Changing Higher Ed

Dr. Drumm McNaughton

Changing Higher Ed is dedicated to helping higher education leaders improve their institutions. We offer the latest in higher ed news and insights from top experts in higher education who share their perspectives on how you can grow your institution.

Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a top higher education consultant, renowned leader, and pioneer in strategic management systems and leadership boards. He's one of a select group with executive leadership experience in academe, nonprofits, government, and business.

Episodes

Mentioned books

Mar 30, 2021 • 37min

Student Loan Debt is Impacting Millennials Economic Wellbeing with Steve Ferguson and Jay Patel | Changing Higher Ed 070

Student loan debt is impacting millennials’ a pressing topic as students graduate from higher education having significant debt. This podcast will feature Steve Ferguson and Jay Patel, who have developed a new way for students to pay off their debt in significantly less time than that currently takes. Drowning in Debt The cost of education has gone up in real dollars as per inflation, due to multiple reasons, such as Prop 13 and state budget cuts to higher education. At the same time, the cost to students has increased significantly, as state funding to education has dropped and students are required to pay. Traditionally, people paid for an education out-of-pocket and from savings. However, the amount that students and families have to pay has gone up significantly more because there is less state government contribution. Title IV came into existence in 1965, and student loans came into play in the 1980s. These loans filled a gap and helped more people go to school. However, colleges and universities significantly increased the cost of tuition as federal funding for loans became available. This led to the advent of the current debt-load issue where student debt is now $1.7 trillion. This is the largest amount owed by society collectively behind mortgages. Over the years, the Department of Education has increased the amount of borrowing available to students. That money is mostly used to pay for tuition, but it also can be used to cover other expenses, such as the cost of housing. Starting around 2008-09, many private lenders such as Wells Fargo, CitiBank and Bank of America got out of the student loan business, causing the federal government to increasingly fill that gap. Since then, the student debt issue has skyrocketed. The nation is at $1.7 trillion in outstanding debt and 45 million borrowers in the U.S. have some Title IV debt. The average debt is over $37,000, and it is crippling for individuals to come out of college with this level of debt load. According to recent numbers, there are 60,000 borrowers who are over 62 years of age who have a combined total debt of $18.5 billion owed to the federal government. That is over $300,000 per borrower. This group is close to qualifying for Social Security while having a large outstanding student loan. Another significant threat to the nation’s economy is the debt load for the 25-34 year-old age group, which currently stands at about $90 billion. There are 310,000 borrowers who owe roughly $300,000 per borrower. These significant debt loads can potentially impact the ability for individuals to start families, buy houses and cars, etc. While many of these individuals who have these debts used these funds to earn a graduate degree, undergraduates also are coming out of school with $30,000-$40,000 in debt. These smaller amounts also impact individuals’ ability to buy a house and start a family. Innovation in Student Debt Repayment There hasn’t been a lot of innovation in student loan repayment previously. Many suggest that loans can be paid in a decade, but in reality that time period extends to 20-30 years. SLR 67 is a new type of investment vehicle that is used to pay for education. This savings and investment program uses a different strategy that came out of conversations with more than 800 stakeholders, including individuals, brokers, dealers and universities. This investment vehicle is designed for students and their families to repay their current or future loan faster. The SLR 67 has an interactive broker so when the student or family opens an account, they receive an automated investment strategy management plan over a specified time period. They can select a one-time investment or recurring investment. This gives individuals flexibility based on their income. The contribution program builds the principal to pay off the student loan. Using two basic financial principles—time/value/money and compounded interest—to accelerate what is put toward the principal. This program also is going to be marketed to employers to consider as a match for their employees. This could significantly increase the amount of money that could go into this product to help pay off student loan debt. This could be an employee retention tool, especially if it becomes tax-deductible for employers. The product has been launched and an account can be created and quickly funded so the automated strategy will take over. The company is focusing initially on the higher earner who has high debt but will expand the product’s scope in the future. Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders Ferguson and Patel suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders: From a university standpoint, institutions are measured on their repayment rates. They have an obligation to monitor their repayment rates to ensure that they don’t come under a 30% cohort default rate. This is a real issue for smaller institutions because just a few borrowers can affect the institution’s cohort default rate. The college or university also has a social and moral obligation to provide information to help students repay their debts since the institution was the one that profited. Employers also benefit from the students who enter their workforce. Therefore, employers can step up and help their employees figure out creative ways to repay the student loans through creating a match program. This financial tool brings innovation to a part of society that hasn’t had much. This tool is trying to help all parties, whether they are large borrowers or individuals who have smaller student loans. Bullet Points The cost of higher education has increased significantly over the years due to multiple reasons, which has led to larger student debt. Traditionally, people paid for higher education out-of-pocket and from savings. Title IV loans didn’t come into play until the 1970s. There was a significant increase in the cost of tuition as these federal funds became available. Over the years, the Department of Education has increased the amount of borrowing available to students. That money is mostly used to pay for tuition, but it also is available for students to cover for other expenses, such as the cost of housing. As private lenders dropped out of this market, the federal government stepped in and took over a larger share. Title IV filled a gap and helped more people go to school, but also led to this debt-load issue where Title IV debts are now $1.7 trillion. This is the largest amount owed by society collectively other than mortgages. The nation is at $1.7 trillion in outstanding debt and 46 million borrowers in the U.S. have some Title IV debt. There are 60,000 borrowers over the age of 62 who have a combined total debt of $18.5 billion owed to the federal government. That is over $300,000 per borrower. The debt load for the age group comprising 25-34-year-olds is about $90 billion. There are 310,000 borrowers who owe roughly $300,000 per borrower. These are significant debt loads that can potentially impact the ability for families to start, people to buy houses and cars, etc. While many individuals who have large student loan debts used these funds to earn a graduate degree, undergraduates also are coming out of school with $30,000-$40,000 in debt. There hasn’t been a lot of innovation in student loan repayment previously. Many suggest that loans can be paid in a decade, but in reality that time period extends to 20-30 years. SLR67 is a new type of investment vehicle that is designed to pay for higher education or student loan debt that uses an interactive broker. When the student or family opens an account, they receive an automated investment strategy management plan over a specified time period. Using two basic financial principles—time/value/money and compounded interest—this financial tool accelerates what is put toward the principal. This program is starting with the wealthier graduates—doctors and lawyers—who have larger student debt, but will eventually be offered to graduates with smaller student loan debt burden. Guests Social Media Links: LinkedIn Steve Ferguson: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevefergs/ LinkedIn Jay Patel: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jayk-patel-4232712/ The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: Website: https://changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Keywords: #studentdebt #university #highereducation #education

