Academics Under Siege

Stanley Fish thinks that a corner has been turned and there is no going back on public anmus for academia. Interesting how this plays out, in light of this being the first time in history when both the American president and vice-president and both their spouses are academics. (Which he does not mention.)

But I fear that no defense of academic practices, however nuanced and moderate, will be successful because, on the evidence of the comments, the anti-academic animus that depresses Thomas Zaslavsky is deep and pervasive. There is a general sense that academics have cushy jobs they don’t even perform, that they inhabit a wonderland of “privileged sleaze” and display an “overweening sense of entitlement” (Victor Edwards). dan1138 speaks for many when he proclaims, “We simply don’t need a cosseted privileged class able to demand lifetime job security in exchange for some hypothetical intellectual function.” They just don’t believe that the yield of maintaining us in a protected enclave is worth the enormous cost.

What Do They (the Public) Want From Us?

Kevin P. Reilly, president of the University of Wisconsin System since 2004, suggests that we all need to take the question "What do they (public) want from us," more seriously:

Taken together, the four pillars of better preparation, more graduates,more research, and better dissemination and commercialization constitute my “More Better” prescription for American higher education to address our society’s most pressing challenges.

The two pillars in the middle are at the traditional core of higher education’s mission. Educating and credentialing our students, and carrying out cutting-edge research, define who we are. On either side of these central functions stand two others that we have not embraced as fully as we now must. What we do to shore up the two “bookend” pillars – preparing youth for postsecondary achievement and leveraging the results of our research – will increasingly define our success as 21st century institutions of higher learning.

Who's Getting Money from the State and Why? How?

Scott Jaschik reports on two new studies, each of which aims to understand the how and why of state funding for institutions. Does lobbying work? Apparently so. Who's in the best position? Apparently, campuses located in proximity to a state capitol with democratic control.

"Two new studies suggest that strategy may go only so far and that, in some respects, public universities are like real estate: They benefit from location, location, location. The best locations may be in states led by Democrats (and with other political conditions) and in cities in or near statehouses. The studies don't contest the way research universities receive more per student than do other kinds of institutions, although they suggest that in states with a flagship and multiple research universities, flagship status may be less important than believed, and that research universities tend to be favored."

Read the full article here:
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/06/10/approps

SHEEO's 'SHEF': State Higher Education Finance Report

What might have been the beginning of a financial recovery in 2008 for public higher education ended prematurely with the growing awareness, late in the year, of the depths of the current financial crisis. The State Higher Education Executive Officers organization (SHEO) has been publishing this annual "state of finance for public higher ed" for quite some time now. The most recent report - PDF of report here, PDF of press release here - is not optimistic:

[T]he current recession is likely to renew and intensify a long term trend of declining state support and higher tuition and fees for students in public colleges and universities. “Despite progress over the past three years, per student state and local support for public higher education has only recovered about half of the funding lost during the sharp downturn from 2002 to 2005,” noted Paul Lingenfelter, president of SHEEO. “All the signs in the current recession point toward further decline, renewing and accelerating the long term trend for public higher education to become more expensive for students and their families.”
Recessions tend to be particularly harsh on public higher education and on its students. The data for the past 20 years clearly outline the pattern and its consequences. Constant dollar state support per student fell by 13 percent from 1988 to 1993, two recessions ago. (All financial comparisons are in 2008 dollars.) During that period, tuition jumped from 25 percent to 30 percent of total revenues. In the late 1990s, state support recovered and the rate of annual tuition increases slowed down, but tuition remained near 30 percent of total revenues.

Flagship State Colleges: The Big Picture

Writing in University Business, James Martin and James E. Samels, provide a 30,000-foot view of these flagship institutions:

Today a new breed of state colleges has emerged alongside these more traditional teachers colleges - a more nimble, market-driven generation of contemporary state colleges. These forward-looking, public four-year colleges and universities are uniquely positioned to partner with their public and private two-year college colleagues to provide a progressive, stair-stepped pathway to baccalaureate and graduate school completion. . . . Leaders at these entrepreneurial institutions have chosen a variety of paths for achieving state college 'best of breed' status - each with its own special academic twist. . . . Conceived and chartered as small normal schools over a century ago, these and other aspiring state colleges have achieved flagship status through academic program diversification, degree elevation, niche marketing, and by partnering with mission complementary institutions, businesses, government, and the nonprofit sector.

Top 10 State Policy Issues for Higher Education in 2008

From our friends at the American Association of State Colleges and Universities (AASCU): "What lies ahead for 2008? Presented here are the top 10 state issues most likely to be at the forefront of discussion and action that will affect public higher education across the 50 states, in the view of the state policy analysis and research staff at AASCU. While numerous topics shape state higher education policy, each affecting the issues of affordability and quality, our focus is on the overarching issue of college access. This synopsis is informed by an environmental scan of state policy activities of the past year, trend analysis, and events that will continue to shape the policy landscape. Some issues are perennial in nature, while others reflect attention to near-term actions in state policy and public discourse. The influence of any given issue across individual states will, of course, vary."

Good Policy, Good Practice: Improving Outcomes and Reducing Costs in Higher Education (A Guide for Policymakers)

From the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education and The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems: "Together, Parts I and II of this document present the solid base of experience available to policy leaders as they seek to raise the higher education attainment of state residents, even in the face of fiscal constraints. There is more experience and knowledge about improving educational outcomes and policy strategies than is often recognized. We urge policymakers to draw upon and improve these examples when they, as we believe they must, engage in development of state policies and strategies aimed at enhancing student opportunity and success while keeping college affordable for students and states. Good Policy, Good Practice demonstrates that states have tools–policy strategies and levers–to assure a viable economic and educational future for their citizens."