One of the most recognized brands worldwide is Nike, featuring its famous Swoosh logo. The history of the logo is colorful and much insight can be gleaned from its concept and development.

In the late 60’s, Phil Knight was teaching accounting at Portland State and he approached a college student named Carolyn Davidson to do some graphic design work for him because he heard she needed money to take an oil painting class. They agreed on $2 per hour and their relationship began. After working for several years as a freelance graphics designer for Phil, he asked her in early 1971 to create a new logo for a shoe company he was starting.

She created several logos and presented them. The Swoosh was not immediately accepted and she was asked if she had others. After presenting several other designs it was decided to go with the Swoosh because they needed it immediately and Phil said, “We don’t love it but maybe it will grow on me.”

And the rest is history. The Nike Swoosh is one of the most recognizable logos in the world. And what whopping sum did Carolyn get paid? $35 for the 17.5 hours it took her to create the design options presented to Phil. Pretty good investment.

Where do we look for fresh ideas in higher education? Industry experts, benchmark studies, consultants? Maybe it is time we start looking at the customers we serve for how we should be redesigning higher education. That is only the beginning. Instead of rejecting new ideas because “we have never done it that way,” we need some of Phil’s attitude. I don’t love it but maybe it will grow on me.

College students have depended on coffee since the emergence of formal education although I am not sure which one came first. Regardless, you can bet they have been symbiotic partners for decades. This week Starbucks announced a partnership with Arizona State University to allow employees to enroll in online bachelor degree programs.

This is big for several reasons. One-Starbucks is not limiting tuition reimbursement to classes that are directly applicable to their career as a barista. Two-there is a no repayment provision if the employee leaves Starbucks. For this program, freshman and sophomores will get partial tuition scholarships combined with need-based financial aid from Arizona State. During their junior and senior years, Starbucks will pick up the tab for their entire tuition.

As an educational futurist, I have predicted for a while now that we will start to see more of a melding between corporate training and formal education. The for-profit institutions have been doing this for years and, like most innovations in higher education, the not-for profits and state-funded colleges are slow to join. This is a big step forward for the new education model that relies less on eighteen year olds physically attending a campus but more on the non-traditional students. Yet, most not-for-profit and state funded institutions continue to focus their efforts on competing for the limited traditional student market. They are building new dorms, new football fields, and new cafeterias and investing almost nothing in technology-driven education.

While I don’t see personally the appeal of Starbucks’ coffee, I do applaud this bold move. So, I raise my Tall Blonde, with extra whip and a double shot of espresso to you Starbucks.

Bonus points to Starbucks for letting me order a tall blonde with no judgment! Tell me what you think of this bold move by Starbucks below.

Find out more about this program at the Starbucks website.

The Growing Ban on Graduation Selfies

We all know about selfies, a word that did not exist when I graduated college. Come to think of it, cell phones have come about since I graduated college. During a trip to Gatlinburg, Tennessee during Christmas last year, I treated my 75 year old father to a facebook posted selfie of the two of us enjoying breakfast at possibly the greatest restaurant in the world… The Pancake Pantry. Dad was not really impressed.

ABC announced a new show titled “Selfie” will premier this fall. A love story of sorts, a love of “likes” by a self-obsessed woman who “After suffering a very public and humiliating breakup, she becomes the subject of a viral video and suddenly has more social media ‘followers’ that she ever imagined – but for all the wrong reasons. She enlists the help of a marketing expert at her company to help her repair her tarnished image.” Not sure how this show can possibly last more than one season.

This year colleges are banning the selfie at graduation. More specifically, they are banning selfies on the podium as soon to be graduates cross the stage for their diploma. Having been involved with the planning and execution of many graduations that were strategically planned, rehearsed and choreographed with military-like precision; an unplanned selfie can throw the entire event into a catastrophic free for all. Not really, but if a significant number of graduates pause for even 10 seconds it can be annoying for the rest of us who are not so narcissistic.

