Where does the axe fall next?

[Balsy]

More press on UA.

[ZippyRulz]

"The Legislature made a mistake by not addressing fees as well as tuition, Johnson said."

So the state continually reduces financial support of the universities, then makes them freeze tuition, and when they make ends meet however they can, blames them for a mistake made by the state. Now that's embarrassing.

[morris buttermaker]

Universities have for years (especially in states where individual universities compete with each other-- rather than fall under one system) spent money on anything and everything, like drunken sailors.

[Dave in Green]

It was pretty obvious that UA was going to have to explain that fee thing in more detail once the complaints reached Columbus. If they don't have a good answer it could get messy. This is one of the real issues as opposed to the red herring of the president's home refurb after 16 years of wear and tear.

[Dave in Green]

Universities have for years (especially in states where individual universities compete with each other-- rather than fall under one system) spent money on anything and everything, like drunken sailors.

Have you (or anyone else reading this thread) spent any time at all on OhioHigherEd.org, the home of the Ohio Board of Regents that oversees Ohio's public universities? You can get a really good read on where they're pushing UA and other public universities by seeing what's prominently featured on that website.

[LosAngelesZipFan]

Just looking at that graphic on athletic department spending, I wonder how much money could be saved through a Can't merger. Combined budgets is over 50M and if all the saving lowered the subsidy (about 40M combined), the school could possibly have an AD the size of UC but with less subsidies. Clearly, the saving would come from merging redundant programs rather than making cuts.

The biggest chunk of both ADs is football-- we can't afford 2 of these football programs in NEO. It's only going to get worse, regardless of the records. Start there, get an exception from the NCAA to have a single Akron-Can't football program.

[ZippyRulz]

Trying to pin all the blame on any UA President for what may or may not have been a good plan that went wrong due to unforeseen circumstances overlooks the actual UA operating structure and responsibilities:

The University of Akron's Board of Trustees is the governing body for The University of Akron, pursuant to Ohio Revised Code 3359.01. The Board is composed of 11 members—9 voting members and 2 nonvoting student members—all of whom are appointed by the Governor of Ohio with the advice and consent of the State Senate.Trustees are appointed to a nine-year term of office, with the exception of Student Trustees who are appointed to a two-year term. On October 26, 2011, the Board adopted Rule 3359-1-10 thereby creating the position of Advisory Trustee and enabling the Board to add up to three non-voting members in that position, in addition to the 11 governor-appointed individuals.

The Board of Trustees has been charged by the Ohio Legislature (Ohio Revised Code 3359.03 and 3359.04) with—selecting and appointing the president; setting the operating budget; approving personnel appointments; granting all degrees awarded by the University, including honorary degrees; establishing tuition and fee rates; approving contracts; and approving all rules, regulations, curriculum changes, new programs and degrees at The University of Akron.

There's some strange irony in that the state appoints trustees who then hire a president who pokes his finger in the eye of the state who is ultimately responsible for his actions. I guess in the end it just means they could fire his a$$ directly or cause the trustees to do so. Another funny thing is that the governor could get as involved in the situation as he wants to but he is now preoccupied with becoming a presidential nominee.

[LosAngelesZipFan]

It is hard to second guess re-building campus-- it desperately needed it. Too bad there wasn't more state support available for it.

After looking at the budget info on the UA website, and in the context of our convo of confederating UA and Can't in some way, I wonder if there would be a way to pass a small 'sin tax' in NEO counties served by a confederated UA-Can't "NEO system". Since the state is basically abdicating its role in funding higher ed, the local community steps in and provides some support. Perhaps local residents then get a scholly/rebate to attend. Maybe it's a crazy idea, but it would directly align the support of the institutions with the area that benefits from their presence.

BTW, is OU getting a lift from fracking in its area? Is that bringing in new dollars that are trickling to OU in some way?

[LosAngelesZipFan]

BTW, the state actually has a program to create a unified global student recruitment effort https://www.ohiohighered.org/sites/ohiohighered.org/files/uploads/global/GREATreport.pdf

I still think this would be a great place for UA and Can't to create a unique, combined effort on for the benefit of NEO.

[ZippyRulz]

It was pretty obvious that UA was going to have to explain that fee thing in more detail once the complaints reached Columbus. If they don't have a good answer it could get messy.

