By now the American public is convinced that US higher education system is broken, except those who are at the Brookings Institute. The question that one has is what next?  If we know something is not right, how then we can fix it or make it better?

One needs to look at the history how long the system has been built.  It may well over 375 years (Harvard was founded in 1636).  So, the current system that we all know has evolved over a long period of time.   Perhaps, one may need at least as long as the same length of time to rebuild the whole system and keep it on the right path again.  Can the US wait over 375 years to get the entire system fixed?  Or can the country take drastic changes to accelerate such corrections?  The answer is yes.  This is exactly what the regulator is trying to accomplish through the CAR and a more aggressive financial audit toward for-profit colleges which has been conducted in more recent months.  As results of the policy shift, American public learned one after another which of these institutions are facing liquidity problems and potentially will be diluted and wiped-out from the competitive map.  There is a great chance that this financial and compliance audit will be expanded to any Title IV institutions (that have received the federal funding) non-profit private or state owned.

Whatever the remedies are, one basic principle that can be used to achieve such goals is to apply the core-competence paradigms.  For extreme example is that it probably rather odd to have an institution in Arizona or Utah to run an Oceanography program.   Even though it could, the question is how efficient and effective that program will be?  US colleges need to ask themselves, what are their strengths and how can they sustain in the long-run based on their own strength, and not from other unsustainable sources such as alumni contribution.  State regulators need to relocate the budget and funding based on the current reality!  Since resources are getting more limited, they should not be stretched across different institutions.  For example, Community Colleges (CC) can concentrate to offer the General Education (GenEd) and trade classes, while the four-year institutions within the state might be able to offer junior and senior classes as well as more specialize courses, but not to repeat offering the same GenEd classes.  Eliminating the same courses will surely cut unnecessary expenses which otherwise could be spent to support the two-year institutions.  The cost saving from implementing such a policy can be allocated to fund CC program so that the tuition can be reduced and if possible with no cost.

The public needs to be aware that what is happening currently is just the tip of the iceberg.  Therefore, appropriate actions need to be done.  As the industry undergone this important stage, there will be unintended short-run consequences that go along with it on many areas such as employment, college culture, required skill sets, new ways how to manage higher institutions, type of offered courses, payment scale and other infrastructures.  Most higher education institutions are caught by surprise on the magnitude and speed of current changes that are happening.  However, some institutions may not even realize such changes are occurring and if they are, they still do not know what and how to react.