More Cuts coming to Akron ...

[GP1]

57 minutes ago, egregiousbob said:

As for current round of budget cuts, I have heard there's growing sentiment among trustees and the administration that it's time to de-emphasize football.  Simply no ROI in the existing business case.

How could they make it less emphasized?  Seems almost impossible. 

 

What other MAC schools are getting a return on their football investments?  At the most, zero. 

 

Sounds like we need new blood on the board with a better vision of how an athletic department benefits the athletes students alumni fans and general community around Akron. 

[ZipCat]

39 minutes ago, GP1 said:

Sounds like we need new blood on the board with a better vision of how an athletic department benefits the athletes students alumni fans and general community around Akron. 

 

Does it actually benefit the alumni and general community around Akron? I wouldn't trust any financial analysis that said it did further than I could wipe my own ass with it. The only ones it truly benefits is administrators to pad their resumes, and people with coaching/sports-fitness degrees because it keeps a lot of them employed. 

 

If it comes down to cutting teachers/professors or cutting coaches/sport-fitness folks ... the choice should be pretty clar.

[GP1]

2 minutes ago, ZipCat said:

 

Does it actually benefit the alumni and general community around Akron?

It is not. There in lies the problem. 

[Sergeant Zip]

From Signal Akron, proposed cuts of 10 faculty members in polymer science are part of a list of more than 30 faculty members that could be let go.

[ClevelandZip]

32 minutes ago, Sergeant Zip said:

From Signal Akron, proposed cuts of 10 faculty members in polymer science are part of a list of more than 30 faculty members that could be let go.

Cutting 10 of 19 of the professors in our most well renown program seems like a huge mistake. Hope someone talks some sense into these people.

[zip-O-matic]

Didn't Duke show up a few years ago and poach our best professors who took their doctoral students and research funding with them?

[UAZipster0305]

On 11/26/2024 at 12:43 AM, zip-O-matic said:

Didn't Duke show up a few years ago and poach our best professors who took their doctoral students and research funding with them?

I thought that was about a decade ago.

[UAZipster0305]

On 11/25/2024 at 1:57 PM, ClevelandZip said:

Cutting 10 of 19 of the professors in our most well renown program seems like a huge mistake. Hope someone talks some sense into these people.

 

Our leadership for the past fifteen years has to be some of the most incompetent at any Ohio university all-time.

 

Sadly, this example demonstrates it's just continuing.

[Hilltopper]

I'm hearing the professor to student ratio is way out of whack in the polymer program.

[adzip]

Guess is the students are not there because of the drop off in international students nationally. The graduate programs in Polymer Science are heavily made up of foreign students. Without them, many classes would be literally empty.

[zippy-claws]

On 11/28/2024 at 9:41 AM, Hilltopper said:

I'm hearing the professor to student ratio is way out of whack in the polymer program.

 

22 hours ago, adzip said:

Guess is the students are not there because of the drop off in international students nationally. The graduate programs in Polymer Science are heavily made up of foreign students. Without them, many classes would be literally empty.

 

I concur with both of these posts.  Being retired from the plastics and polymer business as a chemist in my "previous life" I have witnessed a steady decline in the original intent of this department and program.  What was originally designed to train not only PhD candidates but undergrads and associate degree seekers to help populate a need for engineers, chemists and technicians slowly changed to a highly PhD driven program with most candidates from overseas.  My company, as well as several other prominent Polymer companies donated cash and equipment, plus co-op opportunities and internships, hoping to see a return in employable, polymer science trained candidates for our industry.  Even the American Chemical Society and it's Rubber Division, as well as the local Rubber Groups professional societies endorsed the programs and also provided financial support.  But that supply dwindled as did support, as a lot of the rubber, plastics and polymer companies left the area.  When we attended our daughter's graduation 5 years back the Polymer Science doctoral stoles were awarded, and reading the abstracts of their doctoral theses I was bemused at the subject matter and research, and thought how far away from the original intent they had strayed.  And Hilltopper is right, it was a school top-heavy in Profs.