Jan 19, 2021 • 34min

COVID Psychological Impact on Higher Ed Institutions with Tom Marrs | Changing Higher Ed 066

The COVID psychological impact on Higher Ed institutions is the topic of this Changing Higher Ed Podcast with host, Dr. Drumm Mc Naughton and guest, Dr. Tom Marrs. Under discussion is crisis recovery for higher education institutions that will continue to remain challenging as the fallout from the pandemic, including increasing economic issues, continue to emerge. Dr. Tom Marrs, is a licensed psychologist and assistant director for client engagement at the Center for Executive Education at Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School. A Rapidly Changing Stream of Challenges Higher education institutions are dealing with the psychological impact of COVID and the multiple challenges, many of which have never been faced before. During this pandemic, many faculty and employees are returning to work exhibiting signs similar to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Employees may have contracted the coronavirus and may be dealing with its implications; they also may have lost loved ones, friends and work colleagues. Additionally, the metaphorical higher education “ship” is trying to right itself in a world that has changed significantly. The challenge of crisis recovery for higher education institutions becomes how to adapt to this emerging new paradigm. The pandemic and the resulting economic issues are causing a pivot in many organizations’ business model. This can lead to a purgatory where organizations have to figure out how much money to invest in changing infrastructure while not knowing how much of this will be moot once “business as usual” returns (if it ever does). This situation can result in organization leaders experiencing significant stress that can make decision-making difficult. Every day, solutions emerge for some COVID-related problems while new problems emerge. For example, there is now the reality of the vaccine on the horizon, but that brings up a quandary related to the large section of the population that doesn’t want to get the vaccine because they don’t trust it. There also are issues with distributions and logistics as well as timelines to be followed in administering the vaccine. Understanding and Coping with High Stress Events Many are describing the stress-induced issues in the general population as being PTSD. While PTSD is well-known as a buzzword, most individuals do not understand what it is, especially since the term is used frequently in social media and by news agencies. In the present circumstances, individuals are facing some element of struggle to function socially, interpersonally, developmentally, educationally, occupationally and physically. Many are lumping these experiences under the term PTSD as a way to give everyone a common language about what an individual is witnessing or experiencing. Many individuals use this term because it is known and there is a set of assumptions about what it means. People want to use this term to describe how severe their symptoms feel because these symptoms are stress-related and lead to a profound reaction. However, this applies a clinical pathology to something that is non-clinical and is instead better explained as a human reaction to a very stressful situation. One needs to look at the primary populations – the military and police – as examples of populations who experience PTSD. The current reaction by faculty and staff look very similar to that at this point. However, in the military, very few soldiers get PTSD given the number who experience severe trauma. That’s because the military prepares soldiers for what battle will look like during boot camp and gives them the strategies and tools in order to deal with these stresses psychologically. We don’t have that type of training with the general population so people are not prepared for the current situation and the resulting stresses. Extended Levels of Stress The real impact on people’s mental and psychological health and mental well-being is yet to be seen because one of the key components to diagnosing someone with a stress disorder is cessation of the thing that is causing the stress. An accurate diagnosis cannot be made if the stressor is continuing. Society now has to deal with other emerging issues. While COVID may go away thanks to the vaccine, there is a new intense stressor on economic conditions. We haven’t seen all of the impact of this situation economically and the health symptoms that will emerge because of it. This means our way of life is changing profoundly, which is going to lead to more stress. The first thing that needs to happen is for the dust to settle once the immediate risk for COVID begins to subside. People will have a natural tendency to try to return to homeostasis once the stress alleviates. When this happens, most people return to normal functioning within 3-6 months, but they don’t feel that is possible when they are in the middle of severe stress events such as we’re experiencing with COVID. Many people may be suffering from an adjustment disorder, which is a very high-functioning level of PTSD that comes from being exposed to a novel situation that is highly stressful and out of the ordinary. The situation overloads individuals psychologically and they start showing signs of PTSD. This is very similar to what is being seen during the pandemic. Managing the Psychological Impact on Higher Ed Employees and Faculty Returning to Campus The question becomes how to prepare these individuals to return to some sense of normalcy when they return to campus. That happens naturally as people regain their sea legs once they determine they can do things the way they used to or they find a new normal that will eventually feel safe. Most people will eventually find a new sense of security and safety in the new normal. However, there will be a group of people who will continue to struggle because they can’t get overcome their adjustment disorder. This may emerge in older faculty and employees who are more set in their ways; for example, individuals may exhibit these symptoms because they can have difficulty pivoting to a virtual environment and to the new order of things. An Unequal Psychological Impact – Finances The COVID psychological impact on Higher Ed employees is exacerbated by the resulting economic impacts to staff who are in lower compensation brackets and may be taking a larger financial hit. It’s important for higher education leaders to be aware of this because these impacts can cause individuals to develop a palpable fear reaction that can be seen in the workplace. This leads to behavioral issues that have to be dealt with in the workplace, especially because individuals are worried about losing their jobs in the present economic climate. Higher education leaders can make a difference