139

Final Report ofTHE LT. GOVERNOR’S COMMISSION

ON HIGHER EDUCATION &ECONOMIC GROWTH

December 2004

Prepared for Governor Jennifer M. Granholm

140

Acknowledgements

The commission thanks its benefactors, DaimlerChrysler, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, and Manulife,whose generous financial contributions allowed the commission to accomplish its task. The Council of MichiganFoundations was also instrumental in providing financial assistance to the commission.

The commission also acknowledges the time and effort of those people who served on the work groups. Theirparticipation informed the commission in critical areas and contributed a breadth and depth of expertisewithout which this report could not meet the governor’s charge.

A number of institutions deserve acknowledgement and thanks for contributing key resources that facilitatedthe commission’s work. Public hearings were the most vital component of its fact-finding efforts, and severalinstitutions—Grand Rapids Community College, Lansing Community College, Northern Michigan University,Northwestern Michigan College, Saginaw Valley State University, and Wayne State University—generouslyprovided facilities and other enabling resources. The Delta-Schoolcraft Intermediate School District, theIngham Intermediate School District, Lawrence Technological University, Michigan State University, NorthernMichigan University, and the University of Michigan all opened their real and virtual facilities to the commissionand work groups for meetings.

Finally, the commission is grateful for the tireless work of John Austin, who served as policy director for thecommission. Senior policy adviser John Burkhardt, PhD, director of the University of Michigan Center forthe Study of Higher and Post-Secondary Education (CSHPSE), worked with a team of researchers to supportthe commission’s work: Britany Affolter-Caine, Nathan Daun-Barnett, Mark Garrett, Laurel Park, and TomPerorazio from the University of Michigan’s CSHPSE; and William Edwards from Michigan State University’sEducation Policy Center. Senior policy advisor Jim Jacobs, PhD, of the Community College Research Centerat Columbia University, also contributed to the effort. In combination with staff support from Public SectorConsultants, the research team expertly captured both the intent and the spirit of the commission’s findingsand facilitated the delivery of this report to the governor within the time allotted.

141

Foreword

In June 2004 Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm signed Executive Order No. 2004-32 (AppendixA) and announced the formation of the Lieutenant Governor’s Commission on HigherEducation and Economic Growth, chaired by Lt. Governor John D. Cherry Jr. Theexecutive order charged the commission with identifying strategies to double the numberof Michigan residents with degrees and other postsecondary credentials of value withinten years. The deadline given to the commission for its final report was December 31,2004.

Thirty voting members were appointed to the commission; nonvoting members includedthe directors of the Departments of Labor and Economic Growth, Education, andInformation Technology; the state budget director; the state treasurer; the president ofthe State Board of Education; two state senators; and two state representatives. (A listof the commission members is provided in Appendix B.) The commission met fourtimes over a six-month period to consider the issues and discuss recommendationsconsistent with the charges in the executive order. Four subgroups of the commission,supplemented by additional experts and stakeholders, engaged in additional meetings,e-mail exchanges, and telephone conferences between full commission meetings. Thefour work groups were in the areas of:

� Improving Preparation—encompassing curriculum, standards, assessment,instructional modes, and advanced placement and dual enrollment opportunities forhigh school students

� Expanding Participation—focusing on instilling higher levels of educationalaspiration in Michigan residents, removing financial and cultural barriers, andincreasing higher education capacity and distance learning opportunities

� Increasing Degree Completion—focusing on barriers preventing students fromcompleting degrees, better accommodating students’ varying paces of attainment,easing student transfers, and expanding articulation agreements on credits amonghigher education institutions

� Maximizing Economic Benefits—focusing on aligning degree-granting programsto emerging business needs, workplace-specific and on-site education,commercialization of university research, and entrepreneurial partnerships betweenpublic education and private business

Each work group met independently six or seven times over the course of thecommission’s work.

The commission spent most of its first three months collecting and analyzing informationabout higher education issues in Michigan and how Michigan trends and governmentalpolicies compare to those of other states. The commission used a variety of means toaccumulate background information needed to understand which higher education issueswere most important to developing Michigan’s workforce. The following approaches

i

142

were used to build a common knowledge base as a foundation for the commission’sfinal recommendations to the governor and the legislature:

� Solicitation of public comment through a series of six public meetings held throughoutthe state, online comments through the Cherry Commission website(www.cherrycommission.org), and the submission of written comments. (A summaryof comment from the public meetings can be found in Appendix C.)

� Presentations to the full commission and to commission work groups by leadingnational and Michigan experts on specific higher education topics identified as critical.

� Research briefs and special reports on various higher education issues prepared bycommission staff, universities, research organizations, and state agencies.

Where practical, the full text of background materials was also made available to thepublic on the commission website.

Recommendations emerged from work group deliberations and evolved in an iterativeprocess, with each work group discussing and refining recommendations and issuingindividual reports to the commission (provided in Appendix D). Commissioners andwork group members provided approval on the overall direction of each work group’srecommendations before the November commission meeting. This final report is acompilation and synthesis of all of the work groups’ recommendations and reflects theconsensus of the commission.

ii

143

Contents

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1

THE CHOICE .................................................................................................................... 3

WHY HIGHER EDUCATION MATTERS.................................................................................. 5

WHERE MICHIGAN STANDS .............................................................................................. 7

WHAT MICHIGAN MUST DO ........................................................................................... 11

Raise the Bar....................................................................................................... 12Clear the Path ..................................................................................................... 16Win the Race....................................................................................................... 22

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................. 27

GLOSSARY ..................................................................................................................... 29

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY ............................................................................................... 35

