On the Approaching Tenth Anniversary of Mark Yudof's Inauguration

As President of the University of Minnesota

Mr. Bonzo has been associated with BigU since 1970. During this time he has observed the reign of presidents Malcom Moos, Peter McGrath, Kenneth Keller, Nils Hasselmo, Mark Yudof, and Robert Bruininks.

Of these presidents, the one whose influence on the university will be the most lasting and who did the best job was Mark Yudof. It is possible that Ken Keller might have had a larger influence if he had served longer but his presidency was cut short by a harmless mistake or overweening arrogance depending on what you thought of his Commitment to Focus program.

Now Mark Yudof was an outsider and he did not stay at the university for very long. Some apparently feel that this is bad for the university and seem to be willing to settle for a lifer who knows the institution well and will stay as president for a long time. Hasselmo, Keller, and the present occupant are examples of this lifer type.

Mr. B. is not a great fan of administrators but in his career he has observed two excellent presidents, Yudof at Minnesota and the late Howard Swearer while at Carleton. Swearer later served at Brown University where he did an outstanding job. They were both great writers, articulate, cultured, and comfortable in dealing with students, janitors, secretaries, and faculty. Yudof knew how to deal with state legislators and other politicians including Jesse Ventura. Swearer didn't have to, but I am sure he could have picked it up. Both individuals were scary smart but did not take themselves too seriously.

Events of the past ten years are indeed depressing, e.g. the destruction of General College, the prostitution of the University to Coca-Cola, Twin City Federal, and Pepsi Cola, addiction to consultants and the latest management fads, disgraceful treatment of workers. Now in cynical moments when ugly things happen at BigU courtesy of our administration it can be consoling to think: "It's this way everywhere." Don't believe it. Leadership matters.

What follows are some excerpts from Mark Yudof's Inaugural Address. They make you want to go out and labor mightily to keep the University of Minnesota a great university. Let's hope that some day we have another leader of Mark Yudof's caliber in the Big House.

Inaugural Address ( October 17, 1997)

I am deeply honored by my appointment as the 14th president of the University of Minnesota and by all of those assembled today in Northrop Auditorium to celebrate that ascendancy. I accept that honor with gratitude and humility. I accept it with the certainty that I would not be standing here today but for the family that nurtured and guided me.

Today marks a transition or passage in my own life and in that of my family, and it may also evidence a further evolutionary stage in the life of this great University, an accelerated evolution toward higher levels of excellence and service to this state and nation. I certainly hope so. I will do my absolute best in the years ahead. I approach the 150th anniversary of the University with a confidence borne of deep respect for our government leaders, the Board of Regents, and our splendid faculty and staff. Most importantly, I have faith in our students, those sons and daughters of Minnesota, who are our sole reason for being.

One critical value is community. The University should be a functioning community in which students, staff, and faculty are part of a larger whole, in which there is a sense of social obligation that transcends self-interest, and in which there is a culture of civic responsibility, civility, and tolerance.

In recent years, too many in the academy have abandoned community, with its commitment to fairness, willingness to sacrifice for the good of the entire enterprise, and a sense that we are all in this together. They have played the politics of distrust, envy, cynicism, and self-advancement.

It is fundamental--as Emmanuel Kant beautifully explained and the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States embody--that the individuals in our community be treated with equal respect.

The need for integrity permeates every aspect of the University. The education mission of the University must be taken seriously--not just the way to get state funding.

Administrators should tell the truth, keep their word, implement what they promise, and not dissemble. My point is plain enough: Without integrity, the phrase higher education is an oxymoron.

Within our resources and true to the multiple purposes of a great land-grant institution, the hydraulic that drives the University should be the quest to be outstanding, to do things as well or better than any other institution in the nation.

We should always nurture a climate in which academicians are not intimidated by outside forces, other faculty members, students, or administrators.

I pledge today that I will always defend academic freedom. After all, whatever the titles, I am first and foremost a member of the academy and a fellow professor. All I ask in return is that the faculty never accepts mediocrity, that it hold itself to the highest standards of intellectual and pedagogical excellence, and that it police itself for those few colleagues who fail to uphold the highest standards of our profession.

Minnesotans expect us to be fair in providing access to the University for their sons and daughters. If we do not provide reasonable access--including access for those who are underprepared and historically underrepresented in higher education and in the upper levels of our socioeconomic life, the taxpayers and state government of Minnesota will turn their backs on our graduate, research, and outreach functions. Simply stated, it is imperative that we continue to embrace our land-grant roots if we are to thrive.

When making decisions, I view shared governance and consultation with constituent groups as only fair because of the enormous stake they have in the University. Without fairness there is no legitimacy and no buy in to the institutional vision.

To the best of my recollection, no great scientific discoveries, no insightful social science tracts, and no novels have been produced in Morrill Hall. No classes are taught in Morrill Hall. No patients are made well in Morrill Hall. My point is that we must value delegating academic and other decisions to campuses, colleges, schools, departments, and faculties. Administrators can facilitate, they can help the deans to build better English or physics or public health programs, but they cannot actually do the building. Help, or get out of the way! The great universities of the world--whether Bologna 900 years ago, Trinity College-Cambridge in the 17th century, or Stanford and Berkeley today--are highly decentralized. Without authority invested where the real work of this University is done, the light of excellence will only grow dimmer.

If war is too important to be left to the generals, then education is too important to be left only to professional educators. University administrators have not yet cornered the market in acumen and foresight; a monologue will not suffice.

