Vermont as the canary

[polly_mer]

Full text from Twitter:
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Lessons-From-Vermont-s/247639?key=ru53T2OqzfFxl6vyxrUoEWF2leoT_4BE30vyHUN9tDuvR4O2RzijiRv30bTdzfVFeTNlWmRDemJaWHotUDNYU1BQMEZSRDk0X2F4eWtfdmtTNDB6Z2ZoQ3hGcw

[spork]

The article talks a lot about Bennington College. I would be worried if I was a youngish faculty member there. St. Michael's College has an enrollment that is nearly three times larger and an endowment that is twice as large, and it wisely began downsizing a few years ago with faculty voluntary separation programs.

[Caracal]

Full text from Twitter:
https://www.chronicle.com/article/Lessons-From-Vermont-s/247639?key=ru53T2OqzfFxl6vyxrUoEWF2leoT_4BE30vyHUN9tDuvR4O2RzijiRv30bTdzfVFeTNlWmRDemJaWHotUDNYU1BQMEZSRDk0X2F4eWtfdmtTNDB6Z2ZoQ3hGcw

It is worth pointing out that Vermont is very unrepresentative state, that is only getting more unrepresentative. 94 percent of the Vermont population is white and non-hispanic, compared to 76.5 percent in the country as a whole. The number of people in the state who are foreign born is 4.5 percent, compared to 13.4 percent nationally. At 61 percent, Vermont has the highest rural population in the United States. The national number is about 19 percent. I'm not criticizing the article, which makes these points, but the context is important.

The US population as a whole is not expected to decline, not is the number of people of college age. In fact, the US education department projects that enrollment is post secondary institutions "is projected to increase 13 percent, to 22.6 million, from 2015 to 2026, a period of 11 years." What is expected to happen is that the rural population is going to decline and the white population is going to decline.

So, sure, Vermont, because of its extreme demographics is illustrating challenges colleges in other states are going to face, and, sure, this process might be fatal to some schools and that will be tough for faculty and others employed there. But, I think it is important not to confuse this readjustment for some sort of larger "crisis" within higher education. Even as you have some schools resizing themselves or shutting down altogether, you ought to see other schools in metro areas with increasing population growth expanding. In theory, they ought to also be hiring more instructors. The real questions are about whether or not you're going to see money invested in this and how that money is going to be spent. I see a lot of people trying to argue that somehow demographic shifts mean that college has to change into some different thing, like distance learning or vocational training (and maybe to some extent there's room for some of this), or downsize the liberal arts. That strikes me as people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion.

[mamselle]

Thanks for this pithy expression of what a lot of people seem to be doing in a lot of situations at the moment!

people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion

M.

[marshwiggle]

Thanks for this pithy expression of what a lot of people seem to be doing in a lot of situations at the moment!

people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion

M.

To be fair, the media have been doing this for ages. When was the last time an issue was presented as something where there were actual worthwhile points to consider on both (or more!) sides, rather than as the potential "end-of-civilization-as-we-know-it" if we choose the "obviously wrong" side?

[spork]

[. . . ]

I see a lot of people trying to argue that somehow demographic shifts mean that college has to change into some different thing, like distance learning or vocational training (and maybe to some extent there's room for some of this), or downsize the liberal arts. That strikes me as people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion.

While all of what you wrote is basically true, for tuition-dependent higher ed institutions in areas of the country suffering from demographic declines, long-term survival boils down to (as someone else said, which I highlighted in another thread) grabbing market share to drive the competition out of business. Every year our CFO creates projections five years into the future that are based on enrollment growth and increased tuition revenue. Where are these new, wealthier students going to come from? Whenever I ask this question, I don't get a clear answer.

