My pat answer is mathematics (the universal language), biology (in order to master non-linear, dynamic thinking especially related to complex systems and ecosystemic issues) and Chinese (since in 10 years Chinese will be even more important than it is today in both the commercial and scientific domains).

But let’s peek around the corner. Both design and the arts are going to become increasingly important. Why? First we must crack the problems of our lives being flooded by junk. We need to better understand the design ethos of ‘elegant minimalism’ and then we need to master the art of the sketch where hand and mind merge to expand our imagination. Imagination will soon count more than creativity, if it doesn’t already, because there is no deep reason to be creative if we can’t first imagine new worlds to create or enact.

But in addition, as complexity increases, our ability to communicate the complex in simple, authentic terms will become increasingly important in order to mobilize collective action. The ability to create sketches or other forms of visualization that evoke understanding and help coordinate action will be priceless.

Comments | Reprints | Share:          

With a hot market for their skills and employers who offer top-notch salaries and benefits, should computer science students pay more for their bachelor’s degree than theater or history majors? In Washington state, the answer could soon be yes.

Historically, undergraduates in this state have paid flat tuition rates based on the number of credits they’re earning. For example, a Washington resident taking a full-time load of classes would pay $8,122 in tuition this year at the University of Washington, no matter which bachelor’s degree they’re pursuing.

Those flat rates were set under previous state law, which gave the Legislature the exclusive power to set tuition for in-state undergrads. But a new law approved this week by Gov. Chris Gregoire gives universities broad power to set tuition rates on their own for all students—opening the door for varying undergraduate tuition rates.

“I don’t expect the institutions to jump whole-hog into this model the first year. It will take a little bit of thought and study and reflection,” says state Rep. Reuven Carlyle, a Seattle Democrat who was the main sponsor of the tuition flexibility law. But he also says the old flat-rate model is “just wildly economically inefficient,” and doesn’t give policy-makers a good idea of what it will cost to improve education in particular disciplines.

“It’s extremely difficult from an efficiency point of view for us in Olympia to figure out how an institution should cross-subsidize programs,” Carlyle says. “One-size-fits-all, top-down, Olympia-centric is just not good policy anymore.”

With flat tuition rates, the less-expensive students are effectively subsidizing the education of their peers in more expensive fields. An English major, for instance, pays the same as a student studying engineering, chemistry, or computer science, which are much more expensive to teach because of higher faculty salaries, special equipment, and other costs.

Freshmen are also generally cheaper to educate than seniors, since the younger students take survey courses packed with other students, while the older ones are in smaller groups with more specialized subjects. It’s also assumed that the cost will be less of a burden for students entering higher-paid professions. Those factors already help drive the variability in tuition rates for graduate degrees in Washington.

While some university leaders have publicly discussed the issue, it doesn’t appear that any school is poised to imminently move to a “differential tuition” model for undergrads. Washington State University, for example, just announced that it was increasing next year’s resident undergradate tuition by a flat rate of 16 percent—the baseline rate assumed in the state budget.

But faced with back-to-back state budgets that were hammered by the Great Recession, it may be an attractive option to help sustain the highest-cost and highest-demand majors in the years ahead. The boards of Western Washington University and the UW are set to consider their new tuition rates later this week, although UW officials aren’t expected to make a decision until the end of June.

If Washington schools do eventually make the leap to differential tuition rates for undergrads, they would have plenty of company: One widely cited study found that more than half of U.S. public … Next Page »

Comments (2) | Reprints | Share:          

This is a startup survival story for the books. Allurent, which the tech media reported as defunct last month, has gotten new life through an acquisition by Boston-based Jenzabar, a maker of higher education enterprise software. What’s more, Allurent, which develops interactive widgets for enhancing e-commerce storefronts, never stopped doing business, says Jenzabar CEO Robert Maginn. The acquisition was first reported by Dow Jones VentureWire today.

Jenzabar and Allurent have been connected long before this deal, in which Jenzabar will own 100 percent of Allurent and will invest a “seven-figure sum” in Allurent over the next 12 months, according to Maginn. The exact dollar value of the deal was not disclosed. Allurent was founded in 2005 by a group of veterans from Art Technology Group (NASDAQ: ARTG), the e-commerce software maker that sold to Oracle (NASDAQ: ORCL) late last year for $1 billion. Maginn was an investor in ATG and Allurent, which raised about $14 million, through his investing vehicle New Media Investors.

