Spellings Report

The 2006 publication of the controversial report of the Spellings Commission on the Future of Higher Education has sparked a national dialogue about the state of postsecondary education in the United States. The report places higher education in crisis and calls for a number of radical reforms in the areas of accessibility, accountability, affordability and quality. While most constituents agree that some change would improve the establishment, not all concur that a crisis exists or that radical reform is necessary for its survival. In the year since its publication, a number of important changes have been introduced while others are being considered for adoption. The impact of the report on the higher education community will be discussed.

Keywords Accountability; Accreditation; Financial Aid; Higher Education; Institutional Effectiveness; Negotiated Rulemaking; Spellings Commission; Spellings Report; United States Department of Education (USDOE)

Overview

In 2005, U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings established a 19-member commission to "consider how best to improve our system of higher education to ensure that our graduates are well prepared to meet our future workforce needs and are able to participate fully in the changing economy" (US Department of Education, 2006, p. 33). One year later, the commission submitted its report and published A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education: A Report of the Commission Appointed by Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings (2006). The Spellings commission examined four key areas of higher education:

• Access,

• Affordability,

• Quality and

• Accountability

They concluded with six strong recommendations for reform directed at colleges and universities, accrediting agencies, governing boards, policymakers, elementary and secondary schools, the business community, parents and students (USDOE, 2006).

For the purposes of the report, the commission defined higher education as inclusive of "all public and private education that is available after high school, from trade schools, online professional training institutions and technical colleges to community colleges, traditional four-year colleges and universities, and graduate and professional programs" (USDOE, 2006, p. xi). Among its goals were the continuation of a world-class educational system that recognizes and adapts to changes in demographics, technology, and globalization, accessibility of higher education to all Americans throughout their lives, efficiency and cost-effectiveness within and among institutions and graduates with workplace skills adequate to a rapidly changing economy (USDOE, 2006).

Findings

The report strongly criticizes the current state of U.S. higher education and has stirred a great deal of debate among educators, administrators and policymakers. A recent article quotes the report as saying,

Castigating American higher education as complacent, the report claims the U.S. educational system is risk-averse, self-satisfied, and unduly expensive. Like railroads and steel manufacturers, the report warns, the education industry must adapt or risk being left behind by educational systems in other countries ("Spellings report spells," 2006, p. 10).

The Commission asserts that higher education is not simply a means for social mobility and holds that "everyone needs a postsecondary education" (USDOE, 2006, p. x). Moreover, the Spellings Commission blames higher education for the lack of continuity between secondary and postsecondary education, which often results in inadequate preparation for college and poor retention of those who do attempt college level work (USDOE, 2006).

Further, the commission found that "many students who earn degrees have not actually mastered the reading, writing and thinking skills we expect of college graduates [as] over the past decade, literacy among college graduates has actually declined" (USDOE, 2006, p. x). The consequences of these and other compounding problems, such as a lack of accountability in higher education and a confusing and inadequate system for disbursing financial aid, impact all Americans. However, they "are most severe for students from low-income families and for racial and ethnic minorities" (USDOE, 2006, p. x).

Finally, the report states that the changing demographics of current college students have not yet been recognized. Americans tend to believe undergraduates are "18-to-22 years old with a recently acquired high school diploma attending classes at a four-year institution" (USDOE, 2006, p. xi). In reality, "of the nation's nearly 14 million undergraduates, more than four in ten attend two-year community colleges. Nearly one-third are older than 24 years old. Forty percent are enrolled part-time" (USDOE, 2006, p. xi).

Some of these conditions remain true today. For instance, A 2011 report from the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, Affordability and Transfer: Critical to Increasing Baccalureate Degrees notes that in many states the majority of students in higher education are enrolled in 2-year institutions, but that difficulties in transferring credits stand in the way of these students earning a bachelor's degree. The same report notes that African American, Hispanic, and American Indian/Alaska Native students are disproportionately likely to enroll in 2-year institutions in many states, so that inadequate recognition of their needs makes it more difficult for these students to complete their education.

