|
April 1997
by Dr. John W. Bardo -- jbardo@wcu.edu
Program Review and Enrollment
I have been asked by several faculty members to comment on issues regarding program review and enrollment. These are two serious issues that affect all areas of the University. And, while they are in some ways distinct, they do relate to one another. I'd like to take this opportunity to frame these issues as I think they relate to where we are going as a University.
While the university system has reviewed programs in various disciplines over the years and has monitored programs, the legislative mandate requiring review every two years is relatively new. And, while North Carolina began this process relatively recently, there is no indication that program review will be eliminated in the foreseeable future. Indeed, I would anticipate that, as pressures on the state budget increase, program review will become, if anything, a more complex process. As implemented in this state, program review attempts to deal primarily with issues of educational efficiency by focusing on the number of graduates each program produces. Most members of the legislature with whom I have spoken recognize that the UNC system is among the best in the United States. They do not seem to be questioning the quality of programs; quality is assumed. Their issue is much more focused on the efficient use of scarce resources. While any given decision to eliminate a program may not affect a department's resources in the short-run, an assumption of program review is that, over time, elimination of programs which are not productive by state standards will make funds and positions available for reallocation to other, more productive programs.
There are several other factors with regard to program review of which you ought to be aware. First, graduate or specialty programs with low enrollments are probably most vulnerable to elimination. Second, basic programs in the arts and sciences at the undergraduate level are probably the least vulnerable, though there are no guarantees. I would strongly encourage each department that has low enrollment programs to think about whether enrollment can be increased and whether the program can be maintained in its current form. If not, what options might be available? It is clear that, within the North Carolina system, we will need to focus on building and maintaining quality programs that can be productive in terms of students graduated.
Again, you should be aware that this is not an unusual situation. Most states have some form of program review occurring on a regular basis. In North Carolina, where a high percentage of the total university budget is paid by taxpayers through legislative appropriation, there is no reason to believe that the interest in eliminating programs that are not productive will dissipate.
Enrollment
Issues associated with program review and our current situation with funded enrollment has caused me to reflect on how these issues are tied together. You should be aware that WCU's enrollment has not changed significantly in 20 years despite the fact that the population of the state is continuing to grow. At the same time, virtually every other UNC institution has grown. And, while none of us are looking for unbridled growth, we need to build appropriate enrollment. Because our enrollment has been stable, our resource base also has been relatively stable. This affects our ability to hire faculty, provide equipment, or increase base budgets in departments. In fact, it affects even our ability to obtain capital funds to expand academic spaces. The Coulter building was the last general purpose academic building built on this campus; funding was approved in 1974. In looking at enrollment with Vice Chancellor Collings and Dr. Noelle Kehrberg, there are several key factors that need to be examined:
Freshman recruitment and admissions. We have made major strides in the last couple of years in our ability to attract high quality freshman applicants. The Admissions Office is doing an excellent job of re-working our approach to prospective students, and they should be congratulated. However, the faculty is the real cause of increased interest in Western. Quite simply, the actions you have taken to increase academic quality already are making a difference. To date this year, we have been able to accept 350 more freshmen than last year; increase significantly the number who are qualified for academic scholarships; and preliminary indications are that we may increase our average SAT again. As of the last week in March, we also instituted a deferred admissions program for students who showed academic potential but who do not meet our current admissions standards. These students will be considered for admission after they complete a successful semester at a community college, which could include remedial or developmental work. At the freshman level, we need to "stay the course," continue to develop quality in our programs, and press to attract the best high school students to Western.
Community college transfer. We expect the number of transfer students to be about stable this year; but these numbers need to grow. Given the changes in the community college system that are in process, we should expect the number of transfers to increase over time. We are beginning to formulate a plan to become more closely linked with regional community colleges. Western now has a full-time community college articulation officer; we will host a conference for community college counselors this summer; and we are examining such ideas as "joint admissions" and expanded specific program articulation. We need to do a better job in our community college transfer program, but we are beginning to address this issue systematically.
Student retention. Western has a relatively low freshman to sophomore student retention rate; we can do better. Currently, we retain only about 69 percent of freshmen into the sophomore year. Since 1982, our retention rate for freshmen has varied from a low of 67 percent to a high of nearly 74 percent. Within the UNC system, our retention rates for freshmen are low; the average for similar institutions in the system is 76.9 percent. Contrary to what may be thought, most freshmen who leave Western are in academic good standing. My interest in student retention does not include reducing quality or keeping students in college who choose not to work at the level of quality you demand. I am concerned that we need to do a much better job systematically working to retain qualified students who are in good academic standing. Other universities have been able to increase retention rates to 75 or 80 percent (or more). There is no reason that we cannot do the same and continue to increase academic standards. Both Student Development and Academic Affairs have taken some steps that should help affect retention. The freshman residence hall is a first step as is the freshman course schedule. But, we need to examine systematically all aspects of our retention programs. This will be much of the work of the next academic year and it will specifically be the charge of Vice Chancellor Collings and the new vice chancellor in Student Development.
Graduate enrollment. The single most problematical area for this University is in the area of graduate enrollment. We have many small programs that may well be eliminated by the UNC system's program review, and we do not yet have a coherent plan for how we will increase enrollment at the graduate level in Cullowhee or in Asheville. Other universities with higher tuition and fees have entered the Asheville market and, in some cases, they are over-subscribed. Clearly, there is a demand for graduate education in the Asheville area that we have not effectively addressed.
It is imperative that we, as a comprehensive university, develop a clear plan for graduate education that allows us to provide quality programs at a level of enrollment which can be sustained within the program review process. I am concerned, for example, that we have no new graduate programs in the planning stage once the Masters in Nursing is approved. We have not yet, as a faculty, systematically considered which programs can work in this region and in this location. It is now time to develop such plans and to focus productive attention on graduate programs. Vice Chancellor Collings, the Dean of Graduate Studies and Research, and the college deans will be working with faculty members on this planning process in the next academic year.
I hope that this discourse has at least begun to frame a set of issues and to provide some insight into the program review and enrollment issues. I look forward to continuing to work with you in bringing Western to its next level of excellence. Thank you for the great year and for the difference that each of you is making in our future.
|
