Search

We examine the role of universities in knowledge production and industrial change using historical evidence. Political shocks led to a profound pro-science shift in German universities around 1800. To study the consequences, we construct novel microdata. We find that invention and manufacturing developed similarly in cities closer to and farther from universities in the 1700s and shifted towards universities and accelerated in the early 1800s. The shift in manufacturing was strongest in new and high knowledge industries. After 1800, the adoption of mechanized technology and the number and share of firms winning international awards for innovation were higher near universities. [This paper was produced as part of the Centre's Growth Programme.]

This paper summarises the literature that has linked education and economic growth. It begins with an overview of the key concepts in neoclassical and endogenous growth models, and discussion on how these have been tested in the data. Issues with respect to specification, the measurement of human capital and causality are discussed, together with studies that have sought to addresses these. A more recent and growing literature that explores the links between firm level human capital and productivity, including externalities, is then summarised. Beyond studies that link human capital to economic performance directly, there are numerous studies that have explore the relationships between human capital and the determinants of growth including investment, technology adoption and invention. Key findings from this literature are drawn out, together with a summary of the literature that has linked the activities of universities (key producers of both human capital and innovation) to their local economies. The paper concludes with discussion of policy implications stemming from this body of research, and promising areas for future research.

Higher education transforms learners, cultivates talent and offers pathways to opportunity. Education is the rising tide that should lift all boats, and "Pathways to Opportunity: The Virginia Plan for Higher Education" charts the course for doing so. The Plan reflects those near- and longer-term issues that significantly impact the landscape of higher education in the Commonwealth. Developing this Plan amid the pandemic and the emergence of social justice issues sharpened the report's focus on the challenges of equity, affordability and transformative outcomes--challenges not unique to Virginia. Several themes emerged from the year-long planning process. Results of a quantitative data analysis of the current state of higher education in the Commonwealth and input from a diverse group of higher education stakeholders confirm that "Pathways to Opportunity: The Virginia Plan" should: (1) Emphasize the importance of equity as a specific goal and underlying element of The Plan; (2) Ensure that The Plan's vision, target, goals, strategies and measures are linked closely; (3) Enable clear connections between The Plan and State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV's) day-to-day work and organizational commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion; and (4) Adopt deliberate and boldly aspirational goals in light of the pandemic and social justice issues. In October, Council established three goals for higher education: it should be equitable, affordable and transformative. These goals are the framework for The Plan's 10 strategies and five measures as well as the vision of "Best State for Education" and overall target of 70% educational attainment of all 25 to 64-year old working-aged Virginians.

The State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (SCHEV) has a codified responsibility to develop the Commonwealth's state-level strategic plan for higher education and to review The Plan every six years to ensure its relevance in addressing critical issues. In 2019, to fulfill a Code requirement and more important, to identify the main near- and long-term issues facing higher education, SCHEV began the review of the current Plan. The project staff spent a year reviewing quantitative data and suggestions and comments from an array of stakeholders. The process included a look at "The Virginia Plan in Action (2014-2020)," identifying accomplishments over the last six years and where efforts should be focused moving forward. Such analysis shaped the resultant new plan - "Pathway to Opportunity: The Virginia Plan for Higher Education," which sets forth goals and strategies to address critical issues and includes measures to assess progress toward those goals. Much progress has been made since 2014, and although higher education continues to face many challenges, this report illustrates how The Virginia Plan's programs have benefited higher education policy and programs. [For "The Virginia Plan for Higher Education: Annual Report for 2019," see ED604673. For "Pathways to Opportunity: The Virginia Plan for Higher Education," see ED612339.]

Researchers and journalists have documented the challenges confronting the nation's rural communities--dwindling populations, few employment opportunities, the opioid crisis, and a lack of public investment. However, there are many rural communities that are surmounting these obstacles and helping their young people build a brighter future. The authors of this report identified 133 rural counties that rank in the top 10 percent of all rural counties for youth economic advancement. To get a ground-level view, they homed in on a subset of counties within the top 10 percent, using characteristics that correlate with upward mobility--such as teen birth rates and high school graduation rates--to guide them. They also used demographic data to seek out counties with some diversity in terms of population size, adjacency to metropolitan areas, racial makeup, and predominant industries. Supported by the Cooperative Extension System of the nation's land-grant universities, they conducted over 200 in-person interviews with public, private, and nonprofit community leaders, including approximately 100 interviews with focus groups comprised of middle and high school students. To discern how these communities increase the odds that their young people will climb the income ladder, they collected insights from young people. This field report details what they found. It offers a firsthand account of economic mobility in rural America, reflecting what they saw as well as what they heard from community leaders and young people themselves. [The report was written in collaboration with the National 4-H Council and the Cooperative Extension System of land-grant universities.]

"Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2018" contains the Budget Message of the President, information on the President's priorities, and summary tables. President Trump's 2018 Budget's defining ambition is to unleash the dreams of the American people. This requires laying a new foundation for American Greatness. Through streamlined Government, the country will drive an economic boom that raises incomes and expands job opportunities for all Americans. Faster economic growth, coupled with fiscal restraint, will enable the federal government to fully fund national priorities, balance the budget, and start to pay down the national debt. The government's moral commitment to replacing the nation's current economic stagnation with faster economic growth rests on the following eight pillars of reform: (1) Health reform; (2) Tax reform and simplification; (3) Immigration reform; (4) Reduction in federal spending; (5) Regulatory rollback; (6) American energy development; (7) Welfare reform; and (8) Education reform. [For the 2017 Budget, see ED576935.]

"Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2017" contains the Budget Message of the President, information on the President's priorities, and summary tables. President Obama's 2017 Budget makes critical investments while adhering to the bipartisan budget agreement he signed into the previous fall, and it lifts sequestration in future years so that the nation continues to invest in its economic future and national security. It also drives down deficits and maintains fiscal progress through smart savings from health care, immigration, and tax reforms. It also focuses on meeting the nation's greatest challenges not only for the year ahead, but for decades to come. [For the 2016 Budget, see ED576934.]

State efforts to boost the economy--economic development--first came to Pennsylvania in the 1950s with the establishment of the Pennsylvania Industrial Development Authority (PIDA) low interest loan program used to recruit manufacturers to Pennsylvania, including devastated coal regions. Since that time, economic development in Pennsylvania and other states has evolved through several waves. The 1980s saw the emergence of "grow your own" strategies, which sought to nurture and grow local businesses rather than recruit businesses from elsewhere. In Pennsylvania, the Ben Franklin Technology Partners (BFTP) and Industrial Resource Centers (IRCs), established in the early and latter part of the 1980s respectively, were at the heart of efforts to grow new businesses and help existing small and medium-sized ones become more productive. The 1990s and 2000s saw the emergence of multi-pronged strategies based on investing in "regional assets." One prong of this "building on strength" approach emphasized mapping and supporting strong, high-wage, regional "industry clusters." Other prongs highlighted assets such as higher education research institutions, unique culture and history, or natural beauty. In recent years, there has been increasing emphasis on "innovation." In part, this takes discussion back to the late 1970s frustrations with the interaction between research universities and industry. In the past, new "waves" of economic development--and new approaches to state collaboration with the private sector--have tended to come at moments of economic distress, such as the mammoth job loss in the Pennsylvania steel industry and the broader erosion of manufacturing in the 1980s. Economic distress created both the demand for new approaches and the political will within state government, business, and the broader community to step back, to diagnose the roots of economic malaise, and to make a fresh start on the state's support for the private sector. The U.S. and Pennsylvania economies are finally recovering from the Great Recession but virtually none of the benefits of that growth have gone to typical families. There is also an urgency about discussions of innovation and global competitiveness. The U.S. has lost ground in technology sector after technology sector and a gnawing concern exists that, at some point, if the production of new products is mostly offshore the U.S. will lose its research advantage. In this context, the present document outlines a new state economic strategy, All Pennsylvanians Prospering Together or "APP Together". The focus here is on the medium to long term. In addition, the report focuses on economic development relatively narrowly defined--the programs largely within the purview of the Pennsylvania Department of Economic and Community Development (DCED), although there is a brief discussion of skills development in the manufacturing sector. This narrow focus means that transportation infrastructure is not discussed. Nor is how the state can maximize the economic payoff of any given level of responsible shale drilling (e.g., by spurring value-added processing or using cheap energy to boost manufacturing). The report recommends that economic development in Pennsylvania going forward embrace the following core principles: (1) invest in public goods that deliver public benefits; (2) the state should invest in growing its own businesses, building on assets, such as dynamic technology industries and higher education institutions; (3) Pennsylvania should pursue a good jobs strategy; and (4) Pennsylvania should invest in her cities, town and landscapes. The appendix provides a list of practitioners interviewed in the creation of this report.