APPENDIX A: EXECUTIVE ORDER .................................................................................... 43

APPENDIX B: COMMISSION AND WORK GROUP MEMBERS ................................................ 51

APPENDIX C: PUBLIC HEARING SUMMARIES .................................................................... 57

Marquette ............................................................................................................ 59Saginaw............................................................................................................... 61Traverse City ....................................................................................................... 63Lansing ................................................................................................................ 65Grand rapids ....................................................................................................... 69Detroit .................................................................................................................. 73

APPENDIX D: REPORTS OF THE WORK GROUPS ................................................................ 79

Report of the Preparation Work Group ............................................................... 81Report of the Participation Work Group .............................................................. 95Report of the Completion Work Group............................................................... 111Report of the Economic Benefits Work Group .................................................. 123

iii

1

Introduction

If we want a high-performance economy, we must work now to improve the strength,depth, and adaptability of our colleges and universities. The mission of thiscommission could not be more critical to our state.

Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm, March 15, 2004

With those words, Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm established the Commission on HigherEducation and Economic Growth under the leadership of Lt. Gov. John D. Cherry Jr.She also gave the commission a daunting charge—within the next ten years find ways todouble the number of Michigan residents who obtain college degrees and other valuablecredentials. As she had said in her 2004 State of the State address just weeks earlier,Michigan’s economic position has changed, and the state will have to travel new roadsto reach a brighter economic future. Now she was asking the “Cherry Commission,” asit would be known, to blaze a trail that would dramatically change the nature of Michigan’sworkforce.

Michigan began the twentieth century as a hotbed of innovation and entrepreneurshipthat led to the state’s domination of the industrial economy. Michigan created theautomobile industry and became a world leader in furniture manufacturing,pharmaceuticals, chemicals, and other industries. The state’s manufacturing base createda thriving Michigan economy, one in which workers with little formal education in thetraditional sense were able enter the middle class and earn a decent living. It also attractedpeople from across the nation and around the world to live and work here, to make thesesplendid peninsulas home.

Today, the foundations of Michigan’s economy have changed, in response to a worldwideknowledge revolution. To thrive economically, Michigan must now adapt and innovateto contend with global—not just national—competitors. To do that, Michigan must ensurethat its residents are the best educated in the world and prepared for a lifetime of learning.

Facing this economic imperative, the governor asked the Cherry Commission to developa set of powerful ideas that would transform Michigan’s education system and help thestate make the transition into today’s economy by instilling in all residents the aspirationfor education beyond high school, developing their ability to achieve postsecondarysuccess, and providing them with access to a wide variety of learning institutions.

Michigan public and private education institutions—from colleges and universities tocommunity colleges to technical apprenticeship and certification training programs—offer Michigan residents the opportunity to achieve postsecondary success in numerousforms. Many Michigan residents will complete baccalaureate degrees—or better yet,postbaccalaureate degrees. Others will complete associate’s degrees or certificateprograms in fields vital to Michigan’s economic future such as health care, advancedmanufacturing, and information technology. Still more will complete apprenticeship

2

and technical training programs after high school. Some will become entrepreneursinformed and motivated by an education that supports this ability.

To grow in the decades ahead, Michigan needs an unprecedented number of residentswho have reached these milestones along the higher education continuum. At the sametime opportunities for those who end their education at high school will continue todiminish. Those who say that all Michigan residents do not need a four-year collegedegree are right. But anyone who believes that Michigan residents can look forward to agood life with only a high school diploma could not be more wrong.

The governor and lieutenant governor challenged the bipartisan commission to makepolicy recommendations that would meet three goals:

1. Double the percentage of residents who attain postsecondary degrees or othercredentials that link them to success in Michigan’s new economy

2. Improve the alignment of Michigan’s institutions of higher education with emergingemployment opportunities in the state’s economy

3. Build a dynamic workforce of employees who have the talents and skills needed forsuccess in the twenty-first century

Under Lt. Governor Cherry’s leadership, the 41-member commission took itsresponsibility seriously, conducting wide-ranging research and intense deliberations.The commission heard testimony from scores of leaders and residents from all walks oflife, and gathered input from hundreds more by mail, online, and in person. The reportthat follows reflects not only the insights gained from that work but also the commission’sstrong sense of urgency about the need for change to give Michigan the economic futureit wants and deserves.

3

The Choice

Michigan is at a moment of decision. Having established the standard

of economic success in the industrial economy of the twentieth

century, Michigan is today precariously balanced between that era

and the changing economy of a new century. Michigan’s residents,

businesses, and governments can either move forward to a future

of prosperity and growth fueled by the knowledge and skills of the

nation’s best-educated population or they can drift backward to a

future characterized by ever-diminishing economic opportunity,

decaying cities, and population flight—a stagnant backwater in a

dynamic world economy.

This report of the Lt. Governor’s Commission on Higher Education

and Economic Growth reflects the imperative of fundamental change

in Michigan’s economy and the role education plays in this

transformation. Michigan’s willingness to work hard and its ability

to innovate are characteristics that gave state residents a high standard

of living in the last century. That legacy—the quality of life we

enjoy today—is imperiled by a changing economy in which

knowledge is the key to economic growth and opportunity. Michigan

can meet this challenge only if it has the courage to set and

achieve within the next ten years a new expectation for learning:

postsecondary education for all.

4

5

Why Higher Education Matters

Education has long been recognized for the many ways it enriches individuals andcommunities. In today’s economy, a highly educated population has a second andimmediate benefit: when work can be located anywhere in the global village, economicgrowth and jobs will be created in those regions that have this key ingredient.