I'd guess Pres. Scar.'s explanation is going to be the plain simple truth, that he is up against it due to the circumstances he came into and he is having to find creative solutions to get through the current financial situation. I'm starting to think it's the trustees and Proenza who are going to have some 'splainin to do in Columbus about the current situation and wouldn't be surprised if some trustees get the boot.

[a-zip]

I'd guess Pres. Scar.'s explanation is going to be the plain simple truth, that he is up against it due to the circumstances he came into and he is having to find creative solutions to get through the current financial situation. I'm starting to think it's the trustees and Proenza who are going to have some 'splainin to do in Columbus about the current situation and wouldn't be surprised if some trustees get the boot.

+1

[a-zip]

Balsy, I was just reading through some of your comments and positions on some of the more recent “hot” topics;

· Corp of Cadets has huge bust potential

· Don’t like the presidents house being remodeled

· You are a protester on the rebranding

· The whole rebranding idea is absolutely asinine

· Don’t believe Dr. Scarborough has done any due diligence

· Dr. Scarborough has shown disregard for the UA community

· Dr. Scarborough has no fundraising ability

· He has made zero effort to be engaged with students, faculty and staff

· Don’t agree with the cutting of some of the 200 undergrad degrees

· Education is not a business. It should not be a business. It should not operate as a business. It does not work on the same principal of a business.

· Bill Gates and Mark Cuban know nothing about education

· Don’t like MOOC courses

· Complain that decisions are being made without research and then when you find out money was spent on research you complain

· You complained there is no transparency with Dr. SS administration when feedback is that it is much better than the previous administration

· Oh, and you started the A-Roo being eliminated thread when TW’s response to you clearly said we were simply moving to the Z, NOT eliminating the A-Roo.

Someone said, “We need a critic as UA president”. Balsy, I think you should apply.

[Balsy]

Balsy, I was just reading through some of your comments and positions on some of the more recent “hot” topics;

· Complain that decisions are being made without research and then when you find out money was spent on research you complain

Someone said, “We need a critic as UA president”. Balsy, I think you should apply.

I'm well aware of my positions, thanks. The one bullet above though I'd like to perhaps clarify. If money is being spent on research, I want to see it. I don't trust (nor should anyone) research that isn't peer reviewed. Just because money was spent on research, doesn't mean it was good, which is why the peer review process IMO is so important. Your peer review of my criticisms, for example, is a good thing.

If someone (perhaps DiG) can find peer reviewed research, and case studies deal with the success of a university to a polytechnic, I'd love to read it.

I'm critical of decisions made by a lot of people at UA because (pardon my language) I give a damn about UA. And, IMO, the people who care most about something are the people who should also be most critical of it.

[a-zip]

It is a forum for us to state our opinions (we all have em')

We state opinions, the administration makes changes and you criticize. Conspiracy, mistrust, false statements. Do you think the status quo is acceptable? What are your solutions?

[g-mann17]

So what is the root cause of the need for change?

An expected loss of revenue (budget gap) due to "declining" enrollment.

What caused the declining enrollment, it wasn't because of the changes and beautification of campus. The decline in enrollment was specifically due to a desire to do two things....1) increase the graduation rate...2) make the university more prestigious by increasing the metrics of incoming freshmen.

So now because of the change to being an "open enrollment" university the new president is stuck with an image problem. The University of Akron, despite what the alumni and students know, is viewed as a commuter school, a last choice school. That is not an ideal image when you want to improve the type of student you want to attract.

Now I disagree with some of the decisions, lower the cost of intro credits and raising fees on 300-400 level classes. That is counter productive to goal number of increasing the graduation rate. It promotes dropping out or transferring to other schools. Quite frankly it's a car sales technique that has no place in public education.

Outside of that, the re-branding concept seems great. Establish an identity that as been lacking. People with knowledge pigeon holed UA as an engineering school even though it has many strong programs. The problem with the re-branding is that people "understand" polytechnic as "tech" and you put yourself at the disadvantage of having to educate people on what a polytechnic school is. Also the lack of transparency (though necessary as to avoid other schools from stealing the idea) created fear of a name change.

