The Governor's Commission on Higher Education & the Economy
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Building on Knowledge, Investing in People: Higher Education and the Future of Ohio’s Economy COMMISSION MEMBERS Richard W. Pogue, Esq. Edward M. Hundert, M.D. Commission Chair President Advisor Case Western Reserve University Jones Day Bruce Johnson, Esq. Edmund J. Adams, Esq. Director Frost Brown Todd LLC Ohio Department of Development Ohio Board of Regents Dave Johnson Donna Alvarado President Aguila International Summitville Tile Ohio Board of Regents Tom Johnson H. Peter Burg (deceased January ’04) Director Chairman and CEO Ohio Office of Budget and Management FirstEnergy Table of Contents Theo Killion Carol Cartwright, Ph.D. Vice President Vision . .1 President The Limited Brands Kent State University Tom Noe The Governor’s Charge . .2 Roderick G. W. Chu Vintage Coins & Collectibles Chancellor Ohio Board of Regents The Commission’s Process . .4 Ohio Board of Regents Frank Samuel Roy Church, Ed.D. Science and Technology Ohio’s System of Higher President Advisor to the Governor Education: A Profile . .6 Lorain County Community College Dorine Seaquist Laurel Pressler Dawson Higher Education: A Strategic Senior Vice President, Patient Services Chief of Staff Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Investment . .8 Office of U.S. Senator DeWine Center Leadership: Creating A E. Linn Draper, Ph.D. Robert Sommers, Ph.D. Better Future for Ohio . .14 Retired Chairman, President and CEO Chief Executive Officer American Electric Power Butler Technology and Career Overview of Recommendations . .17 Senator Eric Fingerhut Development Schools Ohio Senate Representative Jimmy Stewart Goal 1: Providing More Ohioans Senator Randy Gardner Ohio House of Representatives With the Knowledge Ohio Senate Jerry Tatar and Skills to Succeed . .18 Kim Goldenberg, M.D. Retired Chairman MeadWestvaco Goal 2: Creating More Jobs President Wright State University Through World-Class Research, James M. Tuschman, Esq. Innovation, and Technology N. Victor Goodman, Esq. Barkan and Robon LTD Commercialization . .30 Benesch, Friedlander, Representative Peter Ujvagi Coplan and Aronoff LLP Ohio House of Representatives Strengthening Accountability Galen Graham, Ph.D. Representative Shawn Webster to Advance Higher Education’s Regional Vice President Ohio House of Representatives Role in Economic Development . .37 DeVry University Ron Wright, Ph.D. R. Stanton Hales, Ph.D. Getting Started . .45 President President Cincinnati State Technical and The College of Wooster Community College The Commission’s Work: Other Issues It Considered . .49 Senator Bill Harris Susan Tave Zelman, Ph.D. Ohio Senate Superintendent of Public Instruction The Commission’s Work: Karen Holbrook, Ph.D. Ohio Department of Education Expertise and Resources . .63 President The Ohio State University IUC-OACC Joint Statement . .65 Tragically, one of the Commission’s most contributory members, Acknowledgements . .67 Mr. H. Peter Burg, died during the course of the Commission’s work. Building on Knowledge, Investing in People: Higher Education The Commission urges all Ohioans to embrace and the Future and support this of Ohio’s Economy VISION for the betterment of the state and its citizens: Ohio will achieve higher education's full potential to create more and better jobs for the state's citizens, increase economic competitiveness, and fuel economic growth. April 29, 2004 The Governor’s Charge Three Issues for the Commission to Address Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve Harrison Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve n his June 3, 2003, charge to the Commission, Governor Bob Taft acknowledged that Ohioans Iface a dilemma. He said: “Higher education is more important to our economic future than ever before, yet our resources are limited. It is therefore imperative for the state to establish policies that secure a maximum return on our public investment in higher education. It is an established fact that higher learning leads to higher earnings. It also is clear that Ohio’s per capita income has fallen below the national average. Employers offering higher paying jobs require more educated workers with the ability to learn new skills throughout their careers. Ohio’s success in the knowledge economy depends on growing our research base in fields that are relevant to present and future economic opportunities.” 