Student ID's tied to Financial Institutions

I read most of my news online, so when I came across an article entitled, "Student banned after debit card/student ID card complaint is reinstated" I had to click.  A student at Catawba Valley Community College (Hickory, NC) was suspended after his complaint that his student ID card had to be tied to a bank.  While his complaint is unclear an the nature of how he complained is unclear, I think he has a fair point.  Why do institutions of higher education offer the "amenity" of linking student ID's to banks?  Not credit unions, banks.  Many schools do this, including Metro State (though theirs is optional, not required--you can get two types of student ID's), Texas A & M, UC Irvine, Creighton University, San Diego State University, and countless others.  These were just the top, relevant hits in my Google search of "student ID bank".  Most of their websites speak of this feature as a Bonus! or a Convenience! or a perk of some kind.

There have been numerous posts on student loan debt and what an issue it is for students to be incurring unreasonable amounts of debt to go to college and beyond.  There's even a a White House "We the People" Petition to eliminate all student loan debt in order to stimulate the U.S. economy (yeah, that is not happening, but what a great thing to wish about).  With that in mind, and with many of us rather irate at the cost of education, why are we allowing our students to incur debt AND making it incredibly easy for them to do so?  We know that banks tend to be predatory to our students, so much so that the Credit Card Act of 2009 actually began to regulate how banks and our student populations are allowed to interact.  The bill includes:

·         Credit card issuers must verify proof of income or otherwise require a co-signer before issuing a credit card to consumers under the age of 21.

·         Credit card issuers cannot send prescreened card offers to those under 21 unless they have consented to receive such offers.

·         Card issuers cannot raise a credit limit on an account for persons under 21 with a co-signer, without written permission from the co-signer.

·         Credit card issuers are prohibited from providing free items in exchange for applications when marketing to students on or near campus. The days of "credit card swag" (free t-shirts, frisbees), in exchange for credit card applications are over. Rewards programs offered with credit cards are still allowed, however.

This just makes me wonder if the Feds are so willing to regulate banking relationships with students, why the heck aren't we as institutions doing the same?  Or at least requiring some sort of financial literacy requirement prior to doing so.

Of course, in all of this there has to be some sort of benefit to the institutions, otherwise we wouldn't do it, or at least I hope not.  I would love to know what kind of money we are making off of these banks by giving them marketing right on our student ID's.  I couldn't find this information on any internet resources, but I suppose there's a good reason for keeping that information close to home.

Connecting more with students through technology – too good to be true?

Two articles this week caught my attention, both focusing on technology but from different directions: marketing and promotion vs. retention and attrition. Separately, the articles had merit enough but I believe the strong discussion is when the concepts emphasized in both are linked together.

The first article, “How colleges use, misuse social media to reach students” on CNN.com by Umika Pidaparthy, discusses an idea that is not entirely new and some people in this class have already blogged about this week: social media.


Colleges are more and more frequently using social media as a pubic relations tool to entice students to attend a particular school or to reach out to students who have already been accepted to the institution. While many schools have been incorporating Facebook and Twitter feeds into their public relations, some schools are doing a poor job of keeping their accounts up to date. The Washington Post subsidiary, StudentAdvisor.com, has been doing critiquing of how schools marketto potential students in its “Top 100 Social Media Colleges” list.

The site’s main purpose is to help students of all ages find the school that is right for them through online information provided by advisors and peers. The idea of letting potential students of any kind ask any questions in a relatively professional forum that is not managed or controlled by administrators for a particular institution is close to what youth in society today expect from the Internet.

Think of this as the Wiki of Higher Education institutions. 

Of course, it is also a not so subtle marketing tool for the Post’s special advertisement sections pertaining to being a college student. Ads and commercials from Bed, Bath and Beyond, Staples and others mix with hot tips and insights, supposedly from other student product testers. However, perhaps this is how youth of today prefer to receive their marketing. They would rather not to be advertised to unless it is catered to their desires and needs, such as with the commercials on Facebook. Needless, irrelevant print material sent by colleges and universities are tossed away without a glance. The “magazines” offered by StudentAdvisor are there for the taking but not forced into someone’s face in the manner of pop-up ads or direct mailings.

Having an alum from particular a school share the inside scoop on the best meal to get on a Tuesday in the dining hall or having a peer relate what to expect at a basketball game makes the potential college seem real and welcoming. Is it all true? Can the real answers be found by asking what seem to be random strangers? Maybe not, but that isn’t stopping potential students from trying.

The other news story from Inside Higher Ed coveredtechnology used as a personal assistant for students who need a little extra boost to their academic motivation and perseverance. 