through helping individuals deal with these stress and fear reactions. Higher education leaders should not pathologize behavior, especially when there already is a performance baseline. Personnel issues will continue, regardless of the pandemic. There will continue to be good and poor employees, based on the differences in performance. Leaders have a choice if issues have emerged. These issues can be treated as a sudden onset of performance issues or can be looked at as if the employee has PTSD and needs to be referred to the employee assistance program. Leaders also can consider that these behaviors may be signs of adjustment disorder or extreme stress over a long duration of time. Under these circumstances, leaders need to take a different approach that is focused on getting the best from the team. Therefore, it’s important to cut employees a little slack and talk to them about what they need. Leaders also need to normalize the situation and become empathetic. Additionally, leaders need to be careful about the language they use in communicating to faculty and staff (even through emails). The language that is used can help employees to be okay with the situation and to feel the leader’s empathy. Leadership Self-Care The psychological impact on higher ed employees means leadership must step up their game while managing their own stress and trauma. When people are under stress, they look to people in power and who they respect for direction. Therefore, it’s important for leaders to take care of themselves—and set the example for others. Leaders also can get fixated on specific issues or topics so they are continually ruminating. Leaders need to understand that it is completely normal to have difficulty making decisions when under a lot of stress. They also need to be careful about not pathologizing the current situation for themselves through saying it is terrible and awful, or that they have PTSD because the body will respond to what the individual thinks. The human body is very adaptive based on stress levels. By shutting down, the body helps lower the stress levels. This can show up as depression, where individuals don’t want to go out and do things that previously were pleasurable, such as attending social situations. Sleeping patterns can change, which can range from getting no sleep to always sleeping, and even having nightmares. Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards Marrs suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders: Leaders need to help people to not pathologize their situation through being careful about the language they use. During times of stress, change, flux and uncertainty, we should increase the flow of information instead of decreasing it. Stay in touch and keep communicating, be positive and use intentional language to help people feel okay and normal. Leaders should not make decisions based on assumptions that things will go back to normal or the world is ending. Instead, take the approach that this is a severe but temporary condition. While terrible and life-altering, this situation is temporary. Don’t overlook opportunities to temporarily increase support services for employees in order to get the most return for investment. This could be increasing funding for programs that provide financial assistance for employees, creating more sessions at employee assistance program or increasing daycare services on campus. Bullet Points The pandemic’s psychological impact on Higher Ed institutions has created a ripple effect of both solutions and emerging problems that have resulted in prolonged high stress levels among individuals. Some organizations are in purgatory as leaders have to figure out how much money to invest in changing infrastructure while not knowing how much of this will be moot once “business as usual” returns. This can result in organizational leaders experiencing significant stress that can make decision-making difficult. While PTSD is well-known as a buzzword, most individuals do not understand what it is. It can be triggered by sudden traumatic events such as waking up during surgery or anaphylactic shock. However, in general these events do not include a life-threatening illness or debilitating medical condition such as COVID. The real impact on people’s mental and psychological health and mental well-being will not emerge until cessation of the thing that is causing the stress, which in this case is the pandemic. Many individuals may be experiencing an adjustment disorder, which overloads individuals psychologically and leads to signs of PTSD. While most will recover from this disorder once the stress drops, many older faculty and employees may struggle with it post-COVID because they have difficulty pivoting to a new environment. The deteriorating economic conditions is emerging as a new stressor. This may have a profound and continued effect on employees. Staff who are in lower compensation brackets may be taking a larger financial hit due to the current economic situation. Higher education leaders need to be aware of these situations. Individuals may develop a palpable fear reaction that can be seen in the workplace. This leads to behavioral issues that have to be dealt with in the workplace, especially because individuals are worried about losing their jobs in the present economic climate. Higher education leaders should not pathologize behavior, especially when there already is a performance baseline related to that employee. If issues emerge, they can be treated as a sudden onset of performance issues, a case of PTSD where the employee needs to be referred to the employee assistance program, or signs of adjustment disorder or extreme stress that developed over the pandemic’s long duration of time. Leaders need to cut employees a little slack and talk to them about what they need. Leaders also need to normalize the situation and become empathetic, especially in their spoken and written communication. Leaders also need to take care of themselves, which sets the example for others. This includes understanding that it is completely normal to have difficulty making decisions when under duress and through not pathologizing the current situation because the body will respond to what the individual thinks. The human body is very adaptive based on stress levels. By shutting down, it helps lower the stress levels. This can show up as depression and changes in sleeping patterns. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: Texas A&M University’s Center for Executive Development Tom Marrs, PhD Guests Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-marrs-42b30a31/ The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: Website: https://thechangeleader.com Website: https://changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Keywords: #crisesrecovery #higheredemployees #university #highereducation #educatio