"Turn and Face the Strain: Age Demographic Change and the Near Future of American Education" outlines a fierce battle looming between the needs of public health care and education. A crisis is fast approaching that makes comprehensive improvement of America's public schools more important than ever. Faced with rapidly expanding populations of the young and the old, working age taxpayers will experience the growing strain of insufficient tax revenue to fund public services from now until the foreseeable future. One solution to the crisis: an American education system that leads to a college and career-ready generation prepared for high-wage job earnings in a competitive global economy. Data tables and state-by-state analyses are appended. [For the policy brief, see ED574382.]

"Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 2016" contains the Budget Message of the President, information on the President's priorities, and summary tables. The ideas offered by President Obama in this 2016 Budget are designed to bring middle-class economics into the 21st Century. They are intended to help working families feel more secure with paychecks that go further, help American workers upgrade their skills, so they can compete for higher-paying jobs, and help create the conditions for businesses to keep generating good new jobs for workers to fill. The Budget will do these things while fulfilling the most basic responsibility to keep Americans safe. The government will make these investments and end the harmful spending cuts known as sequestration, by cutting inefficient spending, and closing tax loopholes. This Budget will also put the Nation on a more sustainable fiscal path by achieving $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction, primarily from reforms in health programs, the nation's tax code, and immigration. [For the 2015 Budget, see ED555246.]

Japan, the Republic of Korea and Singapore are in the process of adopting approaches that can be characterised by the terms "learning society" and "lifelong learning". This report uses case studies to present a description of the three countries' national socio-economic climates and to assess their political will and governmental commitment to building a learning society. These countries understand how important an educated workforce is in order to achieve economic growth, and they are aware of the need to invest in research. All three countries have recently seen substantial demographic shifts, which will have considerable influence on growth over the coming decades. Japan, the Republic of Korea and Singapore all value education highly, and citizens of all ages are guaranteed the right to education. This report discusses policies, action plans, governance and financing from each country and clarifies common lessons that can be drawn from the three countries' endeavours. Furthermore, it outlines how each country supports quality formal education, community-based learning, workplace learning, ICT and e-learning, and the recognition of prior learning outcomes. In terms of building learning societies, these three countries have made outstanding progress in recent years, and consequently their methods and experiences have implications for many other countries and communities. While the idea of a learning society has been accepted by more and more countries in the world, there will never be a single set of ready-made formulae for its implementation. The following Annex is included: Building a Learning Society in Japan, the Republic of Korea and Singapore: A Summary. A bibliography is included.

The Education Scotland publication, "External Quality Arrangements for Scotland's Colleges, Updated August 2013," specifies that Education Scotland will produce a number of subject-based aspect reports each year. These reports complement, in a subject-specific context, the generic evaluations of learning and teaching in Education Scotland's external review reports of colleges. This report evaluates college programs within the energy (renewables) subject area. Programs covered by this report are offered at levels 4 to 8 of the Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). These programs provide education and training for an industry sector that is making an increasingly important contribution to Scotland's economy. In preparing this report, inspectors visited a sample of seven colleges, drew on the findings of published Education Scotland reviews of colleges, and examined other relevant publications and reports. They consulted with key stakeholders, including employers and professional bodies. The following are appended: (1) Colleges visited in the fieldwork for this report; (2) Equalities data--gender; (3) Data for construction and engineering programmes, 2010-11 to 2012-13; (4) Portraits of excellent practice; and (5) Glossary of terms.

The United States has posted more than 100 consecutive months of net job gains since the economic recovery began in 2010, making this the longest expansion in seven decades. Yet, for many, wage growth has lagged, leaving many families economically insecure. Meanwhile, job and economic growth continue to accrue in select corners of the nation, leading to disparate economic and social outcomes across the country. This uneven progress reflects, in part, a nation grappling with an accelerating pace of change. Powerful new technologies have enhanced people's and firms' ability to achieve unprecedented productivity and have made the global economy more interconnected than ever. At the same time, these forces are making some skills and knowledge obsolete. As demand for specific knowledge and skills rises, the people and places that can meet these demands thrive, while others lose ground. The main objectives of this report are to: (1) Review the main underlying causes of structural change in the national labor market--from automation to digitalization to global competition--and the nature of the policy responses to date in addressing these challenges; (2) Propose a tailored approach to helping policymakers and companies bring economic growth to their regions by applying data-driven network analytics to reveal industry and city growth patterns within the U.S.; and (3) Demonstrate how the network analytics approach can inform local economic development strategies that foster growth and good jobs through four city-specific case studies: Nashville, TN; St. Louis, MO; South Bend, IN; and Boise, ID. [This report is a collaboration between the Center for Universal Education and the Metropolitan Policy Program at Brookings. Support from the MasterCard Center for Inclusive Growth.]

