so is this the start

[RobPort]

Before I take that statement at face value from you, what experience do you have running large organizations with multiple stakeholders?

I'm not asking you to take it at face value. I've provided you with facts. Huge increases in spending - to the point of making North Dakota spend more per capita on higher ed than any other state in the nation and more as a percentage of our overall budget than all of our neighbors - juxtaposed with university officials screaming about being underfunded.

I don't think it requires an MBA to conclude that something is, clearly, amiss.

Nor do I think a citizen need be anything other than a citizen to speak out about how his/her tax dollars are being spent.

[PhillySioux]

I'm not asking you to take it at face value. I've provided you with facts. Huge increases in spending - to the point of making North Dakota spend more per capita on higher ed than any other state in the nation and more as a percentage of our overall budget than all of our neighbors - juxtaposed with university officials screaming about being underfunded.

I don't think it requires an MBA to conclude that something is, clearly, amiss.

Nor do I think a citizen need be anything other than a citizen to speak out about how his/her tax dollars are being spent.

You may be right, but just to be clear "They get to much money" and "they spend it stupidly" are opinions, by definition they cannot be facts.

[RobPort]

You may be right, but just to be clear "They get to much money" and "they spend it stupidly" are opinions, by definition they cannot be facts.

No, but the spending and budget numbers I cited to support those opinions are most certainly facts, as are reports about the UND's use of it's planes to spend thousands of dollars on flights to Bismarck as opposed to hundreds of dollars on gas.

[FargoBison]

That's certainly the talking point we hear coming from NDSU's leadership, but it doesn't pass the smell test for two reasons.

First, the "peer university" metric is a poor one. Each university has its own unique set of circumstances when it comes to educating students. Just because another state increases funding to one of its universities doesn't automatically mean we have to increase ours. We should care about what NDSU really needs, not what some other university gets.

Second, and more importantly though, is the fact that North Dakota spends more per capita on higher education than any other state in the nation. According to research done by Legislative Council, higher education spending is 18.3% of our state budget.

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/higher-education-spending-is-18-3-of-north-dakotas-budget/

That's a higher portion than Minnesota, Colorado, South Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Idaho (if you want to talk about peers). And which university gets the lion's share of that funding? NDSU.

Though don't get me wrong. This isn't a NDSU problem. This is a higher education problem. They get too much money, and they spend it stupidly.

Our system of higher ed is overbuilt but good luck getting that fixed, a few colleges are basically entirely redundant and only remain open so a few towns don't suffer an economic impact. Most of the schools in the state are very efficient, especially NDSU but we have a few too many. That is the problem.

NDSU has to compete with those schools from other states, the funding they get definitely has some meaning. No two schools are the same but you can't stick your head in the sand and act like what other states are doing doesn't matter.

[The Whistler]

What we do know is that despite the (1) fantastic increases in state funding and (2) massive increases in tuition prior to that the colleges are still (3) claiming to be woefully underfunded.

There are three facts.

My conclusion is that the more money we give them the worse they misspend it.

[RobPort]

Our system of higher ed is overbuilt but good luck getting that fixed, a few colleges are basically entirely redundant and only remain open so a few towns don't suffer an economic impact. Most of the schools in the state are very efficient, especially NDSU but we have a few too many. That is the problem.

NDSU has to compete with those schools from other states, the funding they get definitely has some meaning. No two schools are the same but you can't stick your head in the sand and act like what other states are doing doesn't matter.

The only thing that should matter is NDSU's performance. Is the school attracting students, and are those students being educated. Now, in 2008 ND taxpayers spent roughly $71 million on tuition waivers for out-of-state students. If we're having to give the product away for free, there's a problem.

Second, let's keep in mind that the four-year graduation rate at NDSU is just 19% (UND ain't much better at 22%). That's abysmal, and it doesn't get much better after even six years when it goes up to just 53% (56% for UND).

This, again, speaks the mentality of the university bureaucrats which is build lots and lots of buildings and herd students into them with little regard for outcomes. And we've seen little improvement in these numbers despite pouring a windfall in appropriations onto the universities.

We can agree or disagree about what the appropriate level of funding for these universities is, but it's clear that the money they're getting now isn't being spent appropriately. Mostly because the higher education folks aren't accountable to anyone.

