Using Classification of Instructional Program Codes in HRD: Invited Reaction

This reaction begins by highlighting four strengths of the article: (a) the clear introduction of CIP codes and how they are utilized; (b) where the discipline of HRD fits with the CIP code system; (c) the illustration of how CIP data can be utilized in HRD research; (d) the call for faculty to become more aware or CIP codes and impacts of this system upon programs. This reaction will also present some challenges and highlight an important use of CIP codes that was not discussed in the article. This reaction will then present a case that demonstrates why we as HRD program leaders cannot ignore the importance of CIP codes. Finally, implications of CIP codes for HRD and the role of higher education faculty members will be presented. The Rose (2023) manuscript holds valuable information that can lead to better program data and possibly some new streams of HRD research.

on a very important part of the U.S. educational system that many faculty members fail to recognize since it often lies outside of our daily activity. An important part of this reaction paper is to identify those aspects of the manuscript that seem valuable and those points of the manuscript that seemed to lack the attention needed.
The article authored by Rose (2023) presents a clear introduction of CIP codes and highlights some of the ways that they are utilized. The author focused on the HRD CIP code and uses that would likely be of interest to HRD faculty members. The starting point of uses for CIP codes included in the article were program completion data, graduate and faculty salaries, program reviews, and examining labor data (National Center for Education Statistics, 2020a). The author correctly points to the fact that the accuracy of any of this data relies on the CIP codes identified by the institutions and as a result does not represent all academic programs that are commonly associated with the HRD field. The lack of a universally adopted and known definition of HRD has led to inconsistent classification of data in HRD education research (Cho & Zachmeier, 2015;Kuchinke, 2002;Roberts, 2014;Zachmeier and Cho, 2014).
Although I appreciate this author's desire to inform the HRD field to the CIP codes and the potential uses, due to the way programs are classified, I doubt that the HRD programs will ever subscribe to the use of the HRD CIP code in numbers great enough to provide useful data for program completion data. Since CIP codes are frequently assigned by administration, I doubt that many programs housed outside of the college of business will ever classified as HRD unless they are named Human Resource Development.
To illustrate this point, Roberts (2008) (Roberts, 2015). By comparison, according to Rose (2023), the CIP code for HRD only yielded 89 institutions and only 50 with one or more HRD degree completers. The Roberts' directories also had limitations resulting from the self-reported nature of the data and the fact that HRD is often an emphasis or concentration within a larger degree program. I am currently very interested in the Academy of Human Resource Development's Program Directory Project that is being pilot tested by the Program Excellence Network (PEN) (email communication with the AHRD, May 12, 2023). The aim of the AHRD Program Directory Project is to develop a comprehensive database of all AHRD member programs. The obvious limitation of this project is that it will only include programs whose faculty align with the AHRD as their professional home.
Rose's (2023) Figure 2: CIP-SOC Crosswalk for the HRD Code clearly illustrates both the power and the weakness of the multidisciplinary nature of HRD. In this figure seven HRD-related CIP codes are cross-walked to 20 different SOC code occupations. The CIP is subdivided in a hierarchical, three-level structure. The highest level is the 2digit series, which is composed of 47 categories. This is followed by the 4-digit series, composed of 421 categories, and the final level 6-digit series which is composed of creates a situation where programs can be classified into any number of the 1847 6-digit series codes. Rose (2023) did an excellent job of illustrating how CIP data can be utilized in HRD research and especially how powerful the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) is to the researcher. I also support the call for faculty to become more aware of CIP codes and impacts of this system on programs in the U.S. that often operates in the background.
A fundamental element of all federal government classification systems is that they are used to give uniformity in the presentation of date. For example, this allows the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation the ability to determine if both organizations are funding the same research in the same discipline. This could be used to eliminate duplication and allow each group to quickly find reports on a single instructional program. This also allows the Department of Treasury to find and track spending on instructional programs. This doesn't matter if it is CIP codes as used in this article or Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes, North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) codes or Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) codes.
Another direct spin-off on the use of these codes is that they are commonly utilized by private organizations to track their spending but are also commonly used to track customers or clients. For example, an educational software company may categorize their clients by zip code so they can track who is purchasing their product, which allows them to better resource their marketing programs to target populations. Whether this be in relationship to the over $190 billion of federal funds (USA Facts, 2023) which are allocated for higher education or the tracking of billions of other dollars in grants and aid that are offered, each of these classification systems allow tracking of these dollars and comparison the reporting and the effectiveness of how these dollars are utilized.

