Now lets see where this goes: to state legislatures or to the judiciary?
Michigan has already pass a law that prohibits collegiate athletes from joining a union.
We have not heard the last of this.
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015/08/17/national-labor-relations-board-declines-assert-role-northwestern-football-union?utm_content=bufferffc78&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=IHEbuffer
This past week we saw in Michigan another university go above the legislatively imposed tuition cap. It gave up a million dollars in state aid for eight or ten times as much gained from a tuition increase. Lots of hand wringing by policy makers about what to do with this development and the hand wringing will get worse as more universities make this choice.
At the same time Michigan we have a legislator re-introducing legislation to allow community colleges to offer some four year degrees that have up to now been the exclusive of four year universities.
Over all of this of course is the issue of the cost of getting a two year and/or a four degree. The cost to the student is getting higher and higher and leaving students with more and more student loan debt.
The debate is important about tuition costs and student debt. The debate is important about loss of state aid to universities and the cost of offering a university curriculum, student services and construction of new campus buildings. The debate is important about what is the scope of education that should be provided at a community college and should community college tuition be free..
Maybe the discussion between the legislators and community college and university presidents should really be between college and university trustees who approve these tuition hikes, who approve the expanding programs, who approve new buildings, etc., etc.. Maybe they should be asked why and what they are doing? They are the policy makers in higher education and they approve all policies and procedures.
Maybe we need a discussion at a statewide level about higher education governance and cost.
Bridge magazine has an excellent overview of this issue in its recent edition. http://bridgemi.com/2015/07/turf-war-community-colleges-want-to-offer-more-4-year-degrees/
Who is watching the watchdogs is what policy makers should be asking? We pay a lot of public money to these accreditation organizations and as this article below says we may not be getting much for our money. What about elected and appointed university boards? Are they watching? Who holds them accountable? At least the elected boards have to face re election but not many are ever removed from office? Who is performing evaluations, etc., on board members? Will more transparency help? Should we have more public involvement on who gets on these boards> More on this later. http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-watchdogs-of-college-education-rarely-bite-1434594602
"Resolution Opening Up U. Board Meetings Could See Vote Next Week
A resolution that would change the Constitution to require the state's university governing bodies to be subject to the Open Meetings Act could be brought up for a vote in the House Oversight and Ethics Committee next week, its chair said Thursday.
The resolution (HJR O) would strip the word "formal" from the section of the Constitution governing university board meetings, and would require sessions of governing bodies of higher education institutions to be open as prescribed in the Open Meetings Act.
Rep. Ed McBroom (R-Vulcan) said he hopes to report the resolution when the committee meets next week. The committee did adopt a substitute offered by Mr. McBroom that strips language from the resolution pertaining to the Freedom of Information Act.
He said he felt the wording was redundant as there is already a section in the Constitution regarding FOIA.
Because of a Supreme Court case in 1999, university governing boards are able to hold deliberations in private and only "formal" meetings in public.
Mr. McBroom said he has been meeting with universities to find out if there are "specific issues" the OMA would create for the boards.
"As I see it right now, the Open Meetings Act would be adequate. It already provides for closed sessions, and for open sessions depending on specific information," he said.
Mr. McBroom said to him the resolution is common sense. He said it fixes a lack of clarity in the Constitution that led to the 1999 decision.
"The courts have determined again and again university boards are governing boards," he said. "I think we simply need to adopt this to clarify what, in my mind, is already in the Constitution," he said. "I don't think that is a heavy lift. ... We'll see. I am always a little bit of an optimist on the desire of open and transparent government."
The committee heard more testimony on Thursday from people mostly bashing the University of Michigan.
Douglas Smith, a former professor at the U-M, told committee members the university secretly hired an attorney after a student doctor was found with child pornography so that it could cite attorney-client privilege when asked about the incident and an investigation of the university that began afterward.
Patrick Clawson, a private investigator from Flint, said he once served U-M Regent Denise Ilitch with a subpoena and she screamed at him and acted like she was above the law.
While most who testified in committee Thursday were supportive of the bill, the Presidents Council, State Universities of Michigan was opposed." (Gongwer News Service).
...those who combine soft skills like communicating with technical skills." This is a good read on importance of liberal arts degree, a degree in the humanities combined with some solid technical skills is the future of educating leaders for our new global economy. This is from an article in the New York Times today by Nick Krisoff. http://nyti.ms/1D6fiTW Recently, author Fareed Zakaria (In Defense of a Liberal Education) and Michael Roth (Beyond the University: Why Liberal Education Matters) published books on this topic. These two books are worth a read for all those concerned about preparing and educating future global leaders but also for those concerned about how universities are or are not focused enough on global trends and preparation of global leaders.
A good idea and good partnering with between high school & college leaders.
http://hechingerreport.org/some-high-schools-following-their-graduates-straight-into-college/
We need more conversations about this issue. University leaders, including facult/researcher leaders, need to drive this debate. It should not be left to be only debated off campus and in the media. This article is a good review of the issues and concerns involved.
US higher education leaders are facing another "disrupter"- more universities globally in top 150 universities. Much more intense competition for students globally.