Though the authors state in the Introduction that, “We believe such [online] systems have the potential to improve faculty productivity and lower instructional costs without sacrificing educational quality,” online education continues to face staunch critics.  Fundamentally, the report notes that the onslaught of online education in the higher education landscape has the potential to completely transform our concept of and basic approach to educating the nation’s college students.  The concept of online education is so foreign to many that there is some resistance based solely on it being “different.”  The authors conducted interviews with a variety of institutions utilizing online education in a variety of ways.  Not surprisingly, considering the relatively recent arrival of online education on the higher educational scene, institutions are still working to figure out how best to utilize new technologies to reduce instructional costs, improve student learning outcomes, and maximize faculty effectiveness.

Online education is becoming such a disruptive force (to use Clayton Christensen’s terminology) in education that the authors state, “Online learning is taking place at just about every college and university in the nation.”  In their interviews with administrators and faculty at institutions implementing online education in some way, there were some common themes uncovered discussing the rationale for the introduction of online education.  Many institutions, for example, see online offerings as a revenue generator.  Online education has the ability to reach non-traditional students (adult learners who are not able to attend class in a physical, more traditional setting) as well as students who would otherwise not enroll with the university due to geographic location.  While there are significant startup costs associated with implementing an online environment, many schools anticipate eventually recouping that initial investment through decreased use of facility space, increased enrollments thanks to the online offerings, and more effective use of faculty time.  Interestingly, some universities have seen cost savings as well as increased revenue yet the authors point out, “Very few institutions are using either the savings from online education or the net incremental revenue to reduce the price of education to students.”

Schools are also beginning to utilize online education as a means of improving student retention and persistence.  Practically speaking, the current economic crisis that has led to reductions in faculty size and reduction in course offerings, has effectively barred many students from getting into the classes they want and need to graduate.  By moving courses to an online environment, more can be offered overall and fewer students will be blocked from registering for core courses.  In this way, students will be more likely to continue their educations unabated.  In addition, some schools believe that online education has the potential to dramatically improve our understanding and execution of practices to improve student learning outcomes.  Some institutions have implemented online education as a means of testing this theory.  The authors acknowledge that “the belief that students in online courses may learn the material better than their traditional-format counterparts did not appear to be widely held.  This may be partly due to the scarcity of convincing evidence, produced by rigorous evaluations, about the effectiveness of hybrid or online learning compared with that of traditional modes of teaching.”  (The Department of Education released a meta-analysis in 2009 that found that “on average, students in online learning conditions performed better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.”)  

While there are many reasons stated by university administrators for implementing online platforms, there are many perceived barriers, some of which have been stated in the discussion above regarding the rationales for implementation.  As is the case with all disruptive technologies, a small group of early adopters carries the burden of proving the value to others.  For many faculty members interviewed for the report, online education is seen as the end of their value as instructors.  The authors note that fears over diminished faculty ranks in the face of online education was a common theme in their conversations.  While online learning does lend itself to a certain level of “automation,” the faculty must still remain engaged in order to make the course as effective as possible.  Additionally, for those faculty who are willing to venture into the world of online teaching and learning, the authors recommend that institutions create some type of incentive or compensation program.  The initial work required on the part of the faculty member teaching in an online environment is substantial enough that universities should consider breaking down this particular barrier by offering some type of incentive or additional compensation structure for innovative faculty members willing to pursue the online platform. 

For many faculty members, control or ownership over the course is paramount to all other concerns.  The report notes that some faculty members have questions about the implications for intellectual property standards in the online environment.  Others note that they take great pride and care in crafting their courses and many are unfamiliar with the concepts associated with instructional design – they teach the way they were taught and are comfortable in that setting.  In response to these stated challenges and perceived obstacles, the authors have provided a series of remedies including to “make faculty pioneers heroes” by embracing those willing to venture into the online environment and pave the way for others to follow.  Other strategies include establishing centers within the institution separate from the traditional to experiment with online learning and continuously developing a mechanism for mining data that will assist in providing answers to the questions of student learning outcomes, persistence, and retention in the online setting. 

