The focus
of her speech today and the requirements on higher education that are
being proposed are a prime example of more big government solutions by
the current Administration.
In a previous life, I was involved in discussions on the
database that will track all students. Like the states that have
databases to track students, the federal government will ultimately use
the data for data-matching purposes (data-mining) well beyond
graduation. There is no evidence that states that violate their
citizens’ privacy rights have better higher educational outcomes as a
result.
The Administration wants a No College Student Left Behind Act
for higher education. Spellings expresses “disappointment” about
the private colleges and their opposition to the database and other
burdensome requirements–maybe she should remember that higher
education in this country is successful because the government hasn’t
dictated every possible issue for private colleges, although they’ve
come close. This is why some colleges, and certainly more soon,
will do their best to stop taking federal funds or accept students that
participate in the federal aid programs (it isn’t that feasible though
if a school wants to compete).
There is a parallel to K-12 education–the Administration is
also undermining support for vouchers through their actions. As
my colleague Roy Cordato argued in his recent op-ed,
(I am paraphrasing) vouchers are a means by which the government can
start controlling private K-12 schools. Nobody has to look any
further to support this argument than the higher education system and
what Spellings is proposing.
I expect the National Center for
Education Statistics (NCES) and the Department of Education to try an
end-run around Congress on an issue like the database (the House passed
legislation expressly forbidding the database).
This isn’t a
defense of colleges, but a defense of developing sensible policies that
don’t micromanage the higher education system.