For most of the last century, Michigan’s residents enjoyed a higher standard of livingthan almost any people in the world. The work involved in mass-producing cars andother products provided decent wages to workers who had relatively little formaleducation. Today that world is gone. In its place is an economy that demands significanteducational achievement in all but the lowest paying sectors. Even production jobs inMichigan’s world-leading manufacturers today demand workers with advanced educationand skills.

As in the country as a whole, education levels determine Michigan residents’ incomelevels and either limit or expand their opportunities for future economic gains (seeExhibit 1).

EXHIBIT 1U.S. Unemployment Rates and Earnings by

Educational Attainment Level, 2003

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.NOTE: Unemployment and earnings for workers aged 25 and older, by educational attainment; earnings for full-time wage and salary workers.

Each year of college attainment enables an individual to increase annual earnings by anaverage of 10 percent. Furthermore, the gap in earnings between persons with a highschool diploma or less compared to those with an associate’s, bachelor’s, or advanceddegree has been widening since 1975. This gap in earnings has grown, even as thesupply of college-educated workers has risen.

There is also a strong correlation between the education level of a state’s workforce and

6

its economic vitality. States that educate and nurture creative talent—and that build andmaintain the necessary K–12 and postsecondary education systems—keep and attractpeople and investment and can capitalize on the multiplier effects that create newcompanies and jobs. Recent research shows that a 5 percent increase in the share ofcollege-educated adults would boost overall economic growth by 2.5 percent over tenyears, and the real wages of all Michigan residents by 5.5 percent.

As shown in Exhibit 2, over the past 30 years per capita income growth in Michigan hasdecreased by 12 percent relative to the U.S. average, putting it well behind the best-educated states (that is, those states with the highest shares of knowledge industries andhighly educated people).

EXHIBIT 2Per Capita Income in Selected States, 2001, Ranked by Percentage ChangeRelative to U.S. Average, 1969–2001

Share of population2001 per capita 1969–2001 income 25–34 with bachelor’s

personal change relative to or higher degreeState income Rank U.S. average Rank in 2000

U.S. Average $30,527 n/a 27.5%District of Columbia $45,284 1 31.24% 1 50.6%Massachusetts $38,945 4 18.06% 2 41.4%Colorado $34,003 7 15.51% 3 34.8%Connecticut $42,550 2 13.37% 4 35.3%Virginia $32,328 12 13.25% 5 33.1%New Hampshire $33,771 8 13.23% 6 33.3%New Jersey $39,077 3 10.39% 10 34.7%Minnesota $32,722 11 8.99% 14 34.5%Maryland $35,355 6 6.43% 20 34.2%Michigan $29,499 20 –11.78% 47 26.0%

SOURCE: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis.NOTE: These states were selected because they all experienced above-average income in 2001 and above-average income growth over the previous 15 years.

Further data indicate that the disparity illustrated above is accelerating as people gravitatetoward states and metropolitan areas that have already established themselves as talentcenters in the world economy.

The fact that postsecondary education leads to greater economic growth is undeniable,and the reasons are equally clear. Postsecondary education

� fosters discovery of new ideas that create new goods, services, and whole industries;

� prepares people in the disciplines and with the skills demanded by today’s economy;

� builds dynamic, attractive communities where creativity and culture create thequality of place that is today so critical at attracting economic development andjobs; and

� creates greater prosperity for the college educated and non-college educated alikeby making a state’s economy more productive and dynamic.

7

Where Michigan Stands

The decades when manufacturing workers with little formal education enjoyed highwages may have created a high standard of living in Michigan, but they also produced adangerous side effect: an education achievement gap between Michigan and itscompetitors. Exhibit 3 illustrates the problem. While in leading states 40 percent ofadults have an associate’s or higher degree and 33 percent of adults have a baccalaureateor higher degree, the comparable figures in Michigan are 29 and 22 percent, respectively.Michigan’s share of adults with a master’s or higher degree is 8 percent, compared to 14percent in the leading states.

EXHIBIT 3Percentage of Adults Aged 25 and Older with Degrees, 2000

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau.

The troubling reality in Michigan is that nearly all (90 percent) of the state’s 9th graderssay they want to go on to college, but only 41 percent enroll directly out of high schooland, ultimately, only 18 percent graduate with a bachelor’s degree.

Many factors affect Michigan’s poor performance in the attainment of postsecondarydegrees.

Too few students successfully finish high school prepared for success:

� An unacceptable number of young adults in Michigan drop out of high school, leavingthem woefully unprepared to navigate today’s economy, let alone the economy oftomorrow. While the state lacks reliable data on the extent of its dropout problem,credible national studies suggest that only 65 to 73 percent of 9th graders graduatefrom high school in four years.

8

� Only 30 percent of students who graduate from high school take a course of studyrigorous enough to prepare them for postsecondary education.

Too few of our young people and adults are participating in postsecondary educationcompared with leading states:

� Thirty-seven percent of 18–24-year-olds are enrolled in institutions of highereducation, well behind leading states that enroll up to 48 percent.

� The share of Michigan adults over the age of 25 participating in postsecondaryeducation has declined in the past decade from 5.4 percent to 4.1 percent, puttingMichigan even farther behind the leading states where up to 6.5 percent of all adultsaged 25 and older are enrolled in some form of postsecondary learning.

A final issue is poor completion rates for those who are seeking a bachelor’s degree (seeExhibit 4). Just over half of Michigan’s residents who seek a bachelor’s degree willcomplete it within six years—a rate significantly lower than that of the leading states.And a large share (25 percent) of Michigan residents over the age of 25 have somecollege experience but no degree or credential.

