While true, the cuts to majors at WVU were to undersubscribed ones, so not likely to have been the subject of parental pressure to begin with.
Agreed. Just pointing out that at other institutions, the drive towards specialization is creating more departments, more programs, more more more.
I remember 2001/2002 when the ambitious āe-commerce majorsā all blew up. It was really sad. These were kids who could have spent four years learning actual fungible skills in CS, graphic design, psychology, writing, and econ. Instead, they drank the kool-aid and got highly specialized degrees which would have been great on-ramps to all those jobs in e-commerce which evaporated with the tech bust. My then employer had a sad revolving door of new hires who we were trying to help reboot into different roles.
2 Likes
What you donāt seem to understand is that undersubscribed majors are not necessarily undersubscribed departments (and, once again, the evaluation did not consider second majors or minors). To take foreign language as an example, many majors, concentrations, or other programs might require foreign language proficiency ā anything from business to social work to comp lit to study abroad. So students are taking those classes even if theyāre not majoring, which is why the world languages department has come in under budget every year. Education majors will have to take a lot of courses in content areas for teaching certification, even if theyāre not majoring in those disciplines. A major may have just a handful of students, but if itās one of very few available in the country (puppetry), then it brings added prestige (and OOS tuition dollars) to the university. Students might not major in history, but they pack large lecture halls to get their general studies credits. And even these considerations donāt take into account the departmentsā contributions outside the university ā outreach in the community, involvement in high school-level or undergraduate competitions (National History Day, science competitions), appearances in media outlets, professional service, guest speaking, and other means by which the faculty make their disciplines relevant to a wider public, which is part of the role of a public university, flagship or not.
Number of majors, especially given how this review counted them, is a false flag. It doesnāt mean as much as other measures. The ways in which a department serves the university goes well beyond the number of majors taking courses in that department.
6 Likes
Yes, I do understand that. Look at the list of factors the Provost office considered. It includes factors such as research, community need, role of a public u, etc.
I understand that sadly the FL dept at WVU was indeed undersubscribed-very small class sizes, few classes, with a consequently light teaching load per faculty member, ( and little to no research) per the report. The dept is not particulatly well regarded in its field, and alternatives exist.
The major with just 1 student to which I referred was puppetry. Only 1 other school has that as an independent major; those other colleges which choose to teach it manage to do so within existing theater departments at cost savings. Maybe WVU doesnāt really need or care to be known for puppets.
And those wood science and forestry departments seem to share almost all courses-why are there 2 administrative depts for that?
So maybe we should give a little credit to the consultants who actually blew the whistle on this situation, even if it was forced by financial mismanagement at WVU. Contrary to the initial reports and reactions by some posters, there is no evidence this is some sort of right wing conspiracy to destroy the humanities.
Reasonable experts could conclude there were opportunities for cost savings while impacting the fewest numbers, and this was a responsible plan to fill that budget shortfall. Had the FL department proposed keeping Spanish and Chinese to begin with while achieving savings elsewhere, maybe the whole issue would have been curtailed. Clearly womenās studies did something right and FL abysmally failed to justify its continued existence.
I am certain we will just agree to disagree, and thus will bow out with the hope that the right lessons from the WVU cuts are learned before the inevitable next round of cuts elsewhere.
Sadly, I donāt think there are āright lessonsā because what works in Maine is likely not the solution in Arizona, and definitely not the solution in Wyoming. It is tempting to view higher ed with a very big lensā¦ after all, the French Revolution, Socrates, Tribology, Topologyā arenāt they all the same across the country? Except when they are not; except when geography and a regionās history come into play; except when the dueling values of upskilling/economic development run smack into the reality that it is hard to teach a freshman college level physics if he or she went to a HS where math stopped at algebra.
1 Like
You may be right, but I think we can agree that Maine, Arizona and Wyoming will all be facing budget cuts in the future and will need to determine how best to respond.
1 Like
To be completely blunt about it, I legitimately believe that you have been repeatedly wrong in this discussion, and have mischaracterized both higher education and its processes at both WVU and throughout the sector in this discussion.
That isnāt an āagree to disagreeā scenario.
