Search

International students are critical to the competitiveness of American higher education in terms of financial, intercultural, and educational contributions. However, recent data indicates that the U.S institutions enrolled 31,520 fewer international students in Fall 2017 as compared to Fall 2016. At average tuition and fees of US$ 25,000, higher education institutions are likely to lose potential revenue of US$ 788 million for the first year of studies alone. This paper examines the shifting landscape of international enrollment from the lens of three overlapping Waves spread over seven years and takes a deeper dive into implications for American universities. Wave I was shaped by the terrorist attacks in September 2001 and resulted in slower overall growth in international student enrollment of 11% between 1999 and 2006. Wave II has its origins in the global financial crisis which prompted universities to search for self-funded students and experienced overall robust growth of 44 percent in international student enrollment between 2006 and 2013. Finally, Wave III is shaped by the new political order and intensified competition from English-taught programs in Europe and Asia which will slow down the pace of projected growth in international enrollment to 18 percent between 2013 and 2020. In this current Wave of intensified global competition, overall international student enrollment is likely to flatten or decline for most universities. While the reputation and quality of American higher education is admired and emulated around the world, resting on its past laurels will not be sufficient for attracting international students in the Third Wave. This means that universities must get proactive and strategic in reaching, engaging and supporting international students throughout their educational lifecycle. Demand for studying abroad among international students remains robust, however, increasing competition and expectations for value for money will requires proactive and concerted efforts to maintain the global competitiveness of American higher education.

In this paper the authors identified the size of America's home market as a crucial component of its historical comparative advantage. The authors showed that over the last four decades nearly 60 percent of per capita U.S. growth has been dependent upon growth in the domestic consumption. Thus, a comprehensive demand side strategy also must target the domestic consumers U.S. businesses know best. On the supply side, they asked themselves what education and skills matter for individual and national economic success in the global economy? The authors' research demonstrated that education matters for growth and college matters the most. Boosting college completion rates by just 10 percent would inject $125 billion into the economy over the long run. Education credentials often serve as a signaling devise that employers use to gauge what potential hires might know and be able to do on the job. Employers are really interested in the knowledge, skills and abilities people bring to the workplace, not just their education credentials. The authors examined a new data set to test this hypothesis and found preliminary evidence to support it. The authors showed that the greater the level of skill required of occupations, the higher the education levels of job incumbents. Secondly, they found that the greater the level of skill required of occupations, the greater the average earnings for workers in those occupations, after holding constant the level of education. Consequently, not only is there a clear payoff to education, there also is an independent payoff to higher skills. And that appears true not only for competencies like innovation, critical thinking, and complex problem solving, but also for basic skills and social skills that are important in interacting with colleagues and customers. They also found that these competencies were useful in estimating which jobs are most vulnerable to being offshored overseas. In conclusion, they recognize that globalization is neither automatically beneficial nor universally destructive. Neither their analysis nor history offer assurances, though their work does suggest some ways forward. Therefore, they should identify strategies that will enable America to seize opportunities presented by globalization while minimizing its negative effects on communities, workers, and their families. Average Earnings by Education of Workers and the Competency Level Occupations Require are appended. (Contains 14 figures, 8 tables and 57 endnotes.) [This paper was written with Zamira Simkins.]

In his recent bestseller The World Is Flat, Thomas Friedman argues that countries like the United States can no longer compete in the global economy on the basis of making and selling commodities. Their competitive edge increasingly comes from how well they produce products, services, and technologies that are new . . . special . . . non-standard--and thus not easily produced across the globe by competitors. In this paper, we look at the educational implications of this crisis--implications that are both profound and alarming. We argue that young people in the United States today are being prepared for "commodity jobs" in a world that will, very soon, only reward people who can do innovative work and punish those who can't. The problem is being exacerbated by a new equity gap, in which some students have access at home to the technologies they need to prepare for life in a digital world, but many do not--a problem made worse by current educational policies that focus on giving students standardized skills for standardized tests rather than preparation for creative thinking and innovative work. We argue that the time to tinker with schools, as we have done for decades, is over, and that the change we need is neither liberal nor conservative. We make the case here that the same technologies that are creating this crisis provide a potential solution, and we propose the concept of epistemic games as one way to solve this looming crisis of learning. (Contains 1 figure.)