EXHIBIT 4Education Preparation and Completion Rates, 2000

SOURCES: Greene and Forster, 2003; National Center for Public Policy in Higher Education, 2004; NationalInformation Center for Higher Education Policy Making and Analysis, 2002.NOTE: “College-ready” means possessing the minimal requirements necessary to apply to a four-year college oruniversity (Greene and Forster).

9

All these numbers are significantly worse for Michigan’s African American and Hispanicresidents (Exhibit 5), and those who live in a rural or less developed area (Exhibit 6).

EXHIBIT 5Educational Attainment, with Michigan Disparities by Race

SOURCES: Greene and Forster, 2003; Education Commission of the States, 2003; National Information Centerfor Higher Education Policy Making and Analysis, 2002; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000.

As Exhibit 6 graphically illustrates, much of rural Michigan—and some urban pockets—are marked with low higher education achievement levels.

While too few young people in Michigan earn college degrees, the problem is exacerbatedby the fact that Michigan is losing many of its best and brightest to states where dynamiccities are known as great places to live and work. Net out-migration of Michigan residentsstands at 11.2 percent overall, and is acute among educated 22–29-year-olds.

� Michigan lost 11,665 residents in this age group with bachelor’s degrees, while theleading state (California) gained 140,588; the average net migration for all stateswas a gain of 6,929.

� Michigan also does very poorly (45th in the country) in attracting young, educatedpeople to the state.

10

EXHIBIT 6Michigan Educational Attainment by Geographic Location

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau; University of Michigan Center for Statistical Consultation and Research.

11

What Michigan Must Do

While Michigan clearly has some distance to travel to join the top rank of states withhighly educated residents and growing incomes, Michigan has some very strong assetsthat will help it compete in this economy. Even with its relative decline, the state is stilla major economic power. Michigan has remained both the decision-making center andthe research and design/engineering center for automobiles and related advancedmanufacturing industries. Michigan ranks very high in the share of high-tech jobscompared to the rest of the nation; the high-technology share of employment in Michiganexceeds the national norm for similar employment by 72 percent. Michigan has a hugeshare of global research and development spending and highly skilled R&D workers inthe automobile and pharmaceutical industries and life sciences and related sectors, makingMichigan first in industry-supported research and development as a share of gross stateproduct.

Much of Michigan’s comparative advantage today is linked to its powerful statewidenetwork of public and private universities, colleges, community colleges, and traininginstitutions. Led by three nationally ranked research universities, these 182 institutionscollectively support research and development on the cutting edge of new ideas andtechnologies, and serve as the ladder to expanded economic opportunity for Michigan’sresidents. These institutions make Michigan

� fourth in the nation for total research and development expenditures as a percentageof gross state product,

� seventh in the percentage of science and engineering degrees granted each year, and

� ninth in the number of patents issued.

Michigan’s public and private higher education institutions are strategically located acrossthe state and collectively awarded over 140,000 degrees and certificates last year, givingMichigan a strong foundation from which to improve these figures.

While the commission has been candid about Michigan’s problems, it is united in thebelief that bold and courageous action will allow Michigan to achieve greatness in thedecades ahead that will match and surpass its past achievements. Michigan’s challengeis now to turn these assets into greater economic growth and opportunity for its residents.It is in that spirit that the commission offers the following recommendations.

12

RAISE THE BARToday, Michigan can make no more importantstatement about the critical nature ofpostsecondary education than to guarantee thatall students can complete meaningfulpostsecondary education after they finish highschool. Just as the high school diploma came todefine expectations of minimum educationalattainment in the twentieth century,postsecondary education must be the newminimum standard for the twenty-first century,and its achievement is a shared responsibilityof the student, community, and state.

RecommendationMake Higher Education Universal

The commission recommends that Michigan,over the next decade, forge a new compactwith its residents: an expectation that allstudents will achieve a postsecondary degreeor credential coupled with a guarantee fromthe state of financial support linked to theachievement of that goal. This commitmentto universal higher education should strive toremove financial and other barriers to degreeand credential completion and end, once andfor all, the idea that postsecondary educationis an option rather than a necessity. Thecompact will send a powerful message toMichigan’s current residents and businessesand to those it hopes to attract: Michigan willset and reach the new standard of educationalachievement in America.

(Participation Work Group rec. 1,Completion Work Group rec. 1,

Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 2)

13

The commission is persuaded that thecompetencies required for success in college andin the workplace have converged. All studentstoday must be equipped with rigorous academicpreparation and high-performance job skills. Thelong tradition of sorting students into “college-bound” versus “non-college-bound” tracks is nolonger relevant; indeed, it is harmful to astudent’s future and to the state’s economy. Thesame core competencies must define a “high-expectations” set of learning objectives for allstudents, whatever their background, interests,experience, or life destination.

In recent years, Michigan has focused attentionon early childhood education and has put inplace rigorous K–8 curriculum standards. Statelegislative, education, and governmentleadership has realized that Michigan mustextend rigorous standards to the high schoollevel and better connect high school learning topostsecondary aspiration and success.

RecommendationSet High Expectations for High SchoolStudents through Rigorous Standardsand Curriculum

The commission recommends that the StateBoard of Education develop by the 2006–2007 school year rigorous high schoolstandards that reflect the competenciesnecessary for postsecondary success andreadiness for the world of work. Thecommission further recommends that schooldistricts require all students to take coursesthat will allow them to achieve these newstandards and, by extension, postsecondarysuccess. Guidance from the State Board ofEducation/Michigan Department of Educationshould be provided in the form of a new highschool curricular framework to guide theteaching for all students in grades 9–12.

