Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar

Rose, Brady have a new higher education plan

Posted in:

Illinois

* Sen. Chapin Rose (R-Mahomet) and Rep. Dan Brady (R-Normal) are filing a bill called the Higher Education Strategic Centers of Excellence Plan,to overhaul the higher education system. Dot points…

• Creates a uniform admission application to be accepted at all public universities in Illinois.

• Any high school student with a grade of B or better average will qualify for automatic admission to an academically appropriate public university if they maintain their B average through graduation. This will extend an opportunity to all students in Illinois; while respecting individual institutions rights to admit students that are the best fit for their existing programs.

• Any student who is not offered admission to a public university must automatically be referred to the community college district where they live and provided with enrollment information.

• If a public institution of higher education accepts a student, they will receive an acceptance letter from that institution setting forth any grants or scholarship offers extended by the institution at that time.

Seems a bit small ball, but what are your thoughts?

posted by Rich Miller
Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:02 am

Comments

Meh, small ball is right. This idea of one size fits all, except when it doesn’t, reminds me of the Illinois Articulation Initiative, which gave work to lots of bureaucrats, but has not worked very well at all in practice. It too was aimed at streamlining transfer until every four year deviated from it with its own unique requirements.

Comment by G'Kar Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:07 am
When you have a governor that flat out refuses to fund higher education, what are we really talking about?

Did they vote both vote to override the funding for higher education this last budget?

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:10 am
I guess I don’t get the point.
Are they calling for closing all admissions offices at public universities and centralizing it under one roof?

Are they trying to save money or create new forms?

Focus, Chapin. Focus.

Also, I don’t think getting into Illinois schools is the problem. Paying for Illinois schools is the problem. And neither Brady nor Rose have done anything to offer assistance there.

Comment by Michelle Flaherty Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:13 am
As someone who remembers filling out many college applications not too long ago, the consolidated application sounds good. Wisconsin has a more integrated system like this, and Texas has a system where if you’re in the top 10 percent of your class you automatically get in to UT. I’m with OW, the financial security of my school would scare me if I was a prospective student.

Comment by A Young Person Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:17 am
One of their Points

. The University of Illinois recently added an $82.6 million brand new STEM (Science Tech, Engineering and Math) building for its’ Springfield campus. $82.6 million for a new STEM program when the ‘crown jewel’ of the state’s higher education system, the U of I’s engineering and science programs in Champaign-Urbana. We need to start by protecting what we already have – not reinventing the wheel. Not too mention that several other universities in Illinois with higher ranked STEM programs than UIS’ have been awaiting new science buildings themselves.

They don’t seem to realize that Springfield serves a Vastly different population than UIUC

But with Chapin being a UIUC guy, I guess all the world revolves around Green Street.

Comment by Someone you should know Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:18 am
Pie in the sky. After crippling funding cuts, this plan seeks to mandate admissions policies, perform a comparative evaluation of academic excellence, and find “efficiencies.” Meanwhile, entire programs have been eliminated at institutions whose reserves did not outlast the State’s mismanagement of the budget process, well-qualified faculty have departed, building programs have ceased, and deferred maintenance — deferred in some cases now for DECADES — continues. The plan did not mention any additional resources to help repair the damage done by the State. Just some more mandates and assessments. You cannot make a hog fatter by weighing it more often.

Comment by morningstar Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:21 am
===The University of Illinois recently added an $82.6 million brand new STEM (Science Tech, Engineering and Math) building for its’ Springfield campus. $82.6 million for a new STEM program when the ‘crown jewel’ of the state’s higher education system, the U of I’s engineering and science programs in Champaign-Urbana. We need to start by protecting what we already have – not reinventing the wheel. Not too mention that several other universities in Illinois with higher ranked STEM programs than UIS’ have been awaiting new science buildings themselves===

Did Rauner veto that?

Did Rose or Brady vote for that, then just voted “Red” on the budgeting mechanism to pay for it?

After these 3 fiscal years, I wouldn’t call Raunerites members “concerned” about higher education.