Though there are some perceived barriers to the adoption of online learning systems in American higher education, there is significant evidence that students are migrating toward the online environment.  Babson Survey Research Group, in conjunction with The Sloan Consortium, Inside Higher Ed, and Pearson, noted in its recent report titled, “Going the Distance: Online Education in the United States, 2011” that in the Fall of 2010, more than 6.1 million students took at least one online class.  That represents a 10.1 percent increase over online enrollments in Fall 2009.  In his book The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from the Inside Out, Clayton Christensen notes that the cost of operating an online university is half that of operating a traditional one, largely because of a lack of facilities needed for students.  (To see more about Christensen’s theories in The Innovative University, see my blog article posted last August.)  This translates into an opportunity for students to receive an education for significantly less cost than they could at an average traditional university.  Considering the ambitious goals of the Obama Administration to bring America back to its preeminent position in terms of college graduates, an alternative to traditional higher education is necessary.  At this point online education seems to be a viable alternative and the number of students registering for online courses at traditional universities and the number enrolling at fully online institutions like APUS is a testament to this – despite any perceived barriers.

Today I had the honor of hosting the ribbon cutting event for American Public University System’s (APUS) latest addition to its Charles Town campus, a 1,660 panel solar array.  The array is the largest solar project in the state of West Virginia and will produce approximately 480,000 kWh of energy.  The energy produced will provide between 40 and 50 percent of the energy needed to power the 105,000-square-foot green Finance Center which is under construction adjacent to the array and being built to US Green Building Council’s LEED Gold standards.  The array features 15 universal electric car charging stations and doubles as covered parking for the university’s staff and guests.  The array was fully constructed with American-made components and will produce enough electricity to power 30 average size homes annually.  To equate this to vehicles and commuting, the amount of electricity generated by the array would enable the average gas-powered vehicle to travel 1.9 million miles, the equivalent of 120 commuters driving 15,000 miles each year. 

I was joined at our ribbon cutting event by several notable dignitaries including West Virginia Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito.  Vice Mayor of Charles Town, Don Clendening and Mayor of neighboring Ranson, David Hamill were also on hand to commemorate this event.  Congresswoman Capito, Vice Mayor Clendening, and Mayor Hamill have all expressed and demonstrated their own commitments to sustainability and sustainable development so it was especially fitting to have them in attendance.  We were able to demonstrate the universal electric car charging stations thanks to three local car dealerships (Apple Valley Chevrolet in Martinsburg, Younger Auto Group in Frederick and Hagerstown, and Renn Kirby Mitsubishi in Frederick) that showcased their own electric vehicles during the event.  The APUS Sustainability Committee also hosted an information booth to share information with visitors about the university’s comprehensive sustainability initiatives. 

Today’s event and the comprehensive sustainability program at APUS not only represent our own commitment to sustainability but also illustrate the American spirit of ingenuity and innovation in general.  It was as much about providing renewable energy for our university as it was about making a commitment to our local and extended communities that we will continue to work to promote a more sustainable future for us all.  In 2007 when I signed the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC) as a charter signatory, I did so because I believe higher education has a unique opportunity to shape the future of the nation in addressing the issues associated with climate change. 

With access to some of the best and brightest minds, higher education would be remiss if it did not use that opportunity to address one of the nation’s – the world’s – most pressing problems.  The hallowed halls of the university can, in the most traditional sense, be seen as places for the exchange of theory and ideas.  Higher education has a unique opportunity, however, to lead by example and turn those theories and ideas into action.

One of the most visible sustainability efforts that we have undertaken relates to buildings.  As part of our commitment to the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC), we have pledged to build all new construction to at least US Green Building Council (USGBC) LEED Silver standards.  Our new 45,000-square-foot Academic Center, built on a brownfields site, is currently in the LEED certification process and we hope to achieve a Gold designation.  There are many green features in that building which we completed and occupied in late 2010.  The HVAC system is highly efficient and operates through multiple zones, for example.  In addition, the building is outfitted with energy efficient windows which are covered with sunshades to assist in further regulating indoor temperatures.  Occupancy sensor lighting fixtures and ENERGY STAR appliances can be seen throughout the building.  All materials used in construction and all furniture originated within 500 miles of the building site, decreasing the carbon emissions associated with materials transportation.  Perhaps, the crowning achievement of the Academic Center is 99 solar panels situated on the roof which supply approximately 7 percent of the building’s total energy needs.

