Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

PASSHE Institutions Merging

Collapse

Support The Site!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by WarriorVoice View Post

    I've NEVER made any of those claims, although I don't know ANY Conservative white males who AREN'T homophobes...
    Then I would postulate that you live in a very odd area! I have conservative white male friend who are homosexuals and many who are anything but homophobes.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post
      Another model that relates to athletics I forgot about is Fairleigh Dickinson. One campus competes at the D1/FCS level, the other at the D3 level. Similar models exist with the Southern Illinois campuses (FBS and FCS) and formerly at LIU (FCS and D2). Could you imagine if Bloomsburg goes D1/FCS and Lock Haven and Mansfield go D3? I wonder if they'd allow Lock Haven to stay D1 in wrestling and pool the Bloom wrestling funds with Lock Haven. That would be something!

      But...I don't see how this saves much from the current scenario. Scholarships aren't internally funded and I see APSCUF successfully helping coaches benchmark salaries against their D1 & D2 members rather than the D3 benchmarks.
      I don't think there is anything in the PASSHE plans that addresses athletics. What I could see happening ultimately is Mansfield dropping NCAA sports altogether, LH dropping football and possiblu going Sprint like Mansfield, and Bloom athletics staying the same.

      There will be no intermingling of the LH and Bloom wrestling programs Remember, LHU has 2 successful D1 programs with wrestling and field hockey. Those programs are supported heavily by private funding.

      When we emerge from the current situation there will be pressure on athletic budgets everywhere.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post

        The Chancellor talked about how in the business world, they look at mergers much sooner when businesses aren't doing well. In higher ed, it's almost like schools want to go out of business before they make changes.

        He also talked about how the costs of closing a school could be in the $100+ million range. So closing 1 could really hurt the entire system. It sounds like they absolutely don't want to close schools.

        On B, I'm not so sure they have to sacrifice their name. It's possible they do, but not a certainty. He did talk about 1 accreditation for the 3 schools integrating. What that means? They're still determining the course. So a lot of things are unknown and still to be determined. It sounds like there are certain paths they have to go for accreditation. Like it sounds like they may spin up a new entity and make the schools under that. What that looks like? Stay tuned.
        Yea...The "college world" has always baffled me. They do so much that is just financially baffling and seem to ignore success metrics for YEARS while refusing to make any meaningful changes. At best they wait until the financial situation is at crisis levels before doing anything and even then what they propose/do is the bare minimum they think is necessary to limp the college forward.

        Another thing that is baffling in higher education is determining success by comparing yourself to others in your area. Success is not a "compared to" game. If you are comparing yourself to a failing school and claiming success because your enrolement numbers haven't shrunk quite as much, you are going about it all wrong. Success or failure should be based on how YOUR college is doing...if YOUR college has lost students for the last 10 years, YOU have a problem...Doesn't matter if you have only lost 10% of your student base while other schools have lost 15%. YOU are STILL failing!!

        While there are some great college presidents who are innovative and forward thinking, seems that most are career educators with little understanding of how to manage and lead large, diverse organizations. There is a great difference between being "technically competent" (in the case of colleges, a great educator) and someone who can manage and lead a multi-million dollar business (make no mistake, that is what colleges are). While having technical competency can help a leader be successful, there are MANY more important skills that have a much greater impact on the success or failure of a business leader. Probably the biggest success trait of someone coming in to lead a filing organization is the ability to recognize AND admit the problems, then take bold and immediate steps to address them.

        It would be an interesting experiment at say Mansfield to bring in a business leader from completely outside of academia and see what they can do. Soe may poo-poo such an idea saying that such a person couldn't possibly "understand" the world of academia, but the real questions is, could he/she do much worse that the pevious leaders who DID understand it??

        Comment


        • Originally posted by boatcapt View Post
          Yea...The "college world" has always baffled me. They do so much that is just financially baffling and seem to ignore success metrics for YEARS while refusing to make any meaningful changes. At best they wait until the financial situation is at crisis levels before doing anything and even then what they propose/do is the bare minimum they think is necessary to limp the college forward.