We must also value our obligation to reach beyond the boundaries of our classrooms, libraries, and laboratories. We must value using our vast stores of knowledge to help solve the great public policy issues of the day; to help alleviate suffering; to assist in the development of aesthetic sensibilities; and to preserve the ecology of the planet. This is outreach and service where it touches and can be touched.

As a newcomer, let me tell you a great secret about the University of Minnesota, one that you may have overlooked. It is a secret that makes me very proud to be here. The University of Minnesota system, with its 48,000 students, varied campuses and programs, University and General Colleges, partnerships with MnSCU institutions, plans for distance learning, and more, has created the best balance between access and excellence that I have observed in any public university in the country. Self-doubts are inevitable in higher education, but in this case Minnesotans should be patting each other on the back.

Some would urge the University to pull back on its land-grant responsibilities, to rein in the access programs, to abandon the General College, to minimize the importance of the University of Minnesota Extension Service and other outreach programs, tone down our efforts to strengthen elementary and secondary education, or renege on the promise of U2000 for undergraduates.

But at what cost? To save so little and destroy so much? I will not support such efforts. Any short-term gain to research or graduate and professional programs occasioned by cutbacks to the core will be self-defeating.

The result will be a decreased level of public support for the entire University enterprise. There will be less to share. The University is built on its undergraduate program, though it rightfully aspires to and has achieved much more. If the foundation cracks, the whole edifice is in jeopardy.

At an inauguration there generally is unbridled optimism for the future and a sense that all is possible. I am honored by your confidence and good will. But I also am reminded of what Clark Kerr once said of university presidents:

The university president in the United States is expected to be a friend of the students, a colleague of the faculty, a good fellow with the alumni, a sound administrator with the [regents], a good speaker with the public, an astute bargainer with the foundations and federal agencies, a politician with the state legislator, a friend of industry, labor, and agriculture, a persuasive diplomat with donors, a champion of education generally, a supporter of the professions. . . , a spokesman to the press, a scholar in his own right. . . a devotee of opera and football equally, a decent human being, [and so on]. . . .

No one can be all of these things. Some succeed at being none.

At the crossroads of expectation and reality, human fallibility and aspiration, individual will and institutional inertia, I hope that you will forgive my inevitable lapses, take joint responsibility for the nurturing of values and goals, and find comfort in the progress we make together.

God bless all of you and God bless the University of Minnesota.

Amen - Bonzo

On the Explosion of New Medical Schools Nationally and The Possibility of a New One Locally

When the University of St. Thomas and Allina first announced that they were exploring the possibility of a new medical school, Mr. B. was surprised. No doubt the administration at BigU was also surprised and perhaps a little worried?

Mr. B. noted in the announcement by UST that a Pittsburgh consulting firm, with local offices in Minneapolis, Tripp Urbach (TUBA) had been retained for the purpose of a feasibility study.

A little web checking ensued.

From the Tripp Urbach website:

“The Tripp Urbach consultants deliver premium customized market research, strategic planning and economic analysis to a broad range of client partners. Since 1990, Tripp Umbach’s accomplished and seasoned research teams have been providing the essential tools and solutions its clients need to compete and succeed in their specific business environments.”

Hmm…

Their client list is quite impressive and includes some heavy, heavy, hitters such as:

The Cleveland Clinic, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Mass General, The Mayo Clinic, The Ohio State University Medical Clinic, Lenox Hill Hospital, Children’s Hospital Pittsburgh, Children’s Hospital Boston, Children’s Hospital Chicago, a raft of other tony places and interestingly enough, The University of Minnesota Medical Center.

Noteworthy non-medical school academic clients include: Carnegie Mellon, Cornell, Penn, Virginia, Penn State, Ohio State, North Carolina, Arizona, Michigan State, Pitt, and, interestingly enough, the University of Minnesota.

With a consulting firm such as TUBA, perhaps St. Thomas doesn’t feel that the 150 years of medical school experience that BigU brags about is necessary for them to consult? Especially since BigU itself, as well as its Medical Center, goes to TUBA for advice. Our neighbors at St. Thomas are very smart, they have their own business school and appear to have hired a top notch consulting firm. Perhaps BigU's kvetching at this point appears patronizing? ("Why haven't they consulted us, we have 150 years of experience?" to approximate public statements by our administration.)

Now our leaders at BigU are famous for getting in bed with consulting firms or business school theoreticians. The way this game works is that first you decide what you want and then solicit the appropriate consultant. They tell you what you want to hear and you then go about doing it. Once they know what you want, they can even give you an economic rationalization for it. If things don’t turn out quite right, you can always blame the consultants. Or better yet, just declare the results a success, hope that no one notices, and move on.

The infamous attempt to destroy tenure via the process known as reengineering was the result of a dalliance with the Hammer/Champy crew. Driven to Discover is a commercially inspired enterprise. OurLeader finally let it drop that we are in the middle of a Kotter-inspired change mission. Kotter is a former Harvard Business School type who has decided to live off the gullible in both traditional business and in the business that education has become.

The other development that Mr. B. stumbled upon was the great number of new medical schools on the horizon. Dr. Cerra is correct that the osteopaths are responsible for some of this, but there are plenty of new allopaths (MD’s) on the horizon, much to the delight of premed wannabes and to the consternation of those already in the system who apparently fear the economic competition.

The driving force for most of these new med schools seems to be the production of family practice and internal medicine docs of the type that directly treat patients, or perhaps I should say customers?

There seems to be a feeling that we have enough specialists and researchers, but that general practice docs are in short supply. Given the agonizing experience of most of us in the clinic, perhaps there is actually something to this?

