Global Breaking News - Monday, December 23, 2024

Should the Government Grade Colleges?
The Obama administration is considering a rating system for colleges and universities that receive billions a year in federal loans and grants. Should the government rate schools? What should be done to hold institutions accountable in the face of lower graduation rates, rising student debt and lack of access for the poor and minorities?
* rating system = 등급제/ federal loan = 연방 융자; 국채/ grant = (정부나 단체에서 주는) 보조금/ hold sb accountable (for ~) = (~에 대해) ~에게 책임을 묻다(지우다)/ in the face of ~ = ~에도 불구하고; ~에 직면하여

 정부는 대학교 등급을 적용해야만 하나요?

1. First Step to Deeper Reforms
Ideally, the rating and performance-based funding system would drive states, institutions and students toward the transformative change needed to tame rising debt and jump-start social mobility.

2. Rating Could Have Unintended Consequences
The Obama administration has to gather relevant data first before developing sanctions that could damage the very students they are seeking to help.

3. Great Value in Rating Tool
Developing a government ratings system will require input from all sectors of higher education, but its primary consideration should be its usefulness for students.

4. Distracting From the Real Issues
If the Obama administration links federal financial aid to its rating system, there will be less aid for low-income students.

5. No Need to Centralize Education
A one-size-fits-all set of bureaucratic criteria established by the federal government will weaken the greatest strength of American higher education: its diversity.

Sample Essay

Rating Could Have Unintended Consequences

Any government ratings system for universities will have serious consequences, many of which are unintended. Even with the rankings published by U.S. News & World Report, there are widespread examples of gaming and manipulation by colleges in the data they provide. Presidents have submitted ridiculous reputation surveys that disparage their competitors, and admissions offices have manipulated their statistics to improve their college’s standing. And this is just to get a better ranking in a magazine.

What can we expect if the Education Department connects student aid eligibility to the ratings? The pressure on institutions will be enormous, and undoubtedly some of them will choose unethical paths. Institutions will feel pressure to lower academic quality, graduate unqualified students, or reduce services to the low-income students who need a quality college education most. How will these issues be monitored and managed?

Data availability is also a real problem. Higher education insiders are well aware that the data needed to hold institutions accountable are of varying quality. We have the worst data on exactly the kinds of higher education institutions that would be most likely to receive the lowest ratings. So improving data quality for these colleges has to be an immediate priority. This issue is particularly worrisome if the Obama administration insists on rushing out these ratings in the coming year.

Finally, what exactly will happen to colleges that fail to meet some ratings benchmark? Eliminating student loan eligibility is essentially a death sentence for any college, and eliminating Pell Grant eligibility will be the same for any school with a significant low-income student population. Reducing eligibility makes little sense – some students at a school can get loans or Pell Grants, and other students cannot?

The Obama administration has to develop sanctions that do not damage the very students they are seeking to help. And rushing any plan out the door without thinking through these issues would be an enormous mistake.