We Must Upgrade College, University Trusteeships

No business or industry could survive if it were based on the methods prevalent in academia.

No competitive business could survive if its department heads, managers and staff worked just 180 days of the year; if they devoted only two hours a day to their main duties; if the business appointed its board of directors on the basis of whom they knew rather than their expertise.

What manufacturer could survive if faced with production limits like the enrollment caps the Legislature places on our state colleges and universities.

It’s difficult to rationalize that institutions preparing graduates for business careers do not practice the basic concepts of business.

It’s time for successful business leaders to examine and critique higher education and rescue it from itself.

To improve education, to make it more affordable, would touch every aspect from the top down: the governor’s office, Legislature, Washington Education Association, boards of trustees, presidents, administrative staffs and faculties.

One important place where change should be made is in the trustee selection process.

Examine the present trustee system. The trustees’ lack of knowledge; the pressures they’re under from the presidents, administrative staffs, faculty and Washington Education Association members; their attendance; their voting records; their knowledge of student concerns and of the disciplines taught.

Check the trustrees’ credentials. In what areas, if any, does their expertise aid their board, the university or the taxpayer? Why were they appointed because they were capable or in repayment of a political contribution or other assistance?

There should be a preselected pool of qualified lawyers, doctors, educators, businessmen, law enforcement, government officials, leading citizens, etc., from which the governor could choose his appointees to the various institutions.

New appointees would be enrolled in short courses that would acquaint them with the duties involved and various aspects of the university for which they would become responsible. They would be monitored periodically as to effectiveness and they would undergo six-month probation periods during which they could not vote on any serious or large financial decisions.

Business teams should examine the need for faculty unions. They should find out why classrooms are vacant. They should know the student-to-teacher ratio and class preparation time. They should be aware of faculty activities that bear little relationship to teaching and of the misuse of productive teaching time. They should know what outside funds are earned by faculty during normal teaching hours.

At present there is no way to assess the quality of higher education’s products, its graduates. Nor does it have to meet industry standards for competitiveness.

Boards of trustees and regents directly control the expenditures of billions of tax dollars, yet the manner in which they are selected and appointed gives little or no thought to the capabilities of those individuals. Unfortunately, it is not a matter of what they know but merely of how much they contributed to the political campaigns and whom they know.

Too many of them are not qualified and many of those who are spend little time executing the duties of the position.

I spent seven years on one university’s board and found it takes almost two years to become fully aware of, among other things:

State laws and by-laws.

Disciplines and various curriculums.

Need for capital improvements.

Administrative, faculty, student and maintenance concerns.

Athletic programs.

To be a productive member of the board of trustees or regents - to vote knowledgably in the best interests of the institution, faculty, students, the state and, most important, the taxpayers - takes much time and research into every phase of the university.

I would hazard a guess that not one trustee or regent is fully cognizant of all the areas of his or her duties as a board member. All too few spend the time needed to be “really qualified” members of that board.

However, by placing more emphasis on the selection process, the universities, the state, the students and taxpayers would be much better served.

xxxx