Education for a Better World

Yesterday, President Biden announced that "The United States is rallying the world’s democracies to deliver for our people, meet the world’s biggest challenges, and demonstrate our shared values". I suggest part of this could be an online education program, to complement, rather than confront, China's Belt and Road Education Plan (Worthington, 2014 & 2018).

Expanding infrastructure in low and middle-income countries will required trained workers. The Build Back Better World  (B3W) program aims to invest trillions of dollars in developing countries infrastructure. That will require millions of trained professionals, in the fields of energy, health, digital technology, and education. 

I propose Australia be the lead partner for B3W Education, in the indo-pacific, but world wide. We can mobilize our decades of expertise in higher education. In doing so, we can create new opportunities around the world, as well as jobs at home.

References

Worthington, T. (2014, August). Chinese and Australian students learning to work together online proposal to expand the New Colombo Plan to the online environment. In 2014 9th International Conference on Computer Science & Education (pp. 164-168). IEEE. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCSE.2014.6926448

Worthington, T. (2018, December). Blended Learning for the Indo-Pacific. In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE) (pp. 861-865). IEEE. URL https://doi.org/10.1109/TALE.2018.8615183

Most UniversityTeaching Staff are Non-Tenured

The US Government Accountability Office has  released a detailed report finding that 70% of those employed teaching at universities are non-tenured and those part-time were paid 75% less than full-time tenure-track faculty (GAO, 2017). This is consistent with a survey by the Florida Public Services Union, which found two-thirds of university teachers have jobs without long-term security (SEIU, 2017).

The levels of the use of "contingent" teaching staff are likely to be similar in Australian higher education, but hopefully without such poor work conditions. However, advances with on-line education and AI are likely to  reduce the job opportunities and working conditions for all adjuncts.

I suggest graduate students need to be encouraged to think of academia as a supplement to a career in an outside field or profession. Those who do wish to have a part-time career in academia need to be encouraged to obtain formal qualifications in two disciplines: firstly in their chosen profession and secondly in teaching.

Teaching academics how to take a professional attitude to teaching, I suggest, can help improve their working conditions. Rather than work long unpaid hours to attempt to keep up with an unrealistic workload, academics can instead change their teaching techniques to fit the resources available.
 As an example, I have academics complain to me that they do not have enough time to do all the lecturing and marking required. So I suggest they do less lecturing, and use alternative forms of assessment, which do not take as much time. The problem is that unless they have been trained how to do this, staff are not confident to make the change. A typical response is that alternate teaching and assessment techniques will not work, or will not be approved by accreditation authorities.

Universities can offer their teaching staff training and education to improve both quality and the efficiency of the teaching. However, it is up to individual academics to take the time, and considerable effort, needed to learn their craft.

References

SEIU (2017, November). Life on the Edge of the Blackboard: Florida Adjunct Faculty Survey 2017, Florida Public Services Union. URL http://seiufacultyforward.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/Life-on-the-Edge.pdf

GAO (2017, October). CONTINGENT WORKFORCE: Size, Characteristics, Compensation, and Work Experiences of Adjunct and Other Non-Tenure-Track Faculty". United States Government Accountability Office. URL http://www.gao.gov/assets/690/687871.pdf

Future of Education is in the Clouds

The Information Age article "Blue skies or thunderstorms - what is the future for education?" reports on a Consumer Electronic Show (CES) panel session on transforming education. Part of this I agree with: "... employers value competency based advise ... MOOCs have been over-hyped ... credentials were the way of the future...". The article departed from reality at that point, when it suggested that students were not interested in "... finishing an entire course ...". Try telling a student they should stop now as they have learned enough and not bother graduating. They likely response is "I invested tens of thousands of dollars and years of my life in this and I want my my qualification!"

The article quotes ACS CEO Andrew Johnson as saying “The US is a bellwether for Australia ...". I disagree: the USA has a very different education system to Australia (and most of the world). The USA can't be taken of as an indication of what will, or should happen in Australia, or elsewhere, with education.

Johnson is reported to have also said:

"What we are hearing from policy commentators at CES is that all new net job growth in the US comes from new businesses and start-up firms, while there is a growing trend towards self-employment. "

This is confirmed by Australian research, with job creation by start-ups, while old firms shed jobs. This has implications for education, but I suggest not as drastic as Johnson suggests:

"This will have significant implications for education models to identify the knowledge and skills needs that are aligned with career aspirations,"  continued.

