Higher Education Quarterly, 0951–5224 Volume 55, No. 2, April 2001, pp 175–184 Why Learn? Higher Education in a Learning Society Tessa Blackstone, Department for Education and Employment It is an honour to be invited to give the Birley Lecture here at City University1. Many previous lecturers had personal contacts with Robert Birley. Alas, I did not, like Lord Prior, keep pigs at Charterhouse during the war. Nor was I spotted by Robert Birley on the strength of brilliant scholarship answers in history, but coupled with undistinguished Latin and Greek, and worse mathematics, like William Rees-Mogg. But I do share with Robert Birley a passion for education. Not only as an end in itself, but also as a means to increase the prosperity of society as a whole and the life-chances of individuals. I want to concentrate this evening on university education, and to make links with the very end of Robert Birley’s distinguished career, when he was professor and head of the department of social sciences here. I shall talk about the future of higher education in a world which is changing rapidly, and in which the application of knowledge will be essential to our prosperity. Higher education in the twentieth century Robert Birley was born in 1903. When he went up to Oxford in 1922, he and his fellow undergraduates – there were just 25,000 of them – counted for around 1 per cent of his age group. That proportion doubled in the period to the Second World War; and doubled again in the first 15 years post war so that when Robbins was writing his report there were about 125,000 undergraduates. The Robbins report itself – which led to City University taking its present form – was the start of an extraordinary change over the next thirty years. By the end of the 1970s the participation rate of young people was about 12 per cent. Now it is nearer 35 per cent. The student population has changed too. In 1962/63 relatively few entrants to full time undergraduate courses were mature. Now the proportion is almost 60 per cent.  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA. 176 Higher Education Quarterly In 1962/63, just 26 per cent of higher education students were female. Now women outnumber men in higher education. The changing world of work and the importance of knowledge Why do these changes matter? Because of the growth of the knowledge economy. And I don’t mean just a few dot-com companies. I am talking about an emerging global economy in which there is increased internationalisation of production and trade – world export volumes were ten times higher in 1995 than 40 years earlier. Where there is greater mobility of capital. Where there are social and cultural transformations which result from new information and communication flows. And I am talking about an emerging knowledge economy which is driven by innovation and ideas, skills and knowledge. These are now the tools for success and prosperity in the 21st century just as much as natural resources and physical labour were in the 19th. The implication of these changes is the increasing demand on all the workforce to have better skills. Economic growth will depend on the skills, inventiveness and creativity of the workforce. Birley recognised the same phenomenon in South Africa nearly 40 years ago. He helped produce a report ‘Education and the South African Economy’ which traced the connections between education and economic and social development and, through projections, built a picture of future needs. The report was unusually prescient. It discussed the effects of industrialisation and automation, and particularly the effect of computers. But perhaps not surprisingly, it viewed the computer as just another form of mechanisation – to replace clerical functions – and although there is a hint of numerically-controlled machines, the report understandably failed to predict that information technology would transform work itself in the way it has. Of course, higher education itself is not immune to these forces for change. Globally, the market for higher education is worth some £300 billion per year. Demand is growing fast. It has been estimated that there will be 159 million global enrolments in higher education by 2025, with 87 million of these from Asia. New providers are already expanding to meet this demand, especially in the US. They are using the advantage of English as the world language to expand into overseas markets. Existing providers are using their prestigious brand names as a selling point. And there are partnerships emerging between universities and media organisations. There is growing competition too for overseas students. And the increasing sophistication of information and communication technologies  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Why Learn? 177 is allowing an expansion of what a recent Universities UK report called ‘borderless education’ where web-based materials can be delivered world-wide at the click of a mouse. For these reasons, the Prime Minister wants by the end of the decade, fifty per cent of young people to have benefited from higher education by the time they reach 30 years old. That’s an ambitious target. But from what I will say later, I hope you will see it is a necessary one. And it has an important implication. This further growth in participation cannot – and will not – just be more of the same. Rather, there will be a new tradition for higher education. Students will be both full-time and part-time. Both young and mature. They will study in the institution and in the workplace. Using conventional and novel teaching and learning techniques. They will combine work and learning where that is convenient for them. They will return to learning when they need to. And above all, they will be drawn from the entire spectrum of society – from all social classes and all ethnic groups. The test will be how they can benefit, not which school they went to, or whether