The commission anticipates that the subjectmatter required to reach the new standardscan and will be delivered through a variety ofcontexts, teaching styles, and courseselections. But the commission categoricallyrejects the idea that schools should offer tostudents a curriculum that does not preparethem for postsecondary success. Until thiscurricular framework is established, thecommission recommends that districts adopta curriculum (i.e., course of study) that reflectsrigorous standards for all students, such asthat of the Presidents Council, StateUniversities of Michigan, and therequirements for becoming a MichiganScholar. Once established, the new Michiganhigh school standards and curricularframework should be adopted by schooldistricts for all students.

(Preparation Work Group rec. 1)

14

To support a new set of rigorous standards, anew assessment is needed to track progress inmeeting standards, inform curriculum andinstruction, and increase readiness as well as theaspiration to succeed in postsecondaryeducation.

RecommendationA New High School Assessment

The commission recommends that legislationbe passed calling for a new high schoolassessment for use in the 2007–2008 schoolyear to replace the high school–level MEAP.This assessment must:

1) Be an accepted test for college readinessfor the purposes of admission

2) Increase students’ aspirations to attendinstitutions of postsecondary education

3) Measure individual student performanceagainst the new Michigan standards

4) Be useful for aligning curriculum, coursesequences, and grade-level contentagainst the standards

5) Be valid as the high school assessmentrequired under federal law (No Child LeftBehind)

While it should produce a score on arecognized college entrance exam, thisassessment should also measure students’competence and adherence to the full arrayof Michigan’s new high school standards. Thecommission further recommends that until anew assessment is deployed, Michigan schooldistricts adopt a high expectation for studentsaspiring to enroll in postsecondaryeducation—corresponding to a compositescore of 22 on the ACT program or anequivalent college entrance exam (the levelof 22 being strongly correlated with successfulcompletion of a postsecondary degree).

(Preparation Work Group rec. 1)

15

Individuals with the skills that have traditionallydefined entrepreneurship—risk-taking,creativity, responsibility, and adaptability—arenow making a difference throughout our society,whether in their own ventures or working foranother employer. More Michigan residents mustuse these skills to create new businesses andbenefit existing firms. Michigan must rekindlea culture of entrepreneurship, starting with theeducation of all the state’s young people andextending to how Michigan thinks abouteconomic development and job-trainingactivities.

RecommendationCreate a Culture of Entrepreneurship

� The State Board of Education mustintegrate entrepreneurial skills andeducation into Michigan’s K–12standards.

� Michigan’s two- and four-year highereducation institutions must create aCenter of Excellence forEntrepreneurship and Innovation as anetwork to cultivate entrepreneurialeducation and activities among Michigancommunity colleges, universities, andbusiness and community partners.

� Michigan’s two- and four-year highereducation institutions must develop andoffer entrepreneurial degree or certificateprograms and enhance existing degreeprograms with entrepreneurship skills andtraining.

� The Michigan Department of Labor andEconomic Growth and Michigan’s K–12and higher education associations mustadd to current, initial efforts to create75–100 partnerships among Michigan’scommunity colleges, universities, andK–12 systems that offer anentrepreneurial curriculum leading tocertificates and degrees.

(Economic Benefits Work Group recs. 2 and 4)

16

CLEAR THE PATHAs Michigan creates a high-expectationsenvironment for all high school students, it alsomust recognize that far too many Michiganstudents attend high schools that do not helpthem find success in life and work. This problemis most acute in low-income communities,exacerbating the ethnic and regional disparitiesthat exist in educational attainment in Michigan.To make real the belief that all students canachieve rigorous academic standards linked topostsecondary success, Michigan must give allstudents the opportunity to attend high schoolscapable of helping them reach that goal.

RecommendationImplement New Strategies for HighSchool Success

Before the decade is over, Michigan’sgovernment, business, education, and civicleadership must put in place a network ofnewly fashioned secondary schools andlearning environments. This effort must be ona scale sufficient to effectively serve everyschool community where students aredropping out in large numbers or are notachieving Michigan’s high expectations forlearning. Refashioned high schoolenvironments must be formed aroundresearch-based models that engage andmotivate students. Proven models includesmall high schools, blended high school andpostsecondary institutions, and career andother themed and contextualized learningenvironments.

(Preparation Work Group rec. 3)

No effort to create a high-expectations learningenvironment in Michigan’s schools can fail torecognize the critical role that teachers andadministrators play in achieving these goals.Policymakers can create new standards on paper,but it is only educators who make them real inthe lives of Michigan children. We must giveeducators the tools and support they will needto achieve the commission’s ambitious goals.

RecommendationEquip Educators and Administrators toSupport the High-Expectations HighSchool Path

Michigan’s school districts must make thecreation of the high-expectations learningenvironment the central focus of professionaldevelopment activities at the secondaryschool level. Intermediate school districts(ISDs) and two- and four-year highereducation institutions—in partnership witheducation stakeholders from the business andfoundation community—must develop newstrategies and new resources for professionaldevelopment that will allow teachers to helpall students meet the new rigorous standards.

(Preparation Work Group rec. 2)

17

Michigan’s communities are currently engagedin extensive and intensive economicdevelopment efforts. Whether at the municipalor county level, there is almost universalrecognition that communities must take theireconomic destinies in their own hands. Businessdecision makers routinely cite the availability ofa skilled workforce as the chief determinant ofinvestment decisions, and communities whoseresidents have higher levels of education alsohave higher levels of economic growth. Yet, fewMichigan communities have focused on thiscritical link between increased educationattainment and economic development goals. Tothrive economically, communities acrossMichigan must see the issue of increasingeducational attainment as a responsibility thatall stakeholders must share.