This may be the one event where there are more photos being taken per square foot by proud family and friends as you cross the stage than you could possibly post to your social media page. There is no need for that selfie here.

It could be worse, just think of the problem selfies would have caused when I graduated. Where to store that Polaroid and then the incessant shaking to see if the photo developed before one would leave the stage.

What do you think about this issue? Share with me below or on my social networks.

TV with Rabbit Ears

For those of you reading this that don’t remember black and white television broadcasts, you might be thinking the title of this blog is making fun of Grandpa’s ears, the ones attached to his head. Brief lesson for the younger set; prior to cable and satellite television providers, one would purchase an antenna for their television to improve reception of broadcast signals coming across the airwaves. Most antenna sets had a heavy base and two expandable metal rods, giving them the name rabbit ears. So you could watch local broadcast television for free given your proximity to the television towers broadcasting the signal.

Today in the age of cable and satellite television, most people don’t realize television signals are still broadcast over the air. As Netflix and Hulu erode the traditional broadcast base, a company called Aereo is putting the nail in the proverbial major network coffin. Using technology, Aereo captures these over the air broadcasts and them makes them accessible via the internet to its subscribers willing to pay just $8 per month.

As you might imagine, the broadcast networks such as ABC, NBC and CBS are not happy with this service that takes their highly scheduled programming and makes it available anytime a customer wants it and at a fraction of the cost from cable and satellite providers. They are accusing Aereo of copyright infringement. The Copyright Act states that the owner of a creation has the exclusive right to perform the work publicly. Aereo argues that a broadcast via the Internet to a person’s computer is not a public performance; and The Second Circuit court agreed. This case is now before the Supreme Court and their ruling could impact the way we watch TV.

I am thinking about how this could apply to higher education. What if a college simply took lectures captured and distributed via the college website, MOOCs or social media outlets such as YouTube and then packaged them into a degree program for a fraction of the cost? In theory, you could argue that the content comes from an accredited college and that an amalgamation of accredited content should equate to an accredited degree. And no rabbit ears required!

I will warn you this post has little to do with higher education and more to do with something that has been annoying me. I would like to tell you it is something really important to world peace, betterment of mankind, or even something witty. Nope. It is about credit card commercials and the close-up shot of their card being swiped by a customer.

It’s backwards! The card is scanned so the logo of the credit card is visible, but when it is swiped this way, the magnetic strip is not going through the credit card machine. It started with Chase Freedom. I am a Chase customer and it drove me crazy every time I watched the commercials. Now, Tina Fey is doing it with her AmEx!  While I am a loyal customer of American Express, I shudder when I am forced to watch this atrocity happen over and over again in their #EveryDayMoments campaign.

So what is the deal? Do they think we don’t care? Truth is, my guess is that the general public doesn’t care. Is it vanity? Is their name so important that if we didn’t see their logo we would not believe the message?  Is this tactic designed to inspire me to leave my comfy spot on the couch to go shopping with my American Express card?  Not today, AmEx.

Enough of this rant. By the way, Disaronno, stop spinning the square lid on your Amaretto bottle clockwise to remove it.  Guess no one ever told their advertising agency about leftie loosie, rightie tightie.

Publish or Perish Cartoon

Academic research is often seen as the basis for promotion through the faculty ranks and the golden ticket to tenure. Turns out, most of it is a waste of time. Although there still remains a small contingency of academics who believe tenure should be based on a professor’s ability to teach students rather than how often he or she is published in academic journals, the old adage of “publish or perish” prevails. A study conducted by Indiana University found that 90% of papers published in academic journals are never cited by anyone else and as many as 50% of papers have only seen the eyes of their authors, referees and editors.

In an effort to see how my limited academic publishing has impacted the world, I used scholar.google.com to search for references to my academic research. Among with some non-academic articles, I found my dissertation. I am proud to say at least five committee members, plus my advisor (and a few editors I bribed with beer) consumed this bit of brilliance. I figure about ten other people have feasted on my writing, albeit probably by accident. According to my calculations, approximately three times as many people have read my literary contributions than have read the vast majority of most other academic authors. BOOM.

