Search News


Browse Archives

News

Hazard or Opportunity?

June 23, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

WASHINGTON -- The thesis behind a meeting of educators and policy makers here Monday was that higher education is facing a crisis and that if its leaders fail to respond adequately, the consequences will be significant for colleges and the country. That's a theme that many critics and an increasing number of supporters of higher education have hit in recent years, from the Spellings Commission to a collection of foundations and advocacy groups, including the sponsors of Monday's meeting: Jobs for the Future, the Lumina Foundation for Education, and Education Sector.

While some postsecondary experts balk at the story line, Monday's meeting put a persuasive twist on it by framing higher education's situation in the context of other industries that have been faced with similar technological and other pressures and have responded, on balance, not so well.

Those in attendance spent the morning hearing experts from fields such as journalism (Alan Mutter) and health care (Joanne Lynn) that have themselves been buffeted by transformative changes, and those presentations left at least some of the participants thinking that, as one put it, "higher education is in many ways better off" than the other industries, given that demand for its product remains high and funding for it remains solid, if not as plentiful as many college leaders might wish.

But looking good compared to the newspaper business (which is widely seen as being in freefall, desperately searching for new business models) and health care (which is absorbing an increasingly unsustainable portion of the United States' gross national product) shouldn't make people in higher education feel especially sanguine. The afternoon's discussion focused on the ways in which college leaders have or haven't responded to the array of technological, demographic and budgetary changes that are combining to increase the pressure on colleges and universities to perform.

As is often the case at such events, those in attendance heard mostly from those who believe that higher education must change and who have sought to respond aggressively. Eric D. Fingerhut, who as chancellor of the Ohio Board of Regents has led his state's efforts to impose greater efficiency and centralized control on a group of public institutions that had, like those in many states, operated largely as free agents, made it clear that the "crisis" Ohioans face is not the recession of the last year but the larger and longer-unfolding "transition of the economy of the industrial Midwest."

That enormous challenge, Fingerhut said, is "why I want to grab our leaders by the lapels and say, 'Don't you see what's going on around here?'.... The fact is that the ability of future generations of this state to sustain our commitment to a vibrant system of higher education is very much at risk."

While Fingerhut discussed some of the ways his state, under Gov. Ted Strickland, has sought to transform its public higher education system, Paul J. LeBlanc described steps he has taken in six years as president of Southern New Hampshire University (a private institution with a public college name) to make the institution much more responsive to the needs of its students -- and not by building climbing walls.

LeBlanc, who said he believed a decade's worth of boom times in higher education enrollments, endowments and other indicators had "masked" emerging turmoil, described both curricular innovations (a three-year degree, lower-cost satellite campuses) and back-office changes, the latter -- but not the former, LeBlanc said pointedly -- closely modeled on for-profit colleges. "We're tearing up the page in how we do a lot of things operationally," he said, "and all of our benchmarking is on the for-profit side." The university has cut the time it takes to process an online student's financial aid application to 40 days from 90, and expects to drop it to 7 within a year.

"It's appalling how little genuine innovation has gone on in higher education," LeBlanc said, noting that it "took us 25 years to get the overhead projector from the bowling alley to the classroom" decades ago. Asked what he saw as the primary impediment to innovation, LeBlanc cited faculty governance (Best line of the day: He attributed to the president of another New England university the description of a faculty as "a thousand points of No"). But he also said Southern New Hampshire had been able to make the changes it had because of a "set of faculty champions who've come on board."

Eduardo J. Padron, president of Miami Dade College, agreed with Fingerhut that institutional self-interest impeded public higher education's progress and with LeBlanc that the lack of innovation was a problem. But at some point a lack of resources matters, too, he said, especially in a state like Florida that depends on sales tax to fund its government operations. "When the economy's in bad shape, we have the least money for the institutions that are in the best position to strengthen the economy," he said.

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Hazard or Opportunity?

