Making Opportunity Affordable

• John Immerwahr, a senior research fellow at Public Agenda and professor of philosophy at Villanova University, has been systematically studying public attitudes toward higher education for many years.

• Derek Redelman, vice president of education and workforce development for the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, is spearheading education reform efforts for Indiana’s business community and is the team leader for Indiana’s participation in Lumina Foundation’s MOA grant program.

• Carmen Berkley, president of the United States Student Association, a Washington, D.C.-based group that tracks and advocates for federal legislation, is educating and organizing students on policy issues affecting them.

Part 1: Public Opinion on Higher Education
John Immerwahr discusses his recent report Squeeze Play 2009, which shows that the public is becoming increasingly concerned about college costs. Moreover, the public worries that not everybody who needs a postsecondary education can afford it. He also talks about key differences of opinion among college presidents, business leaders, policymakers, and the public.

“What we’re seeing is people not only saying it’s important to have a higher education, but that it’s essential…. At the same time, people are increasingly panicked about whether they’re going to be able to get this higher education. In other words, it’s more and more important, and yet seemingly more and more elusive.”
– John Immerwahr

Download the interview. (mp3)

Full Transcript follows article.

Part 2: Implications for the Business Community
The discussion turns to business leaders’ thoughts on higher education, productivity at colleges and universities, and economic competition from other countries. Immerwahr explains what he has heard from business people across the country. Derek Redelman notes that Main Street’s attitudes on higher education are still largely positive – but business leaders are increasingly worried when they learn what it will take for the United States to keep pace with other nations in building a highly skilled, highly educated workforce.

“It will be increasingly difficult for business folks here in the United States to continue to be successful, as they’re competing with people in those countries that are getting more talent, oftentimes for less money.”
– Derek Redelman

Download the interview. (mp3)

Full Transcript follows article.

Part 3: College Affordability and the Economic Downturn
What has the economic downturn meant for colleges and students? Immerwahr explores how changes in the economy over the past six months have affected the public’s views on the costs of going to college. Redelman notes the United States is spending a lot on higher education, but may not be getting what it needs in return. Carmen Berkley discusses the predicament students and their families are in and student perspectives on how colleges are spending money.

“[H]ow can we envision a [complex global] society without an educated populace? …[T]here are thousands, hundreds of thousands, who are not reaching their potential, who are not making it through school, who are never making it to school in the first place, because of how much it costs.
– Carmen Berkley

Download the interview. (mp3)

Full Transcript follows article.

Part 4: Missions, Money and the Faculty Perspective
The discussion concludes with key stakeholders’ perspectives on how, without increasing resources, we can enable more citizens to graduate from college. Immerwahr talks about the effect that colleges’ “mission creep” has on undergraduate students. Berkley argues policymakers aren’t making higher education a priority. She notes rising tuition and fees are putting college out of reach for the country’s low-income students. But Redelman contends that simply increasing higher education funding won’t necessarily fix the problem.

“It’s a good thing that people are starting to focus on the problems and articulate their own views… But what we don’t know yet is whether this dialogue will lead to a productive compromise or consensus, or whether it’s going to become more frustrating and further fractionalized.”
– John Immerwahr

Download the interview. (mp3)

Full Transcript follows article.

Conversation with John Immerwahr, Derek Redelman and Carmen Berkley
April 8, 2009

Part 1: Public Opinion on Higher Education

MODERATOR: Recently, Making Opportunity Affordable hosted a conversation about productivity in higher education with a prominent public opinion expert, a business leader and a student advocate. In excerpts from the conversation, we will hear from Public Agenda researcher and Villanova professor John Immerwahr. His recent report – Squeeze Play 2009 – shows the public is getting increasingly concerned about college costs and worried that not everybody who needs a postsecondary education can afford it. John also will talk about key differences in opinion among college presidents, business leaders, policymakers and the public. 

John Immerwahr: What we see in public opinion are really two kinds of tectonic plates moving. And the first is a growing sense of the importance of higher education. People have been saying that higher education is important for the last 20 years at least. When I was a high school student, people said if you wanted to make it in the United States you had to have a high school diploma, but those days are long gone.

