The Other 85 Percent

Susn Green Says:

I think it’s time to relinguish the level of social consciousness that continuously focuses on the negative aspect of our educational efforts. Most people just want to live nice lives. Getting a good education and learning how to do that successfully is how most view Transparency by Design in institutions of Higher Learning. There are statistics unfortunately, that demonstrate the ineffectiveness of college curriculums, among socially divers groups,that failed to consider the learning obstcals of these students. Most of them were unaware of the thinking, perspectives, vocabulary, and lifestyles of the faculty and staff of the curriculum concepts initiated in these institutions,and therefore failed to meet their academic challenges. And this was only because they did not translate or precieve the academic conceptions the way the institution’s curriculums presented them. It doesn’t mean anyone is wrong. It just means we’re all different and therefore we need to make a greater effort toward effective transparent and multicultural communications. We all know now many of the failures of cultural divers groups had nothing what so ever to do with their learning capabilities, but instead the differences in their perspectives that result from a different lifestyle. I think Transparency by Design is an excellent educational approach that upholds the promises of America’s Constitution, providing all students with an equal opportunity to learn.

Susan G.

March 28th, 2008 at 11:26 am

Bruce Becker PHD (TPI) Canidate Says:

The focus of the ongoing discussion is relevant to the following: What is the risk in colleges and universities being more transparent / accountable?

This student used historical information to best comprehend, apply, and essentially synthesize his findings into the aforementioned discussion. Many may ask, what information does this education professional wish to share? Cognitive skills and then delivery of a definition which assists all students in full comprehension is a start:

Transparent:

1. Not visible, hidden; said of a system which functions in a manner not evident to the user. For example, the {Domain Name System} transparently resolves a {fully qualified domain name} into an {Internet address} without the user being aware of it (Howe, 2004 n.p)

Analysis

Given the information known, the professional can proceed with an analysis which is integrated and later navigated by qualitative research. Key points being: (1) participation in the setting, (2) direct observation, (3) in depth interviews, and (4) analysis of documents and materials, and finally followed by the “Risks” with integration of transparency.

Note: For sake of maintaining the reader’s attention the professional will navigate past the research methodology and straight to the risks.The first concerns which come to mind are associated with accreditation (given that the professional has properly understood the question at hand). If a university is to become virtual then it may be subject to higher academic standards by the accreditation body. Local colleges and universities are constantly scrutinized for not providing more courses in a transparent environment. Obviously the audience is the students attending the colleges demanding “an environment where professionals can study at their own pace, when they want to, and finally enjoy the fruits of flexibility when considering a transparent learning environment.

This professional has attended over 100 e-based courses through two universities. What implications were encountered through completion of each course? As mentioned above, this professional was required to attain and maintain a higher level of understanding by applying what was learning through self-empowerment. For example, each individual course was challenging but what risks were encountered by this professional for choosing to attend a transparent university?

In response, he would respond “none”. This response is directly reflective to how employers view e-based learning compared to the traditional brick and mortar university at present day and not eight years ago. Through time, the risks associated with e-based learning have been minimized and eliminated by consistently challenging working adults with higher academic requirements in order to maintain a high level of accreditation for their parent university. The preceding comment is not to be confused with the adult not benefiting from a higher academic standard. The student/working adult is equally benefited by the additional constraints which may or may not be visible in an e-based learning environment. Arguments?

Reference

Learnthat (2004) Transparent defined, Retrieved March 28, 2008 from http://www.learnthat.com/define/view.asp?id=7840

March 28th, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Dr. Karen L. Fernandez Says:

As a career public school teacher I can’t help but shudder at the thought that higher education under the “transparency by design” model will suffer from the same insanity as K-12 under No Child Left Behind. It’s a great idea to go public with meaningful data–but in the case of K-12, somehow only quantitative data is considered to be of relevance, significance, or sufficient rigor. How will higher education avoid this? When I look at the learning outcomes rubric (on the “Transparency by Design” link) I see language eerily reminiscent of my state’s report cards for K-12, and I wonder how these complex learning outcomes for higher ed. will be measured and distilled for public consumption. Quite frankly, my Capella degree has meant nothing to me in terms of increasing my value to my organization or furthering my career–would my mastery of learning outcomes then be less than proficient?

March 29th, 2008 at 8:15 pm

Jason Turan Says:

I agree that the article is right about some of the benefits of self-regulation for certain industries in determining high-efficiency processes for technical problems. However, there are many business processes that aren’t just a matter of technical expediency but public interest.

