Hello everyone I've got a couple articles that are relevent to some of the things we are going over in our classes. First, in speaking with Dr. Meningal this week about her vice presidency, future plans to presidency in higher education, and leadership I think this article about " The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership" is interesting and very relevent. (http://chronicle.com/article/The-Imminent-Crisis-in-College/124513/)
In the spirit of football season I thought that the article "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" is a wonderful article. For those of us who were wondering the process of attaing a college football team and cost, here you go!
I think it is interesting how not too many people want to become a college/university president, but it is also not that surprising. Despite whether you are in student affairs or academic affairs a majority of people going into the world of higher education get involved because of the students. The student interaction is a big draw in this field and as Dr. Meningal addressed Greg’s question yesterday it is the one thing she misses the most as she continues to climb the ladder. But I think it’s great that she does make an effort to make those limited interactions meaningful and goes out of her way to make sure she is indeed interacting. A lot of presidents I have met could take a note or two from her. :) Good job Takiyah on relating these articles to what we’ve been learning in our classes.
I'll just post this week's "amazing, but meaningless coincidence" because there seems to be one every week! The instrument I'm using for my dissertation was developed by a professor who now teaches at Kennesaw State!
I agree that it is not surprising that many people do not want to become college/university presidents because they know that the higher they climb the student affairs ladder, the less students they get to work with. After all, the reason that many of us are interested in this field is to work with students, so it is understandable why many people would not want to work as a president. With that being said, I think that it is not a bad thing that some schools hire presidents that do not have student affairs backgrounds. Many people with student affairs backgrounds do not want the responsibility of the position.
Richard Ekman states in the article, The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership, "Still, we should be concerned that a growing number of colleges are being led by people who have never had direct experience in the heart of the enterprise as faculty members, department chairs, deans, or provosts." The article fears that if this number continues to increase that colleges and universities will become an industry that is led by people who do not understand it. However, both business and student affairs aspects are important in running an entire university/ college. You need a variety of transferable skills, and as long as the people surrounding the president have a strong student affairs background. I do not necessarily think that it is a bad thing if the president does not have a background in student affairs.
I can understand why many people do not want to become presidents of universities due to the lack of direct communication with students. We all entered into this field of higher education so that we can work and interact with students on a daily basis. However, I do feel that we as future student affairs professionals need to look at the bigger picture of things. We need to understand that the student experience, involvement, and academics are the number one priority. A president of a university needs to be someone who understands the bigger picture of things. They should understand the culture of a university, the students at universities, and have the ability to elevate and enhance a university to levels beyond belief. What better person than a student affairs professional? I feel as though we need not to let people without a true understanding of students and education come in and take over our universities because their lack of understanding can correlate a negative affect on students; thus negating the hard work that we provide to our students. I personally have the aspirations to become the president of a university even though I understand that my communication with students is limited. Me being the president of a university would give me the opportunity to create a change in culture and tradition that would hopefully result in students having the best experience possible.
In the Kennesaw State article, the part that stuck out to me was when it stated, "Last year not one program in Division I-AA broke even financially; in Division I-A, only 14 did. Many programs continue to bleed money: Deficits among Division I-AA athletic programs have continued to climb in recent years, reaching a median of $8.7-million in 2009." It would be interesting to see where USF fell on this list, especially as there continues to be talk about building our "own" stadium in the future.
The article on the lack of leadership in colleges truly amazes me. With so many brilliant and truly talented people working on all campuses across the country, I would imagine there would be more than enough talented and qualified applicants for any president position that were to become available. I agree that a president doesn't necessarily need to have a student affairs or academic background as long as he/she surrounds him/herself with strong individuals in each area on the executive board. I wonder how much decision making the president truly has when he/she has a Board of Trustees to report to (an earlier article I believe we read stated most of these people had little to no academic or student affairs background) in addition to the executive team that would help in making decisions that affect the entire university. I do think the idea of "president mentoring" or developing senior leadership institutes for mid-level administrators is a great way to develop talent within the educational system. It will be interesting to see what evolves during the course of our careers as we see leadership change at the universities we work at in addition to the ones we have ties to.
I also am not surprised that there is a lack of interest in being a college President. When do most presidents start 50-55? I think all of our experiences in grad school and post grad will help to shape the route that we go. This article brings up great questions about the future of higher education. Higher education does operate like a corporation in the sense that individuals work their way up in the “ranks” and get recognized by their work ethic. There are great benefits to having a traditional path in higher education but at the same time I have an open mind about giving the opportunity to someone who had a different path. Just because you were not an RA doesn’t mean you aren’t capable of working in Res Life. This is why the practicum, internship, and TA experiences during graduate school are so important. If a student affairs professional or academic can apply what they have done in a greater capacity as a president to lead the university then great. The process, I’m sure will be challenging but if someone is cut out for it, then they’ll put forth effort. I think there would be more cases of student affairs professionals becoming academics then vice versa. In my opinion this is a positive discussion that may allow more professional development opportunities for all employees, making higher education a more fluid place. It can also give colleagues a better understanding of the work of different divisions.
Since the topic of why most student affairs professionals don't care to become presidents of colleges has been covered, I'll try to take a slightly different approach to the topic. Dr. Miler has mentioned in class (and it has also been present in our readings) that student affairs is currently in the beginning stages of massive change. In Ecology, we have been talking about static versus dynamic environments. Some schools have begun to embrace more dynamic environments, while many others are still in static stages. I wonder if perhaps there is a way to re-organize the system in order to allow presidents and vice-presidents to remain in closer contact with students. Unfortunately, I think many presidents do not make an effort as Dr. Meningal does to interact with students. As a result, they are not in tune with the needs of the university and what it is the students would like to see happen. I would assume that the larger a college or university is, the less contact individuals in higher administration have with students, and those are the schools where contact is the most important in order for adequate student learning and development to occur. It will be interesting to see what changes, if any, are made in the upcoming years as we all enter the profession.