[FargoBison]

The only thing that should matter is NDSU's performance. Is the school attracting students, and are those students being educated. Now, in 2008 ND taxpayers spent roughly $71 million on tuition waivers for out-of-state students. If we're having to give the product away for free, there's a problem.

Second, let's keep in mind that the four-year graduation rate at NDSU is just 19% (UND ain't much better at 22%). That's abysmal, and it doesn't get much better after even six years when it goes up to just 53% (56% for UND).

This, again, speaks the mentality of the university bureaucrats which is build lots and lots of buildings and herd students into them with little regard for outcomes. And we've seen little improvement in these numbers despite pouring a windfall in appropriations onto the universities.

We can agree or disagree about what the appropriate level of funding for these universities is, but it's clear that the money they're getting now isn't being spent appropriately. Mostly because the higher education folks aren't accountable to anyone.

The students who get waivers are not getting them for nothing. A lot of them at NDSU teach classes or do research, there is a reason they get that money.

You know how many college students nationwide graduate with a degree? 17%, this is not a problem unique to ND. It does need to be improved. I'd love to see the four-year rate at least doubled and the system will need to be reformed to get that done.

That said I don't see Carlson's idea fixing that, the legislature needs to figure out how to work with the SBoHE. Legislators need to educate themselves and take a long look at higher ed across the nation and higher ed in this state and work with the SBoHE in reforming the system.

[PhillySioux]

The only thing that should matter is NDSU's performance. Is the school attracting students, and are those students being educated. Now, in 2008 ND taxpayers spent roughly $71 million on tuition waivers for out-of-state students. If we're having to give the product away for free, there's a problem.

Second, let's keep in mind that the four-year graduation rate at NDSU is just 19% (UND ain't much better at 22%). That's abysmal, and it doesn't get much better after even six years when it goes up to just 53% (56% for UND).

This, again, speaks the mentality of the university bureaucrats which is build lots and lots of buildings and herd students into them with little regard for outcomes. And we've seen little improvement in these numbers despite pouring a windfall in appropriations onto the universities.

We can agree or disagree about what the appropriate level of funding for these universities is, but it's clear that the money they're getting now isn't being spent appropriately. Mostly because the higher education folks aren't accountable to anyone.

I'm not sure what your experience is with the university system as a student, maybe you could enlighten us.

However, I will say (having earned a degree from UND) that there is EVERY opportunity for a student to graduate on time. My wife finished in 3 years, whereas I took a bit more time. The graduation rates are more reflective how students today view their time at a college or university these days than how "university bureaucrats" view their jobs.

[coach daddy]

The only thing that should matter is NDSU's performance. Is the school attracting students, and are those students being educated. Now, in 2008 ND taxpayers spent roughly $71 million on tuition waivers for out-of-state students. If we're having to give the product away for free, there's a problem.

Second, let's keep in mind that the four-year graduation rate at NDSU is just 19% (UND ain't much better at 22%). That's abysmal, and it doesn't get much better after even six years when it goes up to just 53% (56% for UND).

This, again, speaks the mentality of the university bureaucrats which is build lots and lots of buildings and herd students into them with little regard for outcomes. And we've seen little improvement in these numbers despite pouring a windfall in appropriations onto the universities.

We can agree or disagree about what the appropriate level of funding for these universities is, but it's clear that the money they're getting now isn't being spent appropriately. Mostly because the higher education folks aren't accountable to anyone.

I don't know who you are, or where you came from, but welcome to the board!!! I have been saying these things for years about higher ed. The other part of higher ed that drives me nuts is they'll blame the K-12 parties for the fact that students don't graduate sooner or at a higher rate. Their faculty is full of unqualified (in the eyes of DPI, which defines highly qualified at the K-12 level) teachers, but the high school teacher's are thrown under the bus for the ineptitude of higher ed. faculty; alot of whom were educated at NDSU and/or UND.

I'm not smart enough to know the funding issues that exist but I am smart enough to know that if half your class is failing the tests you write, the problem isn't the students, its the teacher. In K-12 eduction, we take that personally. In Higher Ed., they blame K-12. I call BS on all of it.

[coach daddy]

I'm not sure what your experience is with the university system as a student, maybe you could enlighten us.