On the other end of the building “spectrum,” however, are APUS’ comprehensive adaptive reuse practices.  Rather than utilize existing green space to construct new buildings, we decided to invest in the historic downtown Charles Town community by purchasing and renovating existing structures for our office spaces.  At least 5 of our buildings have great historical significance and we took measures to restore as much of the historic value as possible to those buildings while updating them to create greater energy efficiency (most have energy efficient windows and HVAC systems, low flow toilets, motion sensor lighting, etc.). 

Etter Hall (our main administration building), for example, was built in the early 1800s as the home and office of physician Charles Taylor Richardson.  The building became the area’s first hospital in the early 1900s, a capacity it served for several decades.  By 1950, however, the community had outgrown that hospital and the building became a nursing home.  APUS purchased the building in 2003.  Though we updated many aspects of the building (including the elements previously listed), the elevator car is the original (and, was one of the first in this area, quite a novelty) with upgraded electrical controls and doors.  The wooden floors in Etter Hall are also original to the building. 

Aside from our buildings, APUS has undertaken several other initiatives to minimize the school’s environmental impact.  Our computers, printers, and servers are ENERGY STAR rated as are many of our buildings’ appliances.  Our printers are set to default to print on both sides of the page for multiple page documents.  We have recently expanded our recycling program to make it more comprehensive.  Using The Big Green Box Program, we are now recycling batteries and other electronics.  Though you may take up to a year to fill The Big Green Box before sending it back to be recycled, APUS filled its first box in only 5 weeks, sending nearly 40 pounds of batteries to be recycled.  Earlier this year, APUS introduced a carpooling program to its staff in order to address carbon emissions associated with employee commuting.  The program has seen early success and I suspect that it will continue to be successful, especially given the rising cost of gasoline.  Coupled with our carpooling program is a telecommuting policy that allows many staff employees to work from home at least one day a week; others telecommute every day.  Thanks to several paper reduction initiatives we have seen a 25 percent reduction in paper usage even in the face of tremendous employee growth. 

Thanks to APUS’ online format, our carbon footprint is comparatively lower than many other schools’, particularly since our faculty and students may teach and study from their home, office, or another convenient place.  However, while we do not have to contend with the emission challenges associated with student commuting, the maintenance and operation of dormitories, dining halls, sports facilities, etc., we will continue to work toward reducing our environmental impact even further.  Though Earth Day is a noble effort to call global attention to the state of our environment, at APUS the commitment to sustainability is alive and well throughout the year. 

Next week I will share an article about APUS’ latest green building project, a 1,660 panel solar array that doubles as a covered parking structure.  The array, the largest in the state of West Virginia, will provide approximately 50% of the power necessary for a green building that is currently under construction adjacent to the school’s green Academic Center. 

In September 1962 Rachel Carson published her groundbreaking work, Silent Spring, documenting the negative impact of pesticides on the environment, specifically on birds.  The book received nationwide acclaim and landed on the New York Times best-seller list where it stayed for 31 weeks.  In 1962, the New York Times wrote of Carson and Silent Spring, “’She tries to scare the living daylights out of us and, in large measure, succeeds.’” The editors of Discover Magazine recently included Silent Spring among its list of the 25 greatest science books of all time.  Prior to Carson’s book, environmentalism and sustainability were lofty ideals that had very little concrete application and brought even less sense of collective urgency.  As a result of Carson’s book, however, tangible actions were taken (the banning of the harmful pesticide DDT).  Carson proved to us all that even the voice of one individual can make a difference and with her voice, given to us through her work, Silent Spring, the modern environmental movement was born. 

Through various fits and starts, the American environmental movement has continued to gain momentum.  The passage of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) in 1970 was a promising step in the right direction and represented the world’s first national policy on the environment.  The NEPA met with resistance in the United States, however, but sparked a larger movement and environmentalism as a discipline and practice began to spread across the globe.  National efforts to address environmental problems including climate change became more commonplace and the United Nations established its Environment Programme in 1972 as a result of the UN Conference on the Human Environment.  In recent years, despite international criticism regarding the United States’ stance on several international environmental treaties (most notably the Kyoto Protocol) Americans are beginning to see sustainability featured more prominently in their daily lives.  Addressing what is arguably the world’s most pressing collective issue will take more than a conscious recycling effort.  We must realize that negative changes to the environment impact every aspect of our lives and must be addressed in a holistic and comprehensive fashion.  One sector of American life is taking sustainability very seriously – American higher education is leading the march toward promoting sustainability. 