I am not all that suprised at the article concerning Student Affairs professionals being hesitant to move into president positions. A few of our guest speakers have already stressed how much responsibility and detachment forms in leadership spots. Dr. Meninghall and Dr. Miller both have made great points about trusting and hiring good people to carry out tasks as well. I believe there is a difference between leadership and management. To manage a University is one thing but to lead would mean to still inspire, motivate and care for those you work for. A good president may not have direct contact on a daily basis with student populations but can have an equal impact by staying true to them and as Dr. Miller says, hiring GOOD people :)
The college president dilemma is concerning because of the impact that this trend could have in the long term. Would this lead to more higher education institutions functioning like for-profit institutions? What components of academic or student affairs will change (i.e. are we going to see a surge in intercollegiate athletics because that generates money/donations)? As we have mentioned, I think that many components of higher education that are not financially profitable will suffer if the holistic components of education are replaced.
I am also interested, as are Andrea and Emily, to see what future changes will be made in higher education due to a lack of student affairs professionals’ desire to pursue president positions. In was interesting that the article compared this crisis to that of the U.S. automotive industry. While I don’t believe the changes higher education may see will be as extreme, what if it is not completely out of the question? In this worse-case scenario, the focus would be on efficiency and neglect to support student development. Static environments may become the norm. It is obviously difficult to predict these outcomes. However, what I deduced from class is that, over time, our field may fill with more professionals of similar educational backgrounds (i.e. CSA programs). This increases the odds for future college presidents to come from this background and bring with them the motivation to encourage student success and development.
Reading the article on college leadership helps to explain why many colleges are running, like Emily says, "for-profit institutions." Deans, vp's, provosts and other high-ranked officials seem to be the best fit to run universities. However, their passions lie in making sure that the students they serve are benefiting from the college experience. One thing to also note is that these officials can impact the college experience directly without every small detail being released to the world. On the flipside, as the article states, the infamous "sunshine" laws is one thing that turns people off from wanting to seek a presidency, mainly at state universities. Sunshine laws are mandates that require "regulatory authorities' meetings, decisions and records to be made available to the public." So, not only would their candidacies be made public, ever decision made would also be made known as well. As much as this law allows people to know what is happening at universities, it can put presidents in a position where they become "puppets," which, I think, may also be a reason as to why college officials shy away from presidencies. In the end, many individuals qualify for presidencies; some of them take on the challenge. Few will be chosen to lead...
I chose to focus on the second article, "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014." Just as Brent noted I believe it is interesting that of all collegiate football programs only 14 broke even last year. I took a course in my undergraduate work that was with an extremely active leader in the field of NCAA sports. He told us that at the time only 9 schools made a profit and after naming the institutions it was clear why they managed to make money. The ones that are most memorable now are: Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and USC although they probably are not anymore. The fan bases for those programs are in place and the money is there because of their popularity. It makes me wonder the question, "Can a program move into this echelon or are the teams that have reached elite status there to stay?" The best programs recruit the best players which give them the ability to compete every year bringing the most fans. How does a team such as South Florida compete over the course of many years?
Kennesaw State University seems to be in an interesting position. They have the excitement and the people in place to make it happen but is the money there? They cited a budget of $10 million to fund the starting of a football program but the article states that Div AA programs are losing a median of $8.7 million (I also thought median is an interesting statistic to use). Based on these statistics it will be interesting to see if they go through the effort to build a program.
There is a section in the article concerning leadership in universities where it writes about many top universities that employee professors with great backgrounds in their field, but little teaching experience. We’ve all been in a classroom with a professor who has a doctorate in their field with tons of experience, but they can’t teach in a way that is engaging or remotely interesting. Most professors rarely use blackboard to their advantage and stick to old and traditional lecture to a motionless, voiceless classroom. The way a university hires professors should be based off of their ability to teach first, and their success in their subject field second.
As I read the article about plans to start a football program at Kennesaw State Univ., I was reminded of the development of football at USF. The information describing characteristics of Kennesaw State reflect USF, 15 years ago. USF was at the same stage of institutional growth of KS when it began the process to develop a football team. USF had an image of a commuter school that it wanted to grow beyond and USF requested the advisement of a local football icon, Leroy Selmon, to help build awareness and booster support. It is clear that considerable planning and budget appropriations are needed to work toward the goal. But is this really a goal or more a reaction to the expectations of Saturday afternoon sports fans? Our society has become very accustomed to getting what they want from Universities, simply by asking repeatedly, “when are you going to have a football team?” Whether it is a need or a want is unimportant at this stage, just like USF. Fortunately for Kennesaw State they have many elements of the building process available to begin. The support of regional sports fans, proud students and alumni, the wisdom of experienced advisors, NCAA support and a new functional facility to host games. So get ready to schedule your road trip to Atlanta I 2014, because the Bulls are gonna beat the Owls.
While reading "The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership" I couldn't help but feel the undertone that even student affairs administators would not be viable candidates to become college presidents. Richard Eckman states, "we should be concerned that a growing number of colleges are being led by people who have never had direct experience in the heart of the enterprise as faculty members, department chairs, deans, or provosts". This means he is weary of people who don't come directly from a faculty background. I see his point about how outside candidates from different industries would be risky candidates because they don't understand colleges, but I find it interesting that there isn't much emphasis on the strength of student affairs candidates. From other things that we have read and how it seems to be, faculty and upper administration don't always see the value of student affairs professionals or if they see the value, they feel it is a step below faculty. I understand our profession cannot exist without professors and students enrolled in those classes, but it seems like student affairs is like a step child that isn't quite fully accepted into the collegiate family. I realize some institutions have been able to overcome this, but I think it is the more dynamic schools Andrea and Angela have referred to above. As we grow in our careers, I hope this will change and the change will start with strong leadership (from either side of an institution) that understands the importance of student affairs.
I really like the articles this week. As many of you have already mentioned, I too am not surprised in the decreased number of people interested in presidencies. Not to sound repetitive but like many have mentioned we all decided to do student affairs to work with students. For me at least, the thought of being a college president is unappealing. It is important for me to interact with students in different capacities and it is obviously very difficult once you have reached that level in your career. I agree with Andrea in the fact that many of them don't make the effort to interact with students and therefore may not adequately be prepared to make the changes that the STUDENTS want to see happen within the university. I am interested in seeing how this dilemma will pan out as we continue on our paths as student affairs professionals.