Now, as we are starting to learn at BigU, the usual behavior of the current administration, when there are problems that have been neglected in the past, is to point in some other direction and make a lot of noise.

BigU effectively axes General College, a place with high minority enrollment: “In order to keep minority enrollment up, we’re going to have to cut out of state tuition. That way we can enroll minority students from Illinois, or California, or Florida.”

BigU is at the bottom of the BigTen: “We are going to become one of the top three public research universities in the world.”

We have a shortage of family practice physicians: “The answer is not to turn out more doctors, we need to develop ‘quarterbacks’ for the healthcare system, like pharmacists or nurse practitionsers.”

Medical school tuition at BigU is obscene - the highest of any public university in the country: “We didn’t want to do this, but the legislature made us.”

Good leaders recognize problems early on and do something about them...

Eventually, though, BigU will get dragged, kicking and screaming, into facing and hopefully solving some of our problems. Maybe a kick in the pants from St. Thomas/Allina is not such a bad thing?

Maybe BigU’s medical school should cede the family practice business to St. Thomas and concentrate on turning out specialists and MD/PhDs? As the St. Thomas folks say, they don’t want to compete, just complement.

After all, no one ever became one of the top three public research universities in the world by turning out family practitioners, did they?

Bonzo

Driven to Discover Question of the Week:

"How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?"

Sorry, I am not making this up....

Bonzo

And another one hits the road...

(Mr. B. thanks a friend for calling this to his attention.)

From BigU's Biotechnology Gateway:

Flickinger leaves BTI for N.C. State

The BioTechnology Institute's Michael C. Flickinger, Professor of Biochemistry, Molecular Biology, and Biophysics, has accepted a joint appointment with North Carolina State University in Raleigh, North Carolina, as Professor of Microbiology in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and Professor of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering in the College of Engineering located on the Centennial Campus. Beginning this August, he will also be Associate Director for Curriculum of the new Golden Leaf Biomanufacturing, Training and Education Center (BTEC), the largest bioprocess and biomanufacturing training center of its kind on a U.S. academic campus.

It is going to be difficult to complete the Ten Year March to Greatness when we can't keep the good people we've got. NC State is an interesting institution. They have also recently recruited a world-class mass spec/proteomics person (David Muddiman) from Mayo. It's hard to be humble at BigU when you have ambitious aspirations, but maybe it would be a more productive strategy to try to keep the good people we have?

Bonzo

So What's It Going to Be at BigU?

A Medallion or a Yugo?

Mr. B. has previously written about the Yugo strategy that was unfortunately endorsed today at the U of M by the Board of Regents.

See: "The Fix is On, Another Fast Shuffle at BigU, or If You Can't Compete on Quality Compete on Price"

Thanks to OurLeader for further evidence that discussion of such matters is not for the stakeholders. Big Brother knows best. So much for transparency and openness. There are many unintended consequences on the horizon.

Out of state (non-reciprocity) tuition is to be set at $2000 per semester higher than in state tuition. This is a cut of about $8000 per year. It will be interesting to see how much traffic this generates from out of state students. Needless to say the new rate is significantly less than out of state tuition at so-called medallion schools that the U would like to emulate:

Many of the nation’s best and brightest students consider the University of Minnesota a “medium-quality school,” not in the same class as Michigan or Wisconsin.

The university is not viewed as a “medallion” destination [According to BigU, the BigTen medallion schools are Michigan, Penn State, Illinois, and Wisconsin] by top academic prospects. Even honors students who choose Minnesota rate its academic quality lower than the schools they turned down, according to an internal university analysis.

“Medium-quality, high-affordability” schools like the University of Minnesota must keep tuition low or offer big scholarships to lure good students. “Medallion schools” can charge higher tuition and offer fewer merit scholarships.

Oh well, if you can't compete on quality, compete on price. There was even talk in the early stages of the proposed Ten Year March to Greatness that a high quality residential college should be formed to attract outstanding students. Someone must have finally realized that this would cost a lot of money, more than we are apparently willing to spend except for football. BigU is not Carleton, St. Olaf, or Macalester. Education at BigU remains a business. It will be interesting to see the reaction of ColdState citizens to this move, once its implications become more fully understood.

From the Pioneer Press:

by Paul Tosto (Article Last Updated: 06/27/2007 04:26:20 PM CDT)

The U will significantly cut tuition at the Twin Cities and Duluth campuses for students from states outside the Upper Midwest. Starting for students entering in 2008-2009, those "non-resident, non-reciprocity" students will pay only $2,000 more per semester than Minnesotans for the Twin Cities campus and $1,000 more than Minnesotans in Duluth. Right now it's nearly a $6,000 difference on the Twin Cities campus and nearly $5,000 for Duluth.

Officials say that while the U's commitment to Minnesota students remains solid, the university is concerned about projected declines of high school students in Minnesota and neighboring states and how it might affect the university's future enrollment. Reducing non-resident tuition would make the U potentially more attractive to students outside the Upper Midwest.

One of the deans at an open forum on the budget claimed that going out of state, to Illinois for example, was going to be necessary in order to keep up minority enrolllment at BigU. Excuse me sir, you have heard of the late, lamented General College? You do know that we have a large minority population in North Minneapolis that might be fertile ground for BigU to do some of this vaunted outreach and community involvement. Perhaps then we could educate our own minority citizens at BigU rather than the citizens of Illinois, or Florida, or California. Or is that too much to ask of a land grant institution that aspires to be one of the top three public research universities in the world, but is having trouble rising to the top half of the BigTen?