their parents went to university before them. Some might argue that higher education is already taking as many students as can properly benefit from it. I disagree. First, the economic evidence is that graduates command an earnings premium over those with A levels. Employers are prepared to pay 25 per cent more for a male graduate and 20 per cent for a female graduate. Even for the larger numbers of more recent graduates entering the labour market there is little sign of these wage premia significantly deteriorating. And graduate unemployment remains under half the national average. Putting this together leads to the personal rate of return of a first degree over A levels being some 11–14 per cent. A good investment by any standards. Second, the participation rate of lower socio-economic groups is still low. A good deal of this is due to low achievement at school. But as our educational reforms in schools work through, I refuse to believe that the potential of these groups to benefit from higher education is exhausted. And this does not mean dumbing-down. It’s to do with raising aspirations and achievement. You only have to look at the increase in participation rates for women to see what can be done. Higher education and the knowledge economy All this means that higher education has a central role in the development of the knowledge economy, and in maintaining Britain’s competitive position. I want to talk about five challenges for universities and  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 178 Higher Education Quarterly colleges in the knowledge economy. First, to provide students with the skills and knowledge they will need in the new world of work, and to make sure the qualifications on offer are appropriate. Second, to foster in those graduates a willingness to learn throughout life, as well as providing post experience courses and continuous professional development which are needed by businesses. Third, to engage in scholarship and research. Fourth, to foster innovation and knowledge transfer from higher education into business and industry, and through this to contribute to economic growth locally, regionally and nationally. And last, to embrace the new information and communication technologies which offer the potential for new ways of teaching and learning. I will take these points in turn. Relevant skills and knowledge First, higher education needs to respond to skill shortages for highly trained people. Some shortages are widespread – the projected demand for IT skills is still outstripping supply, despite a 50 per cent increase in enrolments on computer science courses since 1995. There are also some very specialised skills in urgent demand, for example, the know-how to process and analyse the huge quantities of data generated by the human genome project and similar biological and medical research. Institutions – and students – need to understand and be sensitive to demand. And because the lead time for the more specialised science-based skills is so long, we need to ensure that science is interesting for our children and that we keep attracting enough of them to study science, engineering and technology. That is why we are launching Science Year in 2001 to raise the profile of these subjects in schools and colleges. Generic skills and work experience Employers now seek graduates who combine specific knowledge with the generic skills that will enable them to make an immediate impact on business success and be effective in a range of roles. They need skilled communicators, effective team workers and creative problem solvers. As the work place continues to change in response to global markets, the advance of new technologies and customer expectations, graduates will need to continue to develop their skills. They will not only need to keep up with these changes on a personal level, but also lead change themselves. All students should benefit from experience in the world of work before coming face to face with the realities of the modern labour  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Why Learn? 179 market. The old Northampton Institute, predecessor of this University, pioneered sandwich courses. Today we need to extend the opportunities for work and project placements as integrated elements of academic courses, ensure that Graduate Apprenticeships become available in a wide range of business and industry sectors and successfully introduce the new foundation degrees. But the student population is changing. Many undergraduates will be mature students who have worked in the past. Others will be studying part-time while holding down jobs. Some will have taken a gap year and worked abroad. Others will be filling responsible roles as volunteers. We need to find ways to help them value this experience and to articulate the transferable skills they may already have developed. Better careers advice Graduates also need the skills to manage their careers effectively in an increasingly complex and fast-moving employment market. That means, more than ever, graduates need personalised, impartial guidance to help them make the right choices. Careers Services in higher education ought to provide an important link to business, the economy and society. Their influence on individuals, with employers and in their institutions should be a powerful one, delivered consistently and to high standards. Martin Harris’ review of higher education careers services which I am publishing today emphasises that modern careers services should develop so that: • • • • they promote and target their services to those who most need them; they are integrated fully with the academic life of their institution; they make better and more effective use of ICT; they are open about what they offer, to whom, and how well they perform. New and relevant qualifications – the Foundation degree We also need new types of qualification. Not everyone wants, or needs, a