However, I will say (having earned a degree from UND) that there is EVERY opportunity for a student to graduate on time. My wife finished in 3 years, whereas I took a bit more time. The graduation rates are more reflective how students today view their time at a college or university these days than how "university bureaucrats" view their jobs.

First, well done by the Mrs., she made some sacrifices to get the degree done that quickly.

Secondly, the graduation rates are a great indicator of the problems that exist in higher ed. The lack of support to the students, the idea that the more students we have on campus the more attractive our campus is are just a couple of examples, in my opinion, of problems we have in higher ed. right now. Like my wife always tells me, "size doesn't matter."

[sf340flier]

...Their faculty is full of unqualified (in the eyes of DPI, which defines highly qualified at the K-12 level) teachers...

I know the majority of the faculty voted against the state legislation (actually, only the aviation department faculty either abstained or voted against), but unqualified?

I'm as mad as the next guy over this logo issue, but I think this is getting out of control quickly. We're starting to utilize "mob mentality." In one short discussion thread we've gone from saying the SBOE President should resign, to the State Board of Higher Education should be disbanded, to all state institutions should be privatized, to North Dakota college students don't graduate (blatantly false compared to national averages), to the faculty at North Dakota's colleges are unqualified. All over one issue?

And again, some people think the system is broke and want the state legislature to take over (they want bigger government to take over and solve the problem). Personally, I think the people at the Board are broke, not the system. But no matter where you stand on this issue, let's not lose our heads.

[The Whistler]

I know the majority of the faculty voted against the state legislation (actually, only the aviation department faculty either abstained or voted against), but unqualified?

I'm as mad as the next guy over this logo issue, but I think this is getting out of control quickly. We're starting to utilize "mob mentality." In one short discussion thread we've gone from saying the SBOE President should resign, to the State Board of Higher Education should be disbanded, to all state institutions should be privatized,

Who said all state institutions should be privatized?

to North Dakota college students don't graduate (blatantly false compared to national averages),

We have a poor graduation rate. Maybe other places are worse but that doesn't make us good.

And again, some people think the system is broke and want the state legislature to take over (they want bigger government to take over and solve the problem).

How is eliminating a layer of government mean we want bigger government.

Personally, I think the people at the Board are broke, not the system.

We've got a good person or two on the board and they vote along with the turkey's. The system is broke.

[SooToo]

That's certainly the talking point we hear coming from NDSU's leadership, but it doesn't pass the smell test for two reasons.

First, the "peer university" metric is a poor one. Each university has its own unique set of circumstances when it comes to educating students. Just because another state increases funding to one of its universities doesn't automatically mean we have to increase ours. We should care about what NDSU really needs, not what some other university gets.

Second, and more importantly though, is the fact that North Dakota spends more per capita on higher education than any other state in the nation. According to research done by Legislative Council, higher education spending is 18.3% of our state budget.

http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/higher-education-spending-is-18-3-of-north-dakotas-budget/

That's a higher portion than Minnesota, Colorado, South Dakota, Montana, Nebraska and Idaho (if you want to talk about peers). And which university gets the lion's share of that funding? NDSU.

Though don't get me wrong. This isn't a NDSU problem. This is a higher education problem. They get too much money, and they spend it stupidly.

Passage of this amendment would be a huge mistake. As others have mentioned earlier, anyone who thinks higher ed would be better under more direct political control needs to review what happened at NDSU back in the 1930's before the creation of the SBoHE. The biggest fiasco of recent times occurred when one university president was able to defy his boss (chancellor of higher ed), skirt the rules and build his own personal fiefdom (see president's house fiasco, lavish charters to Washington), in large part because he had the explicit political backing of the sitting governor. Please note also that one of Al Carlson's goals with this measure is to remove from direct voter control the state department of public instruction, which just happens to have been held by the opposition party for 20+ years.

If your issue is that too much money is spent -- and that's always Whistler's issue -- in higher education, I'm not sure how this measure would help. Appropriations still would be controlled as they are now, by the legislature. You would do better to campaign to close schools or limit higher ed enrollments, but then you'll run into stiff opposition from local elected officials, who see their local institution of higher education as an engine of local economic development.. You're right that North Dakota spends a lot per capita on higher education. The much more salient statistic, of course, is that we spend relatively little per student compared to other states. Again, the answer would be to limit enrollment. Good luck with that; North Dakotans historically have strongly supported "open access" to higher ed." Unfortunately, we seem to be stuck with a 1980's something-for-nothing attitude in the state; we want all our kids to be able to go to college; we just don't really want to pay for it.