[zip-O-matic]

2 hours ago, zippy-claws said:

 

 

I concur with both of these posts.  Being retired from the plastics and polymer business as a chemist in my "previous life" I have witnessed a steady decline in the original intent of this department and program.  What was originally designed to train not only PhD candidates but undergrads and associate degree seekers to help populate a need for engineers, chemists and technicians slowly changed to a highly PhD driven program with most candidates from overseas.  My company, as well as several other prominent Polymer companies donated cash and equipment, plus co-op opportunities and internships, hoping to see a return in employable, polymer science trained candidates for our industry.  Even the American Chemical Society and it's Rubber Division, as well as the local Rubber Groups professional societies endorsed the programs and also provided financial support.  But that supply dwindled as did support, as a lot of the rubber, plastics and polymer companies left the area.  When we attended our daughter's graduation 5 years back the Polymer Science doctoral stoles were awarded, and reading the abstracts of their doctoral theses I was bemused at the subject matter and research, and thought how far away from the original intent they had strayed.  And Hilltopper is right, it was a school top-heavy in Profs.

 

Don't know a lot of the internals and history of the program, but it seems like a program meant to support the region's businesses that ended up with dreams of turning itself into Berkeley and winning Nobels.  My hunch would be that this was, to some degree, Proenza driven.  All that seemed to happen is that we lavished attention on a group of faculty who managed to catch Duke's eye and then bail on UA.

[ZipCat]

On 11/25/2024 at 1:57 PM, ClevelandZip said:

Cutting 10 of 19 of the professors in our most well renown program seems like a huge mistake. Hope someone talks some sense into these people.

 

CEO brainrot. 

[UAZipster0305]

On 11/29/2024 at 4:21 PM, zip-O-matic said:

 

Don't know a lot of the internals and history of the program, but it seems like a program meant to support the region's businesses that ended up with dreams of turning itself into Berkeley and winning Nobels.  My hunch would be that this was, to some degree, Proenza driven.  All that seemed to happen is that we lavished attention on a group of faculty who managed to catch Duke's eye and then bail on UA.

 

It's been a while since I have checked in with this thread, but never have I been more disappointed in my fellow UA alums and supporters, and not just this particular post. I say this as an alum and someone who is STEM faculty at a major research university (not Duke).

 

Academic departments do not exist to serve industry nor vice versa. Rather, both coexist and grow in a complementary manner to serve an economy and create a community of support. UA's expertise grew out of the rubber industry, and because it was on the cutting edge of innovation (which all top STEM departments are), a whole new economy of polymers emerged. UA supplied intellectual property and graduates with advanced research training that allowed new companies to form and grow. This is why ACS and companies support the program, and it is the reason NEO is known as polymer valley.

 

Now, did polymer science and engineering need an entire college unto itself with the associated overhead of administration?...almost certainly not. Being a department within the college of engineering enables the same productivity, thus it is almost certainly a better value having been consolidated. However, a drastic reduction in faculty and the commensurate decrease in intellectual property, research funding, and graduates is as bad for surrounding industries as it is for the university itself. These losses are substantial too because polymer science and engineering was one of only two nationally ranked programs at UA, along with I/O Psychology. Do you enjoy seeing UA diminished on an international or national level? I certainly do not. Do you want to see UA become exclusively a regional state university? I do not. The truth is, UA WAS the Berkeley of polymer science and polymer engineering, and Proenza was 100% correct for celebrating this fact.

 

To Hilltopper's comment, the professor to student ratio is likely out of proportion for the polymer science and polymer engineering programs because they are primarily graduate programs in which faculty salaries are paid more through research grants, contracts, and endowment than teaching. It takes a lot more resources to mentor a graduate student to being a top scientist because it requires so much individual attention, whereas thirty undergrads can be taught in parallel via lectures and with the help of graduate students. Nearly all other departments have both undergrad and grad programs, so apples and oranges.

 

To adzip,yes, many of the students in polymer science and polymer engineering are not Americans, but that is the result of having an internationally-recognized program. It has international reach, and the program requires students with international-level credentials, experiences, and distinctions to maintain. How many STEM faculty at any university are international? How many of our best soccer players over the years have been international? Why is this a problem?

 

The only justification for such a reduction in faculty should be that resources previously available to support salaries were no longer available and this financial limitation was impossible to overcome through other means that were extensively explored. In any case, the loss of that many faculty in one of UA's few nationally and internationally recognized programs should cost executives their jobs.

 

Finally, the logical disconnect between so many posters here at ZN desperate for national recognition for sports but to not care about even maintaining international distinction in academics and research is astounding. Without a doubt, the latter is easier, especially in the current landscape, given the less even playing field in athletics, which is now further exaggerated by NIL

Edited Friday at 06:23 PM by UAZipster0305

[GP1]

The City of Akron has Goodyear and their research center. Akron also has the Bridgestone research center.  I could see how a world class research school could look regional. Akron doesn't have to leave the region in order to service research needs for companies if that is the priority in addition to education, which I feel is more important. If the cuts take into consideration maintaining the base of research demand until things improve, maybe they are making the right choices. 

