ปลายเดือน ก.ย. ๕๓ อ่านข่าว นสพ. ว่ากระทรวงศึกษาธิการมีแผนใช้เงินกว่า ๑ ล้านล้านเพื่อปฏิรูปการศึกษา   โดยที่เงินกว่า ๘ แสนล้านเป็นเงิน กยศ.   เห็นเงินก้อนโตทีไรผมอดคิดไม่ได้ว่า มีกลไกตรวจสอบความคุ้มค่าของการใช้เงินไหม

          พอดี ศ. ดร. ปิยะวัติ บุญ-หลง ส่ง อี-เมล์ นี้มาให้   จึงได้เห็นว่าในสหรัฐอเมริกาเขามีกลไกตรวจสอบและบอกแก่สาธารณะ ดังต่อไปนี้

---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------

Subject: Read Our New Report: 'Are You Gainfully Employed?'
From:    "Education Sector Updates" <Education_Sector_Updates(at)mail.vresp.com>
Date:    Sat, September 18, 2010 2:56 am
To:      piyawat(at)knit.or.th

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Colleague,

Millions of dollars and thousands of letters are pouring into
Congress and the Obama administration over a controversial proposal
to judge vocational programs based upon work-force outcomes. Many of
the letters claim gloom and doom--that the proposal would shut down
huge swathes of the for-profit education sector. But a new analysis
of the gainful employment standard by Policy Analyst Ben Miller -
http://cts.vresp.com/c/?EducationSector/17db6094f5/a78909c66a/3f9e218769
shows theses claims are overblown. Miller estimates that just 4
percent of programs would be shut down under the proposed standard
and the vast majority would keep their eligibility.

Miller looked at more than 12,600 programs at colleges and
universities across the country and estimates that just over 500
would be ineligible for federal student aid. Of the remaining
programs, 16 percent would be eligible, 65 percent would be eligible
with a debt warning, and 15 percent would be restricted.

The report -
http://cts.vresp.com/c/?EducationSector/17db6094f5/a78909c66a/dfe5d7fa13
uses publicly available data to present, for the first time, a
picture of the potential effects of the controversial gainful
employment proposal, which would make it more difficult for
for-profit colleges, in particular, to access federal funds. The
for-profit sector has grown dramatically in recent years, largely
free of federal regulation. But if the department's proposal takes
effect, that freedom would be significantly curtailed.

Under the proposed rules, vocational training programs would be
judged by the ratio of the debt that graduates assume relative to
their current earnings and the rate at which they are able to repay
it. If programs offered by for-profit colleges exceed certain
thresholds on those measures, they risk losing eligibility for
federal student aid. Given that many for-profit colleges receive
close to 90 percent of their revenue from federal grants and loans,
losing access to these dollars would be a death sentence.

It is programs, rather than entire institutions, that are most likely
to face problems under the new regulations. According to Miller's
analysis, medical assistant and culinary training programs are the
most likely to be declared ineligible under the new regulations.The
12 ineligible programs in baking and pastry arts also fare poorly.

Of the 2,351 bachelor's degree programs in the survey, Miller
estimates that 8 percent, or 193 programs, would be ineligible, and
an additional 29 percent would be restricted. Of the ineligible
programs, 31 are in e-commerce--the most of any program type. Other
program types with large numbers of ineligible programs include
interior design (19) and graphic design (16).

"Programs connected to greater work-force needs are less likely to be
ineligible," Miller says.  "Only a handful of programs in accounting
and one program each in business management, legal
assistant/paralegal, and nursing would be ineligible. By contrast,
most ineligible programs are in 'dream job' areas: they provide
training in cutting-edge fields like online businesses and graphic
design, or in luxury occupations like interior design or fashion
merchandising. These areas are associated with relatively high
borrowing levels, but do not offer large numbers of jobs."

The report has already generated a strong reaction from the Career
College Association (CCA), which questioned some of Miller's
methodology. In a post -
http://cts.vresp.com/c/?EducationSector/17db6094f5/a78909c66a/9518a0a577
on The Quick and the Ed, Miller acknowledges some limits to publicly
available data. For example, Social Security Administration salary
reports are not made public. However, Miller says, "I believe the
methodology employed to be completely reasonable and rest entirely on
data either reported by the federal government or the schools
themselves."

 

          ผมอยากเห็นการทำวิจัย ประเมินผลการใช้เงินของโครงการใหญ่ๆ   ที่มอบให้หน่วยงานที่เป็นกลางและน่าเชื่อถือเป็นผู้รับผิดชอบดำเนินการ   โดยมีเป้าหมาย ๒ อย่าง คือ (๑) เพื่อพัฒนาวิธีการดำเนินการ ให้คุ้มค่ายิ้งขึ้น  (๒) เพื่อเป็นการเรียนรู้ ว่าต่อไปหากจะมีครงการใหญ่ๆ เช่นนี้ จะต้องใส่กลไกด้านการจัดการอย่างไรบ้างเข้าไปตั้งแต่ต้น เพื่อประสิทธิผล และประสิทธิภาพ

 

 

วิจารณ์ พานิช
๒๒ ก.ย. ๕๓