| |
About UCEA
Board of Directors
Bylaws/Policies
Commissions
Committees
Communities of Practice
Contact Us
Global Associates
Letters from Kay Kohl
Mission
President's Letters
Regions
Staff
Strategic Vision Statement
|
|
It’s Time to Integrate Higher Education, Workforce and Economic Development
Kay Kohl, UCEA Executive Director and CEO
UCEA InFocus, December 2007 (PDF)
When states lack the skilled workers needed to fill knowledge-economy jobs, companies usually are not inclined to hang around in the hopes that their needs will eventually be met. Recently, Wisconsin's Washington County came close to losing the Gehl Company-a 148-yearold company that had been a key employer in the state. The Gehl Company foresaw its talent needs were changing as it transitioned from a manufacturing to a design-focused enterprise and it had no indication that the state would be able to meet its need for high performance engineering talent.
Engineering Programs for Working Adults
Fortunately, an all too rare collaborative effort by regional economic development and university leaders, plus the governor's office, was able to turn the situation around. The state developed a package of incentives that persuaded the Gehl Company to remain in Wisconsin and moreover to build a new world headquarters and research and development facility in the County, bringing a projected 350 new white collar jobs to the community. Chief among the incentives provided was a University commitment to deliver new baccalaureate engineering programs from the University of Wisconsin-Platteville in the County. The program formats being designed will enable both place bound working adults to earn engineering degrees and also make it possible for local youth to pursue engineering studies without having to leave home.
Like Wisconsin, several states are confronting a shrinking supply of new workers together with a need to develop an increased number of workers with the knowledge and high level skills required by emerging jobs. Though many policymakers might wish otherwise, a two-year degree is insufficient education to fill many high-demand occupations in today's knowledge-driven economy-be those jobs in industry, health care or government. To meet the talent needs of many employers, educators and state policymakers must commit to providing relevant, convenient baccalaureate degree opportunities not simply to traditional age college students but also to the existing stock of place-bound workers.
Developing Current Workforce Talent
New York and California are two states that rank among the foremost creators of knowledgeeconomy jobs. Policymakers in these two states share a concern that these good-paying jobs will go out of state, and possibly offshore, unless the states are able to develop the talent in their current workforce. Unlike some states, New York and California have large populations of young workers. The problem is twofold: the educational attainment level of the younger generation of workers is low relative to the economy’s needs and too few young people are preparing for careers in engineering, science and technology. The Center for an Urban Future concluded in a recent report that “if New York is to remain a world class economy, it must get more working adults into college and ensure that they graduate.” A similar conclusion was reached this year by California’s Postsecondary Education Commission. It noted that many part-time students with full-time jobs did not have the luxury of enrolling on a full-time basis and that “the success of under-represented populations depends on efficient part-time programs and California’s ability to create educational pathways that will increase degree attainment.”
When it comes to program development, university leaders and policymakers have tended for far too long to approach economic development, workforce development, and higher education separately. Policymakers may readily expound on the importance of upgrading or retraining those already in the workforce for high demand, wellpaying occupations in their state. Often, however, there’s no follow-on action in the form of new programs. It’s as though each group—higher education, workforce development, and economic development—is waiting for one of the others to develop a response when what the state desperately requires is an integrated response to keep its economy vibrant.
|
|