The consequences of releasing too much regulatory control to private institutions has lead to a wave of public scandals. Enron’s and Arthur Anderson’s accounting scandals, unsafe Chinese imports of food and toys, as well as this current mortgage meltdown can all be attributed to unrestrained self regulation. Corporation’s sole purpose in existence is to generate money and capital. They can only be expected to enforce any regulation up to the point where it’s profitable. It is government’s responsibility to enact laws in the public’s interest and enforce them. Expecting corporations to regulate themselves is like putting a fox in charge of guarding a hen house.

With all of that in mind it appears “Transparency by Design” increases transparency within the system but still leave the Educational System self regulated. Mr. Offerman would “Transparency by Design” increase public regulation on the industry? Is it even desirable to do so?

March 31st, 2008 at 12:03 pm

Janet Duke Says:

I agree that due to the changing faces of students in today’s schools, administrators are faced with the problem of developing ways to accommodate these students’ learning. Like NCLB’s response to accountability in k-12 public schools, Universities too need to be held accountable for student’s achievement in higher education.

In Student writing in higher education: contemporary confusion, traditional concerns, Lillis and Turner argue that “current academic practices need to be located within a broader historical and epistemological framework both in order to reach a deeper understanding about what’s involved in student writing and in order to inform meaningful pedagogies” (Lillis & Turner, 2001, p. 57).

The authors also believe that students are confused about what is expected of them. This occurs when non-traditional students are asked to write an introduction, avoid plagiarism, write in their own words, or to avoid grammatical errors. This also occurs when the instructors write comments on students’ work. The confusion with words is described as “a convention which is highly situated in a number of specific ways, not least, in relation to disciplinary knowledge, departmental practices and individual tutor expectations” (Lillis & Turner, 2001, p.61).

Since the purpose of schools is to help students achieve, school administration needs to devise policies to assist non-traditional students learn to write in a formal traditional way, and to become published. These non-traditional students are the changing faces in today’s schools, and the other 85 percent.

Reference

Lillis, T & Turner, J. (2001). Student writing in higher education: Contemporary confusion,
traditional concerns. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(1), pp. 57-68.

March 31st, 2008 at 2:41 pm

Mike Offerman Says:

Dr. Fernandez, thank you for your post. You ask if failure to add value to your career would mean that your learning outcomes achievement would be less proficient. Obviously, some students do not earn a degree only to further their career. But most adult students would like to see that happen as one outcome of their learning. That is why Transparency by Design institutions are working together to develop common research questions for their alumni surveys. We want to know the impact of having completed a degree and part of that impact will be with one’s career. What we don’t want is to have graduates succeed in achieving learning outcomes that don’t help them move ahead in their career. The impact analysis is a way to begin to get at the question of whether or not we have selected the right learning outcomes.

You also express concern that the questions about learning outcomes is reminiscent of No Child Left Behind. While this is a voluntary effort that is not tied to funding, that is certainly a legitimate concern. Our hope is to avoid negative outcomes by committing to voluntary continuous quality improvement based, in part, on our ability to measure and benchmark learning outcomes.

Mike Offerman

April 1st, 2008 at 1:21 pm

Janet Duke Says:

Dr. Offerman,

You said that this is a “voluntary effort that is not tied to funding”. Well, it might appear not to be tied to funding, but if universities have to meet certain federal standards, then those voluntary efforts might be used as compliance with such standards. On the other hand, depending on who is conducting this “voluntary continuous quality improvement based, in part, on our ability to measure and benchmark learning outcomes” it just might be seen as “negative outcomes” thereby bringing your fears to reality. All the stakeholders have to be a part of this collaborative effort for it to work. This includes students.

I enjoyed reading Judith Eaton’s article, and I agree with a lot of what she said. I am concerned that whenever the Federal Government gives money it has to have some kind of regulations that goes with it. My concern is that this affects student financial aid. I think that colleges and universities should include students in the decision making process in a meaningful way. Unlike accreditors or advisors, students have a real stake in whether these colleges and universities help them learn and become successful in today’s global society. This includes meeting federal guidelines for funding.

If I were giving out this much aid, I would establish standards, and means to check for compliance. I would not use the current accreditors. I would also devise policies to include students in a meaningful way. This attached site shows the millions of dollars at stake here.

http://www.policyalmanac.org/education/archive/crs_higher_education.shtml

Janet:)

April 9th, 2008 at 1:22 pm

Janet Duke Says:

Dr Offerman,

What do you think about this news clip?

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9805E4DA1639F93BA15752C0A962958260

Janet:)

April 10th, 2008 at 12:55 pm

The Other 85 Percent » Blog Archive » What does the future hold for college accreditors? Says:

[...] Response to comment by Janet Duke to the post “What is the risk in colleges and universities being more transparent / accountable” [...]

April 17th, 2008 at 9:03 am