Can State University Systems Be Everything to Everyone?
You can find articles everywhere... about low pay/raises for faculty or increases in tuition or fights in state houses regarding funding levels. State university systems are grappling with the challenge of offering comprehensive educational programs amid declining state support and rising operational costs. This raises a critical question: Can these institutions continue to be everything to everyone?
Over the past two decades, according to the NEA, state funding for public colleges and universities has significantly decreased. In 2020, 32 states allocated less funding per student compared to 2008, with an average decline of nearly $1,500 per student. This reduction has shifted the financial burden to students, leading to increased tuition and fees. For instance, tuition and fees at public national universities have risen about 32% over the past 20 years, according to US News.
The University of Houston exemplifies this trend, where students face increased costs for housing, dining, parking, and textbooks, despite a tuition freeze. The Houston Chronicle has followed this issue for years, seeing that these hikes are attributed to inflation and the need to cover rising operational costs.
In states with multiple university campuses, the duplication of programs across campuses is under scrutiny. Maintaining identical programs at each campus can lead to inefficiencies and increased costs. Research at EAB Consultants suggests that joint- and multi-campus programs can help institutions share faculty and financial resources, eliminate unnecessary duplication, and increase access for students.
For example, if a state has three major university campuses, it may be more efficient to have two schools of business rather than one at each campus. This approach can optimize resource allocation and reduce unnecessary duplication.
Despite the logic of consolidation or specialization, any move to reduce or relocate programs carries significant political risk. Elected officials often advocate fiercely for the institutions located in their districts, viewing them as economic anchors and points of pride. The potential loss of a school, department, or program (especially one with visibility or jobs) can provoke strong local resistance. This creates a politically charged environment where even data-supported realignments face steep hurdles. These political dynamics must be acknowledged as a major factor in any effort to streamline or reallocate academic offerings.
To address these challenges, state university systems might consider strategic specialization, where each campus focuses on specific academic strengths. This model promotes collaboration rather than competition among campuses, ensuring a diverse range of programs across the system without unnecessary overlap.
Implementing such a strategy requires careful planning and coordination to ensure that students have access to the programs they need, possibly through inter-campus collaborations or online course offerings.
Given the financial constraints and the need for efficient resource utilization, state university systems may need to move away from the model of offering every program at every campus. But doing so requires navigating political realities just as carefully as financial ones. By embracing strategic specialization and system-wide collaboration, public institutions can continue to provide high-quality education in a more sustainable way.
