Colleges in Dire Financial Straits

[Wahoo Redux]

Also from Polly's list:

The Higher Education Apocalypse

On a Friday afternoon in April, the 119-year-old Mount Ida College in Newton abruptly announced it was broke and planned to shutter its doors after commencement the following month, leaving nearly a thousand students scrambling to figure out their future.

The sudden closure, which until then had been a storyline associated mainly with corrupt for-profit schools, sent a jolt through the state and put school administrators across the country on high alert that declining profits and diminishing enrollment were reaching a stage of crisis.

"The culminating moment was the abrupt closure of Mount Ida, the way it transpired and the real outrage that came not only from the college community but also from parents and Massachusetts in general," Santiago says.

Within months, Massachusetts officials went from monitoring the effect of market forces on their higher education industry to actively playing a role in mitigating future risks.

In response, Santiago and state lawmakers convened a working group that quickly prepared a report detailing the emergency and outlining eight specific recommendations to ensure that the state – along with students and the campus community, more importantly – isn't caught off guard again.

I'll say it again: the public DOES actually care.  Capitalize on that.  And yes, as the article points out "Massachusetts's economy is intrinsically linked to the success of its institutions of higher education, perhaps more than any other in the country;" nevertheless they can still be used as a model.  Everyplace there is a college there is a micro-economy created by the institution.  And not just the ginormus land-grant institutions; a lot of these small towns would be wastelands without their super-dinkies and satellite campuses and CCs. 

[mamselle]

From Polly's March 25th list:

Unprepared Trustees: A Critical Problem in Higher Education

Michigan State, Penn State, the University of Maryland, and Virginia, among others, offer disastrous examples of boards behaving badly and offering inadequate oversight. This is especially the case when the board's leadership focuses on preserving and enhancing the institutional brand, ranking, or athletic prowess, instead of fostering academic excellence and student success.

It is apparently only now occurring to people that having trustees who know nothing about academia might not be such a good idea.

So, specific fix: recalibrate our trustees with academics.  There are lots of specifics to be considered, obviously, but this seems like a very good place to start.

Agreed. And...

Not quite the same thing, or in the same context, but a similar problem hit churches in the 1980s-2010s, I'd say.

A whole lot of work on developing business models for churches had begun in the 1950s (I have some of the books) and by the 1980s, enough other work on business structures, markets, styles and analysis had bred people who thought they understood how to "run stuff," and wanted second careers, and decided their local churches could benefit from their expertise and know-how.

Several places ended up with senior ministers, rectors, or pastors who'd been businesspeople first, and thought they'd run their church like they'd run their businesses.

Awful stuff happened (for one thing, the personality that makes for a good business leader doesn't quite map into the needs of a bereaved member for pastoral care at 3 AM, or the patience and understanding that an ADHD child requires when running up and down the aisles during your oh-so-carefully-researched sermon...) and, I think, more recently, this tendency has been addressed--either by seminaries that screen more carefully for such issues, or teach about the differences better; or by denominations and confessional groups that have figured out the things they need to ask to avoid installing such individuals in long-term pulpit settings.

The thing that looked like it would be a win-win (most churches being notoriously poor at times) ended up, often, to be a lose-lose (no income because everyone went away mad, and the new clergyperson was dismayed at their perceived failure and inability to get another posting because, if nothing else, church members do talk...).

It might make an interesting study in acculturation, inculturation, etc., but in the meantime the mis-match in institutional needs and directorial preparedness can be lethal.

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

From Polly's final entry:

The other college debt crisis: Schools are going broke

[Hiram College in Ohio] needed to refinance its long-term debt, and lenders were not looking kindly on the old liberal arts model.

The result was a top-to-bottom makeover of the school's curriculum and its overall approach. Gone were majors seen as stodgy or less aligned with a career path — including religion, art history and music. In their place are programs in sport management, international studies and crime, law and justice. There is a new emphasis on technology, and all students are required to complete an internship, a study-away trip or a research project in order to graduate.

The college has dubbed its approach "the new liberal arts" and trademarked the term.

You anti-lib-arty types should be at least a little happy with this approach.

In other words, I really appreciate that Polly is ringing the bell, but all of these articles ALSO suggest ways forward.  We need to acknowledge the gloom-and-doom and then ALSO pay attention to suggestions for revision.  This is America, after all, and it is folly to assume that we are an inflexible people incapable of solving major cultural problems.

[mamselle]

Do I need a dose of anti-sarcasm powder to read that last line correctly?

;--}

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

Do I need a dose of anti-sarcasm powder to read that last line correctly?

;--}

M.

No.  No sarcasm. 

Honestly, I meant that, even if it sounds pretty square.

[mamselle]

OK, because I could see it either way.

I think we may be sclerosing in some ways, and while I've often thought we needed to outgrow some of the less endearing aspects of our cultural adolescence, I did think we might not harden into inflexible polarities as quickly as it sometimes seems we have done.

M.

[Wahoo Redux]

I had never seen "sclerosing" before----is that a verb used outside medicine?  Cool.

I was being quite sincere.  Our higher ed system is on the verge of freefall.  There will have to be immediate reductions made because of birthrate, finances, and COVID, certainly, but birthrates change, times change, the pandemic will be over, and we should not let the legacy of education falter.  People have been taking college for granted for some time now, and certain populations have been radicalized against education even as they send their children off to college. 

I appreciate all the new ideas and restructuring, but these will only go so far----not to mention destroying many of the best aspects of education (v. job training).  I think there is no other way than to make an appeal to the populace.   

[marshwiggle]

I appreciate all the new ideas and restructuring, but these will only go so far----not to mention destroying many of the best aspects of education (v. job training).  I think there is no other way than to make an appeal to the populace.

And there we have the fundamental attitude that derails all of these discussions.

[apl68]

From Polly's March 25th list:

Unprepared Trustees: A Critical Problem in Higher Education

Michigan State, Penn State, the University of Maryland, and Virginia, among others, offer disastrous examples of boards behaving badly and offering inadequate oversight. This is especially the case when the board's leadership focuses on preserving and enhancing the institutional brand, ranking, or athletic prowess, instead of fostering academic excellence and student success.

It is apparently only now occurring to people that having trustees who know nothing about academia might not be such a good idea.

So, specific fix: recalibrate our trustees with academics.  There are lots of specifics to be considered, obviously, but this seems like a very good place to start.

Agreed. And...

Not quite the same thing, or in the same context, but a similar problem hit churches in the 1980s-2010s, I'd say.

A whole lot of work on developing business models for churches had begun in the 1950s (I have some of the books) and by the 1980s, enough other work on business structures, markets, styles and analysis had bred people who thought they understood how to "run stuff," and wanted second careers, and decided their local churches could benefit from their expertise and know-how.

Several places ended up with senior ministers, rectors, or pastors who'd been businesspeople first, and thought they'd run their church like they'd run their businesses.

Awful stuff happened (for one thing, the personality that makes for a good business leader doesn't quite map into the needs of a bereaved member for pastoral care at 3 AM, or the patience and understanding that an ADHD child requires when running up and down the aisles during your oh-so-carefully-researched sermon...) and, I think, more recently, this tendency has been addressed--either by seminaries that screen more carefully for such issues, or teach about the differences better; or by denominations and confessional groups that have figured out the things they need to ask to avoid installing such individuals in long-term pulpit settings.

The thing that looked like it would be a win-win (most churches being notoriously poor at times) ended up, often, to be a lose-lose (no income because everyone went away mad, and the new clergyperson was dismayed at their perceived failure and inability to get another posting because, if nothing else, church members do talk...).

It might make an interesting study in acculturation, inculturation, etc., but in the meantime the mis-match in institutional needs and directorial preparedness can be lethal.

M.

I'd never heard of there being a rush of former business types into the clergy (Apart from Sister Philippa in Rumer Godden's In This House of Brede).  I grew up in churches where the pastor (Usually my father) was typically a blue-collar bi-vocational minister who worked at construction or something to support the family.  What they lacked in formal education (Although some, like Dad, had been to seminary) they made up in being very much of the community they ministered to.

[mamselle]

Yes, that's definitely another firm model (that has, in fact, outlasted the one I described over time). Starting with Paul, tentmaking models for ministry have been brought respectable, far-seeing individuals into service. In many ways, that describes my own work--one foot in the EA/sciency world, the other in the liturgical arts.