But what we’re seeing that’s even more dramatic recently is people not only saying that it’s important to have a higher education, but that it’s essential – that you can’t even be considered for a job without some sort of college degree. And the stress on the absolute necessity of a higher education has been changing dramatically.

Back in 2000, only 31 percent of the public thought it was really impossible to succeed without a college degree. That number has nearly doubled today, so we’re up to 55 percent who feel that way. That’s a huge change on something that isn’t topical, such as an even that just happened. It’s a much broader trend. So, there’s a huge growth and emphasis on that whole question.

At the same time, people are increasingly panicked about whether they’re going to be able to get this higher education. In other words, it’s more and more important, and yet seemingly more and more elusive. And so again if you go back to, say, 1998, which were kind of the go-go years – everything was seemingly going up, the stock market was up, incomes were up, everything was up. At that point, we saw less than half of the population saying that many qualified and motivated students can’t have access to higher education. Then by 2003 that number has gone up from 45 percent to 57 percent, by 2007 to 62 percent. Our most recent study – end of 2008 – it’s up to 67 percent, the largest number we’ve ever seen for that question.

So … the title of the report is Squeeze Play because people are saying, higher education is more important and less available. And when people are caught in that kind of situation, they’re pretty nervous.

I think people think that higher education could do much more with less. The public is not interested in the fact that colleges have all of these issues. For example, many college teachers teach only six hours a semester – six hours a week, basically. Now there are reasons for that, but people don’t understand that. They don’t want to hear that. They don’t see why that has to be. They think: Maybe those professors could teach 12 hours a week and they’d be fine.

So, the public has no great reservoir of sympathy for the problems of higher education, but yet there is no great demand from people saying, “We have to get in and reform you.” The current situation, in other words, is that there is little concern about the problems that colleges worry about, but also little energy for reform.

We interviewed a number of college presidents. Now, they don’t all say this, but if you put them together, this is kind of the composite picture. And the picture would be that first of all, we’re educators; we’re very committed to access. And we feel that a college educated population is essential both to the growth of the economy and also to especially minorities and recent immigrants, making them able to move into the mainstream of American society and the middle class lifestyle and all of that. So, we as college professors are sold on that. No question.

And at the same time, the presidents tell us that they believe in maintaining a quality education here and we believe that American colleges and universities are the best in the world and we intend to keep that.

And third they say that higher education is an expensive business because it’s a labor intensive business. And it’s technology dependent operation, but the technology is not like in a lot of industries [where it] increases productivity. The technology is for instruction, so it doesn’t increase productivity. You still have to teach the same number of students and it takes just as much time and now it also requires technology.

So, …[college presidents] want to provide a quality education to as many people as possible, but it’s very expensive. …[T]hey see these three things as a kind of seesaw, or three-sided seesaw, or what we call an “iron triangle.” And they would say, well, if you want me to educate more students, I’d love to do that, but I’m going to need more money to do that. And if I don’t have more money, I’ll have to cut the quality. And likewise, if you cut my money from the state, as many states are doing, especially in these troubled years, I’m going to have to either take fewer students or reduce my quality. And you know if you expect me to take more students and you don’t give me – you get the idea.

Part 2: Implications for the Business Community

Moderator: Our discussion on productivity explored the business community’s attitudes on higher education, productivity, and competition from other countries. In the clips we are about to hear, Public Agenda researcher and Villanova professor John Immerwahr will explain what he has heard from business people across the country. Derek Redelman, of the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, will note that Main Street attitudes on higher education are still largely positive. But business leaders are increasingly worried when they learn more about what it will take for the United States to keep pace with other nations in building a highly skilled, highly educated workforce.

John Immerwahr: What you’ll hear the businesspeople saying is, “We’ve had to make painful cuts. We’ve had to streamline. We’ve had to lay off many, many workers. And we don’t see you in higher education doing that. We see you doing business pretty much the same as ever. Maybe you have a hiring freeze, but not [a reduction] like we’re doing. And all you’re asking for is more money from us, which we don’t – the state doesn’t – have to give.”

And so their focus, I think, is more on efficiency than on access.