"Not all education institutions will be able to focus on preparing for students for the traditional firm of an industrialised era.”

For the last few years I have been mentoring winning teams of Canberra university students learning innovation and preparing business plans for the start-up competition "Innovation ACT". Last year, students were able to do this as part of their IT degree, through the ANU Techlauncher Program. In thinking about this (and in preparing some m-learning innovation materials for the students), it struck me how many of the "start-up" skills are also applicable to jobs in large corporations, government agencies and research organizations. It is not just in start-ups that students need to learn to structuring and communicating an idea, to work in teams and to make estimates.

"Millennial" students are no different in what they want from education. Students want an education which will advance their careers. Vocational training organizations have been better at responding to these needs than universities.

Much of this learning can be done on-line and so I suggest the future of Higher Education is not blue sky, or thunderstorms, it is in "the Cloud". ;-)

College Jocks No Solution to a US Skills Crisis

The answer to "Why are so many college students failing to gain job skills before graduation?" (Jeffrey J. Selingo, Washington Post, January 26) seems obvious: US college programs are not designed to teach, or test, job skills. If you want someone trained to work, then hire an Australian. ;-)

As Selingo says, college athletes learn to work on teams, which is a skill valued by employers. But you don't have to become a college jock to learn teamwork, you can enroll in a vocational program which teaches such skills.

It is no surprise that students who study science, where teamwork is required, learn to work in teams. If graduates of social work and business don't have these skills, then this is easily remedied, by including it in the curriculum.

As Selingo says, the best preparation for employment is a mix of classroom learning and practical experience. This what the best vocationally oriented higher education programs provide: they incorporate the real world experience into the courses.

I don't agree with Selingo that too much emphasis is placed on the student picking a practical field of study. The problem is that the supposedly practical majors, such as business, do not provide the skills required in the workplace.

Selingo's suggestion that Google is increasingly hiring people without degrees is nonsense. You are not going to get a job programming Google's computer systems without very advanced qualifications as well as being able to demonstrate the required skills.

The solution is not to take up football at college and hope that somehow some of those skills are recognized by an employer. Students need to select programs which combine academic excellence, vocational skills and practice. Such programs are offered by Australian Higher Educational institutions in both the vocational and university sectors. Last night I was discussing at the ACS e-Learning Special Interest Group how to further this with skills in innovation.

US States Consider Australian Style Student Loans

The US state of Oregon has introduced legislation for government subsided loans for college students. The bill is called "Pay It Forward" (HB 3472) and has some similarities to  the Australian subsidized "HELP" student loans scheme. Other US states, such as "An Act to reduce the cost of college education for Massachusetts residents" (Bill H.3631, Referred to Massachusetts Joint Committee on Higher Education, 19 August 2013). However, the Oregon bill is not legislation to enact a specific funding scheme, but just to have the state's Higher Education Coordinating Commission formulate the details of a scheme.

Under the Australian scheme, loans only need to be repaid in installments based on the student's income and after it reaches a set level (currently $51,309 Australian dollars a year). This is a relatively low cost scheme to administer as repayments are handled as part of the income tax system. It lessens the worry of debt repayments, as the students know they only have to repay when they have a higher income. But the scheme is not without problems (such as students who leave Australia and never repay the debt). Also the scheme assumes that education leads to higher income. The Australian government has a set of other schemes for quality education and to inform students, but this does not guarantee higher wages for graduates.

Some of the proposals for the Oregon scheme, as described in 'OREGON'S “PAY FORWARD, PAY BACK” PROPOSAL' (by Terrance Adams and Alan Shepard, Connecticut Office of Legislative Management, 6 August 2013), differ from the Australian model and do not look like a good idea to me. In particular, one proposal is for a lower rate of repayment if the student does not graduate. It is not clear why the rate is not based simply on their ability to pay and the amount the course cost. Having lower rate for students who do not graduate will complicate administration and invite manipulation of the system.

One useful way to encourage students to study is to allow multiple exit options. In this way the student does not have to commit to many years of study with the risk that if the do not complete all years they receive no reward. Instead they can be granted a lesser qualification for part completion of the program. However, under the Oregon proposal, it would not be clear if this counted as "graduation". Also there would be the temptation for the student to game the system by withdrawing shortly before completion, moving out of Oregon and using their course credits to graduate elsewhere, and avoiding the higher repayment rate.