I also worked on-and-off with a consortium of seminaries for many years, so the concentration of folks like the ones I described might have been more visible during the time in question. The ATS (Asso. of Theological Schools) as led by D. Aylford until his recent retirement, surveyed and published a study on the state of theological education up through the early 2000s, and it's noted there, for one thing.

But the parallel I was seeing was between academic institutions being run by non-academics, and ecclesiastical institutions being run by those who were not originally theologically trained (and sorry to say, put on what training they did get as a thin veneer over their previous professional inclinations...a wineskins problem, maybe.)

Some parallax may have been afforded by the disparate viewpoints (and I can think of at least one excellent example, as an exception, who proves that case) but many dysfunctional results also arose, I thought, among those for whom their preparation was not "bred in the bone," as it were.

M.

[spork]

Trustee boards at the small, private, not-for-profit institutions I've worked at, and that are often the subject of this thread, usually consist of the following, with individuals often in multiple categories:

• Alumni regarded as "successful" business-people.
• Alumni who refuse to understand that the world is different from when they were in college.
• Executives/owners of local "big business" -- banks, real estate development companies, etc. (often with financial ties to the university that present conflicts of interest that are ignored).
• Wealthy retirees who moved to the local area and who are regarded as previously successful business-people.
• Past or potential future donors.
• People who accept without question the PowerPoint presentations delivered at trustee meetings by the university's president and/or CFO.
• Religious zealots more interested in perpetuating a doctrine than in the institution's financial viability.

[apl68]

University of Arkansas at Little Rock is now looking at cutting and eliminating various programs.  Among the proposed cuts, performing arts, any foreign languages besides Spanish, and several engineering programs that haven't been doing too well at UALR.  And the usual reductions to English, History, etc.



https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2020/mar/31/ualr-looks-at-academic-program-cuts-202-1/

[lightning]

University of Arkansas at Little Rock is now looking at cutting and eliminating various programs.  Among the proposed cuts, performing arts, any foreign languages besides Spanish, and several engineering programs that haven't been doing too well at UALR.  And the usual reductions to English, History, etc.



https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2020/mar/31/ualr-looks-at-academic-program-cuts-202-1/

Some of those majors that are proposed to be cut, require talent, prepared academic backgrounds, tenacity, and hard work from students. That's often why numbers are low in those majors. Sadly that can leave a university with a majority of programs that are fluff, and a student population, the majority of whom have no talent, are unprepared academically, can't stick with anything, and think hard work is reading 20 pages a day. This will lower the overall reputation of the university, and devalue the credential from UALR, continuing the cycle of mediocrity to its inevitable end.

[Wahoo Redux]

University of Arkansas at Little Rock is now looking at cutting and eliminating various programs.  Among the proposed cuts, performing arts, any foreign languages besides Spanish, and several engineering programs that haven't been doing too well at UALR.  And the usual reductions to English, History, etc.



https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2020/mar/31/ualr-looks-at-academic-program-cuts-202-1/

Some of those majors that are proposed to be cut, require talent, prepared academic backgrounds, tenacity, and hard work from students. That's often why numbers are low in those majors. Sadly that can leave a university with a majority of programs that are fluff, and a student population, the majority of whom have no talent, are unprepared academically, can't stick with anything, and think hard work is reading 20 pages a day. This will lower the overall reputation of the university, and devalue the credential from UALR, continuing the cycle of mediocrity to its inevitable end.

We are letting American higher ed crash.

[apostrophe]

University of Arkansas at Little Rock is now looking at cutting and eliminating various programs.  Among the proposed cuts, performing arts, any foreign languages besides Spanish, and several engineering programs that haven't been doing too well at UALR.  And the usual reductions to English, History, etc.



https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2020/mar/31/ualr-looks-at-academic-program-cuts-202-1/

Some of those majors that are proposed to be cut, require talent, prepared academic backgrounds, tenacity, and hard work from students. That's often why numbers are low in those majors. Sadly that can leave a university with a majority of programs that are fluff, and a student population, the majority of whom have no talent, are unprepared academically, can't stick with anything, and think hard work is reading 20 pages a day. This will lower the overall reputation of the university, and devalue the credential from UALR, continuing the cycle of mediocrity to its inevitable end.

We are letting American higher ed crash.

That is a painful lists of cuts and reductions.