This article introduces original annual average years of schooling measures for each state from 1840 to 2000. The paper also combines original data on real state per-worker output with existing data to provide a more comprehensive series of real state output per worker from 1840 to 2000. These data show that the New England, Middle Atlantic, Pacific, East North Central, and West North Central regions have been educational leaders during the entire time period. In contrast, the South Atlantic, East South Central, and West South Central regions have been educational laggards. The Mountain region behaves differently than either of the aforementioned groups. Using their estimates of average years of schooling and average years of experience in the labor force, the authors estimate aggregate Mincerian earnings regressions. Their estimates indicate that a year of schooling increased output by between 8 percent and 12 percent, with a point estimate close to 10 percent. These estimates are in line with the body of evidence from the labor literature. (Supplemental information is provided in 4 appendices. Contains 36 footnotes, 15 tables and unnumbered figures.)

Vocational Education can play a key role in revitalizing the American economy particularly through research and development in four areas: economic development and productivity, equity and access, youth employment, and energy. It can enhance productivity by identifying innovative vocational education programs successful in enhancing community and economic development, developing entrepreneurship training, aiding in vocational agriculture teacher preparation, developing curricula that addresses community economic development needs, and emphasizing new technologies and leadership development opportunities. Research and demonstration projects can aid in expanding vocational educational opportunities for women, minorities, and handicapped persons. Vocational education can play a key part in reducing youth unemployment by providing in-school and out-of-school programs for disadvantaged youth. It has already begun to respond to emerging industries and technologies needed for the energy crisis. The National Center for Research in Vocational Education can assist in this endeavor by improving national dissemination and utilization of research and development products focusing on the four priorities mentioned above, examining and describing critical issues confronting vocational education, assisting in strengthening the nationwide vocational education research and development system, and improving articulation among education, business, industry, labor, and economic development agencies. (MN)

Globalization is an evolving concept characterized by economic, technological, social, and political dimensions. Vocational education and training (VET) practitioners and the VET system must make more conscious efforts to lead thinking about the social dimension of globalization. The mission of Australian VET today is largely couched in economic terms--to ensure a skilled work force capable of helping the country's industries become globally competitive. In Australia, much of the debate about globalization has focused on economics and technology, and the social and political dimensions of globalization have largely been side-stepped. The Australian education and training system has worked very hard to ensure that technology is pressed to the service of VET rather than falling for the trap of technological determinism. The challenge is not so much to invest in the technologies but to more quickly and effectively apply the technologies for the purposes of vocational learning and for using them to transact VET business. The following issues related to the social dimensions of globalization remain vitally important to the development and delivery of VET: access; Australian cultural identity; and community. Australia's VET practitioners and leaders must support a community-building purpose for VET and work to enhance the stock of social capital in their communities. (MN)

Raising Arizona was the challenge of the 20th century. Sustaining Arizona is now the challenge of the 21st. A crucial part of that task is not just understanding today's knowledge economy, but mastering it. Ray and Charles Eames, the creative geniuses behind many iconic 20th century designs, debuted their film "Powers of 10" in 1977. In nine minutes, the viewer zooms from a picnic in a park to a view of the universe from outer space back to being inside the cells of the human body. The journey is a powerful lesson in perspective. For decision makers, the lesson is clear: each level offers crucial input for wise choices. This paper applies the "Powers of 10" idea. As a result, this paper looks at issues and demands from three perspectives: 30,000 feet, 10,000 feet, and on the ground. Each level provides insights vital to Arizona finding new ways to develop a quality workforce suited to "stimulating innovation, creating wealth, and promoting economic growth." "To Learn and Earn" concludes with questions that the Arizona Minority Education Policy Analysis Center (AMEPAC) sees as a starting point for working with partners throughout Arizona. (Contains 35 endnotes.) ["To Learn and Earn: Arizona's Unfinished Business in Human Capital" was written with Richard Toon and Yuri Artibise. This report was prepared for the Arizona Minority Education Policy Analysis Center (AMEPAC).]

