Translate

Showing posts with label higher education futures. Show all posts
Showing posts with label higher education futures. Show all posts

Sunday, January 08, 2023

The incredible shrinking future of college, by Kevin Carey in Vox

Here is a very informative recent article on the hard-cold reality of the state the higher education is in dubbed as the "enrollment cliff." Some smaller private colleges have announced plans to close. 

An obvious policy fix is to bring in the student of color demographic that has been historically under-represented in higher education. This should get coupled with addressing student debt policies and financial aid support for prospective students. This would encourage many students to enroll. Online degrees are also structuring students from brick and mortar schools. Eliminating barriers to legal immigration would help, too, including creating a pathway to citizenship for DACA recipients.

We'll be hearing in higher education circles about both the enrollment cliff and "deconstruction." The latter, as defined by Shippensburg University President Charles Patterson, is as follows:

 “Presidents these days are in the business of deconstruction,” he said — not in the sense of tearing down what their forebears created, but of rethinking and reconfiguring what universities have and who they are, for leaner times."

There are, of course, regional differences with Northeastern and Midwestern colleges particularly impacted in the more immediate future. All told, the future of higher education is concerning such that expressions of local- and state-level political support by our communities must get underscored in our state legislatures nationwide.

-Angela Valenzuela

#EnrollmentCliff #highered #highereducation #deconstruction


The incredible shrinking future of college

In 2021, Shippensburg University won the NCAA Division II Field Hockey championship, completing an undefeated season with a 3-0 victory over archrival West Chester. The “Ship” Raiders also won it all in 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2013, which I know because I saw it written in big letters on a banner festooning the fieldhouse on Ship’s campus in south-central Pennsylvania when I visited last month.

Ship was in fine form. Young men and women wearing logoed Champion sweatshirts bustled between buildings. There was a line at the coffee shop in the student union. It was the kind of bright-blue autumn day that you would see on a brochure.

There was no way to tell, from the outside, that Ship was a shrinking institution. Or that the problem is about to get a lot worse — not just here, but at colleges and universities nationwide.

In four years, the number of students graduating from high schools across the country will begin a sudden and precipitous decline, due to a rolling demographic aftershock of the Great Recession. Traumatized by uncertainty and unemployment, people decided to stop having kids during that period. But even as we climbed out of the recession, the birth rate kept dropping, and we are now starting to see the consequences on campuses everywhere. Classes will shrink, year after year, for most of the next two decades. People in the higher education industry call it “the enrollment cliff.”

Among the small number of elite colleges and research universities — think the Princetons and the Penn States — the cliff will be no big deal. These institutions have their pick of applicants and can easily keep classes full.

For everyone else, the consequences could be dire. In some places, the crisis has already begun. College enrollment began slowly receding after the millennial enrollment wave peaked in 2010, particularly in regions that were already experiencing below-average birth rates while simultaneously losing population to out-migration. Starved of students and the tuition revenue they bring, small private colleges in New England have begun to blink off the map. Regional public universities like Ship are enduring painful layoffs and consolidation.

The timing is terrible. Trade policy, de-unionization, corporate consolidation, and substance abuse have already ravaged countless communities, particularly in the post-industrial Northeast and Midwest. In many cases, colleges have been one of the only places that provide good jobs in their communities, offer educational opportunities for locals, and have strong enough roots to stay planted. The enrollment cliff means they might soon dry up and blow away.

Monday, August 09, 2021

Scenarios for the next COVID-19 variants: The SAGE document

This is the first piece I've seen that lays out credible, possible scenarios of how the Covid19 variants could play out with suggestions of how these different scenarios could impact higher education.

According to his bio on his website, BryanAlexander.org, he is "an awardwinning, internationally known futurist, researcher, writer, speaker, consultant, and teacher, working in the field of higher education’s future."

His scenarios are mostly unsettling, to say the least. 

Still, we all need to have our eyes wide open.

Thanks to UT Higher Education Professor Pat Somers for sharing.

-Angela Valenzuela 

Scenarios for the next COVID-19 variants: the SAGE document


What will COVID-19 develop into?  What variants should we expect?

