Blog

Good money from not-so-good benefactors: Part i

13 September 2009

On Friday West Virginia University announced a $1 million gift for energy research from Robert and Brenda Murray. The gift will be matched by $1 million from the Legislature’s $50 million Research Trust Fund. According to WVU’s press release, the funds will be used for a good purpose: “research on safer, more efficient and cost effective ways to use fossil fuels.”

Bob Murray is the President of Murray Energy Corporation. Murray Energy owns Utah’s Crandall Canyon mine, where nine people lost their lives in August 2007. You may remember that Mr. Murray initially came across as a sympathetic character in media broadcasts, but opinions changed as the investigation unfolded and it became clear that the accident was the result of serious safety violations and $1.6 million in fines were imposed against the mine operator.

As you would expect, WVU accepted the money and said nothing about Mr. Murray’s controversial past. I think they did the right thing.

More on Wheeling Jesuit University

11 September 2009

Earler this week, Inside Higher Ed published an interesting article about the firing of Wheeling Jesuit University President Reverend Julio Giulletti. The article suggests that Giulletti’s ouster may have resulted from a dispute with the Most Reverend Michael J. Bransfield, possibly over Mount de Chantel Visitation Academy property in Wheeling, rather than a Office of Inspector General audit report that I discussed in an earlier blog post. A new blog called Save! Wheeling Jesuit University is devoted to the controversy.

A conversation on southern energy

10 September 2009

The Southern Growth Policies Board spent the last year studying energy issues and recently issued its 2009 report titled “A Conversation on Southern Energy.”

The report begins by making a not-all-that-compelling case that energy issues in the South are different from energy issues in the rest of the country. As support for this premise, SGPB points out that four states, including West Virginia, are net exporters of energy; the South produces more coal and nuclear power; the South uses more energy per capita because of its climate and industrial base; and the South has great alternative energy potential.

Some interesting information about West Virginia energy contained in the report:

A GOOD THING: In 2006 West Virginia produced far more energy (4,107 trillion BTU) than it consumed (829 trillion BTU) and edged out Louisiana as the southern state (there were four) with the largest energy surplus.
A GOOD THING: Only about half of the southern states have developed state energy plans, and West Virginia is among them. A quotation from the West Virginia state energy plan highlighted in the report: “A long-term solution to our energy needs will involve a combination of all three energy opportunity areas: (1) enhanced production of fossil energy sources including advanced coal technologies; (2) renewable energy development; and (3) energy efficiency.”
A BAD THING: West Virginia has 332 clean energy businesses and 3,065 clean energy jobs and is the only state to have seen a decrease in clean energy jobs over the last decade. (Source: The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2009)
A BAD THING: West Virginia had no clean energy venture capital investment between 2006 and 2008. Nationally over $12 billion in such investments were made.
A GOOD THING: West Virginia is projected to have 10,700 new green jobs by 2038.

The report recommends the following:

Educate people about energy issues.
Pursue a broad range of energy options (which appears to be a fundamental principle of every state’s energy plan).
Begin with energy conservation and efficiency (but realize it won’t produce energy independence).
Encourage research and development related to new energy technologies. (The federal investment in energy R&D in 2007 was $2.8 billion; stimulus funding is providing $2.5 billion for advanced energy technologies.)
Ensure that the workforce is prepared for emerging green jobs. (WorkforceWV currently is working on such a plan.)

A matter of degrees

9 September 2009

I probably read more national reports than do most people involved in education and economic, workforce and community development. From time to time, I will provide summaries of those reports so that you can decide whether you want to read them.

Last week the Democratic Leadership Council issued a report titled: “A Matter of Degrees: Tomorrow’s Fastest-Growing Jobs and Why Community College Graduates Will Get Them.” For the record, the DLC was formed in 1985 (shortly after Ronald Reagan’s resounding defeat of Walter Mondale for the United States Presidency) by a group of Democrats convinced that the party had moved too far to the left. Despite its rightward leanings, the DLC recently has embraced much of President Barack Obama’s political agenda.