I really like the articles this week. As many of you have already mentioned, I too am not surprised in the decreased number of people interested in presidencies. Not to sound repetitive but like many have mentioned we all decided to do student affairs to work with students. For me at least, the thought of being a college president is unappealing. It is important for me to interact with students in different capacities and it is obviously very difficult once you have reached that level in your career. I agree with Andrea in the fact that many of them don't make the effort to interact with students and therefore may not adequately be prepared to make the changes that the STUDENTS want to see happen within the university. I am interested in seeing how this dilemma will pan out as we continue on our paths as student affairs professionals.
Takiyah did a great job this week in relating the article to our guest speaker! After hearing Dr. Meningal speak about her job and how passionate she is about what she does, I can only hope that there are more people out there like her who desire to and can keep higher education on the right track. That is, focusing on and supporting the students in their learning and success. If I understand the numbers in the article correctly, about 40% of college or university presidents come from outside higher education. This is a large number and one I didn't expect! I sincerely hope that those who are being hired are, as Dr. Miller says, good people, and ones who can lead with the education goals of the university in mind. If too many, as the article says, "[manage] for efficient production," it could mean a loss of focus on the real reason for colleges and universities existing, and could be devastating to the quality of our higher education system and our students.
I also really enjoyed both articles for the week. Also, like everyone has stated I am not surprised that small number of people wanting to be university president. I myself do not see this as a career path at the moment. I am also not surprised by the increase in those not in an academic setting taking the role of presidency for universities due to their business "savvy" background. This is worrisome however, like Emily stated this this could lead to universities functioning as for-profit institutes.
I also enjoyed the "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" article and found it interesting the cost of adding a football team to an institution. It is surprising to me that a large university in Georgia, which is a football fanatic state would not have a team.
The article about Kennesaw State should be shocking in the current economic environment. It is hard to believe that the committee is recommending starting football with the expectation to lose money. What is also interesting is that they do not touch on the additional costs which should also go along with forming corresponding women’s team to comply with Title IX. Football has become such an attractive lure because of the name recognition and perceived prestige as the school becomes better known. I wonder if the committee that was reviewing this decision also made individual cash donations to kick off the fundraising. I also wonder if Vince Dooley is the right person to head this type of committee. He left the University of Georgia years ago and has not worked small schools since before he came to Georgia in the 70’s.
The article about Kennesaw State working towards a football program surprised me. The article stated Kennesaw State is “eager to change its image as a commuter school” but is the cost of creating a football team the best option right now? If they don’t even expect to breakeven then should they be thinking of other ways to change its image? Perhaps they could put money into a different program, sports, academics, or residence hall related. If creating a football team is the best way for the school to be recognized and grow I hope they really think about the long term costs and benefits.
Like many others I wasn’t too surprised by the lack of interest of many to become a university president. The article on college leadership mentioned the concern that “higher education will become an industry that is led by people who do not truly understand it” and this is possible with the number of people coming from areas outside of academia. Student affairs professionals are not necessarily from academia backgrounds, but do understand the goals of higher education and could lead a university successfully. I think people with many different backgrounds could hold the position of being president, but it is the people that surround and support the president need to keep the president focused. I do think it would be easier for a president if they did have the academic or student affairs background.
I thought the article on Kennesaw State University starting a football team is realistic. Most people thought it was shocking that the university is trying to have a football team. It seems to be what the people want in that area. According to the article, the president said that in every meeting he was asked when the school was going to have a football program. I think that they will get plenty of private donations from the community to fund the program at first. Then they will just have to have a strong coaching staff to begin and build the program further. My only worry about the football program would be the shift from the academic focus that they have now. There have been many studies conducted that state when colleges and universities have strong sport programs the focus on academics decline and sometimes this could be the worst outcome for a school.
Oh college football. I graduated from a football crazy college; my little brother is playing baseball at a school that doesn’t have it. No one left our campus on football weekends, he jokes about being the only one on campus over the weekend (he’s four hours from our home town). His school has discussed adding football and he’s really looking forward to it, just so that there will be more going on over the weekends. Last year he made three or four weekend trips home just for football games. When you look at it that way, maybe the cost, even if athletics isn’t making money, is worth it. If students stay for football they’re probably more likely to participate in other weekend programming and hopefully be more involved during the week too. Baseball lured my brother out of state for college, but without it I’m not sure the suitcase campus feel would be very appealing. Another benefit is school pride. My parents took both of us to Iowa football games as a little kids, so by the time I was a student at the U of I my school pride was well intact. From our Ecology reading this week, student pride has some campus safety ties, students are more protective of their space if they are proud of it, and football can do a lot of school pride. I can definitely understand the reservations about starting a football program with the way most university budgets look right now, but a lot of good can come of it too and it made my college experience more positive.
Like many others, the lack of interest in college presidency is not surprising. I came from a small institution where we went through three different presidents in my four years there. Of the presidents that failed, they had a strong financial and business background. I am not saying that this is at all a bad skill for a president to have, however a corporate or financial background is very different than one who comes up through a student oriented background. The one president that was highly successful, and loved by students, was Dr. Kneedler. He was known for being a presence on campus at many student events. He was at many of the sporting events, he came to residence hall programs and also helped new students move into their room on the first day of orientation. He put himself on the level of his students, which created an amazing atmosphere on campus between students, staff and faculty.
Many presidents have a disconnect from students, and they tend to focus more on the technical aspects to run an institution. Like Dr Miller stated, a student affairs professional in a president position would be a deadly combination. Although presidents are disconnected from students, due to the demand of other duties, it is still their responsibility to make those connections with students and to stay up to date with the latest trends and needs of their student population. This population is who they serve and they must be connected to them in some way.
(Chance) The "Imminent Crisis...." article was rather interesting. It details the plight of many universities in attracting qualified individuals for the position of president. While qualified can be a generic term, rightly qualified is more astute. And rightly qualified is something that should be addressed in choosing "the best people, for the right job."