Learning and skills contribute to economic growth both directly, by improving the skills base available to employers, and indirectly, by underpinning the five foundations of productivity identified by the government: ideas, people, infrastructure, business environment, and places. This is the case for all levels of learning from basic skills to degree level -- research clearly shows earnings, employment and productivity gains for each level of learning. Skills also contribute to social justice, helping to improve social mobility (the extent to which an individual's life chances do or do not depend on their family background) and reduce inequality (the gap between rich and poor). Gaining basic skills helps people access opportunities, and widening access to higher education also opens up new career opportunities. However, the UK's skills base has long lagged that of comparator countries, holding back economic growth and social justice. Nine million people in England lack functional literacy and/or numeracy, and a higher proportion of people have low skills compared to other countries, leaving the UK mid-table at best in the international rankings. This is the result of cuts in public funding for adult skills, alongside falling employer investment in skills. This report shows that the UK is on track to fall further back in the international league tables by 2030. Its qualification profile is projected to improve, but this would still fail to match other countries' rates of improvement. The status quo is not good enough and will hold back economic growth and social justice. This report analyses the potential impact for the UK of a higher ambition based on: (1) Increasing the proportion of people with functional literacy and numeracy to 90% by 2030; (2) Increasing the proportion of people with medium qualifications with a greater focus on Level 3 qualifications. This would mean by 2030 20% and 30% of people have Level 2 and 3 qualifications respectively; and (3) Maintaining the expected rate of progress in high qualifications, so that by 2030 43% of people have Level 4 qualifications or higher. Achieving this scenario would boost the UK economy by £20 billion per year and support an additional 200,000 people into work, along with significant taxpayer savings. It would also improve social justice by widening opportunity and making sure that more people have the fundamental skills and capabilities increasingly needed for economic and social inclusion, as well as bringing wider benefits to health, wellbeing and civic engagement. Ultimately the UK's future prosperity and fairness relies on high quality learning and skills. [This report was supported by NOCN Group.]

This cross-national study focuses on key issues and policy considerations in promoting lifelong learning in Ethiopia, Kenya, Namibia, Rwanda, and Tanzania (the five African countries that took part in a pilot workshop on "Developing Capacity for Establishing Lifelong Learning Systems in UNESCO Member States: at the UNESCO Institute for Lifelong Learning in 2010". The methodology used in the study is inspired by grounded theory which involves the use of systematized data collection and analysis procedures to generate, develop and derive inductively contextualized theory about a phenomenon. Through desk research and field work, the study team has selected examples of lifelong learning policy and programmes in the five participating countries. The report reflects on the porous boundaries that exist between the sectors and highlights six key issues that affect the operationalization of lifelong learning, namely: (1) conceptual understandings of lifelong learning; (2) recognition of learning achievements; (3) the role of counselling and guidance; (4) teachers and facilitators; (5) financial resources, and infrastructure; and (6) coordination among stakeholders. The lessons learned from the study are summarized in ten concrete recommendations for further action and reform. If adapted to local contexts, these recommendations can be implemented fully or partly in many other countries. Appended are: (1) List of Interviewees; and (2) Semi-Structured Questions for the Fieldwork. A bibliography is also provided.