Paul Smith’s College, akaThe College of the Adirondacks, in upstate New York is known for degrees ranging from the culinary arts to forestry. Now the school may be known for a groundbreaking method of student interventions.

When a student’s grades drop below a certain mark, or if the student has forgotten to submit a form, multiple college personnel are notified through the use of an early warning database. These instructors, advisers and administrations then contact the student and initiate the reminder or conversation about the circumstances that caused the warning. 

Proponents of the “behavioral intervention team” hope this is another way to provide student support and not allow anyone to fall through cracks in the higher educational system. They have put much thought into how much information can be shared and used, according to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). But has there been thought put into how to best help students begin to advocate for themselves? By increasing the amount of guidance provided by the school, are we then taking away from the student’s development? How can students learn responsibility if they are not allowed to fail once or twice?

Considering how popular the Siri personal assistant on the new iphone 4S has already become, I imagine the use of personalized checks and balances to ensure student retention and success will be something students appreciate, if not outright request.

Both the StudentAdvisor website and the database early warning system are new technologies being used to associate with students in a more effective manner. Even though the method of communicating online or electronically may seem less personal, the connection established is meant to be unique for each student. People in society today as a whole expect individualized attention. This attitude bleeds over into how the students of today and tomorrow expect their relationships with their institutions to begin and continue beyond graduation. As professionals in higher education, we’d better be on our toes.

Readings

If you have not received the readings for tomorrow evening please let me know immediately so I may send them to you. It is critical for tomorrow's class that all students have completed them.

Social Media's Slow Slog into the Ivory Towers of Academia

Social Media's Slow Slog Into the Ivory Towers of Academia

http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/09/social-medias-slow-slog-into-the-ivory-towers-of-academia/244483/

To be a “digital native” or a “digital immigrant” are terms that are being thrown around for those students who were born at the beginning of the technology boom opposed to those born before it. For those born in 1992 and after are known as your natives and immigrants are the ones prior to that that are learning how to use modern day technology and its ever changing upgrades. The interesting part comes in to how hgier education used technology and adjusts their curriculum to meets the needs of today’s society and learning practices.

This article has an interesting take on how and why higher education uses digital media within its classes and discusses if it is using it effectively. It is one thing to say that you are using it and another to say that you are using it effectively, meaning using it with the correct pedagogy to help students get something out of the class and expand their understanding of social media.

The argument that this article is using is that there are professors who are saying they are teaching a social media class, or a technology class, but they are not using the resources at all. "It's like studying to be a doctor and never touching a body, and then going into practice. You gotta get your hands on it, know how it works. You can only theorize about how these communities work if you're not willing to actually go in and see how they function.” (Smith-Robbins)

Another interesting part of this article discusses the myth that arises with social media in that NOT all digital natives know modern technology and it would be a false assumption for every student to be able to know the fundamentals of modern technology and social media. Further, the argument is also raised that teachers today should not be so hesitant in actually learning from their students, especially in this arena. I think this is so true.

Being around students on an everyday basis, I see how quickly they are at getting on line and engaging in technology as a form of learning. However, it is one thing to just let them use their computers and social media as a form of “learning” and then to actually have a theoretical practice behind it. To have a lesson and an exact measure for what students are supposed to be doing would help narrow the gap within the “digital natives”, but if the professors were able to put their ego aside (if that is the case, not sure if it is) and allow for students to show them how social media can really be of a great assistance in the classroom. I think of the scene of Transformers 2 where Sam is in the college classroom in the beginning of the movie and he “shows up” the professor about what he is lecturing on, and the professor responds by saying, “I will not be punked by a student in front of the dean.” I just thought that was fitting.

Nevada Higher Ed: Visionary or Off Their Rocker?

Having spent almost ten years living in Las Vegas and working in higher education for most of that time, I am always interested in issues facing Nevada, particularly related to higher ed. Nevada's state slogan is "Battle Born" because it obtained statehood during the civil war...it seems this slogan can also describe the current state of higher education there.

I read the Inside Higher Ed article, then read the actual report submitted by Bruce James (Chairman of the Fresh Look at Nevada's Community Colleges Task Force) to the Nevada System of Higher Education Chancellor, Daniel Klaich. The report highlighted issues similar to those faced in other states: shortage of trained workforce, need to improve college graduation rates, large numbers of students needing remediation, need to establish pathways from K-12 to and through college, be more strategic regarding program offerings at state institutions, and evaluate tuition and fee structures.