The author of the article makes a good point he talks about GM. GM veered away from hiring people with experience in cars. Understandably these people did not have much understand of that specific industry, instead bringing with them their own experience in their previous fields. If universities and colleges continue to hire presidents with little to no experience in education, then I think the fallout could be atomic.
I really liked the point brought up in The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership that "Presidents should take seriously their role as mentors of talented young administrators and faculty members, underscoring the intellectual stimulation and professional satisfaction of the presidency." I think this is extremely true for every level of our profession. I know for many of us we are getting into this field to guide and mentor students so it would be purely ignorant if we didn't also mentor our colleagues. I know I wouldn't be here now if it wasn't for the guidance and advice of my mentors at my undergraduate. There are many reasons why we aspire to bigger and better things in our lives. One of these reasons is we see someone we respect and admire in a position above us and they mentor and guide us and we in turn aspire to be like them. So this makes sense that Presidents of University need to focus on the mentoring aspect.
I agree with Emily, Chance and the others who have mentioned the foreseeable problems associated with hiring school presidents from other fields. The parallel the article draws to the GM crisis left a powerful impression of the possible disengagement of school leaders to their schools. I personally think that there is much for a school to gain from the expertise and experience other fields can offer higher education. However, a possible incorporation of such “outside” expertise could be in the invention of precisely that—a consulting, rather than leading position for individuals’ whose life work has not been in the field. Have those who have been involved in other fields hired as consultants for the university, working with current student affairs professionals and professors, who, in their work, have learned the value and uniqueness of working with students.
What I find most interesting about the "Imminent Crisis..." article is probably something that went overlooked by most. It doesn't surprise me that so few people aspire to be University Presidents - but rather - "who" those people are... Only 24 percent of Chief Academic Officers - these are the men and women who work closely with the University Presidents, know the work they put in and the decisions they have to make. It takes a special talent to be a leader and it takes guts to WANT to be a leader. Just like a quarterback on a football team, the President gets praised if the University "wins" or does well, but who do we blame when things go wrong? It's not an enviable position, especially when you consider that most of these folks are on executive team positions with nearly the same amount of power, without nearly as much of the risk for blame.
This first article is right on time within the context of what we're learning in this program and within higher education in general.With shifts in other areas of higher ed (technology, cost, available amenities, diversity, accessibility) has come a shift in focus on what the mission of higher ed is/should be. I've heard more and more people remark how colleges and universities are becoming "big businesses." In many places, the premium isn't on educating the citizenry for such lofty goals as a more sensible electorate or the self-discovery and holistic development that the "college experience" has prided itself on providing for years, or even the delivery of quality educational opportunities. The focus has shifted to assembly-line type efficiency--the inputs and outputs and the bottom line. I think it's very sad. And I hope that as we continue on our journeys of becoming SA professionals we recognize and promote the importance of advocating for administrators who know education, and whose focus isn't on number crunching, technology etc...but rather understand the importance of the human aspect of what we're (allegedly) here to do.
I think the article on Leadership was very interesting. I have always questioned how people got to certain positions on campus, especially when they do not have previous experience. I am a believer that in order to do a job right you have to have had some experience or practice in that field. I know there are exceptional people who are able to adapt and adjust to their job at hand, but the question arises, when they need to make certain decision regarding someone’s future, and they don’t understand situations that are common within the population they have to deal with can they really do the job appropriately. Especially on a college campus there are so many responsibilities and if someone is not familiar with certain circumstances I believe this is not fulfilling all responsibilities of a leader.
The article "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" shows to me just how much colleges think football is important. I enjoy college football and believe that whether it is a good thing or not; many people get most of their school pride from their college football team. It does not matter if that college is the leading research center of the country and finding medical cures left and right. If that college has a football team for some reason people seem to connect and have more pride with their football team than anything else at their college.
For Kennesaw State U. to go out now and get a football team seems like an attempt to gain popularity in the country and give more people a reason to enroll. Some can say academics should be the first thing someone looks for when deciding where to go to college, but sadly that is not the case for everyone. With a football team in 2014 I am sure Kennesaw State U. will see an increase in enrollment and even school pride.
I think it is very interesting that after all this education, that people are wanting to settle before they get to the top. Like Dr.Miller always says it is very important to hire the right people, and I do not think that industrial presidents will be as effective or understanding as presidents who have seen the in's and out's of the education system. I hope this trend starts to turn around,I do not see many positives in hanving someone outside of education serve as a president of an educational institution. I enjoyed the football article and I think it is a great idea. I am a huge supporter of sports and I think college pride is highly based upon athletics. Providing more opportunities for college athletes to play and for a community to get involved is always exciting. I think a football team would definately change not only the style(communter to residential) but I think enrollemt may increase as well.
I loved the football article. What I found most intriguing was the parallels I thought about with USF. I don't know if everybody in the cohort knows, but the USF football is a very young program. We've spent a lot of time discussing how USF is a young university, but I don't think that's translated into how we also have a young athletics program (notably Football). The article also made me think about athletics and how it fits in student life. As Dr. Miller has pointed out before, athletics teams play interesting roles in universities. A football team is a great recruiting tool for universities (whether or not it should be is a different debate). At USF, the football program really helps enrich the student experience. I know that personally football season is my favorite time of the year and I learned quite a bit about time management seeing as Saturdays were entirely committed to football and tailgating as an undergraduate. While this might be unique at USF (I don't know if football is an "all-day" thing at other schools like it is at USF), but it certainly shaped my experience as a student. Perhaps the most surprising thing to me from the article was that athletics programs at those Division I-AA schools don't break even. Knowing that football programs, and athletics programs in general, are big-dollar and expensive operations, I just naturally assumed they made LOTS of money and that was why universities kept them around.
Hello everyone I've got a couple articles that are relevent to some of the things we are going over in our classes.
ReplyDeleteFirst, in speaking with Dr. Meningal this week about her vice presidency, future plans to presidency in higher education, and leadership I think this article about " The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership" is interesting and very relevent.
(http://chronicle.com/article/The-Imminent-Crisis-in-College/124513/)
In the spirit of football season I thought that the article "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" is a wonderful article. For those of us who were wondering the process of attaing a college football team and cost, here you go!