Plan to Rate US Colleges and Cap Student Loans Similar to Australia

US President Obama released a "Plan to Make College More Affordable: A Better Bargain for the Middle Class" (White House, 22 August 2013). This envisages publishing performance measures for US Colleges from 2015 and later tie government aid to these ratings. Also it is proposed to cap student loan repayments at 10 percent of monthly income. These measures are similar to some already in place in the Australian higher education system. The USA could learn from Australia's experience.

The Australian Government provides subsidized student loans called "HELP" which only need to be repaid when income reaches a set level (currently $51,309 per year). This is a relatively low cost scheme to administer, but is not without problems (such as students who leave Australia and never repay the debt).

If government is funding education, then it seems reasonable there is a government mandated minimum standard. This system applies in Australia to higher education, with both private and public institutions requiring to meet minimum standards. But a government rating one institution as better than another is more problematic and not done in Australia. Apart from the problem of having a reliable system, it has to be asked what is the purpose of the government rating and if it will be effective.

Australia has the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), which is a government agency, but relatively free of political interference, with academics setting the standards.

The Australian Government provides the "MyUniversity" website with details of all Australian institutions. This details the qualifications of the staff and how many have awards for teaching, which is relatively uncontroversial.  More at issue are student survey results for each subject area.

I have recently undertaken tertiary teacher training and so am comfortable with the idea of being rated by the students and have designed a course which rates highly. But some of my colleagues have difficulty with the concept and practice of designing courses which meet external standards and are popular with students.

There is the risk of a race to the bottom, with courses which just meet minimum standards and are designed to be easy and therefore popular. But I find that students value a course which challenges them. Also while meeting external standards is a useful discipline for the course designer.

The USA might want to adopt more of the Australian approach to encourage quality higher education. However, problems remain with both systems. One issue is if the information provided about courses actually influences student behavior and if this information is useful in making a decision on what and where to study. As an example, there are swings in different sectors of the economy. If these swings match the length of a course, then the information reported about student's success in the workforce will give the wrong signals to the students.

As an example, Australia has experienced a mining boom over the last few years, with a high demand for skills in that sector. A student looking at the statistics would think  mining is a good area to get into. However that boom is now coming to an end. The student may find there are no jobs by the time they graduate. Or if they are lucky, the end of their course will coincide with the next upswing in mining. One way to counter this is to provide predictions of future employment (which have their own problems). Another solution is to provide courses suitable for a range of jobs.

Government Rating Universities Not a Good Idea

The US Government is reported to be planning to rate colleges and using this to apportion funding ("Obama’s Plan Aims to Lower Cost of College", by TAMAR LEWIN, New York Times, August 22, 2013). If government is funding colleges, then it is reasonable there is a government mandated minimum standard. But a government rating one college as better than another is more problematic. Apart from the problem of having a reliable system, it has to be asked what is the purpose of the government rating and if it will be effective.

Australia has the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), which is a government agency, but relatively free of political interference, with academics setting the standards.

The Australian Government provides the "MyUniversity" website with details of all Australian institutions. This details the qualifications of the staff and how many have awards for teaching, which is relatively uncontroversial.

More at issue are student survey results for each subject area. I have recently undertaken tertiary teacher training and so am comfortable with the idea of being rated by the students and have designed a course which rates highly. But some of my colleagues have difficulty with the concept and practice of designing courses which meet external standards and are popular with students.

There is the risk of a race to the bottom, with courses which just meet minimum standards and are designed to be easy and therefore popular. But I find that students value a course which challenges them. Also while meeting external standards is a useful discipline for the course designer.

Problems with US Higher Education

The US Government plans to rate colleges are reported to be related to a number of perceived problems with US higher education: low completion rates of students, and defaults on student loans. Some solutions proposed are already in routine use in Australia, such as competency-based assessment, used in the Australian vocational system, where the emphasis is on demonstrating the required skills, not the length of study. The Australian system of student loans is tied to the income of the student, lessening the hardship for the student (but not reducing the need for policy to encourage vocationally relevant courses).

While the New York Times article mentions MOOCs as a way to  reduce costs. However, someone has to pay for the development of MOOCs. Without correcting flaws in the US education policy, MOOCs will accentuate problems. It is likely there will be new startup educational institutions offering MOOC based programs of questionable value, temping established institutions to follow the same path to compete. This is likely to lead to a collapse of institutions, much as happened at the turn of the last century with the DOT.Com crash of companies offering free web products with no underlying business case.