RecommendationCreate Community Compacts forEducational Attainment

Michigan local government leaders (frommayors to county commissioners) must joinwith business, labor, and education leadersto organize “community compacts” thatincrease local postsecondary participationrates by 5 percent each year for the next tenyears. Each community should establishbaselines for postsecondary participation andset targets for annual improvement, focusingefforts on students who are unlikely to attendcollege. As part of these local compacts,public and private universities, colleges,community colleges, and postsecondarytraining institutions should create partnershipswith local school districts and high schoolswith low rates of students going on to college.

(Participation Work Group rec. 3)

While more Michigan residents need toparticipate in higher education, Michigan willnot achieve its economic development goalsunless it helps a far greater share of its highereducation students complete degrees in a timelymanner. Michigan’s state universities havethemselves recognized the critical nature of thisgoal and have challenged themselves to increasecompletion rates. There are a number ofimportant factors within each learninginstitution’s control that can improve Michigan’sdegree completion rates, including guidancecounseling, outreach, and support services. Allthese services are particularly important tohistorically underrepresented populations. Aspart of a compact of shared accountability, eachpublic and private two- and four-year highereducation institution should shine a light on itsown work to increase enrolled students’completion rates and should hold itselfaccountable for improving its completion rates.

RecommendationImprove Institutional CompletionMeasures

The leadership bodies of Michigan’s two- andfour-year higher education institutions mustensure that each public and private highereducation institution sets its own successgoals and benchmarks for student progressand degree completion that emphasize timelyprogression to the degree. Such goals andmeasures should be based on each school’sunique mission and population, but withattention to the success among importantsubgroups within the student body (e.g.,minorities and women). Goals, measures,and results are to be reported annually,beginning with the 2005–2006 academic year.

(Completion Work Group rec. 2)

18

While most Michigan residents live withincommuting distance of two- and four-year highereducation institutions, proximity remains aserious barrier to educational attainment. Thisproblem is most acute in Michigan’s non-metropolitan counties, which have long had lowhigher education participation rates. Michigan’seconomic success requires that in every regionof the state there is easy access to the full rangeof degree-granting programs, includingbaccalaureate degrees in a variety of high-demand fields. Michigan’s higher educationinstitutions, both public and private, are movingto offer convenient access to a full range ofhigher education programming throughextension programs, university centers,partnerships between community colleges andfour-year institutions, and a host of virtual andremote learning opportunities. The expansion ofthese efforts can ensure that all Michiganresidents have the geographic access andopportunity to gain advanced degrees that arerelevant for economic opportunity. We alsorecognize that many of Michigan’s two-yearinstitutions are prepared to offer appliedbaccalaureate degrees in selected areas thatcorrespond with regional economic needs.

RecommendationExpand Access to BaccalaureateInstitutions and Degrees

� Michigan’s higher education institutionsmust examine the availability andgeographic coverage of higher educationservices and put in place the necessarypartnerships to ensure that residents inall parts of the state have access to two-and four-year baccalaureate programs.

� Universities that currently grant appliedbaccalaureate degrees must forge newpartnerships with community colleges toexpand the availability of this credential.In addition, the Michigan legislature mustpass enabling legislation during the 2005–2006 legislative session that defines thecriteria and process by which Michigancommunity colleges may offer appliedbaccalaureate degrees in response tounmet economic, employer, or communityneeds in their service regions wherepartnership arrangements have failed tomeet these needs.

(Completion Work Group rec. 4)

19

As Michigan’s high schools prepare all studentsfor postsecondary education and training, anincreasing number of our secondary schoolstudents will have the ability to complete college-level work during their high school years.Michigan must seize this opportunity for learningby expanding opportunities for high schoolstudents to earn college credit. This will allowstudents to achieve their education goals morequickly, reduce the cost of postsecondarydegrees, and give many students a betterunderstanding of their own potential to succeedat college-level work. Rather than hold itsstudents back, Michigan must be willing toaccelerate the pace of learning to realizeeducation gains that will translate into a strongereconomy and better jobs.

RecommendationExpand Opportunities for “EarlyCollege” Achievement

The legislature must replace the current dualenrollment funding system during the 2005–2006 legislative session with a system thatprovides incentives for collaboration betweensecondary and postsecondary institutions.

Michigan’s school districts must expandopportunities for dual enrollment and fortaking college credit courses so that 50percent of the state’s high school studentsare earning college credit by 2015. All schooldistricts, even those with the mostacademically challenged schools, shouldachieve a minimum enrollment of 10 percent.

(Participation Work Group rec. 2)

20

For a growing number of residents, the path tohigher education and postsecondary credentialsis not a straight line. Many start at a two-yearschool and either transfer to a four-year schoolor resume postsecondary education after sometime away. All Michigan residents should be ableto obtain postsecondary credentials of value,regardless of whether they start and finish at asingle institution, move between institutions, orre-enroll after time away for work or familyobligations.

A major roadblock to degree completion inMichigan today is the difficulty students havetransferring credits as they navigate betweeninstitutions. Many lose credit that they haveworked hard to obtain, while others are forcedto repeat courses to earn degrees in their chosenfield. The state and higher education institutionsmust make this journey as efficient and user-friendly as possible if more people are to earnpostsecondary credentials in a reasonable lengthof time and at a reasonable cost.

