At a recent forum
that brought together various systems chiefs, campus heads, and the top dog
himself, Commissioner of Higher Education Joseph Rallo, generally they stumped
for what they termed “autonomy,” which they defined as marginal changes to
practices and procedures in delivering higher education, such as in pursuing capital
projects without so much bureaucracy to hurdle. These kind of changes will do
little to stabilize funding and increase efficiency in higher education for a
state ranked 18th in per
capita spending on higher education now facing cuts of anywhere from $100
million to $600 million this upcoming fiscal year, depending upon legislative
vagaries in the next few months.
But when queried about substantive
changes in Louisiana’s higher education systems featuring genuine autonomy that
would induce efficiency, these mandarins blanched. In particular, University of
Louisiana System Pres. Sandra Woodley was dismissive about the notion of
increased “privatization” (in the sense higher education mostly would control
revenue-raising capability, have few constraints on spending decision-making,
and its possessing a large degree of separation from state control), alleging
through this that “only the relatively wealthy will be able to participate” in
earning a college degree. She also called mythical that closing or merging
campuses would put higher education funding on firmer ground, because it would
cost more to educate different “universes” of students.
To show just how ignorant and
nonsensical her remarks were, let’s compare two states on demographics, higher
education, and flagship universities, one of which is Louisiana (all data from
2013 except for budgeted senior institution totals which are 2014 and
proportion of populations with baccalaureate degrees and above which are 2012).
Can you guess which one?
State A – population: 4.6 million; per capita income: $40,057 (ranked 30th
among the states); percent of students not of minority ethnicity in four-year
schools: 60.5 percent; total money budgeted for senior institutions: $2.754
billion; flagship school annual tuition per hour for 12 semester hours:
$729.83.
State B – population: 3.9 million; per capita income: $39,166 (ranked 32nd
among the states); percent of students not of minority ethnicity in four-year
schools: 64.9 percent; total money budgeted for senior institutions: $2.465
billion; flagship school annual tuition per hour for 12 semester hours:
$661.20.
Regular readers of this space
probably have figured out the answer from these data and even know what the
other state is. For those who haven’t, here are some more clues:
State A – percentage of non-white
population: 40.4 percent; percentage of adults with baccalaureate degrees or
above: 23 percent; number of baccalaureate-and-above universities: 14;
graduation rate from these after six years: 44.7 percent; taxpayer funding for
senior institutions: $1.16 billion.
State B – percentage of non-white
population: 22.5 percent; percentage of adults with baccalaureate degrees or
above: 31 percent; number of baccalaureate and above universities: 8;
graduation rate from these after six years: 55.5 percent; taxpayer funding for
senior institutions: $269 million.
After these, perhaps only Woodley
would not know that State A is Louisiana. State B is Oregon, which on its way
essentially privatizing all its four-year schools by the middle of this year
with the three largest already operating almost as totally autonomous state
agencies. If Woodley doesn’t know that the privatized Oregon system, in a state
with a poorer population which obviously hasn’t been priced out of college, can
produce better results with far less reliance on taxpayers with only eight
institutions and a student population not much different racially from
Louisiana’s, then she’s derelict in understanding this issue.
The reason why she and other
Louisiana higher education leaders would be fearful, if not disparage, a
leaner, more efficient higher education system that relies more on its own revenue
generation is this would reduce their power and create unwanted pressure on
them. The closing, merging, or demotion of four-year schools would place fewer
dollars and people under their commands. In Oregon, by the middle of this year
every such institution will have its own separate board that hires a chief
executive officer who will have to manage more like an executive than a bureaucrat
while the state department in charge of workforce development oversees the 17 community colleges; contrast
that to Louisiana’s having a wasteful chain of command that begins with Rallo,
who oversees Woodley and three other systems presidents, and then the dozens of
senior and junior colleges beneath them, with a separate Louisiana Workforce Commission.
But perhaps more discouraging of
them is that the faculty members and staff made redundant by this restructuring
would be up in arms and, worse of all, even more exercised would become a
couple of dozen state legislators, whose chests puff out in pride at the presence
of one or more state universities in or near their districts and whose vocal
chords resonate, especially in election years, about how they have maintained
all of the jobs associated with them. The only thing more terrifying to
Louisiana’s higher education administrators than competing in the educational
marketplace with little state backstop is having to face a horde of tenured and
classified state employees who believe they should have their jobs for life if
they want and politicians who think right-sizing Louisiana higher education
threatens their reelections.
So, understand that this talk of “autonomy”
doesn’t come close to fixing what ails the state’s higher education delivery
system, at least not when defined in the timid and self-serving way that it was
at this panel. It’s not more taxpayer money that will solve for this, as
Louisiana State University System President F. King Alexander implied when he
remarked at the event that the state was in the bottom five both in
expenditures per student and in degrees awarded, when already the state ranks
above average in per capita
population expenses. Instead, the answer comes in restructuring to spend more efficiently
and to rely more on own resources; the reason why Louisiana spends relatively
little per student is not because of the state’s share, but because the average
tuition for four-year schools in the state is fourth-lowest among the states –
and raising tuition demands increased leadership capacity to deliver a better
product, a possibility that seems to scare these people.
Chronic budgetary problems will
haunt Louisiana higher education until it pares its number of campuses (and governing boards), raises
average tuition levels, and makes internal changes to deliver a better product.
Throwing up hands and saying restructuring measures and organization cultural
change won’t help but more taxpayer money will does not solve the long-term
problem; that’s not only obscurant smoke-and-mirrors, but it’s also patently
false.
1 comment:
WHY, WHY, WHY, WHY hasn't our Governor changed this (or, at least, made a serious attempt) in his seven years of fantastic reform tenure.
He has, contrary to your positions, been a total failure and absentee.
Post a Comment