Blogg away!!
Second article:
ReplyDeleteKennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014
(http://chronicle.com/blogPost/Kennesaw-State-U-Aims-for/26953/)
I think it is interesting how not too many people want to become a college/university president, but it is also not that surprising. Despite whether you are in student affairs or academic affairs a majority of people going into the world of higher education get involved because of the students. The student interaction is a big draw in this field and as Dr. Meningal addressed Greg’s question yesterday it is the one thing she misses the most as she continues to climb the ladder. But I think it’s great that she does make an effort to make those limited interactions meaningful and goes out of her way to make sure she is indeed interacting. A lot of presidents I have met could take a note or two from her. :) Good job Takiyah on relating these articles to what we’ve been learning in our classes.
ReplyDeleteI'll just post this week's "amazing, but meaningless coincidence" because there seems to be one every week! The instrument I'm using for my dissertation was developed by a professor who now teaches at Kennesaw State!
ReplyDeleteGreat articles, Takiyah.
I agree that it is not surprising that many people do not want to become college/university presidents because they know that the higher they climb the student affairs ladder, the less students they get to work with. After all, the reason that many of us are interested in this field is to work with students, so it is understandable why many people would not want to work as a president. With that being said, I think that it is not a bad thing that some schools hire presidents that do not have student affairs backgrounds. Many people with student affairs backgrounds do not want the responsibility of the position.
ReplyDeleteRichard Ekman states in the article, The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership, "Still, we should be concerned that a growing number of colleges are being led by people who have never had direct experience in the heart of the enterprise as faculty members, department chairs, deans, or provosts." The article fears that if this number continues to increase that colleges and universities will become an industry that is led by people who do not understand it. However, both business and student affairs aspects are important in running an entire university/ college. You need a variety of transferable skills, and as long as the people surrounding the president have a strong student affairs background. I do not necessarily think that it is a bad thing if the president does not have a background in student affairs.
I can understand why many people do not want to become presidents of universities due to the lack of direct communication with students. We all entered into this field of higher education so that we can work and interact with students on a daily basis. However, I do feel that we as future student affairs professionals need to look at the bigger picture of things. We need to understand that the student experience, involvement, and academics are the number one priority. A president of a university needs to be someone who understands the bigger picture of things. They should understand the culture of a university, the students at universities, and have the ability to elevate and enhance a university to levels beyond belief. What better person than a student affairs professional? I feel as though we need not to let people without a true understanding of students and education come in and take over our universities because their lack of understanding can correlate a negative affect on students; thus negating the hard work that we provide to our students. I personally have the aspirations to become the president of a university even though I understand that my communication with students is limited. Me being the president of a university would give me the opportunity to create a change in culture and tradition that would hopefully result in students having the best experience possible.
ReplyDeleteIn the Kennesaw State article, the part that stuck out to me was when it stated, "Last year not one program in Division I-AA broke even financially; in Division I-A, only 14 did. Many programs continue to bleed money: Deficits among Division I-AA athletic programs have continued to climb in recent years, reaching a median of $8.7-million in 2009." It would be interesting to see where USF fell on this list, especially as there continues to be talk about building our "own" stadium in the future.
ReplyDeleteThe article on the lack of leadership in colleges truly amazes me. With so many brilliant and truly talented people working on all campuses across the country, I would imagine there would be more than enough talented and qualified applicants for any president position that were to become available. I agree that a president doesn't necessarily need to have a student affairs or academic background as long as he/she surrounds him/herself with strong individuals in each area on the executive board. I wonder how much decision making the president truly has when he/she has a Board of Trustees to report to (an earlier article I believe we read stated most of these people had little to no academic or student affairs background) in addition to the executive team that would help in making decisions that affect the entire university. I do think the idea of "president mentoring" or developing senior leadership institutes for mid-level administrators is a great way to develop talent within the educational system. It will be interesting to see what evolves during the course of our careers as we see leadership change at the universities we work at in addition to the ones we have ties to.
I also am not surprised that there is a lack of interest in being a college President. When do most presidents start 50-55? I think all of our experiences in grad school and post grad will help to shape the route that we go. This article brings up great questions about the future of higher education. Higher education does operate like a corporation in the sense that individuals work their way up in the “ranks” and get recognized by their work ethic. There are great benefits to having a traditional path in higher education but at the same time I have an open mind about giving the opportunity to someone who had a different path. Just because you were not an RA doesn’t mean you aren’t capable of working in Res Life. This is why the practicum, internship, and TA experiences during graduate school are so important. If a student affairs professional or academic can apply what they have done in a greater capacity as a president to lead the university then great. The process, I’m sure will be challenging but if someone is cut out for it, then they’ll put forth effort. I think there would be more cases of student affairs professionals becoming academics then vice versa. In my opinion this is a positive discussion that may allow more professional development opportunities for all employees, making higher education a more fluid place. It can also give colleagues a better understanding of the work of different divisions.
ReplyDeleteSince the topic of why most student affairs professionals don't care to become presidents of colleges has been covered, I'll try to take a slightly different approach to the topic. Dr. Miler has mentioned in class (and it has also been present in our readings) that student affairs is currently in the beginning stages of massive change. In Ecology, we have been talking about static versus dynamic environments. Some schools have begun to embrace more dynamic environments, while many others are still in static stages. I wonder if perhaps there is a way to re-organize the system in order to allow presidents and vice-presidents to remain in closer contact with students. Unfortunately, I think many presidents do not make an effort as Dr. Meningal does to interact with students. As a result, they are not in tune with the needs of the university and what it is the students would like to see happen. I would assume that the larger a college or university is, the less contact individuals in higher administration have with students, and those are the schools where contact is the most important in order for adequate student learning and development to occur. It will be interesting to see what changes, if any, are made in the upcoming years as we all enter the profession.