2 BUILDING ON KNOWLEDGE, INVESTING IN PEOPLE The Governor directed the Commission to In this context, the Governor directed the consider three issues relating to the purpose Commission to search for promising ways to and value of higher education: attract and enable more students to participate in higher education – and for strategies that P-12 Issue #1: schools, colleges, and universities can use to MAKING OHIO COMPETITIVE ensure students are successful in college. And IN THE KNOWLEDGE he urged the Commission to determine what ECONOMY interest and role the state has in increasing access to higher education for students from The first issue deals with the role of higher low-income and minority families. education in making Ohio competitive in the knowledge economy. When institutions of Issue #3: higher education endow students with knowl- DELIVERING RESULTS FOR edge and prepare them to be lifelong learners – PUBLIC INVESTMENTS to be people who continuously upgrade their knowledge and skills – the state has the human The third issue centers on the structure, capital needed for economic growth. governance, and financing of higher education, questioning how state support for higher In this context, the Governor asked the education can best be directed to promote the Commission to examine the needs of students, State of Ohio’s goals and expectations. It employers, and the economy as they relate to directed the Commission’s attention to the higher education. He directed the Commission geographic distribution and patterns of to look at how state-supported research at collaboration and competition among Ohio’s Ohio’s colleges and universities benefits the colleges and universities – and to the economy – and how those benefits can be governance structures of these institutions. magnified. And he asked the Commission to consider how institutions of higher education In this context, the Governor urged the should be held accountable for meeting the Commission to identify the appropriate roles state’s expectations. for competition and collaboration among Ohio’s colleges and universities and to examine Issue #2: organizational structures and funding mecha- PROMOTING ACCESS AND nisms that could enhance institutions’ capacity CREATING OPPORTUNITIES to meet the state’s long-term needs and FOR ALL STUDENTS promote economic growth. He asked the Commission to include consideration of the The second issue focuses on student access, role of Ohio’s private colleges and universities opportunities, and success. Making higher in its deliberations. Finally, the Governor direct- education available to large numbers of citizens ed Commission members to examine the role is a critical component of preparing Ohio to of the Ohio Board of Regents in overseeing succeed in the knowledge economy. However, and setting higher education policy and to access alone in not sufficient. To increase their recommend ways to better integrate the opportunities for professional fulfillment, services offered by Ohio’s two- and four-year growth, and earnings, students must succeed in colleges and universities and adult workforce their postsecondary education goals. education centers. HIGHER EDUCATION & THE FUTURE OF OHIO’S ECONOMY 3 The Commission’s Process Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve Harrison Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve n June 2003 Governor Bob Taft convened This Commission was chaired by Richard W. the Commission on Higher Education & the Pogue, former Managing Partner of Jones Day, IEconomy, which is the third commission and consisted of 33 Ohioans who came from a the Governor formed to study, and make variety of professional backgrounds: recommendations about, education policy in • Nine senior officers of educational Ohio. The first was the Commission on Student institutions Success, which was chaired by William F. • Nine individuals from business and Patient and presented its report to the Governor commerce on December 14, 2000. The second was the Commission on Teaching Success, which was • Six members of the Ohio General Assembly chaired by W. G. Jurgensen and issued its report (three from each Chamber) on February 20, 2003. •Four state government officials •Four representatives from the Ohio Board of Regents, including the Chancellor • One Congressional aide who served as Director of Cabinet Affairs for former Ohio Governor George Voinovich The Commission’s staff work was led by Katherine Canada, Ph.D. The Commission benefited from its members’ diversity of backgrounds and experiences, which was reflected in the points of view that Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve Harrison 4 BUILDING ON KNOWLEDGE, INVESTING IN PEOPLE were voiced throughout its deliberations. Accordingly, the Commission process was designed to produce broad agreement, rather than unanimity on every point. Readers of this document should not assume that every member concurs with every one of the Commission’s recommendations. However, the Harrison Credit: Ohio Department of Development/Steve Commission reached broad consensus on the report as a whole in its response to the integration among the work of the committees challenge presented by Governor Taft – to and to keep the Commission’s work on recommend what