance and collaboration by team leaders, project directors and others.

The study campuses were:
California State University Stanislaus
Clemson University, South Carolina
City University of New York John Jay College of Criminal Justic
Elizabeth City State University, North Carolina
Louisiana Tech University
Montclair State University, New Jersey
Murray State University, Kentucky
Northwest Missouri State University
Truman State University, Missouri
University of Northern Iowa
University of Wisconsin – La Crosse
Virginia State University

The stories told about these colleges and universities underscore the diversity of successful approaches to retaining and graduating students. Good performance here is not just the province of small, selective institutions. With nurturing and care, it can be achieved at any AASCU campus. But these stories also suggest that simply finding “best practices” somewhere and “plugging them in” is unlikely to be effective.

Results
While study campuses were all successful in retaining and graduating students, they were remarkably diverse in their institutional characteristics. They exhibited an extraordinary variety of specific strategies to promote student success. What is distinctive among those institutions with high graduation rates is the overall campus culture within which these practices are deployed, and the quality of presidential and administrative leadership that keep them moving and coordinated.

Keynote Speaker at Annual Meeting

noreply@blogger.com (aascu.news) — Wed, 07 Sep 2005 16:21:00 +0000

Jose Ramos-Horta is the senior minister, Minister for Foreign Affairs and Cooperation, Timor-Leste, visiting professor, Faculty of Law, University of New South Wales, Sydney, and distinguished visiting professor, University of Victoria, Melbourne.

When Indonesia invaded East Timor in 1975, Ramos-Horta was on his way to the United Nations Security Council, urging them to take action in the face of the Indonesian Military onslaught that killed one third of the Timorese population. Despite his exile, in 1991 Ramos-Horta was elected Vice President of the National Council Maubere Resistance, an umbrella organization of pro-independence movements both in and outside East Timor.

Ramos-Horta shared the Nobel Peace Prize with his fellow countryman Bishop Carlos Filipe Ximenes Belo. The Committee chose to honor the two laureates for their "sustained efforts to find diplomatic solution to the conflict of East Timor based on the people's right to self determination.”

Higher education leaders in the United States are keenly aware that the lack of international focus in our institutions is a deficit that must be corrected. There is a growing interest in the impact of globalization on higher education and the responsibilities we must shoulder in adequately educating our students. Ramos-Horta will pose key questions that need to be asked by American higher education leaders.
(excerpted from:http://www.mfac.gov.tp/ramos-horta.html)