What Does It Mean to Say That a Group of Institutions Are 'Comparable'

Writing in the TLT Group's blog, Steve Ehrmann muses about a thread he has been following in the ASSESS email list in which some are questioning the value of collecting certain kinds of comparable data from comparable institutions. To Ehrmann, the biggest reason for caution is research by Howard Bowen:

Howard Bowen tested the hypothesis that higher education instruction has a production function, i.e., that there is some normal relationship between spending and outcomes. When someone remarks that "I can't run a program with that budget; it's too little money," or enviously comments about another program, "With that endowment and budget, they must be wasting a lot of money," or simply spends time collecting comparable data in order to compare their program with the norm (can we boast our results are 5% better than those achieved by other programs that have about our same budget? can we use below average budgets to justify a request for an increase?) --- all of those imply a faith in a production function . . . [He]found no such evidence to support the belief in a production function.

---

Regional SCUP Events! Enjoy the F2F company of your colleagues and peers at one of three SCUP regional conferences this spring:

• March 14–16: Baltimore, MD
• March 24–26: Cambridge, MA
• April 5–7, San Diego, CA

Integration and Persistence Among Community College Students

This item is a Research Abstract from The League for Innovation in the Community College. This item is a longer version of the same report:

This study suggests that beginning community college students do become integrated into the college environment, as indicated by the sense of belonging reported by students in the sample. As predicted by Tinto’s integration framework and in congruence with research findings on students attending four-year institutions, the study further suggests that integration is related to community college students’ persistence. Moreover, as argued by many authors, the study supports the notion that community college students rarely experience social integration as a result of participating in activities such as clubs. But that does not mean that social integration itself is not significant.

The results indicate that integration, including social integration, is developed through participation in information networks. These networks are initiated in classroom-based activities. Classroom discussions, for example, help students feel academically connected to the college while also promoting relationships that extend to social activities outside the classroom. The networks allow students to navigate the campus environment, access knowledge about the college, create a sense of social belonging, and, ultimately, feel that there are people who care about their academic welfare.

Because much of this integration begins in the classroom, the results of this small, exploratory study suggest that practitioners should find ways to structure students’ academic activities so that they promote the development of information networks. In particular, it is worth considering whether a Student Success course should be required of all beginning students. In addition, student-centered pedagogies might also be encouraged. Finally, professors should be supported in their efforts to work individually with students in order to further develop their potential as information sources in students’ networks.

Inevitable, so Let's Plan For it: The Semantic Web (Web 3.0) in Education

If you're like us, you may be getting tired of hearing the term "Web 2.0" every time you're in a technology related discussion. The article referenced here is not an easy read, but you should read it anyway. Wouldn't it be nice if planners start planning for Web 3.0, ahead of time?

The mantra of the information age has been “The more information the better!” But what happens when we search the web and get so much information that we can’t sort through it, let alone evaluate it? Enter the semantic web, or Web 3.0. Among other things, the semantic web makes information more meaningful to people by making it more understandable to machines. . . . Ultimately, the goal of Web 3.0 is, in a phrase, data integration. . . . The implications for education are profound. Let’s consider three areas of impact: knowledge construction, personal learning network maintenance, and personal educational administration. . . . The Semantic Web is historically unique in that for the first time society can see a foundational shift in technology well in advance of its arrival. For the past 25 years we have been in reactive mode, as one wave of technological revolution after another caught us unawares. With the Semantic Web being both inevitable and slow to develop, we can begin discussing possible learning scenarios that might emerge once it arrives. . . . In fact, the Semantic Web is far enough into the future that we can actually help shape it. Educators would do themselves, students, and the world a tremendous favor by jumping into the discussion now and helping Web 3.0 developers realize a vision that recognizes education and promotes the public good as top priorities. Bias is implicit in all technology—let’s choose our bias for the Semantic Web wisely.