Time for Institutions to Evolve
Time for Institutions to Evolve
by Harold Jarche | Thu, 11/20/2008 - 10:40
It's getting more difficult to be just a run-of-the-mill university in North America today, as noted in Higher Ed: Next Bloated Industry to Go?:
The challenge, of course, is that the needs and composition of students, industry, and state are constantly changing. Federal, State, and Local funding will all be decreasing in the years ahead. So doing the same thing (like GM or Ford) won’t get the weaker colleges and universities through what is ahead.
There are many low-cost options that any university or college, public or private, can adopt now and make itself more appealing. First of all, free blog hosting and free e-mail addresses for life should be a standard offer. They're both excellent ways to stay in touch with graduates and foster a sense of community, especially when it comes to future fund raising. The costs of data transmission and hosting are constantly going down, so these will not be a drain on finances.
Other options include joint offerings (at no additional cost to the student) for courses and programs at other institutions. I see that some MBA programs are offering this, such as the McGill-HEC bilingual MBA. Programs such as these do not put a lot more burden on the university and in return broaden the market.
We saw great expansion in universities and colleges after the Second World War and more so once the boomers reached college age. Prior to that time, university was for the elites. This fragmented industry is now consolidating, under economic and demographic pressures, and students will be demanding more for their money. Using social media and connecting via the Web are two ways to remain nimble in this evolve-or-die situation.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
| Created by: Mike Madin 1998 | Last updated: 11/21/2009
Comments
Companies take on students,
Companies take on students, chosen from 62 Canadian universities, for four months, paying $7,500 for their services. That figure is matched by MITACS (from provincial and federal government funds), with the $15,000 going to the supervising professor, who pays the student a minimum of $10,000. The rest of the money goes back into the research program to pay for equipment and software, with some money going to a travel fund.
Goodbye elitism!
In the small, rather economically depressed town I live in in the east midlands of England, there is a college of further education.
Further education and higher education have tended to be two different things in the UK. The former is offered by colleges and leads to diplomas and NVQs, whereas the latter is offered by universities and leads to a degree.
Increasingly, FE institutions are offering HE courses (I did my own post grad certificate of education at a FE college), to mixed reactions. There are those who make snide remarks about degrees from Walmart.
But back to my local college. Currently there is a brain drain in the town, as youngsters with aspirations leave to study elsewhere... and don't come back. So the local college is hoping to provide a local alternative for youngsters (and older learners)... and whyever not?
BUT
At a recent networking event, I met the principal of the college and I think I rather startled him by pointing out that he first needed to attract quality staff, and, to do that, he needed to be able to offer them excellent career prospects. I asked what he was doing about CPD. This is where the rope hits the rudder. Many colleges (and universities) seem to think that by offering their staff carte blanche to attend any programme of study on offer to students of the college, they are providing their staff with excellent CPD support.
I beg to differ.
Where is the provision of emerging techologies (and the requisite tech support staff) to broaden their teaching and learning experiences? Where are the discussion forums, the communities of practice?
To cite a rather hackneyed Anthony Robbins quote: If you do what you've always done, you'll get what you've always got.
Post new comment