As colleges and universities began to consider the impact of their own operations on the environment, they also began to disseminate information about sustainability to their students, either formally or informally.  In 2006, as a result of planning sessions among a group of college and university presidents and a representatives from a variety of environmental organizations (including Second Nature and ecoAmerica) held at the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education (AASHE) conference at Arizona State University, 12 devoted college and university presidents outlined what would later become known as the American College and University Presidents’ Climate Commitment (ACUPCC).  By March 2007, 152 college and university presidents (I was one of them) signed the precedent-setting commitment aimed at providing a framework for addressing sustainability in higher education.  Today, nearly 700 institutions of higher education have signed the commitment.  Each of them has committed to reducing their environmental impact and working toward eventually achieving complete carbon neutrality by a date of their individual choosing based on their specific circumstances (based on our location in West Virginia and the limited fuel mix available to us at this point, APUS has chosen 2050).  While the goal is ambitious, I am convinced that if there is any collective group capable of addressing such a pressing issue, it is higher education. 

Colleges and universities have served as the nursery for nurturing social movements in America for decades.  As with the civil rights movement and the women’s rights movement, the growing movement to address our collective issue of global environmental change is being fostered on college and university campuses across the country.  It makes sense that these settings would nurture such movements – college campuses are packed with great minds eager to learn and understand, eager to make a difference in the world.  Though the ACUPCC provides a logical and effective framework for implementing sustainability into operations and curricula, many schools who have not signed that specific commitment are taking the issue of environmental change very seriously, as well. 

As students graduate from colleges and universities that recognize the critical nature of and are working to address the issues of global changes in the environment, they will enter the workplace more prepared than any previous generation to tackle these issues on an even grander scale.  As with other social movements whose sparks were ignited on college campuses and eventually spilled into our larger society, so too will be the path of the sustainability movement.  Colleges and universities are realizing that it is no longer enough to discuss lofty ideals in a theoretical setting.  We all must take collective action to address the world’s most pressing problems.  I applaud those schools that are working to address the issues related to environmental change and feel confident that this is just the first wave of a movement that will continue to grow.

In 2004, the American Public University System (APUS) Board of Trustees elected Dr. Kate Zatz as a new board member.  As APUS’s newly appointed president, I visited Dr. Zatz who worked at Hudson County Community College in Newark, New Jersey.  We talked about a number of things during my visit and I asked her if she could recommend any publications about student retention.  She handed me a copy of Leaving College and told me that it was an excellent resource for reading about student attrition research.  I read it and distributed copies to others at APUS.  Later on, Leaving College and my interest in student retention would inspire my doctoral dissertation and subsequent research related to online student retention.  When I received a pre-publication notice for Completing College: Rethinking Institutional Action a few months ago, I ordered a copy.

In the preface to Completing College, Vincent Tinto states that the goal of his book is not to develop a new theory of retention but to suggest a framework that institutions can utilize in applying policies and actions to improve retention and college completion.  Based on the quantity of dog-eared pages and highlighted paragraphs in my copy, I would say that he has accomplished his goal.

Tinto cites four conditions that must be present at colleges and universities in order to enhance retention and completion.  These four are expectations, support, assessment and feedback, and involvement.  Conveniently, he has organized a chapter of the book to discuss each of these conditions and provides case studies as well as references to research that support the effectiveness of actions in the areas that improve retention and completion.  Another chapter entitled “Administrative Action” provides policies and practices including investments, organizing for a focus on retention, and the timing of actions.  While he notes that some retention practices are effective throughout college, Tinto strongly advocates an institutional focus on the first year student for the most effective return on time and expenses invested.  A three step action plan for institutions is recommended.  The first step is for an institution to align and sequence courses and support courses so that success in one leads to success in the following course(s).  Next, faculty actions and interactions in the classroom are critical to student success.  Lastly, faculty development is critical to the institution’s retention efforts and must be included in a plan.

In the book’s final chapter, Tinto calls for institutions to keep a focus on their retention initiatives and not to let them fade away over time as leaders and participants move on to other responsibilities.  He writes that many institutions have retention projects but that few take them seriously (most include retention projects as just one more item on a long list of projects).  Tinto notes that for adult students in particular, success is measured one class at a time and that dropouts are not always dropouts until a number of years have elapsed (he recommends keeping a dropout in the system for nine years).