Growing pains are rough, I remember when Proenza first took over, the increase in fees to pay for buildings that no one would see or use for 4 years hit a lot of people the wrong way, and enrollment dropped (below 25,000 at one point). But it eventually grew again. As Akron positions itself as a school of first choice, there are going to be some growing pains, but I think we will see improvement more quickly.

[Dave in Green]

I'm well aware of my positions, thanks. The one bullet above though I'd like to perhaps clarify. If money is being spent on research, I want to see it. I don't trust (nor should anyone) research that isn't peer reviewed. Just because money was spent on research, doesn't mean it was good, which is why the peer review process IMO is so important. Your peer review of my criticisms, for example, is a good thing.

If someone (perhaps DiG) can find peer reviewed research, and case studies deal with the success of a university to a polytechnic, I'd love to read it.

I'm critical of decisions made by a lot of people at UA because (pardon my language) I give a damn about UA. And, IMO, the people who care most about something are the people who should also be most critical of it.

Regarding peer review, I agree that it's important. But not everything that hasn't been peer-reviewed should be summarily dismissed. It just requires a little closer scrutiny to determine the validity of the data. Any kind of case study of a university changing to a polytechnic, let alone one that's been peer-reviewed, is a pretty unlikely item to be easily found if it even exists. I try to prioritize my search time on things where I'm likely to find good data in a reasonable time frame.

I also agree that those who care the most about something should be critical about it. But there's a big difference between constructive criticism and continuous bashing. It's not constructive to treat something like a FPS with unlimited ammo where you just hold down the trigger, strafe anything that moves and ignore anyone who says, wait, what you're trying to blow away may not be a space invader after all.

Constructive criticism requires taking the time to intelligently research things to clearly differentiate what may be wrong from what may be right. It requires a balance of acknowledging what's right along with criticizing what appears to be wrong. It requires focusing on the primary things that appear to be wrong and not getting distracted by trivial side issues. It requires acknowledging that those being criticized for apparently being part of the problem are not always entirely responsible for having created the problem. It requires showing respect for the opinions of others who also care but may have different perspectives and conflicting viewpoints.

We should all welcome constructive criticism.

[Balsy]

Regarding peer review, I agree that it's important. But not everything that hasn't been peer-reviewed should be summarily dismissed. It just requires a little closer scrutiny to determine the validity of the data. Any kind of case study of a university changing to a polytechnic, let alone one that's been peer-reviewed, is a pretty unlikely item to be easily found if it even exists. I try to prioritize my search time on things where I'm likely to find good data in a reasonable time frame.

I also agree that those who care the most about something should be critical about it. But there's a big difference between constructive criticism and continuous bashing. It's not constructive to treat something like a FPS with unlimited ammo where you just hold down the trigger, strafe anything that moves and ignore anyone who says, wait, what you're trying to blow away may not be a space invader after all.

Constructive criticism requires taking the time to intelligently research things to clearly differentiate what may be wrong from what may be right. It requires a balance of acknowledging what's right along with criticizing what appears to be wrong. It requires focusing on the primary things that appear to be wrong and not getting distracted by trivial side issues. It requires acknowledging that those being criticized for apparently being part of the problem are not always entirely responsible for having created the problem. It requires showing respect for the opinions of others who also care but may have different perspectives and conflicting viewpoints.

We should all welcome constructive criticism.

Very good points Dave.

And a-zip I do actually have a constructive solution, of possible solutions that I would definitely need more information about the actual financial situation of the university. As a counter to the implementation of MOOCs and a more immidiate focus would be on improving the value and quality of the education students recieve, and make that value in direct competiion with other public universities in the state. I'd go in more depth, but perhaps this should be a topic for another thread (off topic).

[a-zip]

So what is the root cause of the need for change?

An expected loss of revenue (budget gap) due to "declining" enrollment.

What caused the declining enrollment, it wasn't because of the changes and beautification of campus. The decline in enrollment was specifically due to a desire to do two things....1) increase the graduation rate...2) make the university more prestigious by increasing the metrics of incoming freshmen.

So now because of the change to being an "open enrollment" university the new president is stuck with an image problem. The University of Akron, despite what the alumni and students know, is viewed as a commuter school, a last choice school. That is not an ideal image when you want to improve the type of student you want to attract.