The report ostensibly makes the case for President Obama’s plan to increase the federal investment in community colleges. The report cites Bureau of Labor Statistics data that suggest that there will be 2 million new jobs requiring an associate’s degree or post-secondary training over the next decade (actually 2006 through 2016) and that jobs requiring an associate’s degree will grow at almost twice the rate of occupations overall (18.7 percent vs. 10.4 percent). Importantly, 1.3 million of those jobs make the hot jobs list, meaning above-average growth and above-average wages. The report focuses on jobs associated with health care and education, information technology, and energy and the environment.

The report’s recommendations are surprisingly breathtaking in scope:

Make community college free for the next two years for anyone who majors in health care, education, information technology, and clean energy. The report does not provide a price tag for such a proposal, nor explain how community colleges would ramp up to handle an influx of students in these majors. (In an earlier section of the report, the DLC notes the challenge of finding nursing faculty, who make significantly less than their colleagues working for health care facilities.)
Launch a national public campaign against both high school and college dropouts. All I can guess is that this must be someone’s pet initiative because the recommendation fits, at best, awkwardly in this report.
Reform higher education assistance programs to reward and demand college completion, not just showing up. The report does not explain how this should be done, but West Virginia’s Community and Technical College System has a new financing system that could serve as a national model. The financing system will reward institutions who get students to key educational momentum points (e.g., completion of developmental education, earning a certificate, earning an associate’s degree). The West Virginia approach is consistent with the “tipping points” research produced for the Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges.
Make the American Opportunity Tax Credit fully refundable and more generous. What is it with right-leaning Democrats and tax credits? Research suggests that financial aid, not tax credits, are the way to go. Making parents and students front money, rather than providing it when needed, is a barrier to access.
Offer states job training program waivers in return for getting more of America’s workers the skills they need to excel in the new jobs market. Given recent research suggesting that traditional job training programs do not work very well, this proposal seems eminently reasonable.

Beer: It really won’t slow you down

8 September 2009

There continues to be little for West Virginia University to cheer about in terms of college rankings.

U.S. News and World Report places WVU in the third tier (of four) among national universities and its law school in the third tier among all law schools. (WVU’s law school was in the fourth tier a few years ago, so this is progress.)
The Princeton Review ranks WVU sixth nationally in terms of partying and eighth in terms of beer affinity. Apparently seeking to add a little humor to the discussion of partying and beer affinity, the Quick and the Ed blog recently published the graduation rates of the Princeton Review’s beer-loving and beer-hating schools and found that students at beer-loving institutions had an average six-year graduation rate of 77.5 percent, while those at beer-hating institutions had a 63 percent graduation rate. The one anomaly among the beer-loving schools: WVU with a 55 percent graduation rate. (Partying schools, by contrast, had lower graduation rates than non-partying schools thanks in part to WVU’s lower-than-average graduation rate.)
The Washington Monthly ranks schools in terms of their contribution to the public good: (1) Social Mobility: How well do colleges perform at recruiting and graduating low-income students?; (2) Research: How well do colleges do at producing cutting-edge scholarship and Ph.Ds?; and (3) Service: Do colleges encourage students to give back to their country? Where does West Virginia University rank among national universities? 162 out of 258. Interestingly, WVU does a slightly better-than-average job of graduating students when one considers the percentage of students receiving Pell grants. Where does West Virginia University do really badly? In federal work-study funds spent on service and in faculty both receiving significant research awards and in the National Academies.

So how will West Virginia University rank in the soon-to-be-released National Research Council (National Academies) rankings of various graduate programs, which are widely considered to be the most statistically rigorous and credible rankings around? You don’t have to wait for the results. I provided the answer on 26 June 2009.

Good money from not-so-good benefactors: Part i

More on Wheeling Jesuit University

A conversation on southern energy

A matter of degrees

Beer: It really won’t slow you down

Recent Updates

Recent Comments

Archives

Technology Posts

CONTACT

LEGAL DISCLAIMER