Should you accept gifts from students? - Arina Shvarts

With the holidays right around the corner I felt that the article by Lionel G. Standing titled “The Problem of Student Gift Giving” would be very interesting to discuss. Standing argues that professors should never accept gifts from students. He believes that students who give gifts have ulterior motives such as expecting to receive a passing grade on a mid-term or a high mark on a paper. According to Standing (2012, para. 4), “the social norm of reciprocity then means that we are motivated to return the benefit somehow.” With this statement, the author is implying that once a professor receives a gift, they are expected to return the favor.

Standing goes even further by comparing academia to politics. He claims that if a politician or government official accepts a gift from a lobbyist it is considered bribery, the same goes with higher education instructors. Standing also shares a few personal experiences in which some of his friends or colleagues were in situations where they accepted a gift from a student and later discovered that this student had failed the course or plagiarized their dissertation. This created a very uncomfortable dilemma for these instructors.

In the article, Standing does take culture into account. International students who attend colleges and universities in the United States or Canada may give their professors a gift as a gesture of gratitude and appreciation. Standing claims that these gifts are more appropriate to accept, as are gifts from graduate students.  But in general, no matter how tempting it may be, Standing believes that professors should say “no, thank you” to gifts from their undergraduate students.

As student affairs professionals we might also receive gifts from the students we work with. Colleagues and classmates, do you think it is inappropriate or unethical for us to accept them?

Standing, L.G. (2012). The problem of student gift giving. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2012/10/29/essay-why-professors-should-reject-student-gifts

School Vouchers by Vincent Scarfo

When I tell people I am pursuing a degree in education, they tend to ask if I want to be a teacher, because most people don’t think of Student Affairs when it comes to education. While this misunderstanding can be tedious to explain, it also leads to some interesting conversations about K-12 education. With the election coming up, these conversations tend to focus on access, cost, and equity in education, but the most interesting conversation is about Governor Romney’s plan for school vouchers.

While vouchers would appear to increase access to private and charter schools, there would still be the difference in price to be paid by the student’s family. This would mean wealthier families would still be able to afford the higher rated private schools. Many of these schools are also religiously affiliated, leading to religious indoctrination and a lack of secular options. The vouchers would also remove funding from public schools, which desperately need the funds.

Proponents argue that students at private schools should not pay for education twice, and want the money they spend on public school back in the form of a voucher; however, funding for public school is not tuition based, it comes from taxes. Taxpayers without children still fund schools, and they don’t get money back because they are not utilizing the school services. If that were how taxes worked, we wouldn’t have many local government services (e.g. parks, libraries, etc.). Public schools are already underfunded, with large classroom sizes, a lack of teachers, and inequity between schools in different neighborhoods. It is foolish to believe these schools could succeed with even less funding.

This may seem like a strictly K-12 issue, but it may come to affect college access in major ways. Currently, private schools and public schools in wealthier districts have higher graduation rates and college acceptance rates than public schools in less affluent areas. The voucher system would widen this gap even further by underfunding public schools to the point of a less than quality education, and making families pay for private schools to ensure their students get a quality education. The communities with the lowest socioeconomic status will suffer the most, and have less access to a quality education. How can students stay competitive in their college search if they are unable to buy a quality education?

Instead of funding voucher programs, the government should invest in the public school system. The reason people want a voucher program is the poor quality of public schools. Instead of abandoning ship, lets make repairs and improve the current system. Better public schools would mean that anyone could have access to a quality education. Bronfenbrenner’s Sphere’s of Influence has shown that rallying the community behind the school will make it more successful. Investing in the community is a better investment than pulling people out.

Private colleges boom as California universities falter: By Rose. R

For many generations, the University of California, California State University systems, and community colleges, have been distinguished as some of the best examples of what public institutions of higher education should be. In the past, CSU campuses enrolled 420,000 students at all it's 23 campuses, with a tuition of  $5,970 per year. While UC’s tuition was $13,200, and enrolled a total of 222,000 at it’s 10 campuses.