          Another thing that is baffling in higher education is determining success by comparing yourself to others in your area. Success is not a "compared to" game. If you are comparing yourself to a failing school and claiming success because your enrolement numbers haven't shrunk quite as much, you are going about it all wrong. Success or failure should be based on how YOUR college is doing...if YOUR college has lost students for the last 10 years, YOU have a problem...Doesn't matter if you have only lost 10% of your student base while other schools have lost 15%. YOU are STILL failing!!

          While there are some great college presidents who are innovative and forward thinking, seems that most are career educators with little understanding of how to manage and lead large, diverse organizations. There is a great difference between being "technically competent" (in the case of colleges, a great educator) and someone who can manage and lead a multi-million dollar business (make no mistake, that is what colleges are). While having technical competency can help a leader be successful, there are MANY more important skills that have a much greater impact on the success or failure of a business leader. Probably the biggest success trait of someone coming in to lead a filing organization is the ability to recognize AND admit the problems, then take bold and immediate steps to address them.

          It would be an interesting experiment at say Mansfield to bring in a business leader from completely outside of academia and see what they can do. Soe may poo-poo such an idea saying that such a person couldn't possibly "understand" the world of academia, but the real questions is, could he/she do much worse that the pevious leaders who DID understand it??
          Mansfield already had a non-academic as a president. He was even a Mansfield alumnus. But he failed. The university continued to lose students and his top-down management style brought from the military doesn't fly - especially in a system used to "shared governance."

          Most business leaders fail as university presidents. Universities are not as agile as the standard business. PASSHE schools only have control of roughly 75% of their revenue, a lot of personnel expenses are decided at the system level, and until very recently had limited control over pricing. On the other hand, Cheyney has a business executive as president right now. But he also has university governance experience from serving on the PASSHE board and the Cal trustees and has PASSHE. IMO he's done pretty well at eliminating scandal and reversing course on enrollment at a school with a terrible location and terrible reputation.

          As I mentioned, in PASSHE there is a stated philosophy of "shared governance". This isn't a state where you try to bust a union. We already tried that when the former governor brought in Jeb Bush's lieutenant governor to be chancellor. He caused the first and only strike in system history. The great majority of employees also belong to very strong unions. Even a strong swing in strategic direction could result in acrimony that stifles progress elsewhere. You'll see that with the coming degree program cuts. The professoriate has an antiquated culture that in many ways still operates similar to how it did pre-WW2.

          Management style is more critical for these schools than past executive success. In business, most employees are at will and can be fired for poor performance or even just a bad fit. The "do as I say, and that's an order" style that typically comes from business executives and military leaders doesn't go well in a business where people are the commodity. I haven't worked for someone coming into higher ed from corporate work, but I have worked for ex military. I also got to know Edinboro's last permanent president pretty well, and he's ex military as well. The common issue I saw was that they saw people in two-dimensional lenses. They see your rank and your function. You're an admissions counselor and you recruit students. That's what I pay you to do. The problem is that they fail to understand the third dimension of people and often create cold environments where they fail to explain how they arrived at strategic decisions. That might fly in environments when business details are all private, but in PASSHE nothing is private. Everyone can look up your salary, everyone can do a FOI request on your e-mails, and the financials are usually published somewhere. If you get caught lying or talking trash, you're toast. You'll have a mutiny on your hands.
          Last edited by Fightingscot82; 09-29-2020, 10:49 AM.

          Comment


          • Treating employees with contempt is not part of being a good leader...quite the contrary. Nor is "breaking the union." There are many, many highly successful executives that work in businesses that employ many union employees. Heck, over half of the employees I had working for me were union employees and I found a way to treat them with respect and retrench my organizations processes. Was it easy? Nope. To say unions and union employees are "reluctant to change" is an understatement. Sadly in many cases, unions are serious roadblocks to making changes necessary to insure the continued health of an organization. BUUUTTT...It can be done...It just takes a lot longer than it should. Change is never easy but sometimes, as is the case with the schools in the PASSHE (and the PASSHE itself), it is absolutely necessary...the only other option is to continue the slide toward going out of business.