While a number of other studies have been published in the past decade, the Spellings Commission findings differ in significant ways (Basken, 2007). The Commission does not suggest that additional funding is necessary; nor does it suggest that shifts in academic priorities are required. "The Spellings panel proposed a direct challenge to some deeply cherished and longstanding ways in which colleges operate, calling on higher education to shed some of its mystery and fundamentally prove the value it delivers" (Basken, 2007, p. 2). To accomplish that change, the commission called upon institutions to measure and publish student learning outcomes including developing standardized tests, administering them and compiling data, including total student costs and college completion rates. This kept the Commission from granting its unanimous approval of the report. According to Basken (2007), "one member, David Ward, president of the American Council on Education, withheld his vote, saying he could not be sure how Congress might translate his colleagues' language into legislation" (p. 3).

The commission shed light on issues surrounding accessibility, affordability and accountability. Ward believes that "so far the political responses have left the ball in our court. If the efforts currently underway continue and institutions adopt them, I believe we will avoid costly, complex and misguided federal policy solutions" (Ward, 2007, p. 5).

Further Insights

Accessibility

Among its findings, the Spellings Commission reports that access to higher education remains limited for many Americans, especially those in low-income classes, racial and ethnic minority groups and underserved and nontraditional groups. The commission stresses that this is a critical issue as these populations will comprise a large portion of the workforce in coming years (USDOE, 2006). The report states "access to higher education in the United States is unduly limited by the complex interplay of inadequate preparation, lack of information about college opportunities, and persistent financial barriers" (USDOE, 2006, p. 8).

The higher education community recognizes obstacles related to access and diversity and has made these issues a priority; the Commission's report has focused increased attention on an already critical concern. Efforts are underway to actively address such issues. According to Andrew Ward (2006), president of the American Council for Education (ACE), "ACE joined with Lumina Foundation for Education and the Advertising Council to develop the KnowHOw2Go public access campaign, which is using national advertising to expose millions of first-generation and low-income middle school students to important information regarding college preparation and financial aid." Furthermore, ACE, State higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), and the National Association of System Heads (NASH) are working with Achieve on its American Diploma Project Network, a project which targets making the high school diploma a true indicator of preparedness for college (Ward, 2007, p. 5).

Cost & Affordability

The Commission found that issues surrounding cost and affordability posed persistent and significant barriers for Americans seeking postsecondary education. Describing the system as "dysfunctional", the commission describes rapidly declining state subsidies and rising tuition costs at a time when the cost per student is increasing faster than inflation or family income (USDOE, 2006, p. 10). The Commission asserts, "colleges and universities have few incentives to contain costs because prestige is often measured by resources, and managers who hold down spending risk losing their academic reputations" (USDOE, 2006, p. 11). Reeves (2007) supports the Commission's findings and states, "many observers have become alarmed by the ever-escalating price of a college degree. A study released in 2006 by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education gave 43 states the grade of "F" for affordability" (p. 1).

Financial Aid

The Commission found that major reform is needed to ensure that students who are in need of financial assistance for postsecondary education are able to access it. "The entire financial aid system - including federal, state, institutional, an private programs - is confusing, complex, inefficient, duplicative, and frequently does not direct aid to students who truly need it" (USDOE, 2006, p. 12). They further found that need-based aid was not rising commensurately with tuition increases, leaving a gap that many students are unable to bridge. Among the major issues listed were the number of federal programs available, the complexity of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) forms, the timing of the award notifications, the unmet needs of low-income families and concerns about the amount of debt with which students graduate (USDOE, 2006).

One clear effect of the report has been a renewed interest in need-based student aid (Ward, 2007). "In his FY2008 budget, President Bush called for significant cuts in subsidies paid to banks in the federal student loan program, with the savings being used to finance large increases in Pell Grants provided to low-income students" (Ward, 2007, p. 5). In September 2007, Congress, with broad bipartisan backing, approved the largest increase in federal student aid since the GI Bill in 1944 (Basken, 2007). While this legislation was somewhat different from what the President suggested, it is apparent that the Spellings Commission addressed this issue and policy makers are responding with programs that will assist low-income students, institutions, and the nation (Ward, 2007).

The Spellings panel was not the only force pressing for a change that would make college more affordable for families and more responsive to the needs of the U.S. economy (Basken, 2007). In 2006, Democrats who had been urging a substantial increase in federal student aid took control of Congress and subsequently approved large increases to the federal student aid programs. According to Basken (2007), "the department's own Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance, in a September 2006 report...warned that between 1.4-million and 2.4-million potential U.S. college graduates would fail to enroll or to complete their classes because of financial obstacles" (Basken, 2007, p. 2).