Over recent years, California’s Public Higher Education system has been plagued with a $2.5 billion dollar budget cuts that have not only increased tuition, laid off academic advisers, cut class enrollments for students, but also put in jeopardy the future of higher education. In an article titled “Private colleges boom as California universities falter”, Christina Hoag (2012) suggests that although budget cuts have had detrimental effects in higher education, the educational crisis has a flip side to it(Hoag, 2012). With an immense number of California students disillusioned with the costs of tuition and fewer classes, private institutions and out-of-state schools are experiencing an increase in enrollment from freshman and transfer students to earn their college degrees. ."When it takes more than six years to graduate from a public university, that makes all of California's private schools a much better value for the money," states Homa Shabahangm the vice provost of the University of La Verne, whose enrollment has increased by 70 percent in the past five years.

But the University of La Verne is not the only private institution experiencing a higher demand from California students. Northern Arizona University has also received an increase of 40 percent enrollment over the last three years. The school has been recruiting California students by providing a break on out-of state tuition rates, which means out of state students will be allowed to pay for their tuition at a discounted rate.  The University of Oregon has hired more admissions counselors to recruit highs school freshmens from all over California. Their numbers have gone up from 177 five years ago, to 449 just this year. Saint Mary's College of California has also experienced a 51 percent increase in application submissions since 2009, with nearly 6,000 students applying for 600 freshman slots. Beseda, a representative from Saint Mary's states that "We're happy to have these students but I hope nobody thinks we're the long-term solution, the long-term solution is to invest more in higher education."
Because budget cuts have made it a lot harder for students to get admitted or graduate on time, private colleges and universities have responded to this crisis by recruiting students and promising smaller classes, course availability, graduating on-time, and good financial aid packet. 

If students are enrolling at private institutions of higher education, what will California public institutions going to have to do to bring their enrollment numbers up? As future student affairs professionals, how can we help? What are the implications for those of us planning to work at California public institutions? How do budget cuts affect student affairs in the public sector? 

-Rose R.

                                                       References

Hoag, C. (2012). Private colleges boom as calif universities falter. San francisco chronicle, Retrieved from http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Private-colleges-boom-as-Calif-universities-falter-3967405.php 

Medina, J. (2012, June 01). California cuts threaten the status of universities. The new york times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/02/us/california-cuts-threaten-the-status-of-universities.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1&

Are College Students Still Learning?

Sofia Janney-Roberts

 

                I recently read an article in the NY Times that completely shocked me. Written by Bob Herbert, the piece reported on the findings of the book, Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses (Arum & Roska, 2011), (2011). According to the authors’ findings, college students are graduating with much less critical thinking, communication, and reasoning skills than in the past. Upwards of 45% of students showed no improvement in these areas after their first two years. Many graduates could not even solve simple tasks such as distinguishing fact from opinion. When compared with their peers from the 1960s, the 2,300 students surveyed also spent 50% less time studying, with 36% percent reporting allotting less than five hours a week on homework. Yet, the average grade point average of such students was above a B (Herbert, 2011).

                The article criticized both students for attempting to “slide-by” and institutions for allowing them to. However, I suspect that much more is at play than simply shocking statistics. The educational landscape has changed drastically since the 1960s and I don’t believe that a side-by-side comparison of outcomes between today’s graduates and past graduates is fair. Institutions have greatly diversified in type and in population. There are now colleges for every type of student – those that commute, want to obtain a technical degree, are returning to school after a long time, as well as the traditional student. While I applaud this trend and promote equity efforts, I wonder if something has been lost in the shift towards diversification. Are colleges (and students) still making learning the clear and pure priority?

                The rise in professionally focused programs likely also contributes. The liberal arts curriculum which was the hard and fast rule of the past, now serves a limited percentage of college students.  I presume, from my own experience, that outcomes from liberal arts schools—where critical thinking and communication is central to the curriculum—would differ from the results indicated in the national study. However, these programs are not necessarily better or produce more prepared students. One has to wonder what important and indicative skills the study highlighted in Academic Drift is not measuring.

                Even if it does not paint a complete picture, this report still garners attention. Critical thinking, reasoning and communication are important qualities to instill in students – clearly something needs to change, regardless of the mission of a university’s curriculum. Perhaps the answer is not to limit criticism to the students and faculty, but to look to administrators as well. As students and institutions become more diverse, and programs become more career focused, it is up to student services to fill in the gaps. As student affairs professionals, how and when can we capitalize on opportunities to create thoughtful and productive graduates? 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/05/opinion/05herbert.html?_r=0

Once Upon a White Student Union by Mace Porotesano

 So, the other day this past week I received an email from a friend who said this: “Watch this video. The panel is very interesting. You'll feel enlightened.

