"Merit"-ocracy

The NY Times has an interesting editorial today arguing for a "broader definition of merit" in college admissions practices, taking up the now popular call to disregard (or at least supplement) SAT/ACT test scores. These tests were long only administered to a fairly elite group of high school students who knew enough to take them and could afford to do so, and now--while they're taken by a much broader base of students-- their scores are muddled by disparities in test preparation. In other words, rather than measuring simply what a student knows in terms of book knowledge, they also measure that student (and his family's) social and financial capital.

On that, I agree with the Times and all who make a similar argument.

Where we part ways is with regard to alternatives. The typical suggestion is for admissions to rely more heavily on high school coursework and grades. Coursework, at least, is a pretty strong predictor of college attainment. But if the goal is a "meritocracy" does this really get us closer? Shouldn't we take a step back and first figure out what we mean by encouraging "meritocratic" admissions to college?

A postsecondary education is hardly optional anymore. At least some form (be it technical training, an associates, or a BA) is needed to get a decent job, and perhaps even more importantly to feel like a valued member of society. Under such circumstances who doesn't merit admission to college?

One's high school grades and coursetaking certainly are partially reflective of effort and talent, but they are also substantially reflective of sheer luck. Does your high school or even your district offer an IB program? Do you go to school with a lot of other kids with high grades, or are your peers generally getting C's as well? How does your principal think about student achievement--are teachers who give all A's questioned? What about those who are "hard" graders?

My list could go on and on but my point is that social situations structure opportunity for coursework and good-grade-getting. These things are no less signals of social and financial capital as SAT/ACT scores are. We have to be honest about that.

If a college must narrow its pool of eligible students, and we acknowledge that there are few if any really "fair" ways to do so, then how about simply taking that eligible pool and selecting among them using a lottery? Let luck lead the way. Then you don't have to explain why student A is more "meritorious" than student B-- she's not. It was just dumb luck.

As an aside-- if colleges decided to do this, we'd be one step closer to being able to measure the actual value-added individual institutions provide. What an amazing contribution to society, and surefire way to encourage higher education to aim higher at serving students well. If your college would like to try this, feel free to send me an email.

You have read this article college admissions / College Cost Reduction and Access Act / high school / higher education / New York Times / SAT with the title College Cost Reduction and Access Act. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/10/the-ny-times-has-interesting-editorial.html. Thanks!

Read It Here First

Please don't confuse this blog with a breaking news operation. It's hard to be on top of everything amidst being parents, holding full-time jobs, and trying to follow the pennant races (Go Sox!). But sometimes, despite doing most of our blogging after the sun's gone down, we're way ahead of the curve.

Such was the case with the TEACH Grants. Sara was all over this issue back in April, prior to the U.S. Department of Education's release of regulations. I notice that Education Week picked up the story in the September 15, 2008 issue, six months later.

Now, Stephen Sawchuk is an excellent reporter (formerly with EdDaily), but my wife scooped you on this one, dude!!! Check out some of Stephen's blogging at Teacher Beat.

You have read this article college / College Cost Reduction and Access Act / Education Week / loan / TEACH grant / teacher education with the title College Cost Reduction and Access Act. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/09/read-it-here-first.html. Thanks!

Watch Out: TEACH grants are the new debt trap

The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program was established by Congress under the College Cost Reduction and Access Act, to benefit current and prospective teachers. This new grant is available as of the 2008-09 school year. It provides $4,000 per year to students willing to commit (as recent high school graduates) to earning a degree in education and then going to teach full-time for 4 years in high-poverty schools in a specific subject area.

On the face of it this looks like a good program-- incentives for more individuals to become teachers, teach in low-income communities, financial assistance that does not have to be repaid, etc.

But beware: If a student does not fulfill the terms of the grant it is automatically converted into an unsubsidized loan, with interest accruing starting when the loan began.

One can easily imagine many ways a student could fail to fulfill the terms of the grant.
Here are but a few examples:

1. The 18 year old student might change her mind about becoming a teacher (all you have to do to be eligible is to "plan on completing coursework necessary to begin a career in teaching")

2. She might not be admitted to a school of education. This is easy to imagine at a school like UW-Madison, where our admissions occur only after a student begins college and are quite competitive.

3. She might not succeed in the program (you have to maintain a 3.25 GPA each semester)

4. She might not find an appropriate teaching job in her local area and thus be forced to move away from home, or even out-of-state. (There is a clause for this: "There are, however, graduate degree alternatives for teachers or retirees with experience in a teacher shortage area" but the options aren't spelled out)

5. Once she's teaching, she could be laid off (new teachers are especially vulnerable to this).

6. The school at which she's teaching might change in composition, such that it is no longer considered "high-poverty." (It seems the criteria will be based on % free lunch)

For these reasons and many more, the student's "grant" of up to $16K might suddenly become an unsubsidized loan amounting to far more with interest included (something along the lines of $40K over a 10 year period).

Yet to sign up for the program the student only signs a simple form-- since it's not a loan there is no promissory note clearly spelling out terms and conditions. This is thus not like a loan forgiveness program.

We should be very concerned about the potential impacts of this highly misleading program on uninformed students. We should be especially concerned because the U.S. Department of Education knows, and it explicit about knowing-- and expecting-- that fully 80% of those receiving the TEACH grant will fail to meet its requirements and therefore have their "grant" turned into an unsubsidized loan!

Here is the text from the federal regs:

"As discussed elsewhere in this preamble, program cost estimates reflect data on recent college graduates entering eligible teaching fields, adjusted for the percentage of students who graduate, maintain a 3.25 grade-point-average and take out a Federal loan. (In the absence of any need-based eligibility criteria, Federal borrowing was used as a proxy for unmet financial need.) Data from longitudinal studies were used to estimate the percentage of recipients who graduated from college, were highly qualified, and taught in high poverty schools for four out of the eight years following graduation. Based on this data, the Department assumed _*80 percent of recipients *_will eventually fail to fulfill their service requirements and have their grants converted into Federal Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loans."

The Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) Grant Program and Other Federal Student Aid Programs; Proposed Rule
[Federal Register: March 21, 2008 (Volume 73, Number 56)]


At this point, the legislation has been approved and the Secretary of Education is taking comments on the proposed federal regulations.

While grants are more attractive to students than loans, there is nothing more destructive than false promises. This needs to be retooled--quickly--into a loan forgiveness program.

Spread the word.

You have read this article college / College Cost Reduction and Access Act / higher education / loan / TEACH grant / teacher / teacher education / U.S. Department of Education with the title College Cost Reduction and Access Act. You can bookmark this page URL http://apt3e.blogspot.com/2008/04/watch-out-teach-grants-are-new-debt-trap.html. Thanks!