Jan 12, 2021 • 36min

Crisis Recovery for Higher Education Institutions a Top Priority for 2021 with Barbara Mistick| Changing Higher Ed 068

Crisis recovery for higher education institutions remains at the top of the to-do list entering 2021. The coronavirus pandemic continues to change the nation’s higher education landscape, which includes 1700 private non-profit colleges. This podcast will feature Barbara Mistick, the president of National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities. Higher Ed’s Crisis Recovery Continues The pandemic has been very personal and many individuals believe that they are in it alone. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the number of jobs across the higher education sector that have been lost is approximately 500,000, and that about 150,000 of those jobs will not come back after the pandemic. Therefore, this is a significant period of change and adjustment across higher education. Many of these individuals who are affected are dealing with a significant amount of isolation. Higher education didn’t have much warning that the pandemic was coming. When the pandemic first started to emerge, the primary concern was how to bring students who were participating in study-abroad programs home. There wasn’t a sense that the pandemic was going to be a permanent or semi-permanent situation; instead, the general feeling was that it was going to last only a short period of time. This crisis recovery in higher education has continued for a long period of time, which is difficult. These crisis situations tap into leaders’ training and extraordinary good sense in being able to look after a community. Everyone has had to respond differently, depending on their sector and community. People are being asked to rally their energy and do the work for a sustained period of time, which they can do only if there is an inspirational leader who is providing guidance. There is a point where the fatigue factor weighs in, which is starting to happen. Pandemics can last for several years as nations see hot spots continually popping up and higher infection rates emerge in certain places. However, because there also is the prospect of the vaccine on the horizon, people see an end point. BUT …. it hasn’t arrived yet, and this leaves leaders having to navigate a crisis situation for an extended period of time. In the fall, faculty were already burned out. They already had faced swapping out courses, moving rapidly back to online education and rapidly changing plans for the semester. This led to increased stress, which ultimately can result in burnout. This uncertainty leaves people looking to the senior leadership team for a response. Higher education leaders’ optimistic nature also may have worked against them, since this approach suggested that the chaos from the pandemic would end quickly. The end isn’t in sight so everyone across the institution has felt a level of uncertainty. Lack of Political Leadership This situation was compounded by the lack of a national political response, which forced each state to respond on their own, resulting in each state identifying different actions and behaviors based on what was happening in that state. Higher education was challenged because of the number of residential college and institutions that have a student body that comes from others states and nations. This made the question of quarantining much more complicated. While faculty and staff were frustrated with higher education leadership during the pandemic, the college or university president often was frustrated with the political leadership, which made decisions that affected institutions without including higher education leaders in those discussions. Pandemic-Induced Whiplash With ever-changing state guidance and ever-evolving issues related to the pandemic, many institutions had to change from in-person to hybrid instruction to online learning within a semester. This proved very challenging for faculty and students because they wanted some level of certainty. This felt like whiplash for many higher education stakeholders. Some institutions did a good job of adapting to the changing environment due to the pandemic. At the global level, institutions were very flexible—which is not a term commonly associated with higher education. Institutions, to their credit, also put students first by focusing on student safety. This included bringing students back from international trips as well as back to campus, and making changes to academic calendars. Institutions also focused on preparations and change management. Some institutions planned their efforts using four different scenarios through looking at delivery systems and calendaring options. No matter the method that leaders were looking at, the guide star remained consistent – ensuring that students were able to continue their education, that it would be a good experience, and that students would be safe. Support from Surprising Places Institutions also became much more mission-focused on the well-being of students. The pandemic offered the opportunity for Congress and higher education to find common ground on how to help students through a very difficult time. Seeing the institutions’ commitment, Congress included higher education funding in the CARES Act, which provided money for students through colleges and universities. This seemingly reversed Congress’s declining support for higher education, as evidenced through the decreased funding to the Pell Grant program. Faculty also came on board to make the changes to help institutions survive. Higher education often gets tied up on things that are perceived by the faculty to be not going well. However, when the chips were down, the best of the Academy emerged. Faculty focused on helping students to get through the semester while student life staff worked on different and creative ways to help students be successful. The pandemic also highlighted the gaps related to access to broadband and technology. Students in rural, urban and lower socio-economic areas had had difficulty accessing the internet while some tried to complete their assignments on their phones because they didn’t have computers or tablets. To address this, Congress passed a package right before the end of 2020 that will help address these issues, which will help communities as well as higher education. Moving Forward Private higher education institutions are doing things that other institutions should be doing but affordability and accessibility are issues. There are vast areas of the nation that don’t have