ReplyDeleteI am not all that suprised at the article concerning Student Affairs professionals being hesitant to move into president positions. A few of our guest speakers have already stressed how much responsibility and detachment forms in leadership spots. Dr. Meninghall and Dr. Miller both have made great points about trusting and hiring good people to carry out tasks as well. I believe there is a difference between leadership and management. To manage a University is one thing but to lead would mean to still inspire, motivate and care for those you work for. A good president may not have direct contact on a daily basis with student populations but can have an equal impact by staying true to them and as Dr. Miller says, hiring GOOD people :)
ReplyDeleteThe college president dilemma is concerning because of the impact that this trend could have in the long term. Would this lead to more higher education institutions functioning like for-profit institutions? What components of academic or student affairs will change (i.e. are we going to see a surge in intercollegiate athletics because that generates money/donations)? As we have mentioned, I think that many components of higher education that are not financially profitable will suffer if the holistic components of education are replaced.
ReplyDeleteI am also interested, as are Andrea and Emily, to see what future changes will be made in higher education due to a lack of student affairs professionals’ desire to pursue president positions. In was interesting that the article compared this crisis to that of the U.S. automotive industry. While I don’t believe the changes higher education may see will be as extreme, what if it is not completely out of the question? In this worse-case scenario, the focus would be on efficiency and neglect to support student development. Static environments may become the norm. It is obviously difficult to predict these outcomes. However, what I deduced from class is that, over time, our field may fill with more professionals of similar educational backgrounds (i.e. CSA programs). This increases the odds for future college presidents to come from this background and bring with them the motivation to encourage student success and development.
ReplyDeleteReading the article on college leadership helps to explain why many colleges are running, like Emily says, "for-profit institutions." Deans, vp's, provosts and other high-ranked officials seem to be the best fit to run universities. However, their passions lie in making sure that the students they serve are benefiting from the college experience. One thing to also note is that these officials can impact the college experience directly without every small detail being released to the world. On the flipside, as the article states, the infamous "sunshine" laws is one thing that turns people off from wanting to seek a presidency, mainly at state universities. Sunshine laws are mandates that require "regulatory authorities' meetings, decisions and records to be made available to the public." So, not only would their candidacies be made public, ever decision made would also be made known as well. As much as this law allows people to know what is happening at universities, it can put presidents in a position where they become "puppets," which, I think, may also be a reason as to why college officials shy away from presidencies. In the end, many individuals qualify for presidencies; some of them take on the challenge. Few will be chosen to lead...
ReplyDeleteI chose to focus on the second article, "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014." Just as Brent noted I believe it is interesting that of all collegiate football programs only 14 broke even last year. I took a course in my undergraduate work that was with an extremely active leader in the field of NCAA sports. He told us that at the time only 9 schools made a profit and after naming the institutions it was clear why they managed to make money. The ones that are most memorable now are: Florida, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame, and USC although they probably are not anymore. The fan bases for those programs are in place and the money is there because of their popularity. It makes me wonder the question, "Can a program move into this echelon or are the teams that have reached elite status there to stay?" The best programs recruit the best players which give them the ability to compete every year bringing the most fans. How does a team such as South Florida compete over the course of many years?
ReplyDeleteKennesaw State University seems to be in an interesting position. They have the excitement and the people in place to make it happen but is the money there? They cited a budget of $10 million to fund the starting of a football program but the article states that Div AA programs are losing a median of $8.7 million (I also thought median is an interesting statistic to use). Based on these statistics it will be interesting to see if they go through the effort to build a program.
There is a section in the article concerning leadership in universities where it writes about many top universities that employee professors with great backgrounds in their field, but little teaching experience. We’ve all been in a classroom with a professor who has a doctorate in their field with tons of experience, but they can’t teach in a way that is engaging or remotely interesting. Most professors rarely use blackboard to their advantage and stick to old and traditional lecture to a motionless, voiceless classroom. The way a university hires professors should be based off of their ability to teach first, and their success in their subject field second.
ReplyDeleteAs I read the article about plans to start a football program at Kennesaw State Univ., I was reminded of the development of football at USF. The information describing characteristics of Kennesaw State reflect USF, 15 years ago. USF was at the same stage of institutional growth of KS when it began the process to develop a football team. USF had an image of a commuter school that it wanted to grow beyond and USF requested the advisement of a local football icon, Leroy Selmon, to help build awareness and booster support.
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that considerable planning and budget appropriations are needed to work toward the goal. But is this really a goal or more a reaction to the expectations of Saturday afternoon sports fans? Our society has become very accustomed to getting what they want from Universities, simply by asking repeatedly, “when are you going to have a football team?” Whether it is a need or a want is unimportant at this stage, just like USF. Fortunately for Kennesaw State they have many elements of the building process available to begin. The support of regional sports fans, proud students and alumni, the wisdom of experienced advisors, NCAA support and a new functional facility to host games. So get ready to schedule your road trip to Atlanta I 2014, because the Bulls are gonna beat the Owls.
While reading "The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership" I couldn't help but feel the undertone that even student affairs administators would not be viable candidates to become college presidents. Richard Eckman states, "we should be concerned that a growing number of colleges are being led by people who have never had direct experience in the heart of the enterprise as faculty members, department chairs, deans, or provosts". This means he is weary of people who don't come directly from a faculty background. I see his point about how outside candidates from different industries would be risky candidates because they don't understand colleges, but I find it interesting that there isn't much emphasis on the strength of student affairs candidates. From other things that we have read and how it seems to be, faculty and upper administration don't always see the value of student affairs professionals or if they see the value, they feel it is a step below faculty. I understand our profession cannot exist without professors and students enrolled in those classes, but it seems like student affairs is like a step child that isn't quite fully accepted into the collegiate family. I realize some institutions have been able to overcome this, but I think it is the more dynamic schools Andrea and Angela have referred to above. As we grow in our careers, I hope this will change and the change will start with strong leadership (from either side of an institution) that understands the importance of student affairs.
ReplyDeleteI really like the articles this week. As many of you have already mentioned, I too am not surprised in the decreased number of people interested in presidencies. Not to sound repetitive but like many have mentioned we all decided to do student affairs to work with students. For me at least, the thought of being a college president is unappealing. It is important for me to interact with students in different capacities and it is obviously very difficult once you have reached that level in your career. I agree with Andrea in the fact that many of them don't make the effort to interact with students and therefore may not adequately be prepared to make the changes that the STUDENTS want to see happen within the university. I am interested in seeing how this dilemma will pan out as we continue on our paths as student affairs professionals.
