Rethinking Higher Education Funding - Centering Student Learning

Core Issue: The current higher education funding model in the United States, which prioritizes metrics like completion rates and attendance, is fundamentally misaligned with the true purpose of education: fostering student learning and preparing them for real-world challenges.

Key Arguments:

• Disconnect Between Funding and Learning: The emphasis on superficial metrics incentivizes institutions to prioritize quotas over demonstrable learning outcomes. This "reduces education to a transactional process, stripping it of its transformative potential."
• Quote: "Faculty are pressured to 'pass' students to meet completion targets, while students are seen as mere contributors to apportionment."
• Negative Consequences: This misalignment leads to:
• Diminished Quality: Institutions may lower academic standards to artificially inflate completion rates, resulting in graduates who lack the necessary skills and competencies.
• Invisible Learning: The absence of focus on learning outcomes disincentivizes investments in effective assessment practices and innovative teaching methods.
• Exacerbated Inequity: Students from disadvantaged backgrounds are disproportionately affected, as they may complete courses without acquiring the skills needed for success.
• Ethical Imperative: The current model represents a breach of the social contract inherent in education, failing to adequately prepare individuals for meaningful lives and careers.
• Quote: "The unfairness of the current system lies in its failure to honor the social contract of education: to prepare individuals for meaningful lives and careers."

Proposed Solutions:

• Funding Based on Learning Outcomes: Shift the funding model to reward institutions based on their effectiveness in helping students acquire measurable skills and competencies.
• Transparent and Equitable Metrics: Replace surface-level metrics with those that reflect genuine learning progress, such as mastery of core competencies, critical thinking, and problem-solving abilities. Make this data accessible to all stakeholders.
• Empowerment and Accountability: Faculty: Grant faculty the autonomy and resources to innovate in their teaching.
• Students: Involve students in discussions about their own learning.
• Institutions: Hold institutions accountable for producing graduates who are prepared to contribute effectively to society and the economy.

Call to Action:

The briefing document issues a strong call to action, urging a move away from the current system that "treats students and faculty as tools for generating revenue." It emphasizes the urgency of demanding a new model that prioritizes student learning and empowers both faculty and students.

Quote: "It's time to demand a system that values what students learn over merely what they complete. Anything less is unfair, unethical, and unsustainable."