I’d like to continue my futures exploration of the pandemic today by focusing on a set of scenarios recently published by Britain’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE).  It’s an interesting document, sharing a range of possibilities well grounded in current epidemiology, from what I can understand. These potential futures are ones colleges and universities need to consider as they plan for 2021-2022.

Let me summarize and excerpt them here, then develop some implications for higher education.


SAGE’s method – implied, but not fully stated – seems to focus on several scenario variables: virus transmissibility, lethality, and ability to escape vaccines, all driven by mutations to the virus’ shape and contents.

“Scenario One: A variant that causes severe disease in a greater proportion of the population than has occurred to date.”  In other words, this new COVID variant injured and kills more people and a greater range of us.  SAGE offers two modern analogies to help us visualize how terrible this could be: “For example, with similar morbidity/mortality to other zoonotic coronaviruses such as SARS-CoV (~10% case fatality) or MERS-CoV (~35% case fatality).”

35%. Think about that – out of every infected group, about one third dies.  And SAGE considers this to be a “[r]ealistic possibility.”

“Scenario Two: A variant that evades current vaccines.” In other words, the vaccines we’re taking now don’t work as well in blocking transmission and illness.  William Haseltine dubs this one a ““vaccine-busting variant.”  The Delta and Lambda variants are early examples of it.

Note that this could occur by a virus jumping from humans to animals, mutating in those new hosts, then returning to humans again.

“Scenario Three: Emergence of a drug resistant variant after anti-viral strategies.”  Similar to number two, but also more dangerous for therapy and treatment.

“Scenario Four: SARS-CoV-2 follows an evolutionary trajectory with decreased virulence.”  This is a positive development, with COVID-19 weakening over time.  It wouldn’t disappear, just become less and less transmissible and damaging.

The first three are dangerous and frightening. SAGE deems them to be have a decent likelihood of occurring (1+2 are “Realistic possibilit[ies]“, 3 “Likely – unless the drugs are used correctly“). Scenario four is benevolent – but, alas, not so likely to happen soon. (“Unlikely in the short term, realistic possibility in the long term.“)


COVID infections by nation to date, with US emphasized, via DIVOC-19.

Overall, what is to be done?  For many of the scenarios SAGE recommends similar responses: reducing transmission through nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) (i.e., masking, social distancing, lockdowns, etc.); continuing to offer current vaccines, worldwide; developing and administering vaccine boosters; extensive monitoring of humans (and animals) for variants; rapid development of new vaccines; stockpiling therapeutic drugs; investing in AI for long-term use.  In case of scenario three, SAGE recommends not giving people as many antiviral drugs as we now do.

As scenarios, it’s important to remember that they are not only visions of possible futures, but attempts to influence the present. One BBC account reflects that these scenarios seem less likely to occur in that country, given dropping case rates, but might represent an attempt to scare people into better public health behavior.

What does this mean for higher education?

It depends on the scenario.  If scenario one occurs, we face the choices presented in summer 2020: close campuses and shift to remote instruction, or attempt in-person education with major on site protocols to reduce infections?  Increased lethality, and range of most injured victims, means a greater proportion of the academic community can be directly hit. If death tolls reach MERS levels I would hope all campuses would shut down in-person operations, but the pandemic experience shows clearly that many colleges and universities can follow other logics.

Scenarios two and three present similar, familiar choices for postsecondary institutions. Do we invite populations back on campus and trust in our individual mixtures of vaccination, testing, and NPI to keep most of us safe?  Or do we return back online and take major financial hits?

Scenario four is a path back towards normalcy. COVID-19 becomes like the seasonal flu. We want people to take their vaccines. Some will get sick, and a few die. But socially we deem this to be acceptable.  Face to face instruction returns and many try their best to recapture fall 2019.

Academic research appears to be essential for the world in every scenario, especially the first three. This suggests that colleges and universities divert more resources to relevant programs, even if they are suffering financially overall.

Which of these seems most likely to occur?  How do you think they might impact academia?