Reaching For the Seminal Moment

For most of my professional career, I have believed that institutions, more or less, happen upon a seminal moment in their evolution.  Indeed, when approached about consulting or management opportunities I typically first begin by looking at some combination of ethos, culture, board and management leadership, and cold, hard numbers to determine the possible.  It all very much depends, of course, on whether pledges made about system change are kept by the parties who made them.

Recently, my attitude has shifted.  I have come to recognize that seminal moments fall more ordinarily into two fairly distinctive categories.

The first is that which is foisted upon an institution. It may be crisis precipitated by a regional accreditation review, a change in leadership, admission or advancement numbers that tank, or public relations disasters, large and sometimes small.  Every action causes a reaction and from bad institutional moments good policy can emerge.  In the end, it’s an outcome likely from recent debacles at fine institutions like Penn State and the University of Virginia.  The right leadership in shared governance and a sense of common purpose create a will of the committed to produce positive change.  Or, at least, we hope so.

The second category is more nuanced.  In this example, much of the preliminary work occurs behind the scenes.  It also builds across leadership changes and relies heavily upon the work of dedicated middle management, faculty, and a progressive, prudent, action and outcomes-oriented board of trustees who view themselves as stewards whose job it is to create defined inflection points in institutional history.  They understand the history and tradition, the level of competition, the centrality of the academic program, and the technology tsunami sweeping over higher education.

Most important, perhaps, is that boards of trustees appreciate what they do not know.

Continue reading

Putting Strategy, Ambition and Guts Back into College Fundraising

One of the tired adages about American higher education is that the role of the university president is “to live in a big house and travel the world with a tin cup in one’s hand.” The commentary on the implosion of Gordon Gee at Ohio State University this week picks up on this theme to embellish the image of president as chief supplicant.The role of the president has changed dramatically in the past twenty years. Fundraising is more important because the stakes are higher, the competition has intensified, and traditional revenue streams are tapped out or drying up.

In a sense, the image corresponds to the reality faced by many presidents, at least in a superficial way. At the same time, however, public perception confuses the philosophy, intent and approach.

Some presidents are rotten fundraisers. They avoid the task, delegate it to their advancement officers, and never get past the perception that fundraising somehow diminishes their commitment to the academy from which many of them came.

Continue reading

Herein Lies Yet Another Route to Madness

Here is another item from Futility Closet (http://www.futilitycloset.com/), re-posted with the permission of Greg Ross.

*************************

It was British wordplay expert Leigh Mercer who coined the classic palindrome “A man, a plan, a canal—Panama” in Note & Queries on Nov. 13, 1948. He later said that he’d had the middle portion, PLAN A CANAL P, for a year before he saw that PANAMA fit.

Mercer published 100 palindromes in N&Q between 1946 and 1953. Here is a brief selection: Continue reading

The New Rules of Engagement

Many college and university boards of trustees operate in a shockingly inefficient and counterproductive way. They are often an impediment to change and bastions of tradition, old boy networks, outdated practice and alumni parochialism. At other times, they may be testing grounds for new business models, consumer fads, or the will of the dominant trustees. Contemporary college and university boards are seldom nimble, forward-looking and entrepreneurial.
 
This puts the president and senior staff in a genuine dilemma. How do you respond best as the institutional CEO without facing  unnecessary political intrigue, idiosyncratic whim, and confusing rules of governance?
 
Boards must be held more accountable, especially to themselves. They must refocus their energies on setting policy, financial stewardship, and crafting a climate for the administration to succeed by re-imagining who they are and how they relate as a board within a shared governance structure. In doing so, boards must seek new rules of engagement. The ability of the college or university that they serve to respond to the shifting dynamics within higher education will depend upon it.
 
For more detailed information on this topic please refer to this article in the May/June issue of Academe found here  http://www.aaup.org/article/new-rules-engagement
 
 

First Vedder and Now This

I have been a faculty member at Wright State University since 1990. It has generally been a very nice place to work. Our AAUP chapter/bargaining unit has been a strong one almost since its establishment, and although we have not always regarded our administration’s decision-making as enlightened, the truth is that, especially in this corporatized era and in comparison to the administrations at other public universities even within Ohio, our administration has generally tried to do what is best for our institution and to treat our faculty and staff fairly and respectfully. As a result, the university has succeeded in improving its academic reputation while remaining one of several “open-enrollment” institutions in Ohio. Programs across the seven undergraduate colleges have achieved regional and even some national recognitions, and the university now ranks third among Ohio’s public universities in terms of total research dollars generated, trailing only the Ohio State University and the University of Cincinnati. We do not do well, however, in most national rankings because our continued open-enrollment mission skews a number of statistics, in particular graduation rates. But, among students with G.P.A.’s sufficient to be admitted into degree programs, our graduation rates are actually somewhat higher than those at most public universities. And the university is making intensified efforts to insure that students who are underprepared receive academic assistance and placement that will increase their chances of academic success. All this has occurred while our tuition has remained among the lowest in the state.