ReplyDeleteI really like the articles this week. As many of you have already mentioned, I too am not surprised in the decreased number of people interested in presidencies. Not to sound repetitive but like many have mentioned we all decided to do student affairs to work with students. For me at least, the thought of being a college president is unappealing. It is important for me to interact with students in different capacities and it is obviously very difficult once you have reached that level in your career. I agree with Andrea in the fact that many of them don't make the effort to interact with students and therefore may not adequately be prepared to make the changes that the STUDENTS want to see happen within the university. I am interested in seeing how this dilemma will pan out as we continue on our paths as student affairs professionals.
ReplyDeleteTakiyah did a great job this week in relating the article to our guest speaker! After hearing Dr. Meningal speak about her job and how passionate she is about what she does, I can only hope that there are more people out there like her who desire to and can keep higher education on the right track. That is, focusing on and supporting the students in their learning and success. If I understand the numbers in the article correctly, about 40% of college or university presidents come from outside higher education. This is a large number and one I didn't expect! I sincerely hope that those who are being hired are, as Dr. Miller says, good people, and ones who can lead with the education goals of the university in mind. If too many, as the article says, "[manage] for efficient production," it could mean a loss of focus on the real reason for colleges and universities existing, and could be devastating to the quality of our higher education system and our students.
ReplyDeleteI also really enjoyed both articles for the week. Also, like everyone has stated I am not surprised that small number of people wanting to be university president. I myself do not see this as a career path at the moment. I am also not surprised by the increase in those not in an academic setting taking the role of presidency for universities due to their business "savvy" background. This is worrisome however, like Emily stated this this could lead to universities functioning as for-profit institutes.
ReplyDeleteI also enjoyed the "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" article and found it interesting the cost of adding a football team to an institution. It is surprising to me that a large university in Georgia, which is a football fanatic state would not have a team.
The article about Kennesaw State should be shocking in the current economic environment. It is hard to believe that the committee is recommending starting football with the expectation to lose money. What is also interesting is that they do not touch on the additional costs which should also go along with forming corresponding women’s team to comply with Title IX. Football has become such an attractive lure because of the name recognition and perceived prestige as the school becomes better known. I wonder if the committee that was reviewing this decision also made individual cash donations to kick off the fundraising. I also wonder if Vince Dooley is the right person to head this type of committee. He left the University of Georgia years ago and has not worked small schools since before he came to Georgia in the 70’s.
ReplyDeleteThe article about Kennesaw State working towards a football program surprised me. The article stated Kennesaw State is “eager to change its image as a commuter school” but is the cost of creating a football team the best option right now? If they don’t even expect to breakeven then should they be thinking of other ways to change its image? Perhaps they could put money into a different program, sports, academics, or residence hall related. If creating a football team is the best way for the school to be recognized and grow I hope they really think about the long term costs and benefits.
ReplyDeleteLike many others I wasn’t too surprised by the lack of interest of many to become a university president. The article on college leadership mentioned the concern that “higher education will become an industry that is led by people who do not truly understand it” and this is possible with the number of people coming from areas outside of academia. Student affairs professionals are not necessarily from academia backgrounds, but do understand the goals of higher education and could lead a university successfully. I think people with many different backgrounds could hold the position of being president, but it is the people that surround and support the president need to keep the president focused. I do think it would be easier for a president if they did have the academic or student affairs background.
I thought the article on Kennesaw State University starting a football team is realistic. Most people thought it was shocking that the university is trying to have a football team. It seems to be what the people want in that area. According to the article, the president said that in every meeting he was asked when the school was going to have a football program. I think that they will get plenty of private donations from the community to fund the program at first. Then they will just have to have a strong coaching staff to begin and build the program further. My only worry about the football program would be the shift from the academic focus that they have now. There have been many studies conducted that state when colleges and universities have strong sport programs the focus on academics decline and sometimes this could be the worst outcome for a school.
ReplyDeleteOh college football. I graduated from a football crazy college; my little brother is playing baseball at a school that doesn’t have it. No one left our campus on football weekends, he jokes about being the only one on campus over the weekend (he’s four hours from our home town). His school has discussed adding football and he’s really looking forward to it, just so that there will be more going on over the weekends. Last year he made three or four weekend trips home just for football games. When you look at it that way, maybe the cost, even if athletics isn’t making money, is worth it. If students stay for football they’re probably more likely to participate in other weekend programming and hopefully be more involved during the week too. Baseball lured my brother out of state for college, but without it I’m not sure the suitcase campus feel would be very appealing.
ReplyDeleteAnother benefit is school pride. My parents took both of us to Iowa football games as a little kids, so by the time I was a student at the U of I my school pride was well intact. From our Ecology reading this week, student pride has some campus safety ties, students are more protective of their space if they are proud of it, and football can do a lot of school pride. I can definitely understand the reservations about starting a football program with the way most university budgets look right now, but a lot of good can come of it too and it made my college experience more positive.
Like many others, the lack of interest in college presidency is not surprising. I came from a small institution where we went through three different presidents in my four years there. Of the presidents that failed, they had a strong financial and business background. I am not saying that this is at all a bad skill for a president to have, however a corporate or financial background is very different than one who comes up through a student oriented background. The one president that was highly successful, and loved by students, was Dr. Kneedler. He was known for being a presence on campus at many student events. He was at many of the sporting events, he came to residence hall programs and also helped new students move into their room on the first day of orientation. He put himself on the level of his students, which created an amazing atmosphere on campus between students, staff and faculty.
ReplyDeleteMany presidents have a disconnect from students, and they tend to focus more on the technical aspects to run an institution. Like Dr Miller stated, a student affairs professional in a president position would be a deadly combination. Although presidents are disconnected from students, due to the demand of other duties, it is still their responsibility to make those connections with students and to stay up to date with the latest trends and needs of their student population. This population is who they serve and they must be connected to them in some way.
