The dire economic picture is forcing campus constituencies to rethink their choices — all constituencies, all choices. Assumptions are being thrown out the door.

Let’s start with the largest group — the students. This is shopping season, the time of year when students and their families complete their campus visits and begin filling out applications to the colleges of their choice. But what are their choices and how do they pick them? By location (near or far from home), type (Ivy League, Big Ten, elite, boutique, rural, urban), disciplines of study (liberal arts, engineering, technology, health sciences, education), and of course, price (tuition, room and board, fees, living expenses).

Price appears to be the trump card this year. Families are shopping for discounts — both on the list price and on financial aid. In a recent survey quoted in USA Today, 50 percent of families report “limiting their children’s college choices to less expensive options.” College savings accounts are spiraling down in value. Home equity is decreasing by more than anyone could have imagined. Family savings for retirement are now being shifted to use for their children’s education. A mitigating circumstance: Several of the richest colleges in the nation have recently announced they are opening up their financial-aid coffers to provide generous packets of aid to students who come from families that make less than $200,000 (which is most of America). But if you add up all the students those few well-endowed schools can handle, the figure is a small drop in the admissions bucket and most families realize they must adjust their priorities and personal choices.

The administration. Strategic plans traditionally look ahead five to ten years, carefully laying out institutional goals and mission, putting building blocks in place, charting the course for the future. Every sound administrator expects to make mid-course adjustments, to tweak the strategic model, to respond to small bumps in the road. Very few, however, could have predicted the perfect storm: horrendous loses in endowments; the tightening of credit for capital projects; lack of liquidity available for short-term loans; possible reduction of personal and foundation philanthropic gifts; and the potential loss of student applicants.

This is the time for reinvention. As the president of the University of Arizona recently said, “We cannot achieve our aspirations with either our current funding or operational models.” How this is accomplished will depend on how quickly colleges and universities (and the rest of the world) sense that a stable floor has returned to the economy. If the markets continue to tumble, some decisions — and possible draconian ones — will need to be made quickly, and if the markets take a deep breath and appear to return to a calm, then decisions can be made with greater deliberation. To paraphrase the old education expression — here are the new 3-Rs for these troubled times: Reorganizing, Restructuring, and Reformatting how the business of higher education is accomplished.

On the surface, tenured faculty have the least need to worry — for their jobs are secure for ever and a day: There is no legal retirement age. Nontenured junior faculty and contingent faculty do have cause for concern. If the senior faculty feel the need to stay in their jobs longer than previously anticipated (in order to build back up their retirement funds), fewer jobs will be available for the younger professors. If student enrollment falls, there will be few positions for adjunct faculty. If students flock away from the liberal arts and go toward preprofessional training (as often happens in hard economic times), then there may need for some retrenchment in the size and shape of departments. All of that, however, is nuts and bolts.

Let’s consider the bigger picture. The senior members of the faculty are the backbone of the academy. They represent the most important line of interface with students. They are the mentors to the next generation of scholars. They are the discoverers of what is new and the interpreters of what is old. They are the guardians of tradition. And so they should be leading the discussion about the Three R’s. The faculty should be offering up ideas for reinvention: for — dare I say it — cost savings in the delivery of educational services, for new models of pedagogy, for redesign of curriculum, for rethinking major fields of study, for refocusing on what is “needed” to complete degree requirements, for how they interact with their fellow professors — who is hired, promoted, tenured, and when in the career path this all happens. The faculty should lead the discussion on change.

Traditionally, faculty are not “first responders” — they rarely rush toward decisions. They most often are defenders of the status quo, and question why change is necessary. They deliberate and study all sides, evaluate and re-evaluate, and craft solutions that are at times elegant and at other times muddled — but rarely do they decide swiftly.

So where does that leave us in these difficult times? Good leadership rises to the top. First-rate administrators will instill a sense of confidence and take bold actions. First-rate faculty will offer thoughtful commentary and participate in change. Students will vote with their pocketbooks. And time will tell if all the parties acted wisely.

(Headscratcher photo from Photobucket.com)