In August, 2013, President Barak Obama announced an initiative to address these issues by create a rating system for colleges that would take into account measures such as affordability, proportion of low-income students enrolled, student indebtedness, and graduation rates. The ratings would be tied to federal student financial aid and the proposed plan which would begin in the 2015 school year, is intended to make college more affordable and help students and their families select colleges that produce graduates with a manageable amount of student debt.

Learning

The Commission found that though international rankings have placed the U.S. twelfth in higher education attainment and sixteenth in high school graduation rates, there is still little movement towards increasing learning outcomes and economic value in higher education (USDOE, 2006). "Several national studies highlight shortcomings in the quality of U.S. higher education as measured by literacy, rising time to degree, and disturbing racial and ethnic gaps in student achievement..." (USDOE, 2006, p. 13).

Reeves (2006) asserts, "There is strong evidence suggesting that academic standards have dropped, that anti-intellectualism is rampant, that leftist partisanship reigns, and that degrees signify little" (p. 57). Citing a number of studies published in the past decade, Reeves (2006) concludes, "evidence of an intellectual decline in higher education has been accumulating for years" (p. 57).

While the Modern Language Association (MLA) (2006) supports the validity of many of the claims in the commission's report, it states "the report ignores the humanities' role in training workers for the new global knowledge economy and their ability to help citizens think more imaginatively, feel greater sympathy with others, and make sounder moral judgments" (p. 2). The commission discusses the need for employees who are able to solve problems, write and think critically; these skills are most often taught in humanities courses. The report offers no support for humanities; however, it focuses on the need for continued expansion in technical and scientific fields. "By the Spellings report's own logic, then, and even by its rather narrowly utilitarian standards, the humanities deserve strong support and 'increased federal investment.'" (MLA, 2006, p. 2).

Accountability

Accountability, also known as institutional effectiveness, has been at issue in higher education for some time. While it is accepted that institutions must be responsible to stakeholders, plans for how to collect and report data tend to be individualized and compartmentalized. The commission found that this was a critical issue and states "there is inadequate transparency and accountability for measuring institutional performance, which is more and more necessary to maintaining public trust in higher education" (USDOE, 2006, p. 14). Financial health and adequate resources are no longer enough of a measure. Further, despite increasing attention paid to student learning outcomes by institutions and accreditation agencies, parents and students still have no means through which to compare data across programs or institutions (USDOE, 2006).

According to Ward (2007), subsequent to the publication of the Commission's report, "the Department of Education launched a controversial effort - through an administrative process known as "negotiated rulemaking" - to rewrite the federal regulations it uses to oversee accrediting agencies. The outcome, whether intended or not, would have led to the federalization of accreditation" (p. 5). Simultaneously, the Department attempted an expansion of its regulatory control of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, which approves accrediting agencies (Ward, 2007).

Congress intervened soon after the negotiated rulemaking session closed, and both the House and the Senate Appropriations committees prohibited the department from issuing new regulations without new legislative authority (Ward, 2007). "Faced with overwhelming Congressional pressure and great concern within the higher education community, the secretary announced that she would not issue new regulations on accreditation [until it had been considered as a part of the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act]" (Ward, 2007, p. 5).

The report is critical of the accreditation process because of its strong emphasis on resources, process and governance and its lack of attention to student learning outcomes. Calling for more transparency, the report asserts that accreditation should focus on "results and quality rather than dictating, for example, process, inputs, and governance which perpetuates current models and impedes innovation" (USDOE, 2006, p. 25). The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) counters, "this characterization ignores both the changes in the accreditation process that have already been underway for two decades and the historical foundations that produced the higher education system so highly prized both here at home and abroad" (AAUP, 2006, p. 3).

The higher education community seems to have responded to the call for greater accountability. Ward (2007) states, "these efforts avoided a one-size-fits-all, federally mandated solution and stressed the need to be sensitive to the rich diversity of institutional missions" (p. 5). Almost concurrent with the publication of the Spellings report came an open letter published collectively by several higher educational organizations, Addressing the Challenges Facing American Undergraduate Education, which discussed many of the same issues as that of the commission and outlined several accountability initiatives ("Addressing the Challenges," 2006). One of these is the Voluntary System of Accountability set forth by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU) and the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC):

The proposed system would include, for those colleges and universities that choose to participate, reporting scores on student engagement measures using one of three standardized measures of student learning. Leaders at AASCU and NASULGC hope dozens of institutions will begin using the system once it is approved by their boards (Ward, 2007, p. 5).