If this sounds as if I am presenting a shameless advertisement for my institution, I can justify that effort as something of a salvage mission. Continue reading

Faculty Members on Boards of Trustees

The new issue of Academe takes a look at all aspects of governing boards. There are individual perspectives and individual institutions that get examined, but also a broader, quantitative look at how faculty participate on boards.

In 2011-2012, researchers at the Cornell Higher Education Research Institute (CHERI) did a survey of faculty members who serve on boards of trustees. Including faculty on boards is often cited as a “best practice” for improved board-faculty relations, so this research is an important way to find out not only to find out how widespread this practice is, but also what effects it is having where faculty are included. Three of the people involved in that research – a professor, a grad student, and an undergrad – wrote about the study for Academe.

It’s a great source of information on a lot of different questions you could ask about boards: Which committees have the highest rates of faculty involvement? Which have the least? Which committees are faculty generally allowed to sit on, but not chair? In what areas do faculty think they have the most influence? Take a look at the full article for the answers to these and more questions.

Odd Library Subject Headings

The following item is another one from Futility Closet (http://www.futilitycloset.com/). It is re-posted here with the permission of Greg Ross, who maintains the site. You can have daily updates delivered to your e-mail each morning.

*************************

When PLAFSEP magazine asked its readers to nominate the silliest library subject heading, the hands-down winner was “Buttocks (In Religion, Folk-Lore, Etc.).”

Other highlights, gathered by columnist John R. Likins:

That’s from Likins’ article “Subject Headings, Silly, American–20th Century–Complications and Sequelae–Addresses, Essays, Lectures,” in Technical Services Quarterly, vol. 2, no. 1/2, Fall/Winter 1984, using data from the Library of Congress and Cataloging in Publication.

American Giant Checkered Rabbit
Bankruptcy–Popular Works
Catastrophical, The, See Also Comic, The
Child Abuse–Study And Teaching
Contango and Backwardation
Dentists In Art
Fantastic Television Programs
Food, Junk
Ghosts–Pictorial Works
God–Addresses, Essays, Lectures
Hemorrhoids–Popular Works Continue reading

Pathways at CUNY

 Recently, the administration of the City University of New York proposed a series of academic changes to the school, grouping these changes together under the name “Pathways.” The system would make it easier for students to transfer between CUNY schools, and it would have looser graduation requirements. This proposal and the faculty opposition to it are the focus of an article in the May-June issue of Academe.

Sandi Cooper, a professor in the CUNY system who has been closely involved with the system’s faculty senate, writes about the Pathways proposal and how problems with the board of trustees led directly to this controversial plan. In some ways, the proposal (or something similar) is the result of years of slow acquisition of power by the trustees, and away from academic schools, departments, and professors. In one example of misplaced institutional priorities, the president of the student government is given a voting seat on the board of trustees, but the president of the faculty sits on the board without a vote.

Of course, the whole story is just one case study of one specific board; the new issue of Academe features several articles on the topic of faculty boards. Click here to read Sandi Cooper’s article, “The Road to Pathways,” and click here to see the whole issue.

Linking Diversity to Work Force Needs

Despite the evolving interpretation offered by state and federal courts, American higher education as a community remains committed in its support to increase diversity among students.

At the same time, however, our colleges and universities largely fail to link diversity initiatives to specific workforce needs. This tendency often applies philosophically to all students enrolled, fueled in part by a belief that the responsibility for higher education institutions writ large is to educate broadly.

There are wonderful programs and support groups to promote and support diversity, of course, measured by gender, race, sexual preference, and socioeconomic income. The report of the Ford Foundation-funded Century Foundation released this week speaks compellingly to the role and problems facing American community colleges in these areas. It cites outstanding programs from the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation and the Edvance Foundation, where I serve as CEO and a director, to illustrate efforts underway that demonstrate fresh thinking.

Continue reading

CUNY Pathways: No Faculty Support

Barbara Bowen, President of the Professional Staff Congress, the faculty union of the City University of New York (CUNY), sent this message to union members yesterday:

Dear Colleague:

The results of the referendum of No Confidence in Pathways are in: 92% voted No Confidence in Pathways. The vote is a stunning rebuke to the Pathways curriculum and the coercive measures used to impose it.

More than 60% of the 7,202 eligible voters in the referendum among full-time faculty voted—a remarkable rate of participation. A total of 4,322 votes were cast: 3,996 agreeing with the statement of No Confidence in Pathways, and only 323 disagreeing (there were 3 void ballots). The high percentage and high turnout mean that an absolute majority of the full-time faculty has expressed No Confidence in the University’s basic curriculum.

It should be clear now, if it was not before, that CUNY should not move forward with Pathways. A 92% vote of No Confidence is a mandate for change. With a new interim chancellor about to take office, and Chair of the Board Benno Schmidt’s term soon to expire, the moment is right to repeal and rethink Pathways. The result of the referendum empowers us at a critical moment.

Thank you to everyone who voted in the referendum, whatever position you took. Every vote was important. And thank you especially to the hundreds of full-time faculty, part-time faculty and professional staff who worked in support.  Together, we held thousands of conversations, person-to-person, about the future of the University. The connections we made with each other will be important as we continue to press for academic quality for our students and fair working conditions for ourselves.

Continue reading