As I neared the end of the short list of citations, I was surprised to see a reference in a book entitled Redemption Concluded written by Van G. Gill and published in 2012 by Friesen Press. I was thrilled to see my work being used by a fellow scholar and to learn how my study of the personal characteristics of effective turnaround presidents at private, not-for-profit institutions would fit into this book. Maybe the non-traditional characteristics I discovered in my dissertation were finally getting noticed and were being validated by the academic community! While I eagerly read though the citation, which correctly identified me as the (former) VP for Institutional Advancement at Sterling College, I learned the author of “Dispensationalism” is, in fact, the Reverend Mark Sarver, a title no one has ever mistakenly bestowed upon me.

So, although I was cited in an academic work, it was in error. But don’t tell Friesen Press – they may want those royalty checks back.

Publish or Paris Cartoon

We all know the rule. If you drop food on the floor and pick it up in less than five seconds, the food gods will keep it safe from the germs, microorganisms and general dirt-laden carnage on the floor.  The rule has expanded beyond food; I have personally witnessed a young mother scoop up her progeny’s pacifier from the floor and pop it back in the baby’s mouth and shout out, “Five-Second Rule!”  And that makes it OK.

Turns out, according to a study conducted at Ashton University in Birmingham, England, the five-second rule actually has some research-driven science behind its validity. Not that I really needed evidence to support my own personal comfort with the five-second rule, but I do feel somewhat better now.

Cocaine and the sexual habits of quail

But not all research conducted by American universities (whose funding comes from the taxpayers albeit through government agencies) is as valuable. Consider some of the grants that have been funded for research at our illustrious institutions of higher education, like the 2010 award of $181,406 to Dr. Chana Atkins at the University of Kentucky to study how cocaine enhances the sex drive of Japanese quail, courtesy of the National Institutes of Health.

Not sure who wrote that grant, but I would like them to write a grant for the study of stupid studies at American Universities. And the justification for quail grant, which I am sure was written much more eloquently in the Statement of Need, was that there appears to be a tendency for people who use cocaine to engage in risky sexual behaviors. Really? And the birds, turns out Japanese quail have sex a lot in the lab, even without the cocaine.

The government just released the new amount for Pell Grants next year – $5,730.

That means that if the Department of Education would have given this money to deserving students instead of buying cocaine for horny birds, thirty-one more students could have had the opportunity to go to school.

That makes my head hurt.  Maybe Dr. Atkins would like to research that?

When I was little, one of my favorite meals was a big bowl of spaghetti with extra Parmesan cheese on top.  My mother always let me shake the green can of cheese over the steaming pile of pasta, and I would shake until I had a perfect dusting of cheesy golden deliciousness.  We gave it the nickname “Shaky Cheese.”

Recently, a movement gained traction at the trade talks with the European Union to limit the use of common food names that are based on European cities, regions or even culture. If this comes to pass, then only cheese that is made in Parma, Italy can be sold as Parmesan cheese. Such a fate also looms large for Feta, Asiago, Gorgonzola, Fontina, Grana, Muenster, Neufchatel, Romano –and that’s just the cheeses! What travesty lies in store for Greek yogurt, Valencia oranges and Black Forest ham?

So why the push to limit others from using these names that we in the United States consider generic? It’s financial. The EU sees these “imposters” as cutting into their business and reducing their sales.

Maybe those of us that have been in the online education for years should get the EU to advocate for MOOCs to stop using Online as part of their name. How can it be fair that we have been doing it for years but they are getting the attention?  Oh wait, MOOC providers have yet to figure out a business model that really works, so the EU probably won’t help us. And, besides, MOOCs really are not cutting into our business or reducing our sales; if anything they are bringing validity to online education in some twisted fashion.