For the last several years, manufactured crises in Washington have hindered, rather than helped, economic growth and opportunity. Earlier this year, however, Democrats and Republicans came together to produce a 2014 budget that invests in key areas of innovation, education, and infrastructure--investments that will help grow the nation's economy, create jobs, and strengthen the middle class. The President's 2015 Budget provides a roadmap for creating jobs, growing the economy, and expanding opportunity for all Americans. It invests in manufacturing, research, clean energy, infrastructure, education, and security, building a foundation for long-term economic growth. The Budget promotes economic opportunity and mobility by rewarding hard work with fair wages, putting a secure retirement within reach, and ensuring health care is affordable and reliable. It includes enhanced efforts to deliver a 21st Century Government that is more effective, efficient, and supportive of economic growth. It responsibly pays for new investments, reduces the deficit as a share of the economy to below two percent by 2023, and puts debt as a share of the economy on a downward path after 2015. The Budget also addresses the Nation's long-term fiscal challenges by building on the savings and reforms in the Affordable Care Act, reforming other mandatory programs, and ending wasteful tax breaks that benefit the wealthiest. It is a Budget that shows how the nation can build on the progress that has been made over the last five years and ensure that it remains strong and prosperous, both now and in the future. The "Opportunity For All" section of the 2015 Budget is divided into the following sections: (1) Building on Economic Progress; (2) Progress on Our Fiscal Health; (3) Helping, Not Hurting, Our Economy; (4) Enacting Bipartisan Budget and Appropriations Acts: Important Steps in the Right Direction; (5) The President's 2015 Budget; (6) Managing Government to Drive Further Growth and Opportunity; (7) Investing in Jobs, Economic Growth and Opportunity; (8) Building a 21st Century Infrastructure; (9) Equipping Every American with a High-Quality Education and the Skills to Succeed; (10) Expanding Opportunity for Middle Class Security; (11) Ensuring Our Nation's Safety and Security; (12) Reducing Long-Run Deficits and Promoting Sustainable Growth; (13) Implementing ACA [The Affordable Care Act] and Making Additional Health Reforms; (14) Making the Tax Code More Simple and Fair; and (15) Fixing Our Broken Immigration System. A section entitled, "Opportunity, Growth, and Security Initiative: Securing Our Nation's Future" is also included. Education-related proposals include Community College Job-Driven Training Fund, Pre-School for All Initiative, new Race to the Top Equity and Opportunity competition, ConnectEDucators initiative, investing in high school redesign, making college more affordable, and First in the World fund, among others. [This summary reflects the "Opportunity For All" section of the 2015 Budget. For the 2014 Budget, see ED576933.]

As states adopt and implement bold education reforms intended to dramatically increase a student's likelihood of graduating from high school prepared for college and career, there is a strong sense among many states that reporting the right data to the right people at the right time, and reporting it well, is an essential path toward meeting their college and career readiness (CCR) goals. By setting their sights on improving CCR outcomes among high school graduates, states will promote greater opportunities for individuals as well as economic growth at all levels. Timely, accessible, contextual, and coordinated data reporting in alignment with these goals--and strategies for getting there--is a critical foundation for states' CCR reform efforts. To go one step further, it can also serve as a strategic driver toward the goals. The intent of this policy brief is to clarify some concrete mechanisms by which states can gain traction, turning their aspirations for effective public reporting into reality. It first explores the current state of public reporting on CCR indicators across states, then discusses several policy mechanisms on which states can draw to advance their reporting, and finally addresses the opportunity for states to create partnerships to ignite the power of data reports. [For "Transforming Public Reporting to Ensure College and Career Readiness for All" (2012), see ED540450.]

Human Capital development through education is a long time investment made by the state to enhance the well being of her citizenry. By investing in education, well educated individuals bring to bear their talents, knowledge, skills and experiences as they function in the various sectors of the economy. Human Capital development is therefore a prerequisite for economic growth and development, as well as a necessary and sufficient condition for poverty reduction in Nigeria. Unfortunately, successive governments in Nigeria have continued to pay lip services to the issue of investment in education. The author is of the view that poverty is synonymous with underdevelopment. Therefore, investing in human capital through education is the best strategy for overcoming the developmental challenges in the country, especially poverty reduction. This will be achieved by ensuring an effective educational system that is well funded, equipped, science and technology focused, dynamic, and innovative.

As states adopt and implement bold education reforms intended to dramatically increase a student's likelihood of graduating from high school prepared for college and career, there is a strong sense among many states that reporting the right data to the right people at the right time, and reporting it well, is an essential path toward meeting their college and career readiness (CCR) goals. By setting their sights on improving CCR outcomes among high school graduates, states will promote greater opportunities for individuals as well as economic growth at all levels. Timely, accessible, contextual, and coordinated data reporting in alignment with these goals--and strategies for getting there--is a critical foundation for states' CCR reform efforts. To go one step further, it can also serve as a strategic driver toward the goals. The intent of this policy brief is to clarify some concrete mechanisms by which states can gain traction, turning their aspirations for effective public reporting into reality. It first explores the current state of public reporting on CCR indicators across states, then discusses several policy mechanisms on which states could draw to advance their reporting, and finally addresses the opportunity for states to create partnerships to ignite the power of data reports. (Contains 4 resources and 2 footnotes.)