When you refuse to fund something in government, you want it to go away.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:22 am
So what are the automatic admission policies for community college graduates? Or between universities? A good friend wanted to be an engineer, but didn’t have the grades out of high school to get accepted in the College of Engineering at U of I. He was admitted to College of Ag, worked hard, and transferred into Engineering his junior year. Now he’s a fine engineer (20+ years now). How would this affect someone like him? I get the concerns for specialization, but picking a university is about more than just the academics. An outstanding student might feel overwhelmed at the monolith U of I, but feel right at home at SIU-E. This feels very much like the regimented British educational system. Frankly I’m surprised that that someone as libertarian as Rose likes this nanny state approach to higher education. And which schools (if any) will still provide a liberal arts education?

Comment by Undiscovered country Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:22 am
This can’t hurt enrollment any, so it’s worth a try to see if this does some good. It would be better if this was paired with some mechanism to make the transition from CCs to the Public 4-years seamless, like dual admission.

But it’s a small step forward.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:26 am
I understand the concept, and most students with an A or B average would already get accepted to most of the IL public universities. This should already be happening to land more students. I don’t think you will see a significant boost in enrollment because of this.

The problem is students are wanting out of IL and are looking to attend out of state schools that are offering a nice package to recruit them. The universities should focus on getting more community college transfer students. It is cost effective to the family/student to attend 2 years at a community college and then transfer to a public and still get a diploma from a 4 year university.

The budget impasse and lack of MAP grant funding only made things worse. Nice idea and PR move, but this does move the needle.

Comment by Tunes Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:27 am
I think these are all good ideas, in general. But

1) The first prong needs some fleshing out. I worry it could end up stratifying the schools on class lines.

2) The big problem in IL higher end is funding. This doesn’t touch that. It isn’t designed to. That’s fine, not every bill needs to solve every problem all at once, but it seems like missing the forest for the trees.

Comment by Arsenal Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:34 am
47th Ward — at the rate this State is going, “transition from CCs to the Public 4-years” will be a very seamless process because the academic quality and resources of most regional 4-year institutions are becoming depleted enough that they will soon be indistinguishable from the two-year institutions.

Comment by morningstar Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:34 am
Don’t you just love these small government libertarian Republicans trying to set up yet another bureaucracy and enact even more rules, regulations and laws?

Comment by illini Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:35 am
===The big problem in IL higher end is funding. This doesn’t touch that. It isn’t designed to. That’s fine, not every bill needs to solve every problem all at once, but it seems like missing the forest for the trees.===

It appears its designed to, and designed to fool us in thinking that they care about higher education while Dems and brave Republicans want higher education funded.

This isn’t an accident.

This is really good stuff …

===…most students with an A or B average would already get accepted to most of the IL public universities. This should already be happening to land more students. I don’t think you will see a significant boost in enrollment because of this.

The problem is students are wanting out of IL and are looking to attend out of state schools that are offering a nice package to recruit them.===

Right there.

If you are a family and schools, up to now, ease the financial burden and make it far more affordable than the Illinois schools that weren’t being funded and offer no financial incentives… it makes staying in Illinois a financial burden, and the university isn’t even being fully funded by the governor.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:39 am
Lol morningstar, I suppose that’s one way to get there.

I think there is a big question of capacity at the public universities. Illinois exports a lot of students, always has too, in part because there is a big drop off in quality from U of I to the next tier, but also because there aren’t enough seats for every Illinois HS graduate with the grades to get into college.

If CCs were academically on par with the public four-years, it would add the necessary capacity with no new capital costs and provide a lower cost way for students to complete an education: live at home for two years and attend a CC, then transfer to finish your baccalaureate degree. Cuts the cost of college in half and makes those MAP dollars go a lot farther.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:40 am
LOOPHOLE ALERT: Seems to me that a B average does not guarantee admission to any University: “while respecting individual institutions rights to admit students that are the best fit for their existing programs”

Comment by Chippy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:54 am
47, there a few universities who currently have in place the seamless transition from cc’s to 4 years.