[UAZipster0305]

51 minutes ago, GP1 said:

The City of Akron has Goodyear and their research center. Akron also has the Bridgestone research center.  I could see how a world class research school could look regional. Akron doesn't have to leave the region in order to service research needs for companies if that is the priority in addition to education, which I feel is more important. If the cuts take into consideration maintaining the base of research demand until things improve, maybe they are making the right choices. 

Without insider facts, it is impossible to say what the right course of action is, but I appreciate your thoughtfulness and perspective.

[Hilltopper]

16 hours ago, UAZipster0305 said:

 

It's been a while since I have checked in with this thread, but never have I been more disappointed in my fellow UA alums and supporters, and not just this particular post. I say this as an alum and someone who is STEM faculty at a major research university (not Duke).

 

Academic departments do not exist to serve industry nor vice versa. Rather, both coexist and grow in a complementary manner to serve an economy and create a community of support. UA's expertise grew out of the rubber industry, and because it was on the cutting edge of innovation (which all top STEM departments are), a whole new economy of polymers emerged. UA supplied intellectual property and graduates with advanced research training that allowed new companies to form and grow. This is why ACS and companies support the program, and it is the reason NEO is known as polymer valley.

 

Now, did polymer science and engineering need an entire college unto itself with the associated overhead of administration?...almost certainly not. Being a department within the college of engineering enables the same productivity, thus it is almost certainly a better value having been consolidated. However, a drastic reduction in faculty and the commensurate decrease in intellectual property, research funding, and graduates is as bad for surrounding industries as it is for the university itself. These losses are substantial too because polymer science and engineering was one of only two nationally ranked programs at UA, along with I/O Psychology. Do you enjoy seeing UA diminished on an international or national level? I certainly do not. Do you want to see UA become exclusively a regional state university? I do not. The truth is, UA WAS the Berkeley of polymer science and engineering, and Proenza was 100% correct for celebrating this fact.

 

To Hilltoppers comment, the professor to student ratio is likely out of proportion for the polymer science and polymer engineering programs because they are primarily graduate programs in which faculty salaries are paid more through research grants, contracts, and endowment than teaching. It takes a lot more resources to mentor a graduate student to being a top scientist because it requires so much individual attention, whereas thirty undergrads can be taught in parallel via lectures and with the help of graduate students. Nearly all other departments have both undergrad and grad programs, so apples and oranges.

 

To adzip,yes, many of the students in polymer science and polymer engineering are not Americans, but that is the result of having an internationally-recognized program. It has international reach, and the program requires students with international-level credentials, experiences, and distinctions to maintain. How many STEM faculty at any university are international? How many of our best soccer players over the years have been international? Why is this a problem?

 

The only justification for such a reduction in faculty should be that resources previously available to support salaries were no longer available and this financial limitation was impossible to overcome through other means that were extensively explored. In any case, the loss of that many faculty in one of UA's few nationally and internationally recognized programs should cost executives their jobs.

 

Finally, the logical disconnect between so many posters here at ZN desperate for national recognition for sports but to not care about even maintaining international distinction in academics and research is astounding. Without a doubt, the latter is easier, especially in the current landscape, given the less even playing field in athletics, which is now further exaggerated by NIL

Thank you for such a reasoned response to the issues facing UA. I love athletics but I also recognize the limitations a school of our size is facing in this new age of NIL. My hope is that we continue to not go full in to this arms race that we can never win. Hopefully the new administration can find the right formula to have a balance of academics and still maintain a presence in sports.

[GP1]

3 hours ago, Hilltopper said:

Thank you for such a reasoned response to the issues facing UA. I love athletics but I also recognize the limitations a school of our size is facing in this new age of NIL. My hope is that we continue to not go full in to this arms race that we can never win. Hopefully the new administration can find the right formula to have a balance of academics and still maintain a presence in sports.

When I see the word "we" in your post, I hope you mean a bigger we as in the MAC and MAClike conferences. 

[Hilltopper]

https://x.com/John_Sabol/status/1882556254465532056?t=aTfsvSB3dR6LhDjEWO0pug&s=19

[GP1]

3 hours ago, Hilltopper said:

https://x.com/John_Sabol/status/1882556254465532056?t=aTfsvSB3dR6LhDjEWO0pug&s=19

When I see this article, it reminds me that college athletics in the USA are unique to the rest of the world.