The following is a speech my father gave fifteen years ago at a forum on quality in higher education at the University of Virginia.
AECB
This
is a pleasure. As a Virginia alumnus of some 29 years and as a parent of a
first year student, it was very rewarding to be asked to speak on today’s issue
of quality in higher education – a parent’s perspective.
I
must confess that preparing these remarks was more difficult than I thought it
would be. Of course, my daughter had been quick to volunteer me as a
contributor, and Dr. Mikelson graciously agreed.
And
as I struggled over just what to say, I found myself recalling the words of
Mother Teresa. Probably with a very big sigh, she was heard to say that she was
sure that God wouldn’t give her anything she couldn’t handle; she just wished
he didn’t trust her so much.
Well,
I am sure my daughter and Dr. Mikelson wouldn’t ask me to do anything I couldn’t
handle, but last night I was wishing they hadn’t trusted me so much.
They
had asked me to give the parent’s perspective on what represents or determines
quality in higher education. As a parent, of course, I should have clear
opinions.
But
I have also been a professor for 24 years and an academic dean/vice-president for nearly a
dozen. I found it very difficult to separate what I thought as a parent and
what I hoped other parents thought from what I knew as a professional in higher
education.
As
any self-respecting academic would, my first thought was to go to the research,
to the journals – surely I thought there was a rich literature on parental
opinions about quality. No, there isn’t – it’s pretty slim pickins'. So I
thought I’d surf the web – browse the internet – where scholarly rules aren’t
quite as rigid and advice is free. Still very little.
As
a last resort I thought I’d collect my own data – I’d survey everyone who came
in my office. I had plenty of colleagues who were parents and who had sent children
off to college. I received lots of interesting ideas, but, of course, my
colleagues were all higher education professionals with ideas that were perhaps
a little too insider-ish.
Then
– serendipity struck, as it usually does in research. Last week my college held
an open house for prospective students, and I had the opportunity to query
nearly 400 parents and students – or at least as many as I could that day.
So, I finally had something to report – and lots of it. I
called my daughter to confirm how much time I had. She told me I started at
1:30 and I could speak as long as I wanted, but everyone else would be leaving
20 minutes after I began. So, I guess I have 20 minutes, but I don’t think I’ll
need all of it.
The parents with whom I spoke were very insightful.
Basically they told me that quality was determined by a college’s or
university’s ability to deliver expected benefits. Those weren’t their words,
but that’s my distillation of them.
Many parents did add a kicker - quality was a college’s or
university’s ability to deliver expected benefits - at an acceptable price. So
clearly quality was being somehow related to value – at least when they were
attempting to choose among different schools. They wanted quality but knew
there were limits to how much quality they could afford.
These expected benefits are many, but can be grouped into
three categories.
First and foremost, educational or academic benefits – just
as it sounds. Development of intellectual capacity, critical thinking and
communication skills, and a knowledge base with depth and breadth. Development
of values, attitudes, and self-image. Sensitivity to diversity and an
understanding of the strength arising from diversity. Refinement and
development of personal interests.
Secondly, there are the personal or non-academic benefits
which revolve around the extracurricular life of an institution, athletics,
social life, the politics and activities or perhaps making peer contacts that
may later pay dividends.
Lastly, there are what one colleague has called the fringe
benefits. These are post-college outcomes that are not really due to the
student’s development itself. They’re due to a cachet the college offers, the
power of the credential. Just having a degree from a university as distinguished
as UVa or Stanford or Harvard or Michigan will by itself open a few doors that
might not otherwise be opened. Very hard to measure, but it is clearly an
expectation at some schools.
Now the parents with whom I spoke didn’t mention all of
these, but they mentioned many of them. And it was clear that they that were interested in these
benefits. They were interested – in a word - in outcomes That was how they
measured quality.
They were disappointed that outcome was such a hard thing to
learn about. Mostly they heard about promises of outcomes. Little data.
