September 2006

Lead article: Federal commission recommends changes that would impact faculty

On September 26, secretary of education Margaret Spellings announced a five-point “action plan” for U.S. higher education.

Spellings’ announcement was based on a recent report from the Commission on the Future of Higher Education. This group was charged with developing a comprehensive strategy for higher education. The 19-member panel made several recommendations in four areas: access, affordability, quality and accountability (www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports.html).

In her speech, Spellings focused on five specific actions:

• Expanding principles of the No Child Left Behind Act to high schools.
• Streamlining the process of applying for federal financial aid.
• Creating a unit record database to track college students’ academic progress.
• Providing matching funds to colleges, universities and states that collect and publicly report student learning outcomes.
• Convening members of the accrediting community in November “to move toward measures that place more emphasis on learning.”

Spellings described her speech as only “the beginning of a process of long overdue reform.”

David Ward, president of the American Council on Education (ACE) and a member of the Spellings commission, did not sign the panel’s final report. He did, however, urge ACE member institutions to act on the commission’s recommendations, saying it would be a “big mistake” to try to avoid them.

Ward stated, “There may be people who believe that if they lay low long enough, this will go away. But I think they’ve caught the tail of something they’re going to hang onto.”

Even if only a few of the commission’s recommendations are implemented, they would affect both students and faculty members at all levels of higher education. The panel, as well as Spellings, clearly supports increasing faculty accountability for student learning. They also clearly expect improved efficiency and productivity in higher education.

Spellings’ fourth “action” point would most certainly impact teaching at the individual and department level. In view of what faculty members and departments may be facing in the next few years, this issue of Teaching Matters focuses on meeting unit-level goals for teaching.       

—JE

Resource: Secretary’s proposals reassure some education leaders, disappoint others. chronicle.com/daily/2006/09/2006092702n.htm