Comment by Because I said so.... Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 10:58 am
Illini - but this fits with what some of us (Word and me and others) have discussed in the past. (Maybe) the time is now look into creating an “umbrella” college system like Wisconsin has and consolidate a good chunk of administrative duties. That would fit in nicely with the “one application fits all” concept and save families/applicants from a) filing several applications and b) paying several application fees.

Comment by Curl of the Burl Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:00 am
Brady and Rose are making it look like they are actively at work, work, work on fixing higher ed.

Comment by Norseman Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:00 am
===there a few universities===

Yes, but why don’t all of them? Some of the private universities have better articulation agreements than some of the publics.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:01 am
I think we should pause and think about this phrase: “Any high school student with a grade of B or better average will qualify for automatic admission to an academically appropriate public university if they maintain their B average through graduation.” That is a highly qualified statement.

U of I at Champaign is not going to admit a high school student even with an A GPA over a student who has much higher ACT or SAT scores and a B average. Moreover, to put it simple, all grade point averages are not created equal.

So a B average student from Payton prep in Chicago, or a B average student from the Illinois Math and Science Academy in Aurora more than likely would be a much stronger student than most A grade point average students from East St. Louis Sr. High School or even Rauner College Prep charter high school in Chicago. Conceptually this entitlement means little given that U of I Champaign or for that matter any other part of the University system will create their own cut scores and determine who the academically appropriate students for admission are.

The California approach for residents is far better in my opinion. If you’re in the top 9 percent of California high school graduates and aren’t admitted to any of the UC campuses you apply to, you’ll be offered a spot at another campus if space is available. That standard of the top 9% is determined by a combination of GPA and test scores see http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/freshman/california-residents/admissions-index/index.html

Comment by Rod Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:08 am
- Curl of the Burl -,

This is not creating the Lincoln University system.

If anything, this is a phony attempt to appear to address the higher education issues, but skipping that pesky funding issue and that this governor has no intention in strengthening Illinois’ universities. Heck, Rauner hasn’t fully funded the state’s universities … and how has Rose and Brady voted… when it came to university funding since Rauner became governor?

Its a small ball feeble attempt to seem engaged.

“Never mistake activity for achievement ” - John Wooden, the University of California… Los Angeles.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:10 am
Willy - please reread what I typed. I said it “fits with” that concept. I understand this is not a major reform. But it is certainly in line with that concept.

Also - from a consumer standpoint the idea of paying for one application instead of several is pretty good. Applying to several colleges really ads up.

Comment by Curl of the Burl Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:14 am
UIUC has already admitted to lowering its admission standards.

So, there’s that.

Add that to the reduced funding and the financial strain staying in Illinois as opposed to going out of state …

The chancellor himself said the past 25 months of a lack of funding has hurt.

I don’t see that addressed here, as the talk of whatever this is addressing seems to ignore the funding issues the chancellor showed concern for when asked.

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:16 am
@Curl - and I have not necessarily dismissed nor am I necessarily opposed to the concept. And Willy, I believe is also on board with this general concept.

But with a few caveats. A full reorganization of Higher Ed would be necessary - and this can not , and will not, be accomplished with this new mandate and these new directives. Unfortunately, I do not see this happening.

In addition, there would still have to be a stand alone system that is independent from state mandated directives. We all know what impact these last 3 years have had on many, many aspects of the U of I system and should be very cautious about further attempts to diminish its reputation and standing.

Comment by illini Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:21 am
On the issue of CC transfers to 4-year institutions: the transitions aren’t seamless in part because the students are not prepared for the rigors of university coursework by two years of CC. They come to the 4-yr inst. not knowing how to write or think critically so the 4-yrs end up having to provide all kinds of remedial training. And guess what, IF the 4-yrs do provide formal remedial training it costs money so we’re right back to problem #1. Furthermore, CCs cannot offer the same level of education as a 4-yr institution when the instructors have little more than a master’s degree and in some cases only a B.A. or B.S. Presumably they are knowledgeable of the subject matter but they are not experts in their fields- they don’t peer review the latest publications, or produce their own research/work that is then passed on to students.

