Graduate Program Cuts at BGSU

[professorjackson]

Learned today of some significant cuts at BGSU in terms of graduate study. Here are the programs to be eliminated:

Master of Rehabilitation Counseling
Master of Education in Gifted and Talented Intervention
Master of Education in School Psychology
PhD in Communication Studies
PhD in History
Specialist in Education in Reading
Specialist in Education in School Psychology

Programs described as having to “rethink how they can strategically position themselves in the future” and “articulate a new vision and mission” by October 1, 2011 or they will not be allowed to recruit a graduate class for 2012 and beyond:
Master of Arts in Economics
Master of Education in Reading
Master of Education in Business Education
Master of Arts in Communication
Master of Science in Computer Science
Specialization in Leisure and Tourism

[Rightupinthere]

Thank you, Mr. Fingerhut.

[musicman2343]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't our Ph.D program in History one of the best in the country? If so, WHY WOULD WE CUT IT?!

[transfer2BGSU]

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't our Ph.D program in History one of the best in the country? If so, WHY WOULD WE CUT IT?!

$$$$

The last I heard, the Ohio Board of Regents (OBOR) was no longer providing the university funding for the program as of the late 1990's (it was ordered cut by OBOR previously). The University was able to fund the program through grants for the longest time. I believes Nathan might be able to shed some more info on this (or our esteemed Dr. Jackson).

This does not surprise me at all. I had a feeling that graduate programs would be hit the hardest since our graduate enrollment is small. Also, OBOR is probably going to be coming out and forcing the universities to drop those graduate programs they no longer fund.

[jacojdm]

Thank you, Mr. Fingerhut.

Don't you mean Mr. Petro?

[footballguy51]

I am a member of Graduate Student Senate. We just had our general assembly this afternoon, and naturally this was a hot topic. The graduate dean, Dean Messer-Kruse, was there to discuss this list of 13 programs and answer questions. Naturally, it was a short discussion and then a dance around all of the questions. It became very apparent that these decisions may have very little to do with him, and it has a LOT to do with Provost Borland.

One key topic that we were VERY interested in was the criteria used in making these decisions. We were told that money did not play a role in the decision making of these programs, and it was based on Academic Quality and Sustainability. However, nothing specific was offered as to what was actually viewed, and several arguments were made IN FAVOR of the academic quality of at least one of the programs on the closure portion of the list.

For those of you that are confused as to why the faculty of BGSU chose to unionize, look at this as a prime example. This decision affects faculty, staff, and students. However, all of these decisions were made without our knowledge or input, and all of these decisions are not being transparently defended so that we may understand them. In a University setting that seems to tout "Shared Governance", they seem to have a lot of "here is our decision, live with it" occurrences.

We, as the GSS, have invited the Provost to come to our General Assembly to answer our questions regarding these decisions, and he has declined due to scheduling conflicts. An email was written this evening after our meeting stating we would like to call a special general assembly so that he may attend, and we would like to know when he is available. We want answers, and the people he sends in his place to these meetings cannot answer our questions. If he continues to dodge our meeting requests, we will make it known. It may just be leaked to the BG News, the Sentinel, and the Blade, just as this list of 13 programs was leaked to the news outlets before the affected students and faculty knew about it.

All we want to know is why, and if he can satisfactorily answer why, perhaps we may actually understand these decisions and see them as business decisions. Metaphorically, as it stands right now, essentially 13 long-standing employees were called into the managers office and told they were fired without explanation. When an explanation was requested, a vague, "You didn't do your job" was offered. Nothing specific could be offered, and unfortunately we suspect there may not be anything specific to be supplied as an answer. This decision had to come from somewhere, and we would just like to know how.

[Rightupinthere]

Thank you, Mr. Fingerhut.

Don't you mean Mr. Petro?

Nope.

[Tech83]

Thank you, Mr. Fingerhut.

Don't you mean Mr. Petro?

Nope.

Mr. Fingerhut and Gov. Strickland were actually guiding this process pretty well. IMHO (and from what I know). It was painful, but the universities had control of the process.... it wasn't top down decision-making. It was - you need to look at yourself honestly and make adjustments to fit your budgets. And don't come back to us saying you're an expert in everything. We all know better.

You can't have your cake and eat too. You can't applaud the slash and burn governor for his budget, then turn around and howl like a rabid monkey about cuts like this. Its a bit disingenuous. I'll excuse you this time.