            Maybe the military in the 50's and 60's saw people in "2 dimensions," but that's not how the military operate anymore. Certainly in a combat situation, there is a need for directed action with an expectation that the troops will carry out the orders. But outside of those specific situations, military leadership goes out of its way to explain the why of decisions and encourages troops up and down the chain of command to speak up when something isn't working OR can be done a better way.

            I would say that if a leader get's caught lying or talking negatively about the people who work for him, he/she is toast...regardless of weather they work in a union dominated environment, the military or an at-will company.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post
              Another model that relates to athletics I forgot about is Fairleigh Dickinson. One campus competes at the D1/FCS level, the other at the D3 level. Similar models exist with the Southern Illinois campuses (FBS and FCS) and formerly at LIU (FCS and D2). Could you imagine if Bloomsburg goes D1/FCS and Lock Haven and Mansfield go D3? I wonder if they'd allow Lock Haven to stay D1 in wrestling and pool the Bloom wrestling funds with Lock Haven. That would be something!

              But...I don't see how this saves much from the current scenario. Scholarships aren't internally funded and I see APSCUF successfully helping coaches benchmark salaries against their D1 & D2 members rather than the D3 benchmarks.
              The PSAC was split between D2 and D3 for seven years after the three-division model was introduced in 1973, and West Chester was Division I except for football until 1982.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Fightingscot82 View Post

                I agree. It's not the innovation I hoped this chancellor would bring but I also don't think its foolish. Outside of West Chester, the PASSHE schools don't have much in terms of reserves. It used to be something schools used for rainy day building projects or unexpected expenses, but lately they've been chipping away each year to plug budget deficits. To me, that's the most attractive byproduct of the staff reductions - some financial flexibility. If COVID doesn't go away, or infections spike again, I don't know how long the system can bail out schools who need money to refund fees. Those fees pay for things (and people) who can't just be discarded.
                Lock Haven putting up a fight. They reported $53 million in reserves.

                https://www.sungazette.com/news/top-...ity-employees/

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Bart View Post

                  Lock Haven putting up a fight. They reported $53 million in reserves.

                  https://www.sungazette.com/news/top-...ity-employees/
                  I don't know if that number is accurate. It would absolutely shock me that they're that high. In fact, a number that high would probably put Lock Haven out of integration conversations.

                  Comment


                  • Call me shocked. Not one Debate comment today.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by IUPbigINDIANS View Post
                      Call me shocked. Not one Debate comment today.
                      I saw two old geezers on the tube the other night. Was that a debate?

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by WarriorVoice View Post

                        I saw two old geezers on the tube the other night. Was that a debate?
                        Whomever they were ... they were good for business.

                        The debate was the second highest rated show in network television history.

                        It was also the highest rated show on cable television ... ever.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by IUPbigINDIANS View Post

                          Whomever they were ... they were good for business.

                          The debate was the second highest rated show in network television history.

                          It was also the highest rated show on cable television ... ever.
                          It was kind of a cross between the Jerry Springer show meets 2 people accusing each other of cheating at a card game...with control of the US at stake. I think Springer does a better job of moderating his show though.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by complaint_hopeful View Post

                            It was kind of a cross between the Jerry Springer show meets 2 people accusing each other of cheating at a card game...with control of the US at stake. I think Springer does a better job of moderating his show though.
                            Trump took it off the rails. Full stop.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by iupgroundhog View Post

                              Trump took it off the rails. Full stop.
                              My favorite lowlight was when the moderator was trying to ask a question and he was correcting him during the question.

                              Comment


                              • SNL will be must-watch TV tomorrow night.

                                Comment

                                Ad3

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X