[polly_mer]

But, I think it is important not to confuse this readjustment for some sort of larger "crisis" within higher education. Even as you have some schools resizing themselves or shutting down altogether, you ought to see other schools in metro areas with increasing population growth expanding. In theory, they ought to also be hiring more instructors. The real questions are about whether or not you're going to see money invested in this and how that money is going to be spent. I see a lot of people trying to argue that somehow demographic shifts mean that college has to change into some different thing, like distance learning or vocational training (and maybe to some extent there's room for some of this), or downsize the liberal arts. That strikes me as people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion.

What actual data and higher ed analysis sites do you regularly follow? I ask because this paragraph is so at odds with the stream of information from the past fiveish years.  The stream of information indicates:

* Outside of the elite and hugely motivated, most people attend colleges within 50 miles of home.

"The zip code that a child is born into oftentimes determines their life chances," said Nick Hillman, an author of the study and assistant professor of education leadership and policy analysis at the University of Wisconsin at Madison. "Place matters because it reinforces existing inequalities."

At public four-year colleges, the median distance students live from home is 18 miles. That number is 46 miles for private nonprofit four-year colleges, and only eight miles at public two-year colleges.

<snip>
The crux of the problem is a misalignment of expectations: from policy makers' perspective, students would attend college at whatever institution is best for them. But for some students, location is nonnegotiable -- and often, that means their options are dramatically limited.
For upper-class students, having more information might help; they have the flexibility to travel, and they can afford to shop around. But it isn't enough for working-class students, who may need to choose from the options available nearby.
"Most of the conversations today overlooks the working-class student and prioritizes the upper-class student," Hillman said. "It's just really frustrating from the academic side -- and even more frustrating from a policy angle."
Education Deserts
And for working-class students who want to stay close to home, what happens when there aren't any colleges nearby? No matter how well-informed these students are, they don't end up with many options.

These are students who live in what the study calls "education deserts." An area qualifies as an education desert if there aren't any colleges at all, or if one community college is the only broad-access public institution nearby.

An education desert can include private and public colleges that are particularly selective. That's because local residents may not be accepted into those colleges -- which means they have even fewer options. And if there's only one community college within commuting distance, that's likely where those residents will end up.

Reference: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2016/02/03/when-students-enroll-college-geography-matters-more-policy-makers-think

* Somewhere between half and three-quarters of college students are non-traditional (depending on who is defining non-traditional) in one or more factors including attending college part-time, working far more than a part-time job even if full-time enrolled, not living on campus, caring for dependents, and being over the age of 25.

All too frequently in my career, a graduating student has come to me to express appreciation for helping them to make it to that achievement, indicating that they did not think that they would be successful because they knew they "were not supposed to be in college." They are the students our educational systems deem "nontraditional." They are adults, they are part-time students, they have had jobs, some have had children, some have been caring for elderly parents. Basically, by not being aged 18 to 24 and a full-time student, these "nontraditional" students have entered college thinking they do not belong.

The shocking thing to me has been that these "nontraditional" students have made up the vast majority of those attending their institution. Further, nearly half of the undergraduate students in the American higher education system can be categorized as nontraditional. The National Center for Education Statistics shows large increases in the enrollment of students that have typically been characterized as nontraditional because their demographic makeup identifies them as an atypical college student. Yet the message that these students are the outsiders is persistent and causes much psychological distress and self-doubt.

<snip>
What's more, that statement might be true simply because many of our institutions, programs and traditions are not made for these students -- and this is a problem. Our institutions, programs and traditions are the problem, not the students. We must do better.

The nontraditional narrative is stunningly pervasive in higher education circles. To think about students in any alternate way is to go against the very fabric of the system of education that has been built in our country. However, we know that "traditional" college students are less and less frequently the ones that are entering the doors of many (and I would argue, most) of our institutions.

<snip>
At the institutional level, we should check our assumptions about whom we are serving, as well as whom we should or could be serving. We must not assume to know our demographics but rather examine our programs, services and curricula to be sure they are appropriate for all students -- not just the ones that fit into an antiquated idea of traditional. Further, our developmental programs are designed to help traditional students in many ways but, in fact, those are not the students enrolling in the majority of developmental courses. How can we rethink developmental education for the actual student in the classroom and simultaneously stop blaming our failure to successfully remediate students on the lack of preparation in high school?