BTW - As I have been told... if your governor gets his way with the retirement systems, we could lose 25% of our faculty to retirement. (they would have to retire now or work another 8-10 years to regain their current status) How do you operate a college or even the local high with those types of losses? To be fair, I understand that things are being repositioned as to maintain our experienced staff by not affecting people who are within 5 years of retirement.... but that wasn't how this was headed 6 months ago.

I can talk off-line about a current project that just got killed..... would have created at least 10 new FT jobs, plus all the work generated by a $1.5 million building addition. So much for "your" governor wanting to create jobs.

However, all of these decisions were made without our knowledge or input, and all of these decisions are not being transparently defended so that we may understand them.

No offense, but what rock have you been living under? I'm not on campus full time, but I knew that cuts in our graduate programs were going to occur.

But the question remains.... why does there need to be a PhD in History at multiple schools in Ohio. Pick two or three with exceptional programs and eliminate the others. If we are graduating 1 or 2 Hitory PhD's every couple of years... you have to rethink the cost. And think about this.... we are paying their way with assistantships and grants. So they are NOT bringing in income to the department. I been told some of the numbers...... it's not pretty. We can't continue or afford to have some programs. This will allow stronger programs to flourish.

Look at the numbers Maybe someone can provide a better link... but 2 enrolled in History in 2008!!! Are you kidding me!!
http://www.bgsu.edu/offices/ir/factbook ... ajor2.html

Our research departments generate money to cover the costs of those GA's and TA's. There's no income from history. And I love History.

Look - here's the skinny..... like it or not. We have budget issues. We've had them for years. We been trying to make sure we maintain our strong system of higher education. If you've been following this at any level, you would know that all the State U's had to identify Centers of Excellence under Mr. Fingerhut and Gov. Strickland. Basically.... what makes you strong. What are your best programs. BG has done this and is still doing it.

BG has decided they should focus on undergraduate education. FWIW and maybe you actually don't know this...the Ivy League schools are focused on Graduate program.... not their undergraduate programs. Look at the graduate enrollment vers undergraduate enrollment at Yale, Harvard, Princeton... and so on. Its their law, medical, design schools that are their focus. OSU is really a research facility. Ever so hated Miami is focused on undergraduates..... there are only about 1,300 graduate students in Oxford. BGSU can't be a jack of all trades - and we ain't no Ivy League school.

So before all the nashing and grinding of teeth. Look at the list and imagine the cost verses the actually number of degrees we award. And I doubt that anyone will necessarily lose their job. Those TA's that taught the 100 level courses will be replaced with our full-time faculty. Sure - they'll bitch about having to teach freshman.... because they think they are above it, but there will be enough courses to teach to fill people's contractual obligations.

[footballguy51]

Tech, that webpage is not accurate at all. For instance, there is nothing listed for a PhD in Mathematics, and we've been admitting roughly 5 students a year into that program. The Master of Arts in Teaching (MAT) admits about 5 a year as well, and the Master's in Math and Master's in Stats allows, combined, about 10-15 a year. Now, I am only counting full-time students on assistantship. We also admit probably another 15-25 students that are either full-time fee paying or part-time students. I don't know where Institutional Research got these numbers, or the fact that they left entire programs off the list, but that report isn't very accurate at all.

Trust me, we knew that the Graduate Program was going to face cuts. Of the $25 million budget shortfall the University was facing for the biennium, the graduate college was absorbing $12 million, or roughly 48%. However, the graduate college's budget is nowhere near 48% of the University's budget. Now, although we knew we were going to have to face financial cuts, the decisions to cut programs was made behind closed doors with no notice to us. The students in the affected programs found out from the media before BGSU bothered to tell them about their programs. That is irresponsible, at best. Then, when GSS asked what criteria was used to determine which programs would be closed, we were given a very vague answer and denied clarification. As I stated, with the proper facts, we may actually agree with the decisions about these programs. As of now, we have no facts to go off, and we are being denied any facts to use.

As an example, the "Specialist in Education in Reading" had only one student, who was part-time. She was paying her tuition out-of-pocket, and taking all of her classes online during summer sessions. She stated that she was interested in this specialization, and when she applied to the program, they initially told her no. After further questioning, they decided to admit her. This program was designed to be a part-time program, for only fee-paying students, and no marketing is being done for such a program; one that will make money for the University, not lose money. Since she is part-time, she cannot finish this program in the three years that it has left to survive, so she essentially wasted her money on a program and will just have random credit hours that cannot be applied to anything or transferred.