America faces many challenges in working together to restore the promise of economic growth and security for the country, U.S. families and the American worker. The challenges are both real and serious. Despite hopeful signs of economic recovery, America remains mired in the deepest jobs crisis since the 1930s. One out of every 12 Americans who are willing and able to work cannot find a job. Approximately 13 million Americans remain unemployed. Frustrated and discouraged, millions more have simply given up looking for work altogether. To be sure, the severe job losses experienced during the depths of the 2007-2009 recession have ended, and the unemployment rate fell from 9.4 percent in December 2010 to 8.5 percent in December 2011. But vigorous and sustained job creation has not returned at the level required to put America back to work, and the numbers of long-term unemployed remain at record levels. The CEOs of Business Roundtable (BRT) have a plan to revitalize U.S. economic growth and job creation. They believe that America's business leaders have an obligation to bring their real-world experience on economic matters to public policy, especially in a time of widespread joblessness and economic distress. Job creation depends on economic growth, which cannot occur unless businesses are free to innovate, invest and grow. "Taking Action for America" is a comprehensive plan to jump-start new business investment and knock down barriers to economic growth. It includes pragmatic, actionable recommendations organized into three broad categories: (1) American Global Leadership, which must be secured through: (a) sound fiscal policy; (b) smarter regulation; and (c) competitive taxation; (2) American Advantages, which depend on: (a) open markets for international trade and investment; (b) reliable, affordable energy; (c) protecting U.S. technology assets with effective cybersecurity; and (d) contributions of highly educated world talent; and (3) American Workers and Families, who deserve policies that promote: (a) a skilled, prepared workforce; (b) affordable, quality health care; and (c) stable policies that ensure retirement security. Individual sections contain endnotes.

Education is the key to American competitiveness and a strong economy, and continued federal investment in education is needed in order to support improvements in student achievement and put American economy on the path to sustained growth. The United States must continue to invest in education in order to create a system that is more equitable and that produces American students who are more competitive in the global marketplace for talent. Investment in education makes intuitive sense to the American people, but in this tough budgetary climate, it seems that every public investment is on the table to be cut. This paper discusses six reasons why continued federal investment in education should be a no-brainer as the congressional super committee negotiates this fall: (1) Global competitiveness; (2) Ensuring all students reach high standards of achievement; (3) Economic returns; (4) Jobs; (5) Savings elsewhere; and (6) Path to the middle class. Of course, investing in education isn't going to increase student achievement by itself. It matters how that money is spent, and now more than ever it is important to ensure money is spent fairly, efficiently, and effectively. Here are a couple of key principles to follow: (1) Spend scarce federal money where it is most needed; and (2) Education funding should be efficient and effective, emphasizing returns on investment. The author concludes that investment in education is a social and economic imperative, and efficient and effective federal education spending must be protected in this fall's super committee negotiations. (Contains 35 endnotes.)

In 1997, policymakers in Kentucky enacted perhaps the most sweeping higher education reform legislation of any state in the past two decades. Kentucky's Postsecondary Education Improvement Act (House Bill 1) has been heralded by many higher education leaders across the U.S. as one of the great success stories--a rare instance when a state's governor, legislators, higher education leaders, college and university presidents, and business leaders collectively aligned to implement policies that better serve the residents of the state. The legislation immediately kicked off an agenda for Kentucky's higher education enterprise that is built on the public good rather than the individual needs of colleges and universities. Now more than halfway to the year 2020, it is important to pause and gauge the progress that Kentucky has made during the past decade, and the gains that need to be made between now and 2020 for Kentucky to realize its college attainment and degree production goals. This brief documents Kentucky's movement on a number of key indicators since 2000 and identifies the additional number of college degree-holders needed between now and 2020. While issues of college preparation, developmental education, retention of college students, and student learning (for example) are critical for Kentucky to reach its overall goals, this report focuses largely on measures directly associated with college completion, the educational attainment of the population, and the impact on the state's economy. Percent Change in Completion Rates (2000 to 2009) is appended. (Contains 10 figures.)