See: "Oh Lord, It’s Hard to be Humble, When You Have Ambitious Aspirations"

At least for now it is apparently not the medallion, but the Yugo for BigU. Let's all hope for better in the future.

Bonzo

p.s.

Professor Vivek Kapur, Director of the Biomedical Genomics Center at BigU, has just announced that he will be decamping for one of those BigTen medallion schools BigU wishes to emulate - Penn State.

Some difficult choices face our leaders at BigU: Coke or Pepsi? Research or Teaching? Duplication of medical schools or children's hospitals? Becoming the third greatest public research university in the world or pursuing our mission as a land grant university? The medallion or the Yugo?

Is BigU Still a Land Grant University?

If so, is OurLeader's avowed goal - becoming one of the third best public research universities in the world - appropriate?


An old timer comments with a letter to the Minnesota Daily:

Land grant University

A recent long lunch with fellow writers and editors of The Minnesota Daily, circa late 1950s, got me and some of the others thinking again about the direction our alma mater has taken under its recent leaders, notably President Bob Bruininks.

One of my old Daily crowd entered the College of Liberal Arts and the School of Journalism by way of General College. A high school dropout, he had to take that route, but it worked for him. He proved to be a talented journalist and a brilliant writer whose career couldn't have happened without the University.

General College no longer exists. Bruininks and his followers tell people like my old friend to go to community colleges, knowing full well that the teaching doesn't compare, and the way into a university education is far more difficult.

The University now is wrapped up in building a new football stadium at a cost of more than $250 million, an absurd waste of public money. Meanwhile, as tuition rises at insane rates, fewer and fewer Minnesotans can afford to attend our University - which, under Bruininks, doesn't want them anyway, of course. The University president doesn't want it to be a teaching school so much as a "world class" research institution - and as such, apparently, a monument to himself.

In December, I objected strongly to the large raise given President Bruininks. Recently, I suggested to my state legislators that they look up the stated and legal purpose of a land grant university. I will ask again, and demand that they require adherence to those standards. The University of Minnesota ain't in the Ivy League.

Jim Fuller
reporter and city editor
The Minnesota Daily, 1955-58

Are you being Driven? To Distraction?

Driven to Discover question of the day:

"How much cotton is in a 100% cotton shirt?"

Mr. B. has noted previously the obnoxious public relations campaign (Driven to Discover) being waged by BigU, or should I say by their advertising agency? Thus he was a little annoyed to see the latest version of M magazine arrive in his mailbox complete with Driven to Discover logo front and back as well as another one of those obnoxious questions of earth-shaking importance: "Why don't spiders get caught in their own web?" I leave it to the interested reader to pursue this matter. Could it be evolution or is it perhaps intelligent design? Apparently many of our congresspeople don't believe in evolution, so the answer is obvious. To my great surprise there were actually a number of perceptive letters printed in this issue of M.

To wit:

...I found the article in the winter 2007 issue of M somewhat frightening. In the article, Dean Thomas Fisher writes that the College of Design "educates students to be leaders in the field of social change via design, and to be visionaries for a better future." then works through a list of politically charged buzzwords that leave little doubt about where his personal political allegiances lie. Must some unsuspecting 18-year-old who enrolls at the U wanting to learn how to design Web pages, or blouses, or houses, or gardens--and maybe also make the world a better place in accordance with his or her own personal beliefs and vision--also get an entire load of ideology about exactly what the visions should be?

David W. Downing, St. Paul

And our old friend Will Shapira - who must be BigU's worst letter-writing nightmare - opines:

I take strong issue with the upbeat message and feel-good tone of the M spring 2007 article about the new football stadium. I believe it is a total waste of taxpayer dollars and an insult and embarrassment to those of us who abhor the jock mentality that has spread from the Bierman Athletic Building to the office of President Bruininks.... [ellipses are in the printed letter, so it may have been shortened.] How does a football stadium help Bruininks move toward his purported goal of making the U a top research university? Ski-U-Bah!

Willard B. Shapira

Now Mr. B. has always thought of W. Shapira as some kind of anti-athletics nut (sort of like Mr. B) but he has an interesting background indicating that his position may be a lot more subtle than some of his letters indicate.

He is identified as a "Minnesota Daily sportswriter, 1954-58, Daily sports editor, 1956-58, Minnesota Gopher (yearbook) sports editor 1956-58."

Kudos to M magazine for printing these letters. Maybe something could be done about them by OurLeader and the Board of Regents? Mr. B. still strongly believes that BigU can be a great university. But we have a lot to fix and a good start would be to drop the expensive and lame Driven to Discover campaign and the ambitious aspiration of being one of the top three public research universities in the world.

For a different model of athletics and academics see:

Quartet Set for 'C' Club Hall of Fame Inductions

(which is a description of post-graduate activities of the latest inductees into the Carleton College 'C' Club hall of fame)

Ciao, Bonzo

Mrs. B. is in Nuevo York, so I can spend the day and evening in the lab...

Tuition Reciprocity and BigU
You can buy a better product but you can’t spend more money.

Mr. B. has noted before the idiocy of the reciprocity problem between BigU and Wisconsin. A barrage of propaganda is in the air about the agreement costing the U six or seven million dollars. This is apparently being done to whip up support from the Board of Regents to drop the current agreement with Wisconsin.

