Change is the only constant in life, so it should be no surprise that the state of higher education as evolved as will continue to evolve. This week’s readings, Making Reforms Happen 2015 and The State of Higher Education 2014, touched on this subject. The reading covers changing reforms, policies and perceived changes that must happen in order for higher education to evolve and be inclusive of the all the changes that are occurring in the world.

The report does an excellent job of covering the importance of policy assessment. It states that effective policies have proper implementation and there was follow up by the proper channels. Follow up allows those that implemented it to see that the policies are in fact working or if in the case it is not, what steps to follow to rectify this. Some of the biggest examples are the implementation of online course study, and the movements higher education institutions have taken to welcome non-traditional college students to their rosters. Over the last couple of decades, higher education has made rapid changes and the report has suggested changes in the following areas:  cost, funding, research value, and assessment.

This week we took an in-depth look at our own higher educational structure as opposed to an international overall scope. Right in the beginning of the report (p.4) we have a layout on how to develop frameworks that will evaluate assessments in school systems. These frameworks focus on primary and secondary education, then goes on to say how they affect higher education. Which is great, there is a large disconnect between secondary education and higher education, on the surface this doesn’t necessarily seem like the case, but when you look at many students or question them they will say they didn’t have any or much support when it comes to higher education preparation. These assessments can help to fix these issues.

Here in America, education may seem like a big deal. Majority of (if not all) candidates running for something, be it councilmen, senator or president, even down to housewives competition to be the head of the PTA, all promise to make changes to or improve the current state of education, but oftentimes there isn’t much change, or it’s not a positive one. During the 60’s there was segregation in America, presidents of the time worked to either keep or get rid of segregation depending on what they felt was best for the country and how the people reacted, the ever famous “No Child Left Behind” act that was created by former President Bush, that affected many inner-city schools negatively, many are still trying to overcome the adverse effects, and all the changes that are occurring currently under President Obama’s administration. These policies and reforms have improved and strengthened the state of education, but as also damaged the state. Policies and reforms that lead to the changes to the parent plus loans that caused HBCUs to lose over $300 million dollars in grant and loan money. But with the ever-changing state of education and our resourcefulness here in America, these reforms and policy changes that might have hindered us, has only made us stronger in a sense and we have/are finding ways to come out ahead of the disasters, but many are doing school faster than others.

Carter, J. L. (2013). PLUS Loan Crisis a Blessing in Disguise for National HBCU Agenda. Retrieved March 21, 2016, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jarrett-l-carter/plus-loan-crisis-a-blessi_b_3782738.html

This week we read about international partnerships, problems institutions are having on their home-front, and quality assurance, among other things. The readings cover challenges that many higher education institutions face when venturing into new areas. Among these challenges lay: cultural awareness. What’s nice about this week’s report is that the ACE listed programs that were founded by different higher education institutions that can act as a base line for other institutions that want to venture on the same path. This method that is or can be applied to life itself has been used for years. If I am trying to do something, I am going to look for people who have done it before and do what they did improving on their method if need be.

It is not surprising that with a little investigation we can unveil many issues within higher education on American soil, so while the benefits are great; it seems a little odd that we as a country would want to push forward with internationalization. The biggest issue we have in this country in terms of access to higher education is the cost and prestige that is given to colleges and universities. There are hundreds if not thousands of affordable outlets for access to higher education; right here in New York, we have CUNY (College and University of New York) which has over 270,000 students (in 2014) enrolled in its 23 institutions. Coming from an inner-city high school, I for one did not want to attend a CUNY school, but here I am a grad student in Baruch, one of the top schools in the CUNY system. I do regret every now and then not going to CUNY for undergrad because I wouldn’t have the massive loan balance I have now, this is a reality for a number of students all over the country, if we choose to attend a cheaper, more cost effective school, we probably be semi-financially independent without having to worry about much if any loans at all. The same way many colleges entice foreign students in a ploy to attract them to the institution, is the same ploy that is used on students within America just more tailor-made.

This can be seen with the increase of attract to get veteran students. All schools, public, private, for-profit, or not for profit, know that government money is some of the most reliable money, so why shouldn’t they push to have these students be enrolled. Not saying it’s wrong, but it’s not entirely right either. There are a few schools that don’t really care about its students but care more about the money that is generated by a flux of students instead.  If this is the treatment of students who are living in, or of American descent, imagine students with little to know ties of the American educational system. We have students within our borders that know nothing about the system and get hurt by it unfortunately. One thing to be noted however, higher education is a customer service, which many institutions have realized and are working to improve the treatment of its students, whether its American students or international students. This can be viewed as quality assessment along with transparency and accountability, its only right and makes sense that our students, faculty and staff are informed and knowledgeable about the happenings of the school that are need to know.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/exclusive-cuny-enrollment-hits-all-time-high-fall-article-1.1949121

This week we have two articles that cover higher education governance. The first article “An analytical framework for the cross-country comparison of higher education governance”, focuses on three models used In Europe: academic self-governance, the state-centeredness and the market-oriented model. The article shows belief that it is because of an increase in competition paired with the economic crisis many countries are facing, that has had an adverse effect on higher education. Higher education all over the world, not just in America, has been put under an ever more careful watchful eye where minor mistakes have been blown up and scrutinized. To combat this, many countries have conducted self-assessments to try and figure out how to rectify and prevent future occurrences. These efforts are noted in the article but newer solutions that place more attention on system autonomy institutional balance of power, and financial governance are proposed. This article reinforces the thought that many have had in the past; there is a shift that is causing higher education to have more of a business structure. Just this past week in a case study for my fundraising class, we had to pitch why a made up higher education institute should focus on receiving corporate funding. Corporations have long funneled money into higher education as a way to push themselves beyond their competitors. This is a reality that isn’t going to change, but if it can positively benefit students in the long run it’s a necessary evil I suppose.