Derek Redelman: I think the broad view from business is still largely positive. They still see colleges and universities as the core [of] our economic engines. They recognize that our higher education system is the strongest in the world. They see all of those things. And I think it is from a subset, frankly, of those who may be closer to the university. So, we’re beginning, as John described, to crack a bit on that and to have some concerns.

But if we’re talking about business in general from small to large, then I think probably most people in business have some of the same views that the public does, that the United States is still far ahead of everybody else in the world. I think when you see some of the data that Lumina Foundation, for example, has been putting out, showing where Japan and Korea and Canada and some of the European countries are these days and the amazing growth in places like Ireland, I don’t think most business folks have a clue about that. I know that we had a presentation from Lumina Foundation to our business higher education committee here about a year ago where Lumina presented those data. And these were very engaged people, most of whom who had been serving on this committee for a number of years. And I would say that nine out of 10, if not more, had no idea. No idea at all. And those were among the people who were actually engaged. Now that they know, they’re very concerned – very, very concerned.

I think it’s nothing less important than the future of our economy. I think there is a growing sense – again, I think it’s still a relatively small percentage of folks – but a growing sense that we’re not keeping up. And that places like India and China that have been…kind of subcontractor[s] of ours over the years are becoming much more than that. And it will become increasingly difficult for business folks here in the United States to continue to be successful, as they’re competing with people in those countries who are getting more talent, oftentimes for less money.

Part 3: College Affordability and the Economic Downturn

Moderator: Making Opportunity Affordable talked with an opinion researcher and business and student representatives about what the economic downturn has meant for colleges and students. First, we will hear John Immerwahr discuss how changes in the economy over the past six months have affected the public’s views on the costs of going to college. Carmen Berkley, president of the United States Student Association, will discuss the predicament students and their families are in and student perspectives on how colleges are spending their money. Derek Redelman, from the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, will note that the United States is spending a lot on higher education but may not be getting what it needs in return.

John Immerwahr: In a very short time, we have seen public opinion spike up very sharply on these kinds of basic questions in just a matter of months. And public opinion usually moves slowly. But again, on a question like, “Are higher education costs going up faster than other things?,” that’s jumped just in the last 18 months since our last survey.

Typically what happens, by the way, in state schools, which are what people follow, is that when the economy is bad, the states cut their appropriations to the schools because they don’t have any money and the schools raise tuitions and fees. So, people get smacked – they lost their job or their kid can’t get a job, so they think maybe the kid can go for more education because times are tough, and then the fees are going up.

Carmen Berkley: Students around the country are in trouble. They’re in trouble because their parents are losing their jobs. And their parents are not able to receive credit. Without credit, you cannot take out a loan. [There always have been students who have not] had a lot of information around how to take out loans, how to take out federal financial aid, how to take out direct loans. And so a lot of what we’re seeing is people are not going back to school. A lot of folks are never making it to school. And a lot of folks are deciding to go to community college.

So, …[to] people who are in the business of selling college as if it’s a business: It’s not a business. This is people’s lives. And a lot of people are not able to get a job. And just like our friend from the chamber of commerce is alluding to, we need people that have the skills to go into the workforce. And really, students are in trouble…. [H]ow can we envision a [complex global] society without an educated populace? …[T]here are thousands, hundreds of thousands, who are not reaching their potential, who are not making it through school, who are never making it to school in the first place, because of how much it costs.

[T]here’s no doubt that the states have something to do with it. But I really blame the federal government. I think that the states can only do as much as the federal government will allow them or as much as the federal government will invest. And I think…the federal government [officials are] not investing in students. They’re not lowering the interest rates to make it easier for students to go to school. They’re not prioritizing the Direct Loan program over the FFEL program, and they’re not fully funding financial aid programs like the Pell grant, like the Perkins loan, that will allow working-class and middle-class families to succeed in this economy. And I think what you’re really going to see are people from a higher income bracket whose parents are losing their jobs, they’re going to be the ones who are suffering, and then our country will really start to think about whether or not we have a crisis.