To frame the larger research agenda requires an intimate blending of knowledge of the situations of foreign research universities and those of public research universities in the United States. The first step was to bring together for a two-day symposium a group of scholars and practitioners, some with deep and varied knowledge of United States public research universities and others with specific knowledge of the university systems and recent changes in pertinent foreign countries. The purpose of the symposium was to share comparative information and analysis, to discuss major issues facing national and supranational systems of higher education and the role of research universities, and to identify the most promising avenues for further investigation. The symposium was focused on a group consisting largely of economically developed countries and regions that are important exemplars or locales for consideration of reform or alternative systems from those of the U. S. Considerations were structured around four major policy areas, including: (1) Fees and Finance; (2) Access, Quality and Accountability; (3) Science and Technology; and (4) Organization and Governance. Participants (a list of whom is in Appendix 1) provided working papers on assigned topics related to one or more of the four policy areas, or were asked to comment on the papers and the short presentations. This narrative provides a summary of the symposium proceedings, attempting to capture the gist of what was a varied and thought-provoking set of presentations and discussions. Presentations include the following: (1) Introduction (Chancellor Robert Birgeneau and C. Judson King); (2) OECD Perspective on Major International Issues Affecting Public Higher Education (Chaired by David Breneman and participated by Stephan Vincent-Lancrin); (3) Environmental Scan of U.S. Public Higher Education--Issues and Trends (Chaired by Ahmed Bawa and participated by Irwin Feller and Robert Berdahl); (4) Environmental Scan of Higher Education in Europe--Approaches and Trends (Chaired by John Aubrey Douglass Marijk van der Wende and participated by Michael Shattock, Wilhelm Krull, and Daniel Fallon); (5) Environmental Scan of Higher Education in the Pacific Region--Approaches and Trends (Chaired by Otto C. C. Lin and participated by Philip Altbach, Wan-Hua Ma, and Rory Hume); (6) Comparative Approaches to Financing of Public Higher Education (Chaired by Sheldon Rothblatt and participated by David Palfreyman, Katharine Lyall, and David Breneman); (7) Comparative Approaches to Access and Marketing: Undergraduate Education and Degree Production (Chaired by Steven Brint and participated by John Aubrey Douglass, Kerstin Eliasson, and Grant Harman); (8) Science and Technology Initiatives and Strategies for Economic Development (Chaired by Irwin Feller and participated by Otto C. C. Lin, Henry Etzkowitz, Taizo Yakushiji, and John Zysman); (9) Comparative Approaches to Governance and Management of Higher Education Systems (Chaired by Katharine Lyall and participated by Christine Musselin, Jeroen Huisman, and C. Judson King); and (10) Reflection on Discussion and Targets for Further Research (Delivered by Robert Berdahl, Taizo Yakushiji, Daniel Fallon and John Zysman). Appendices include: (1) List of Symposium Participants; and (2) References and Resources. (Lists 4 resources.)