Today, many students transfer from Michigan’scommunity colleges to four-year institutionsbefore earning an associate’s degree, and someof these students have completed more than halfof the requirements for an associate’s degree orother credential from the community collegebefore transferring to a four-year baccalaureateprogram. When such students subsequentlycomplete at a four-year degree-grantinginstitution the necessary coursework for theassociate’s degree from a community college,they are entitled to a valuable credential. Thiscredential—an associate’s degree—is one thatthe student could use in the labor market whilepursuing a four-year degree. In addition, theabsence of this degree shortchanges employerswho cannot recognize what may be a valuablepotential employee because the person does nothave a recognized credential.

RecommendationImprove Transfer Process and AwardDual Degrees

� Michigan’s two- and four-year highereducation institutions must create by 2006a statewide “Transfer Wizard”: a websitecontaining course articulation and transferinformation for all Michigan institutions,clearly identifying what courses areaccepted, and where.

� Michigan higher education institutionsmust establish by 2006 the MichiganMilestone Compact. This compact wouldgrant to a student transferring from acommunity college to a four-year degree-granting institution an associate’s degreeor other credential/degree by thecommunity college partner followingcompletion of necessary course workconforming to agreed-upon learningoutcomes.

(Completion Work Group rec. 3)

21

While Michigan wants far greater numbers ofits residents to earn associate’s and bachelor’sdegrees, our goals for educational attainmentmust reach higher. Across the nation, talentcenters that bring together large numbers ofadvanced degree holders are enjoying the highestrates of economic growth. Whether they are inuniversity labs and classrooms or corporateresearch and development centers, these are thepeople who are advancing the frontiers ofknowledge and fueling explosive economicgrowth. To ensure Michigan’s economic future,we need ever-increasing numbers of Michiganresidents to reach the highest pinnacles ofeducation. At the same time, Michigan mustattract the best and the brightest from around thecountry and the world to our campuses andworkplaces.

RecommendationIncrease the Number ofPostbaccalaureate Professionals

� Michigan businesses and foundationsmust create a significant endowment tofund scholarships for Michigan studentsto pursue postbaccalaureate degrees atour higher education institutions, withpriority for key disciplines (e.g., science,engineering).

� Michigan’s higher education and businesscommunity must partner to greatly expandinternship opportunities forundergraduate and graduate studentsand faculty. Such efforts should use publicor privately funded stipends to createincentives for students working inemerging fields.

� Michigan’s universities must expand dualenrollment programs to allowundergraduate students to moveefficiently and seamlessly topostbaccalaureate degree achievement.

(Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 6)

While Michigan has a slowly growing traditionalschool-age population, a relatively largeproportion of adults in Michigan have somepostsecondary education but have not attained apostsecondary degree or other credential ofvalue. These adult residents can be tremendousassets to economic growth if Michigan can re-engage them in postsecondary education and seethem earn credentials.

Helping these adults complete their credentialmeans reaching out to adult learners and workers,communicating the importance of postsecondaryeducation, and making it easier for workingadults to access the financial aid, supportservices, and diverse learning deliverytechniques that are available.

RecommendationTarget Adults Seeking to CompletePostsecondary Credentials

Michigan’s postsecondary educationinstitutions must lead community-basedoutreach campaigns that over the next tenyears will recruit half of the 1.5 million adultswith limited postsecondary education to returnand complete their degree. These effortsshould include an “amnesty” on stale orexpired credits, recognition of work-basedlearning experiences, and better utilization ofthe tremendous education benefit thatMichigan’s businesses and labor unions havecreated for employees.

(Participation Work Group rec. 4,Completion Work Group rec. 6)

22

Whether it is the increased number of youngpeople who leave high school ready to succeedin higher education or the tens of thousands ofolder workers who return to the college campus,the recommendations of the commission haveimplications for the capacity and organizationof Michigan’s higher education system. Whilethe commission believes Michigan’s existinghigher education capacity can be used in newand more effective ways to begin achieving itsambitious goals, it also believes that the longer-term, capacity-related implications of theserecommendations need to be well understood.

RecommendationConduct an Analysis of HigherEducation Capacity Needs

During the next legislative session, the highereducation community must conduct ananalysis of the emerging issues and specialproblems related to higher education humanresource and physical infrastructure capacity.

(Participation Work Group rec. 5)

WIN THE RACETo win in today’s economy, Michigan needs tobetter leverage one of its strongest assets—itspowerful network of higher educationinstitutions—to nurture the industries of thefuture and to translate these new industries intojobs for Michigan residents. This does not meanabandoning manufacturing, but rather buildingon traditional strengths in automobile design andmanufacturing and other key industries.Michigan can apply its research anddevelopment talent to assist its existingindustries to adapt and compete through newinnovations, products, and technologies.

RecommendationCreate an Emerging Economy Initiative

� The state and federal governments,universities, and private industry mustboldly invest in Michigan’s Technology Tri-Corridor to support the research,development, and commercialization ofemerging technologies. This investmentshould promote Center of Excellencepartnerships in the Tri-Corridor; organizeand fund public/private partnershipsamong higher education institutions,private partners, and venture capital fundsin emerging economic sectors; and focuspeer-reviewed and applied research onprojects with commercial potential.

� Michigan must create a Twenty-firstCentury Research Fund that will givestate, institutional, and private sectorresearchers improved access to matchingfunds for major research activities thatalign with the commission’scommercialization strategies.

(Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 1)

23

The state must ensure that the powerful researchbeing conducted at Michigan’s research-intensive universities—and in conjunction withbusinesses—is translated more effectively intonew companies, jobs, and an increasinglyentrepreneurial culture.

RecommendationCommercialize More Research

� Michigan’s higher education institutionsmust make commercialization of researchan institutional priority and align internalpractices and performance measures tosupport it where appropriate.