Maybe it is not such a good idea for BigU to get into an unnecessary spat with Wisconsin over this matter. Apparently more Minnesotans think that an education in Wisconsin is a good thing than vice versa, at least based on enrollment. It is a good deal for ColdState citizens to have an opportunity to go to school in Madison at a reasonable tuition rate, because Madison is generally regarded as a significantly better school than BigU for undergraduates. See “Oh Lord, It’s Hard to be Humble,When You Have Ambitious Aspirations."

As has been pointed out many time before, the state of Wisconsin is making up the delta to the State of Minnesota. This fact is noted again by the Rochester Post-Bulletin:

Editorial: Resolve inequity in tuition reciprocity
6/8/2007 12:08:35 PM

... under the rules of the reciprocity agreement between the University of Minnesota and University of Wisconsin systems, students can attend their neighboring state's university at their own in-state tuition rate. Since tuition has increased faster in Minnesota than in Wisconsin, students coming here from Wisconsin are paying at least $1,200 less to attend the 'U' than do students from Minnesota.

It's an unfair situation for Minnesota students, and a somewhat embarrassing predicament for the University of Minnesota. For whatever reason -- reduced state aid, a failure to keep a lid on expenditures -- Minnesota students are seeing tuition at the state's flagship university eat up an increasingly large portion of their education budget.

For whatever reason, the University of Wisconsin has been able to get along with relatively smaller tuition increases.

Now, University of Minnesota officials are adamant that they will either get the agreement changed or drop it entirely in 2008. So far, officials in Wisconsin have been reluctant to make any changes.

Locally, this is a significant issue because of the large number of Rochester and area students who attend college in Wisconsin. Meanwhile, the 'U' is enlarging its Rochester program.

Last year, about 14,000 Minnesota students attended Wisconsin campuses while about 12,000 Wisconsin students attended 'U' campuses.

At the end of each year, Wisconsin compensates Minnesota for lost revenue -- to the tune of $20 million over the past three years. But that money goes to the state's general fund, rather than to the 'U.'

It would be a shame if a program that so many students in both states find attractive is allowed to expire. College students and their parents have been pummeled by tuition increases in the past year. The uncertain future of this reciprocity agreement only adds to their turmoil.

People who run universities are supposed to be smart. They should be able to find a way to equitably solve this problem for the benefit of all -- but especially for students.

There is an obvious solution here.
Why exactly isn't this being taken care of?

(Send the money directly to the institutions involved, or have the governor direct that the money paid to the State of Minnesota be equitably distributed? No... Screw the students and their parents, let them eat cake, er... bratwurst!)

Bonzo

The Fix is On

Another Fast Shuffle at BigU or
If You Can't Compete on Quality Compete on Price

Once again BigU is pursuing a manipulative course of change without prior discussion or consultation with the affected stakeholders. A massive tuition cut for non-resident students is planned with the notable exception of Wisconsin and the Dakotas. This action was set up by an editorial in the Strib published yesterday, on the same day that OurLeader apparently put forth this plan to the Regents who will vote on June 27. It is just this kind of quick and sneaky approach to decisions at the U that makes stakeholders - students, faculty, staff, as well as citizens of ColdState - suspicious of the good will and intentions of BigU's administration. This kind of behavior is hardly the way to improve the academic and consultative climate on campus, among the administation's professed goals. This behavior reminds Mr. B. of days gone by when re-engineering was in vogue at BigU. Move quickly before anyone has a chance to react. Do it when no one is around to argue. These tactics failed when used in the reengineering campaign and badly damaged the U. We have yet to recover from its effects.

From today's Strib:

U has plan to keep enrollment up with a tuition bargain

Officials say a recruiting effort coupled with lower nonresident tuition could be the ticket to stabilizing projected enrollment declines.

By Mary Jane Smetanka, Star Tribune

In California, there isn't enough room in universities for all the kids who want to go to college. And in Florida, community colleges have started offering four-year degrees to expand the capacity of higher education.

And so we are going to get a lot of business from Florida and California? In your dreams. Mr. B. has recruited for BigU in warm states and it is a very tough sell. Students literally shudder when Minnesota is mentioned. Minnesota wants to be Florida's community college? California kids would rather attend BigU than, say, the University of California at Santa Cruz?

Would some of those students come to the University of Minnesota if they didn't have to pay much more than Minnesotans do?

That's the experiment the U is likely to pursue beginning in fall 2008. Officials are proposing to dramatically cut undergraduate nonresident tuition to attract more students from around the nation. Last year, nonresident tuition and required fees on the Twin Cities campus were $21,040, compared with $9,410 for Minnesota students. If the proposed change had been in effect, nonresidents would have paid only $4,000 more per year than Minnesota residents.

If you do the math, that is a cut of ca $8,000. Heckuva deal. Of course it means that for each of the new students attracted someone paying lower tution will be squeezed out… But what the heck our educational mission here is obviously taking a backseat to research, so who cares?

U President Robert Bruininks told the Board of Regents on Thursday that the plan would keep university enrollment up in a time when the number of high school graduates in the Midwest will drop.

Could someone please explain to me exactly why enrollment at BigU has to be so large? We are a small state. Why are we duking it out with large population states like Ohio for the largest state university? Could it be because a large university will support a large budget?

Because most U graduates stay in Minnesota to work, he said, that would benefit the state economically.

Of course that is because most U graduates - now - are from Minnesota. Here some numbers, conspicuously absent in most U pitches, would be useful.

The U enrolls about 10 percent of Minnesota's high school graduates each year and that would not change, Bruininks said. But the composition of the rest of the undergraduate class could look different.