But yes, on campus, I truly believe that the administrations are not spending money the way they should. A lot of money is going into the athletics department. A lot of money is going into buildings. And not a lot of money is going into scholarships. Not a lot of money is going into making sure the students are making it from freshman year to senior year. Who cares that a lot of schools are able to bring in a lot of students? Who cares if they’re able to raise the number of students of color that they’re allowing in the school, if the majority of those people aren’t graduating?

Derek Redelman: We have this arms race going on right now in colleges, where a lot of us who have been out for a while are seeing our own alma maters insisting that their students today have to have the new rec center or the new stadium or the new whatever because if they don’t, then [the schools] just won’t be able to attract kids to come there.

And I think a lot of folks are beginning to really be more and more skeptical about that. …[A]re kids really going to school because it’s the best rec center that they can find? Or are they going there because it’s the best academics that they can find? And so I think there’s more and more question about that.

I also want to go back to one of the other comments…. I don’t know that there’s a lot of agreement out there – in the legislature or in the business community – that we have been shortchanging colleges, whether it’s from the state or the federal government. We spend more on higher education than any other country in the entire world. And my understanding is that it’s been a pretty steady increase in terms of support, both at the direct aid level and also at the individual aid level.

And so I think that we’re really going to have to spend a lot more time focusing on what we’re getting from those colleges. And my friend here noted that students are beginning to understand that there is some money being spent on things like rec centers – that maybe isn’t the best way to spend money and attract kids.

But I think you might get some argument from legislators and others on whether or not they’re funding education fairly or not.

John Immerwahr: Well, let me talk a little bit about what Carmen mentioned, because I think it’s very important. There’s an odd mindset that still permeates a lot of discussions of college. And so if you are with the leadership communities and the media and you say to them “college,” what flashes into their mind is a four-year institution where students live on campus and complete the program in more or less four years. And that’s basically what many of them did and that’s what they are looking for [for] their children, and of course it’s lovely thing. There’s nothing wrong with it.

But it’s not the reality for 90 percent of students – maybe not 90 percent, but for the vast majority of students – many of whom live at home, go to a community college, put together their education from taking a couple of courses here, a couple of courses there, a couple of courses here – piecing it together. And a lot of the competition is for those high-end students at institutions which are competitive. Most institutions are basically not competitive. They’re basically open enrollment for any qualified high school graduate.

So, a lot of the energy around higher education is still driven by the discussion [of] the kids who are in those selective schools.

The irony is that the students who need the most support and help are actually going to the schools that have the least money. And so all of the money is going to the big Research I universities and the major flagships, whereas…who really could use the academic support are the community colleges.

Part 4: Missions, Money and the Faculty Perspective

MODERATOR: We concluded the discussion with stakeholders’ perspectives on how we can get more citizens to graduate from college within existing resources. In the following excerpts, John Immerwahr will talk about the effect of “mission creep” by colleges on undergraduate students. Carmen Berkley, the president of the United States Student Association, will argue that rising tuition and fees are making college less possible for the country’s low-income students. But Indiana businessman Derek Redelman will contend that simply increasing higher education funding won’t necessarily fix the problem.

John Immerwahr: This is something you definitely hear about from – certainly from college presidents. They say that two-year schools are talking about becoming four-year schools. And four-year schools want to have a master’s and Ph.D. programs, and so on. But at the same time, when you talk to the schools, they say that they’re trying to serve the needs of the community, but increasingly the needs of the community are for a four-year degree, as Carmen said, or for a graduate degree. So, it makes sense, in a way, that they’re trying to ratchet up what they offer to match the needs of the public.

This is a pretty controversial topic. Everybody wants everybody else to not have their mission creeping, so to speak, but then the people are doing it and saying that this is pretty important to the community. So, you’ll hear a lot of defensiveness around this very topic.

Carmen Berkley: Do you mind if I interject [a comment on] something that was said previously?

Moderator: Sure.