There was a notable transition in the nature, content, and administration of rural policies in many developed nations in the 1980s and 1990s. These changes concerned issues of governance and institutional framework, the definition of "development," and policy goals and content. A key question, however, concerns the extent to which shifts in the language or rhetoric of rural policy are matched by reality. This paper assesses rural policy changes and their rationale in relation to rural trends at the beginning of the new century. It draws heavily on recent experience in the European Union, especially implementation of Agenda 2000, and also reviews rural policy changes in the United States, Canada, and UK countries. In all these countries, rural policies of a territorial nature now comprise many of these elements: efforts to reinforce rural economies; attempts to restructure agriculture; strengthening of transportation and telecommunications infrastructure; improved business assistance; development of human resources through vocational training, entrepreneurship education, and school-to-work initiatives; local "capacity building"; creation of products based on local identity; new or adapted financial instruments; and new ways of providing public services in rural areas. Trends in institutional arrangements for delivery of rural policy include decentralization, support for bottom-up development, better policy coordination, and regional and local partnerships. Challenges for rural policy and the ways that developed countries are meeting these challenges are discussed. (SV)

Concentrating on executive powers presents a real opportunity for the Obama administration to turn its focus away from a divided Congress and the unappetizing process of making legislative sausage. Instead, the administration can focus on the president's ability to deliver results for the American people on the things that matter most to them. The Obama administration, of course, is already using the capacity of the presidency to drive change in the public and private sector. For example, it promoted the formation of Skills for America's Future, a new public-private initiative in support of the president's goal of 5 million more community college graduates and certificates by 2020. Similarly, President Obama's recent trip to India provided an opportunity for him to win agreements that will bring significant economic benefits to U.S. firms and American workers. There is much more the president can do. The list of ideas presented in this paper offers just some of the many possible actions the administration can take using existing authority to move the country forward. [Forward by John D. Podesta]

In 1991, the Child and Family Policy Center (CFPC) titled its first Iowa Kids Count Data Book "World-Class Futures." That year, Iowa ranked eighth among states in the national Kids Count Data Book, and the report warned against complacence. "World-Class Futures" drew comparisons between Iowa's child outcomes and those for some of America's major trading partners and competitors--Canada, Great Britain, France, and Japan--to show that Iowa should not rest on its laurels if it wanted to compete, and excel, in an increasingly international economy. "World-Class Futures" itself was a reference to a Gubernatorial report, "World Class Schools," that set out an agenda to make Iowa's school system a model for the nation. In his last term in office (1994-98), Governor Terry Branstad focused upon significant education reforms and investments designed to be part of his legacy. His successor, Governor Tom Vilsack, followed this up with additional education initiatives to make Iowa's educational system more competitive with other states, including additional funding for teacher salaries and establishing a goal that 90 percent of all high-school students pursue post-secondary education. In his first term in office, Governor Chet Culver has initiated additional actions to bring Iowa teacher salaries up to the national average and established Preschool for All, an early-childhood program designed to make voluntary preschool available to all Iowa four-year-olds. With such attention from Iowa's last three governors on education reform and excellence, one might assume that Iowa's education system would have moved forward over the last 20 years, both in its own right and in comparison with other states. Two 2006 Iowa Fiscal Partnership (IFP) reports, however, provided information that has challenged this assumption and pointed to the need for Iowa lawmakers to seriously reassess the status of Iowa's educational system. The 2007 and 2009 data analyzed in this update support ts and show that, despite recent investments, Iowa students are not keeping up with their counterparts in other parts of the world, or in other states. (Contains 7 tables.) [This paper updates two earlier CFPC reports prepared for the Iowa Fiscal Partnership--"No Longer a Leader" and "Securing Iowa's Economic Future."]

Through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) the federal government is pumping nearly $790 billion dollars into state and local coffers to strengthen the United States economy. In order to stimulate the economy as quickly as possible, states are being asked to invest much of this funding into regions within 30 days, and to have the funding obligated and spent within the next 18 months. In addition to getting the money out quickly, states and regions have the enormous challenge of having to figure out how to make the best and most strategic use of the funding. Most important, is how to do this so that low-income youth and adults can attain the postsecondary credentials they need to earn family sustaining wages. Presented in this paper are some basic steps states and regions might consider taking to determine how to use the stimulus. First, there are three points to keep in mind: (1) ARRA funding, and whatever system might be created with the stimulus and other available dollars, "are the means to an end"; (2) the goal is to get people jobs and jump start the economy; and (3) to have a sustained effect, short-term actions need to be part of a long-term plan.