A major headline in recent years has been that cash-strapped state governments are cutting back support for many services, including public higher education. Oklahoma is no different. Indeed, in the most recent state budget crafted by Oklahoma policymakers, Oklahoma's public colleges and universities received a 5.8 percent cut in state appropriations. Although campus leaders claim that these cuts will be detrimental to their institutions and the state's economy as a whole, the evidence does not support such pessimistic predictions. This study presents two key findings. First, Oklahoma's state colleges have not suffered financially over the past half-decade. Statewide, university revenues have actually increased over this period, even after controlling for inflation and growths in enrollment. Second, this study makes the case that increasing state appropriations for higher education does not positively affect a state's economic growth. While human capital formation is an important variable in virtually all economic growth models, this study suggests that increased state funding for higher education may be failing to actually increase a state's human capital stock. These findings indicate that public fears and outcries over cuts in state appropriations for higher education are unfounded. State investment in higher education is not an engine for economic growth as conventional wisdom holds. Rather than continuing to blindly pass money from taxpayers to university bureaucracies, Oklahoma would be well-suited to rethink its long-term economic growth strategy. Expense Category Definitions are appended. (Contains 1 figure, 3 tables, and 29 endnotes.) [Foreword by Richard Vedder.]

Research and development drives innovation and innovation drives long-run economic growth, creating jobs and improving living standards in the process. University-based research is of particular importance to innovation, as the early-stage research that is typically performed at universities serves to expand the knowledge pool from which the private sector draws ideas and innovation. As such, it is troubling that in 2008 the United States ranked 22nd out of 30 countries in government-funded university research and 21st in business-funded university research. Moreover, the nation is falling even farther behind. From 2000 to 2008, the United States ranked 18th in the growth of government-funded university research, with countries like China, Korea and the United Kingdom significantly outperforming the United States. Worse still, the United States ranked 23rd in the growth of business-funded research, with it actually declining as a share of GDP. In contrast, collaboration between universities and business grew dramatically in nations like Austria, China, Israel and Taiwan. Given the importance of university research to the U.S. innovation system, and the primary role that innovation plays in economic growth, competitiveness, and job creation, the data presented in this report should serve as a wakeup call for U.S. policymakers. The United States can no longer rest on its laurels and assume that its universities will continue to lead the world, just because they once did. It is up to policymakers to recognize the existence of the problem, and then to implement policies that target the specific areas of deficiency, such as the underfunding of university research. Then, and only then, will the United States be able to restore its position as the global innovation leader. (Contains 4 figures, 7 tables, and 42 endnotes.)

In 2007, Michigan undertook a bold mission: to retrain tens of thousands of adults to qualify for jobs in emerging and expanding sectors of the economy. The state's proposal to jobless, dislocated, and low-income residents was simple but appealing: enroll in up to two years of postsecondary education, and Michigan would cover up to $5,000 in tuition, fees, and books each year, along with related supports such as child care subsidies and transportation assistance. Michigan rolled out "No Worker Left Behind" in August 2007 and stuck with it in the face of budgetary crises and ongoing economic deterioration. The target population has responded in large numbers. More than 150,000 adults enrolled in NWLB-financed training by the end of 2010, and many more were steered to Pell Grants. To explore the role of NWLB in strengthening the student success infrastructure of Michigan community colleges, Jobs for the Future (JFF) studied five institutions with a strong track record of innovation to begin to answer these critical questions: (1) How have colleges organized their efforts to assist low-skilled adults in gaining marketable postsecondary credentials?; and (2) What role has No Worker Left Behind played in the ability of Michigan community colleges to develop innovative strategies for serving this population? JFF conducted detailed interviews with presidents, vice-presidents, and managerial staff of Grand Rapids Community College, Lake Michigan College, Mott Community College, Macomb Community College, and Northwestern Michigan College. The NWLB experiences of the case-study colleges provide valuable lessons for policymakers in Michigan and elsewhere about promoting innovation to increase student success, particularly for lower-skilled, dislocated workers: (1) Reward collaborative relationships between community colleges and Workforce Investment Boards; (2) Target benefits to adults with low basic skills; (3) Support a shift in the Adult Basic Education system to support postsecondary transitions; and (4) Develop a common understanding of college readiness among workforce and higher education systems. A final, critical lesson is the need to strengthen data systems and analysis. Because of data limitations in Michigan, it is impossible to say whether the NWLB strategy substantially increased college access or to compare the success of NWLB-financed students to other students. A uniform, effective system of data collection and analysis is critical to inform and drive better policymaking and institutional decisions. No Worker Left Behind Training Funds Allocations and Projections, FY 2007 to 2010 (Michigan Department of Energy, Labor & Economic Growth) is appended. (Contains 2 tables and 11 endnotes.