The "peer institutions" model may not be perfect but it represents an attempt to objectify questions on spending. We may not have to spend money just because they do so elsewhere, but universities and colleges here have to compete in the same market for employees (professors, researchers, etc.) and face similar infrastructure costs as universities elsewhere. Wthout some attempt at comparative spending assessment, we're left with only arbitrary blanket states like "they get too much money and they spend it stupidly."

[PhillySioux]

First, well done by the Mrs., she made some sacrifices to get the degree done that quickly.

Secondly, the graduation rates are a great indicator of the problems that exist in higher ed. The lack of support to the students, the idea that the more students we have on campus the more attractive our campus is are just a couple of examples, in my opinion, of problems we have in higher ed. right now. Like my wife always tells me, "size doesn't matter."

Thats interesting. Prior to my time at UND, I was a student at Concordia College for a bit (a fine school). They pride themselves on the four year thing. It was a much more paternalistic system, I felt they treated me as more kid than adult. But, they have a very good graduation rate.

The differences to me were fairly clear, right or wrong: At a place like Concordia you will get a good education in four years and that will come with the academic, extra curricular, and social opportunities that a relatively small liberal arts school can provide (At private school tuition rates)

At UND, everything was available to me (more or less). I had to make my own decisions and decide what opportunities I wanted to embrace academically and otherwise. If I wanted support it was/is available. I was not babysat and did not expect to be. A school the size of UND can give anyone what they want to take from it.

[The Whistler]

The biggest fiasco of recent times occurred when one university president was able to defy his boss (chancellor of higher ed), skirt the rules and build his own personal fiefdom (see president's house fiasco, lavish charters to Washington), in large part because he had the explicit political backing of the sitting governor.,,,

HUH? What?

It was the Board of Higher Education that gave Whiskey Joe Chapman cover for all of his misdeeds. It was the board of higher education that overruled the chancellor.

Now one could say that the Governor influenced the BOHE because he appointed who he wanted on there. But after the governor has no influence on their decisions.

[sf340flier]

Who said all state institutions should be privatized?

Not stated by you, but several times in this thread, this idea was brought up.

We have a poor graduation rate. Maybe other places are worse but that doesn't make us good.

Look, college isn't for everybody. Based on national averages, North Dakota has a comparable graduation rate. To think that everyone who starts out in college here in North Dakota should end up with a degree is a little like the entitlement argument you brought up earlier, in my opinion. I mean, NDSU and UND could have a 90%+ rate if that's what is wanted...the colleges would just loosen grade standards and let everyone graduate. However, dissolving the state board could help increase the graduation rate, so if that is the goal, then I would agree.

How is eliminating a layer of government mean we want bigger government.

The state board, no matter how flawed, is a smaller version of government. Right now, they point the colleges in the strategic direction they think is important. The bill would return strategic control over to a much larger body of government...the legislature.

We've got a good person or two on the board and they vote along with the turkey's. The system is broke.

Maybe, but turning it back over to the legislature has been tried before and it failed miserably. Guaranteed if this happens the logo/nickname issue would become the least of our problems. Again, I understand your points, and I think it comes down to you think the system is broke and I think the people making the decisions are doing a poor job. As you stated, reasonable people can disagree on the solution.

[STS]

The state board, no matter how flawed, is a smaller version of government. Right now, they point the colleges in the strategic direction they think is important. The bill would return strategic control over to a much larger body of government...the legislature.

No. Big government equals more government. Abolishing the SBoHE would mean less government i.e. smaller government.

The nickname issue will actually be a good "trial by fire" for the SBoHE, if they recognize what North Dakota wants and snap-to, good for them. If they bite the hands that feed them, it may need to go. And before someone says it, if it's that "small" of an issue, they should have no problem letting it go and doing what the state wants.

[mikejm]

...I am smart enough to know that if half your class is failing the tests you write, the problem isn't the students, its the teacher...

