Which colleges will survive?

[nebo113]

https://www.npr.org/2020/04/20/833254570/college-brace-for-financial-trouble-and-a-big-question-will-they-reopen-in-fall

[polly_mer]

Is this really news to anyone in higher ed?

There's a reason we have the long-running Dire Financial Straits thread on the CHE fora and now here.

Anyone who is surprised has purposely not been paying attention for at least a decade.

[nebo113]

Is this really news to anyone in higher ed?

There's a reason we have the long-running Dire Financial Straits thread on the CHE fora and now here.

Anyone who is surprised has purposely not been paying attention for at least a decade.

Sorry, Polly.  Will check the other thread.

[polly_mer]

It's a good article for those who need an introduction.  However, I remain frustrated that faculty members exist who still don't know these basics that weren't new in 2008.

The current situation is accelerating demise of institutions that were circling the drain, but it is merely an acceleration, not a change in the underlying factors.

This is the equivalent of "water is wet and people drown when they breathe it" level of "news" with recent examples.

[downer]

There is the added vector of how states are going to fund state colleges during a recession. Hopefully higher education will be a priority for states, and maybe the federal govt will do more to support higher education that it deems essential.

[marshwiggle]

It's a good article for those who need an introduction.  However, I remain frustrated that faculty members exist who still don't know these basics that weren't new in 2008.

The current situation is accelerating demise of institutions that were circling the drain, but it is merely an acceleration, not a change in the underlying factors.

This is the equivalent of "water is wet and people drown when they breathe it" level of "news" with recent examples.

And here is what I posted in another thread:

A Tale of 5 Hgih Schools (true story)

A small city has 5 high schools, owing partly to the city being created by amalgamation of smaller cities decades ago. Due to declining enrollments, among other things, all of these schools are relatively small; around 1000 students or less. Teacher salaries are good, and the schools are decently maintained. A while ago, the school board proposed closing one or more schools in order to consolidate. This is for a few reasons:

• These schools have fewer course and program offerings than the bigger schools in nearby cities.
• These schools have fewer extracurricular activities than the bigger schools in nearby cities.

In addition to having fewer extracurriculars, because of the smaller student pool then the quality tends to be lower as well; a team drawing from 2000 students is likely to be stronger than a team drawing from 1000 students.

Many parents fought the proposal of amalgamation. Some of the high schools students themselves supported it.
Funding is not the problem. The provincial government allocates the same amount per student everywhere, so there aren't "rich" schools and "poor" schools. The board does the same. But the economies of scale cannot be avoided. The cost of a principal and a vice-principal divided among 2000 students is lower than divided among 1000 students. Similarly, the size and amount of mainatenance required for a soccer or football field is the same, whether it's for 1000 students or 2000 students.

In addition to this there are new subdivisions in part of the city, where student numbers are growing, and parents would like a school for their kids, but instead their kids are bused to the other schools to slow the decline there.

There are no villains in this story, but the experience the students have in these smaller schools cannot be what it would be if one or two were closed so they could amalagmate. If none of these schools existed now, the board wouldn't set things up this way.

Hanging on to the status quo means *"preserving" a system which provides an experience for the students that is less than it could be.

Is it worth it?

(*When those schools were created, they fit their communities, so the experience students had then was better. So the experience now is a shadow of what it was, so it's more a case of "preserving" the fantasy of what it was.)

So even when the situation isn't desperate, keeping a whole bunch of places alive precludes the possibility of a smaller number being able to thrive.

[mahagonny]

I'm picturing the state university being saved because it's already the state's baby and the president we've had for several years is into expanding, big time. Fair or not, it's too big to fail. Think of CVS where there used to be the neighborhood family run pharmacy. So far they're saying fall semester will be close to normal but I'll believe it when I see it.

[downer]

Are states already committed to funding state colleges for the fall? I guess even if they are, they might not if they don't have the money.

[Caracal]

Are states already committed to funding state colleges for the fall? I guess even if they are, they might not if they don't have the money.

I'm confused by this discussion. Obviously there are huge issues, but in the broader sense, states aren't simply going to stop funding their university systems. The political and economic blowback would be huge. Cuts, massive reorganizing, closing of some campuses? I wouldn't rule things like that out, but no state is just going to shut down colleges. The other part of this is that it is very likely states are going to get big influxes of money from the federal government. How much money and how much of that goes to education are big unknowns, but it basically has to happen if you're going to avoid a huge deflationary spiral.

[downer]

Are states already committed to funding state colleges for the fall? I guess even if they are, they might not if they don't have the money.

I'm confused by this discussion. Obviously there are huge issues, but in the broader sense, states aren't simply going to stop funding their university systems. The political and economic blowback would be huge. Cuts, massive reorganizing, closing of some campuses? I wouldn't rule things like that out, but no state is just going to shut down colleges. The other part of this is that it is very likely states are going to get big influxes of money from the federal government. How much money and how much of that goes to education are big unknowns, but it basically has to happen if you're going to avoid a huge deflationary spiral.

Sorry, you are right. I was not thinking of complete closings, but more drastic cuts of funding, and possible consolidation of different state colleges. My local community college has 3 campuses. It might be harder to justify keeping them all open if all teaching is online.