Comment by gadfly Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:22 am
===If you’re in the top 9 percent of California high school graduates and aren’t admitted to any of the UC campuses you apply to, you’ll be offered a spot at another campus if space is available.===

California does NOT compare well with Illinois. For one thing, the UC system has 10 campuses. If you aren’t admitted to the UC system, you are referred to the Cal State system, which has 23 campuses.

Illinois has UIUC, UIC and UIS in descending order of academic prominence. Then ISU, then the directionals and Governor’s state, then the two other publics in Chicago. That’s 12 total, with some meeting rather modest academic standards, and one (maybe two) mysteriously still holding accreditation.

Apples and bowling balls. OTOH, up until the early 2000s, Illinois had what was then considered to be a very strong state system of higher education. Then we started bleeding them dry and the result is a system in crisis with no leadership overall to help right the ship.

Higher education isn’t a mandatory part of state government, it’s sort of a “bonus” function. But it pays enormous dividends for students, for communities, for businesses and for Illinois culture and society. It was once seen as a critically needed asset and a competitive advantage for Illinois. We need to rethink how we manage it, and this modest proposal is a small start.

I’ll take it, but let’s build on it.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:35 am
Gadfly, all of the issues you cite are easy to fix if the will is there. It only costs about $400 to flunk English 101 at a CC. It costs about 5 times that to flunk it at ISU. CCs are exactly where remedial education should be delivered, not 4 years.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:38 am
Gadfly: “On the issue of CC transfers to 4-year institutions: the transitions aren’t seamless in part because the students are not prepared for the rigors of university coursework by two years of CC. They come to the 4-yr inst. not knowing how to write or think critically so the 4-yrs end up having to provide all kinds of remedial training.”

Do you have any evidence to support this? I have evidence to counter this. Students at my community college who transfer to a state school for their junior year have higher GPA’s at the end of the junior year than native students.

Comment by G'Kar Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:41 am
47 and others: The Illinois Articulation Initiative, IAI, was set up in the late 90’s to allow seamless transfer between cc’s and 4 years. It has never worked. Most 4 years have put up roadblocks, requiring course work different then what was agreed to by IAI. At this point most 4 years have individual articulation agreements with their major feeder community colleges and IAI is simply another bureaucratic joke. Hence,as I wrote in the first comment on this thread, one size fits all except when it doesn’t.

Comment by G'Kar Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:45 am
High school students and their parents are exploring their college choices and encounter many challenges on the road to their future education. The state of Illinois could help by putting up traffic message boards during spring and summer to help direct this traffic. This would be particularly helpful in situations where multiple interstate roads intersect with confusing exits from one road to another.
“UW-Madison Take I-90 West Left Lane 2 Miles” or “Iowa City Traffic Right Lane Take I-80 West” are a couple of examples that come to mind.

Comment by DuPage Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:48 am
Spot on G’Kar,

One reason the public never bought in was because there was no central system that forced them to. Another reason was they could find a grad assistant to teach Poli Sci 101 to a lecture hall of 300 students paying full price to take that course. The CC in the area would only charge a fraction of that cost for the same course. Don’t tell me about any drop in quality, the intro Poli Sci course is basically the constitution class.

The public milked as much money out of the system as they were allowed to. The question is, who allowed them to do it and when are they going to be stopped?

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:49 am
==they don’t peer review the latest publications, or produce their own research/work that is then passed on to students.==

So now you need to publish to teach Looking at Art, Keyboarding Technique, and Culinary Mathematics, all undergrad classes at my local CC? Yikes.

Comment by City Zen Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 11:59 am
@47th - unless things have changed radically recently, I have to disagree with one of your points.

When I was taking the mandatory, required undergraduate courses the lecture was ALWAYS done by a full professor, not a grad assistant. With the accompanying discussion groups or labs, they were conducted by grad students already well into their PhD program.

I fear you are greatly oversimplifying to make a point.

Comment by illini Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:03 pm
Gkar/47th. Amen. My absolute frustration with the thievery by Illinois higher ed centers around these CC roadblocks.