The second article, Approaches to Internationalization and Their Implications for Strategic Management and Institutional Practice, covers internationalization and how the government affects them. On a political front, student mobility; having an intake of foreign students and the export of our own, fosters growth and shows a welcoming side and continues to push global awareness. Students who do study aboard don’t think about how them traveling to this foreign country affects or reflects on their home countries, for many the thought never crossed their minds, this course has opened my eyes to see that this is a large reality, like a majority of things in life, everything or everyone keeps what benefits them in mind. Study aboard and internationalization (when done correctly) benefits the country, the higher education institution, the student, and the government.

Both articles focus on higher education and how it is affected by the government. It was welcoming (albeit a bit disturbing on my end) to see that European institutions are having similar issues. For me who constantly writes that America is a bit too full of itself when it comes to being the perceived number 1 place in the world for education. These readings give me two possible outcomes from this, either America will notice that other places have the same issues and be more open to changing and developing, or feeling as though we are still the best if everyone has our issues because they are following our lead.

Hi good morning everyone
My name is Daneille Grant this is my third semester in the HEA program here at Baruch. I graduated from SUNY College at Old Westbury with a BA in Psychology. It was during my undergraduate career that I discovered Higher Education/ Student Affairs as a profession. Thanks to my undergrad and a few mentors I was able to attend the NASPA conference for two years which helped me realize this was truly an area I wanted to work in. While taking my classes at Baruch I realized that I wanted to work with the Freshman Experience, focusing primarily on First Generation College Students, seeing that I am First Gen myself, I believe that I could use my background and the knowledge I have gained throughout undergraduate and graduate careers to foster a comfortable environment for other First Gen students. I currently work for CUNY Central in the Office of University Registrar as a Student Records Assistant. Upon the completion of my degree I hope to go on to more lucrative positions within Higher Ed.
The articles opened my eyes to internationalization within American institutes of higher education. With America boasting to the best in the world in terms of many things, including education, it is no surprise that people would want to attend schools on American soil for whatever reasoning. Often time people can come to the states having received degrees from reputable institutions in their country, but not be accepted her because the education is “not equivalent” to that offered in the states, forcing people to live below their means, people who were considered doctors lawyers in their home countries not allowed to practice here, having to start over.
In the Altbach article, international education is used to show globalization, this can be used to show progress of education, the access to study aboard, and having the option to attend college/university anywhere in the world, is proof of how far we as a people have come in the world. Study aboard serves to attract many students to a country, it can foster diversity, raise revenue, and is also promotion of the country and the host institution. Online classes might have thought to be beneficial in this accept, but as pointed out in the Oxford article, although Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) give a wider range for students who may not be able to physically or financially be able to do study aboard or leave their countries, a 2013 study revealed that students often times do not complete these online courses, there could be a wide range of reasons for this.
In the Green article, the use of the IAU survey shows exactly how America feels about internationalization. In the states, we have less of a focus on internationalization when compared to other nations globally, which could be correlated to the thought that “America is the leading nation in….” just about everything, supposedly. People within the US face difficulty completing college, it’s no surprise that people not born here would be faced with the same difficulties and that would threaten retention and graduation rates in a nation every college compete against each other to be “Number 1” these students may not be accepted with open arms.
America is a melting pot, and attract many immigrants to its shores for many reasons, education is a large part of life itself, America needs to reevaluate its stance on internationalization. Education on American soil is a multi-billion dollar industry, to calm you are the best in the world, but cannot or refusal to accommodate students globally is primitive.

This week’s article focused on four aspects that are key to internationalization on a higher education level. These four aspects are student mobility, scholar mobility, cross-border education and internationalization at home. Funding that is provided to create and manage higher education comes from federal government, state government, accrediting agencies and higher education institutions themselves. It is no surprise that funding is the root issue that can make or break a program.
A running theme throughout the article is federal funding in combination with a broad-spectrum of contributions, is a key aspect to the success of internationalization policies in U.S. With majority of funds going to higher education institutions within the U.S. it’s not surprising that there is very little money is left to support internationalization efforts that we currently have. Let alone to go about starting new ones. The charts on pages 37-38, show just how much money other countries spend on internationalization efforts, (Saudi Arabia annually funds $6 billion in their King Abdullah Foreign Scholarship Program), when compared to how much is spent annually within the U.S. the ACE reveals that the U.S. while internationalization efforts aren’t funding by our own government (directly), it is interesting to note that we do get funding from foreign governments. The ACE itself discusses how unfair this is. Foreign governments are funding our efforts, but we may or not have a relationship with them in regards to internationalization in the educational sense outside of funding.
With the development of new technologies and other advancements made in other countries, the U.S. federal government has started to support the mobility of scholars and research collaboration policies. Having the resources we already have on our home front, combined with the knowledge that other countries can provide our students will give our students an advantage when they venture out to the world, this is something the government has realized.
In terms of cross-border education, there is very little concentration, at this point, from the U.S. government. That’s not to say we do not have any efforts at all. This week’s article revealed to us that there is a cross-border education effort between the U.S. and the Indian government: the United States-India Educational Foundation (USIEF), which is funded by both countries. And in other my earlier posts I briefly discussed cross border efforts between the U.S. and the Middle East.
It is hard for the U.S. to come together collectively to focus on a process of internationalization. Within the U.S. there thousands of colleges and universities that are pretty much individually ran, with their own mission statements etc., and it is safe to say we here in America pride ourselves on having freedom in our educational efforts, so this poses an issue when it comes to possibly imposing internationalization on schools, no matter if it is for the betterment of the country.