| |
|
|
| |
| Profile: American Higher Education |
| |
| Colleges and Universities |
| |
 |
Four thousand colleges and universities offer degree-granting programs. |
| |
|
|
15% are public 4-year institutions. |
| |
|
|
26% are public 2-year institutions. |
| |
|
|
43% are private 4-year institutions. |
| |
|
|
16% are private 2-year institutions. |
| |
| Students |
| |
|
Thirteen million students are enrolled at the undergraduate level. |
| |
|
|
42% attend public 2-year colleges and universities. |
| |
|
|
38% attend public 4-year colleges and universities. |
| |
|
|
20% attend private 2- and 4-year colleges and universities. |
| |
|
Forty percent of undergraduates are enrolled part-time. |
| |
|
One third of all undergraduates are older than 24 years of age; 70% of this group are enrolled part-time. |
| |
|
One third of all undergraduates are non-white; non-white students are more likely than white students to be enrolled part-time. |
| |
| Appropriations for Higher Education |
| |
|
State and local governments provide about $66 billion annually for higher education, an increase of 26% (in constant dollars) since 1992. |
| |
|
Sources: For institutions and students: U. S. Department of Education, Digest of Education Statistics 2001 (Washington, D.C.: 2002). For appropriations:
Center for Higher Education and Finance, Grapevine: A National Database of Tax Support for Higher Education, State Higher Education Appropriations, 1992-93
and 2000-01 (Normal, IL: Illinois State University).
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
INTRODUCTION
By Patrick M. Callan
|
| |
| |
|
TWO PERSPECTIVES have informed our work at the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education since its inception in 1998:
|
| |
 |
|
The prospects-economic, civic, and social-of individuals, communities, states, and nations depend as never before on the availability and effectiveness of education and
training beyond high school; and
|
| |
|
|
The primary public policy responsibility for American education resides with the states.
|
|
| |
These perspectives converge in the Measuring Up series of state-by-state, 50-state report cards published by the National Center every two years. We have created this
series to encourage and support state leaders in their efforts to expand and improve college-level opportunity and effectiveness-a challenge in every state. In Measuring Up 2002,
as in Measuring Up 2000, indicators and grades are used to evaluate and compare the educational condition of each state's population-how well the people of the state are
being served by education and training after high school. We seek the attention of the public and state leaders on issues of performance by focusing on statewide educational results
rather than on particular colleges and universities. And we encourage a focus on results, not on effort, reputation, or input proxies.
Americans enroll in-and support-an impressive array of
some 4,000 public and private colleges and universities for many reasons. Not the least of these is the strong relationship between higher education opportunity and employment
that supports a middle-class life. For individuals, education and training beyond high school have become a virtual prerequisite for full participation in the economic, civic, and
social benefits of our nation. Moreover, nations, states, and communities now require a college-educated populace in order to compete in the global economy. These are the realities of
the knowledge-based global marketplace-realities grounded not in the pronouncements of educators or government policymakers or researchers, but in labor markets.
|
|
| . | . | . |
| . |
"Willing or not, our nation and its states are in an international economic race to develop human talent-to raise the knowledge and skill levels of societies and
communities."
| . |
| . | . | . |
|
Recent reports based on the 2000 census offer powerful
confirmation of the relationship of college education to the economic prospects of individuals:1
|
|
Two groups of Americans have not participated in the economic gains of the past 25 years: those with only a high school education, whose real incomes have remained flat;
and those who have not completed high school, whose real incomes have actually decreased.
|
| |
|
|
The incomes of individuals with some college education, associate degrees, bachelor's degrees, and advanced degrees have increased both in real terms and in comparison
with those with less education. For example, in 1975 the annual income of a worker with a bachelor's degree averaged 1.5 times that of a high school graduate. By 1999, the
advantage had increased to 1.8 times.
|
| |
|
|
Compounded over a lifetime, these differences in educational level represent average lifetime earnings of $1.2 million for a high school
graduate, $1.5 million for those with some college education but no degree, and $2.1 million for bachelor's degree holders.
|
| |
|
|
These "premiums" for college education grew during the 1990s, while the numbers of Americans who attended and completed college were also increasing.
|
The demand for higher levels of knowledge and skills threatens
to outpace supply. Demographic and economic data project slow growth of the labor force, as the baby-boomers retire and as the demands for college-educated workers grow.