Now, 72 percent of U freshmen come from Minnesota,

[Someone pointed out to Mr. B. that it is closer to 65 percent and that it will probably hit 60 percent in the next few years. Mr. Bonzo will be watching.]

while almost 19 percent are from Wisconsin. Between 3 and 4 percent come from North Dakota and South Dakota.

Now let’s think carefully about the implications here. The out of state mix is going to change and less students will be taken from Wisconsin and North and South Dakota. Now people from those states are used to the weather and the intellectual/social climate of the upper Midwest. They are more likely to stay here than people from, er, California, Texas, or Florida. Interesting that the U, by recent actions, is working to make enrollment of Wisconsin students a less attractive option to Badgers.

Enrollment slipping

But over the next decade, the number of high school graduates is projected to drop 3 percent in Minnesota, 6 percent in Wisconsin, 23 percent in North Dakota and 8 percent in South Dakota. Already, the number of students from the Dakotas attending the U has declined 10 percent. And five of the six other states in the middle of the country that send more than a handful of students to the U also face shrinking numbers of high school graduates.

Ah, finally, the dirty little secret emerges. All of this talk about getting better and better students is predicated on a large applicant pool and it is shrinking. Perhaps it is time to retract enrollment at the U as Wisconsin did some time ago? Why, exactly, does enrollment at the U have to be so high?

"Over the next 10 years, the U needs to position itself to recruit from other states," said Peter Zetterberg, senior analyst in the U provost's office.

Why? Just as the football team seems to be positioning itself to capture the best athletes in Minnesota, maybe the U should take positive steps to capture the best students in Minnesota...

A test case

The U's Twin Cities campus already draws more students from Illinois than it used to, the result of a decision a few years ago to recruit there.

Could we please have some numbers here? How many students over the past ten years were from Illinois? How much money was spent on the recruiting effort?

What other states could be targeted for recruiting isn't clear yet, but potential targets include California and Texas, which already send students to the U.

How many, exactly? It is very unlikely that we will see significant enrollment from either California or Texas in the future. (As most of the kids would say: “Brrr...”)

Zetterberg said the U wouldn't lose money through the change partly because tuition discounts and scholarships mean few nonresident students pay the full amount now. And the new policy should draw more students, he said. Even with tuition cuts, nonresident students would be fully paying the cost of their education.

Once again, numbers would be nice. “Trust us?” Trust but verify.

The plan also would drop nonresident rates at the Duluth campus to just $2,000 more per year than the Minnesota rates. Nonresident rates have already been dropped at the Crookston and Morris campuses.

Regents will vote on the proposal as part of budget decisions June 27.

The fix is on. For once it would be nice to see the Board of Regents do more than rubber stamp OurLeader’s scheme. For once it would be nice to see some real numbers about revenue differential. For once it would be nice to see the U administrators talk straight on these matters. Do we want more money from Wisconsin students? If so, why are we willing to cut nonresident tuition for others by quite a bit (eight grand) and lose revenue on them? To Mr. B. it appears that these two different lines of thought are not consistent.

This latest questionable scheme seems to be an act of desperation by an administration in real trouble with their ambitious aspiration to be one of the top three public research universities in the world. If you look at nonresident tuition for Michigan and Wisconsin, BigU's rate will be significantly cheaper. Thus it appears that a college education is in the same category as a used car. If the product is inferior and isn't selling well, cut the price.

Once again OurLeader makes a bold and audacious (would that be bodacious?) move.

Are we selling Yugos? Perhaps we are...

Bonzo

Have it your way!
Or, in the end the students always seem to take the hit...

Mr B. has kicked around the topic of tuition reciprocity before, e.g., “Small Schools in ColdState and CheeseState Caught in Crossfire.”

The latest skirmish is reported in todays Star-Tribune. As usual the unintended consequences of this move seem not to be of concern to BigU administrators. They will, though, as we continue our march to greatness and demographics start to kick in.

U sets 2008 deadline in tuition battle

Minnesota says it will end the reciprocity pact unless Wisconsin agrees to changes.

By Mary Jane Smetanka, Star Tribune

Last update: June 04, 2007 – 11:35 PM

Tens of thousands of students in the two states use the agreement to attend college across state borders without paying nonresident rates. But U officials say the agreement is unfair.

Because of the way it is structured and because tuition increases in Minnesota have outstripped those in Wisconsin, Minnesotans now pay $1,200 to $2,700 more to attend U campuses than Wisconsin students do. The U's line in the sand is being drawn three years after officials first asked for change in the agreement. Sporadic talks have yielded no result.

Wisconsin officials, including the governor, have been reluctant to change the agreement because they say it helps keep tuition affordable.

In 2005-06, 23,700 Minnesotans and 19,500 residents of Wisconsin, the Dakotas, Iowa and Manitoba used reciprocity to attend college across state lines. In the school year that just ended, about 6,300 Wisconsin undergraduates and 1,000 graduate students attended U campuses.

At the end of each year, a complex formula is used to try to rebalance things financially between the two states. In December 2006, Wisconsin paid Minnesota $7.8 million. However, that money goes into the state's general fund, not to universities.

So, as has been pointed out before, the money is there. BigU doesn't seem to be able to pry it out of the hands of the state. Or at least that is BigU's position. Of course the state can say: "But we give you lots of money..." BigU's response: "Oh, then let's take it out on the students because there is nothing they can do about it." Reminds me of an old movie. Something about failure to communicate...

Ciao,

Mr. B.

Open Your Mouth and Say Ah… Or Why Won’t OurGovernor TeePaw Do the Right Thing and Give BigU What It Wants?