A Case in Point
A case to illustrate this point occurred just over 20 years as The University of Texas at Tyler went through a reorganization and the Department of Technology within the College of Education and Psychology was moved into the College of Business. For brevity I will simplify this to focus on the CIP code, however, it is important to understand that much of the background evolved over approximately a 10-year period. For example, through the 1990s the Training and Development degree was updated to meet changes in industry and the evolving nature of the HRD field. These changes included many course changes and a renaming of the degree to Educational Human Resource Development (EHRD). The Department of Technology also housed degrees in Industrial Technology, Industrial Safety, Construction Management, Industrial Distribution in addition to education and teacher certification-based degrees in the preparation of Industrial Arts/Technology Education and Trades and Industry (T&I) and community college teachers in occupational disciplines. The move into the College of Business and much growth in the HRD B.S and M.S degrees led the department to request a name change to the Department of Human Resource Development and Technology. We also requested renaming the EHRD degree to simply HRD. This request had to go before the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) and as a part of the approval process a complete review of all CIP codes contained within the department was required. The college later reorganized resulting in the creation of a new Department of Human Resource Development and a separate Department of Technology. The degrees within the Department of Technology previously were classified under CIP Code 13 -Education or CIP Code 15 -Engineering Technologies/ Technicians. The reassigning of degree CIP codes in Texas is just the beginning, because the State funding of higher education is done through what they call formula funding. In the formula funding process, each course is classified by a six-digit CIP code that most closely represents the content of the course. Courses within the HRD degree plan will often use CIP codes outside of the 52.1005 -Human Resources Development (NCES, 2023a), such as Education, Management and Applied Psychology. Care must be taken in this process to ensure the correct code is applied, for example, for a "Technology in HRD" course, do you apply a code from Computer and Information Sciences and Support Services, Education or is possibly the following from the Business CIP codes a better fit? The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2023b), defines CIP Code 52.1207 -Knowledge Management as follows: A program that focuses on the study of knowledge management in government agencies and corporations for the purpose of supporting stated organizational goals and objectives and prepares individuals to function as information resource managers. Includes instruction in information technology, principles of computer and information systems, management information systems, applicable policy and regulations, and operations and personnel management.
My institution has a specific process that must be followed to assign or change a CIP code for a course that requires multiple levels of approval. The formula funding in Texas begins with a basic rate then multiplies it by each area's formula funding multiplier for the level of the course (e.g., Lower Division, Upper Division, Masters or Doctoral) and finally by the number of student credit hours. The current multipliers range from 1.00X for a lower division Liberal Arts class to 48.02X for a doctoral level Pharmacy class. This system recognizes the varying costs of delivering different programs and the State of Texas formula funding committee that sets these rates and multipliers try to incorporate factors such as lab costs, instructional requirements, and faculty salaries into their matrix. In this sample case, the University would receive just over $188 per student more for a Business CIP coded course than an Education CIP coded class.
This Spring semester we taught 162 students in our HRD Masters' classes according to our student management system, and this generated $30,456 more for the institution by virtue of our courses being CIP classified as Business: Human Resource Development, rather than Education. I would encourage the faculty of Southern Mississippi University and Indiana State University to review their CIP codes as they transition into their respective colleges of business. The greater point that Rose (2023) was trying to make is that the CIP codes are neutral to the university's organizational structure, and the CIP code that most closely aligns with the program should be used. HRD research in the future will benefit from more programs being correctly classified in the CIP system.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.