How much longer will Kent be Chancellor?

[Cusefan0307]

I'll believe micron getting as big as they say when I see it with my own eyes..

This is the tired CNY way of thinking.

 

[Willy75]

I dont know about that, but I do know that most schools are incredibly pressed for money and that any "profits" are minimal. Sure, presidents, provosts etc... make a good amount of money, but even their 500k-1M salaries are a drop in the bucket when your budget is a billion dollars.

Even SU is a tuition driven school. If there's a profit, then where's it going?

I can only speak to my school, but sticker price is basically meaningless. Our school recently raised tuition by like $4k/year. The next year, the school took in the exact same amount of money in tuition. Basically, they charged a specific demographic of students 4k more and gave cuts to other students.

Much of higher education has been awash in money for the last 10-15 years if not longer. The problem is that an outsized portion of revenues go to expanding non-teaching bureaucracies. SU is no exception.

 

[CnyTarheel]

I‘ve been in meetings with Micron officials. There’s no pockets being lined. Ignorance at It’s best.

Lol..ok.. Like I said I'll believe it when I see it.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Lol..ok.. Like I said I'll believe it when I see it.

Tell me you don’t have a clue without telling me. Go complain on facebook.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Tell me you don’t have a clue without telling me. Go complain on facebook.

Self-loathing CNY person? Check!
Self-loathing CNY person that identifies with another name program? Check!
Can barely write a sentence and quick to pull politics into it? Check!

Probably one of my relatives. I apologize in advance.

 

[dan7800]

Much of higher education has been awash in money for the last 10-15 years if not longer. The problem is that an outsized portion of revenues go to expanding non-teaching bureaucracies. SU is no exception.

Take it how you want it, but it is the belief that these bureaucracies are needed in order to attract students. I've been in higher education for 15 years, and at least from what I've seen in the small sample size of schools I collaborate with -- I have not observed anyone awash with money.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

Take it how you want it, but it is the belief that these bureaucracies are needed in order to attract students. I've been in higher education for 15 years, and at least from what I've seen in the small sample size of schools I collaborate with -- I have not observed anyone awash with money.

Same here. For some reason this seems to be a popular myth.

 

[orangenauburn]

Professor salaries. They do ok at a lot of institutions.

https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/american.association.of.university.professors/viz/FCSFTFacultySalaries/TREND

The money is awash on the senior admin side

 

[Willy75]

Take it how you want it, but it is the belief that these bureaucracies are needed in order to attract students. I've been in higher education for 15 years, and at least from what I've seen in the small sample size of schools I collaborate with -- I have not observed anyone awash with money.

Multiple articles in e.g. Forbes and WSJ that administrative expenses have increased at a much, much faster rate than instructional expenses. It would be illuminating to compare the number of bureaucrats when Kent started to now (SU has, in absolute not relative terms, one of the largest DEI functions in the U.S.). Massive spending as well on facilities expansion at many schools, some of which I've witnessed firsthand. See “Colleges Spend Like There’s No Tomorrow. These Places Devour Money”, WSJ 8/10/23.
If you're arguing that schools need to spend on facilities to attract a declining pool of applicants I kind of get that notion. But they're fundraising and spending big time.

 

[orangenauburn]

Multiple articles in e.g. Forbes and WSJ that administrative expenses have increased at a much, much faster rate than instructional expenses. It would be illuminating to compare the number of bureaucrats when Kent started to now (SU has, in absolute not relative terms, one of the largest DEI functions in the U.S.). Massive spending as well on facilities expansion at many schools, some of which I've witnessed firsthand.
If you're arguing that schools need to spend to attract a declining pool of applicants I kind of get that notion. But they're spending big time.

When Cazenovia College closed they had more admin and professors than enrolled students

 

[dan7800]

Multiple articles in e.g. Forbes and WSJ that administrative expenses have increased at a much, much faster rate than instructional expenses. It would be illuminating to compare the number of bureaucrats when Kent started to now (SU has, in absolute not relative terms, one of the largest DEI functions in the U.S.). Massive spending as well on facilities expansion at many schools, some of which I've witnessed firsthand.
If you're arguing that schools need to spend on facilities to attract a declining pool of applicants I kind of get that notion. But they're fundraising and spending big time.

Some of it is that schools need to spend more to attract more students most definitely. This ranges from better access services, to better food etc... Instruction is cheap.

I am not saying KS has done a good or bad job, but what he's facing is the norm for about 99% of schools across the US. The vast majority of schools in the US work on a razor thin margin, and it's much more complicated than just saying that the school has too many beauocrats. If it were that easy, schools wouldn't be in the situation that they are in. The four areas that come to mind to me are:

1) Increased focus on research: Most researchers lose money. Think the normal TT hire, at SU they may teach 2 classes a year and I'd be surprised if 10% even break even monetarily for the school (think startup packages etc..)
2) An increased need to have better things to attract more students.
3) In NYS at least, the college admissions scandal had a big blowback. The rules went far beyond legacy admissions etc... things that IMHO were not related to the original scandal and actually hurt students.
4) ... I won't say it because I dont want to get political ...