Mr. B. has previously pointed out the disconnect between authorizing new bioscience buildings for the U (a blank check, so to speak) and an explanation of where the money is going to come from to fill the buildings with people and equipment. These issues have not been addressed in the latest piece by the Star-Tribune's excellent legislative reporter, Lori Sturdevant.

See:

"If You Build It, Grants Will Come? Or, Could Someone at BigU Please Be Honest and Responsible About Expansion of Biomedical Research?"

Perhaps we should worry more about a way to lower tuition for doctors who plan to do family practice in Minnesota so that they can afford to do this? Agitation on the part of BigU's med school administration indicates that this may be a pressing problem, particularly if St. Thomas/Allina get into the mix. BigU is well aware that there may be a limit to the amount of funding available from the state coffers for the education of future health care providers.

See:

"BigU's MedSchoolDean Comments on St. Thomas/Allina Feasibility Study for New Medical School"

and

"University of St. Thomas to Establish New Med School?

as well as

"Blanket Email from Senior Vice President for Health Sciences, Kudos and Questions for Proposed Medical School"


From the StarTribune:

A moment left unseized
The wait continues for a gubernatorial push for the U of M bioscience plan.

By Lori Sturdevant, Star Tribune

Published: June 03, 2007

Twenty years later, DFLer Rudy Perpich circled the globe, hunting for jobs in industries ranging from chopsticks manufacturing to supercomputing. Then came Republican Arne Carlson, who knocked himself out to keep Northwest Airlines afloat.

So as the clock wound down on the 2007 session, I figured that Gov. Tim Pawlenty would soon start talking up the University of Minnesota's request for fast-track bonding authority for four new bioscience research buildings. Or that legislators would start buzzing about calls from the governor's office, urging a kind look at the university's plan for hiring scores of new faculty.

The university's request was, after all, the only viable, affordable, remotely plausible plan in sight for keeping up with the competition, and snagging a share of the industry that's exploding in research hotspots around the country.

But the clock wound down. A public appeal from Pawlenty to the Legislature never came. If one was made privately, it escaped detection.

When asked May 1 about the university's bid for a separate bonding path for biosciences, Pawlenty's response wasn't negative. It just lacked oomph. "That's a good idea," he said. "Either this year or next year, it should go ahead."

The governor wasn't alone in playing it cool. The Senate was with the U on this request for the second year running. But it was a different story in the House. There, where turf jealousies, regional parochialism and raw partisanship are the order of any given day, several senior DFL members weren't interested in giving the university permission for more than one building at a time. Allowing the Legislature a chance to say no before a building's bonds were issued was proposed. No deal.

"Their view was, 'Come to us every two years and let us take care of you,' " said university lobbyist Donna Peterson.

There are two problems with that view. One: It isn't the depth of state commitment that Academic Health Center Dean Frank Cerra needs to turn top faculty heads. Cerra says that recruiting research superstars takes three to five years to consummate. He needs to be able to promise today that a brand-new building will be waiting in 2012 or 2014.

And two, it pins Minnesota's best hope for a desirable new industry on what has become an unreliable process.

University of Minnesota President Robert Bruininks says he'll be back next session -- or, better still, in a special session -- to try again. Platou says he'll try to keep a major donor on the hook. Speaker Margaret Anderson Kelliher says she'll try to "bring greater awareness to legislators about the competitive pressures involved here."

They are a potent threesome, but they can only go so far.

"It's going to take the governor's leadership to make this happen, "Bruininks said. Providing leadership to develop new industries -- that's what governors do, isn't it?

Mr. B. believes that there are a number of logical disconnects in the above analysis.

Blanket Email from Senior Vice President for Health Sciences
Kudos and Questions for Proposed Medical School

This blog has previously posted on the possible establishment of a new medical school in the Twin Cities by the University of St. Thomas and Allina.

The following blanket email has been sent to BigU AHC faculty. Mr. Bonzo posts it without comment at this time. An earlier blanket email by MedSchoolDean at BigU has also been posted.

Frank B. Cerra	Fri, May 25, 2007 at 12:05 PM
Reply-To: "Frank B. Cerra" To: ALL-AHC-ALL@oris.ahc.umn.edu

Dear Colleague -

May is a remarkably productive month in the Academic Health Center. By the end of last week, we graduated 224 new physicians, 134 new nurses, a record class of 157 new PharmDs, 138 new dentists, 91 new veterinarians, and 187 public health graduates prepared to improve the health of our communities.

All of you deserve a strong pat on the back for the work you've done in preparing this next generation of more than 900 health professionals to care for Minnesotans. This has been our commitment since the University was founded 154 years ago.

For the past couple of weeks, I've been reflecting on that historic commitment as colleagues in the community discuss the feasibility of starting a new medical school. The stated rationale for this fledgling partnership between Allina and the University of St. Thomas is the impending shortage of primary care physicians to care for our aging population.

Much of our work at the University is designed to respond to workforce needs in various health professions. Whether it is a need for pharmacists in rural communities, advanced practice nurses to manage chronic care for patients, training all health professionals to move care upstream into prevention, or modeling new cost effective ways to achieve health, our schools have been responsive with innovative programs and expansions of existing programs to meet workforce needs of Minnesota.

As one who has managed the complexities of this Academic Health Center for more than a decade, I do have some questions that will need to get into the dialogue about this new school.

--Is another medical school truly the solution to the need for access to healthcare for aging Minnesotans?
--Are there other models of care that are more fiscally responsible for the future care of chronic conditions?
--Given the available capacity in our state's training programs, would it be more prudent for the community to work with us to find ways to attract students into health careers who are committed to primary care?

