The Week recently reported on a popular trend in education: virtual classes offered free by elite universities.

While this may sound like an exceptional opportunity for the eager learner, it may not be a wise play for universities.

These schools “have partnered with a newly launched company called Coursera to offer more than 100 free online courses this academic year; MIT, Harvard, and the University of California, Berkeley, are following suit through a nonprofit venture called edX.”

Obviously, this is an intriguing option – who wouldn’t want to be able to say he or she had taken a course at Harvard? But how does a school maintain its brand’s integrity when it offers its prestigious commodities for free? Will Duke, Harvard or any other school administering free courses tarnish its brand’s legacy? I think they will if they choose this route.

Free classes will weaken the brand of these schools. Each enjoys a reputation for selectivity and academic rigor. That’s what separates America’s elite universities from all the others. This exclusivity is why both students and parents are willing to pay more in tuition.

Jason Wingard, the vice dean of The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School has it right when he notes that, “Universities recognize that they could be jeopardizing their hard-won reputations and their time-tested business model…You run the risk of potentially diluting your brand.”

Great brands come with high expectations. When we think of Harvard or MIT, excellence comes to mind. Open the doors to the masses and that reputation is damaged.

As the commencement speeches wrap up and the latest university grads make their way into the real world, it is worth a moment to reflect on the world of higher education.

The press has been full of articles questioning the financial value of a higher education today, not because having a degree is important in finding a decent job, but because it may not simply be an investment with a viable ROI.

To that end, more and more centers of Higher Ed are discovering how important it is to view their offerings as a real business and not an ivory tower. Marketing their value to prospective students is an important endeavor for university administrations these days. They must attract the top students and find a way to differentiate its particular university offering from the myriad of choices.

Stealing Share took a hard look at these marketing messages and just posted a detailed study that includes private, public, and for-profit colleges and universities. How are they doing? Check out our report card here and see for yourself.

I am having a tough time liking the University of Kentucky’s brand.

Sure, winning the national championship is nothing to scoff at. Neither is garnering a 38-2 record, or going 16-0 in the SEC conference.

But what does it say about Kentucky’s brand when the entirety of the team’s starting five is bowing out on their chance to earn a collegiate degree in order to jump ship to the NBA? What’s worse is that its starting five consists of three freshman and two sophomores. They haven’t even tasted the college experience — and Kentucky doesn’t care if they do, as long as these kids help the university collect a national championship.

Now, I do get it. These five players are a few months away from first round draft status and millions upon millions of dollars in their pockets. It’s their winning lottery ticket — and personally, I don’t blame them for wanting to live their life’s dream.

The problem I have is Kentucky’s modicum of interest in branding themselves as an academic institution. Is a degree at Kentucky this meaningless?

It may be. Here’s why. These freshman, for example, can fail all of their classes during first semester and follow this up by not attending any of their second semester classes. For these one and done players, they can set up camp for a year and leave to go pro before being declared academically ineligible or kicked out.

Kentucky is fully aware of this and uses these impressionable kids to make massive amounts of money, all while the university relishes in the spotlight. Being in the spotlight allows you to draw more of the same, like moths to a flame. Kentucky did win a championship this year, but it did so by putting together a semi-professional team that played under the umbrella of a university.

Said John Calipari, the head coach at Kentucky: “They [the players] understand why they’re in school…They’re here to get an education. These guys are all going to finish the term.”

Wouldn’t it be nice if that honestly meant something at the University of Kentucky?

I say what I’m about to say without in any way diminishing the hurt and wrong done to the innocent kids by the people in charge of the Penn State football program. All of our hearts go out to them and it’s very easy for me to go from shock over the news to outright anger.

However, taking a step back, I simply want to look at the business issues that are raised by this nightmare as it relates to the Penn State brand.

The AP just released a story saying that Joe Paterno would retire at the end of this season. As a brand, this is akin to bobbing the dog’s tail an inch at a time to save it from pain.

The Penn State brand has been as pure as vanilla ice cream over the years (and sometimes as exciting as vanilla ice cream as well). Everything from its famous, simple black football shoes to its unadorned white helmets speaks to austerity and simplicity. They were without scandal in a tumultuous sports world.

I remember Joe Pa once saying (and getting in trouble for it) that he did not want to leave coaching in the hands of the Jackie Sherrills of the world (referring to the highly successful and controversial Pittsburgh and Texas A&M coach). He claimed to hold his program (and the university) to higher standards.

So, OK, now we know there was deep trouble in paradise. It turns out that Happy Valley was more like the Garden of Eden after the temptation by the serpent than it was the simple garden without a blemish that we all wanted to believe.

Well, Penn State, the blush is off the rose and you will be judged as a brand by how vigorously you do the right thing today. To believe the AP story, the powers at the university have decided that the bruises on their vaunted program are superficial and will fade away at the end of the season — when Paterno exits.

They could not be more wrong.

