New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is working on a plan to consolidate and merge some state campuses... as are numerous other states:
On state university campuses across the country, the concept of consolidating campuses and academic assets has gained increasing traction in recent years as state support for higher education declines, and there's a growing sense that tuition increases are becoming politically untenable at public universities.
In Georgia, officials are preparing to consolidate eight of the state's 35 public universities and colleges. In Colorado, a state medical school - a coveted asset for research universities - was recently merged into the University of Colorado-Denver.
"What's happening in New Jersey is pretty consistent with what's been going on around the various states," said Christopher Loss, a professor of public policy and higher education at Vanderbilt University. "The politics is difficult. There have been a lot of calls for greater efficiency. . . . But every representative at every level of government has constituents who go to college, as well as colleges in their districts with very powerful lobbying arms" [James Osborne, "New Jersey among Several States to Consider College Merger," Philadelphia Inquirer, 201204.30].
So would any of you care to lay odds that the Legislature's summer study committee on higher education will add South Dakota to that list? Rep. Mark Kirkeby from Rapid City has tried a couple of times to push the idea of streamlining South Dakota's six-campus system, but local politics generally stymie even having a conversation in that direction. Will rising tuition and budget constraints push the interim committee in that direction this summer?
Consolidation in some areas would definitely save some money. For example, each campus has separate advertising/recruitment budgets. Why not consolidate recruitment for all state universities into one entity? Why are the individual campuses competing against each other for students?
Also, it's worth noting that many things are already completely consolidated. Purchasing, for example. All purchases over $1000 are run through the purchasing center at USD. SDSMT, for example, doesn't have its own purchasing department.
Campus consolidation, in particular teaching, is more difficult. South Dakota is geographically large and many people would not be able to take college classes if there wasn't a local university near by. Non-Traditional students would be especially hurt.
So I could see each campus pretty much stripped of most of its administration/support services without it causing big problems.
That is exactly what Representative David Lust wanted to do to the administrative management of all public schools within a certain distance to one another three, maybe four years ago. I sat in on the hearing held in the Education Committee and Chairman Ed McLaughlin gave it the only positive vote. tonyamert you are correct in your assumption that many things could be done better in a unified corroborated system; but how that happens in reality with turf wars spreading like wildfire throughout the legislature is anyones guess.
Can you see SDSU and USD being just a part of a SD university system instead of separate entities?
I'd understand closing one of the seven campuses if enrollment was dwindling.
The amount of money you would save by eliminating all administration and support staff through consolidation would not be worth the headaches and aggravation the students and parents would face when no one local could help you with problems. I've had a positive experience with DSU in the last year. If I had no one to talk to in person, there would be one less student enrolled.
I question whether Black Hills State has outlived its usefulness. Anything you can get there you can also get at one or more of the other state schools. Anything you can get there you can also get in Rapid City.
One could make a similar argument about Dakota State, but that school is more distinct in my opinion. Plus, I believe the campus would revert to the family who donated the property if it ceases to be used as a university.
I would be comfortable with a system where we had 3 state universities: SDSU, USD, School of Mines - with additional satelite campuses in SF, Madison, Aberdeen & Pierre. Would that cut costs and still provide adequate higher ed coverage? I think so.
*clears throat... sets down soapbox*
I have long wished that the College of Fine Arts, currently housed in Vermillion, would instead be located in Spearfish. Dedicate the entire campus to the study of Creativity. I have to think there are a great many students and prospective students who would agree with me on then. Then create a consortium with School of Mines to merge the Arts and Sciences into one comprehensive degree and offer MFA's and a PhD in aesthetics/critical thinking. Because as always, the future belongs to those who learn to think outside the box. Start churning out the new DaVincis.
*picks up soapbox... washes mouth out with it.... walks into sunset*
On the creative campus, it would make a great deal of sense to establish a second MA/MFA (visual arts) at Black Hills State, or even a satellite program through USD, so in particular native students could more easily study, without having to travel or relocate a great distance, and then hire more native faculty as well. We seem to losing many of these students to the Southwest, and then their work becomes more representative of that region, style...I'd like to think we could do better, and such an investment could do wonders for not only these students, but for the region.