As the state's only public research university, we stand ready to help the community as they pursue the feasibility of starting a new school.

Frank B. Cerra, M.D.
Senior Vice President for Health Sciences
McKnight Presidential Leadership Chair

A public dialog and discussion on this matter is certainly in order. Perhaps some competition from St. Thomas would be good for Bigu? If this dialog does occur, Mr. B. would certainly like to contribute to the conversation.

On this Memorial Day weekend: memento mori.

Bonzo

Oh Lord, It’s Hard to be Humble,
When You Have Ambitious Aspirations

By executive fiat Mr. Bonzo, as everyone at BigU, is driven to discover. His most recent discovery is the US News & World Report Rankings of America’s Best Colleges, version 2007. Alas, the rankings for public national universities are disturbing news for a BigU in the third year of our ten year march to greatness.

America’s Best Colleges 2007

1 Harvard University (MA)
1 Princeton University (NJ)
3 Yale University (CT).
4 University of Pennsylvania
5 Duke University (NC)
5 Stanford University (CA)
7 California Institute of Technology
7 Massachusetts Inst. of Technology
9 Columbia University (NY)
9 Dartmouth College (NH)
11 Washington University in St. Louis
12 Northwestern University (IL)
13 Cornell University (NY)
13 Johns Hopkins University (MD)
15 Brown University (RI)
15 University of Chicago
17 Rice University (TX)
18 University of Notre Dame (IN)
18 Vanderbilt University (TN)
20 Emory University (GA)
20 University of California – Berkeley *
22 Carnegie Mellon University (PA)
23 Georgetown University (DC)
23 University of Virginia *
25 Univ. of California – Los Angeles *
25 University of Michigan – Ann Arbor *
27 Tufts University (MA)
27 U. of North Carolina – Chapel Hill *
27 Wake Forest University (NC)
30 Univ. of Southern California
31 College of William and Mary (VA)*
32 Lehigh University (PA)
32 Univ. of California – San Diego *
34 Brandeis University (MA)
34 University of Rochester (NY)
34 Univ. of Wisconsin – Madison *
37 Case Western Reserve Univ. (OH)
37 Georgia Institute of Technology *
37 New York University
40 Boston College
40 University of California – Irvine *
42 U. of Illinois – Urbana - Champaign *
43 Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. (NY)
43 Tulane University (LA)
45 Univ. of California – Santa Barbara *
45 University of Washington *
45 Yeshiva University (NY)
48 Pennsylvania State U. – University Park *
48 University of California – Davis *
50 Syracuse University (NY)
50 University of Florida *
52 University of Texas – Austin *
53 George Washington University (DC)
53 Worcester Polytechnic Inst. (MA)
55 Pepperdine University (CA)
55 Univ. of Maryland – College Park *
55 University of Miami (FL)
58 University of Georgia *
58 University of Pittsburgh *
60 Boston University
60 Ohio State University – Columbus *
60 Purdue Univ. – West Lafayette (IN)*
60 Rutgers – New Brunswick (NJ)*
60 Texas A&M Univ. – College Station *
60 University of Iowa *
66 Miami University – Oxford (OH)*
66 University of Delaware *
68 Fordham University (NY)
68 Univ. of California – Santa Cruz *
68 University of Connecticut *
71 Brigham Young Univ. – Provo (UT)
71 Southern Methodist University (TX)
71 Stevens Institute of Technology (NJ)
74 Indiana University – Bloomington *
74 Michigan State University *
74 SUNY – Binghamton *
74 Univ. of Minnesota – Twin Cities *
78 Baylor University (TX)
78 Clemson University (SC)*
78 North Carolina State U. – Raleigh *
78 St. Louis University
78 University of Colorado – Boulder *
78 Virginia Tech *
84 Clark University (MA)
85 American University (DC)
85 Auburn University (AL)*
85 Iowa State University *
85 Marquette University (WI)

Public Universities that are ahead of BigU are bolded*. Wisconsin has dropped one spot from last year and Minnesota has dropped several spots to be tied for 33rd in the public university category. The eleven BigTen schools, including Penn State and Northwestern, are in green. BigU is tied for last place in the BigTen with Indiana and Michigan State.

Now OurLeader and other BigU administrators can cry that the criteria used for these rankings is suspect and that their own numbers are a better method of ranking. But looking at the criteria used in the US News rankings, they don't seem particularly unusual or unfair to Mr. B. Somehow, using them, Wisconsin is 40 [sic] positions above us. And the majority of our competition in the BigTen beat us. With the exception of Northwestern, they all bear the same burden of being a state supported institution. How can this be? And let's face it - if a prospective student is going to be looking for ways to evaluate potential places to attend college, he or she would be foolish not to consider these rankings. They are readily available to prospective students - just google college rankings and see what pops up.

So Mr. B. concludes with his usual request to OurLeader and his functionaries. Please drop this "one of the top three public research universities in the world" stuff. You destroy all credibility when you speak this way. "In the world" reeks of hubris. We have a lot of important work at BigU that should have priority. You would be surprised at what will happen if you can come up with a scheme that the faculty can buy. Let's fix things that are obviously broken. Going on a Children's Crusade at this point is foolish.

"We're number 74!" Now that is a rallying cry. Or, perhaps "Tied for last in the Big Ten - Nowhere to go but up!"

There is obviously plenty we have to do before we worry about becoming one of the top three public research universities in the world. This ambitious aspirations business is a smokescreen. To even mention it, given the sad current state of affairs, is disgraceful.

Mr. Bonzo