Nolan Finley wrote this week about what he considers the stupidity of the Michigan public.
Finley says a recent EPIC MRA poll about public education and preparing students for the future finds that "Forty-six percent said the schools should train students for jobs they can get with a high school degree, while 41 percent said college preparation should be the mission."
Is it really so bad to wish that a publicly provided education could equip citizens for meaningful work with a living wage?
According to pollster Ed Sarpolous, Michigan residents still identify with a manufacturing culture and are not convinced that a college education is necessary to meet their employment needs. This should come as no surprise. For generations, factory work has provided a comfortable, middle-class standard of living to Michigan citizens. People with that perspective have been shaped by the experience of their parents, grand parents and great grand parents. This world view and narrative span generations not fiscal quarters. This is about people and places and history, not shareholders and quarterly profits and global capital movement.
Finley concludes that people in Michigan are stupid and lazy. He suggests a new strategy for promoting higher education among disadvantaged workers for whom he has contempt.
"Create an appetite for the jobs, and maybe job seekers will get off their backsides and get themselves some skills," writes Finley blaming the unemployed for not having work.
Here's another possibility: given the economic stresses befalling the blue-collar, Michigan middle-class maybe they are unwilling to go into debt again to get a college degree that may not allow them to pay back student loans. Maybe these folks are not ready to mortgage their future earning potential. Indeed they are still watching their nest eggs shrivel as real estate values collapse.
Finley should read the Michigan League for Human Services recent report, The Changing Face of Poverty in Michigan, which documents stagnating wages, rising costs, increasing foreclosures, and less access to health coverage.
Perhaps the EPIC MRA poll reveals skepticism about debt, pain from real economic stress and a resistance to acquiesce to globalization? Instead of blaming workers for wanting continuity of their family history and saying we need to better market higher education, Finley should examine cost barriers to higher education in an economy where poverty is increasing. If the unemployed are deciding between medicine and food, college tuition is probably not on their radar.
Showing posts with label higher education. Show all posts
Showing posts with label higher education. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Tuesday, October 16, 2007
Lou Glazer of Michigan Future, Inc. on education and prosperity
Lou Glazer cares about Michigan’s economic future. The president of Michigan Future, Inc., he has spent more than a year presenting New Agenda for a New Michigan to more than one hundred organizations across the state. This week we talked about economic development, investing in talent, and how Michigan can successfully transition from the old manufacturing economy to the nascent knowledge economy.
“Nothing correlates higher than educational attainment with prosperity and high incomes," says Glazer. Yet, Michigan faces a cultural shift of historic proportion to seize that advantage. And current public policy priorities favor funding development of specific industry sectors over investment in higher education.
“For the last three quarters of the last century we had the broadest middle class in the country. And that was wonderful. That happened because 100 years ago we were the equivalent of Silicon Valley; we were inventing what was next,” says Glazer about Michigan’s manufacturing economy. “I believe that economy as a source of mass middle class jobs is over.”
That economy shaped attitudes about the necessity of higher education. As long as heavy manufacturing – the auto industry, in particular – thrived, a high school education could lead to a middle class income. An unfortunate legacy of that blue-collar middle-class culture is a college completion rate that still lags behind the national average.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau in 2004, 24.6 percent of Michigan residents 25 and older have at least a four year college degree. That is below the national rate of 27 percent and below many other states including: Minnesota at 29.7 percent, New York at 30.5 percent and Illinois at 29.1 percent. Governor Granholm has set a goal of doubling the state’s college graduation rate in ten years. Doubling our rate would put Michigan ahead of the District of Columbia (47.7 percent).
Over the last decade, Michigan’s public investment in higher education has eroded. “The most disturbing thing about Michigan public policy over this decade – during Engler and Granholm administrations – is that the state spent a century building up one of the best higher education systems in the world and at the point it matters most, we start dis-investing in it,” says Glazer. “Every one else is investing in their higher education systems and we’re walking away from ours.”
“Preparing, attracting and retaining talent matters most,” says Glazer. He contends that vibrant urban central neighborhoods attract that talent. “When you see the places doing well – Seattle, Boston, New York , Chicago – they are places people want to live. Talent is increasingly moving to central cities.”
According to a 2006 survey of recent college graduates by CEOs for Cities, two thirds of college graduates decide where to live first and then look for work. “Place really matters to this generation. And a big part of Michigan’s problem is that we don’t have a place that is aligned with where young talent wants to live,” says Glazer. He does concede that Detroit, Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor, Lansing and Kalamazoo are making efforts to increase livability of central neighborhoods.
While he advocates public investment in talent, he is skeptical about the economic development approach taken by the 21st Century Jobs Fund. He says that picking the right set of industries and then enterprises within those industries is an inefficient way to foster development. “Every state has a life sciences initiative. Our position is that it’s like fool’s gold. Everybody has the sense that there are riches at the end of the rainbow. The odds that it is going to be your state are low. You have to be really lucky for it to happen in your community,” he says. In addition, those enterprises do not create vast numbers of jobs, certainly not numbers that will offset losses in manufacturing.