http://live.huffingtonpost.com/r/segment/5075b4be2b8c2a504c0004d2”

After I watched the entire panel discussion, I was very much indeed enlightened. The conversation was very thought provoking and touched upon some diversity and racial issues in higher education, for example, affirmative action, and admissions. But it ultimately made me think about how multicultural centers in the future would look like and the role of student affairs professionals in higher education. The Towson University student leader Matthew Heimbach, wishes to create a white student organization “to allow students to come together and advocate for their own interests” (Hanrahan, 2012).  Towson University is a public university located in an urban area in Baltimore, Maryland. There are about 18,000 undergraduate students, and 4,000 graduate students at the University. I think that every student should have this right and exercise his or her right to associate. Being inclusive of all cultures and identities is crucial in student affairs. But I also think its’ important that the administration monitors and oversees what organizations’ are doing.

In the PASA program, we discuss the importance of diversity on campus and the many positive impacts it has on students’ personal development and growth throughout college. Multicultural centers are the (lack of a better word) “awareness” hubs of bringing different groups together, such as racial, ethnic, gender, sexual orientation, religious affiliation groups, etc. to establish a greater understanding, sensitivity, and appreciation of history, values and experiences. Diversity and multiculturalism call for positive identity development for all individuals and asserts toleration of all different beliefs and values. Student affairs professionals are in the position to provide support of the different perspectives within the campus community, and if students’ wish to create a white student union, the support must be there (NASPA Website).

After watching the panel discussion and discovering a little research, Heimbachs’ rationale for establishing such an organization was reasonable but the meetings and actions taken on behalf of their organization can rub off as ignorance. I believe that these instances and situations in a higher education setting can be set in positive light when student affairs professionals take immediate action in community and coalition building between all multicultural groups and parties. What are some other measures or potential aids can student affairs do in a situation like this?

Though the panel discussion was formulated because of the creation of a white student union at Towson University, it touched based on a plethora of dynamic issues that pertained to the American history. I think the panel surfaced a lot of important points to talk about, but this also made me think about Towson students and and their reactions to this. This situation in Towson University is interesting to me and I think that this case foreshadows the road that multicultural centers in higher education maybe taking. As a student affairs professional at Towson, what are some ways you would go about to open dialogue or discussion to the student population about this controversial idea? How would administrators go about the process of implementing a safe-space for students who wish to start a white student union? As Patton stated in her book Cultural Centers in Higher Education, when cultural centers are implemented, questions should be asked like: What is the mission of the culture center? What are student learning outcomes reflected in the mission? What are the programmatic goals of the culture center? How do these goals align with the mission?  If the culture is race specific, how are other students invited to engage within the culture space? To what extent is the programming curriculum designed to promote cross-cultural interactions among students from diverse backgrounds?

References:

Hanrahan, M. (n.d.). White Student Union: Towson University Student Matthew Heimbach Discusses Controversial Group On HuffPost Live. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/11/white-student-union-towson-university_n_1958868.html.

 NASPA | Commitment to Diversity, Inclusion, and Equity. NASPA - Student Affairs Administrators in Higher Education. Retrieved October 22, 2012, from http://www.naspa.org/about/diversity.cfm

Patton, L. D. (2010). Culture centers in higher education perspectives on identity, theory, and practice. Sterling, Va.: Stylus.

The Immigrant Youth Movement: New Horizons for Dreamers and Higher Education by Briseida Elenes

“I chose to get arrested because of our politicians’ callousness toward a pressing issue that affects not only me but also the thousands of other youth on a daily basis. I had the courage, strength, and opportunity to participate in this civil disobedience action thanks to the dedication, valor, and love of others in this movement. Inaction was just not an action.” –Diana Yael Martinez, extracted from Undocumented and Unafraid

You are likely familiar with the civil rights movement of the 1960s and the some of the various social implications which it influenced—racial desegregation, gender equality, disability rights, and the Gay Liberation movement.  Yet how familiar are you with the Immigrant Youth Movement (IYM)? With the recent passage of the California DREAM Act and Deferred Action, the Immigrant Youth Movement (IYM) merits attention.