Trade and economic viability are becoming increasingly important in all countries around the world. As a result, Human Resource Development (HRD) is becoming an integral part of a country's ability to sustain development and it is evident that many countries outside of the United States are integrating HRD as part of their national policy (NHRD). This review of literature explores the reasons behind the thrust of education as the main driver for NHRD. (Contains 1 table.)

A request from the Ford Foundation prompted a fourth and final assessment of the demonstration phase of the Rural Community College Initiative (RCCI), established by the Ford Foundation. Between 1994 to 2002, 24 community colleges answered the foundation's charge to improve access to higher education and to expand the economic development of their regions. Each college was located in an economically distressed part of the United States--Appalachia, the Delta/South region, the Southwest, and tribal reservations of the Northern Plains. Questions of interest in the Phase IV assessment, the final stage of RCCI research, focused on the effect and benefit sustained by the colleges as a result of their participation. Using a mixed method approach, the research team conducted case studies with eight colleges and used federal data sets to consider how these colleges progressed on economic and access indicators in comparison to like institutions. Colleges participating in the case studies were Mountain Empire Community College and Southeast Kentucky Community and Technical College in the Appalachia region, Southeastern Community College and Coahoma Community College in the Delta/Southern region, Southwest Texas Junior College and Laredo Community College in the Southwest region, and Sitting Bull College and Fort Peck Community College representing the tribal colleges and universities of the Northern Plains. The assessment findings show that RCCI values were sustained through four major pathways: the colleges embraced the role of change agent, adopted a mission focus on planning, found ways to enhance student success, and developed creative efforts to sustain change. This report expands on each of these four themes. Overall, the colleges tended to do as well as, and in some cases, better than their comparison colleges on indicators of enrollment and economic factors. Three findings may be of particular interest to funding agencies. The first finding indicates that encouragement of local buy-in for change initiatives appears to result in the loss of identity for the funding agencies. As the colleges successfully integrated the changes within their own institutional structure over time, it became difficult to draw causal relationships between the sustained change and the funding identity--RCCI. The second finding was that sustained change allowed the institutions to grow as organizations, prompting them to identify new needs that required additional resources. This recognition of the need for "more" should be interpreted not as dependency on the external funder, but as a sign of sustained growth. The final finding was that the greatest influence this initiative had on the colleges was to build the capacity of these colleges to try new things and to succeed. In conclusion, RCCI appears to have stimulated, supported, and sustained impressive improvements in access and economic development in distressed rural communities, but over time these improvements were perhaps at the cost of branding. Whether that represents a problem or is evidence of success is a question for the funder. Appendices include: (1) RCCI Colleges; (2) College Case Reports; (3) Methodology; and (4) RCCI Focus Group Summary. (Contains 11 figures.) [This paper was written with assistance of Aimee Heeter, Lilia Santiague, Susan Johnson, and Lynn Barnett.]

The prevailing view among leaders in the university community is that America is not investing enough in higher education. A recent survey of the American economy by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) echoed that concern. After all, college graduates are dramatically more productive than those without higher education preparation, and America is falling behind other nations in the proportion of the adult population with college degrees. National competitiveness and economic well-being are at risk, or so it is argued. The conventional wisdom downplays the concerns about rising costs, particularly soaring tuition fees. One argument is that the cost explosion is an illusion: "net tuition fees" have risen less dramatically than gross tuition fees (published rates). Americans think college costs are greater than they really are. Yet the author thinks most of these arguments are flawed, even downright wrong. An excellent case can be made that Americans are "over invested" in universities, that too many students attend school, that much of their investment is wasted. Moreover, the rise in costs--to society, to taxpayers, and especially to consumers--is excessive, and has been made more so by well meaning but inappropriate public policies. The law of unintended consequences looms large in any discussion of America's colleges and universities. In this paper, the author discusses why universities are overpriced and provides 12 reasons for rising prices.