He was the man in charge and needs to be held to the squeaky clean standards he himself set over the years as he spoke about those “most important youngsters” in his charge. Instead of moving on now, Penn State has apparently taken the easy road and are simply pretending he is retiring at the end of this season.

But the troubles won’t go away. Fans at the rest of Penn State’s away games will make sure of that. The talk of a bowl game and a possible Big 10 championship will be charged with talks of pedophiles, scandals and cover-ups.

I ask a simple question of those supposedly guarding the Penn State brand: If his lack of action and control warrants his dismissal (let’s call a spade a spade here) at the end of the year, surely it would be a clearer statement to send him out now? What are you saving by keeping him on? His honor? A dignified retirement? University prestige? Surely all of that is gone and continues to erode until the head is chopped off the snake.

Be a brand. Stand for something. Restore our faith that Penn State does things the right way.

Am I alone in thinking the names of the collegiate conferences would work well under the guidance of Nurse Ratched?

This has been brewing in my brain for some time now, but with the recent application of both Syracuse and Pittsburgh to join the Atlantic Coast Conference, the sheer inanity of it all sent me into a complete tizzy. Well, not quite to the level of throwing my desk chair across my office in a heated moment of passion (thank you Coach Knight), but pretty darn close.

At first glance, it all looks so inane.

Pittsburgh, a team that is over 300 miles away from the Atlantic coastline, wants to join the Atlantic Coast Conference? Surely, we all know the motivating factor behind this is money. Playing for a stronger football conference helps with the revenue of the university (football is where the dollars are). But seriously, there is something absolutely mixed-up, backwards and upside down about conference names these days. And being that they represent the world of academia, you would expect a little work from the ole’ noggin to come into play.

Truthfully, I can let the Pittsburgh example slide because it is not nearly the worst example currently on the table. Yes, there is a much worse example.

Take the mid-major basketball conference, the Atlantic 10. You would think that the number 10 would suggest ten teams. Logically, that would make complete sense. But no. The Atlantic 10 boasts 14 teams — one of which is St. Louis University. Because you know, when we think of the Atlantic, we all logically think of St. Louis, Missouri.

Even St. Louis’ coach, Rick Majerus, complains about the team’s placement in the Atlantic 10. Says Majerus: “We belong in the Missouri Valley… the A-10′s a good league, but you’ve got to cross two states… What rivalry do we have? Dayton or Xavier? They sure don’t consider us to be big rivals.”

It goes on. Texas Christian University is now applying for the Big East as well as rumors suggesting that Kansas and Kansas State may join the conference too.

They do teach geography in college, right?

What about the Big 10 sporting 12 teams? Or how about the Temple football program playing for the Mid-American Conference? Surely, when I think of Philadelphia, I think of middle America.

However, all this swapping shows the power of the conference brands. (Although, they should be careful. They are all treading very close to becoming meaningless.) Truly great brands are those that exemplify something that we personally covet or want to be. In the world of collegiate athletics, this covetous agenda is of no exception. Take for example, the ACC, a very powerfully branded conference. I ask you, what does the ACC most readily represent? Perhaps that of a league that is home to the really exceptional athletes and the best coaches — teams that have a very real potential to win a national championship. You know, like North Carolina or Duke in Basketball, or Florida State and Miami in football. It’s a no brainer. If you could be a part of this elite group, and had the chance to, wouldn’t you?

Or what about the Big East? We might think of hard-nosed, athletic, basketball. Or a conference with the pedigree of players worthy to make it in the NBA.

So, behind all of this rearranging and moving and this and that, there is a semblance of sense as to why some colleges want to move to more elite conferences. Because when they are a part of these conferences, they too own the feeling of being a little bit better than the competition.

But despite all of these truths, it is still really hard to look at this giant cluster of conference names and yell out — as the world’s greatest basketball coach, John Wooden, once did — “Gracious sakes alive!”

There are rumors swirling that the iPad, Kindle and other tablet strongholds are poised to take over the world of educational textbooks.

Well, isn’t it time?

Lets face it. The brand of the United States is not one to have a cookie to celebrate over these days. Without wading through the abyss of political positions, parties, assertions and this and that, one obvious place that our country’s brand could flex its muscles is through education.

As a father to a hard working teacher, and a friend to many others, my beef is not with teachers, but with the outdated and obsolete system they are forced to work in.

Think about it: Most schools are littered with textbooks. Shelves of these old fossils take up room in classrooms of upwards to 30 students. What’s worse is the textbook adoption system. Here, schools spend millions taking on a new textbook that, in four to five years, goes by the wayside for a newly adopted textbook — and the old textbooks is hoarded away in classrooms or in teacher workrooms.

Oddly, especially with the English textbooks, most of the selections within the new and old textbooks are exactly the same. Only the annotated content that coincides with each textbook differs. Therefore, the dollars are not spent on content, just the ever-changing curriculum that goes with the content. Surely, these dollars could be used elsewhere in the educational sector?

It’s a shame we couldn’t just “update” these older textbooks to have the new and necessary information so we could ultimately just save on space, money and resources.