traditional three year full-time programme of study towards an honours degree. Nor is it always appropriate to lifelong learning or learning in the workplace. The Foundation degree is a new employment-related higher education qualification, which is underpinned by academic knowledge. It is being introduced to meet the skills gap at the associate professional and higher technician level. It will be particularly attractive to employees  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 180 Higher Education Quarterly seeking to enhance their skills and their career prospects because bodies such as National Training Organisations will be actively involved in the design, review and delivery of programmes. Foundation degrees are a part of a coherent pathway of vocational learning that begins in school with vocational GCSEs and A Levels and reaches through to Graduate Apprenticeships. They provide a further rung on the ladder of lifelong learning for those people already in the workplace who are studying Foundation and Advanced Modern Apprenticeships and other work-based qualifications. For these people the foundation degree will offer flexible modes of delivery, such as distance and web-based learning, which enables them to both ‘earn and learn’. Forty prototype courses will begin in September. They will offer a wide range of programmes in leading edge industries such as information technology, e-commerce and creative industries in an equally wide range of HE and FE institutions. Promoting lifelong learning Second, universities and colleges need to promote lifelong learning. That means being flexible in the way courses are provided, taking account of students’ work and domestic priorities. Being more sensitive to the needs of the customer, rather than the convenience of the provider. A single dose of education or training for a young person will no longer be enough. Specialised higher education is a useful way to deepen, update or broaden professional skills. A number of institutions are already engaged: for example, over 5,000 managers and engineers visit Cranfield University’s Technology Park each year. The majority of part-time post-graduate students are now primarily studying in areas relevant to, and often combined with, their work. And many universities now offer a range of short courses tailored to individual needs, including bespoke provision for companies. Promoting scholarship and research Third, higher education supports the knowledge economy by the production and transfer of knowledge – research and innovation. As Robert May often reminds us, we are in a strong position. With only 1 per cent of the world’s population, the UK carries out 5.5 per cent of the world’s research effort and is a major force in research with an 8 per cent share of the world scientific publications and a 9.1 per cent share  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Why Learn? 181 of world citations. Despite this success, we are not resting on our laurels but investing more to underpin what is already a good quality base. We are establishing a new Science Research Investment Fund with the Wellcome Trust to provide a further £1 billion of investment in science infrastructure. We will also be increasing stipends for postgraduate researchers to a minimum of £9,000. And universities can share in the £250 million new programme of research in post-genomics, escience and generic technologies made available through the Research Councils. Fostering innovation and technology transfer Fourth, to reap the benefits of that research it needs to be transferred out of academia. But the gap between academic research and industrial exploitation is often too wide. Some universities have a good record. For example, Newcastle University displays on its website a variety of technologies available for licensing and development for companies and entrepreneurs to browse through. In the long-term many of these links with industry pay for themselves, but in the short term we need to build the capacity of all higher education institutions to carry out this reach-out work. And there will be a continuing need for incentives to pursue those activities that are not financially self-sustaining – for example, much work with small and medium enterprises and with the community. We have made a start with the Higher Education Reach-Out to Business and the Community fund, and we will be building on this with new resources in a larger Higher Education Innovation Fund over the next three years. Embracing new technologies for teaching and learning Last, advances in information and communication technology are taking power away from the provider of higher education and giving it to the learner. Students no longer need to be in a lecture room at a fixed time. They can learn when and where they want. Distance learning is now taking on a meaning beyond the traditional techniques of the Open University. To be fair, the Open University already has several courses delivered over the web; personal tuition for some courses is provided via the Internet, as well as course materials and other learning resources. And other universities are also developing courses to be delivered online, sometimes forming alliances with the private sector to develop coursework and new communication technology.  