 You may be wondering what the IYM has to do with higher education and student affairs. In Understanding Immigrant College Students: Applying a Developmental Ecology Framework to the Practice of Academic Advising (2011), Stebleton illustrates how the ecology perspective lends a comprehensive framework for understanding immigrants’ college experiences (p. 42). Stebleton argues that in order to understand and better serve the immigrant college population, it is necessary to contextualize their experiences by taking into account the varied interactions between students and their environments (pp. 42-43).  Using this framework, immigration policy should be considered an important factor that influences the identity formation of many immigrant students.  The sociopolitical milieu cannot be disaggregated from the socialization and developmental process of young adults. While it is critical to not essentialize immigrant experiences, it is still important to embed our understanding of immigrant youth within the larger political context.

So what is the IYM and what does it mean to students and higher education administrators and practitioners? UCLA’s Dream Resource Center describes the IYM as follows: "No longer living in the shadows, undocumented students are coming out, organizing, advocating for change in immigration policy, and building a new civil rights movement" (http://www.dreamresourcecenter.org/undocumented-and-unafraid.html).  Rejecting the shame and criminalization often associated with the status of undocumented, these youth are reclaiming the term “undocumented” and ascribing to it a new definition with empowering connotations of agency and self-authorship. UCLA’s Center for Labor Research and Education recently published a book titled Undocumented and Unafraid: Tam Tran, Cinthya Felix, and the Immigrant Youth Movement (2012).  The book beautifully offers an insight into the lives and work of two trailblazers within the IYM. Not only were Tam and Cinthya instrumental to the IYM, they were some of the first undocumented students to attend graduate school. After being struck by a drunk driver, their lives tragically came to an end shortly after starting graduate school at Ivy League institutions. Their legacy and inspiration continues to impact the IYM. 

Carlos Amador, a CSUF and UCLA alumnus, recently shared his story at an AB 50 and Undocumented Conference.  Carlos was part of the successful national campaign to pressure President Obama to cease deportations and grant Deferred Action for undocumented immigrant youth.  Deferred action allows eligible immigrant youth to obtain a work permit and protects them from deportation for two years.

The California DREAM Act, Deferred Action, and IYM have evolving implications and new opportunities for higher education institutions and Dreamers alike. For higher education administrators and practitioners, it means listening to Dreamers and implementing new policies and programs that will best support their needs. As Dr. Lisa Cacho, professor of Asian American Studies at the University of Illinois recently stated, “We want to speak with undocumented students, not for them”

(http://www.dailyillini.com/news/campus/article_94712f20-3cda-5fed-b3e9-dfdfc962363e.html). For Dreamers, it means  having the opportunity to openly carve out their own spaces in higher education and in society.  

References:

Dream Resource Center, http://www.dreamresourcecenter.org/undocumented-and-unafraid.html

Musnicki, R. (2012). Group raises money, awareness for undocumented students.  The Daily Illini. Retrieved from http://www.dailyillini.com/news/campus/article_94712f20-3cda-5fed-b3e9-dfdfc962363e.html

Stebleton, M.J. (2011).  Understanding immigrant college students: Applying a developmental ecology framework to the practice of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 31(1), 42-52.

Wong, K., Shadduck-Hernandez, J., Inzunza, F., Monroe, J., Narro V., Valenzuela, A. (2012). Undocumented and unafraid: Tam Tran, Cinthya Felix, and the Immigrant Youth Movement. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Research and Education.

Questioning the Sustainability of Financial Aid – Katrina Randolph

               Questioning of the sustainability of university financial aid has been a topic of discussion in recent months.  The Inside Higher Ed article “Grinnell, one of the country’s wealthiest colleges, questions sustainability of financial aid” discusses Grinnell College’s announcement of its potential changes to need-blind admissions.  According to the article, although Grinnell College has the fifth-largest endowment of any liberal arts college, the administration views that its current financial aid model is unsustainable.  This announcement follows the suspension of need-blind admissions by Wesleyan University in the summer (Kiley, 2012b) and Tufts University in 2009 (Javetski, 2009).

                The President of Grinnell College, Raynard Kingston, stated slow endowment growth and significant increases in the need for aid are the driving factors in the examination of its need-blind admissions process.  Under a need-blind admissions policy, an applicant’s financial situation is not considered when deciding admission.  According to Kiley, institutions approach need-blind admissions in a variety of ways (2012a).  About 40 colleges and universities, including many elite private institutions, have adopted a need-blind admissions and meet-full-need financial aid policy (Kiley, 2012a).  Some institutions are need-blind only for students in the United States.  Others become need-aware for waitlisted students or transfer students. Kingston said that Grinnell is need-blind for students on the waitlist and need-aware for international students (Kiley, 2012a).