Comment by Blue dog dem Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:07 pm
===I fear you are greatly oversimplifying to make a point.===

I work in higher ed, but am also a graduate of ISU, class of 88. I can assure you the instructor listed on my course enrollment was a full, tenured professor. I can also assure you that I never saw him after he welcomed the class to his first lecture. Every class after that was led by a grad assistant, presumably following his syllabus. The same was true for some other intro classes taught in large lecture halls.

I may be simplifying, but I am most certainly not oversimplifying the problem. I’ve been present at IBHE meetings where the subject of why the four years don’t prefer to accept transfer credit has been discussed. It comes down to, in many cases, that they’d rather have the students pay twice for the same class, once at a CC and again at the four year. That’s one of the reasons the four-years tend to “look down” at the credentials of CC instructors. Today, more and more courses are being taught by adjuncts and part time instructors, but the publics still use grad assistants when they can because it lowers costs.

Here’s another anecdote: my older brother went to the local CC for his first year in college before transferring to EIU. Eastern didn’t accept any of his transfer credits. Yes, a lot has changed since then, but the same mentality of how best to fleece the students exists today.

My larger point, and this is way too long and off topic to get into, is that a common application will help because it represents a system wide change. More of that thinking is needed. I agree a one size fits all approach isn’t going to work. But I also think CCs are a key piece of the access/affordability puzzle and the only thing holding them back is quality of instruction. Teaching is portable which means that problem is fixable. But only if the will is there.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:18 pm
I only got halfway through the comments so forgive me, but the “seemless transition from community college to 4 year” ignores the quality of the students and with it, by necessity, the quality of instruction.

Great, force the four years to accept meaningless credits.

How about this? Since you forced us to accept a 3 on the AP exam for full credit, how about we make every cc student take the relevant AP exam. Show me the three. I’ll tell you what would happen. 0.0% of the cc students could write a 3 on an A.P. exam if their only prep was a cc course. You can bank on that!

This is not a rip on my collegues at the c.c.’s who work tremendously hard. It’s just a fact that when the students walk in the door in an open admissions classroom, many if not most of them will not have the background to do the work, and thus the instructor, of necessity, has to “slow” it down, to put it politely.

Most of these proposals that come from people who have demonstrated no particular concern for higher ed in their life choices, result in the dumbing down of education. (That’s also true, by the way, of primary and secondary ed reform as well.)

Did anyone here actually talk to an admissions person about why students are going elsewhere? Hmmm. . . . How about that? Wouldn’t want to consult someone who, you know, actually might know something.

That said, OW has it right.

Comment by Anonymous Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:33 pm
@47th - thank you for sharing. It is understandable, I suppose that the differences in our ages ( probably + 15 years for me ) and colleges could explain much. And I did put conditions on my statement. That being the case, I could very well understand the frustration. Perhaps there is a new norm now at some of the Regionals.

And to your larger point - I suspect we would obviously agree far more than we might disagree. Important discussion nonetheless.

Comment by illini Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:37 pm
===Did anyone here actually talk to an admissions person about why students are going elsewhere? Hmmm. . . . How about that? Wouldn’t want to consult someone who, you know, actually might know something.===

Yeah, none of us know anything about this stuff, especially me. I was just spit balling and making stuff up. Sorry. I just get lonely sometimes and the nice commenters here keep me company.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 12:51 pm
Yes. I did with my youngest. Complete fleecing. I was so ,mad I wanted to file suit. Son lost an entire year. Thievery.

Comment by blue dog dem Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 1:08 pm
==I only got halfway through the comments so forgive me, but the “seemless transition from community college to 4 year” ignores the quality of the students and with it, by necessity, the quality of instruction. ==

==This is not a rip on my collegues at the c.c.’s who work tremendously hard. It’s just a fact that when the students walk in the door in an open admissions classroom, many if not most of them will not have the background to do the work, and thus the instructor, of necessity, has to “slow” it down, to put it politely.==

Yes, it is a “rip” on CC faculty. (Based on your post, I would not call them colleagues.) The truth is that the quality of instruction at CC’s is equal to, and sometimes better than, instruction at the 4 yrs. To be clear, I’m referring to 100 and 200 level course work. The CC faculty are focused on instruction and generally have smaller class sizes. The proof of quality is in the product. As was previously posted, CC transfers outperform native students during their junior year at university.

