“The University of Cincinnati is trying to raise its profile through a risky (but increasingly common) investment: expensive architecture.” …
The premise of the story is that universities are trying to turn themselves into luxury spas through building construction, seemingly abandoning their academic mission along the way, much like luxury detox facilites for the rich that aren’t as much about addiction treatment, as they are about splendor and pampering with no connection to their stated mission.
I disagree. New building construction over time is cheaper than the huge maintenance costs associated with old, asbestos-laden, but ivy-covered exteriors. Old steam heat/water chill air conditioning, leaky windows, and crumbling exteriors don’t lend themselves to the evolution in teaching and the wired campus learning experience which is the norm today. Just as people buy new cars to take advantage of better gas mileage through plugin-hybrid electric technology, and safety features such as adaptive cruise control, lane drift warning systems, rear view cameras with proximity sensors, universities, if they want to stay relevant and incorporate the latest technologies into their teaching and research missions, must build new, low maintenance, energy efficient infrastructure to attract both top-notch faculty and students to their environs. It’s a fiercely competitive environment.
The University of Cincinnati is doing both well, attracting top faculty and excellent students, with top-notch programs in medicine, engineering, criminal justice, design, and music to name a few that go with that new, efficient and adaptive campus architecture. Their built-in, advanced co-op experience gives their graduates a distinct leg up in the current, depressed, new graduate job-hunting environment as they graduate with, on average, six semesters of professional experience in many of their programs.
If you build it right, they are likely to come. If you don’t, they surely won’t. Deteriorating buildings, ill-suited to today’s technology-driven learning environment are more of an anchor, than an asset to many colleges. While I’m no fan of the rapidly increasing costs of attendance, I’d much rather send my children to an academic institution with good programs taught in modern classrooms, and dorms that aren’t small, cold and drafty in the winter, or ovens in the autumn and spring.
During the course of our college visits, (just like all of you) I’ve seen dozens of college campuses…on top of that, my younger son played AAU basketball (weekend tournaments at bunches of other local college campuses)…after awhile, they all blend together for me. But in particular, I’ve done recent visits to the schools I attended (UC and UVM). In one case (UC), the engineering building is fairly up to date, very nice facilities. In the other case (UVM) little has changed in the 30+ years since I went to school there (although, UVM has plans to update that building, as part of its master plan).
I’ve long said that at UC I miss some of the old buildings. But it’s also hard to argue that the campus isn’t tons better now than it used to be back then.