The Association of American Universities (AAU) and the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities (NAICU) have also announced voluntary accountability efforts. In Spring 2008, the 60 U.S. members of AAU will start providing information about undergraduate student performance to the public. It will also offer cost estimators that will provide more accurate information about the net cost students will pay to study at a specific institution. (Ward, 2007). The University and College Accountability Network developed by NAICU will give private colleges a framework with which to describe and present data on student learning outcomes in a way appropriate to institution mission and campus need (Ward, 2007). This framework "will not include any test-based data. [NAICU] contends that the missions of private colleges are too varied and too complex to be captured by any broad-based tests" (Basken, 2007, p. 3).

Innovation

The commission found that higher education has failed to take advantage of "important innovations that would increase institutional capacity, effectiveness and productivity" and that "government and institutional policies created during a different era are impeding the expansion of models designed to meet the nation's workforce needs" (USDOE, 2006, p. 15). While much scholarly research has been done on best practices in teaching and learning, those results are not often translated into practice at either the K-12 or postsecondary level. Failure to take advantage of new technology, adherence to traditional semester calendars, barriers to accepting transfer credits and concerns about accreditation and funding are all viewed as impediments to innovation (USDOE, 2006).

Viewpoints

Criticism

The commission's report sparked a great deal of controversy within the higher education community. Basken (2007) states, "it overlooked major problems such as the conflict-of-interest scandal that subsequently enveloped both college financial-aid offices and the student-loan industry. It had no student representation. It contained no significant international comparisons" (p. 2). The commission's recommendation of a centralized national database that could pose a risk to student privacy and security and there are concerns that the commission's recommendations for student learning outcomes could lead to the adoption of a single instrument or test through which to compare one institution of higher education with all others (Quevedo, 2007).

David Ward (2007), president of the American Council on Education, and the only commission member who did not sign or endorse the final report asserts "the recommendations as a whole...fail to recognize the diversity of missions within higher education and the need to be cautious about policies and standards based on a one-size-fits-all approach" (p. 1). The American Association of University Professors' (AAUP) Committee on Government Relations (2006) described the report as "seriously flawed" in its insistence that higher education was in "crisis" and faulted the report for its limited mention of faculty (p.1).

According to the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) (2006), "the recommendations miss the boat by not attending to two of the most significant issues in higher education-the academic staffing crisis and the decline in funding by the states" (p. 2). The commissioned failed to discuss the increasing reliance on part-time and adjunct faculty in higher education and the impact of that on content and quality. It also did not mention the recent decline in state support for higher education.

The AAUP (2006) asserts that "what emerges from the report is a vision of higher education as a marketplace that should increasingly rely on uniform standards to measure outcomes and technological means to provide training in skills necessary for global economic competition. The process and quality of the educational experience, so central to the formation of a love of learning, civic virtues and social capital, are marginalized to the point of irrelevance" (p. 2).

Conclusion

The findings of the Spelling's commission place the higher education community at a critical juncture wherein numerous changes must be made to ensure that it meets the needs of both the American people and the global economy. While some of the reforms suggested were already being considered, others are still being debated. "Such epochal aspirations motivate many government commissions. One year later, however, there is accumulating evidence that the vision in this case might, at least in some key aspects, actually be realized" (Basken, 2007, p. 1).

Terms & Concepts

Accountability: Accountability in higher education refers to the institution's responsibility to provide the high quality programs and services within the context of its stated mission to its students and its willingness to report related outcomes to all stakeholders.

Accreditation: Accreditation is the non-governmental process through which peer review and self-study ensure that federally funded educational institutions and programs in the United States are operating at a basic level of quality.

Financial Aid: Financial Aid refers to the numerous federal grant and loan programs administered by the Office of Federal Student Aid, which is a department within the USDOE. Its core mission is to ensure that all eligible individuals benefit from federal financial assistance-grants, loans and work-study programs-for education beyond high school.