What would make the proposed effort better would be: 1) guaranteed transfer for CC students meeting designated standards, and 2) guaranteed funding for students with guaranteed admission (guaranteed admission is not with much without funding).

Comment by Pot calling kettle Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 1:52 pm
====Gadfly: “On the issue of CC transfers to 4-year institutions: the transitions aren’t seamless in part because the students are not prepared for the rigors of university coursework by two years of CC. They come to the 4-yr inst. not knowing how to write or think critically so the 4-yrs end up having to provide all kinds of remedial training.”

At one point they universities got to charge back to the CC if this happened after taking a course. Has that changed? I quite liked Illinois’ solution to this and it seemed to be working well.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:07 pm
===the intro Poli Sci course is basically the constitution class

No, no it isn’t.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:08 pm
===I work in higher ed, but am also a graduate of ISU, class of 88. I can assure you the instructor listed on my course enrollment was a full, tenured professor. I can also assure you that I never saw him after he welcomed the class to his first lecture. Every class after that was led by a grad assistant, presumably following his syllabus. The same was true for some other intro classes taught in large lecture halls.

This has likely changed, but not necessarily in a good way. Universities have cracked down on this sort of thing, but instead now hire adjuncts to teach such classes at a very low rate. However, the college looks better because the adjunct likely has a PhD or close.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:12 pm
=== is that a common application will help because it represents a system wide change.

My first comment got caught up in moderation, but there is a common application already. Brady is creating a new one just for Illinois instead of using the Common App already available. It’s not a new idea, it’s an old idea being made worse by trying to do it differently.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:16 pm
There is a fairly significant transfer system for the Illinois system. It isn’t necessarily transparent so quality advising is needed, but most of the community colleges liberal arts (generals) credits will transfer.

http://www.itransfer.org/students.aspx

Where students have problems are
1) Often they want remedial courses to count towards their degree. Those courses should not and will not count
2) It’s hard to plan if you aren’t sure where you are going.
3) If you don’t complete the AA or AS it’s more complicated because it becomes course by course instead of just being done with generals.
4) Some programs are very structured in their sequencing and often this is in STEM areas. Even if their generals are done, they may have to follow the sequence in some cases and that may limit the number of in major courses per semester.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:25 pm
Does this proposal fill an actual need?

Comment by Keyser Soze Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 2:50 pm
===No, no it isn’t.===

Arch, I’d love to meet you in person to have this conversation. If Rich ever hosts a gathering of commenters, maybe we could have time for this subject. You raise excellent points, as usual. Adding anything more would risk me taking this thread further afield and down a rabbit hole, so let me just say this:

When I attended ISU, the first PS course listed in the catalogue was PS105 - American Government. Students who took this class satisfied the requirement to pass the constitution test. Students who did not take PS105 had to sit for a proctored exam covering the state and federal constitutions. This was a requirement for a degree then. I hope it is still today.

So in other words, given that there was no PS101-104, the intro poli sci course was American Government, and it was in fact a course that covered American government and the constitution.

So let me conclude by simply saying, yes it was.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 3:21 pm
===So let me conclude by simply saying, yes it was.

It was, it isn’t though. The Constitution Test is only required for High School graduation though many courses cover the material and you don’t have take a test itself. The college test is no longer required and hasn’t for some years.

I wouldn’t mind it still being required as repetition wouldn’t be a horrible thing, but it shouldn’t be in a Intro to Political Science class. The Intro course should be an introduction to the discipline and a way of thought about political institutions and behavior and from the description in the Course Catalog at ISU currently, that is more where it is targeted. Political Science isn’t civics–I’d get some push back from some friends, but I think most of us would say that we might value civics, but it’s not what we teach as a discipline.