Similar to Leaving College, Completing College has two relevant appendixes at the back of the book.  Entitled “Retention and Persistence” and “Retention and Accountability,” these appendixes discuss the difficulty of measuring and defining persistence.  Tinto urges that no one rush to judgment without examining the attributes of students, the nature of their intent, as well as the types of institutions that they attend.  Disappointingly, but understandably, data is not presented related to persistence and completion rates for online institutions or programs nor for for-profit institutions.  While Tinto mentions that these results should be studied, he states that there are not enough reliable studies to make a meaningful comparison.  After discussing various initiatives related to accountability, Tinto states that none of them take into account student swirling (which I have written about before), double dipping, and transfer.  In the case of students enrolling at multiple institutions, Tinto states that this situation raises the issue of which institutions should be accountable and for what.

All in all, Completing College exceeds my expectations as a college administrator.  Vincent Tinto’s research subsequent to Leaving College provided him with the idea of constructing a framework that colleges and universities can use as a basis for action related to improving retention and completion.  The case studies and research cited are excellent examples of projects that worked in certain institutions and with certain students.  The appendixes are helpful for distribution to those on the outside who may still think that all college students are first-time, full-time freshmen who live on campus and who graduate in four years.  Improving retention and completion is a must if our nation is to return to its globally competitive position.  Vincent Tinto has capped his years of research with an excellent book for institutions to utilize if they are serious about improving retention.  I intend to order a few extra copies.

According to a March 20 report from the BLS, for those veterans serving active-duty since 2001 (known as the Gulf War-era II veterans) the unemployment rate was 12.1 percent in 2011.  The jobless rate for all veterans was 8.3 percent, comparable to that of the US population as a whole.   The BLS report points out that 26 percent of Gulf War-era II veterans reported a service related disability in August 2011 while only 14 percent of all veterans reported the same.  There can be little doubt from these statistics that America’s bravest men and women, those who were willing to make the ultimate sacrifice for the nation’s safety, have come home to a bleak employment situation. 

Unemployment among veterans has been a persistent problem.  In a 1972 report of the National Advisory Council on Vocational Education, Chairman Lawrence Davenport encouraged “an all-out national effort” to address the “crisis” of unemployment among returning Vietnam veterans (during a time of otherwise relatively high general unemployment).  In another era of high unemployment, America’s veterans are returning home to face seemingly insurmountable obstacles in finding meaningful employment.  It is encouraging, however, to see that some organizations are taking this collective responsibility as their own and working to make a difference in the lives of our military men and women and their families. 

On March 21, Aon and Wounded Warrior Project hosted their 4th Annual Salute to America’s Wounded Warriors at the Sheraton National Hotel in Arlington, Virginia.  Approximately 45 wounded veterans had the opportunity to meet with recruiters from more than 60 companies with open positions and a commitment to supporting the nation’s veterans.  In addition to the veterans in attendance, a handful of military spouses also participated.  Without question, military spouses and families make a tremendous sacrifice as well as their loved one in uniform and we should support their achievement as well.  While I was not at this event, I asked several American Public University System (APUS) recruiters and staff to participate.  They reported back that they were impressed by the high quality of the candidates they met. 

The recruiters who were in attendance tell me that during his opening remarks (prior to the actual meetings between potential employers and participants), Aon Director of Human Resources, Dave Dahler, announced that one veteran had already been offered a position with Morgan Stanley.  Once the meetings started, recruiters moved around the room, stopping at veterans’ tables to discuss potential opportunities (a sort of “reverse career fair”).  Recruiters jockeyed for position in line at many of the veterans’ tables and it was clear that both groups saw tremendous mutual benefit in the event. 

Those who attended the event related some of the opening remarks of Aon Board Member, retired four-star general of the US Air Force, and 15th Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Richard Myers.  General Myers quoted George Washington who said (paraphrasing) during the Revolutionary War that we must take care of our veterans in order to ensure that they continue to fight for the nation.   Washington’s remarks ring as true today as they did in the days of the nation’s founding.  He also recounted the treatment of veterans returning home from the nation’s foreign wars.  He explained the experiences of Vietnam veterans returning from war to an economy nearly as stagnant as the current one.  Though both groups of veterans are returning from war, from risking their lives, to an unwelcoming economic situation, today’s veterans have a benefit over those who served three decades ago.  Today’s veterans are returning home to a nation that while perhaps divided over the political reasons associated with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, are collectively proud of their men and women in uniform and eager to assist their transition to civilian life. 