� Michigan’s colleges and universitiesshould establish their own venture capitalfunds within their schools, colleges,institutes, and similar divisions to createlocally managed pre-seed funds thatleverage the existing Smart Zones andbusiness accelerators.

� Michigan’s universities and communitycolleges must form networks toaccelerate applied research and businessformation that leverage existing SmartZones and business accelerators.

(Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 3)

24

In every community there are current job andskill needs among existing employers that needto be matched with a highly trained workforce.For example, a recent study of Michigan’s healthcare industry showed that up to 100,000 new,technically trained health care workers areneeded to serve this sector. Michigan residentsneed to have tools and information available tohelp them better understand the jobs that existtoday and which education programs preparethem well for these jobs. Michigan’s public andprivate postsecondary institutions also need toconsider their contributions to preparingMichigan residents in the disciplines and withthe skills in demand in their region.

RecommendationAlign Postsecondary Education withEconomic Needs and Opportunities

� The Michigan Department of Labor andEconomic Growth must develop and makeavailable by 2006 a more powerful anduser-friendly system for linking job andoccupational data with job/careerinformation and guidance at thecommunity level.

� The Michigan Department of Labor andEconomic Growth must organize, inconjunction with the postsecondaryeducation community, a process forcommunicating and reporting annually thematch between current and emerging joband occupation needs and the efforts andoutcomes of postsecondary educationinstitutions to meet those needs.

(Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 6)

In an era in which quality of place is a criticalfactor in economic development, highereducation institutions are a primary driver ofcommunity development and cultivating qualityof place. Colleges and universities contributeto the physical and aesthetic appeal of acommunity; the diversity of residents; and thearts, culture, and entertainment milieu. Highereducation institutions have both tremendousopportunity and civic responsibility toparticipate strongly in community developmentand revitalization.

RecommendationExpand the Role of Higher EducationInstitutions in Community Development

All higher education institutions mustaggressively partner with their communitiesand “cool city” commissions to develop andimplement strategies and programs thatleverage their unique role. Prime among theseare participation in local planning anddevelopment policy shaping; partnering inmixed-use developments; enhancing art,culture, and entertainment offerings; and usingthe physical and land assets of theseinstitutions creatively as locales for privatesector development, incubation of firms, andhousing.

(Economic Benefits Work Group rec. 5)

25

As Michigan embarks on this journey topostsecondary educational attainment andgreater economic growth, its taxpayers andresidents need to know what is working and whatis not, how far the state has come, and how farthe state has to go in its quest to become thenation’s best-educated population. As Michiganresidents move through an education process thatbegins long before kindergarten and continuesthrough graduate degrees and employment, thestate must be able to chart individuals’ progresswhile respecting their right to privacy.

Currently, Michigan has disconnected datasystems tracking K–12 students, highereducation students, and adult job training andre-employment programs. The state cannotanswer simple yet critical questions such as:What specific degrees and credentials doMichigan residents have? Where do high schoolstudents go and what do they do after graduation?What do graduates of the state’s various collegesand universities do next? Where are theyworking? Answers to these and more detailedquestions about the outcomes for particularschools and programs are essential to guide smartpolicy and investments in an education systemthat strives for lifelong learning.

RecommendationDevelop a Lifelong Education TrackingSystem

The Michigan Department of InformationTechnology must develop by 2007 aninteragency data-sharing arrangement, incoordination with Michigan’s K–12 and highereducation institutions, that creates afunctioning lifelong education tracking systemwith information from multiple data sources,including CEPI, MDLEG, and highereducation.

(Completion Work Group rec. 5)

26

27

Conclusion

The early experimentation of innovators such as Henry Ford, Ransom E. Olds, and theDodge brothers catalyzed a hundred years of industrial growth in Michigan in the earlytwentieth century. Today, in the first decade of a new century, Michigan musttransform itself once again to be a leader in an era where knowledge is the keyingredient in economic success.

If Michigan’s residents, education systems, and governments can work together to increasethe share of the state’s population with credentials of value, Michigan will be a vanguardstate for economic vitality and quality of life. The commission believes therecommendations offered in this report are a roadmap to fundamental change in Michigan.Some recommendations will be implemented soon, while others will require years ofsustained effort to achieve. Some are as modest in scope as others are sweeping. Somewill guide the strategic investment of new resources while others will deploy existingresources more wisely.

Taken as a whole, these recommendations represent a dramatic break from the policiesof the past, policies that cannot guide Michigan to the future we seek. When theserecommendations are implemented, Michigan will have a K–12 education system thatprepares all students for success in college and work, a postsecondary education systemthat moves unprecedented numbers of residents to new levels of educational attainment,and the research and development infrastructure a highly educated workforce needs toreach new levels of economic growth and opportunity.

The commission’s sense of urgency is undiminished by Michigan’s current fiscal crisis.While recognizing that resource limitations will affect the speed with which theserecommendations will be implemented, the commission believes it is critical to set thiscourse today and move steadily forward to the future that we want for this state, increasingthe pace as more resources become available. Furthermore, the commission believesthat Michigan’s long-term economic and fiscal health can only be secured if it makesthe development of a highly educated population an overarching priority.

There is one word the commission has used in each of the recommendations containedin this report—the word “must.” This word reflects the belief that the changes thecommission has called for are essential if Michigan is to succeed and thrive in a changingeconomy. The sense of imperative that has shaped this commission’s work does notcome from the mandate of law. Instead, it comes from the sheer magnitude of the challengeMichigan faces and a mutual belief that all segments of our society will mobilize tomeet it.

In that spirit, the commission is pleased to present this report to Governor Granholmand the people of Michigan.

28