Labor shortages could be felt as the economy emerges from the current recession, and may well persist for two decades. Even the most conservative workforce projections
predict a significant shortage of qualified workers between now and 2020 in jobs that will require at least some college.2
What, one may ask, does all this talk of labor markets, demand
and supply, and the world economy have to do with the indicators and grades in Measuring Up 2002? The answer is everything. Willing or not, our nation and its states are
in an international economic race to develop human talent-to raise the knowledge and skill levels of societies and communities. In this country at least, winning that race will
require economic growth and employment that will maintain and enhance middle-class lifestyles. In contrast to earlier times, the broad dispersion of higher levels of knowledge
and skills-not just the education of a small number or an elite-is required by this new knowledge-based, global economy. The Measuring Up series tracks the performance of
states in meeting this challenge.
|
|
Measuring Up 2000 and 2002 examine higher education as it affects the lives of most Americans-including, but not limited to, the handful of students who
attend an elite college or university. Most Americans, however, rely on public colleges near their homes, and many attend part-time. The national picture of higher education as
it serves all Americans is reflected in the Measuring Up grades; it is one of unevenness and even mediocrity.
|
| |
|
|
The reputation of American higher education as "the best in the world" is derived from that of a few elite institutions and from the research contributions of a small number
of universities. This reputation has little to do with higher education as most Americans experience it.
|
| |
|
|
International comparisons confirm that other nations have emulated, pursued, and, in some instances, surpassed the United States. Despite some improvements in the
past decade, our country is not the world leader in providing college access or in college degree attainment. Other nations are responding more rapidly and more effectively
to the need to raise the education and skill levels of their populations through college-level education and training.
|
Our policymakers and our colleges and universities are
confronted with a major shift-and one that will bear greatly on our economic and civic vitality in the early decades of the twenty-first century. We must reappraise the prevalent
de facto approach of educational and public policy that guided the nation for 50 years after World War II. Roberts T. Jones, president of the National Alliance of Business,
puts the challenge well:
"The academy's long-standing emphasis on identifying and promoting the very best students directly conflicts with the growing moral and economic imperative to maximize
the academic achievement of all students. Even the most rigorous programs and courses will be judged less by the numbers of students they 'weed out' and more by their
ability to educate the greatest number to the highest standards."4
As a nation we recently determined that we
could leave no child behind educationally. The lesson of the knowledge-based, global economy is that establishing-and even
achieving-this goal is only a first step. A second step is needed: Many more adults must be much better educated beyond high school. Without this next step, harsh
economic consequences will befall undereducated individuals, states, and communities. The mediocre national results and modest improvements reported in Measuring
Up 2002 strongly suggest that states and the higher education system are underperforming in meeting today's educational, economic, and civic needs.
Three further observations:
|
|
State financial support for both public schools and colleges grew during the 1990s. Increased appropriations for schools were usually closely connected to explicit public
policy goals, such as raising student achievement and teacher quality. In contrast, increases for colleges usually lacked such an explicit policy base. This difference might
partially explain why the greatest improvements shown in Measuring Up 2002 are found in the area of preparation.
|
| |
|
|
A not-uncommon belief is that the underperformance of higher education will automatically self-correct if preparation improves. This myth is not supported by Measuring
Up 2002. Improved preparation is clearly one of the conditions for higher education improvement, but major gains are unlikely without sustained, strategic attention to
ensuring college access, to keeping cost and price affordable, and to improving student persistence and completion.
|
| |
|
|
Although this report does not deal with the current recession or its impact, the state budgetary travails of recent months point to an ongoing dilemma for policymakers and
higher education leaders: Appropriations are "discretionary" in state budgets, and during recessions this status often permits disproportionate reductions in higher education
budgets and steep tuition increases. However, college is no longer discretionary for Americans who aspire to employment that will lead to a middle-class life for themselves or
for their children.
|
|
Measuring Up 2002, then, presents a portrait of states and their colleges and universities in transition between great successes in the second half of the twentieth century
and the emerging unfamiliar demands of the twenty-first. I believe that two aspects of this transition are critical. First, in the recent past, education and training beyond high
school was just one of many routes to the American middle class. Now, for most Americans, the alternative routes available to earlier generations no longer exist. Second,
earlier policies promoted broad access and college opportunity, albeit somewhat poorly defined, for many, and excellence for a selected few. Now, I believe, policies must recognize
that there are many dimensions of excellence, and that college opportunity must be a vehicle for raising the knowledge and skill levels of most adults.
|
|
| . | . | . |
| . |
"We must reappraise the prevalent de facto approach of educational and public policy that guided the nation for 50 years after World War II."
| . |
| . | . | . |
|
Notes:
1 Jennifer Cheeseman Day and Eric C. Newburger, Current Population Reports, The Big Payoff: Educational Attainment and Synthetic Estimates of Work-Life Earnings (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Census Bureau, July 2002).
2 Anthony P. Carnevale, "The Economic and Demographic Roots of Education Reform," in National School Board Journal (NSBA), October 2001, p. 4. "Tomorrow's Jobs," reprinted from the Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2002-2003 Edition (Washington, D.C.: U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 2002, Bulletin 2540-1).
3 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Education at a Glance: OECD Indicators (Paris, France: 2001 Edition).
4 Roberts T. Jones, "Facing New Challenges: The Higher Education Community Must Take the Lead in Addressing the Dramatic Pace of External Change," in National CrossTalk, Vol. 10, No. 3, Summer 2002 (San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education), p. 10.
back to top
|
|