After outlining the issues, the report provided recommendations for the Chancellor to consider and while most of the recommendations were fairly routine (be more strategic about program offerings, raise tuition since it is very low in Nevada, focus on the increased use of technology, increase college graduation rates, create pathways from K-12 to college, etc.), the most controversial recommendation was to create a completely online community college called Nevada Virtual College (NVC).

The controversy comes because NVC would be separate from any other community college in the state, offering courses "priced to students on a full-cost recovery basis" and created and operated by a vendor chosen by the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE).

If you just read the Inside Higher Ed article and comments (and not the report itself) it may seem as though the concept of NVC is the worst thing ever suggested. Quotes from various faculty and other education leaders / administrators in Nevada ranged from subdued but straightforward "I am opposed to the creation of Nevada Virtual College" from College of Southern Nevada president, to a Dean at Truckee Meadows Community College calling the proposal to create NVC "ludicrous and without merit". One College of Southern Nevada faculty states "people had already been kicked and slapped around, and then they're told their jobs are being outsourced". Unless I missed something significant in the report, I didn't see any mention of eliminating faculty positions at the existing community colleges in the state. One might make the assumption that the online institution will cannibalize existing online enrollments from the other community colleges (or even four-year institutions), which might ultimately lead to elimination of faculty from those institutions. In all honesty, that seems like a bit of a stretch to me.

The article refers to NVC as a "privatized online college" and when I read that, I was somewhat surprised as that was not my initial interpretation. The report actually states that proposals may be solicited from all of the community and four-year colleges in Nevada (the Universities are excluded), Western Governors University, "and carefully selected for-profit institutions". I may be naive, but I'm not seeing anything in that language that immediately suggests that this endeavor would automatically be undertaken by a for-profit, which would make it a private institution.

Some comments question the ability to ensure academic quality when you are paying an operating organization based on students passing courses. At first blush, it does seem like a slippery slope, but the report clearly states that there would be an independent third party chosen by the Nevada System of Higher Education to evaluate the course mastery of each student...which to me is vastly different than simply providing reimbursement after a student passes a course. Additionally, the idea to provide bonuses to the operating organization for getting students to graduate is certainly novel. Now, I'm not saying that either are perfect ideas and both certainly would have the potential to go awry, but as an administrator at an institution with a fairly low graduation rate (albeit not as low as College of Southern Nevada's 9% which is really...really...really low, even for a community college), any help in increasing an important measure like graduation rates would be welcomed.

Granted, the recommendation to create NVC is fairly unique in several ways and potentially not viable; however, I would be very interested in seeing if it gets more fully developed and watching where it goes from here. I also understand that it is much easier for me to take the 'let's just wait and see' attitude because I no longer live and work in Nevada, but still I wonder if we fast-forward ten years, will this idea be a "remember when they thought about..." joke at a cocktail party, or will the concept be seen as ahead of its time and proven successful?

Multi-Tasking Technology and the "Need" for Physical Campus Libraries

Think back to your undergraduate years in higher education. How did you research, write, and submit a paper or project to your professors? How did you study for exams? Where did you do so?

I received my Bachelor's degree is May of 2005. That doesn't seem like that long ago to me. Yet, it technology-times, it is another galaxy! I remember how the procedure of research went very clearly. I would sit with a paper and pencil, draw out an outline or idea, then head to the library. I would wait my turn to sit down in front of a library portal computer. These computers didn't have internet explorer or firefox browsers for seemingly infinite search results. They were used to simply search for materials in the physical library. I'd type in keywords, and find journals or books that contained information of interest. Next, I'd write down the series of letters and numbers associated with the work's location, and I would go on my quest. Once locating the physical journal or book, I had two choices. (1) Sit down at a table, take notes and write out citations; or (2) Head to the copy room--loaded with a pouch of dimes. Ten cents a page, and I would copy journal articles one page at a time. The typing was done at my home computer--a large (aka not flatscreen) monitor with tower. The information was saved an a hard 3-4 inch diskette, and printed from this disk back at the library, before turning in this hard copy to a professor. When it came to exams, everything was in "hard copy" form. Hand-written notes, textbooks, and handouts.

Looking back, a lot has changed. That "old way" seems like a lot of work! So, now that I have the ability to write a research paper from my living room or study without a mass of paper in front of me, does that make me lazy, distracted, or ungrateful for my resources on campus?



I came across a recent blog posted in Inside Higher Education titled, "Booting Down." The argument was unpacking whether or not students using a variety of technological devices within their study rituals was distracting, lazy, or ineffective. The author describes a study of 560 students interviewed from a variety of institutions (4-year universities, community colleges, etc.). These students were studying for final exams in their local libraries, and were using technology as a study tool.

