next »

[jonesey]

This dovetails with my post about Florida requireing all state colleges to verify the "uniqueness" of their individual missions.

Inside Higher Ed has an article on academic program review:

...generally absent from cost containment and revenue sustainability decisions are cost reallocation decisions regarding the relevance and viability of the academic portfolio. The extent to which institutions explore the financial performance, market demand and mission impact of academic programs (e.g., programs, concentrations, courses, sections) across the program portfolio is largely unknown. It is unclear if institutions have a structured process, access to the data and reporting mechanisms to inform review of programs and, subsequently, if they have the capacity to make decisions to retire/eliminate programs.

Given the significant resources allocated to academic programs, the time many programs have been in existence, and the changing market place and challenging economic conditions, a rigorous, objective review is a reasonable and necessary part of an institution’s due diligence.

This sounds a lot like "If you can't get a job with it, remove it from the university" kind of thinking, which scares me quite a bit. 

I'm in a red state where this seems to be exactly where higher ed is heading.

[mad_doctor]

It sounds like they're trying to lay a foundation for revoking tenure through the eliminaiton of programs.

[sibyl]

This writer is hardly the first person to point out that academia is pretty good about creating new programs and lousy at getting rid of old ones.  My own institution has an interdisciplinary minor that was created in the 1980s, when people thought that German and Japanese were going to be the international business languages of The Future.  No student has completed this minor in seven years, and yet the director of this "program" still gets a budget, course releases, etc.  If we were serious about program review, this program would be long gone. 

At a previous institution, I idly mentioned to the president -- a man with a decidedly nonintellectual reputation -- that some people wondered why we had a physics program despite the fact that it had hardly any majors.  He immediately said that any liberal arts college worth its salt needed to have a physics program just as much as it needed a philosophy or history or biology program; we could rebuild the physics program someday but not if we didn't have it.  In other words, physics is critical to the mission.  It's safe.

Could serious program review be used as a cover for nefarious purposes?  Sure.  But the same thing could be said of, say, the fluoridation of water, or income taxes, or tenure.  Doesn't mean it will be used that way.  We just have to be smart enough to use it properly.

[mad_doctor]

I dunno about that.  Administrators at two of my previous schools were very agressive in eliminating programs - one because they had an axe to grind w/ the faculty and the other because they weren't making enough money.  One of them was my program, and we got two months notice in the spring term that our services would no longer be required in the fall.  That was not the first program they had cut, either - they had done a several others in the years preceding my arrival.  Maybe it works differently at Big State R1 U., but not in tier 2 or SLACs.

[madhatter]

I dunno about that.  Administrators at two of my previous schools were very agressive in eliminating programs - one because they had an axe to grind w/ the faculty and the other because they weren't making enough money.  One of them was my program, and we got two months notice in the spring term that our services would no longer be required in the fall.  That was not the first program they had cut, either - they had done a several others in the years preceding my arrival.  Maybe it works differently at Big State R1 U., but not in tier 2 or SLACs.

The fact that you've personally had bad experiences at a few schools does not incriminate all of higher ed.

[mad_doctor]

I dunno about that.  Administrators at two of my previous schools were very agressive in eliminating programs - one because they had an axe to grind w/ the faculty and the other because they weren't making enough money.  One of them was my program, and we got two months notice in the spring term that our services would no longer be required in the fall.  That was not the first program they had cut, either - they had done a several others in the years preceding my arrival.  Maybe it works differently at Big State R1 U., but not in tier 2 or SLACs.

The fact that you've personally had bad experiences at a few schools does not incriminate all of higher ed.

You read too much into it, madhatter.  I think academia does a fine job eliminating programs when it wants to.  You think otherwise?

[der_gadfly]

If an institution 'retires' a program - that is, to officially remove it from a catalog - it is much harder to reinstate it at  later date than it is to 'revive it'.

I agree that keeping an admin on payroll for non-productive programs is a waste of funds, but there is no law that states that JUST because a program (minor/major) stays in the catalog, it MUST have a chair/director/Coordinator....

[mad_doctor]

If an institution 'retires' a program - that is, to officially remove it from a catalog - it is much harder to reinstate it at  later date than it is to 'revive it'.

I agree that keeping an admin on payroll for non-productive programs is a waste of funds, but there is no law that states that JUST because a program (minor/major) stays in the catalog, it MUST have a chair/director/Coordinator....

True, true...

[kaysixteen]

Anyone really think that a decent SLAC should *not* have a physics department?  That be the thin end of the wedge, fella-- next thing you know you will be advocatin' the elimination of the classics department.

[rowan1]

Anyone really think that a decent SLAC should *not* have a physics department?  That be the thin end of the wedge, fella-- next thing you know you will be advocatin' the elimination of the classics department.

Classics Departments are on the chopping blocks all over the country - so are communications, writing and linguistics, philosophy, and other departments many of us see as primary to a liberal arts education.

[svenc]

I dunno about that.  Administrators at two of my previous schools were very agressive in eliminating programs - one because they had an axe to grind w/ the faculty and the other because they weren't making enough money.  One of them was my program, and we got two months notice in the spring term that our services would no longer be required in the fall.  That was not the first program they had cut, either - they had done a several others in the years preceding my arrival.  Maybe it works differently at Big State R1 U., but not in tier 2 or SLACs.

The fact that you've personally had bad experiences at a few schools does not incriminate all of higher ed.

You read too much into it, madhatter.  I think academia does a fine job eliminating programs when it wants to.  You think otherwise?

I can't speak for the Hatter, but I do see it cutting both ways with state legislatures.  I'm in a state with a very generous distribution of regional campuses, and a LOT of overlap in programs across many of them.  As far as I can tell, it's the state legislature, and not the university system, that has championed this large amount of overlap.  Apparently geographic access is more important than access to quality programs.

It's really hard for me to see the wisdom of maintaining so many overlapping programs at multiple campuses, and then making cuts that severely impact the quality of each of these programs.  

[mad_doctor]

Anyone really think that a decent SLAC should *not* have a physics department?  That be the thin end of the wedge, fella-- next thing you know you will be advocatin' the elimination of the classics department.

Classics Departments are on the chopping blocks all over the country - so are communications, writing and linguistics, philosophy, and other departments many of us see as primary to a liberal arts education.

What will be left after all the cutting?  All the stuff you mention are the "hard" or "irrelevant" subjects students don't like to take.  "What wil I ever need physics or classics for?"  They want an easy life, and that means easy subjects.  Customer-driven schools seem only too happy to oblige.

[jonesey]

What will be left after all the cutting? 

Business classes.  Nursing.  Criminal Justice. 

IOW, everything that UoPhx offers...

[mad_doctor]

What will be left after all the cutting? 

Business classes.  Nursing.  Criminal Justice. 

IOW, everything that UoPhx offers...

That's just plain wrong.

BTW, I prefer UPox.

[madhatter]

My point, such as it is, is that academic program review has been around for a very long time. It's expected of institutions by accreditors and professional societies. The Council of Graduate Schools even has a position paper on conducting academic program review for graduate programs.

Can it be used for nefarious purposes? Sure, but what can't? Should it be used to take an honest appraisal of your programs and give them a reality check to see if they're still serving a purpose? Absolutely. If you're working in a program that has gone off the rails, has fewer students than faculty, and is a cookie-cutter copy of forty-seven other programs in a five-mile radius, then you have my sympathies, but I suggest you try to find a way to make it relevant and distinctive. Or start shopping your cv around.