Reference: https://www.insidehighered.com/views/2016/08/05/defining-students-nontraditional-inaccurate-and-damaging-essay


* In 2013, full-time, first-time college students indicated going to college primarily for jobs and money along with an expectation that they would graduate in 4 years, while the data indicate that only 40% will graduate in 4 years.  However, only about half of students entering college in recent years are full-time, first-time students.  A fair number of 18-24 year olds who are geographically constrained start part-time at a community college.

* About a third of all college students currently take at least one online class, even those enrolled in brick and mortar institutions.

The proportion of all students who were enrolled exclusively online grew to 15.4 percent (up from 14.7 percent in 2016), or about one in six students. The share of all students who mixed online and in-person courses grew slightly faster, to 17.6 percent in 2017 from 16.4 percent in 2016. And the proportion of all students who took at least one course online grew to 33.1 percent, from 31.1 percent in 2016.

That last data point represents a steady march in the normalization of online learning, as the proportion of all enrolled students who had studied online stood under a quarter in 2012. But while fans of online learning are likely to be heartened by that slow but sure rise in acceptance, the pure increase in online enrollments -- at a time of overall dips in postsecondary attendance -- may be just as noteworthy.

The Education Department data show that the number of students enrolled in a college or university that is eligible for federal financial aid dipped to 20,135,159 last fall, from 20,224,069 in fall 2016. That's a decline of 0.44 percent.

The dip was driven by sizable decreases at for-profit and community colleges, as is common when economic conditions are improving and more, and better, jobs are available, leading adults to choose them over pursuing their educations. Enrollments grew modestly, meanwhile, at public and private nonprofit four-year colleges, and graduate enrollments edged up, too.

<snip>
But most of the growth in online enrollments is occurring in the sectors playing catch-up. Public and private nonprofit colleges and universities as a group saw about a two-percentage-point increase in the proportion of all students who were studying online between 2016 and 2017, an accelerating pace.

<snip>
At public institutions, the number of students studying partially but not fully online is about twice as large as the number studying entirely online -- nearly three million versus 1.5 million. Many of those students are presumably using online courses to supplement their in-person course schedules, out of convenience and preference.

Reference: https://www.insidehighered.com/digital-learning/article/2018/11/07/new-data-online-enrollments-grow-and-share-overall-enrollment

Another interesting change is enrolling students at huge universities and having students on campus take online courses without investing in the infrastructure.  University of Central Florida was proud of enrolling more students than the physical facilities could handle and billed it as flexibility for the half of their students who are working more than 20 hours per week.  UCF is shifting away from the huge lecture halls that had to be streamed to other locations anyway to fully online classes as better for the students.

I'm not going to link to extensive data indicating that people have already voted with their feet towards majors that are not at all classified as liberal arts and to places that aren't renowned for doing great general education in the liberal arts model.  Yep, the percentage of adults with college degrees has risen quite a bit in my life time, but few of those degrees are in the liberal arts.  The norm is already some other type of education. 

I haven't seen any data indicating that trend is likely to reverse itself with students who are even less prepared for college than ever before and people are much more focused on getting a credential/degree quickly through use of AP credit, dual enrollment, and other means that allow people to skip general education requirements in college.

I get the impression that people think I'm proposing new ideas for higher ed instead of reporting on what I'm reading in a variety of outlets with reputable data.  I remain greatly concerned that faculty members continue to wish instead of being informed on the realities and then making plans based on realities.