Now I disagree with some of the decisions, lower the cost of intro credits and raising fees on 300-400 level classes. That is counter productive to goal number of increasing the graduation rate. It promotes dropping out or transferring to other schools. Quite frankly it's a car sales technique that has no place in public education.

Outside of that, the re-branding concept seems great. Establish an identity that as been lacking. People with knowledge pigeon holed UA as an engineering school even though it has many strong programs. The problem with the re-branding is that people "understand" polytechnic as "tech" and you put yourself at the disadvantage of having to educate people on what a polytechnic school is. Also the lack of transparency (though necessary as to avoid other schools from stealing the idea) created fear of a name change.

Growing pains are rough, I remember when Proenza first took over, the increase in fees to pay for buildings that no one would see or use for 4 years hit a lot of people the wrong way, and enrollment dropped (below 25,000 at one point). But it eventually grew again. As Akron positions itself as a school of first choice, there are going to be some growing pains, but I think we will see improvement more quickly.

gmann, I ran out of "likes" but

Here I go again Capt'n.....

I personally like all the "ideas" I am hearing from Dr. SS. I also liked the ideas Dr. Proenza had. We needed a new stadium, building one on campus was awesome and to have one as nice as the Info was a bonus. I also liked the "idea" of renovating the campus and building new dorms. I like the "idea" of getting away from the commuter school stigma. All of that made sense to me BUT the plan for implementing, rolling out and marketing it all sucked!! "Build it and they will come" is not a strategy - it is more like a "hail mary" to me. Maybe there wasn't enough money left over to market all the new shiny changes or maybe it wasn't well thought out. Some of the ideas that have come on this board I like;

More events at the Info and on campus. Get some concerts, festivals, and other events on campus. Look at what the Lebron James homecoming drew

http://www.wkyc.com/picture-gallery/homepage/2014/08/08/photos--welcome-home-lebron-james-celebration/13807269/

Look at what the Browns "family day" drew

http://www.clevelandbrowns.com/news/article-1/Browns-reach-capacity-for-2014-Family-Day-at-University-of-Akron%E2%80%99s-InfoCision-Stadium/31ede129-e0c8-407e-8170-0dae432c860a

Why stop!!! Get people used to coming to the school, seeing how nice it is.....make it "the place to be". (Don't we make some money off of these???) Someone mentioned UA is difficult to deal with - if that is true.....it needs to be changed immediately. Sadly, these two events have outdrawn any Zip football game (except maybe the opener).

Speaking of Lebron James....he is probably the most recognized athlete in the world. Not many cities can claim having someone like him. Why are we not using Lebron and Nike more? King James Arena, King James Court. That is one of the paths I would be heading down to get a new arena built. He/they have the money to do it!

Building the Info and hiring iCoach was a mistake (as we all know). Maybe Dr. SS should have said "I would not have hired THAT coach" IF someone like Terry Bowden expressed an interest to come to UA to open the new stadium, that would have been a no-brainer. Personally, I liked JD Brookhart and he was doing fine. I realize this is all water under the bridge now but the only reason I bring this up is because WE DO HAVE Terry Bowden now and Chuck Amato. We are sooo lucky to have these guys and if they cannot turn this around, nobody can!! They need our support!! I don't care about the past losing records, weekday games, bad weather, etc. GET OUT TO THE GAMES!! I'm not asking for a sellout right away but 5400 people is a joke!! To me, it is all on the community. If the community does not come out, they don't deserve a team.....go pay a couple hundred to sit at the top of suckeye stadium.

If more people come to the games - we will win more, we will get better recruits (which will help us win more), we will go to bowl games, we can attract better opponents to the Info and people will get more excited. If people sit around and bitch and moan, we will continue losing, we will get inferior recruits and we will get embarrassing articles written about us having the worst attendance in NCAA football. If TB cannot turn this around and he leaves.....say goodbye to D1 football at UA.

I like "moving toward" the Z logo. I think the timing is good because I believe we are about to turn the corner in football. It feels fresh. This topic got more attention than it deserved and I doubt anyone will get turned away for coming to a game with A-Roo gear.

