Skylar Hoover

Benjamin Henderson

CAS 138H: 004

4/13/2018

Make College Transparent

College. The place where students “begin the rest of their lives.” For most people, college

is a choice which comes with a lot of thought. People want to go to a college where they know

they can succeed, connect with people like them, get the degree they want, get a good job, and

often ultimately get money for doing something they, hopefully, enjoy. As of now, this choice is

heavily reliant upon information which is fed by colleges. When choosing a college, prospective

students become swayed by the information they can so easily find online. However, this

information is not nearly as accurate nor as helpful as institutions would like us to believe. In

fact, the information provided does not convey the entire picture of success academically, nor in

the long run. It excludes many student’s records and skews the data one sees when applying for

college. With this said, in order to easily and efficiently make one of the biggest choices in life,

Congress should pass and implement The College Transparency Act of 2017. In doing this,

prospective students will get accurate and truly important data when selecting the best institution

for themselves.

Why Do We Need to Pass The College Transparency Act of 2017?

Back in 2008, the Higher Education Act of 1965 was reauthorized and updated to ban

federal student-level data collection (Schulte). This, in plain terms, means data is not being

collected on an individual level, but rather a general overview of certain students. In

reauthorizing and amending the bill, it ultimately became harder and more time consuming to
collect accurate data. The ban on student level data collection, allows for only first-time, on-time,

full-time students to be reported in on-time graduation rates (Kreighbaum). This being said, Paul

Mitchell and Jared Polis, who both support the passage of The College Transparency Act of

2017, say current data, “does not reflect today’s student population—where nearly two out of

three students attend at least two schools before graduating and nearly 40% of undergraduate

students attend on a part-time basis.” This means a large portion of the students are disregarded

entirely when reporting data, which could be giving false pretenses to prospective students in

regards to how well the institution will serve them.

Yet this is not the only issue with the current system in reporting data. According to

Senators Orrin Hatch, Elizabeth Warren, Bill Cassidy, and Sheldon Whitehouse, data given on

post graduate earnings and the likelihood of receiving a job is only available for students who

receive federal aid. This means prospective students looking to see if their investment in the

particular institution and degree would lead to success in the future, are receiving incomplete

data. In fact, because the current system draws from data on the institutional-level rather than

student-level, it lacks the ability to produce, “complete information on student outcomes by basic

student demographics, major, or credential level,” (Mitchell and Polis). Thus, students cannot

easily access information regarding how other students similar to them fared when they are

choosing which institution to attend.

Finally, by collecting data solely on the institutional level, the burden of transparency

regarding data lies heavily with the institution. This is because the information is much harder to

process and streamline. Institutions must not only collect the data, but then calculate and

streamline the various sets of measurements to meet federal requirements (Hatch, Warren,

Cassidy, and Whitehouse). This can lead to a number of issues because by having to make such
extensive and sometimes random seeming calculations, it is easy to see how the data could

become even more inaccurate. Yet all of this is the cost of attempting to avoid student data

collection.

In essence, students are receiving incomplete, inaccurate, and somewhat disorganized

information. Institutions are currently facing the burden of reporting information in an easy to

understand way. With the current policies in place, it is nearly impossible for institutions to make

their information any more transparent to help prospective students when making one of the

largest financial commitments. Students deserve the right to be given detailed and accurate

portrayals investing their time and money into an institution they hope will set them up best for

the future.

What Will the College Transparency Act of 2017 Do?

The first point to note is, if the bill were to be enacted by Congress, it states it must be

implemented within no less than two years after its initial approval. This would provide a fix to

the transparency issue in a timely manner. The data would include colleges throughout all of the

United States, including private and nonprofit colleges, therefore displaying more accurate date

everywhere (Hatch, Warren, Cassidy, and Whitehouse). This being said, there is some opposition

from universities, though mainly private and non-profits, as this could make colleges look worse

in displaying more accurate success rates to prospective students (Marcus). However, this is not

truly an issue which poses a problem with the bill, to display accurate data should merely be the

goal of displaying any data in the first place. By reporting accurate ratings that may make

universities look worse, maybe universities will be spurred to fix their programs, staff, etc. in

order to bring around success. In any case, it would only benefit students who are investing their

time and money into these institutions.

 Furthermore, the bill would create a new data system at the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES). In theory, the student data from universities would be reported to

the NCES. The NCES would have the task of compiling and displaying the information in a way

which is easy to understand, use, and is beneficial to prospective students (Kelly). However, the

burdens would not ultimately shift from universities to the NCES. Instead, the NCES would be

working alongside different federal agencies, which would help collect, compute, and report the

data. This would hopefully allow access to “student enrollment, retention, completion, and

subsequent labor market outcomes, ” (Reeves and Joo). Each respective agency, like the

Treasury Department, would then calculate the data relevant to their agency and share it with the

NCES for display (Sadler). By doing this, it would be keeping the data from being just one

groups role. It would also allow for further checks of accuracy, and a more thorough and well

organized system to be developed.

However, not everyone sees this collection of data as a good thing. Many of those who

oppose the idea say it poses a security threat. Not only do they believe it could be possible for

someone to hack and steal student information, but some say it is just a general invasion of

privacy (Mull). While it is true, the government has fallen victim to hacking in the past, the bill

is supported by numerous privacy advocates. One of these advocates is the Electronic Privacy

Information Center. Members such as the president and director of the group, wrote a letter to

Congress, detailing their findings on such a policy as the Transparency Act. In essence they

suggested implementing what they call “privacy enhancing technologies,” and a National Secure

Data Service which would help keep all information secure (Rotenberg, Fitzgerald, and Miller).