access to education; policymakers and higher education leaders need to make sure that education becomes available in these areas. Students need to be able to go from high school to college and then earn their college degree. There are many markers to support this. The unemployment rate is much lower for college graduates when compared to high school graduates. In the pandemic, the employment rate is close to 9%; this rate is almost three-fold higher for those who have only a high school degree. Therefore, it’s important to make college accessible. This will require looking at financial aid, which includes increasing the Pell Grant. This effort, which would have the potential to help public and private institutions, may see support from the incoming Biden Administration. The best thing is recognizing diversity in the higher education ecosystem. Maintaining both public and private institutions is critical because students have different learning styles; some do better at smaller institutions while others are prepared to attend larger institutions. Many individuals also go between the public and private sector for their undergraduate and graduate degrees. Private institutions have their place in educating society – they enroll about 20% of all students in the nation, but award 30% of the degrees. There’s an effectiveness ratio that is higher at private institutions as compared to public institutions. Preparing the Workforce The pandemic has exacerbated the haves and have-nots in our nation. Many are unemployed while others are still employed and safely working from their homes. After the pandemic ends, states will need people who are educated and ready to step into the workforce. States have various educational attainment goals based on the industries in each state. Most states have set a goal for a certain level of college attainment, but the number of students who have attained that are much lower than the percentage that the state needs. States are looking at the needs of the workforce, the level of skills and training that are required, and how many people can meet those skills requirements. If a state can’t maintain that, the state can’t be competitive in trying to recruit new employers and industries. Moving Forward In order to recover from the pandemic, higher education is going to need to pull together. They need to turn out graduates who are prepared for the workforce. One concern during the pandemic is the lower number of low-income students who are applying to college. This is problematic across the ecosystem since it will impact institutions for a period of time. Congress’s financial support is not even close to the needs of the sector. The recently-passed stimulus allocates $23 billion to higher education; however, this is only 15-16% of what higher education needed. There also are new COVID testing requirements on campus as well as efforts to increase social distancing. Still, students want to be back on campus and in classrooms, which leads to significant tension. Therefore, it’s important to find ways to support higher education during this pandemic so when this period is over, these institutions can be stronger. Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards Mistick suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders: Given the times that we’re in, it’s important to figure out how to be resilient. Additionally, institutions can bounce forward. There are silver linings in the pandemic, including Congress’s increased support, so we need to do a good job of advocating for this sector. Take a look at what students want from their college experience. Many want the residential option because this is the growing-up aspect of going to college. Institutions understand they are part of the community and are trying to provide support during the pandemic. Bullet Points This is a significant transition period for higher education. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the number of jobs across the higher education sector that have been lost is approximately 500,000. The bureau projects that about 150,000 of those jobs will not come back after the pandemic. The extent of the pandemic was not expected. This has tested leaders’ skills and the resilience of the faculty, staff and students. The lack of a national political response forced each state to respond. This resulted in each state identifying different actions and behaviors based on what happened in that state. Higher education then faced additional challenges, including a number of residential college and institutions that have a student body that comes from others states and nations. This made the question of quarantining much more complicated. Many colleges and universities faced institutional whiplash as they had to move courses online, move students back home and change semesters. However, faculty and staff proved remarkably adaptable—and opted to put students’ needs first in the process. This resulted in numerous scenario planning exercises. The pandemic offered the opportunity for Congress and higher education to find common ground on how to help students get through a very difficult time in the nation’s history. Seeing this commitment, Congress included higher education in the CARES Act, which provided money for students through higher education institutions. Maintaining both public and private institutions is critical because students have different learning styles; some do better at smaller institutions while others are prepared to attend larger institutions. Private institutions have an important place in this ecosystem. The pandemic has exacerbated the haves (those who are employed) and have-nots (the unemployed) in our nation. After the pandemic ends, states will need people who are educated and ready to step into the workforce. Increased Congressional funding is needed to support higher education. There is a strong possibility that the incoming Biden Administration will support increasing the Pell Grant program. Other funding is needed as well to recover from the pandemic. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities Guests Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/barbarakmistick/ Twitter: @BarbaraMistick The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: Website: https://changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Keywords: #university #highereducation #education

Dec 31, 2020 • 43min

Higher Ed Change Management Critical to Surviving 2020 and 2021's Recovery with Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Deb Maue | Changing Higher Ed 067