Your comment reminded me of this article I read the other day. Although the article is about life expectancies in differerent parts of the country (and how wealthy counties in some parts donāt fare well as the poorest counties in others), one of the foundations of the article is the idea that the U.S. is made up of multiple nations.
In the book American Nations I argued that there has never been one America but rather several Americas, most of them developing from one or another of the rival colonial projects that formed on the eastern and southwestern rims of what is now the United States. These regional cultures ā ānations,ā if you will ā had their own ethnographic, religious and political characteristics, distinct ideas about the balance between individual liberty and the common good and what the United States should become.
Thereās a brief description of most of the various ānationsā within the U.S., and it was definitely thought-provoking reading with respect to why different parts of the country respond differently to the same situation.
4 Likes
2 Likes
Nobody likes cuts. No surprise there.
897 faculty voted in the no-confidence vote regarding President Gee, with 797 voting their lack of confidence in Gee while 100 still had confidence in him.
826 faculty voted in the vote to freeze the Academic Transformation, with 747 voting against the transformation and 79 in favor of not freezing it.
I find it interesting that there were 71 people who cared more about the Gee vote than the freeze plan (as shown by participating in the vote), and Iām estimating that 50 of the 71 voted no confidence in Gee. (Yes, there are other possibilities, but itās a shorthand guess.) So whether there are people who were fine with the transformation, or feel itās fairly inevitable and not worth the fight, or whatever the reason, there seem to be stronger feelings about Gee than the transformation. And the feelings toward Gee are not positive.
2 Likes
I get the vote of no confidence but I doubt Gee was the single point of spending or misspending. Budgets go through multiple reviews and approvals. Someone has to be the scapegoat.
Also seems like some Monday morning quarterbacking. Where was the uproar when this reckless spending occurred? Iām fairly certain some faculty enjoyed the benefits.
I see a lot of gnashing of teeth but thereās still a shortfall. It will be interesting to see how they resolve the situation.
2 Likes
It is surprising how much power a college president can wield, if s/he has the support of the board of regents. And Gee is by all accounts a fairly imperial president.
1 Like
I know Iāve seen complaints about it over the past few years, from faculty and others.
But then again, Iām pretty plugged into chatter surrounding the higher education sector, and also I have family in West Virginiaāso Iām more likely to have seen it (or even had it register in my consciousness upon seeing it) than most.
There were numerous protestations and even an āexposeā of sorts that clearly showed the growth plan was completely unrealistic and catastrophic for the universityās finances.
Gee&board of Regents just kept going.
Part of the uproar is that they are currently suffering no consequences for their horrendous decisions. Itās easy to spend recklessly when you have no skin in the game. A minimum would be Gee and others offering some restitution off their own assets/salaries and NOT being allowed to āfail upwardsā (which has been all the consequences Gee has suffered so far when he made horrible decisions elsewhere.)
Finally, no one doubts sth needs to be done, but at least measures that make sense should be used, ie., count double majors, minors, and hours provided to gen ed or other depts to decide on where/how to cut.
3 Likes
The outrage would continue regardless of what departments are cut.
Thereās justified outrage (no consequence for the decision makers, criteria that donāt make sense) and understandable outrage that is closer to a rant than justified.
In the case of WVU, if the process had made sense, had followed a transparent process, and didnāt let the decision makers get away with it, yes people would still have been upset. Anyone who loses their job has a right to be upset. But itās not the same as what happened here and the shock&support would be entirely different.
(Also, do keep in mind that this is only the first round of cuts. Others will be happening.)
1 Like
This.
The idea that some on this thread are vectoring that the faculty (and student and alumni) outrage over the WVU cuts should be discounted because, well, thatās just what these stick-in-the-mud faculty (and, apparently, students and alumni) do all the time, it rises to the level of ānot even wrongāāthat is, itās so divorced from reality and based so deeply in false presuppositions that not only is it not correct, it canāt even be evaluated meaningfully along the correct-wrong continuum.
Well, outside expert consultants and highly degreed academics endorsed the current plan. No doubt many will disagree with it ( or with any plan proposed by anyone with any credentials).
You may not like the current WVU president, provost, or administrators, but they do have the requisite credentials for their positions, as do the consultants engaged. This plan is apparently their expert position.
Other experts may disagree but that doesnāt make this expert analysis irrational.
1 Like