 

[dan7800]

When Cazenovia College closed they had more admin and professors than enrolled students

There's a lot of buzz that there will be other schools in the state to close.

 

[EnviroSciGuy]

There's a lot of buzz that there will be other schools in the state to close.

I was at one of them that already did. For Saint Rose, they took on debt in the 2000s when they were booming to buy real estate and put a sparkly new dorm on Madison Ave... then the 2008 collapse happened. They never recovered. They were treading water after some severe staff and faculty cuts in 2015, and then covid made things all but untenable. They had enough reserves to hold out for a few years, but were unable to identify a strategy to get their enrollment back up. At the time (and to this day) I believed that the only solution was to GROW their way out of it, but they went in the other direction with cuts to some of their more attractive programs, rather than some of the actual deadweight, due to internal politics (just like in 2015).

The demographic cliff is a thing now as well. Some familiar names will probably be meeting the same fate as Saint Rose in the next few years.

 

[Newhouser]

There's a lot of buzz that there will be other schools in the state to close.

There are going to be well respected NY schools that will close within the decade.

 

[HtownOrange]

There are going to be well respected NY schools that will close within the decade.

...and across the nation...

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Remember that colleges can “profit” at most 3%. Colllege faculty and staff typically make less than they would in the private sector.

I don’t think that is true. Many college faculty have no skills that translate to anything outside of academia. What’s an English literature professor going to do. When you add in benefits, time off, etc., it’s a pretty good gig.

 

[CarolinaCuse]

Some of it is that schools need to spend more to attract more students most definitely. This ranges from better access services, to better food etc... Instruction is cheap.

I am not saying KS has done a good or bad job, but what he's facing is the norm for about 99% of schools across the US. The vast majority of schools in the US work on a razor thin margin, and it's much more complicated than just saying that the school has too many beauocrats. If it were that easy, schools wouldn't be in the situation that they are in. The four areas that come to mind to me are:

1) Increased focus on research: Most researchers lose money. Think the normal TT hire, at SU they may teach 2 classes a year and I'd be surprised if 10% even break even monetarily for the school (think startup packages etc..)
2) An increased need to have better things to attract more students.
3) In NYS at least, the college admissions scandal had a big blowback. The rules went far beyond legacy admissions etc... things that IMHO were not related to the original scandal and actually hurt students.
4) ... I won't say it because I dont want to get political ...

I've worked in higher ed for 30+ years. Other observations... faculty and academic instruction comp rates haven't changed (relatively speaking) as much over the years because PhDs and advanced degrees have been the standard for a very long time. Adjust faculty rates have changed quite a bit due to the influence of the private market.

Higher ed administration has changed significantly, as the field has grown more complex with intentionality, preparation, and compliance influences. There are now graduate degrees for higher ed administration and other related fields that reflect the evolution of work in higher ed. With those advances come increased competition for talent driving the market. Yet, I know a good number of higher ed professionals that are paid less than $70k with PhDs and Master's degrees. Personally, I think many higher ed administrators are significantly under paid... but also agree that universities don't need to provide the expanse of services that they are expected to in this day and age.

 

[Willy75]

There's a lot of buzz that there will be other schools in the state to close.

When SUNY reduced tuition for many in-state students a few years back it was widely predicted that smaller private schools would close.NYS didn't care much that those schools provided economic benefits to Upstate towns.

 

[dan7800]

I don’t think that is true. Many college faculty have no skills that translate to anything outside of academia. What’s an English literature professor going to do. When you add in benefits, time off, etc., it’s a pretty good gig.

True. I was thinking areas like engineering, business, etc…. Same for many staff

 

[OttosShoes]

A couple points.

--Colleges don't run 'profit' (which is taxable, and generally goes to shareholders) they run 'surplus', which is money they can stash for future projects, endowments, etc. SU ran a $116 million surplus in 2023. We'll find out soon what it was in 2024 but I expect large. That's pretty successful and makes Kent look pretty good to the only people who can really put reins on him--the trustees.

--There is already a big plan for that surplus. The university wants to upgrade a large number of facilities by 2030. That *includes* Lally and the Dome. It also includes stuff like technology and the [formerly named] L.C. Smith school, which as hinted above may join the ranks of Maxwell and Newhouse. Incidently, Mr. Smith was the 'Smith' in 'Smith-Corona' typewriters, and he was also an athletics booster way back then.

--As far as tuition, yeah, it's too expensive. Part of why I dismissed being too reliant on rankings earlier is because they are part of that problem. The rankings take into account all sorts of arbitrary things, many of which don't necessarily make for a better education yet make for a more expensive one. For example, surveying students and their impressions of facilities. If that other school has three olympic-sized swimming pools, how come ours doesn't? Then the rankings drop, the school has to build more swimming pools and tuition gets more expensive to float it, yet nobody actually got better prepared for their career as a result. It's a vicious cycle, "keep up with the Joneses" on a colossal scale.

Anyway, that's a long winded way of saying "don't hate the player hate the game." Reasonable to be frustrated right now, but IMHO it's because things have gotten rather out of hand for colleges in general.