Events like the one that Aon and Wounded Warrior Project hosted in Arlington are evidence that despite the unfortunate economic situation, many corporations and organizations are throwing their efforts behind supporting our returning veterans and “wounded warriors.”  I would like to applaud Aon as well as the Wounded Warrior Project for their commitment to America’s veterans.  I would also like to thank the companies who participated alongside APUS to provide employment opportunities to those who are arguably our nation’s most deserving. 

(To see some photos from the event, visit Callie Hardman’s photography blog.)

In research that I conducted initially for my doctoral dissertation and then later in a paper with my colleagues Phil Ice and Angela Gibson, I identified several factors as significant variables leading to student disenrollment from an online program.  These variables include no transfer credit received, student’s last grade of F, student’s last grade of W, and low number of courses completed by the student in a 12-month period.

Over the past year and a half, my colleagues and I have continued to examine the student disenrollment patterns at the American Public University System (APUS) and have discussed those patterns with colleagues at a number of other institutions offering online programs.  More and more, I have come to believe that the persistence of students who complete three or more undergraduate courses at APUS and the tendency of students who complete fewer than three courses at APUS to eventually disenroll are much more correlated to adult student behaviors previously identified by researchers using data from traditional institutions.

During the past decade, a major increase in enrollments has occurred  with the number of adults attending online programs versus face-to-face programs.  The reasons are obvious:  working adults are able to attend online programs from any location at any time.  Those with jobs that frequently take them out of town no longer have to juggle schedules to meet the requirement of taking a face-to-face class, but can log in from another city or country; the only requirement is a computer and an internet connection.  Additionally, adult students with a family can come home from work and log in to their classroom after dinner and after the children go to bed.  Those adults whose jobs require them to work non-traditional evening or night shifts can log in during times that suit them and not worry about losing sleep to attend face-to-face courses at a local college or university.

One of the earlier studies regarding persistence rates of adult students was published by the U.S. Department of Education’s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES).  In this study, researchers Laura Horn and Mark Premo identified seven risk factors that were associated with the likelihood that a student would not graduate from college.  These risk factors were:  being independent, attending college part-time, working full-time while enrolled, having dependents, being a single parent, delaying entry to college, and not having a traditional high school diploma.  Working adults attempting to complete an associates’ or bachelor’s degree are likely to have at least three of these risk factors and those with children may have five or six.

Other studies of persistence relating to adult students provide explanations and characteristics of transfer students.  Noting that my own research indicated that students who had transferred credits were  more likely to graduate than those who did not transfer credit, I reviewed some of the literature about transfer students and student attendance patterns.  Wright and de los Santos wrote about this phenomenon in “Maricopa’s Swirling Students: Earning One-Third of Arizona State’s Bachelor’s Degrees” in 1990.  Later, director of Indiana University’s National Survey of Student Engagement, Alex McCormick, wrote a research article titled “Swirling and Double-Dipping: New Patterns of Student Attendance and Their Implications for Higher Education,” outlining the various patterns of student attendance and their implications.  In his article, McCormick attributes the likelihood of students to attend multiple institutions to the standardization of credits and the ability to transfer credits from one institution to another rather easily.  McCormick outlines eight different patterns of attendance for swirling students.  These are: 
• Trial enrollment – Students experimenting with another institution before formally transferring
• Special program enrollment – Students completing most of their coursework at their home institution but completing a special program (e.g., semester abroad) elsewhere
• Supplemental enrollment – Students enrolling at another institution for one or more terms to supplement or accelerate their program (examples include summer programs or taking a course at another institution because it’s unavailable at the home institution)
• Rebounding enrollment – Students alternating enrollment at two or more institutions
• Concurrent enrollment – Students taking courses at two institutions simultaneously
• Consolidated enrollment – Students who satisfy their home institution’s residency requirements but a substantial number of their credits come from at least two other institutions
• Serial transfer – Students who make one or more intermediate transfers sequentially in order to complete a degree
• Independent enrollment – Students pursue work unrelated to their degree program and no credits are transferred

McCormick notes that several longitudinal studies exist and while they provide descriptions of attendance patterns, they fail to provide explanations for those patterns.  He cites Clifford Adelman’s 1999 study that examined the longitudinal data of the 1982 high school graduates’ cohort and identified that students who attended multiple institutions accounted for approximately 60 percent of all students who began at four year institutions.  Approximately 37 percent of all students from the 1982 cohort attended two institutions and 22 percent attended three institutions.  Confirming some of the classifications outlined by McCormick was Adelman’s finding that three in five of the 1982 graduates who attended two institutions returned to their first college, as did half of the 1982 graduates who attended three colleges.  It’s important to note that Adelman’s longitudinal study over 16 years examined college attendance data over a much longer period than the NCES data required to be reported by institutions participating in the Federal Student Aid program.

