College study time: low priority

Declining Study Time Signals Falling Standards, Report Says (Chronicle of Higher Education)

The amount of time spent studying has fallen drastically among full-time students in all demographic groups, whether they work or not, at all types of four-year colleges, according to a report released on Thursday by the American Enterprise Institute. The report, "Leisure College, USA," cites data from various national surveys to show that the average student studied 24 hours a week in 1961 and 14 hours a week in 2003. Colleges' "standards for effort have plummeted" as they cater to students' preferences for leisure, the report says, a shift that may slow economic growth. But there's good news: "College is cheaper than most people think." Modern college students' time savings, the report says, more than compensate for increased tuition.

Graphs from "Leisure College, USA"

We’ve long carped about this particular phenomenon. We last did so two months ago: More absurdo-scandalosity: for-profit universities and credit inflation

The SOCCCD board pulls an agenda switcheroo: IVC dean position approved

     I just realized that the board had at some point revised the agenda for yesterday’s special meeting. The following item had been added:

     I’ve been told that the discussion yesterday was very heated and that, in the end, there were four votes in favor of the dean position (i.e., it was approved). I don't know, but, based on the discussion of the July 26 meeting, it would seem likely that the vote would have been Wagner/Padberg/Jay/Milchiker in favor with Fuentes/Lang/Williams against.
     At last week’s board meeting, the discussion of this item became quite ugly. The item (actually, a portion of a larger item) was tabled. See "I would urge caution".
     Assuming that the board followed the Brown Act, this agenda revision illustrates one of the weaknesses of that law. I had assumed that the originally posted agenda was final. If I had known they were going to discuss the dean position, I would have attended the meeting. Sheesh.

The “student recruitment experience” at for-profit colleges: my, my, my

Shellacking the For-Profits (Inside Higher Ed)

     Senate Democrats made it clear Wednesday that their examination of for-profit higher education has only just begun, and that they plan to pursue legislation aimed at reining what they see as the sector’s dishonest – if not fraudulent – practices.
     At a hearing on the “student recruitment experience” at for-profit colleges that began Wednesday morning and carried on through the mid-afternoon, Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, outlined plans to hold more hearings on the sector, to collect broad sets of information from for-profit colleges, and to begin drafting legislation aimed at cleaning up the sector.
     “Education is too important for the future of this country,” he said. “Facing the budget problems we have in the next 10 years, we just can't permit more and more of the taxpayers' dollars that are supposed to go for education and quality education … to be going to pay shareholders or private investors.”
     Much of Harkin’s motivation came from the findings of a Government Accountability Office “secret shopper” investigation of recruiting practices at 15 for-profit campuses, the results of which – including a powerful videotape visible [above] – were officially released at the start of the hearing. The probe identified “fraudulent, deceptive or otherwise questionable marketing practices” at all 15 institutions, and inducements to commit fraud on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid at four institutions. Coupled with a former recruiter’s account of his experience on the job, the evidence presented at the hearing depicted an industry aggressively and universally going after “leads” and “starts” with the institutional objective of securing federal financial aid dollars….

Oops

At the OC Fair

Good

(Image from OC Weekly)

Read the ruling, courtesy of the New York Times.

The Conclusion:

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional."

(From the OC Register)

Cal State Fullerton raises admission standards for nonlocal community college students

CSUF makes it tougher to gain admission (OC Reg)

     Due to uncertainty in state funding, Cal State Fullerton has required higher admission standards to limit enrollment and decrease its student population.
     The campus will have approximately 1,000 fewer students in the fall than the year before, and around 2,500 fewer students from fall 2008, said Ed Trotter, acting associate vice president for undergraduate programs.
. . .
     For this school year, CSUF has announced that it has received far more applications than it can accommodate and has, therefore, required supplemental applications and higher admission standards for nonlocal applicants to limit enrollment.
. . .
     CSUF received a record 56,132 undergraduate applications for the coming fall, a 32 percent increase from last year.
     For non-local community college students who wanted to transfer to CSUF, their minimum grade point average requirement is 3.7, up from 2.5 last year, [assistant vice president of enrollment services Nancy] Dority said. Traditionally, a 2.0 GPA, which is the minimum required for local applicants, would have sufficed.
. . .
     Because of fewer course offerings and professors, Trotter said CSUF will have more crowded classrooms in the fall than last year.
     CSUF has nearly 200 fewer professors this year than last year, most of whom are part-time faculty or lecturers whose annual contracts were not renewed by the university….

The care and feeding of albatrosses

     Recently, I discussed, and readers asked about, the fate of ATEP, our district’s albatrossian “Advanced Technology and Education Park” in Tustin.
     The SOCCCD Board of Trustees has a special meeting today at 4:00. According to the agenda, the board plans a “Discussion of Plans for the development of" ATEP. (For details, see this post.)
     To peruse ATEP's "long-range" plans and the new "concept 3A" plan, whatever that is, go here.
     Late last month, ATEP issued a press release, declaring that the City of Tustin has approved the “concept plan” for ATEP:

     The Advanced Technology & Education Park (ATEP) received notification today at a City of Tustin Zoning Administration hearing that the Concept 3A Plan for expansion of the ATEP campus has been approved.
     The Concept 3A Plan provides guidelines for future development of the site for up to 305,000 square feet of facilities on 28 of the 68 acres of land in Tustin Legacy. The approval allows the South Orange County Community College District to proceed with planning and site configurations for the expansion of the Advanced Technology & Education Park with maximum flexibility for phasing of the construction. The Concept 3A Plan was approved by the South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees in 2009.
     “The City of Tustin’s approval today is an important and critical step in the development the ATEP campus and demonstrates the City’s support and desire for this campus to be successful,” said South Orange County Community College District Acting Chancellor Dixie Bullock. “We look forward to jointly celebrating the groundbreaking with the City by our side.”
     Dr. Randy Peebles, ATEP Provost said, “ATEP is quickly outgrowing its existing facilities. This approval enables us to accelerate partnerships with business, industry and other educational institutions to build a campus that trains workers for high impact, technical jobs in our region.”
     ATEP will provide advanced technology programs and workforce training for students, professionals and business organizations in Orange County.

What does it all mean? Dunno. Perhaps things will become clearer by the next board meeting.