Higher Education: Higher Education includes all public and private education that is available after high school, from trade schools, online professional training institutions and technical colleges to community colleges, traditional four-year colleges and universities, and graduate and professional programs.

Institutional Effectiveness: Institutional effectiveness is an information-based decision-making model wherein the data gathered through organizational learning activities is used for quality improvement. Specifically, it refers to the ongoing process through which an organization measures its performance against its stated mission and goals for the purposes of evaluation and improvement.

Negotiated Rulemaking: Negotiated rulemaking is a process that brings together representatives of various interest groups and a federal agency to negotiate the text of a proposed rule. The goal of a negotiated rulemaking proceeding is for the committee to reach consensus on the text of a proposed rule.

United States Department of Education (USDOE): The United States Department of Education was created in 1980 through a merger of several offices. Its mission is to promote student achievement and preparation for global competitiveness by fostering educational excellence and ensuring equal access.

Bibliography

Addressing the challenges facing American undergraduate education. (2006). Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.aetl.umd.edu/NASULGC%20Challenges%5f%20092106.pdf

American Association of University Professors. (2006). AAUP statement on Spellings commission report. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/GR/federal/FutureofHigherEd/spellrep.htm

American Federation of Teachers. (2006). Spellings commission report gets an 'incomplete' from AFT. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.aft.org/higher%5fed/news/2006/spellings%5freport%5fincomplete.htm

Basken, P. (2007). A year later, Spellings report still makes ripples. Chronicle of Higher Education, 54 , A1 - A22. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=26951441& site=ehost-live

Liu, O.L. (2011, Sept.). Outcomes assessment in higher education: Challenges and future research in the context of voluntary system of accountability. Educational Measurement: Issues & Practice 30 , p. 2-9. Retrieved December 27, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=65833742&site=ehost-live

Hillman, N.W. (2013, Nov./Dec.). Economic diversity in elite higher education: Do no-loan programs impact Pell enrollments? Journal of Higher Education 84 , following p. 806-831. Retrieved December 27, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=91702608&site=ehost-live Kim, J. (2012, March). Exploring the relationship between state financial aid policy and postsecondary enrollment choices: A focus on income and race differences. Research in Higher Education 53 , p. 123-151. Retrieved December 27, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=70842550&site=ehost-live

Spellings report spells out future for higher education. (2006). BizEd 5 , 10. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=23197909&site=ehost-live

Modern Language Association. (2007). Comments on the Spellings commission report from the executive council of the modern language association of America. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.mla.org/comments%5fspellingsreport

Quevedo, S. (2007). Spellings report targets higher education. The ASHA Leader Online. 12 , 1. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.asha.org/about/publications/leader-online/archives/2007/070417/070417b.htm

Reeves, T. C. (2006). The Spellings report: An inadequate fix. Academic Questions. 20 , 56 - 60. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25149597& site=ehost-live

Suspitsyna, R. (2012, Jan./Feb.). Higher education for economic advancement and engaged citizenship: An analysis of the U.S. Department of Education discourse. Journal of Higher Education 83 , p. 49-72. Retrieved December 27, 2013 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=70536319&site=ehost-live

United States Department of Education. (2006). A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher Education. Washington DC. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/pre-pub-report.pdf

Ward, D. (2007). One year after the Spellings commission: Did it make a difference? Presidency. 10 , 5-6. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=27166112& site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2006). Statement on Spellings commission report. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from: http://www.aacu.org/About/statements/Spellings9%5f26%5f06.cfm

Huot, B. (2007). OPINION: Consistently inconsistent: business and the Spellings commission report on higher education. College English. 69 , 512-525. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25140346&site=ehost-live

Padro, F. (2007). The key implications of the 2006 Spellings commission report: Higher education is a "knowledge industry" rather than a place of learning? International Journal of Learning 14 , 97-104. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Education Research Complete: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=28652075&site=ehost-live

Venezia, A., Kirst, M. & Anotonio, A. (2003). Betraying the college dream: How disconnected K-12 and postsecondary education systems undermine student aspirations. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from Stanford University: http://www.stanford.edu/group/bridgeproject/

Zemsky, R. (2007). Lower college costs and improved student learning: Real answers missing from the Spellings Commission Report. About Campus, 12 , 2 -7. Retrieved December 3, 2007 from EBSCO online database Academic Search Premier: http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=25944669&site=ehost-live