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 182 Higher Education Quarterly Yet such ventures are expensive: as a result progress has been piecemeal. And because the Internet is inherently global, institutions in the UK are already facing competition from providers in other countries all looking for a share in the global market for higher education. And it is not just universities who are entering the fray. Employers are increasingly providing their own courses; as are publishers and Internet entrepreneurs. That is why David Blunkett has asked HEFCE to develop proposals for a national collaborative venture. Under the working title of ‘eUniversities’, this initiative is intended to establish a globally-competitive provider of Internet-based higher education. By bringing together a critical mass of funding, effort and expertise in this initiative, coupled with the fine reputation overseas of British higher education, we hope to be able to challenge the growing number of providers waiting to exploit the online higher education market. Who pays? What I have described so far sets out an ambitious programme for higher education over the coming years. We cannot afford not to implement it. The drivers of the knowledge economy must be sustained. But who should pay? In 1997 the Dearing report recognised that universities were underfunded. The funding per student from public sources had fallen by 36 per cent between 1989 and 1997 – and a further cut was planned for the next two years. Although this was at a time of rapid expansion in student numbers, so some economies of scale were possible –the changes were too far and too fast. At the same time, spending on higher education was also regressive in that the great majority of taxpayers who did not benefit from it paid for the minority – predominantly from the higher socio-economic groups – who did. That was simply not fair. I described earlier the real financial benefits that accrue to most graduates through increased earnings compared to those with university entrance qualifications but no degree. We took a tough decision to share the costs of higher education more fairly between students, their families and taxpayers generally. Fairness requires, however, that only those students who can afford to contribute to the cost of tuition are asked to do so. We have ensured that less well-off students are protected – over 40 per cent of all students do not pay fees at all. As a result of further changes we have made, from September next year the proportion of students not required to make any contribution will rise to around 50  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Why Learn? 183 per cent. The average total fee paid over three years by an undergraduate will be some £1,400. That means the government will still be contributing some 90 per cent of the total costs of tuition. And all the income from tuition fees is reinvested in higher education, as we promised it would be. At the same time, we reformed student support to provide good value loans to help with student maintenance. So, for example, a graduate earning £13,000 repays about £5 a week. All this has allowed this government for the first time in over a decade, to provide a real terms increase in publicly planned funding per full-time equivalent student in England in 2001–02. And this will be sustained in the following years. Since coming to power, it has meant that we have been able to increase planned investment in higher education by a huge £1.7 billion, a 17 per cent real terms increase over the six years from 1998 to 2004. This in turn has allowed us to fund a planned expansion in higher education over this period of nearly 130,000 extra places compared to 1997/98. The Future All this adds up to a new future for higher education. With students drawn from all sectors of society according to their ability. Studying at a time and in a way which fits in with their commitments to work and family. Gaining generic skills as well as specialist knowledge so that their creativity and innovation help drive the knowledge economy. Universities will both be exploiting new technology for teaching and learning and stimulating tomorrow’s technologies through the exploitation of research. Universities will be needed as never before. Conclusion Robert Birley was a man of many virtues. But he had at least one vice. According to his biographer, Arthur Hearnden, when he lectured he would let his enthusiasm run away with him, often alas oblivious to the circumstances of his audience. [. . .] The minutes would tick away and there would be increasingly anxious and surreptitious glances at watches. But Birley would be blithely unaware of their predicament. He would talk on and on, impervious to all hints, until at long last they were released to scurry back to their offices, flustered and appallingly late. (Hearnden, 1984). There is much to admire in Robert Birley and we would all do well to emulate him in many ways. But I am not going to emulate this particular vice.  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 184 Higher Education Quarterly Note 1. The Birley Lecture was given by Tessa Blackstone, Minister of State for Education and Employment in the House of Lords, at City University on 24 January 2001. It is reproduced here in full. References Hearnden, A. (1984), Red Robert: A life of Robert Birley (London, Hamish Hamilton).  Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 2001 Copyright of Higher Education Quarterly is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. Gains and losses on academic transfer markets: Dropping out and course-switching in high Juha-Pekka Liljander British Journal of Sociology of Education; Dec 1998; 19, 4; Research Library pg. 479 Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. Review Reviewed Work(s): Killing the Spirit: Higher Education in America by Page Smith Review by: Jurgen Herbst Source: The New England Quarterly, Vol. 64, No. 2 (Jun., 1991), pp. 312-314 Published by: The New England Quarterly, Inc. Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/366128 Accessed: 24-11-2018 18:05 UTC JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at https://about.jstor.org/terms The New England Quarterly, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The New England Quarterly This content downloaded from 130.156.1.76 on Sat, 24 Nov 2018 18:05:35 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Book Reviews Killing the Spirit: Higher Education in America. By Page Smit (New York: Viking. 