Advertisement

News, Views and Careers for All of Higher Education

Looking for Big Ideas

The U.S. Education Department is looking for the next big ideas in student aid — with a strong emphasis on promoting simplicity of programs and reaching students in their pre-college years.

Senior department officials invited about 20 experts on student aid — campus aid administrators and researchers on financial aid — for a private day of meetings Wednesday. Participants said that the department appears to be thinking ambitiously about changing student aid programs, suggesting that the experts not focus on tinkers, but on how aid programs would be restructured if starting from scratch.

Those in attendance who agreed to talk about the meeting did so only anonymously, saying that they had been told in strong language by the department that it didn’t want the meeting to become public knowledge. Department officials confirmed that the meeting took place, but declined to release names of attendees, saying that it wanted to protect the aid experts from appearing to have endorsed any idea that eventually may emerge from the session. Attendees were generally from outside the Beltway — higher ed association types were excluded — although Congressional officials were invited to listen to a 45-minute wrap-up at the end of the day.

The secretive session led to some speculation about what the department would be able to do with the results. The reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is still pending, but in the uncertain event Congress takes up the legislation again soon, it will probably be to put a Democratic imprint on the bill, not to add more ideas from the Education Department.

One aid administrator who attended said he had the impression that the department had two goals in mind: looking for “low hanging fruit” on which the department might find a way to act in the short term, while setting out an agenda that might carry weight even in a future administration. Some were also surprised by the department’s search for new big ideas, right after the conclusion of the work of the Secretary of Education’s Commission on the Future of Higher Education, which has offered a set of goals — some of them controversial — for improving American colleges.

Many of the objectives discussed at the session are, at least in theory, things that just about all educators would embrace: encouraging academic rigor at the pre-college level, doing a better job of letting children from low-income families know that aid will be available for them to go to college, and simplifying the aid system so that it is easier for students and their families to understand, and for colleges to administer. Simplicity received a lot of attention, attendees said, reflecting a call from the Spellings Commission for “replacing the current maze of financial aid programs.” Sara Martinez Tucker, the under secretary of education, opened the discussion by talking about how important it is to provide the opportunity for all Americans to go to college.

But while access, simplicity and academic rigor are motherhood and apple pie issues, some of the proposals to achieve those goals are sure to be controversial. Nobody favors complexity or confusion as principles in student aid programs. But many college officials fear that with the Bush administration, simplicity doesn’t lead to a situation where less is more, but where less is less. One reason eyebrows are being raised among aid experts about all the focus on complexity is this year’s budget battle over the future of Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, which the Bush administration wants to kill off, while increasing the maximum Pell Grant. This would theoretically result in a simpler system, as both programs help low-income students, but many colleges maintain that this would be a net loss for students in their aid — an analysis that the Bush administration disputes.

Participants in Wednesday’s meeting said that there wasn’t any attempt to build support for any particular aid reorganization, but that the plans discussed did at least in some cases amount to major changes from the status quo.

Cheryl Oldham, chief of staff to the under secretary of education, said in an interview Thursday that the meeting was “essentially a conversation with some financial aid experts” and that this was part of “an ongoing process” of looking for ways to carry out the ideas of the commission.

Oldham said that there was no goal of reaching a consensus or emerging with specific propoals. “We don’t have an end in mind,” she said. She said that the department wanted to invite people “working on this stuff in the field” to the discussion.

Terry W. Hartle, senior vice president for government and public affairs at the American Council on Education, was not at the session and said he wouldn’t have expected an invitation. He said he was encouraged by the meeting because the department seemed to be seeking advice from “people who know this stuff cold” and who would have to deal with any changes enacted.

Hartle said that any ideas about simplification of aid programs would almost certainly be the kind of changes that “require a trip through Capitol Hill.” So there will be plenty of time to raise any issues, he said.

The essential challenge of talking about simplification is that while everyone agrees with the concept, the details aren’t easy to pull off, he said. There are two ways to simplify aid programs, he said: spending a lot more money or a “significant reallocation of resources” away from some programs to others. In the current political environment, spending a lot more money isn’t likely, he said, and any reallocation “is going to come from some students or colleges.”

Scott Jaschik

Got something to say?


Want it on paper? Print this page.
Know someone who’d be interested? Forward this story.
Want to stay informed? Sign up for free daily news e-mail.

Advertisement

Comments

Not so secret at all...?

Could this secret, private meeting be no more than a gathering of the “Rethinking Student Aid Study Group” that Spellings commissioned last year and that the College Board is overseeing?

Given the nature and scope outlined in the article I’d be rather surprised if these folks weren’t largely in attendance and, actually, not having them would be downright dumb...how could Spellings and Education convene a panel of national experts studying the feasibility of student financial aid and then secretly invite a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT set of less-renowned folks for the exact same purpose?

If you’re curious just google — Rethinking Student Aid Study Group — and you’ll find a loads of pages with information on the cast. If anything, it’ll tell you where some peoples’ positions already are on such issues.

DC Observer, at 7:50 am EST on February 23, 2007

Rethinking Student Aid

DC Observer’s comment on the College Board’s Rethinking Student Aid project is totally inaccurate.

The College Board’s Rethinking Student Aid project has no connection at all to the Department of Education or the Spellings Commission. This project began long before the report came out and is totally independent. Michael McPherson, President of the Spencer Foundation, and I are chairing a group of policy analysts and other higher education professionals who are involved in a long-term project to propose improvements to the student aid system. We are funded by the Lumina, Mellon and Spencer Foundations. We are commissioning research papers, through which 8 additional scholars are involved in our project.

None of the participants in Rethinking Student Aid represent any interest groups of any sort. The goal is to focus on equitable and efficient public policies that reduce the current inequalities in educational opportunities.