Sure, they were impressed by reputation – it was usually the
first thing mentioned as a measure of quality. but they were sophisticated
enough to understand that reputation – at least as it’s currently bandied about
by the ratings press – US News & World Report, Princeton Review,
Peterson’s, etc. – is determined mostly by input measures. They wanted
something else. They wanted proof.
They are sophisticated shoppers. They knew what all the
so-called “important” measures were. And they knew there was – perhaps – some
correlation between the inputs and the outcomes.
Input
measures: endowment per student, campus beauty, faculty-student ratios, % PhDs
on the faculty, and the major one – selectivity. How many students are denied
admission. It seems the more selective a school is, the higher the perceived
quality. Some were sharp enough to focus on retention – how many students stay
at the school.
At a college like mine the national averages suggest just
over 1/5 leave after one year
A few were even savvy enough or perhaps cynical enough to
know that schools played the reputation or ratings game. Very close to my home
there are two nationally ranked liberal arts colleges – both in the top 15 in
the country. One of those schools keeps a staff member – a full-time staff
member – whose primary responsibility is tracking those indicators that go into
the rankings – so that they keep themselves rated highly – presumably by
bending the reported data or investing in those things the raters say are
important.
These parents understood that many of those measures are
significant – that they are generally important indicators, but they felt that
the quality a school should be measured more by the kind of student it
graduates, by the kind of student it turns out rather than by the kind of
student it keeps out.
Granted, my sample may be biased– these are parents of
prospective students visiting a fairly young liberal arts college (53 years
old) of about 1700 students with an average regional reputation and with only a
moderately difficult admissions standard. But I think their perceptions will
resonate with most parents. They are certainly more typical of the average
American college parent than the parent of a student at UVa.
They’re concerned about learning. And the typical student at
UVa would learn regardless of the resources the ratings think important made
available to them.
They want to measure quality by looking at how much value
has been added by the college or university – what the education professionals
call talent development. They thought that colleges and universities should be
student-centered. They – above all - wanted the focus to be on undergraduate
teaching and learning. Some were surprised and some weren’t when I told them
that the American University usually thought of as #1 is frequently criticized
for its poor teaching and is finally trying to do something about it.
Since outcome measures are still difficult to come by – in
spite of nationwide initiatives on outcome assessment, I asked these parents
what input measures they considered the most important – the ones they thought
would foster the student development they wanted to see.
The emphasis was always on availability.
They wanted to know first about professors' availability - were the classes taught by full-time
faculty? – not adjuncts or teaching assistants – were the professors available
for outside of class interaction? – were the class sizes small? - what was the
teaching style? They preferred interactive discussion – or actually anything
which fosters active learning.
And they wanted good availability of supporting resources –
extended library hours, computer access, tutoring (peer or otherwise).
In both cases of availability, the focus is on teaching and
learning. They were less concerned with the number of volumes in the
library or how many faculty had doctorates – as long as they were good
teachers.
As I reflected back on what I had heard, it occurred to me
that what they wanted was very similar to something I’d read on academic
excellence when I first became a dean. I’ve
added a few points of my own to those.
Parents want a university where the core mission is talent
development, where the core mission is student learning.
- Where the entire academic community is united in working
toward that goal.
- Where teaching and advising are given high priority.
Where the university has a system that rewards effective
teaching first and foremost – conspicuous success in teaching. Conspicuous
success - learning, not teaching, was important. There is no teaching without
learning. Parents want
learning.
- Where the best students are encouraged to become teachers.
- Where there are no faculty “stars” who have been lured to
campus with low or even no teaching loads.
- Where faculty research
- and please don’t think I’m diminishing the value of research - is used
as a tool to enhance the teacher/learner process – students are involved in
that research.
- Where students are exposed to an environment in which the
values of education and service to others take precedence over the values of
acquiring resources for the school and improving the status of the school.
A university that does all those things and does them well
is a university that is student-centered, it is a university that adds
significant value to whatever abilities or talents a student brings into the
university, and it is a university that parents will consider to be of high
quality.
It doesn’t have to have the largest endowment, the latest
toys, the biggest stars – it has to stress and foster student learning. Any
parent will tell you that those that do it best have the highest quality.
TGB
April, 1999