You don't think there might be anything wrong with the test?

[sf340flier]

No. Big government equals more government. Abolishing the SBoHE would mean less government i.e. smaller government.

Well, what would happen is the new Department of Education would become larger to accommodate the increased mission (read: more bureaucracy) and both the Senate and House would undoubtedly form a committee (each) to handle the higher education issues. The governor would ultimately probably have to have an Education Secretary (or equivalent -- no longer just a K-12 superintendent). At the end of the day, I would wager there would be many more people on the government side deciding the fates of colleges in North Dakota. To me, that's the test of whether government will become bigger or smaller.

Also, no one wants to address that this was tried once before and was a dismal failure...everyone in the state was mad.

[sf340flier]

Well, what would happen is the new Department of Education would become larger to accommodate the increased mission (read: more bureaucracy) and both the Senate and House would undoubtedly form a committee (each) to handle the higher education issues. The governor would ultimately probably have to have an Education Secretary (or equivalent -- no longer just a K-12 superintendent). At the end of the day, I would wager there would be many more people on the government side deciding the fates of colleges in North Dakota. To me, that's the test of whether government will become bigger or smaller.

Also, no one wants to address that this was tried once before and was a dismal failure...everyone in the state was mad.

By the way, here's the structure now: ND DPI Org Chart

I think the amount of new government workers would be vastly greater than what we have now.

Just my two cents.

[RobPort]

I'm not sure what your experience is with the university system as a student, maybe you could enlighten us.

However, I will say (having earned a degree from UND) that there is EVERY opportunity for a student to graduate on time. My wife finished in 3 years, whereas I took a bit more time. The graduation rates are more reflective how students today view their time at a college or university these days than how "university bureaucrats" view their jobs.

I have to chuckle at your inane attempts to turn this into something about me. I'm a political commentator, and our universities are a) mediocre and b) sucking up far more tax dollars than they're worth.

We have a national problem with higher education. The cost is inflated even as the degrees are devalued. We're heading to a day of reckoning. Our out of control local higher ed bureaucrats are simply accelerating it here.

[RobPort]

By the way, here's the structure now: ND DPI Org Chart

I think the amount of new government workers would be vastly greater than what we have now.

Just my two cents.

Not sure how you're seeing the merging of two existing departments as an expansion of government. That's a silly argument. It's a streamlining, and much needed.

[sf340flier]

Not sure how you're seeing the merging of two existing departments as an expansion of government. That's a silly argument. It's a streamlining, and much needed.

Sure sounds good on paper...must be a good idea then;)

[RobPort]

Not stated by you, but several times in this thread, this idea was brought up.

Look, college isn't for everybody. Based on national averages, North Dakota has a comparable graduation rate. To think that everyone who starts out in college here in North Dakota should end up with a degree is a little like the entitlement argument you brought up earlier, in my opinion. I mean, NDSU and UND could have a 90%+ rate if that's what is wanted...the colleges would just loosen grade standards and let everyone graduate. However, dissolving the state board could help increase the graduation rate, so if that is the goal, then I would agree.

The state board, no matter how flawed, is a smaller version of government. Right now, they point the colleges in the strategic direction they think is important. The bill would return strategic control over to a much larger body of government...the legislature.

Maybe, but turning it back over to the legislature has been tried before and it failed miserably. Guaranteed if this happens the logo/nickname issue would become the least of our problems. Again, I understand your points, and I think it comes down to you think the system is broke and I think the people making the decisions are doing a poor job. As you stated, reasonable people can disagree on the solution.

The existing structure of the sbhe was put in place because of an our of control governor. At the time they saw it as a solution to protect the university from politics. What we've learned since is that the solution isn't to make higher ed isolated from the will of the people. The solution is to not elect crazy governors.

We made a huge mistake in 1930 and we should fix it now. We are a state with just 670000 people and a university system that costs well over $1 billion. It makes no sense.

[RobPort]

Sure sounds good on paper...must be a good idea then;)

I'm not necessarily married to merging the two bodies, though I think it would be a good idea. I'd settle for simply allowing the Governor to fire SBHE memebers when he seems it necessary.

That's why we elect these people. To make decisionsike that. And I say that as someone who is less than enamored with Dalrymple.