Today
happens to be the first anniversary of the blog. It’s been a good year, and as I have told
several people at NACAC in Toronto, one of the most fulfilling things I’ve ever
done. I am particularly grateful to all
of you who read and comment both privately and publicly.
I
celebrated by doing a session this morning with Lee Coffin from Tufts and Chuck
Lovelace from the Morehead-Cain Foundation at UNC-Chapel Hill. Our topic was one that readers of the blog
will find familiar. Are we measuring the
right things in the college admissions process?
We addressed (not the same as answering)
that question in three different
areas: non-cognitive predictors of
success; 21st century skills; and measures of institutional
quality. It’s a discussion worth having,
and Lee and Chuck have both done first-rate thinking in how to merge theory
with practice.
Last
week Eric Hoover at the Chronicle of Higher
Education asked me to write a guest post for the Chronicle’s Head Count blog, and it appeared yesterday. Here’s a link.
This
was the first time in five years that I didn’t have official duties. Several people asked me if I missed it, and I
responded by asking if I looked like I had a sense of loss. No one answered yes. I enjoyed the opportunity to serve NACAC, and
the experience has certainly benefitted me both personally and professionally,
but I finished my term with a sense of satisfaction that I had done my best and
that it was time to move on to other things.
Writing about the ethics of college admissions has helped make that
transition easy.
This
morning the NACAC Assembly amended the Statement of Principles of Good Practice
to address the use of international agents.
The Assembly adopted amended language to the motion put forth by the
Board of Directors and Admission Practices Committee based on the report of the
Commission on International Student Recruitment. The amendment to the SPGP’s Mandatory Practices
allows member institutions to use incentive-based agents when working with
international students but requires that the institution ensure “accountability,
transparency and integrity.”
I
think it was important for the Assembly to validate the thoughtful deliberative
process employed by the Commission, but "accountability," "transparency," and "integrity" all leave plenty of room for definition and further discussion. I think no one believes this will
resolve the agent issue once and for all.
No comments:
Post a Comment