This, coupled with the bill’s other security measures like banning law enforcement access,

banning federal ranking systems, and enforcing jail time for any reproduction and or profiting off
of the information, are just a few of other security measures being implemented in the bill

(Schulte). There are a few other attempts the bill makes in terms of creating a system that ensures

privacy remains a priority. For example, the policy will exclude any sensitive data which could

be used to identify a particular students including health records, disciplinary records, names,

addresses, etc. (Reeves and Joo) Also, the bill itself states the system must have “audit

capabilities,” meaning the data must be checked multiple times making sure everything is

anonymous and valid (Hatch, Warren, Cassidy, and Whitehouse).This coupled with the

Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency Act currently in place (Marcus),

could immensely increase the security of everyone's privacy involved.

There is also slight opposition, similar to that which comes with nearly any new

introduction of a policy, being the bills overall efficiency. This opposition is simply rooted in the

idea of more government being bad, and that giving a lot of money to them is ludicrous simply

because the program will probably be ineffective (Mull). However, data is to be reviewed at least

once every 5 years in order to determine if any data should be added, removed, or streamlined

differently (Hatch, Warren, Cassidy, and Whitehouse). By ensuring the system is checked and

kept up to date, as the bill explicitly states as a stipulation, this would help ensure the bills

overall usefulness. Not to mention, the amount of money it could save students and parents, in

choosing a university and major, outweighs the cost of our tax dollars.

With this said by passing the bill and allowing for student data reporting, the bill is the

best way in which students could receive accurate and important information. By including the

entire population of students in the higher education system, a new policy must be implemented

at the federal level as only they would be able to gain access to the earnings and outcomes of

graduates. To do these things would help many students like Sammy Geisinger, the associate
director of the Association of Big Ten Students, as she found it really hard to find good

information when choosing a college.

Even as an enrolled student, I’m curious about job prospects and the career path that I’ve

chosen and want to know how other graduates from my school are doing in the

workforce. We spend a lot of time and money on college, and this data system will help

students make more informed decisions on how to plan their educations and careers.

(Kreighbaum)

The overall concerns regarding implementation should rest with students of this

generation. It should not rest with universities, but students whom like Sammy, feel college is a

large investment. The point of college is to provide an education and to help one plan and

succeed in their career. If students feel they will be benefitted by such a policy, it seems only

right the policy be passed despite slight opposition. The well being of a college’s academic

reputation should not play a role in determining whether the bill is passed or not.

We Need Transparency

The College Transparency Act of 2017 may pose some risks. However, much of progress

and making necessary improvements to nearly anything comes with its risks. In the case of

passing The College Transparency Act of 2017, these security risks and potential costs, are

outweighed by the information it would offer parents and students. By including every student

when collecting data for each institution, the bill would be setting students up with accurate data

pertaining to higher education. It would allow for the data to be theoretically easily obtained and

calculated, and then easily displayed and easy to follow. By having such an increase in accuracy,

there would be an improval to the overall process prospective students go through when
choosing which university will best suit them. Afterall, most people do not accept partial

knowledge when making choices with much less importance than, “the beginning the rest of

their lives.”

Word Count: 1893

Works Cited

Hatch, Orrin, et al. “A Bill To Establish a Postsecondary Student Data System.”

Hatch, Orrin, et al. “The College Transparency Act of 2017 One Pager.”
Kelly, Rhea. “Congress Seeks to Establish New Student Data System with College

Transparency Act.” Campus Technology, 17 May 2017,

campustechnology.com/Articles/2017/05/17/Congress-Seeks-to-Establish-New-Student-

Data-System-with-College-Transparency-Act.aspx?Page=1.

Kreighbaum, Andrew. “Push for 'Unit Records' Revived.” Bipartisan Bill Would

Overturn Federal Ban on Student Unit Record Database, 6 May 2017,

www.insidehighered.com/news/2017/05/16/bipartisan-bill-would-overturn-federal-ban-

student-unit-record-database.

Marcus, Jon. “How Much Does the Government Really Need to Know About College

Students in America?” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 24 Oct. 2017,

www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/10/should-the-government-monitor-

students-college-progress/543735/.

Mull, Teresa. “Government Officials Want More Data Collection. Time To Say 'Thanks

But No Thanks'.” Heartland Institute, 13 Dec. 2017, www.heartland.org/news-

opinion/news/government-officials-want-more-data-collection-time-to-say-thanks-but-

no-thanks.

Reeves, Richard V., and Nathan Joo. “Knowledge Is Power When It Comes to Judging

College Performance.” Brookings, Brookings, 19 May 2017,

www.brookings.edu/blog/social-mobility-memos/2017/05/19/knowledge-is-power-when-

it-comes-to-judging-college-performance/.

Rottenburg, Marc, et al. “EPIC Statement Evidenced Based Policymaking.” Electronic

Privacy Information Center, 25 Sept. 2017.

Sadler, Christopher. “Protecting Privacy in a Postsecondary Student Data System.” New

America, Open Technology Institute, 16 May 2017,

www.newamerica.org/oti/blog/protecting-privacy-postsecondary-student-data-system/.

Schulte, Liz. “College Transparency Act.” Direct Network, 1 June 2017,

directnetwork.mbsdirect.net/college-transparency-act.