MOOCs Confusion

I will continue to think about this over lunch – a tasty near the black forest ham sandwich and chips. Guess we will need a new word for sandwich, too.

It is so awesome that our Senators in Washington want to help fix accreditation. You know the adage – The worst thing you can hear is “Hi, I’m from Washington and I am here to help.” Let’s not forget it was our friendly Senator from Iowa that got this whole state authorization mess started, ostensibly in an effort to stop the spread of for-profit institutions. We all know how that bit of “help” has played out.

Now, Senator Mike Lee from Utah and Mike Rubio from Florida are proposing legislation that will “overhaul accreditation,” their words not mine. As we look at their proposals, you will see it is less about an overhaul and more about a giant uninformed mess on the horizon.

First, Senator Lee is proposing the HERO Act, which his website touts will make post-secondary education more affordable and accessible. How? By allowing all 50 states and the District of Columbia to develop their own systems of accreditation. This makes state authorization look like kids’ play. He also feels this will “open the floodgates of innovation.” Yeah, states play so well together. Can you imagine the transferability issues?

And Senator Rubio called for a “swift overhaul of accreditation.” Again, sounds like something I have been advocating for a while. And how is the good Senator going to do this? By creating an independent accrediting body to accredit free online courses. Great, so now we have regional accrediting bodies, national accrediting bodies, state accrediting bodies and now an independent accrediting body. Tell me again how this reduces costs?

Hey Washington! If you want to help, do away with the Department of Education and allow those federal funds to stay in the states. The states that want a competitive workforce will fund their schools and students. This of course would eliminate all ties of federal funds to regional and national accreditation. Ever wonder how many institutions would be regionally accredited if their Title IV funds were not tied to this antiquated model?

Share what your thoughts are with me below. I’d like to know I’m not alone…

As I was traveling by car to my parent’s home in West Virginia, I was listening to NPR on the radio. I am not sure which program or even the name of the guest because of the lack of reception in the mountains, but I listened in amazement as the host and a physician discussed a study published in the September 2013 Journal of Patient Safety.  The study revealed that the number of patients that die each year from preventable negligence caused by the hospital or medical provider ranges between 210,000 on the low end to over 400,000.

That makes medical errors the third leading killer of Americans behind heart disease and cancer.

My brain was spinning. Think of the amount of money spent to inform the public about the behaviors and foods that contribute to heart disease and cancer and the next biggest killer is the health care system itself!  Naturally, my thoughts turned to training and education. Numerous studies have shown the way we train physicians is ineffective and harmful. Hours working with little to no sleep, using patients as human Guiney pigs and the volumes of information medical students commit to memory in order to seem prepared for rounds. What could possibly be the reason we continue to train doctors this way? Mostly because their teachers, the doctors in the teaching hospitals, were trained that way: a right of passage they too must pass.

How about if we applied technology? My daughter became very ill several years ago and we rushed her to the emergency room in a small rural Kansas hospital. The young ER doctor that came in to examine her had a very troubled look on her face after her initial examination. She reached into her lab coat and pulled out an iPad and began searching. I must admit I was a bit worried. Did she not remember the stuff she learned in medical school? Was my daughter so sick that she had to look up some rare condition?

The doctor saw my expression and quite frankly stated they don’t get many cases like this in their hospital and she wanted to make sure her treatment plan reflected the most recent medical developments. Although I consider myself to be a technology evangelist of sorts, I was humbled by my lack of confidence in this young doctor because she was supporting her knowledge with technology. If you have seen my presentations or keynotes, you know that I am a huge advocate of changing our education system to teach students how to acquire information instead of memorizing it, which is precisely what the actions of this young doctor exemplified.

As the doctor on the NPR program pointed out, it is not about throwing money at the problem; rather it is about a systemic overhaul of the healthcare system. Imagine what could be achieved if higher education leaders stop throwing money at their problems and start changing the way we teach.