[apl68]

Fear of protests from regional constituents will probably make shutting state campuses down altogether very much a last resort.  It's more likely that some will be downsized and downgraded to a lower tier of service.  The pressure to do so will be especially strong in states like Vermont where state campuses are thick on the ground. 

As for small, marginal private colleges, we're surely going to see an acceleration of closures there.  It's just a question of by how much.  The colleges best positioned to survive will presumably be the really rich, well-known SLACs and those small schools that still serve a strong niche--some HCBUs, religiously-affiliated schools that still serve that mission (and aren't associated with denominations that have undergone a demographic collapse), and a few places with strong specialized programs that are still in demand.

[polly_mer]

Are states already committed to funding state colleges for the fall? I guess even if they are, they might not if they don't have the money.

I'm confused by this discussion. Obviously there are huge issues, but in the broader sense, states aren't simply going to stop funding their university systems. The political and economic blowback would be huge. Cuts, massive reorganizing, closing of some campuses? I wouldn't rule things like that out, but no state is just going to shut down colleges. The other part of this is that it is very likely states are going to get big influxes of money from the federal government. How much money and how much of that goes to education are big unknowns, but it basically has to happen if you're going to avoid a huge deflationary spiral.

It's true that states aren't likely to go all the way down to zero, but many states are already only funding a small portion of their public higher ed.  In 2019, only 4.5 percent of CU Boulder's budget came from state funding, while it was 72.2 percent in 2007.

The current situation in Vermont with the proposed closing of 3 of 4 campuses in the system and still leaving a big gap in funding is an extreme case, but not the only one.

Higher ed is usually one of the few pots of discretionary money available to balance the state budget: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/13/public-colleges-face-looming-financial-blow-state-budget-cuts

For the readers in the audience, the assertions in the quoted text are out-of-step with what the online public discussions are among people who know the detailed nuts and bolts of higher ed funding, even before the shutdown occurred.  The assertions read more like wishes and hopes than conclusions drawn from the known data that includes how few states rebounded to their pre-2008 levels of funding of higher ed.  One of the recurring themes about why tuition and fees keep rising faster than inflation is the greatly-reduced state funding of higher ed.

For those who don't know, some state flagships are not R1s and indeed there are no R1 institutions in the entire state (Wyoming comes immediately to mind).  Changing what is offered for the smaller schools may mean what's left bears little resemblance to what most people are picturing as a college, which has significant implications for faculty and other university/college jobs in that state.  Nope, probably won't close literally all the higher ed institutions, but might consolidate in some of the smaller states to a bare handful.

Anyone else remember the Alaska system discussion from last summer with proposed cuts of 40% of the state's funding to higher ed?  Any bets on how long before the voted down consolidation decision is revisited to better use the limited funding available?

[downer]

Can state colleges increase student fees for this fall? Or is the fee level fixed for the coming academic year?

[polly_mer]

Can state colleges increase student fees for this fall? Or is the fee level fixed for the coming academic year?

Depends on the state, what their deadlines are, and who gets to make the decision.

Whether increased student fees is a good idea depends on a whole host of other factors, including whether students will opt for online and still want to pay increased fees instead of perhaps filing lawsuits or taking some time off.

[mahagonny]

Are states already committed to funding state colleges for the fall? I guess even if they are, they might not if they don't have the money.

I'm confused by this discussion. Obviously there are huge issues, but in the broader sense, states aren't simply going to stop funding their university systems. The political and economic blowback would be huge. Cuts, massive reorganizing, closing of some campuses? I wouldn't rule things like that out, but no state is just going to shut down colleges. The other part of this is that it is very likely states are going to get big influxes of money from the federal government. How much money and how much of that goes to education are big unknowns, but it basically has to happen if you're going to avoid a huge deflationary spiral.

It's true that states aren't likely to go all the way down to zero, but many states are already only funding a small portion of their public higher ed.  In 2019, only 4.5 percent of CU Boulder's budget came from state funding, while it was 72.2 percent in 2007.

The current situation in Vermont with the proposed closing of 3 of 4 campuses in the system and still leaving a big gap in funding is an extreme case, but not the only one.

Higher ed is usually one of the few pots of discretionary money available to balance the state budget: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2020/04/13/public-colleges-face-looming-financial-blow-state-budget-cuts

For the readers in the audience, the assertions in the quoted text are out-of-step with what the online public discussions are among people who know the detailed nuts and bolts of higher ed funding, even before the shutdown occurred.  The assertions read more like wishes and hopes than conclusions drawn from the known data that includes how few states rebounded to their pre-2008 levels of funding of higher ed.  One of the recurring themes about why tuition and fees keep rising faster than inflation is the greatly-reduced state funding of higher ed.

For those who don't know, some state flagships are not R1s and indeed there are no R1 institutions in the entire state (Wyoming comes immediately to mind).  Changing what is offered for the smaller schools may mean what's left bears little resemblance to what most people are picturing as a college, which has significant implications for faculty and other university/college jobs in that state.  Nope, probably won't close literally all the higher ed institutions, but might consolidate in some of the smaller states to a bare handful.

Anyone else remember the Alaska system discussion from last summer with proposed cuts of 40% of the state's funding to higher ed?  Any bets on how long before the voted down consolidation decision is revisited to better use the limited funding available?

But you still haven't answered the question in the thread title! C'mon, don't hold out on us.