Oh wait, we can. And thankfully some schools are taking the plunge because the world’s most powerful brand — Apple — can help one of our nation’s worst, education.

If every student was given an iPad, Kindle or Nook at the start of the year —where all textbooks and necessary materials were preloaded — wouldn’t that just be so much easier, and even more fun for students? In the long run, it’d even be less expensive.

How about the simplicity of taking notes, or transitioning from a dictionary to a thesaurus, or reading a class assigned novel, or checking grammar against the pre-loaded copy of Strunk & White’s: Elements of Style? What of finding real-time resources, accessing free newspapers as well as all of those necessary resources that were present in the previously assigned textbook? This list of positive attributes could just go on and on.

But most of all, what about the “wow” factor? Our schools desperately need that “wow” factor. They need that jolt from a powerhouse like Apple or Google or Amazon. Students, teachers and administrators would crave it.

It all seems like a no-brainer to me. It’s time for the education system to start using its brain as well.

Is any one surprised about the recent allegations against the University of Miami football program?

Of course not.

How come? That’s an easy one: Because Miami’s brand of urban thuggery said so. If you don’t believe in the power of a great brand – of it being such a powerful self-reflection of its customers that it can dictate behavior – then look no further than to the Hurricanes.

They developed one of the great brands in college football. It was the brand of outlaws. The incredibly talented who took whatever they wanted and made no apologies about it. It resulted in national championships, media exposure and a national profile. It also resulted in taunting behavior, nightlife altercations and scandal.

And, of course, there was the risk: That the brand would be so powerful that the players, coaches, alumni and boosters would act in accordance with that brand. Therefore, when Nevin Shapiro became the booster from hell, was anyone surprised? The brand of Miami football gave him permission to be the sugar daddy to the football stars and it was what we expected from that brand all along.

Miami got what it wanted by developing an emotional brand that was powerfully persuasive to a large number of people. It did what all great brands do: It was a self-reflection of those you are trying to persuade. It was different than anyone else – openly flaunting its swagger – and the self-reflection had a value that was emotionally intense.

Think about this way. Would we have been more surprised if this happened at Penn State, Nebraska or any other school? Surely, things like this happen in those football programs too, but we don’t believe they happen on this large of a scale because the brands of those programs attract a different sort of audience.

If you consider the power of brand to be overblown, remember the Miami Hurricanes. They are paying the price for it now, for sure, and may never return. But Miami knows the power of brand. If it wants to return as something transformed, Miami will change its brand first.

The news is awash with stories about the dwindling funds for higher education.  As a matter of fact, there is a battle raging for all public funding in just about every sector you an imagine. So, it is not surprising that colleges and universities, especially public institutions, are engaged in plans to help the institution garner a greater share of available funds.

This morning, NPR had an interesting story about just this subject. The summary of the article from the NPR website follows: ”More and more states are looking to link college budgets to schools’ performance — such as number of degrees produced and the ability to graduate challenging students. The idea has been tried before, but now many states say tough finances make it more important than ever to get something for their investment.”

Now, universities and colleges have a serious brand problem and I worry that this new move will just make matters worse.

Most everyone in business today recognizes that the students that knock on their doors seeking a job are completely unprepared to do almost anything. They lack the ability to communicate clearly, they have supped on pop culture and are not well read, they write poorly, can’t seem to problem solve, believe they can multi-task and, on top of it all, are convinced of their own self-importance and worth.

For those of us who hire, the brand of colleges and universities means very little. A degree in just about anything simply means the applicant has great debt and few skills. They have been coddled and spoon-fed by educators and intellectuals that have as much experience and understanding as…well, those of you who recognize this scenario know exactly what I mean.

My dad used to say that a college degree today was the equivalent to a high school degree in his day. I think he was correct. College was not for everyone and those lucky enough to attend had to work their butts off.

Today, it seems everyone goes to college (even if they don’t graduate). Rather than a university representing a major step along the intellectual search, it has become a four (or five, in many cases) years of respite from responsibility, punctuated by binge drinking, non-stop partying, and video games. (My apologies to those to of which this does not apply, but this just proves the power of a brand and how all brands are judged by its common denominator.)

Many believe this erosion of the brand of higher education has been due to more open enrollment, remedial class work and a hunger by the university and college administration for bigger enrollment and a larger student body (and I’m not talking about the Freshman 15). They may be right. College as not meant for everyone, but it has become just that.

So does a focus on rewarding colleges for a higher graduation rate promise to fix the problem? Considering “no child left behind” and the propensity of education to make everything a process, I doubt it.

So tell me, if a college or university stands to lose funding if a student fails out of that university, what do you think the chances are of that university actually flunking that student? If we have learned anything in our lives it is that you cannot legislate hard work and achievement. You can’t incentivize it either from external sources. You either have the drive or you don’t. If you don’t, then maybe college isn’t for you.

If the higher education community cares at all about its brands, those responsible should remember that the basis of all value is scarcity. The more common anything is the less it is desired, rewarded and valued.