The studies mentioned by McCormick and Adelman are excellent starting points for discussions about why more research is necessary to determine the explanations of student swirling.  Is it possible that adult students might attend even more institutions today because the availability and popularity of online courses and programs has increased substantially over the past decade?  The Sloan Consortium’s most recent publication, Going the Distance:  Online Education in the United States 2011, has identified that nearly one third of all college students completed at least one online course in 2010-2011.  At the recent Council of College and Military Educators (CCME) Conference, the Department of Defense reported that 75 percent of all military tuition assistance payments were for students attending online programs.  While the military may be more mobile than most working professionals, the data otherwise supports the increasing trend of adult students enrolled in online courses/programs.  As noted earlier, the risk factors for college completion are compounded for working adult students and may lead to explanations of some institutions’ student transfers.

More and more, I am convinced that the United States needs a national database that tracks the progress of college students as they attend multiple institutions.  The Predictive Analytics Reporting (PAR) Framework funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and managed by the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) Cooperative for Education Technologies has a database with 640,000 student records from students attending online programs at six different institutions.  That’s approximately 10 percent of the students who took online courses last year according to the Sloan survey mentioned earlier.  The National Student Clearinghouse provides data as it is contributed by participating institutions, but institutions are not required to belong to the consortium and only recently has the Clearinghouse been able to accept student data from institutions with non-traditional financial aid enrollment periods.  In addition, that data does not aggregate by institutional profile in a more granular format (adult serving, commuter college, online, etc.). 

During the last reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act in 2008, Congress inserted a provision prohibiting the Department of Education from creating such a database.  To quote McCormick, “if educators, policymakers, and researchers are to assess institutional impact, they will need better information about [an] institution’s attendance profile, if not detailed information about the source of credits at the student level.”  As Adelman and others have identified, there are multiple types of institutional profiles as well as profiles of students who attend those institutions.  Before a policymaker or pundit makes a disparaging remark about student persistence rates at a particular institution or group of institutions, they need to have data far beyond that related to first-time, full-time students that has been the baseline for institutional reporting to the Integrated Post-secondary Education Data System (IPEDS).  Institutions and researchers should collaborate to provide more insights to explanations for adult student drop out beyond “life happens.”  More research on adult student swirling needs to be conducted, particularly for those students attending online programs or institutions.

The webinar featured Mr. Dennis E. Frye, Chief Historian at Harpers Ferry National Historical Park and past president of a national battlefield preservation organization (today known as the Civil War Preservation Trust).  Mr. Frye has written six books and authored more than 70 articles about the Civil War.  He also served as the Associate Producer for the acclaimed film Gods and Generals.  Mr. Frye is an expert on the topic of the Civil War in Jefferson County.

Situated on the border of the north and south, Jefferson County was a critical position for both sides.  At the time of the war’s beginning, Jefferson County was part of the state of Virginia.  Following John Brown’s assault on the US Armory and arsenal at Harpers Ferry, the citizens of Harpers Ferry formed militia, uncertain whether Brown acted alone or whether they should expect another such attack.  It was these militiamen who initiated the first attempts to protect Harpers Ferry from the north. 

Frye compared the fear of the citizens of Harpers Ferry in those days to the fears that most Americans felt in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.  In the midst of  an unprecedented attack by an enemy  yet to be identified, many Americans began taking precautions to be prepared in the event that another attack would follow.  The citizens of Harpers Ferry had similar motivations when they began arming militias to defend their town after John Brown’s attack. 

Robert E. Lee was appointed to develop the military strategy that would be required to defend Virginia, and Lee understood quite well the strategic importance of Jefferson County and the Shenandoah Valley.  Lee assigned Thomas Jonathan (later known as “Stonewall”) Jackson to Harpers Ferry.  Frye explained  that these two men worked tirelessly to develop a sound strategy for defending the area which sits at the confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac Rivers.  He quoted extensively from letters written between the two men and provided the audience with the first-hand accounts of these illustrious soldiers as they strategized on how best to hold their position. 