                Tufts University has seen the effects of the suspension of need-blind admissions.  Dean of Undergraduate Admissions Lee Coffin found that the institutions applicant profile changed.  Coffin stated, "The only thing the economic factors had an effect on was whether students chose to apply to Tufts or not.  Some families held back applications because they realized they wouldn't qualify for need-based aid (as cited in Javetski, 2009)."  Factors including the potential change in student population will be examined prior to the Board of Trustees’ decision in February (Kiley, 2012a).

                How will need-aware admissions change student demographics?  In an effort to raise funds, will institutions admit those that are economically qualified students rather than intellectually qualified?  How will qualified students from middle-class families be impacted by these changing policies?

References

Javetski, G. (2009, April 2). Tufts accepts 26 percent of pool, suspends need-blind admission. The Tufts Daily. Retrieved from http://www.tuftsdaily.com/tufts-accepts-26-percent-of-pool-suspends-need-blind-admissions-1.1639896#

Kiley, K. (2012, October 1). Grinnell, one of the country’s wealthiest colleges, questions sustainability of financial aid. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/10/01/grinnell-one-countrys-wealthiest-colleges-questions-sustainability-financial-aid

Kiley, K. (2012, June 1). Need too much. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/06/01/wesleyan-shifts-away-need-blind-policy-citing-financial-and-ethical-concerns

Who Benefits from Income Based Repayment? by Alyssa O'Keeffe

Nearly 1 out of 5 households in the United States hold student debt (Pew Research Center, 2012).   The government currently offers an IBR plan that forgives federal student loan debt after 25 years, if borrowers pay at least 15% of their income each year.  However, the Obama administration passed a new plan, that reduces the payment rate from 15% to 10% of income, and forgives federal student loan debt after 20 consecutive years of repayment (Stratford, 2012).  The White House Blog (2012) boasts, “1.6 million people will be able to cap their monthly student loan payment at 10 percent of their income, beginning in 2012” (wh.gov, 2012).  However, relatively few people have enrolled in this repayment plan so far. 

            In order to qualify for income based repayment, students must have partial financial hardship: the monthly amount they are required to pay on IBR-eligible loans under a 10-year Standard Repayment Plan must be higher than the monthly amount required under IBR (wh.gov, 2012).   Once students initially qualify for IBR, they can continue to make payments under the plan even if they no longer have a partial financial hardship- which sounds like a surprisingly good deal  (wh.gov, 2012). Why, then, are so few borrowers asking advantage of it?  Who benefits?

            Stratford (2012) fears that this program hurts the US economy.  He argues IBR mostly benefits high-income borrowers with high debt loads, rather than low income borrowers.  According to Stratford (2012), “Low-income borrowers—those earning less than $25,000 a year—will see their monthly payments shrink by $5 to $20… However, high-income borrowers with high debt loads from, say, graduate or professional school will see hundreds of thousands of dollars of their loan debt forgiven after making payments for 20 years”.  Secondly, Stratford argues IBR gives graduate and professional schools an incentive to keep costs high, because ultimately students know they will not have to pay the cost. 

            Meiburg (2012) offers an alternative, stating that IBR give students the ability to pursue meaningful careers that are relatively low-paying, but nevertheless require expensive degrees. For example, working as a social worker, or, working as an academic advisor- for those of us graduating from USC’s PASA program this fall. IBR helps student like myself, who are going into thousands of dollars of debt to secure a job that, despite low pay, provides a valuable service.  The focus should be on developing more loan repayment options to prevent students from defaulting.

References

Stratford , Michael . "Chronicle of Higher Education ." Chronicle of Higher Education . (2012): n. page. Print. <chronicle.com/article/Obamas-Loan-Repayment-Plan/135144/?cid=at&utm_source=at&utm_medium=en>.

Meiburg , Jonathan . "Huffington Post ." Huffington Post . (2012): n. page. Print. <www.huffingtonpost.com/jonathan-meiburg/income-based-repayment_b_1964364.html>.

United States. Department of Education. Federal Student Aid . 2012. Web. <http://studentaid.ed.gov>.

"Pew Research Center Publications." Pew Research Center Publications. (2012): n. page. Web. 17 Oct. 2012. <http://pewresearch.org/pubs/2369/student-debt-record-number-households-owe-young-poor-college-university>.