Chris, EXACTLY! Thanks for adding that.
There is, in fact, an emergent Northern Plains American Art genre not unlike what is now called "Southwest Art." No reason the Black Hills can't become an American cultural center similar to what evolved in Santa Fe, Taos and later Phoenix and Tucson. All SD has to do is is embrace the idea and focus existing resources.
I thought that was the vision for a university at Crazy Horse?
"All SD has to do is is embrace the idea and focus existing resources."
Go ahead Bill, no one is stopping you. And yes Crazy is doing it without government money.
Crazy Horse is a good non-academic example, yes. So is the transformation of Hill City. As per above it is an emerging genre. A good academic model is the Santa Fe University of Art and design: http://www.santafeuniversity.edu/
I'm not a fan of killing communities like Spearfish, Aberdeen or Madison by closing campuses. However, I like the idea of centralizing administrative things much like the University system in Nebraska.
If we are going to suggest closing existing college campuses, we should really start paying attention to the fact that law makers and the Regents have been building another (with plenty of nearby land to expand) right under our nose in SF that is attracting numerous students (not exclusively) non-traditional students.
That's right Donkephant. A satellite campus in SF, which Madison and Aberdeen could also become. No need to kill off the communities. The exception to that would be Spearfish, as Rapid City can accommodate all public higher education needs in the hills.
Arrived late to Bill's rant Needed to say, "Preach it Brother Fleming."
Sounds much better than "Shane! Come back!"
Gov. Dick Kneip proposed campus consolidation in 1977. His plan was to create specialized campuses, which would have ended most liberal arts programs at SDSU, where i was a sophomore history major then, and additional program upheavals on other campuses.
It caused a tremendous uproar. SDSU students packed The Barn for a fiery rally and students declared a two-day strike to go home and lobby their legislators, although i doubt much lobbying occurred.
But newspapers and TV covered the event, and also reported a tiny little protest on the USD campus. In addition, business owners and local officials railed against it, fearing damage to their communities.
Kneip had led a successful effort to revise the SD Constitution and change term lengths and other laws, but he couldn't fight the students and the shopkeepers. The plan announced amid so much fury died quietly.
Dah, this is such a no brainer. SD cannot afford a college and repeating the same administrivia every 50 miles down the interstates. It cannot afford 150+ school districts either.
Glance at Wyoming - about the same size and similar population. 1 university. A few community colleges. And 1 school district per county (23 vs SD's taxpayer - wasteful 60+ counties.
Put our 1 big university in Ludlow, or anywhere except Sioux Falls.
Can I get a clearer definition of what you believe a satellite campus should entail Rorschach? Should the students attending them pay the state support rate--like the University Center head got the legislature to allow him to offer for all "gen-ed" classes, or should they pay a higher tuition rate like they used to at SF(because the idea was to provide education opportunities for non-trads)?
What should/could be done with the existing infrastructures on the campuses that will no longer be utilized? Are there any other Gov. Janklow-esque ideas to be thought of for some campuses? How much thought should be put into the number of out of state students that schools close to the borders attract? --which applies to nearly every campus, so perhaps a better question would be: How much do you think about the in state students you would lose by closing BH or NSU in the NE corner? The cost of higher ed in SD no longer rivals the cost in our surrounding states allowing the schools distance from home to become more of a factor.
I think it is a worthy discussion to have. I also think there are many facets to it and am curious about people's opinions.
Santa Fe is home to the Indigenous Language Institute, too.
http://www.indigenous-language.org/
At the Republican forum last night, four conservative Republicans seeking to represent Lawrence County all rejected the idea of consolidating campuses. This uniform desire to keep BHSU and the rest of the system shows the cognitive dissonance of the SDGOP: they preach small government and self-reliance, but we sustain ourselves with big government. Lots of campuses, lots of counties, all keeping more South Dakotans employed than our sparse free market could.