IBJNews

Indiana panel sets new college degree goals

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
A plan to increase the number of college degrees in Indiana won unanimous approval Wednesday from the Indiana Education Roundtable, but members acknowledged it won't be an easy task.

The "Reaching Higher, Achieving More" resolution looks to increase on-time graduation rates at both two- and four-year campuses and double the number of college graduates produced in the state by 2025. The plan also aims to have 60 percent of Indiana adults with college degrees by 2025.

Gov. Mitch Daniels acknowledged that achieving that goal would be "a real stretch" but said it was an attainable number, even though Indiana has struggled in recent years to improve its post-secondary graduation rate. Only about a third of Indiana adults currently hold post-secondary diplomas, ranking the state 40th in the nation, according to the Lumina Foundation.

The stakes are high. The Bureau of Labor Statistics predicts more than half of the jobs that will be available in the state by 2018 will require a college degree.

The new plan addresses concerns that too few students complete their degrees on time. Just 28 percent of those attending four-year public schools and 4 percent of those at two-year public institutions graduate on time.

The state will now limit academic programs to 120 credits for bachelor's degrees and 60 credits for an associate program to help students complete their degrees sooner. Those limits were part of legislation Gov. Mitch Daniels signed into law earlier this month.

Schools will be encouraged to improve their remedial education programs, must set annual goals to reduce student debt loads and will be required to provide public information on job placement rates for degree programs.

Larry Isaak, president of the Midwestern Higher Education Compact, which promotes educational access in 12 Midwestern states, praised the state's goal of having 60 percent of adults with college degrees. But he said Indiana needs to work on expanding its base of college-ready students and getting them started sooner after graduation.

Indiana University President Michael McRobbie said he supported the education panel's goals but would need more funding from the Legislature, which has continued to shrink its allocation to universities.

"There's a limit to how much we can provide a product of the same quality with reduced resources," McRobbie said.

The roundtable, which includes Daniels, top state education officials, lawmakers and representatives from schools, universities and other groups, proposed the "Reaching Higher, Achieving More" as the successor to a 2008 strategic initiative called "Reaching Higher." That plan aimed to improve graduation rates, expand the role of community colleges in the state and better prepare students at the outset of post-secondary education.

The 2008 plan noted that 54.7 percent of Indiana students at four-year colleges graduated within six years of enrollment, just below the national average, and set a goal of being one of the top five states in this metric by 2012.

Instead, Indiana's rate has declined to 53 percent.

Indiana Commissioner of Higher Education Teresa Lubbers said Indiana's graduation rates have been especially low in recent years because few students are taking the more traditional, four-year residential college path. Instead, more students are taking fewer courses over a longer period to manage costs. Many are often balancing jobs as well.

Currently, 40 percent of Indiana college students are 25 or older and 59 percent attend school part-time, according to the roundtable.

"The non-traditional student has become the majority, and we need to acknowledge that," Lubbers said.

Lubbers acknowledged that the number of Indiana adults with college degrees hasn't budged much in four decades.

"We know it's tough," she said.

But she and Daniels remained optimistic that the state will meet its goals.

"We'll get there," Daniels said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Wrong way
    What this state and our entire nation needs are legislatures which will push businesses back into educating their employees.

    Many jobs that require college degrees to win the job don't require college degrees to do the job. This is an absurd situation; one where a college degree is being used as proxy for intelligence and personality on the part of the employer.

    I'd like to see tax incentives (carrot AND stick) toward businesses hiring and training out of high school for jobs they normally require associates or bachelors for.

    I'd like to see state funded (as well as private, non-profit) institutes of various sorts to absorb some of the excess of Ph.D. recipients, and also to function as apprenticing organizations for those without Ph.D.s.

    End the credential chauvinism that came about thanks to the G.I. bill and unnecessary elitism on the part of academia. Let's recover some of the good parts of the former social order, where merit meant more than title.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT