FlippED would develop a "LinkedIn plus" for students, presenting a version of below online:
1.Portfolio of Student Performance (albeit not all testing scores), List of Aspirations, and their Educational Plan
2.Student Educational Plan, might perhaps be outlined as following example:
Year 1, Coordinate a Community Experience -- project based work experience like Americorp, with OnLine General Ed Courses
Year 2, In Class Time, Residential Experience with OnLine Ed -- to increase the pace of learning
Year 3, OnLine Ed and Career Focused Internships -- sponsored by employer entities receiving first look privileges by contributing to the educational bidder price
Year 4, In Class Time, Residential Experience, Internship -- closing with a Graduation Rite of Passage, Career Placement
3. Price/Willingness to Pay
Students and their families offer an annual price they are willing to pay for the educational experiences they have outlined per Student Educational Plan above. Higher ed institutions, current intermediaries and perhaps new intermediaries accept the student/family bid, or even bid lower -- to provide the plan as proposed.
How is this different from the current system? Students and their families propose a price for what they have outlined in the Student Educational Plan, not passively pursuing what already exists. Perhaps initially, it will be "lesser profile" institutions bidding, but once a market is built, it will be a more efficient way to match student and educational path. Others will join.
Quality control will be maintained by an open, transparent rating system of the educational bidder, and student participant based on explicit deliverables.
And yes, there is a role for the public sector and public sector dollars in this model. Public entity support can be shared directly with the student and family, not with the educational bidder (an aspect of flipping the current power dynamic).
A quick note relative to public dollars. Public investment in human capital to prevent the tragedy of our cognitive "commons" is no joke. And as the cost of the prison system has shown us, early investment/prevention/intervention is less expensive than our current mix of bad outcomes. Public money should support any proposed model, but higher ed institutions and their constellations need to be challenged, need more competition, and more dilution of their brand power.
Possible considerations, outcomes, questions? Need a platform. Need to drive interest and aggregate the student profiles, tapping into the talents and expertise of high school college counselors and other mentors to help students build profile and parse bid options. And then, yes, disrupt and get the bidding going and flip the power dynamic. Create a world where students and families have their own brand, and their own choices for which " educational brands" to pay for, support.