[Caracal]

But, I think it is important not to confuse this readjustment for some sort of larger "crisis" within higher education. Even as you have some schools resizing themselves or shutting down altogether, you ought to see other schools in metro areas with increasing population growth expanding. In theory, they ought to also be hiring more instructors. The real questions are about whether or not you're going to see money invested in this and how that money is going to be spent. I see a lot of people trying to argue that somehow demographic shifts mean that college has to change into some different thing, like distance learning or vocational training (and maybe to some extent there's room for some of this), or downsize the liberal arts. That strikes me as people trying to use the language of crisis to achieve their own goals and avoid actual discussion.

What actual data and higher ed analysis sites do you regularly follow? I ask because this paragraph is so at odds with the stream of information from the past fiveish years.  The stream of information indicates:

* Outside of the elite and hugely motivated, most people attend colleges within 50 miles of home.

I'm not sure I understand. Because of the demographics of Vermont there just aren't that many people of college age in the state. If you're talking about central Florida you have a very different sort of situation, where in fact there is increasing demand for degrees. What you're saying about how the University has responded, actually illustrates my point pretty well. They could be responding to the increase in students by hiring more full time people to teach those students in smaller classes with more support. Instead, they seem to have decided to just become an online university and pretend they are just responding to "what students want," as if that is supposed to be benchmark of higher education. This isn't some inevitable process. People at various levels are making actual decisions not to increase funding along with student enrollment or to invest money in things other than more teachers to actually teach these students.

[Wahoo Redux]

Caracal's point is made on page 24.

[marshwiggle]

Caracal's point is made on page 24.

One thing that is a bit odd is that the graph has a point of inflection right where it changes to "projected". So, while the last few years of measurements show declines, the first year of "projected" enrollment shows an increase.

[Aster]

Another interesting change is enrolling students at huge universities and having students on campus take online courses without investing in the infrastructure.  University of Central Florida was proud of enrolling more students than the physical facilities could handle and billed it as flexibility for the half of their students who are working more than 20 hours per week.  UCF is shifting away from the huge lecture halls that had to be streamed to other locations anyway to fully online classes as better for the students.

UCF's "pride" about so heavily switching over to online education over the last few years is partially BS.

The university leadership dug itself into a huge financial mismanagement crisis (so much that it attracted the state legislature's attention) and UCF has been desperately scrambling for money. Part of that scramble has been to find ways to cut teaching costs.

https://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/news/2019/06/13/additional-spending-probe-finds-ucf-funding-misuse.html
https://www.wesh.com/article/lawmakers-fail-to-give-ucf-additional-funds/27337417

One of the "innovative" cost cutting measures was replacing many of the majors science laboratory classes with "fully online laboratories." This was done specifically to save money from hiring graduate students and maintaining physical laboratory buildings,  and this cost-saving rationale is stated as such by the program coordinator on videotaped advertisements. And then the academic coordinator (who wasn't even a professor!) shows off examples of the online laboratories, which seem to be little more than moving a digital avatar of yourself around a video game and clicking video game objects with your mouse. This is for a majors-level STEM laboratory course, mind you. I could not believe that a moderately high-ranked  public research institution could lower its academic training so much and then be stupid enough to brag about it.

Once I saw that cratering of UCF's academic ethics within my discipline, I stopped recommending any of my students from transferring to UCF to complete their STEM degrees.

[Hibush]

@Aster, given the demographics, would the Vermont schools in the areas of demographic decline better serve their mission and finances by moving to the Orlando area where they are needed?

[rth253]

What about the public Vermont State Colleges (Castleton, NVU-Johnson, NVU-Lyndon)? Any read on them or the Johnson-Lyndon pseudo-merger?

[Aster]

@Aster, given the demographics, would the Vermont schools in the areas of demographic decline better serve their mission and finances by moving to the Orlando area where they are needed?

Ha ha. I think that's how the U.S. Civil War started.

[spork]

WGBH Radio story about Green Mountain College and Poultney, VT: https://www.wgbh.org/news/education/2019/12/10/in-a-tiny-vermont-town-a-college-closes-and-the-local-economy-slips.