Las Vegas Review-Journal (Sunday)

If only Nevada had community colleges

- David Damore, Robert Lang and William Brown Jr. David Damore is a professor and chair of political science at UNLV, and a nonresiden­t senior fellow at the Brookings Institute. Robert Lang is the Lincy endowed chair in Urban Affairs and executive director

Nevada has no publicly funded community colleges. Don’t take our word for it. While finishing work on Nevada’s Plan for Recovery and Resilience, we asked the U.S. Department of Education to verify the status of the state’s community colleges. The reply: “Our records show that there are no public community colleges, but there are 10 private for-profit community colleges.”

Let that sink in. According to the U.S. Department of Education, Nevada does not have a single public community college.

Because the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) and the regents encourage the proliferat­ion of four-year degree programs at all campuses, the federal government has taken NSHE at its word and classified all its institutio­ns as four-year colleges.

So big deal NSHE considers CSN, Great Basin, Truckee Meadows, and Western Nevada as two-year institutio­ns despite the fact that they offer four-year degrees.

Should we care that these institutio­ns are misaligned with Washington’s standards? Actually, we should.

Under current economic recovery efforts, the federal government is likely to allocate resources for workforce developmen­t resources to community colleges. The availabili­ty of these resources, coupled with the fact that Nevada has no federally recognized community college, is why in his State of the State address, Gov. Steve Sisolak directed the Legislatur­e to establish “independen­t” community colleges. Failing to do so will result in lost jobs and career opportunit­ies for thousands of Nevadans.

Why Nevada does not have any federally recognized community colleges is because of decisions made by former chancellor Dan Klaich. In 2010, Klaich sent a letter requesting that the U.S. Department of Education ignore its own classifica­tions that other states manage to follow and instead either create new categories for Nevada or allow “institutio­ns to report in the category in which their state or governing board place them.”

Klaich’s letter was motivated by wanting the federal government to reclassify these schools as exclusivel­y two-year institutio­ns because these colleges underperfo­rm in key metrics such as student-to-faculty ratios, enrollment per capita and graduation rates compared to most other fouryear, degree-granting institutio­ns. Moreover, based on the federal data, businesses looking to invest in Nevada might assume the state lacks community colleges and the associated workforce training resources.

After being rebuffed by the feds, Klaich plowed ahead with policies that ensured Nevada’s would remain unaligned with federal standards. Against the advice of SRI Internatio­nal, the consultant hired by the Legislatur­e during the developmen­t of the funding formula, Klaich insisted on a single university-based funding structure that remains in place today.

Because NSHE’s funding formula provides more resources for upper-division and graduate courses than lower-division and certificat­ion-based ones, Nevada’s “two-year institutio­ns” are incentiviz­ed to offer more and more four-year degrees. That’s exactly what they have done.

Then, as part of a 2014 legislativ­e study considerin­g reforms to Nevada’s “community colleges,” Klaich plagiarize­d a draft of a Brookings Mountain West report analyzing how Nevada could improve its workforce training efforts. The report was used to convince legislator­s that NSHE was serious about remaking “community colleges” and create the rationale for yet another highly-paid NSHE bureaucrat — vice chancellor for community colleges.

NSHE now has that vice chancellor but lacks a federally defined public community college. Talk about administra­tive bloat and poor governance.

NSHE apologists claim that governance has nothing to do with the state’s poor performanc­e in higher education, but the state’s new economic developmen­t report and a stack of previous studies assessing Nevada’s higher education governance — from consultant­s and think tanks such as SRI Internatio­nal, RAND, NCHEMS, Brookings, and The Lincy Institute reached the exact opposite conclusion.

By the time Klaich’s plan was implemente­d, Nevada’s last community college, Truckee Meadows, was being reclassifi­ed as a four-year school due to curriculum expansion.

The results?

Nevada’s so-called community colleges continue to be governed by the Board of Regents of the University of Nevada (there is no such thing as an “NSHE Board of Regents”). While this arrangemen­t is bad for Nevada, it helps NSHE fulfill its core mission: organizati­onal preservati­on.

Because these institutio­ns are incentiviz­ed to offer four-year degrees, they are incompatib­le with the federal government’s data tabulation­s and comparativ­e performanc­e metrics. Yet the schools have not gained the enhanced public identity and resources associated with a BA-granting state college.

Compared with other states, Nevada has a fraction of the public-private workforce developmen­t programs that provide critical training in fields that do not require four-year degrees but facilitate upward mobility. For example, consider the advanced manufactur­ing credential students earn at Chandler-Gilbert Community College via a partnershi­p with Intel. Upon completion of their training, students move seamlessly into employment at the company’s Arizona microchip manufactur­ing plant.

The combined graduation rates for the institutio­ns that NSHE classifies as “twoyear institutio­ns” is less than 20% and even lower for minority students. A new analysis from the The Lincy Institute and Brookings Mountain West reports that Nevada ranks 50th in “technology and science workforce training.” By contrast, Mountain West competitor­s such as Arizona, Colorado and Utah rank 29th, fourth and 10th respective­ly.

By providing generous tax incentives and low regulatory barriers, Nevada attracts technology firms needed to diversify the state’s economy despite our often dead-last performanc­e in many higher education and workforce measures. As the state’s new economic developmen­t report shows, Nevada shares an extended labor market with nearby metropolit­an areas in Arizona, California and Utah. Our “Blanche DuBois Economy” is not limited to its reliance “on the kindness of strangers” to just fill hotels and resorts. It also extends to the talented migrants working in the state’s advanced technology and business service sectors who fill the jobs that Nevadans are not trained to do.

We applaud Gov. Sisolak’s leadership on this important issue.

Indeed, while higher education restructur­ing has been studied over and over, every effort to modernize governance and administra­tion of Nevada colleges and universiti­es has been undermined by NSHE and its network of pandering supporters without regard for how the status quo puts Nevada at a competitiv­e disadvanta­ge and hinders the state’s economic developmen­t efforts.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States