  • It is a K-16 pool, and the lines are blurred
  • Posted by Joe Beckmann , Development/Planning at Somerville Schools/Hispanic Office of Planning, et.al. on June 23, 2009 at 7:15am EDT
  • When K-12 systems wring their hands at dropout problems and then ignore their surprisingly high rate of graduates with remedial, extra years in community colleges and universities, and when neither colleges nor schools acknowledge each others' mutual problems, they hide the mutual gravity of their condition. We know, for example, that retention in grade is a 30% predictor of dropping out; that poor attendance in grades 7 and 8, combined with a poor performance in at least one class, is a 90% predictor. But those are just the predictors at k-12. When colleges stretch out their enrollment with remedial courses, they cost their lowest income students thousands of dollars and years in school. While that may not be their "fault" it is most surely their responsibility to work with the high schools who produce those outcomes (and incoming students). And they don't.

    Historically, k-12 problems are a blame-game, but the colleges will bear the brunt of that game if they don't come on board. And the general economy will feel that effect relatively quickly, in a much slower and much less universal recovery. That's particularly true in higher ed states and regions like Boston, where students will soon discover that college admissions is a revolving door with high and un-reimbursed fees for failure no one even knew, on either side of that door.

  • Did faculty request climbing walls?
  • Posted by Janine C Hartman , Professor of History,Dept of Romance Languages and Literatures at University of Cincinnati on June 23, 2009 at 10:15am EDT
  • Sociologists of academe have documented the tendency of administration and faculty to blame one another for institutional inertia ( "a thousand points of NO") . In times of disorder, that reflex is a costly distraction. Student fun items like climbing walls, and diversion of University assets and form into business adventures may reflect the cultural signature of a national polity dominated by free market metaphor, and no sense of history. They have jeopardised the future and malformed the reputation of higher education.

    This article needs to go further--linking the full texts of the speakers' remarks would help. More professors now are adjuncts, not entrenched in Ivy League chairs. Most students are improvising their time management and finance. We should investigate that reality. The system is fragile on both ends, and will be until it resets.

    Journalism and health care were fields equally distracted by an excessive profits model in the 1990s, undermining a reservoir of public good will that would help now. News was about splashy sensation, not accurate reporting, health served insurance and pharmaceutical interests, not patients. They, and universities, may share a public image that profit, surface reputation ("brand name") and ascendancy matter more to them than the general good. That will only be redressed by honest, mutual efforts, among people who care about the goals of truth,health and education.

  • Re: climbing walls
  • Posted by Jim on June 23, 2009 at 2:45pm EDT
  • I think students requested climbing walls and the other activities now provided to them on campus by voting with their feet and their pocketbooks. (Students are the folks your grad students are interacting with. They are the ones who enable you to be paid to study historical topics on the company dime.)

    As far as I can tell, faculty's standing request is to be left alone. It's irritating when students get in the way.

  • 3-Year degree programs - cost saving innovation
  • Posted by Robert Seidman , Professor at Southern New Hampshire University on June 24, 2009 at 6:00pm EDT
  • President LeBlanc mentions innovative 3-year programs.

    His university completely redesigned its 4-year business administration major so that it could be delivered in six semesters instead of eight. No summer-school or inter-sessions are needed. This competency and outcomes-based 120 credit honors program has proven to be very attractive especially since it lowers the cost of a university education by 25%. This is a model that can be applied to almost any program/major. See:

    Highly Successful 3-Year Degree Program Graduates 10th Class in May 2009 http://amps-tools.mit.edu/tomprofblog/archives/2009/05/947_highly_succ.html

  • Cultural Shift?
  • Posted by Dr. F. Gump on June 24, 2009 at 6:00pm EDT
  • Perhaps our students are sending us all a message, a message that two and three career families are destroying individuals' motivation for moving up, self-improvement, or getting ahead?

    As the students see and tell of adult's (emperor's) lack of clothing or in this case, lack of a solid foundation, we should pay heed. The young are better at straight talk; better at avoiding politics. They don't know a bubble from a pyramid, but the are quite honest about what they see happening in our culture.

    Perhaps Gonzo Capitalism has just worn everyone out and nobody sees it or will admit it, except the young?