Carmen Berkley: And maybe it goes by state, but it definitely is not affordable for people who are in the lower-income bracket. They’re definitely not almost going to school for free. Personally, I was in that lower- to middle-income bracket. My one parent made between $40,000 and $55,000 and our estimated family contribution was $18,000, which meant that we had to take out a loan. And right now the federal Pell grant is under $5,000 and it certainly costs more than $5,000 per year to go to school. Even with a Perkins loan, a Pell grant, and a Stafford loan, that still doesn’t equal [what it takes] to go to a state school.

So, I think there’s a common misconception that low-income students have this free ride going to school, or more low-income students would be going to school. After fees, there are living expenses, and then, how are you going to eat? The aid does pay for tuition, but it definitely doesn’t pay for everything else about going to school.

The students are rallying across the country because of their student fees. And a lot of people have been using the recession as an excuse to raise student fees. But I say to the students who are on campus, they should definitely fight those unfair fees. Some of the fees make sense. Some of those fees are paying for faculty. Some of those fees are going into their student government. But you’re right, a lot of those fees are going into things that students shouldn’t be paying for. The university needs to pick up the tab on basketball coaches who have been fired.

You know, President Obama said that education was going to be one of the top priorities and I definitely think it is. Being someone who’s really deeply entrenched in the budget and appropriations process that we’re going through right now, it’s very clear to me that there are some congressmen who definitely have been prioritizing education. But I think that overall, more money has to go into these programs, not only more money but more education. Because a lot of people don’t recognize what their options are. They don’t know what they can do in order to make it through school.

I think that as a country we have to look at this as a class issue. Some people can go to school and some people can’t. Some people can go to the college of their choice, which affects what kind of job they can get, and some people can’t. And until we take a look at this institution and figure out that it is unfair to a lot of people – it’s really unfair to low- income and middle-income people who are trying to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps – we will continue to be in the situation that we’re in…. [T]he people of the United States are brilliant. And they’re smart enough to go to school and get the job of their choice. But if we continue to prioritize everything else but education, then students and our government and our economy and our jobs are going to continue to suffer like they are right now.

Derek Redelman: Well, again, I think we’ve got lawmakers and business leaders, taxpayers who do value education very, very highly. We are putting a substantial amount of money into higher education. And we’ve got to find some ways to be getting more out of that investment. Just because something is unaffordable doesn’t mean that the problem is that we’re not giving it enough money. Sometimes things are unaffordable because the cost is too high, and that’s got to be part of the discussion that we’re having. And I fear that not enough people are really looking into that quite yet. I think this economy will help people understand that as higher education institutions continue to scream for more funding and the students continue to scream for more support, for at least this year maybe a couple more there isn’t that money available.

People are going to start asking, “What else can be done?” And I think we may have an opportunity here in these couple of years to look at this more systemically, rather than just kind of the old traditional way of saying that if we have a problem, let’s just put more money into it.

John Immerwahr: Well, I think it’s clear that the conversation is heating up a little bit, both at the leadership level and with the public. So, you’re starting to see people crystallizing in different areas. And we didn’t talk about faculty; that’s a whole other picture. They’ve got another take on the situation.

But what we don’t know yet is whether this dialogue will lead to a productive compromise or consensus, or whether it’s going to become just more frustrating and further fractionalized.

So, in other words, it’s a good thing that people are starting to focus on the problems and articulate their own views – that’s how change happens. It doesn’t happen without some incentive. But it’s really too soon to say what the changes will look like. And I think a bad change would be to have government intervention in higher education that tells them how to run their business. But I think if a conversation gets incredibly frustrating, that might be what happens.

You know, one of the things that’s really a consensus between the presidents and the legislatures and, as we’ve heard from Derek, the business leaders, is the notion of we need more people to get a higher education. Whereas, when you talk to faculty, many of them will say the problem is that we have too many people seeking a higher education, too many people who aren’t ready, who aren’t qualified, and who aren’t motivated. The idea that everybody has to have a higher education is resulting in dumbing down the curriculum and lowering the standards. And if we really want to compete, the answer is not to have more educated students, but more educated students, if you know what I mean – students…[of] higher quality, even if that means we have fewer of them.

So, that’s a very dramatic difference [from] what anybody else is saying. And in this enterprise, the faculty must be on board for changes that are going to be made, and they’re not there yet. They have not been part of the conversation.