A skilled and flexible workforce is increasingly identified by governments as key to economic development. With the emergence of a global market in both educational services and labour, agreements on mutual recognition and transparency of skills and qualifications have become important elements of international co-operation. They are often included in broader bilateral and multilateral trade agreements. This paper discusses steps taken in the European Union (EU) to improve the mobility of labour between EU countries. (Contains 6 footnotes.)

American postsecondary education is a diverse collection of public and private institutions, ranging from community and technical colleges to comprehensive and research universities. These institutions are an invaluable resource to states and to the nation -- they educate many of the talented people who work in our industries, businesses, and civic sectors, and they are the places where much of the research and development that benefits this country is conducted. While postsecondary education in the United States has already achieved key successes in the innovation economy, the public postsecondary education system overall risks falling behind its counterparts in many other nations around the world -- places where there have been massive efforts to link postsecondary education to the specific innovation needs of industries and regions. This paper focuses on how states can better align postsecondary education with their economic needs, which will position them to compete in the global economy by producing a highly-skilled workforce and by unleashing postsecondary education institutions' power to innovate. An innovative postsecondary system must: (1) Foster among its graduates the critical skills and capabilities needed to enhance state economic competitiveness; (2) Produce a well-qualified K-12 teacher corps that is highly skilled in the science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines; and (3) Create new knowledge by investing in research and development (R&D) and by establishing policies that facilitate the translation of new ideas into innovative products, processes, and services. The document also introduces a new vehicle for aligning postsecondary education to state economies -- the postsecondary education compact. Through the compact, state governments, the postsecondary education system, the Boards of Regents, and the private sector collaboratively embrace a public agenda to ensure that postsecondary education policies, programs, curricula, and resources address current, emerging, and future economic realities. Among other efforts to reform postsecondary education, governors can use the compact framework to encourage the postsecondary education system and other relevant stakeholders to agree on the mission and key outputs of a system that emphasizes innovation in exchange for state commitments to budget stability and enhanced autonomy in postsecondary education. The compact is based on an understanding of the economic needs of the state and the related outputs of the postsecondary education system. The compact involves establishing: (1) Goals; (2) State Responsibilities; and (3) Mutual Accountability. While offering accountability, the compact is flexible enough to allow for adjustments and to provide for coordination among stakeholders on how the responsibility for achieving the compact's goals and outputs will be shared by all the participating institutions. Finally, the compact presents goals and challenges from a statewide point of view, and identifies challenges and opportunities as the compact matures and, if necessary, is renegotiated. The document contains an Executive Summary and five chapters: (1) Introduction; (2) A Vision of Postsecondary Education; (3) The Postsecondary Education Compact; (4) Advancing the Compact; and (5) Conclusion: The Role of Governors. (Contains 6 footnotes and 1 table.)

In recent years, development has become a cornerstone of the U.S. national security strategy, along with defense and diplomacy. The challenge of development is broader and more multifaceted than it has ever been. It involves not only traditional development--the achievement of economic, social, and political progress--but the added challenges of strengthening fragile states, achieving progress in countries of special strategic interest, providing humanitarian relief, and addressing key global and transnational issues. This spotlight on development has illuminated the critical role of education. Not only is education one of the keys to economic growth and poverty reduction, but it is also increasingly evident that educational failure contributes to broader state instability. Expanded, high-quality education promotes stability and positive participation in the global community. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) thus includes education and training as part of its strategic efforts to promote economic prosperity and security; improve health, education, the environment, and other conditions for the global population; advance the growth of democracy and good governance; and minimize the human costs of displacement, conflict, and natural disaster. Recognition of the important role of education in development has prompted the United States and other donor nations to increase their support for education. This paper sets forth USAID's role in utilizing education as a powerful tool for development. (Contains 4 footnotes.)