Higher education change management was critical in 2020 as college and university leaders dealt with crises brought on by COVID, and will remain so for 2021. This podcast features Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Deb Maue, and looks back at 2020 and predicts what 2021 has in store for higher ed. Overcoming 2020’s Challenges through Change Management The year 2020 was completely unpredictable with crises such as the pandemic emerging seemingly overnight. The nation and higher education have not recovered from what has happened—and it will be a long time before that recovery happens. However, significant good also came out of this year. For example, many people—such as Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart, the president of Amarillo College—stepped up in showing what it means to be a servant leader. This meant getting out on the frontlines, helping to test individuals for COVID, using a mask, demonstrating behaviors to protect everyone, and being very present for the students. These leaders also embraced transparency and strategic communications. Institutions also were able to turn on a dime as the pandemic emerged. Faculty at many colleges and universities converted their entire course load to online over a span of only a few weeks. It was incredible to see the speed that people willingly adapted and how institutions worked to get ready for people to return to campus. The pandemic also forced institutions to really figure out what their mission is—educating students. Dr. Billy Hawkins, the president of Talladega College, checked in regularly with students. This was noticed by both students and parents. Dr. Hawkins continues to meet monthly with student leaders to find out what is going on. These kinds of communications make the college experience so important for students. Academic prioritization also came to the forefront. A great template for this process was led by Dr. Lori Varlotta when she was at Hiram College. They cut a number of programs that were not benefitting the students or the university. What made this effort unique is that Dr. Varlotta raised funds to provide a salary and benefits for a full year for faculty who were in programs that were terminated. This humane approach offers guidance for other institutions as they move forward in prioritizing academic programs in the wake of the pandemic and economic fall-out. Student needs also increased and many institutions stepped up to provide support. Amarillo College again was in the spotlight as it put in new counseling services for students and doing campus visits online. Additionally, some institutions raised and earmarked financial support to help students who were struggling financially. Employee needs also increased. Dr. Tom Marrs of Texas A&M University pointed out how employees are burning out due to the prolonged stress. Many employees have contracted COVID and also seen loved ones and friends struggle with it—and in some cases lose their lives. With no relief in sight for most of the year, the continued stress took a toll, which also impacted people’s ability to perform their jobs. That’s where employee assistance programs and other efforts focused on supporting staff have become even more meaningful. The pandemic has helped underscore the importance of humanity and thinking of others before oneself. 2020’s Student Enrollment Challenges The nation and the world have never experienced a pandemic like this for over a century. The death rate is huge—the daily death rate exceeds that of 9/11. This is fundamentally changing everything on our planet and in our nation. Enrollment was the top challenge facing higher education. College enrollment fell 2.5% from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020, which was almost twice the rate of decline. This represented almost 500,000 students. There were 327,000 fewer first-time students this fall, which was unprecedented. International student enrollment was down 43%. Public institutions experienced a 4% decline in enrollment while privates remained flat—and would have been lower if the graduate enrollments hadn’t helped boost them back up. Community colleges’ enrollment fell over 13%. Transfer students dropped. There were some bright lights, enrollment-wise. For-profits increased enrollments over 5% while graduates were up 3.6%. Community colleges were hit harder than expected. The challenge may be because prospective students often are from lower socioeconomic households who are looking for ways to get into a four-year institution. With the transfer rates between community colleges and four-year institutions being down, it could be possible that the drop in community college enrollments may be due to demographic and financial issues. Finances also are an issue. Moody’s is predicting that the net tuition revenue will decline in about 75% of private schools and 60% of publics. That’s a huge decline in revenues. Private universities have room and board as about 40% of their revenues, which makes it challenging. The publics faced major issues after the Great Recession when the cost didn’t change, but the state government allocations dropped; the tuition burden fell more on students than on states. Student costs and tuition continue to go up. There currently is $1.7 trillion in student debt. This is unsustainable. However, some institutions are trying to find sustainable financial models. For example, Southern New Hampshire University just set a limit to their annual tuition at $10,000 a year for on-line and $15,000 for face-to-face. Many students are transferring to online education because costs are less. This will challenge institutions to find ways to compete. Black Lives Matter and Societal Issues Higher education had to deal with four major issues this year: COVID, Black Lives Matter, climate change and the economy. Each of these issues on their own would be huge; together, they created a perfect storm. This is forcing higher education—and everyone else—to wake up. Long-time higher education leader Dr. Gordon Gee said, “The pandemic has accelerated needed change in higher education by a decade or more.” Black Lives Matter affected higher education in a major way through giving this type of activism a renewed sense of urgency. Protests emerged and grew, especially around the election. Both faculty and students were demanding more emphasis and attention be given to these types of issues, especially in regards to police. Some institutions said they were not going to have police on campus any more. Many buildings are being renamed and statutes are coming down. The superintendent of Virginia Military Institute resigned after racist accusations that were going on at that school. Higher Education Policy Changes Major issues happened with Title IX at the federal level. The Department of Education changed many of the rules on adjudication. Many of these decisions are going to be set aside under the Biden Administration. Distance education also was a significant change point. Higher education had to embrace distance education due to the pandemic. With the Negotiated Rulemaking from 2019 that just went into effect, there’s a significant number of changes to the rules. In some cases, decisions--such as substantive interaction—are good; in this case, that’s going to give rise to institutions similar to Western Governor’s where they are doing competency-based education. It’s not going to be the faculty member being the “sage on the stage” as much. Instead, there will be flipped classrooms and students being more in charge of their learning. Faculty interactions need to be good, but they only need to be once a week. Mergers and closures will continue. There was a big one this year as University of Arizona acquired Ashford University. This consolidation helps the University of Arizona expand its online programs. Additionally, some colleges face sudden closures based on financial crises. Last Year’s Predictions One of last year’s predictions involved the restructuring of the NCAA. The issues that are currently happening in regards to football exposed the NCAA’s inner workings, especially in that some conferences have significantly more power than others. The NCAA will face changes. For example, the current case before the Supreme Court may lead to athlete compensation when their image is used. This will make the rich universities richer because students will want to play at colleges and universities where they can get more