There certainly is crossover, but political science should be about using the scientific process to understand how institutions and political systems affect political behavior.

Civics is closer to experiential learning or service learning and valuable, but not at the core of what Political Science is.

I answered to shortly, but the basic point was that the courses have changed in 30 years (yeah, you can feel old with me there) and while there is value in what you are talking about, that isn’t what political science is today.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 3:32 pm
I don’t understand how this is an overhaul of anything. What does it do, for anyone?

Small ball, ain’t the phrase. I think Rose and Brady are trying to look busy.

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 4:36 pm
Curious that Ferro ran McKinney out of the Sun-Times for doing his job (well), but puts this broadside against the Rauners from a junior flack in prime troncsylvania real estate.

Seems all the GOP poohbahs have serious beef with each other, and not just on this issue.

It appears to have started when the Rauner/IPI summer romance blew up.

And what about that $30M so Proft could run the GA races?

Comment by wordslinger Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 4:47 pm
===prime troncsylvania real estate===

Hilarious.

Comment by Rich Miller Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 4:48 pm
Word–Pretty much

===• Creates a uniform admission application to be accepted at all public universities in Illinois.

The way to do this is the Common Application that already exists. In fact, if you google College Application it’s the first result. I don’t know if I was filing a bill, I might check that. Creating an Illinois specific one doesn’t make any sense-if there is something extra you need, you can add that as an addendum.

—–• Any high school student with a grade of B or better average will qualify for automatic admission to an academically appropriate public university if they maintain their B average through graduation. This will extend an opportunity to all students in Illinois; while respecting individual institutions rights to admit students that are the best fit for their existing programs.

This is very unclear. Do students just apply and then get selected by all the institutions that would accept them? It’s unclear and that creates a ton of planning issues. Maybe you thought you wanted to go to NIU and you got accepted at ISU. So do you switch? How does NIU and ISU plan for this sort of thing? After a few years you can start to estimate yield, but it’s tough up front and has a lot of transition costs.

• Any student who is not offered admission to a public university must automatically be referred to the community college district where they live and provided with enrollment information.

Good.

====• If a public institution of higher education accepts a student, they will receive an acceptance letter from that institution setting forth any grants or scholarship offers extended by the institution at that time.

This means that the students have do do the FAFSA as well as the application up front. It would be good for students to do that, but it doesn’t always happen. Would those who don’t do it be rejected? Not offered any aid? It’s very confusion and difficulty to coordinate and it’s unclear why it’s beneficial. Usually students have done the FAFSA, but those who don’t often can still submit for federal assistance later than the admission decision date.

I don’t get the sense that Brady and Chapin Rose have much of an idea how admissions works in most colleges because this proposal does very little to help and probably confuses the situation a lot upfront with a new application that is wasteful given common apps already exist.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 4:50 pm
===I don’t get the sense that Brady and Chapin Rose have much of an idea how admissions works in most colleges===

They represent enough colleges between them you’d think they could easily find out if they were so inclined.

Comment by 47th Ward Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 5:00 pm
===They represent enough colleges between them you’d think they could easily find out if they were so inclined.

No kidding. I understand where the issues are coming from. To many people the process is really obtuse and certainly you could make it better, but they seem to have created a giant Rube Goldberg contraption making it harder.

Also, tons of grammar mistakes above. My bad.

Comment by ArchPundit Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 5:03 pm
===…you’d think they could easily find out if they were so inclined===

They’re not. Not in the slightest.

Coach Wooden isn’t impressed.

Every single time they allowed Rauner to destroy higher education …

…this is the pretend “busy work” they are ginning up to make people forget that when higher education needed them, they failed higher education.

But, please, let’s pretend this is thoughtful and desined to help state universities … when it appears neither know how admissions works or how other states are successfully outworking state universities, and funding state universities isn’t a priority of this sitting governor.

But, they created some “activity”, LOL

Comment by Oswego Willy Tuesday, Sep 26, 17 @ 5:05 pm