He applauded Jackson’s ingenuity at manipulating the Baltimore & Ohio (B&O) Railroad’s operating hours.  Restricting the railroad’s movement through Harpers Ferry to only two hours each day, Jackson was able to position his men so that when the train came through, his forces were able to take control of the railroad quite easily, seizing several hundred cars containing equipment, arms, and ammunition intended for the north.  Known as Jackson’s “Great Railroad Robbery,” Frye posits this action with allowing the South to maintain control of the area and gain an advantage over their much better armed and trained Northern counterparts. 

APUS makes its headquarters in an area steeped in American history. Charles Town is named after its founder, Charles Washington, George Washington’s brother.  Many of the early plantations in the area were owned by Washington family members.  During the Civil War, there were dozens of battles and engagements in this county between the two armies. Mr. Frye’s focus on military strategy in the area during the opening days and months of the Civil War was of particular interest to me as well as many of our military history students and others.  I encourage you to find time to attend some of the webinars that the APUS Interactive Marketing Team is offering twice each month.  Through the end of 2012, at least once each quarter, they will offer a webinar focused on the Civil War in Jefferson County.   I hope to be able to attend these as well.  Past webinars can be viewed on-demand from the archive section of the CivilWarScholars.com blog which is sponsored by American Public University (APU). 

There have been numerous studies about the difficulties that adult students encounter in completing their college degrees while working, raising a family, being a caregiver, etc.  Graduates attending the reception the night before the ceremony shared some of their stories with each other, the faculty and staff members in attendance, and with me.  Their stories are inspiring.  The faculty, staff, and I are proud of our students and our graduates for their professional, personal, and academic accomplishments and wish all of our graduates the very best in their future endeavors.

At the age of 17, only a year after the United States entered World War I, Buckles lied about his age and joined the US Army.  Buckles volunteered as an ambulance driver and was sent to France where he found the suffering of the French people disturbing.  In a 2001 interview for the Library of Congress’ Veterans History Project, Buckles said, “’The little French children were hungry….To me, that was a pretty sad sight,’” demonstrating his compassion for those living in the midst of the Great War.  During his time in France, he also escorted German prisoners of war back to their homeland after the signing of the Armistice. 

After the war, Buckles held various positions with shipping and steamship companies and was assigned to locations throughout the world.  During World War II, he was working as a civilian in Manila and was captured by the Japanese and held for 39 months in a prisoner of war camp.  In the mid-1950s, Buckles settled in Charles Town, West Virginia where he owned and ran a cattle farm.  Buckles remained quite active until his death.  Aside from maintaining his farm (he continued to drive his tractor until the age of 106), he advocated for a suitable memorial in Washington, DC to commemorate the sacrifices of those with whom he served in World War I.

In March 2008, Buckles visited the nation’s capital and was disturbed by the condition in which he found the World War I memorial.  The monument was dedicated in 1931 as a memorial to the 499 residents of the District of Columbia who gave their lives during World War I.  At the time of Buckles’ visit, no national memorial was in place for all World War I veterans.  Buckles made it his personal mission to change this.  After gaining the support of Senators John D. Rockefeller (D-WV), Jim Webb (D-VA), and John Thune (D-SD), Buckles testified before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Subcommittee on National Parks in December 2009 in support of Senate Bill 2097, the Frank Buckles World War I Memorial Act.  The act was passed and work began at a furious rate in hopes of completing the restoration project before Buckles’ death (Buckles was 108 when the bill was passed). 

Though the restoration continues and Buckles will not be able to see the product of his work to memorialize the efforts of World War I veterans, his efforts will not soon be forgotten by the descendents of those who served in The Great War.  Frank Buckles lived a long and remarkable life.  Even as he approached 100 years old, he continued to make public appearances in an attempt to keep the memory of those who sacrificed everything during World War I alive in the minds of a generation who may otherwise never have a firsthand account of that time.   To read about Frank Buckles’ life in his own words, visit his website.  Frank Buckles was a humble man, typical of many who risked their lives or sacrificed their lives to enhance our freedoms.  We will try to do our part to follow his initiatives to recognize the veterans of World War I.