publicity. Another prediction from last year was that fundraising would change. This proved to be true, although because of COVID not in the way that was predicted. Fundraising also changed based on Black Lives Matter, especially in relation to naming buildings. There will be more due diligence. Mergers and closures were also predicted. While this also has happened, it hasn’t happened at quite the rate that was predicted. A lot of that has to do with the CARES Act, which infused critical funds into higher education. Another prediction was that higher education would develop partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting but it isn’t at the degree originally predicted because of COVID. Looking Forward - Predictions for 2021 Enrollment declines will continue due to the enrollment cliff and the economic downturn caused by the pandemic. This also is part of the finances because of the COVID pandemic. Enrollments may be down the same amount or more than this year as foreshadowed by the decline in applications and FAFSA filings. Finances combined with the enrollment cliff are coming into play. The positive note is that graduate education and degree completion is moving up, which is balancing the loss of enrollment. Institutions need to be positioned properly and understand their mission and the programs that speak to their ideal student. Traditional students will be moving to online universities in larger numbers. Universities with strong online presences, such as Western Governor’s University, University of Arizona, and Southern New Hampshire University are doing well—and will gobble up other programs or create alliances with MOOCs to keep costs down. This also is forcing many institutions to reconsider online education options for their traditional undergraduate students, who now are demanding this option. Non-traditional students also are making up more of the online enrollment; this group needs the flexibility that online education offers. With the Biden Administration taking office, education is going to come back to being in more in the forefront. President Trump and Secretary Betsy DeVos focused on choice; this will be curtailed in the new administration. The new Secretary of Education has a strong educational background from Connecticut, which should be very good for public institutions. If there is a new CARES Act, more money should be steered toward higher education. Free college is a great idea for individuals in certain income levels but this may not happen. The forgiveness of debt is far more realistic. The question becomes how much to forgive and what is fair. Also, having Dr. Jill Biden in the White House will be significant; she will have a big influence on education. Also, hopefully there will be less politicization of education in the future because people realize that education is the awakening of people’s minds. Mergers and acquisitions will continue to come forward. While many institutions have survived the pandemic to this point, many have been bled deeply. These institutions may not be able to survive; in fact, 75% of CFOs in higher education are expressing concerns. The game changer for next year will be the vaccine. The go-go years leading up to the Great Recession are gone. Higher education needs to do a better job of partnering with businesses and employers about what they need. Additionally, the purpose of higher education is for the greater good and to develop life-long learners. So while higher education does need to prepare students for their first jobs, it also needs to instill the understanding of the need for life-long learning. Bullet Points 2020 was completely unpredictable. It will take a lengthy period of time before the nation and higher education return to normal. Higher education had to deal with four major issues this year: COVID, Black Lives Matter, climate change and the economy. Each of these issues on their own would be huge; together, they created a perfect storm. Servant leaders emerged on the frontlines, helping to test individuals for COVID, using a mask, demonstrating behaviors to protect everyone, being very present for the students, and embracing transparency and strategic communications. Institutions turned on a dime as the pandemic emerged. Faculty converted their entire course load to online over a span of only a few weeks while other employees worked to make campuses safe for people to return. The pandemic forced institutions to really focus on what their mission is—educating students. Academic prioritization also came to the forefront as institutions tried to determine how to move forward during the pandemic and the ensuing economic downturn. The challenge is to create a process that treats employees and faculty who are laid-off humanely. Student needs also increased and many institutions stepped up to provide support through counseling and finances. Employees also needed support so many institutions utilized counseling, employee assistance programs and financial support programs to provide assistance. Enrollment was the top challenge facing higher education with declines in most areas. The pandemic may cause up to 20% of higher institutions to close or be acquired due to financial issues. Finances also are an issue. Moody’s is predicting that the net tuition revenue will decline in about 75% of private schools and 60% of publics. Student costs and tuition continue to go up, and there currently is $1.7 trillion in student debt. This is unsustainable. Institutions are starting to develop new models that are more affordable for students. Black Lives Matter brought activism back to campus. This movement forced institutions to look closely at policies, procedures and practices. It also forced institutions to do due diligence before accepting major gifts with naming rights. Title IX shifted to protect the accused, but this probably will shift again once the Biden Administration comes into office. A significant number of changes to the rules about distance education just went into effect due to the negotiated rulemaking process in 2019. In some cases, decisions--such as substantive interaction—are good. Mergers are starting to happen. Some allow institutions to increase their reach, such as into the distance education market. Some institutions are also facing a financial cliff that can lead to sudden closure. The NCAA will continue to face changes. For example, the current Supreme Court case may lead to athlete compensation when their image is used. While mergers and closures were predicted last year, the rate didn’t match what was predicted. This has to do with the CARES Act, which provided a lifeline to struggling institutions. Another prediction was increased partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting but it isn’t at the degree because of COVID. Another prediction that was impacted by COVID was that higher education would develop partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting to emerge. Predictions for 2021 Enrollment drops will continue, due to the combination of the enrollment cliff and students’ and families’ financial issues due to COVID. The positive note is that graduate education and degree completion is moving up, which helps to balance the loss of undergrad enrollment. Institutions need to be positioned properly and understand their mission and the programs that speak to their ideal student. Traditional students will be moving to online universities in larger numbers. Universities with strong online presences will continue to find ways to increase their market share. Other institutions will focus on creating or bringing more programs online. Education will move back to the forefront in the Biden Administration, especially having a Dr (Jill Biden) in the White House. Mergers and acquisitions will continue to emerge as many institutions have been financially bled to death during the pandemic. The COVID vaccine will be the game change. With that said, higher education needs to develop partnerships with businesses and also stress the concept of life-long learning in current students. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center Guests Social Media Links: Guest Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahmaue/ The Change Leader’s Social Media Links: LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-change-leader/about/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Keywords: #change management #governance #university #highereducation #education