So what ought Michigan do? “The pattern we see around the country is that where central cities and higher education are a priority of business leaders they become public policy priorities,” he says. “In Michigan that is missing. The state Chamber of Commerce has basically adopted the Mackinac Center agenda, which is that all public investments are bad and low taxes are the answer.”
Glazer and Michigan Future, Inc. will continue to present their Agenda for the state hoping that the power of their ideas can move leaders to action. As for the general prognosis going forward, using the language of grief, Glazer says, “My sense is we’re somewhere between denial and acceptance.”
“Nothing correlates higher than educational attainment with prosperity and high incomes," says Glazer. Yet, Michigan faces a cultural shift of historic proportion to seize that advantage. And current public policy priorities favor funding development of specific industry sectors over investment in higher education.
“For the last three quarters of the last century we had the broadest middle class in the country. And that was wonderful. That happened because 100 years ago we were the equivalent of Silicon Valley; we were inventing what was next,” says Glazer about Michigan’s manufacturing economy. “I believe that economy as a source of mass middle class jobs is over.”
That economy shaped attitudes about the necessity of higher education. As long as heavy manufacturing – the auto industry, in particular – thrived, a high school education could lead to a middle class income. An unfortunate legacy of that blue-collar middle-class culture is a college completion rate that still lags behind the national average.
According to the U.S. Census Bureau in 2004, 24.6 percent of Michigan residents 25 and older have at least a four year college degree. That is below the national rate of 27 percent and below many other states including: Minnesota at 29.7 percent, New York at 30.5 percent and Illinois at 29.1 percent. Governor Granholm has set a goal of doubling the state’s college graduation rate in ten years. Doubling our rate would put Michigan ahead of the District of Columbia (47.7 percent).
Over the last decade, Michigan’s public investment in higher education has eroded. “The most disturbing thing about Michigan public policy over this decade – during Engler and Granholm administrations – is that the state spent a century building up one of the best higher education systems in the world and at the point it matters most, we start dis-investing in it,” says Glazer. “Every one else is investing in their higher education systems and we’re walking away from ours.”
“Preparing, attracting and retaining talent matters most,” says Glazer. He contends that vibrant urban central neighborhoods attract that talent. “When you see the places doing well – Seattle, Boston, New York , Chicago – they are places people want to live. Talent is increasingly moving to central cities.”
According to a 2006 survey of recent college graduates by CEOs for Cities, two thirds of college graduates decide where to live first and then look for work. “Place really matters to this generation. And a big part of Michigan’s problem is that we don’t have a place that is aligned with where young talent wants to live,” says Glazer. He does concede that Detroit, Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor, Lansing and Kalamazoo are making efforts to increase livability of central neighborhoods.
While he advocates public investment in talent, he is skeptical about the economic development approach taken by the 21st Century Jobs Fund. He says that picking the right set of industries and then enterprises within those industries is an inefficient way to foster development. “Every state has a life sciences initiative. Our position is that it’s like fool’s gold. Everybody has the sense that there are riches at the end of the rainbow. The odds that it is going to be your state are low. You have to be really lucky for it to happen in your community,” he says. In addition, those enterprises do not create vast numbers of jobs, certainly not numbers that will offset losses in manufacturing.
So what ought Michigan do? “The pattern we see around the country is that where central cities and higher education are a priority of business leaders they become public policy priorities,” he says. “In Michigan that is missing. The state Chamber of Commerce has basically adopted the Mackinac Center agenda, which is that all public investments are bad and low taxes are the answer.”
Glazer and Michigan Future, Inc. will continue to present their Agenda for the state hoping that the power of their ideas can move leaders to action. As for the general prognosis going forward, using the language of grief, Glazer says, “My sense is we’re somewhere between denial and acceptance.”
Monday, June 18, 2007
Antics with Semantics or How to Insure the Invisible Partner (update)
Good news for non-heterosexual households in Michigan. Michigan State University has a plan to continue providing benefits to persons formerly known as "domestic partners." Now these family members will be called "other eligible individuals" for the sake of conforming to the restrictively interpreted language of Michigan's man/woman marriage amendment. MSU will begin a pilot program with the new language July 1 and review it annually.
According to a June 15 piece from Inside Higher Ed, "The new policy doesn’t distinguish between same-sex and opposite-sex living arrangements, and in fact it would cover people who aren’t really couples in any sense, but who merely share a home."
The message in Michigan seems to be: if you are gay or lesbian and in a committed relationship, in order to receive the employment benefits that accrue to heterosexuals in partnered relationships, your relationship must be rendered invisible. If your relationship is invisible, you can have benefits. The proponents of the marriage amendment said they didn't want to take benefits away from anyone, just clarify the definition of marriage. Mission accomplished.
Update: Late this morning, University of Michigan announced,"Effective Jan. 1, 2008, a new category of dependent called Other Qualified Adult (OQA) is being offered to all benefits-eligible U-M employees. A set of specific eligibility requirements defines the criteria required for OQA coverage."