(Chance) The "Imminent Crisis...." article was rather interesting. It details the plight of many universities in attracting qualified individuals for the position of president. While qualified can be a generic term, rightly qualified is more astute. And rightly qualified is something that should be addressed in choosing "the best people, for the right job."
ReplyDeleteThe author of the article makes a good point he talks about GM. GM veered away from hiring people with experience in cars. Understandably these people did not have much understand of that specific industry, instead bringing with them their own experience in their previous fields. If universities and colleges continue to hire presidents with little to no experience in education, then I think the fallout could be atomic.
I really liked the point brought up in The Imminent Crisis in College Leadership that "Presidents should take seriously their role as mentors of talented young administrators and faculty members, underscoring the intellectual stimulation and professional satisfaction of the presidency." I think this is extremely true for every level of our profession. I know for many of us we are getting into this field to guide and mentor students so it would be purely ignorant if we didn't also mentor our colleagues. I know I wouldn't be here now if it wasn't for the guidance and advice of my mentors at my undergraduate. There are many reasons why we aspire to bigger and better things in our lives. One of these reasons is we see someone we respect and admire in a position above us and they mentor and guide us and we in turn aspire to be like them. So this makes sense that Presidents of University need to focus on the mentoring aspect.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Emily, Chance and the others who have mentioned the foreseeable problems associated with hiring school presidents from other fields. The parallel the article draws to the GM crisis left a powerful impression of the possible disengagement of school leaders to their schools. I personally think that there is much for a school to gain from the expertise and experience other fields can offer higher education. However, a possible incorporation of such “outside” expertise could be in the invention of precisely that—a consulting, rather than leading position for individuals’ whose life work has not been in the field. Have those who have been involved in other fields hired as consultants for the university, working with current student affairs professionals and professors, who, in their work, have learned the value and uniqueness of working with students.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find most interesting about the "Imminent Crisis..." article is probably something that went overlooked by most. It doesn't surprise me that so few people aspire to be University Presidents - but rather - "who" those people are... Only 24 percent of Chief Academic Officers - these are the men and women who work closely with the University Presidents, know the work they put in and the decisions they have to make. It takes a special talent to be a leader and it takes guts to WANT to be a leader. Just like a quarterback on a football team, the President gets praised if the University "wins" or does well, but who do we blame when things go wrong? It's not an enviable position, especially when you consider that most of these folks are on executive team positions with nearly the same amount of power, without nearly as much of the risk for blame.
ReplyDeleteNow that is interesting...
This first article is right on time within the context of what we're learning in this program and within higher education in general.With shifts in other areas of higher ed (technology, cost, available amenities, diversity, accessibility) has come a shift in focus on what the mission of higher ed is/should be. I've heard more and more people remark how colleges and universities are becoming "big businesses." In many places, the premium isn't on educating the citizenry for such lofty goals as a more sensible electorate or the self-discovery and holistic development that the "college experience" has prided itself on providing for years, or even the delivery of quality educational opportunities. The focus has shifted to assembly-line type efficiency--the inputs and outputs and the bottom line. I think it's very sad. And I hope that as we continue on our journeys of becoming SA professionals we recognize and promote the importance of advocating for administrators who know education, and whose focus isn't on number crunching, technology etc...but rather understand the importance of the human aspect of what we're (allegedly) here to do.
ReplyDeleteI think the article on Leadership was very interesting. I have always questioned how people got to certain positions on campus, especially when they do not have previous experience. I am a believer that in order to do a job right you have to have had some experience or practice in that field. I know there are exceptional people who are able to adapt and adjust to their job at hand, but the question arises, when they need to make certain decision regarding someone’s future, and they don’t understand situations that are common within the population they have to deal with can they really do the job appropriately. Especially on a college campus there are so many responsibilities and if someone is not familiar with certain circumstances I believe this is not fulfilling all responsibilities of a leader.
ReplyDeleteThe article "Kennesaw State U. Aims for Football in 2014" shows to me just how much colleges think football is important. I enjoy college football and believe that whether it is a good thing or not; many people get most of their school pride from their college football team. It does not matter if that college is the leading research center of the country and finding medical cures left and right. If that college has a football team for some reason people seem to connect and have more pride with their football team than anything else at their college.
ReplyDeleteFor Kennesaw State U. to go out now and get a football team seems like an attempt to gain popularity in the country and give more people a reason to enroll. Some can say academics should be the first thing someone looks for when deciding where to go to college, but sadly that is not the case for everyone. With a football team in 2014 I am sure Kennesaw State U. will see an increase in enrollment and even school pride.
I think it is very interesting that after all this education, that people are wanting to settle before they get to the top. Like Dr.Miller always says it is very important to hire the right people, and I do not think that industrial presidents will be as effective or understanding as presidents who have seen the in's and out's of the education system. I hope this trend starts to turn around,I do not see many positives in hanving someone outside of education serve as a president of an educational institution.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the football article and I think it is a great idea. I am a huge supporter of sports and I think college pride is highly based upon athletics. Providing more opportunities for college athletes to play and for a community to get involved is always exciting. I think a football team would definately change not only the style(communter to residential) but I think enrollemt may increase as well.
I loved the football article. What I found most intriguing was the parallels I thought about with USF. I don't know if everybody in the cohort knows, but the USF football is a very young program. We've spent a lot of time discussing how USF is a young university, but I don't think that's translated into how we also have a young athletics program (notably Football). The article also made me think about athletics and how it fits in student life. As Dr. Miller has pointed out before, athletics teams play interesting roles in universities. A football team is a great recruiting tool for universities (whether or not it should be is a different debate). At USF, the football program really helps enrich the student experience. I know that personally football season is my favorite time of the year and I learned quite a bit about time management seeing as Saturdays were entirely committed to football and tailgating as an undergraduate. While this might be unique at USF (I don't know if football is an "all-day" thing at other schools like it is at USF), but it certainly shaped my experience as a student. Perhaps the most surprising thing to me from the article was that athletics programs at those Division I-AA schools don't break even. Knowing that football programs, and athletics programs in general, are big-dollar and expensive operations, I just naturally assumed they made LOTS of money and that was why universities kept them around.
ReplyDelete