In parts of the North Carolina system of higher education, having enough students enrolled to cover the debt service might be more important than, oh, educating those students.
There is an on-going tug of war in the University of North Carolina system (and, I’m sure, many other state systems) between the desire of some administrators to have such low admission standards that they’ll be able to admit almost any applicant, and the desire of the board of governors to keep standards high enough that students who don’t seem to have the academic ability to do real college work will either go to a community college or pursue some other option.
In particular, state institutions that were separate but not equal during Jim Crow remain less than equal today.  And thus, does access beget assessment and remediation and fretting about retention.
Monitoring of the special admits will be intensive. Resources will flow to academic mentorship, counseling, and student assessments. Board member Joan Perry, who nevertheless voted in favor of the pilot, told the educational planning committee that she is worried about the costs associated with such mentorship, and that “advising is pricey.”
As George Leef notes, "Enrolling such students in 4-year universities puts those schools in the remedial education business, even if it isn’t acknowledged to be that."

I think everybody gets it.  Why else does "college is the new high school" have such sticking power as a gripe?

No comments: