Covid-19 Response: Evidence of How Higher Ed Can Be Completely Restructured?

[spork]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

[Caracal]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

I think they are honoring the scholarships, actually.

[onthefringe]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

I think they are honoring the scholarships, actually.

FAQ page seems to indicate they are honoring the scholarships for one year for incoming students, but not for continuing students

" the current financial situation does not allow the University to be able to continue to offer and provide athletics scholarships to current student athletes in the sports"

" the University is required to provide the agreed upon scholarship to the incoming student athletes"

[jimbogumbo]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

spork: there is 0% probability that the $4.4 million cited is accurate. My university did the same same thing several years ago and reported a $400,000 yearly savings. Even that figure was inflated. And, indeed the student athletes' scholarships were honored.

[spork]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

spork: there is 0% probability that the $4.4 million cited is accurate. My university did the same same thing several years ago and reported a $400,000 yearly savings. Even that figure was inflated. And, indeed the student athletes' scholarships were honored.

What do you think Akron is spending annually on athletics, if it's not ~ $19.1 million? And what how much of that would be saved with the elimination of men's cross country, men's golf, and women's tennis, in terms of staff salaries and benefits, administrative costs, and scholarships?

[Caracal]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

I think they are honoring the scholarships, actually.

FAQ page seems to indicate they are honoring the scholarships for one year for incoming students, but not for continuing students

" the current financial situation does not allow the University to be able to continue to offer and provide athletics scholarships to current student athletes in the sports"

" the University is required to provide the agreed upon scholarship to the incoming student athletes"

Oh, apologies, I think I saw something different for another school?

[jimbogumbo]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.

https://gozips.com/news/2020/5/14/general-redesigning-the-univeristy-of-akron-athletics-update.aspx

A total of 32 students are affected by the loss of athletics scholarships.

The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

spork: there is 0% probability that the $4.4 million cited is accurate. My university did the same same thing several years ago and reported a $400,000 yearly savings. Even that figure was inflated. And, indeed the student athletes' scholarships were honored.

What do you think Akron is spending annually on athletics, if it's not ~ $19.1 million? And what how much of that would be saved with the elimination of men's cross country, men's golf, and women's tennis, in terms of staff salaries and benefits, administrative costs, and scholarships?

I don't doubt Akron is spending way too much on athletics. I think virtually every D-1 program is, mine included.

What I'm saying is those are the programs that cost the least, in every way. Less travel cost, less in coaches' salaries, small number of athletes, and nothing in facility maintenance.

The savings cost is inflated with the intent of  making the administration look good as it cuts academic programs, and Akron is cutting a bunch.

[mamselle]

Having been raised in Ohio, and done my B.A. at OSU, I'm wondering when they're going to start dismantling the big football machine.

(Probably never.)

I heard at one point that the claim it supported the rest of the campus was backwards from the balance sheet side: it created a lot of interest and gave kids with some athletic ability a path towards more education (not saying what level that was at...I had my doubts...many seemed to do Business degrees and those degrees seemed fudged to those of us whose department building (that had finally moved out of the former laundry building into a refurbished museum building) was next to the spiffy, shiny new Business school building...certain connections were suspected, there...) but the sports program actually cost the university more than it brought in, even after alumni donations (mostly earmarked, some made to specific students in-kind) were considered.

So...pardon my cynicism.

I don't recall Akron having a notable football program--to their credit, in my mind.

M. 

[spork]

[. . . ]

The savings cost is inflated with the intent of  making the administration look good as it cuts academic programs, and Akron is cutting a bunch.

We are definitely in agreement about what is going on at Akron. And at other Ohio universities. I'm reminded of the recent discussion about unbundling on an another thread:

[. . . ]

The problem with bundling is that is allows the decisions makers to impose a subsidy for their pet rpojects on everyone.  Cable bundles would include a few popular channels plus a whole bunch of really niche things. Libertarians oppose all kionds of taxes for this reason. At least with governements, if they spend money on programs most people think are frivilous voters can boot them out of office. However in an institution, students get no such say over what their bundled fees subsidize. The employees who make those choices are untouchable.

[. . .]

Similarly, universities across the world operate quite well without internally-funded athletic programs. The USA is the outlier, with the majority of money spent on intercollegiate athletics acting as a subsidy for monopolistic professional sports leagues formed of teams owned by billionaires.

I wonder if now is the time when prospective students and their parents are finally asking themselves "What is the better value, the university where the football and basketball coaching staff collectively gets paid $15 million per year, or the university where the equivalent amount of  money is spent on academic programs?"

[Cheerful]

On the subject of universities (partially) getting out of the leisure/recreation business:

Leisure/recreation business is spot on!

University of Akron is eliminating men's cross country, men's golf and women's tennis teams, which will save $4.4 million or slightly less than 25 percent of the money spent on athletics.
...
The numbers here are totally insane. $4.4 million spent per year on activities that 32 students participate in when the total enrollment is ~ 25,000 students. And Akron is still funding 17 other athletic programs.

32 students participating is probably right.  Have you seen student attendance at higher ed leisure/recreation events?  In many cases, it's just a few, if any, watching the "studentathletes."  Even football and basketball at some U's have few spectators.

[polly_mer]

I wonder if now is the time when prospective students and their parents are finally asking themselves "What is the better value, the university where the football and basketball coaching staff collectively gets paid $15 million per year, or the university where the equivalent amount of  money is spent on academic programs?"