The study’s key findings included:

• 85 percent only had 1 or 2 information technology (IT) devices running when interviewed
• 61 percent only had 1 or 2 websites open and in use, most of which were being used for course work
• 81 percent checked for new messages such as email messages or Facebook
• 65 percent said they used social media sites, like Facebook and Twitter, to coordinate study sessions or group work.

The author of the cited article within the blog was determined to set the record straight, in reaction to the negative stereotypes associated with this "dumb generation" full of "multi-tasking slackers," and their inappropriate use of technology. It may be an inaccurate assumption of university faculty and staff that students clicking around on a laptop or browsing on a smart phone or using these methods to simply choke out their boredom or fuel their entertainment quick fix. A majority of students interviewed in the study used technology to advance their learning, not to distract themselves from it.

The researcher is quoted saying, “The technologies are so ubiquitous and they are also interruptive and disruptive and convenient … so they have to be managed, and students are doing this in a creative way.”

Whether uploading a YouTube video explaining a difficult concept from class, or using cites such as Google Scholar to locate full-text articles not contained within the walls of their local library, students are using technology to advance the scope of their education.

These ideas got me thinking...these students were interviewed in campus libraries...but did they really need to be there?



This brought me to a place of examining the "need" for campus libraries. In an article titled: "Re-Positioning Libraries: A Consideration of Obstacles," (UNC library database--ProQuest) the author quotes, "Information technology is the friend of libraries! Information technology is the enemy of libraries!" These contradictory statements are supported by noting that technology has immensely increased accessibility to valuable educational materials, yet issues such as copyright "commercialization," and drastic declines in gate counts, circulation, and reference transactions show trends that are beginning to alert stakeholders. Library advocates fear that administrative and government support (including funding) may also decline with the perceived notion that "libraries are a thing of the past and withering."

This article brought new light to my eyes. In the past six years, throughout my MS degree and year and a half in my doctoral program, how often have I "needed" the physical library on campus? Without a doubt, I "need" the online database of scholarly journals and books...but what about the hard copies and physical space a library holds? I've met group members at libraries, used computers to email or print articles, and climbed the stairs to sit in silence to study materials I already had with me. Yet, my actual need to use physical materials within those walls has been very scarce (not entirely non-existent). What does this say about the future of our libraries in higher education?

I'm confident many students, faculty, and staff alike would hate the idea of seeing libraries across campuses disappear. I know I would. I believe this topic brings up unique considerations for technology in higher education. Are we starting to "out-smart" our own cornerstone resources?

Kylie

Bye Bye Blackboard?

According to stories in today's Chronicle of Higher Education and another in InsideHigherEd, Pearson Publishing is now providing a free learning management system that will allow institutions to focus their limited technology funds on purchasing educational content rather than paying to license and customize an information platform. In lay terms, they have developed a beta-version of a free learning management system that will go head to head with the industry leaders including Blackboard and Desire2Learn.

OpenClass is a free commodity marketed directly to individual faculty members whereas most universities implement learning management systems on an institution-wide basis. Pearson's self-stated intent is to encourage the purchase of "products that the company’s higher ed division sees as the future of its bottom line: e-textbooks, e-tutoring software, and other 'digital content' products." The learning platform acts as a type of gateway drug that leads users to want electronic resources sold by Pearson. Although Pearson is open to the idea of allowing other publishing companies to upload resources onto the OpenClass system, Case Western Reserve University’s Chief Information Officer Lev Gonick notes that it is somewhat analogous to expecting Microsoft to team with Apple in order to sell its products. Whether or not the competition will “play nice” is unclear at this point. That issue will likely be the limiting factor for a publisher-based management system. Often, faculty members demonstrate loyalty to a particular publisher. For some, that publisher of choice is Pearson. For others, it is not. If OpenClass attracts products from a variety of publishers, then it may indeed steal market share from Blackboard and Desire2Learn. If not, it will be another technical solution with limited potential.

Personally, I am hoping that this new system takes off because my co-worker and I are currently in early negotiations to author an e-textbook of the type described in the InsideHigherEd article. Rather than a traditional textbook, the e-text would include links, videos, and other resources that students could engage with in whatever manner they deem most useful to learning the topic. Whereas a traditional textbook is provides the reader with the author’s version of what is required to learn, an electronic textbook is interactive and somewhat customizable to each individual student’s learning style. For some students, reading the text may suffice. For others, learning would be enhanced significantly by having an opportunity to delve into a video of the real-life applications of a theory or equation.