1990. Pp. xvii, 315. $19.95.) Killing the Spirit is one volume in the now fashionable string of books that attack higher education. It is heavy on narrative a light on analysis. It is jolly good reading, and one wants to ap plaud when the author's darts hit right on target-which they often do. It is also an unreliable guide to its subject, for the author is careless with his facts and contemptuous of any requireme that he document his sources or aid his readers in tracing them for themselves. Nonetheless, Smith's targets are well chosen and deserve searching analysis. Smith defines them as "academic fundamentalism," which, he explains, is "the stubborn refusal of the academy to acknowledge any truth that does not conform to professorial dogmas" (p. 5); "the flight from teaching"; "the meretriciousness of most academic research"; "the disintegration of the disciplines," which, he adds, is the fragmentation of the social sciences and the humanities into ever more subfields (p. 9); the alliances forged between universities and government agencies and private corporations; and, finally, the corruptions of big-time campus athletics. Smith proceeds historically and devotes the bulk of his volume to the age of the modern, big-time university. Throughout the book he argues that the history of higher education is marked by a continuing conflict between what he calls the Secular-Demo- cratic and the Classical-Christian traditions. The former relies on enlightenment through reason; the latter softens that reliance with a faith in natural law and revelation. The accelerating victory of the former over the latter led to the major evils of the modern university: the neglect of the undergraduate and of teach- ing in favor of graduate study and research. Undergraduate colleges, he avers, serve as the farm system of the universities. Smith's dislike of the conventional ways of scholarship serves as a perfect example of a laudable impulse that, when left unchecked, becomes an annoying, even detracting and offensive habit. In the absence of footnotes and of a complete bibliography, 312 This content downloaded from 130.156.1.76 on Sat, 24 Nov 2018 18:05:35 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms BOOK REVIEWS 313 we have no way of checking t Errors and misleading statemen consin, Smith writes, was esta founded together with its stat next year. According to Page Sm influence of Richard Ely and J of Michigan. But the two prof was Henry Carter Adams who gan. The attempt to fire Richar consin was led by E. L. Godkin it was School Superintendent O attack, while Godkin lent edito to Smith's claim, Ely stated th adviser" of Governor Robert L rectly dates Eliot's presidency thirteen pages later he thinks twenty-five-year incumbency racies and carelessness do not increase the reader's confidence in the author's reliability. The book, though faulty in many ways, hits its target. Its message ought to be taken to heart by those who are attacked, even though the aim is often scatter-shot and the charges need to be revised. Every reader, I'll wager, will find a favorite passage. I couldn't repress a shout of assent when I came across Smith's spirited assault on the social scientists-"the academics-who-would- be-scientists"-who talk about "detachment, objectivity, neutrality, [and] the dispassionate treatment of data," when the "hard" scientists, whom they so desperately try to imitate, speak of "pas- sion and obsession, of hunches and inspiration, of insight, excitement, and profound emotion" (p. 282). The chapter on the "Social Nonsciences" makes a nice companion-piece to that on the "Inhumane Humanities," and both together illustrate well Smith's thesis of the "killing of the spirit." Still, it takes more than a once-over-lightly ramble through developments in higher education if one wants to challenge the entrenched powers-that-be inside and outside the universities. And one should ask for more than wit and indignation if one hopes to revive the joy of teaching and the love of learning. Smith's book may serve as a wake-up elixir today. But we need more searching analysis and stronger medicine to carry on from here. This content downloaded from 130.156.1.76 on Sat, 24 Nov 2018 18:05:35 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms 314 THE NEW ENGLAND QUARTERLY Jurgen Herbst, University of Wisconsin-Madison, teaches a writes on the history of higher education. The Norton Book of Nature Writing. Edited by Robert Finch John Elder. (New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 199 Pp. 921. $29.95.) Nature writing has a long and distinguished place in the his of both English and American literature. While antecedents the genre are readily found in classical writings, its modern f took shape in the letters of a remarkable English curate, the erend Gilbert White, of the parish of Selborn in Surrey. Coll and published in 1789 after the author's death under the title Natural History and Antiquities of Selborn, these letters for record of White's observations of the natural world around him. It is thus entirely appropriate that Robert Finch and John Elder open their superb anthology entitled The Norton Book of Nature Writing with excerpts from the Reverend Mr. White's letters. In the baker's dozen selected by the editors, White examines the behavior of earthworms, swifts, hedgehogs, and a favorite tortoise which he introduced into his garden. Among other matters White discusses what he calls the "economy of nature," the interdependence of species and habitats that comprise the central focus of modern-day ecology. In their informative introduction, Finch and Elder state the ground rules for their choice of more than one hundred pieces by nearly as many authors. A brief but informative sketch introduces each author and places the selection in context with his or her other writings. Although limited to non-fiction prose in English, the choices include parts of