OQAs or OEIs? Neither has the same ring as "spouse."
Related Post: "The Law is the Law"
According to a June 15 piece from Inside Higher Ed, "The new policy doesn’t distinguish between same-sex and opposite-sex living arrangements, and in fact it would cover people who aren’t really couples in any sense, but who merely share a home."
The message in Michigan seems to be: if you are gay or lesbian and in a committed relationship, in order to receive the employment benefits that accrue to heterosexuals in partnered relationships, your relationship must be rendered invisible. If your relationship is invisible, you can have benefits. The proponents of the marriage amendment said they didn't want to take benefits away from anyone, just clarify the definition of marriage. Mission accomplished.
Update: Late this morning, University of Michigan announced,"Effective Jan. 1, 2008, a new category of dependent called Other Qualified Adult (OQA) is being offered to all benefits-eligible U-M employees. A set of specific eligibility requirements defines the criteria required for OQA coverage."
OQAs or OEIs? Neither has the same ring as "spouse."
Related Post: "The Law is the Law"
Wednesday, June 6, 2007
"The Law is the Law"
The list of public institutions discontinuing same-sex domestic partner benefits in Michigan grows daily. MSU will no longer offer benefits and the existing benefits will end when current contracts expire. (According to Pam Beemer, assistant vice president for Human Resources at MSU, 54 people currently use the benefit at MSU.) What took them so long? University of Michigan made that announcement immediately after the February 2 Court of Appeals ruling.
According to Rusty Hill, spokesman for Attorney General Mike Cox, "the law is the law." So public institutions will need to find creative ways to rename and restructure the benefits extended to same-sex domestic partners. And it behooves them to do so immediately, unless they want to lose valuable employees to more welcoming states and employers.
The law doesn't deny the right to provide health insurance or other benefits to domestic partners; it denies the right to equate the benefit in any way with the benefits given to straight married people. Certainly, human resources and legal departments can work around that. Let's see...what might we call this employment benefit? "Health Insurance Allowance" to be used at employee discretion? Fine. Call it something else, but don't leave couples and families with children in the lurch.
According to Rusty Hill, spokesman for Attorney General Mike Cox, "the law is the law." So public institutions will need to find creative ways to rename and restructure the benefits extended to same-sex domestic partners. And it behooves them to do so immediately, unless they want to lose valuable employees to more welcoming states and employers.
The law doesn't deny the right to provide health insurance or other benefits to domestic partners; it denies the right to equate the benefit in any way with the benefits given to straight married people. Certainly, human resources and legal departments can work around that. Let's see...what might we call this employment benefit? "Health Insurance Allowance" to be used at employee discretion? Fine. Call it something else, but don't leave couples and families with children in the lurch.
Monday, April 16, 2007
That's Entertainment: Coulter in Livingston County
Is Coulter being brought in as a lecturer or an entertainer by the Livingston Economic Club and Cleary University? And does this distinction matter?
Here is a troubling hybrid: verbal abuse and propaganda merge with news and entertainment. And there you have the Imus problem, the Coulter problem, the O'Reilly problem, and more.
This communication approach presumes a single correct point of view for any issue and is utterly repulsed by dialogue. It has no use for other view points than to be foils for its own aggrandizement. If it really is entertainment, it aims to satisfy our demons not our better angels. Its central deceit is to portray hateful words and attitudes as playful articulation of beliefs held by a reasonable, but silent majority. (Glenn Beck does us the courtesy of self identifying,"Hey! I'm just saying what we're all thinking.") You all know who you are, apparently. And a number of you have already bought tickets for the Coulter event.
So, Coulter seems still to be commercially viable and politically useful.
From the Cleary website: "We at Cleary University have a strong past and proud tradition as a specialized business university and we remain committed to the enhancement of society through the many successes of our alumni and their employers."
Maybe for Cleary bringing in Coulter is an object lesson titled "Profitable Controversy: Hateful Sound Bite as Unforgettable Hook."
Here is a troubling hybrid: verbal abuse and propaganda merge with news and entertainment. And there you have the Imus problem, the Coulter problem, the O'Reilly problem, and more.
This communication approach presumes a single correct point of view for any issue and is utterly repulsed by dialogue. It has no use for other view points than to be foils for its own aggrandizement. If it really is entertainment, it aims to satisfy our demons not our better angels. Its central deceit is to portray hateful words and attitudes as playful articulation of beliefs held by a reasonable, but silent majority. (Glenn Beck does us the courtesy of self identifying,"Hey! I'm just saying what we're all thinking.") You all know who you are, apparently. And a number of you have already bought tickets for the Coulter event.
So, Coulter seems still to be commercially viable and politically useful.
From the Cleary website: "We at Cleary University have a strong past and proud tradition as a specialized business university and we remain committed to the enhancement of society through the many successes of our alumni and their employers."
Maybe for Cleary bringing in Coulter is an object lesson titled "Profitable Controversy: Hateful Sound Bite as Unforgettable Hook."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