I like the re-branding. People need to become more educated on Polytechnic and the school needs to help with that. At some point, the schools reputation will speak for itself. I would not discourage my son to go to business school at Virginia Tech because it is a "polytechnic school". It is a great school....period! If we ultimately morph into Ohio Tech.....I like it. It sounds bigger.

I like the idea of blending MOOC http://jolt.merlot.org/vol9no2/bruff_0613.htm

The recent budget cuts?? I don't like them but they need to be done. We are not the only school out there to drop sports and if it frees up money for academics, I am all for it.

I do believe transparency is good but most organizations do not want information, history, plans to fall in the hands of competitors. Transparency has its advantages — and challenges. Organizational transparency helps create trust among stakeholders, encourages more informed decision making, and supports greater participation. However, it does not guarantee that the right decisions will be made or that information will not be manipulated or misconstrued. I like this comment from a CEO;

Like most children, my five-year old son is extremely transparent. For example, he enjoys playing card games, especially Uno, but requires all players to keep their cards exposed. You might say we play a transparent game. From my son's perspective, he cannot see playing the game any other way. If we attempt to hide our cards and play the game correctly, he assumes that we are cheating and holding back information. On the other hand, since all cards are exposed, he has learned how to manipulate the plays and direct the players' activities. Playing this way takes a bit longer, but in the end someone wins, often my son.

Lets face it, technology and social media have created plenty of transparency....like it or not.

There is a lot going on. Dr. SS has a lot of tough decisions to make and I don't expect everyone to like them all. I like hearing the objections but I HATE bitching without presenting alternative solutions. I hope this administration is taking their time, considering all options and rolling things out in an orderly manner.

[morris buttermaker]

Have you (or anyone else reading this thread) spent any time at all on OhioHigherEd.org, the home of the Ohio Board of Regents that oversees Ohio's public universities? You can get a really good read on where they're pushing UA and other public universities by seeing what's prominently featured on that website.

DIG- I have not looked at this-- and will.

I must say, I feel fairly vindicated on all my doom and gloom posts.No one likes to hear bad/ negative news about the Zips programs, but it was coming at the University like a runaway train.

Everyone who thought the next AD hire was easy or an attractive job (not me) sure is looking at it differently these last couple of weeks

[Dave in Green]

The doom and gloom about Zips athletics is nothing compared to all the ticking time bombs in the real world. Anyone who thrives on depressing news should read the following piece from The New Yorker. It's absolutely chilling and extraordinarily well written:

The Really Big One

[Spin]

Morris....you might want to check on the Soccer Scholarships. Or, maybe someone else can enlighten us. As far as I know, there's been plenty of guys in the past who had to qualify with an Academic Scholarship because we don't have enough Athletics to hand out on the men's side due to Title IX.

Would the baseball elimination at least allow us to correct that injustice?

They cut baseball to save money. Not spend it somewhere else.

[ZachTheZip]

They cut baseball to save money. Not spend it somewhere else.

Unless they pull a CSU and announce that we're starting a varsity Lacrosse team in a few weeks.

Lacrosse is the sport of choice for rich suburban kids these days, which gets rich suburban parents involved in the athletic program. That's the conclusion CSU made, as did Mike Waddell when he was AD at Towson.

[morris buttermaker]

Lacrosse can be played/ competed at the D1 level without being fully funded.. meaning the max number of scholly's is 12.6... for a roster of 40? it is also a fairly inexpensive sport to sponsor... a school could compete with probably somewhere in the range of 6-8 and do fine. The prospect of attracting potential student athletes paying tuition is how the D3 model works.. and I think in certain sports can work at D1. Lacrosse is one of them--- but I don't see it happening for Akron. So, a potential athlete getting a 1/4 at PSU as an out of state student is better off being a 100% walk on at an in state school like Akron. (financially).

[ZippyRulz]

The doom and gloom about Zips athletics is nothing compared to all the ticking time bombs in the real world. Anyone who thrives on depressing news should read the following piece from The New Yorker. It's absolutely chilling and extraordinarily well written:

The Really Big One

Akron is looking pretty good after reading that!

[ZachTheZip]

https://mobile.twitter.com/AkronZips/status/621768699884638208

Everybody needs to share this. Hopefully the ABJ and the rest will get the message.