essays by such fiction writers as Henry James, Virginia Woolf, and John Updike. Not surprisingly, Henry David Thoreau receives the largest allotment of space, including excerpts from Walden, A Week on the Concord and Merrimack Rivers, and The Maine Woods, but almost half the selections are from writings published after 1945. Many of the contemporary writers are well known-Annie Dilliard, John McPhee, Peter Matthiessen, and Barry Lopez are all here-while others among the modern authors enjoy as yet only a regional or otherwise limited reputation. One hopes that inclusion in this distinguished volume will give them well-deserved exposure. This content downloaded from 130.156.1.76 on Sat, 24 Nov 2018 18:05:35 UTC All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms Research Paper Assignment – Fall 2018 The major assignment for this class, on which we will be working on throughout the semester until the end of the semester, is the Research Paper. Your Research Paper will be 5-to-7 page paper focusing on a critical argument. You must include perspectives from at least SIX books, journals, magazines, papers, articles, interviews, surveys, and newspapers in your paper. The amount of internet-based sources is not limited, but will not be allowed until the requirements noted above are fulfilled. The MLA system of documentation, both within the body of the text, as well as at the end in the form of a Works Cited page, must be used to report the citations We have covered on multiple occassions how to do so this semester; you can always find guides to proper MLA formatting through the links provided in this course and through the Library website. We will not cover this crucial process any further in the course; you will be reponsible for correct citations and a proper MLA works-cited page for this assignment. You must submit the following to receive a passing grade: • Persuasive argument paper (Essay Three) • The RPQ • outline and annotations • rough draft • final draft. If you fail to turn in any of these items by their due-dates, or fail to complete any part of the research project, you will receive a failing grade for the entire assignment, no exceptions. You may choose from ONE of the following topics: • Voting laws and rules • Opioid epidemic in America • Higher education You will choose a topic and then create a thesis statement for an argument that you will defend. The first step is to come into class with the completed RPQ (Research Paper Questionnaire). Research Paper Questionnaire (RPQ) – WRT­101 Name: Hilmi Durmaz Date:11/19/18 Course Number:WRT 101­036 Fill in your answers in complete sentences (where applicable). If your preliminary research suggests that your original project is unworkable, download another RPQ and resubmit. If the answers are not completely, thoroughly, and correctly answered, there will be a serious reduction in the final grade for the research paper, up to and including a failing grade. I. Research topic you’ve chosen to consider. a. Higher Education II. Why have you chosen this topic? a. I am college student, who aim to study after college, I think it is going to helpful for me, and it is the only topic I have most ideas III. What is your proposed thesis statement (you may change it if needed)? a. People really need to study afterwards high school such as college and master because it helps people to have certain network, they get better paying jobs and they receive more respect than uneducated people. III. What FIVE questions you have about the topic that you may support in your argument? · Why are tuition for higher education that much? · Do people really need to get higher education? · What are the benefits of higher education as well as education? · Why does etiquette of PhD degree that matter · Why do people drop out colleges? IV. Titles of the works that you have located and will consider utilizing. List them alphabetically and in MLA style. You must list at least FIVE print­based or database sources (i.e. NOT internet sources). a.Lewis, Ralph G, and Douglas H Smith. Total Quality in Higher Education. St. Lucie Press, 1994. b.Smith, Page. Killing the Spirit : Higher Education in America. Viking, 1990. c.Keller, George. Academic Strategy : The Management Revolution in American Higher Education. Johns Hopkins University Press, 1983. d.Selingo, Jeffrey J. College (Un)Bound : The Future of Higher Education and What It Means for Students. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2013. e.Solomon, Robert C, and Jon Solomon. Up the University : Re­Creating Higher Education in America. Addison­Wesley Pub, 1993. V. In a grammatically correct and carefully edited paragraph, describe the focus and approach that you have tentatively elected to present in your paper. Include the thesis statement for the analysis part of the paper. Do not submit an outline. Be specific. Thesis Statement: People really need to study afterwards high school such as college and master because higher education help people to have certain network, they get better paying jobs and they receive more respect than uneducated people in the society. Paper is going to aim to describe goods and bads of the higher education. It starts with bads such as why higher education is that expensive and why people drop out from colleges. Then it is going consist of rank the benefits of the higher education such as why people need it, What PhD means to big companies, and the environment and network that they are going to see in college under the question of what are the benefits of the higher education as well as education. Then it is going contain with few negative things about higher education and then explain why those negative things are worth for higher education. There are 5 questions and there will be answers for them in each five page. End is going to be the paper with brief summary of answers for five questions.
Purchase answer to see full attachment