Additionally, the Communications program has recent award winners for University research awards and state awards. This would go to show that this program is of a strong academic quality, which was supposedly one of the criteria used in the decision making process. Why would you cut a program which is of such a high caliber?

These are the questions we want answered, and the answers in which we are being denied. I am not as angry about this as some of the other GSS Senators are. There are some that are furious because they will be the last class to graduate from these programs, and their degree will mean much less now that they will be seen as the last of a dying program. Foreign students are fearful they won't be able to prove the legitimacy of their degrees to their home country, a requirement for them being allowed to travel abroad to attend college.

[Tech83]

Footballguy - Thanks for the info.

We just can't support programs with one or two students.... whether they pay for themselves or not. The overhead kills you.

It comes down to looking beyond the walls of BG and at the entire State system. Like it or not.

When push comes to shove, I think legally, you have to allow students who are in programs finish programs. As far as I know - a program being eliminated does not affect the worthiness of the degree. I have to disagree. There are still graduates of Ohio University's architecture program who are licensed and practicing and well-respected members of the profession. The OU program lost its accreditation in the 70's and the program is no more. One of their former instructors is one of the most prolific writers on the subject. Just go to Amazon and search Francis (Frank) Ching.

Upside - BG will soon offer a Master of Architecture degree. Once accredited - it will be the only Professional degree at BG. It is my understanding the architecture profession in Toledo and NW Ohio in general pushed for this program to grow. Look for it to have 20-30 new students annually - it will also help the undergrad program grow.

[hammb]

I know little to nothing about the individual programs being cut, but I definitely believe BGSU is making the correct decision in slashing graduate programs and focusing on undergrad. The University needs to focus in order to balance the budgets, and it doesn't make sense to me to maintain these programs admitting single digit numbers of students every year. It's just not feasible.

Focus on what you do well and do it better. Cut the stuff you don't do as well as it makes no sense to fund it. Like it or not there are a lot of major Universities in the state of Ohio and the best way for BG to maintain its place in that group is to focus on being a top flight undergraduate school.

[footballguy51]

I know little to nothing about the individual programs being cut, but I definitely believe BGSU is making the correct decision in slashing graduate programs and focusing on undergrad. The University needs to focus in order to balance the budgets, and it doesn't make sense to me to maintain these programs admitting single digit numbers of students every year. It's just not feasible.

Focus on what you do well and do it better. Cut the stuff you don't do as well as it makes no sense to fund it. Like it or not there are a lot of major Universities in the state of Ohio and the best way for BG to maintain its place in that group is to focus on being a top flight undergraduate school.

I do not disagree with that sentiment at all. We should focus on what we do well, and restructure or eliminate programs that are not performing. Once the data is made available, I hope the GSS, and I, can come to the same consensus on the programs that were cut or were listed for restructure.

One thing that was brought up during the meeting that makes perfect sense is that the University wants to restart a 5-year review process for all programs, undergraduate and graduate. This will then hold these programs accountable to being competitive and viable, and in the end should improve the quality of education that is being offered at BGSU. Relating back to a business point of view, if employees never have to go through an end-of-year performance review that impacts their pay or their job, the employees tend to get comfortable in their current state and no longer strive to better themselves. Hopefully, this process will help to correct some of the ruts a lot of programs have fallen into.

[Falcon Fanatic]

BTW - As I have been told... if your governor gets his way with the retirement systems, we could lose 25% of our faculty to retirement. (they would have to retire now or work another 8-10 years to regain their current status) How do you operate a college or even the local high with those types of losses?

Sorry to go off topic (as we often are on here), but just had to jump in here on this particular comment. You are right about a LARGE number of faculty retiring from both the college and the public school ranks in the next few years. Because of the things going on (mostly the State Teacher's Retirement changes that are coming), I'm going to be one of them. Wasn't something I was planning to worry about for at least 4-5 years, but now I'm at the point where I have to make a life changing decision very soon. Education in this state is going to change, and unfortunately, not in a good way. I fear for the future of education in this state.

[musicman2343]

Education in this state is going to change, and unfortunately, not in a good way. I fear for the future of education in this state.

So true...
I'm probably going to have to transfer my teaching license to another state.

[Tech83]

FF - I thought you might be one of those in the Catch 22. You obviously would like to continue to teach, but will have to retire to make the numbers work...... or teach until you're 70 And I know you're only a couple years older than me. (no joke here..... you're too young to have to be thinking about retirement)

Footballguy - What are you studying? What program?