$15M is more than the whole budget of a college like Super Dinky.

The question I see more people asking is what are we getting for the money and is it really worth it?

[Wahoo Redux]

A number of our adjuncts may be given the kiss-off.  We have one retirement this summer and at least one more on the horizon next spring.  As would be expected, no new hires have even been talked about. 

Union negotiators claim that admin is trying to use the crisis as an excuse to attenuate the next 3 year contract----but the union is always excitable and combative, and the admin is always crying poverty during negotiations.  These days it is, let's say, a little easier to believe the poverty angle (both president and provost took voluntary pay cuts without a lot of obvious appreciation from faculty)

Long and short, it looks like we are going to be a much leaner animal after this is all over with a great many more faculty teaching lower div.

[bento]

Are any universities taking a hard look at the need for so much mid- and upper-level administration?

My U is not.  Cuts are being visited on adjuncts, office staff, department operating budgets, anything but administrative lines. And we are one of the most top-heavy, over-administered universities in the nation.  (This was pointed out clearly by an auditing firm we hired, and subsequently ignored.)

[polly_mer]

Are any universities taking a hard look at the need for so much mid- and upper-level administration?

My U is not.  Cuts are being visited on adjuncts, office staff, department operating budgets, anything but administrative lines. And we are one of the most top-heavy, over-administered universities in the nation.  (This was pointed out clearly by an auditing firm we hired, and subsequently ignored.)

"Need" for administration is harder to define for most institutions than projecting enrollment and cutting contingent (or even TT/T) faculty down to the calculated need.  When the enrollment is higher than expected, hiring excellent replacement faculty in many fields is a matter of picking up the phone and saying, "Would you like a job for the next/current term?"

It's inefficient to use faculty and low-level administrators to do the tasks of office staff, but it's straightforward to have those competent people pick up many of the day-to-day tasks that are individually necessary (e.g., I've watched the provost make copies for his meeting in an hour).  Having students do much of their own data entry for registration-related/financial-aid tasks means fewer people are needed as basic clerks elsewhere in the institution.  Hiring fantastic office staff is hard.  Hiring competent enough people to take over day-to-day tasks is again fairly easy and little more than submitting a job ad this week and making calls next week.

However, hiring experienced, knowledgeable, good mid- and upper-level administration on short notice is a much harder task.  Most institutions will not have a recent audit indicating where they can just cut administrative lines and be OK.  Mid-level administration is usually where the institutional excess capacity resides that can be redeployed to keep abreast of an evolving situation, run scenarios, and have the bazillion discussions with peers at other institutions doing the same thing to come up with plans and decisions.

It's true the institution probably doesn't really need an assistant to the associate dean for fun, games, and toys as a general matter.  However, if the institution only has exactly enough people to do the day-to-day running of the institution along with a president, provost, CFO, and VP of enrollment/financial aid to do the longer-term strategy, then there isn't any slack to stand up an ad hoc Covid Institutional Response Committee (CIRC) to get a workable plan in place in a timely manner. 

It's true that we couldn't have predicted this Covid situation 10 years ago.  However, most institutions will deal with unforeseen-in-the-details situations frequently enough that they need the extra capacity to be able to stand up extra committees and have people working nearly full-time on those committees who can safely not do their normal job for weeks/months.

In the situation of too few mid-level administrators who can safely be redeployed, the institution ends up with a "plan" of

All faculty here have been directed to submit, through their departments, a plan for the fall semester that includes explanations of how we are going to:

• Maintain 6' separation between all students and the instructor in classrooms with a seating capacity of, for example, 35 students, in courses that already have 35 students registered.
• Teach all courses on campus and online, simultaneously, to accommodate students who become ill or who have pre-existing health conditions.
• Run all courses 100% online if the campus needs to be emptied out after the semester begins.

All full- and part-time faculty members have been given three days to submit this information.

At competent places, the CIRC will have dealt with the spacing for classrooms and labs by discussion with relevant parties to double/triple check a good plan developed in conjunction with peers.  For example, my non-academic employer has changed the configurations of all rooms other than personal offices to make 6' distancing easy on everyone.  Academic institutions can do something similar since many people use most rooms over the course of an operational week.

At competent places, the CIRC would again have been abreast of the ongoing public discussions of pros/cons/logistics of alternative instruction delivery, including the possibility of transitioning during the term, and then presented locally feasible options to departments to discuss and send back their decisions if the plan includes any decisions.  Competent administrations do not expect individual faculty members to figure it all out on their own.

Delegating everything to individual faculty on short notice in areas where the faculty will not be experts or even necessarily up on the current-as-of-last-month best practices is a failure of administration on many levels.  Choosing wrong as a CIRC based on incomplete information is possible, but choosing to let the faculty individually just sort out a plan that has to be coordinated across the institution is going to go wrong enough that all experienced administrators should know that's not anywhere near the top 10 ways to get a workable plan.

[Cheerful]

Are any universities taking a hard look at the need for so much mid- and upper-level administration?

My U is not.  Cuts are being visited on adjuncts, office staff, department operating budgets, anything but administrative lines. And we are one of the most top-heavy, over-administered universities in the nation.  (This was pointed out clearly by an auditing firm we hired, and subsequently ignored.)

+1