This is a long term project and we do not yet have any idea what the recommendations will be.

Sandy BaumCo-chair, Rethinking Student Aid Study Group, The College Board

Sandy Baum, Senior Policy Analyst at The College Board, at 9:51 am EST on February 23, 2007

Just my opinion

I wish they would restructure their definition of “Independent” and “Dependent” for students living on their own, paying their own bills, and not being supported by their parents in any way. Let’s, for once, reward those who embrace responsibility and maturity!

Sandra Kemp, Global Financial Aid Services, at 9:55 am EST on February 23, 2007

Apology Due

My sincere apologies to Sandy Baum and the rest of the “Rethinking” group for a gross error on my part...I misread a news piece jointly discussing the College Board’s work and referencing the Commission on the Future of Higher Education’s findings in September about the need for re-evaluating the student aid system.

Perhaps the good people at Inside Higher Ed could post this comment (to correct the error) and delete the other one for accuracy’s sake?

DC Observer, at 11:30 am EST on February 23, 2007

Universal income-contingent loans

I would start with universal income contingent loans for tuition up to, say, $35,000 pa, administered by colleges, the Department of Education and collected by Inland Revenue.

The loans have to be universal so that all prospective students know that they are eligible for a loan. They have to be capped but at a pretty high level to prevent undisciplined price escalation. Repayments have to be contingent on students’ taxable income so debt-adverse students aren’t discouraged. And they have to be collected by Inland Revenue to simplify administration (no need for a separate financial aid form, for example) and to minimise defaults.

These schemes have been operating most successfully in Australia since 1988 and in England since 2005.

The schemes and the reasons for their particular design are described in Chapman, Bruce (2006) ‘Government managing risk: income contingent loans for social and economic progress’, Routledge: Oxford; and Barr, Nicholas & Crawford, Iain (2005) ‘Financing higher education: answers from the UK’, Abingdon and New York: Routledge.

Gavin, Principal Policy Adviser at Griffith University, Australia, at 6:35 pm EST on February 23, 2007

My recommendation

If I were wanting to restructure financial aid from the ground up, I would do away with all types of federal student loans.

Although student loans has enabled many to afford college, the simple fact is college wouldn’t be so expensive if not for student loans. The introduction of guaranteed student loans has conincided with the uncontrolled growth of college costs. If administrators could not rely on student loan programs to guarantee their class sizes, then they would be more inclined to be phyisally responsible with the funds they do have available.

Dave, Financial Aid Guy, at 9:51 pm EST on February 23, 2007

A Call for Ideas!!

It’s great to see some in the federal government are trying to spark some fresh ideas for rethinking student aid. I’m a sophomore at Yale helping put together a Roosevelt Institution (www.rooseveltinstitution.org) publication of 25 ideas to increase socioeconomic diversity in higher education. If you have some ideas you’d like to share with federal and state legislators and education policymakers or if you’d like to learn more about Roosevelt’s efforts, please e-mail me at zachary.marks@yale.edu or contact caitlin.howarth@rooseveltinstitution.org, editor-in-chief of Roosevelt publications.

zmarks, National Education Policy Director at The Roosevelt Institution, at 6:51 am EST on February 24, 2007

The fery first thing anyone trying to reformat financial aid should do is go back and look at the original GI Bill; the plan that started it all and still the most successful of all. And when doing so, they should note that not only was it oriented to the individual, it was not semester driven but enrollment driven. We must break the semester lock in financial aid and stress steady enrollment instead including summers, trimesters,cohort sequence, etc rather than the silly so many hours per two semesters per year. That would do more to help, and to change the pattern of utilizing higher ed capacity than anything.

OldDoc, VPAA, at 4:25 am EST on February 26, 2007

Advertisement

 Jobs Related to Looking for Big Ideas

or search for jobs directly.

Theatre Arts — Associate Faculty Pool
West Valley/Mission Community College District

West Valley College is now accepting applications for qualified persons interested in part-time teaching assignments in ... see job

Sociology, Faculty Member Tenure-Track, Fall ‘09
Monroe Community College

MCC is located minutes south of Lake Ontario in Rochester NY. The College enrolls approximately 36,000 students each year. ... see job

Senior Project Manager — Department of Internal Med, Cardiology
Yale University

General Purpose
As the Senior Project Manager, have the responsibility for managing CORE government and ... see job

Associate Specialist — Computer Systems
University of California, Irvine

CECS Center for Embedded Computer Systems Position: Associate Specialist The Center for Embedded Computer Systems (CECS) at ... see job

Regular Fellow
University of Colorado at Denver and Health Sciences Center-Downtown Denver

Posting Description: Individual needed full-time for up to two years’ funding, starting Spring 2007. The ... see job

Assistant Professor/Associate Professor
Western Carolina University

ASSISTANT OR ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP CENTER FOR ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION COLLEGE OF BUSINESS WESTERN ... see job

Sr Assoc Dir Career Mgt Center
University of Georgia

Job Summary Reporting to the Director of the MBA Career Management Center (CMC), the Associate Director will ... see job

Associate or Full Professor — Department of Psychiatry; Children’s Hospital — Clinical
University of Pennsylvania

The nation’s first university, Penn is a world-renowned leader in education, research, and innovation. Situated on a ... see job

Assistant, Associate, or Full Professor of Spanish
Georgia Gwinnett College

Georgia Gwinnett College, the 35th member of the University System of Georgia, is a premier 21st century four-year liberal ... see job

Web Publisher
Burlington County College

The Web Publisher is responsible for management of BCC’s web properties including design, development and maintenance. 1. ... see job