Here’s the Wicked Problem.

Higher ed has reached an inflection point: the cost of education is rising while public faith is falling.

Although the benefits of education are still present, they are offered unequally. According to the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce, higher education delivers a significant ROI. However, higher education is a tiered system, where the benefits are clustered at the top, and risk is clustered at the bottom. Those from low-income backgrounds are often sent to institutions that deliver a small or negative ROI, and confer large amounts of debt without enhancing opportunity. To make matters worse, government loans and grants are being systematically eliminated, further corroding the ladder to opportunity.

Absent real investment in a social ladder, higher education will exacerbate inequality rather than mitigate it.

How could things be different?

Now is the time to reimagine higher education as a public institution. To make this happen, we would need a new “land grant” or “space race” push towards funding higher education.

In this new wave, we would need to shift the focus from granting an ROI to individuals to tackling local issues, supporting community members, and enhancing the regional economy all at once. Instead of using metrics like ROI and graduation rate, the community-university model would measure its success against local public indicators, local economic metrics, and the social and health outcomes of neighborhoods.

What can we do now?

Federal funding might be dissolving, but states can increase their investment in higher education. One bright and bold example is Arizona State University, a self-proclaimed “national service university.”

Other states can follow their playbook. I’ve organized their range of innovations in order of the leverage point they intervene at, according to Donnella Meadows.

leverage point	intervention
10. The structure of stocks, flows, nodes	Multiple entry points, high schools, hospitals
7. Positive feedback loops	Teaching teachers, awards
6. The structure of information flows	State of Arizona reports, Arizona indicators
5. The rules of the system	publicly engaged scholarship
4. The power to change structure	department of community, municipal relations
3. The goals of the system	inclusive excellence, promote the common good
2. The paradigm	Michael Crow presidency, “national service university,” new ASU charter

The leverage points are numbered 1-12, with 1 being the most powerful change, and 12 being the least impactful change. Below I will describe several of the innovations and the leverage point they interact at.

At number 10 is the structure of stocks, flows, and nodes. At the university, this corresponds to the structure of campuses, the entry and exit points of the system (enrollment, applications, graduation), as well as the structure of community offerings such as medical hospitals. As part of their innovations, ASU expanded the amount of possible entrypoints, including direct enrollment from high schools and local community colleges. They also increased their hospital services that were directed towards the local community.

At number 6 is the structure of information flows. By establishing their own practice of releasing State of Arizona reports and Arizona indicators, they report on several key metrics and release how their work addresses the issues that are measured. This provides useful information on their performance in the community, outside of traditional metrics like graduation and enrollment.

At number 4 is the power to change structure. In this case, ASU established the Department of Community and Municipal Relations, which is tasked with maintaining and monitoring all of the systems set in place that engage the community. This creates accountability and creates a governing body to address underperformance and create strategic improvements.

Lastly, number 2 is the paradigm. Michael Crow established the new paradigm in his inaugural speech about inclusive excellence and the “national service university.” He rejects exclusivity as a marker for excellence and instead promotes the diverse, varied success of all students.