“The only mistake they really made was not anticipating that the economy was going to come crashing down,” says Maginn of Allurent, which had shrunk in recent years and saw an acquisition deal fall through in the fall of 2010, leading to the reports of its demise. ”I was surprised when the deal they were set to do in September and October abruptly fell apart. We had to take a step back and think about the Allurent business and potential applications to our business.” Jenzabar started putting together a deal with Allurent late last year, and even hired on some of the staffers to work on Jenzabar, he says.

Through the deal, Allurent will become a wholly owned subsidiary of Jenzabar, which makes software that powers and supports “every office you can think of on campus,” from admissions to billing to financial aid, Maginn says. The technology also powers online courses and e-commerce sites for selling university paraphernalia. Allurent’s products will help make the e-commerce applications with Jenzabar more interactive, and Jenzabar vice president Chris Hartigan will act as general manager of Allurent. Meanwhile, Allurent will … Next Page »

Comments | Reprints | Share:          

Susannah Malarkey, the executive director of the Technology Alliance in Seattle, spent three days earlier this month in Boston with a group of Seattle civic and business leaders as part of the 2010 Intercity Study Mission. These annual trips, organized by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce since 1983, enable Seattle business leaders to pick the brains of civic leaders from around the country and bring the lessons back home to the Northwest on venture capital, urban planning, and education.

In the 27 years the program has been around, this was the third time Seattle representatives have looked to Boston for tips on how to foster community, growth, and local industry. There’s a reason why we keep coming back. Boston has a comparable population to Seattle with just half the landmass and a long history as a standout cluster for academia, innovation, and startup culture. Boston has a lot to offer Seattleites as we are planning for our own city’s future, Malarkey says. I dropped by Susannah’s office last week and spoke with her about the trip. Here are a few of the most important lessons she took away from our sister city to the east:

Reconnecting to the Waterfront

In 2006 Boston completed the most expensive highway tunneling project in the country, the “Big Dig,” which rerouted the city’s Central Artery, Interstate 93, through downtown and away from the waterfront. The project, which went billions of dollars over budget and six years past its initial completion deadline, is often compared to the proposed deep-bored tunnel to replace the Alaskan Way Viaduct along Seattle’s waterfront. And though the two projects are  different, according to Malarkey, there is much to be learned from both the Big Dig and its aftermath. What were the biggest hiccups in the project? How do we ensure that we don’t make the same mistakes? What can we do once the project is completed to help our city reconnect to its waterfront?

Former Massachusetts Secretary of Transportation Fred Salvucci, often referred to as the “godfather” of the project, told the visitors from Seattle about the major road bumps Boston experienced during the Big Dig. On the top of the list: inconsistent management. He emphasized the need to have a clear vision, measurable objectives, and strong and consistent leadership to successfully complete a project of this size, Malarkey says.

“It was an enormous project, they had switched management, and it was so huge and so complex that not having consistent management was really key to not having it finish on time,” Malarkey says.

In Boston’s case, finishing the project was only the first part of the equation. The second part was reviving the city’s waterfront, even when little resources remained. Instead of using taxpayer dollars, … Next Page »

Comments (1) | Reprints | Share:          

I’d like to throw out a few factoids for your consideration:

1. Washington is a high-tech state. For example, we rank 4th among the 50 states in the number of individuals in science and engineering occupations, as a proportion of our workforce.

2. However, most of these high-tech workers are imported from other states. We rank 36th among the 50 states in bachelors degrees granted as a percentage of the 18-24 year-old population, and 27th among the states in Ph.D’s awarded as a percentage of the 25-34 year-old population.

3. This under-investment in higher education disadvantages kids who grow up here (who are denied the opportunity to prepare for high-tech jobs) and smaller companies (which must recruit from the local workforce).

4. All states are facing severe budget problems this year. But different states are dealing with them in different ways.

5. In Washington, higher education is slated for far deeper cuts than in any other high-tech state. In other words, a system that already disadvantages smaller companies and kids who grow up here is going to get far worse. See the chart below, and more information on how Washington’s budget proposal compares with peer states by clicking here.

6. This craziness could be addressed by making different budgetary choices (as all other high-tech states seem to be doing), and/or by allowing tuition to rise in order to avoid reducing capacity (UW tuition, even with an increase double what the Governor and the State Senate have proposed to allow, would still be the lowest among Global Challenge State peer institutions – less than $8,000 per year for a top-tier education; federal and institutional financial aid increases would maintain affordability).

7. You’ve got to decide what sort of future you want for your kids and your state. And then tell your legislators – you can find them here.

Comments (1) | Reprints | Share: