Be the Spark!

contribute now

TOL Hosts Special Event on Higher Education 

AIR DATE: Thursday, January 8th 2009
Download the mp3 for this show.
What does the future hold for Oregon's public university system?

Next week Think Out Loud hosts a special event at Portland State University. University presidents from the U of O, OSU, PSU, and Eastern Oregon University will be joining us to discuss the state of higher education in Oregon. Our event is timed to a gathering of university presidents from across the state who will meet to prepare their agendas for the 2009 legislative session beginning January 13. Top of mind, as usual -- but especially during this recession -- is funding.

There are many ways for you to participate.

First, you are invited to join us in the Smith Memorial Student Union Ballroom at PSU on Wednesday January 7th from 7 to 9 pm to participate in this free event. The doors open at 6 pm and seating is first-come, first-seated. We would love for you to join us -- and no rsvp required!

Or you can tune in next Thursday and Friday mornings, at our regular 9 am, when these two hours of programming will air. (The first on Thursday, the second on Friday.)

And, as always, you can kickstart the conversation online. The two-hour live event will turn into two shows. Part One (to air on Thursday at 9 am) will deal with money. What's the solution to funding higher education in Oregon? How does the recession impact that funding? Is this an opportunity to change the model by which higher education is funded in the state? How much should families pay for public education? How much should the state pay?

Part Two (to air on Friday at 9 am) will look at the academic experience of going to university today. How do Oregon universities need to change in order to prepare a globally competitive workforce for the future? Is that even their mandate? If not, then what is? Should universities respond to public demand for courses (like workforce training, perhaps?) or should they be ahead of the curve, trying to establish what this state needs for the future?

We're exploring the state of higher education in Oregon and we'd love your perspective -- as a student, graduate, parent, professor, administrator or community member; whether you're involved with a public or private university, a college or a high school; if you rely on graduates, or if you're considering going back to school -- what are your thoughts on the funding and experience of higher education in this state?

UPDATE 1/16/09: We didn't get much into private higher ed in this show, although Paul Marthers, Dean of Admission at Reed College made it clear the drop in endowments are hitting hard. More on private colleges in Oregon today in this column by M. Lee Pelton, the president of Willamette University.
My oldest son graduated from UO in 2005. During his years there he held a variety of typical student part-time jobs. Each year, he paid more in Oregon state income taxes than did Portland General Electric Corporation! The dramatic increase in higher education costs is a direct result of legislative policy that has intentionally shifted costs away from state funding to students and families. And, as a higher ed faculty member myself, I have seen this year after year!
OregonCougfan —
Unless your oldest son paid $3 million in OR state income tax, then your accusation is nonsense. PGE paid $3 million in state income tax according to its latest annual financial report. If you are truly a higher ed faculty member, then I'd rather not go to your class.
pentol —
Check the following website: http://www.ocpp.org/cgi-bin/display.cgi?page=cp0808window. And yes, for the years leading up to 2005, PGE paid the corporate minimum tax. My point is that businesses have all sorts of tax shelters that working families do not have. Yes, they create jobs. But, they need to pay their fair share. Argument aside, the fact is that the legislature has intentionally shifted costs away from the state to families, and has done so for over 10 years.
OregonCougfan —
For some reason the URL did not post properly. Check the Oregon Center for Public Policy and the article by Michael Leachman from August 2008. www.ocpp.org. And, you are welcome to challenge my argument, but please don't make it personal.
OregonCougfan —
A corporation is not a person. All of the people who work for the corporation have to pay taxes on any realized income like the rest of us. This includes the most highly compensated people in the corporation. The corporation has tax shelters for very good reasons. Primarily, these are there to encourage investment in, say things like alternative or renewable energy. Personally, since "most" of us work for corporations, I hope that we don't tax them so that they can be competitive in the global economy...so that I can continue to be employed and..er...pay taxes to support things like our university system. Doh!
fatmidwesternwhiteguy —
I am a parent of two students who have attended or are currently attending a couple of Oregon colleges. They both have had the same experience of professors who are practically unreachable outside the classroom. These teachers seem to have forgotten that their job doesn't begin and end with their lectures! As a consumer paying for their salaries, I'd like to hear why they feel it's okay to ignore student requests for academic help or advice outside the classroom.
pashmun —
Usually, a good prof. will have office hours, others wont. It then is up to the students to attend those hours. A student most be persistent when trying to reach a prof outside the classroom. However, I do agree that some prof. only teach to keep their research going and tend to ignore students more.
sims507 —
I'm thinking that you should include the state of private higher education in the conversation. Oregon is home to a wealth of renowned private higher education institutions. It is unfortunate that your guests are only from public higher education.
omelight —
Why would private higher education be controversial in any way, I would imagine the state is great because the only agenda is to satisfy the customers.
chernobyl —
No, I agree with omelight.

If anything private institutions are more beholden to their ?customers? because they rely so much on the student?s tuition and alumni support. (And I don?t think that a non-controversy is less important in discussing the overall picture of higher education)

The astronomical costs of private education have driven students into public institutions even if they would have preferred to attend a private university.

This is part of a larger system at work, where students and their families are having a harder time finding the financial support they need to cover education costs. There is an increased demand for financial aid with a dwindling pool of money available and outrageous debt that a student goes into after completing college.

For my part, I left a private university when its costs rose over $35,000 per year! It was just too much for me and my family.
amy-OR —
I am just now graduating from PSU and am reminded of how the engineering departments chairperson wanted to setup a satellite campus in vietnam. This was/is a project which was/is heavily funded by Intel so that they could employ local engineers in a yet to be built manufacturing plant in Vietnam. I know it is important for engineering departments to respond to the educational needs their respective future employers of students have. And globalisation is here to stay, I realise this, but I get nerves when our collegiate system collaborates so closely with corporations in projects which, if anything, will hurt the employ-ability and future prospects of new engineers.
chernobyl —
I would say that, if anything, state higher education is too inexpensive. Students come to the University for the "college experience," rather than a real education. On the other hand, I have seen many focused and capable people who aren't willing to pay tuition. I would suggest basing tuition on a sliding scale based on performance rather than a flat rate.
walkejor —
I'm curious how this might work. Do you mean that the better you do academically, the less you pay?
David Miller —
This is for the 2nd half of your program: Perhaps we need a different definition of "higher education" to include practical life skills, such as financial health, marriage education, parenting, etc. because as a society in these areas we certainly seem to be unstable. There is a wealth of material even from university research which could combat the the rising divorce rate for example but I'm not sure that we are teaching in Oregon Universities much that people will actually use for a lifetime. - Sher Ireland, licensed couselor.
sherireland —
One thing I have struggled with in my education is the "One size fits all" approach to teaching. Sometimes I find that too many regulations on teaching style and method can be oppressive and invasive. Here's why: if I approach an instructor to discuss why their teaching methods aren't working for me, and they tell me that the changes are out of their hands, I feel completely dis-empowered. I would like to know what can be done about regulation, so that students feel they have a right to ask for variations on teaching methods when they are necessary, instead of students feeling like they are nothing more than a product riding the conveyor belt of the education system. Sometimes I feel like I am seen as a means for financial support for the school I attend, not a person who is hungry for knowledge and understanding.
rkclark —
Post-secondary persistence rates are alarmingly low across the state and the country, particularly for students of color, first-generation college-going students, and low-income students. I'd be very curious to hear what these college and university presidents are doing to address low persistence rates--particularly for the populations mentioned above--given the need for post-secondary training to participate in a meaningful way in the current global economy.
andrew@openmeadow —
I am an undergraduate student currently enrolled at Portland State University, so I was thrilled to hear that this live edition of TOL would be hosted in the student union at my school. I cannot speak for other State Universities, but as for PSU, I can't help but feel as though the university and its administration is only in it to make more money rather than promote student welfare. The number of bureaucratic hoops that students are made to jump through at these universities in order to get anything accomplished is overwhelming and extremely discouraging. By making education so difficult to access, it severely decreases social and economic diversity among students. Education should not only be for the wealthy, and students should not be forced into such deep debt in order to get a degree.
yingerta —
Can you -- or another PSU or Oregon university system student -- give me a sense for the kinds of bureaucratic hoops that you're talking about?
David Miller —
An additional income tax of 1% will pay for one year of college (University of Oregon in-state tuition plus room & board). College graduates on average make at least 50% more than high school graduates, so paying an addional 4%-5% of income for 4-5 years of college is affordable and would make college accessable to many people that currently can't afford school. This option would also be good for people that run out of money after starting school.

Payments wouldn't even cover interest when the student starts paying back their education. But with wage inflation and raises the average graduate would pay off their education over their lifetime. Like insurance this payment plan would minimize risk. Some people would pay more than the cost of their education and others would pay less. People that eventually earn higher incomes would subsidize those that have lower incomes. This analysis is based on median income of $50,233 (US census), 3.6% average wage inlation (US census 1978 to 2008), 6% interest cost for state bonds that will be paid off with this additonal future tax revenue and University of Oregon in-state tuition ($6531/year) and UO estimated room & board.
Gary3822 —
Most of us pay 15.3% SS & Medicare tax, federal income tax, and 9% state income tax. Not to mention that some self-employed in Portland pays Trimet tax. Do we need additional 1% so that university bureaucrats can spend more?
pentol —
This 1% is a financing mechanism to pay the student's portion of the cost of higher education. It's equal to the net present value of one year's tuition, room & board and would be an optional tax, a user fee of sorts. Students would still have the option of paying for school as they do today and not incurring the tax.
Gary3822 —
Universities shouldn't have to teach students things that they should have earned in high school! There needs to be higher standards that begin in elementary/middle and high school. I went to the U of O and there was much more drinking rather than studying going on...I also went to a university in Germany (with no tuition fees ) for 2 years and those students were hard working and very serious. Higher education may not be for everyone and that is okay...education is a privilege!
corine —
I would really like to discuss - realistically - the practice of contracting with public university staff and administration and paying them more than the highest state elected official - our governor. How is it that the President of The University of Oregon makes 700,000 A YEAR. And we have not enough dormitories for students who must fend for themselve off campus. And high and higher costing instructional materials - in many cases that are unethically published and deemed "necessary" by the professors demanding their use.

How can we have "salaries" that are not really "salaries" but truly out of whack public compensations for not overseeing a college/university - but something else - something not quite justified to a tax paying public. Come on - how come University Presidents and/or any other staff member/administrator at public schools are not capped out at the level of our governor? They should be.... gross misuse of public funds. GROSS.
h20zone —
While I understand that this broadcast coincides with a statewide meeting of university presidents, I am extremely disappointed to see OPB sponsor an event focused on the state of higher education in Oregon and exclude community colleges. All told, Oregon's community colleges serve more than double the amount of students than do Oregon's universities, providing students with everything from high school completion/GED support to workforce skills and career change opportunities to transfer education coursework and more . . . all of which are taught by highly skilled, dedicated educators at a fraction of the pay and a fraction of the budget of their university counterparts.

I applaud the Oregon University System and its institutions; they are of invaluable to this state and its people, and have recently made tremendous strides in partnering with community colleges to better serve students. However, to talk about the future of Oregon's higher education system and not include community colleges is, at best, a gross oversight.

For more information on Oregon's Community Colleges, visit http://www.oregon.gov/CCWD.
Kenai1969 —
Higher Education afford-ability is the most important discussion that we can have in this state in light of these terrible economic times. In fact, we shouldn't just be talking about higher education, lets talk about post-secondary education as a whole by including community colleges. EVERYONE who wants to attend college in this state should be able to- at an affordable cost. Bottom line is we need to invest more in colleges and universities because it is the only way to get Oregon back on track and back to work.

Unemployment in Oregon is 8.1%, which is the fastest growing unemployment rate in the country, while our colleges and universities are bursting at the seams and in higher demand than ever. Colleges around the state have had record enrollment. The problem is that these schools are in high demand but still unable to offer affordable education to many Oregonians who need it most. Oregon ranks 44th in the nation for its per-student state appropriation. Our state has a history of disinvestment in our colleges but in 2007 the legislature took the first step in reinvesting and that must be continued.

Every dollar in the Governor?s budget this year counts. We need to make smart investments with positive and quick returns in order to put our state back on track. Our colleges and universities are the economic engines that can do that. The legislature needs to fund the Governor?s budget recommendations for our colleges including the Shared Responsibility Model so we can keep making college affordable for low-income and under-represented communities in Oregon. Low-income and working families in Oregon have to contribute a huge amount of their income even after aid to be able to afford tuition. With how much college graduates contribute back to our communities and economy we need to put some more support behind them.
gbrist635 —
The option of an additional user income tax would make college affordable to all students and would be funded by the people that receive the schooling. A 1% increase in a persons income tax will fund a year at the University of Oregon including tuition and room & board.
Gary3822 —
Revenues from PSU subsidize other campuses of the Oregon University System. Salaries at PSU are much lower than U of O and OSU, despite far higher cost of living in the Portland area. I would like to hear some discussion of why this discrimination against PSU persists.
jwalker —
I agree and would like to ask Why are we building a U of O building in Portland? Why not move those programs along with other vital job creation programs like electrical engineering to the Portland State Campus. In fact why not cut out the turf wars entirely by creating 1 university and placing programs where they make the most sense geographically. It seems that this would create a great deal of savings that could be passed along to students and in the long run create a better more diverse economy for Oregon as a whole.
dcress —
I am a student at Clark College in Vancouver, WA. My husband works in Portland and pays Oregon state taxes. I would like to be able to attend PSU or another Oregon public university, however I have to pay out-of-state tuition, which seems ridiculous since my husband pays taxes to Oregon state, Vancouver is a suburb of Portland, and considering that a number of Washington colleges offer in-state tuition rates to Oregon residence. Has this subject been discussed? What can be done to help students like me?
gigi98684 —
The cost of higher education is outrageous. Even community college tuition is too high for most to pay for out of pocket. While I am not currently working (as I am a full-time student), my husband's salary is just high enough to keep us ineligible for grants or subsidized loans. As a result, I am forced to accumulate a huge debt in order to persue a higher education. That is not a great way to end school. I am an almost 40 year old student with a 4.0 GPA. I'll graduate with over $30,000 in loans.
gigi98684 —
PSU and U of O are the only universities in Oregon preparing Speech and Language Therapists for the work force demands in our State. Both univeristies graduate more undergraduate students in the program than are admitted to their respective masters program which are limited to less than 30 students per year. Employers in hospitals, rehab centers, nursing homes, schools and preschools are facing great challenges as our work force is retiring and we are unable to find find replacements. In addition I understand that both universities declined a significant amount of incentive funds from the Oregon Legislature to expand their programs. My questions are: What are the barriers to expanding these programs throughout the state? and Why do the univeristies refuse to offer Speech and Language Degress sufficient to meet the legally mandated demands of the State's public and private institutions?
HWylie —
I am a senior in high school and am applying to three out of state universities as well as University of Oregon. Soon I will decide where to attend. My dad does not want me to go to school in Oregon because he says professors at our public universities receive only 60% the salary of contemporaries in other states such as Michigan or California. Is this true? If so, why such a gap? Is our smaller population the only difference? Though there are always outliers, it would make sense that the salary paid reflects the overall quality of the staff.
Oregon —
Yes and no. Teaching faculty will take a job for more money just like anyone else but just like anyone else, money is not the only motivation. There are exceptional faculty here as well. I would not rule out an in-state education based solely on the perception that because we pay less we have a lesser quality faculty.
nativefan1 —
None of the comments so far have addressed the quality of our institutions of higher education. Despite our funding issues, I think it is fair to say that our Universities continue to be recognized nationally for the quality of our graduates and for the leading research produced here in the state. I hope any discussion of the state of higher education does not fail to talk about all of the good things we are accomplishing despite our lack of funding. Just think of what we could do with more resources!
nativefan1 —
I am a graduate of University of Oregon, and actively caring for values important to Oregonians since I moved here in 1980. One of the values I support is buying locally. But I am troubled by the lack of support the universities, the state, local governments and Oregon owned businesses provide for Oregon graduates. We need to not only buy locally but we need to hire locally as well. We have got smart and dedicated individuals who not only used their hard earned money to pay back their student loans but some were lucky to receive state tuition support. Now over the last decade I have been in the position of being unemployed but do not have an alumni association or career center that supports baby boomers who are out of work. I never thought I would live to experience age descrimination but I do. The only letters I receive from U of O alumni department are requesting financial support to develop the newly young graduates careers. I feel the administration of the university system are sorely out of touch with the needs of ordinary Oregon college graduates.

One of the most frustrating situations I witness is hiring of young graduates from other parts of the country who acquire jobs during a period when there is a shortage of jobs. Just a few years ago I listened to a newcomer of 25 years of age describe how the state interviewed her over the phone for a social worker's position before she even moved here. Driving from the East Coast to Oregon for her first time she received a call stating she got the job. I am sure that there was a resident of Oregon who graduated from one of our schools, received financial support from our state, and qualified for the job of social worker at that time when jobs were particularly scarce here in Oregon!I am not against other Americans moving here but let's use the human potential and resources we already have and those for whom we have financed an education. When we think of recycling let's be smart and use our local home grown college graduates first. I value experience, wisdom, age, and local talent. Why is that not a value integrated into our universities and employment systems?
indigo —
What is the purpose of higher education?

Are Oregon's public higher education institutions meeting their objectives?

Are graduates receiving the education and skills they need to be successful?

Do graduates feel their degrees are worth what they paid for them?

How about a simple equation for funding education discussion:
1/3 paid by student, 1/3 paid by state, 1/3 paid by corporations.

College education used to be provided free to California residents. Why aren't we imaginative enough to provide free college for everybody who is academically qualified?

Why aren't schools at every level turning out academically capable and curious students?

Do corporations pay their fair share for future employees?

Do universities provide corporations with well-prepared graduates?

Does society receive fair value from graduates?

Are we wasting native talent by sending jobs overseas?

Do we think global competition is more beneficial than global cooperation over the long term? Only when we cooperate are we able to navigate successfully through uncertainty.

I graduated from OSU in 1985. Several of my engineering and computer science instructors returned to private industry to receive better pay and use their skill sets before they became obsolete.

OSU lacked the resources to adequately prepare all the students enrolled in engineering. To gain admittance to the last two years of [b]professional engineering[/b], a student had to meet the GPA criteria of 3.5 or above depending on the discipline.

Some of the most challenging courses were taught by graduate students. While the graduate students may have been intellectually and personally top notch, many of them were not skilled educators. I paid a lot for my education and was frustrated that I had to do extra work to get onto the same page as my instructors.

I lament that I learned how to satisfy [b]the system[/b] instead of retaining what I supposedly "learned". I fought hard to pass the tests and graduate instead of obtaining a positive college experience.
trurl9 —
I saw several new flat screen TVs and computer stations in PSU Admission office, a fancy TV on the floor in the bookstore, and a new gymnasium building. This is a school, not an airport. How many flat screen TVs do we need? There are so much waste at PSU and yet we still wonder why tuition keeps going up. It's because school officials keep spending students & taxpayers money!
pentol —
I can't speak on the first two items, but the recreation center you mention is paid for by student fees, and Portland State students voted to raise fees for that project, not school officials. Some people, and I take it you are one of them, believe that recreation centers are an extravagance. I disagree. Given the public health crisis that is obesity and the sedentary lifestyle of many Americans, it is vital that students are given the oportunity to establish healthful behaviors, and exercise is one of those. I go to Oregon State and the rec center here is heavily utilized; I suspect the one at PSU will be as well.
Brian Collins —
Colleges and universities are in a unique position to influence global climate change both in terms of operations and education. What are your priorities to reduce the carbon footprint of your campus and how do your academic programs support these initiatives?
gsanders —
Colleges and universities around the country are embracing a "learning-centered paradigm" that emphasizes student learning (rather than instruction) as their primary mission. What does this mean to you and what has changed at your institutions in response to this?
gsanders —
Today's "Millenial Student" is much different from the student of 20-years ago. How is you university different today as a result and what how will higher education be different in the next 20 years?
gsanders —
I have a question to the president of PSU
I am finishing my Bachelor of Science at PSU, and I have found that the quality of the teachers has been very high. What have not been of high quality are the facilities. The science buildings are falling apart and classes are taught in rooms with unusable desks. For instance two upper-division biology classes, Immunology and Medical Bacteriology have been taught in the fifth avenue cinema since at least last year. Science classes must bring in an enormous amount of money from people on a premed track, there were five hundred students in two sections of organic chemistry last term, yet you spend money on a new rec-center. How do you justify this?
hubcap13 —
I have met with, and will meet again tonight with Sen. Frank Morse, Rep. Andy Olsen and Sara Gelser at our town meeting. After spending 25 years in the community college system I am calling for a complete review of the management structure in Oregon Higher Education. There are over ten layers of management between the Governor's office and the first community college or University student. I believe the manager to worker bee ratio is out of whack and the last time this issue was addressed was in a Peat Marwick and Mitchell report back in 1995 that suggested the same. Even little LBCC has 17 Vice Presidents, Deans and Directors on staff. The Walmartinization of Oregon Higher Education has been the goal of upper management for quite some time.....I see the movement towards the use of part timers and adjuncts while maintaining the status quo at the management level as not a good investment of our tax dollars. I see the payment of over half a million dollars per year to University President's as ridiculous....this is not the Curtis Mathis mentality..that is..the most expensive TV sets in the world...but worth it....I see the fact that over 100 salaried employees in Higher Education make more than our Governor as ridiculous....I am asking that administrators validate their existence in the system....show us how your efforts add to the bottom line of our colleges and universities....prove to us that half million dollar salaries are justified while folks are cut off mental health programs in our State....show us that the current management structure and the related costs are worth these huge salaries in terms of what we get for their performance....I see tremendous waste at the management level...we have far too many Presidents, Vice Presidents, Deans, Directors, Assistants to all of the above, program coordinators, department chairs....this is not a partisan issue...both sides of the isle in Oregon can look for a change in the philosophy of overmanaged systems.
JAMISON LEE —
I'm not sure how you get 10 layers of management. First, students don't have managers (we are the customer). If the main, individual contributor at a university is a Professor, here is what I see as the layers: Professor reports to Dept. Chair, who reports to Dean of the College, who reports to the Provost, who reports to the President of the University, who reports to the OUS Chancellor, who is hired by the state board of higher education (which is appointed by the governor). That looks like six layers of management to me. Certainly, there are many administrative employees who do not teach or do research, but that is because universities are large, complex organizations with lots of accounting, maintenance, grant administration, and other work that needs to be done.

I also think your metric of the governor's salary is quite unrealistic. Oregon's governor is paid about $93,000 a year. While that is well more than the median family income, it is low compared to other state governors and extremely low compared to jobs of that level of responsibility. If we offered less than $93k for the person we want to preside over our state's largest universities, I don't think we would get very qualified people because those folks are going to be offered much higher salaries by other campuses. I'm not saying that Oregon needs to be the high price leader - we don't and we aren't - but we can't expect to underbid the market by that much and have competent people running the university. And believe me, the results of incompentent leadership are far more costly than what we are currently paying our university leaders.
Brian Collins —
See Marc Bousquet's How The University Works (also a website). Arguably, the number of full-time administrative positions has increased and the number of full-time instructional positions has decreased. The President's used the word "flat" to assure us they've cut the fat. I wonder.
GREEKS —
Here ya go....
Governor
Governor's Staff
Chancellor
Chancellor's staff
Department of Education
Staff
Office of Community Colleges
Staff
LBCC Board of Education
LBCC President
Staff
Vice Presidents
Staff
Deans
Staff
Directors
Staff
Department Chairs
Program Coordinators
Senior Faculty
Adjunct Faculty
The Student!

And you missed the point about the Governor's salary.....I think it is ridiculous that we pay over 100 higher education employees MORE than the Governor. 80 percent of the Oregon budget for Higher Ed goes towards adminstration of the programs.
JAMISON LEE —
Actually, I was trying to post a question for the forum this evening. I would like to know how the colleges and universities can justify the outrageous salaries paid to coaches and assistant personnel in the sports programs and pay professors and adjunct faculty so poorly. It seems to me we have our priorities upside down and backwards.
Sharri —
Absolutely, and did any of them answer this question? Hardly, and Ray's celebration of athletic programs is an embarrassment. As I said in my comments, to say that such programs are neat because otherwise underepresented groups would not enroll or hold on until graduation, is an insult to these groups.

Makes you really wonder how such people become College presidents. But then, look who we've had in the white house for 8 years.
GREEKS —
Could the presidents discuss the collaborative efforts surrounding the new Life Sciences building and the enormous potential of this and related Waterfront projects?

Thank you,

Larry Galizio - State Representative - Tigard - House District 35
galizio —
Given the current economic situation in the state, why is changing the "made in Oregon" sign on the White Stag building downtown Portland to "University of Oregon" a priority? And has there been enough student and public input on the decision?
Theophilus101 —
Given the current economic and enrollment climate, why is it a priority for UofO to change the "made in Oregon" sign on the downtown Portland White Stag Building to "University of Oregon"? And has there been enough student and public input on the decision?
Theophilus101 —
We are already paying the price of not fully funding higher education and it will only get worse. Taxpayers do not want to pay for it and legislators are too meek to stand up and fund it. Period! It has been this way for decades. But if people think it is bad now, just wait. Here is my solution and it is easy: FUND IT! It ultimately benefits all so I won't mind paying a bit more to see it funded. Big corporations can pay more, too, and it does not bother me one bit if they go elsewhere, at least we will know why. Someone will recognize the bigger picture for what it is and locate here. People will see that we are not just blowing smoke. If we are out to do the right thing here then we need to stand up and insist that it happen.
Dr Loco —
The University of Oregon's academic quality has been sliding for the past several decades. Under-funding is certainly a major factor. However, the University's relentless focus on athletics at the expense of academics is another contributing factor.
Thank goodness Frohnmayer is retiring. His leadership has been a great disappointment.
paul from Eugene —
Portland State has more non-traditional students than any public university in Oregon. As a Portland State student and a single parent in my thirties, my college experience is vastly different from a recent high school graduate. I'd like to know how our new president intends to address the challenges faced by students from different backgrounds.
Kurt Arndorfer —
I find it interesting that sports in these institutions moves money away from the real education of the students. Try tutoring one of the sports players in science or math and tell me how they recruit the 'best and brightest'.
It is ridiculous that so much money is wasted on sports.
My experiences at PSU and SOU were mixed. SOU genuinely helps the student through financial aid and with advising. PSU, on the other hand, has massive delays in any advising or financial aid processing. I am looking to go for a Masters degree, but I'm saving up my pennies to pay cash as I go so I don't have to go through their nightmarish system.
Beeblebrox —
I know a woman who graduated in June 2008 with a BA from PSU. Her grammatical and spelling skills are so primitive that my 5th grade daughter felt embarrassed for her, and asked me if she could correct this woman?s writing. This woman is a product of the Portland Public Schools system, obtained a GED from the Portland Community College system, then enrolled in and subsequently earned a degree from a PSU degree-granting program. That PSU would grant a BA to this woman brings the academic and intellectual integrity of PSU?s degree granting programs under a cloud of suspicion. This can, and in my circle does, have an adverse impact on capable individuals who have earned their degree(s) from PSU.

