Estimated US College Going Rates by State - 2005-06

CL Higher Education Center

New: College Going Rates by State - 2008 Early Release

CL Higher Education Center just released the estimated US College Going Rates by State for 2005-06 High School Graduates.

The analysis is based on the 2005-06 Common Core Data (CCD) survey, the Private School Survey (PSS) and the Integrated Postsecondary Education System (IPEDS) migration survey managed by the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES) of the Department of Education (USDE).

The CCD and PSS survey is used to estimate the number of high school graduates from a state. The IPEDS migration survey provide the information of how many of those students went to colleges. Since PSS is collected every two year and the number of graduates collected by the 2005-06 PSS is that of 2004-05 academic year. By assuming that 2004-05 number is a good estimate for the 2005-06 number, we can add it to the number of public high school graduates collected by the CCD to produce the total number of high school graduates for a state.

Estimated Number of High School Graduates by State 2005-06

CL Higher Education Center

CL Higher Education Center just released the total Number of High School Graduates by State for the 2005-06 academic year.

The analysis is based on the 2005-06 Common Core Data (CCD) survey and the Private School Survey (PSS) managed by the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES) of the Department of Education (USDE). Since PSS is collected every two year and the number of graduates collected by the 2005-06 PSS is that of 2004-05 academic year. By assuming that 2004-05 number is a good estimate for the 2005-06 number, we can add it to the number of public high school graduates collected by the CCD to produce the total number of high school graduates for a state.

The data in these table can later be used to estimate the college going rate for a state when combined with the migration data from the Integrate Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Release of Graduation Rate for Private High School By US states

CL Higher Education Center

CL Higher Education Center just released the graduation rate for private high school by state.

The analysis is based on the 2005 and 2007 Private School Survey (PSS) that is managed by the National Center of Education Statistics (NCES) of the Department of Education (USDE). The overall graduation rate for private high school is 98.3 for 2004-05 graduates and 98.0 for 2006-07 graduates. The data presented will also be used for estimating the total high school graduates of a state, which can then be used to estimate the college going rate for each state when combined with data from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS).

Obama Tries New Tack to Collect Student Data

Original Article
Student Data Systems, Unite!

But when it comes education, we need to think about education first, not the research.

Personally, I like this one:

"For it to succeed, it can't be loaded with those who think unlimited data collection is the holy grail of educational reform." by Ms. Flanagan.

Here are couple of my thoughts - comments welcome:
On the onset, people supporting the tracking like to quote the accountability as the reason. But, there is a problem. If you really want accountability, you should know how to delegate responsibility. If state is responsible for educating the K12 students, I see no reason for other people to snoop around on those individual records. All you need to do is knowing how many students come from that state is not performing and leave the task to the state. This concept applies to other smaller entities too. Research is a different issue. Researcher can contract with entities and help them with the task of improving their performance.

The other popular idea/practice behind the tracking is to define students' success on their performance at the next level in their life. Federal Government can then trace back to students' prior encounters (i.e. schools, teachers ... etc) and hold them accountable. This approach is, in a way, very handy for the Federal Government or any big brothers, since they do not need to set the curriculum defined success before hand but can always accuse schools for not setting the curriculum high enough.

For accountability to work, each entities should be targeted/given a clearly determined or agreed-to goals and evaluated against it. If such an objective goal have been set, a high school will already know if they met their responsibility or not. There is no use of the tracking system.

The task of the Federal Government or Colleges is to work with high schools to work out what is the reasonable goal for the high school graduates and to develop suitable objective evaluation methods.

I am a researcher and I love data. But when it comes education, we need to think about education first, which happen to be teaching responsibility, not the research.

Release of 2008 Educational Attainment by State and Age

CL Higher Education Center

CL Higher Education Center just released the state report on Education Attainment.

The analysis is based on US census' 2008 American Community Survey (ACS). The analysis reported the % of population for each education attainment level and age range. In general, the high percentage of graduate degree workforce correlated well with a state's New Economy Index published by The Information Technology & Innovation Foundation.

Slipping (Further) Off the Pedestal

Original Article - The article is about a survey of public's perception about the HIGH higher education price.

Quality check is the most important factor in affecting the cost of higher education.

A lot of comments are well received.

I like to point out couple of my points:

Should we really believe the HE is necessary for all/most of our citizen?
Personally, I wouldn't say that just yet until I see our K12 crank out quality students - I am pretty sure a lot of things I do today, I will be able to do it with my high school degree adding some self-improvement.

To me, the quality check is the most important factor in affecting the cost of higher education. Personally, I have no problem with the idea that the lower cost will bring down the quality - as long as the quality is reflect on the price. There are institutions with great faculties and highly qualified students that are well deserved the high price. But there are also institutions with great faculties but not so qualified students. In this case, the high quality faculties is under used and institutions might as well lower the price and hire suitable faculties. The problem is, of cause, at this point, parents and students do not have good information on the quality of college graduates. They can only go for the brand names and, of cause, no one is going to risk their future by betting on cheaper colleges - you can't blame people to believe that, in some way, the price could reflect quality especially when there is no good indicator.

For-Profit Colleges Change Higher Education's Landscape

Original Article
Chronicle of Higher Education falls down on the job

Objective measurement is in no way try to intimidating the 'traditional higher education' but a fair mechanism that protect the public and it happen to be in favor of GOOD old 'traditional higher education institution'.

It's hard to believe that the traditional university and colleges still don't think that an objective measurement of their graduates is not only the right thing to do but also an indicator of their quality. Why are they against it? I can't understand their logic. But I hope it have nothing to do with their fears of comparison. If that is the case, I am afraid that even I will begin to question the quality of the education our kids are receiving.

===== Added on Feb. 20, 2010
It seems that the second article pointed to the problem of quality. That article is written by former Chronicle staff. To my opinion, the Chronicle is more of a 'Higher Education Insider', which, most of the time, defend the value of 'traditional higher education'. I actually wondering if the Chronicle have being actively support the idea of objective measurement of college graduates. At this point, I can only hope some of these people will finally realize that the support of objective measurement is in no way try to intimidating the 'traditional higher education' but a fair mechanism that protect the public and it happen to be in favor of GOOD old 'traditional higher education institution'.

Education Directions - US Education Department

Clash Over Student Privacy
Resistance on Debt Proposal

To be finished ...

Given these two instances, I am beginning to question the direction US Education Department is taking.

My major concerns are 1. The dis-regard of law in the privacy case and 2. The dis-regard of the free-market mechanism in the Debt Proposal case.

In the case of privacy, I understand that data is very useful in UNDERSTANDING possible problems in our education system. But trying to ignore the law and forcing forward with rules? Do they really understand the value of having a democratic government?

I am a supporter of accountability. But I simply can't agree with US ED's way of forcing an organization to accept responsibilities that they do not have adequate control. Besides, how does this take into account the responsibility of the students and parents?