I have a degree from a first-tier school, a post-graduate professional degree, and ran a technology company for over a dozen years. In my professional life, we preferentially recruited new hires from schools that we trusted, such as Lewis and Clark, Reed College, UC Berkeley, etc. Unfortunately, individuals presenting credentials from PSU were rarely accorded the same respect, as were individuals from schools whose academic integrity was not suspect.
kamanu —
As a student at PSU I understand your point. However, while some of my classmates would have trouble passing the fifth grade, the same does not hold true for everyone. Over the course of four years I have come across journal articles from undergraduates at Harvard, Oxford, and Columbia where the quality of thought and writing were appalling, so the problem goes well beyond PSU. A quality education from PSU is less likely than from UC Berkeley, but should not be dismissed out of hand.
Kurt Arndorfer —
There is no composition requirement at PSU. Instead, there is a required University Studies Program which consists (allegedly) of numerous writing-intensive courses which are supposed to make a difference in students' writing. I believe the courses are often staffed by instructors who may have little if any training in writing instruction, or in how to comment constructively on or judiciously evaluate student writing.
GREEKS —
Several observations on last night's show on higher education. I am a retired college professor,

First, given the sad state of higher education in Oregon, it was regrettable that there were so many empty seats for this live event at PSU. Where were the students, or the faculty, or the union reps to put some tough questions to these Presidents? PSU prides itself on the E-word, "engagement," but it was hardly in evidence at this event. Except for a few attempts at tough questions from emailers, most from either the audience or Emily Harris were softball pitches, and the Presidents dutifully replied with obviously rehearsed monologues never interrupted by impolite follow-ups. (Harris generally is so cordial she never wants to appear argumentative. This was especially evident when President Wievel's specious free enterprise metaphor justified UO moving into Portland went unchallenged. How legitimate is it, anyway, to view Universities as competing corporations? That deeper question never came up.)

Second, it is astonishing that only 13% of the budget for higher education is supplied by the state. This diminishing support raises two questions: should college Presidents be held accountable for a failure to increase popular support for higher education and, should we, if this shrinkage continues, give over the idea that public higher education really exists, since so much financial support for it depends on private giving (as is the case for private schools). The answer to your first question "What's the solution to funding higher education in Oregon?" would seem to be that the solution is certainly not to be found in the public will expressed through the legislature.

Third, why was there no outrage, laughter or groaning when President Ray of OSU praised the value of his athletic program because it meant that those underrepresented student groups (hm? Blacks and Hispanics etc.) would otherwise fail to attend college and complete their degrees? I wouldn't go so far as to call this racism, but it's pretty close: you know, the best way to get diversity and increase opportunity for these folks is to get 'em to play ball for our entertainment. President Ray, incidentally, also thought it was pretty neat that schools like OSU, because of their sports programs, got really good publicity among Oregonians. Sadly, he did not address the deeper question of why, given such nice publicity and endorsement of his sports teams, this enthusiasm did not translate into greater fiscal support among legislators and the general citizenry for higher education.

Fourth, the question of the steady increase of contingent or part-time underpaid teaching staff was raised but not dealt with sufficiently. Shockingly, President Ray said they needed to do more research on this matter, but the fact is, lots of research has been done for years, and there is considerable evidence to suggest that there is a correlation between the percentage of part-time faculty, heavily concentrated in the introductory first and second year courses, and student attrition. President Wievel has a nicely rehearsed speech on this topic, defending the adjunct teaching staff as coming from the "real world" and promising to try to involve this staff more in the "community" at PSU. Any adjunct in the audience would understand this to be saying that that such "involvement" would hardly be compensated and that the real question parity and just wages remains ignored. Besides, how can you afford to be more "involved" if you're cobbling together several part-time positions just to survive (or to pay off your college loans?)

Incidentally, at the end of the show, President Frohmeyer had some glowing words to say about his "liberal arts education." But what he didn't say is that it is precisely in these general education or liberal arts courses that the abusive working conditions and inadequate class sizes predominate. (Anyone interested in pursuing this question further should visit Marc Bousquet's website: how the university works.com, and also read the book with this title. The PBS video, and accompanying book DECLINING BY DEGREES, is also instructive on this and other matters.)

Fifth, a steady mantra of the evening was that a quality higher education system is a good "investment" in Oregon overall. However, that truism does not seem to have much credibility among the tax paying public which, apparently, has not gotten the message and has grown increasingly stingy in its willingness to support higher education. The result: growing student debt, which, of course, is a joy to the lenders.

Now, as the film mentioned above argues, it is important to acknowledge history and to understand the shift in values that has occured with respect to support for higher education. Once there was a contract, especially evident after WWWII, that educational advancement was a PUBLIC GOOD, not merely a means to private enrichment. This public dimension meant that there was a kind of contract in play insofar as there was generous public support (investment) in such a good. However, steadily, over the years, and especially since the '70's, that contract has been shredded and education has become, like any other "good" or "service", something to be purchased only by those who could afford it, or by those willing to burden themselves with massive debt. As a result, the idea of broadening opportunity with public investment lost credibility so that now students bear an increasing percentage of the burden, and institutions must depend more on philanthropy and corporate giving (which always raises the question of autonomy and the extent to which colleges best serve "the public good" when they create employees for corporations the way the NCAA creates players for the NFL and NBA.)

Again, some students last night spoke eloquently about their debt burden and yet there was always the sense that such a burden was the needed price to "pay" for future success. The idea that matters could be otherwise, that there was a time when a relatively debt-free graduation day could be made possible by a generous public treasury, was unthinkable. How ironic, then, to hear President Wievel recall fondly his days in Holland when students demonstrated against a modest increase in tuition! Where have those students gone and why must all too many of them be locked out or allowed in only if they are willing to assume a debt burden that at one time would have seemed unduly harsh for people with higher educational aspirations?


Finally, I found it interesting that little time was really given to the quality of students' experience at any of these institutions. There was, of course, some dutiful praise from that PSU student for his political science teachers, but the paucity of students in attendance meant that there was little sampling of the range of satisfaction beyond the familiar complaints of deteriorating infrastructures. Generally education was seen as exclusively preparation for work, and there was no talk of the arts, of cultural enrichment, of opportunities for international study. True, one can only work with what one has on hand, but it seemed to me regrettable that while there was considerable monological speechmaking, there was little if any real dialogue or thinking going on. Perhaps these blogs can compensate for that

As for the question regarding the proper role of higher education vis a vis
"workplace training," doubtless those who trained in the past for jobs in the future which are now thriving offshore, will always be wondering whether universities can, as you put it, ever be "ahead of the curve" when it comes to anticipating the "needs' of the workplace.

GREEKS —
Both NPR and OPB say they support higher education. They both devote considerable time. However, both NPR and OPB are currently engaging in a practice that does subtly damage higher education. Within the last year or two there has been a nation wide "movement" in the media to not address Ph.D.s EEd, Psy Ds etc with the traditional honorific of "Doctor." Supposedly, some national media "style guide service" is suggesting this. The reasons given are bogus really. The term "Doctor" Smith is a sign of respect for the education that that person has gone through and the expertise they have acquired. It is an acknowledgement by the media and the public that we do care about education and reaching its highest levels. Just using it once in an interview or a story can make a significant impact. Not using it also has a significant impact on undermining the achievement of highest degrees.
The physicians and medical doctors have plenty of words that clarify what their area of knowledge is. (for example; "physician" and "medical doctor.")
It is not surprising that the AMA attempted to push for the word "doctor" be limited to physicians so that the poor ignorant public wasn't confused into thinking that a Doctor of English Literature could help somebody after a car crash. This is absurd but very political and effective. NPR and OPB should know better. We need all the PhD types we can get in almost every field. US schools are having trouble getting PhDs in fields from nursing to engineering. Foreign schools are producing many more. Taking away a very powerful word and symbol of respect does have an impact on children, society, government, etc.
Nobody is going to convince me that stripping Doctor from Einstein, doesn't have an insidious negative impact. Don't you agree Mr. Einstein. We are helping nobody by doing this. We are causing cultural damage. We are damaging higher education by doing this. Words and names do make a difference. The human brain reacts at a deep level to such symbols. If your son or daughter used to be called Dr. Smith because they received a Ph.D. in Art History, don't tell me that it doesn't feel differnt when NPR says they won't use that term any more. It does have an impact. It does matter.
David
TroutDavid —
I am not a college president, but I too was disappointed to see that there were NO college presidents from ANY of Oregon's private colleges/universities to provide other views. If OPB and in particular, Think Out Loud strive for balance in opinions, they should not disregard the views of the leaders of these private universities. Perhaps a future show please? Here's a view from the "other" schools
http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/01/deepening_the_debate_on_higher.html
eugeneor —

Comments are now closed.

Thanks to our Sponsor:
become a sponsor
Web Analytics