Dec 18, 2020 • 35min

Strategic Board Leadership Creates New University Governance Paradigm with Henry Stoever | Changing Higher Ed 066

Strategic board leadership is an emerging paradigm of university governance that can help higher education institutions navigate the multiple challenges. This podcast will feature Henry Stoever, president of AGB. Changing Paradigm of University Governance Typically, higher education boards are made up of individuals who are appointed as trustees because they have made significant philanthropic contributions, either to the institution or, in the case of public universities, to a political party candidate who then appoints the individual once elected. This approach is shifting as boards and institutional leadership teams begin to develop strategic partnerships. In the strategic board leadership approach, both individual trustees as well as the entire board need to learn how to work in strategic partnerships with higher education presidents and the institution’s leadership team. This approach shifts the focus so that the board and its members become a built-in consulting team for the higher education president and cabinet. Additionally, the board no longer serves as a rubber stamp for the institution’s proposed strategies and initiatives; instead, trustees need to proactively engage as thought partners. In the current environment, both student success and long-term institutional vitality are part of the crisis recovery for higher education institutions due to the pandemic and the resulting online and hybrid learning environments. These issues have increased the importance of strategic board leadership in order to create well-informed, more holistic strategies for both student success and long-term institutional vitality. Strategic thought partnerships between presidents and boards are becoming increasingly important as the pressure mounts on higher education presidents due to the pandemic. These individuals are on call 24/7 and can face unrest at any time. At the same time, the roles and expectations of board members have never been more challenging. By working together, presidents and boards can leverage their work for the institutional and student good. Trustee Recruitment Strategy This approach changes the way higher education governing boards are recruited. Previously, the primary driver for board member selection has been philanthropic (or political donation) capacity and relationships. In this new paradigm, philanthropy remains important, but selection of board members also must be based on other attributes, including their knowledge of key areas such as academic affairs, finance, marketing, strategy and risk, operations, legal, regulatory and international experience. Boards should be proactively identifying these necessary skills through using a skill set matrix. This matrix builds and informs the composition of the board through analyzing individual board members’ skills and those that are needed on the board, and balancing them against individual trustees’ terms. This approach ensures that appropriate trustees are seated who can oversee the creation of the strategy for the institution’s future, instead of focusing on the institutional past. Evolution of Board Governance Over the past year, boards have been forced to change how they work. They have been required to meet much more frequently as institutions face a myriad of challenges due to the pandemic and social unrest. Boards also have had to lean in from an oversight perspective. This requires working in partnership with the higher education leadership, but not doing the work of the management team. Boards must listen to all key stakeholders, both on and off campus, while also listening to and working with the institution’s leadership team to ask insightful and probing questions. Trustees are being asked to consider alternatives and also to analyze both the intended and unintended implications of potential strategic directions. The mnemonic NIFO (nose in – fingers out), or in other words, not micromanaging is critical in today’s higher education governance environment. The board’s role is to listen and ask the difficult questions of administration. Making suggestions in a limited way is acceptable (and encouraged), but there is a fine line between oversight and suggestions vs. micromanagement. Unfortunately, the difference between oversight and suggestions versus micromanagement is not cut and dry – it varies among boards and administrations. One of the ways that boards can be in touch with stakeholders is through establishing board committees that have both board members and key stakeholders on them. This enables board members to gain deeper insight into what is going on in the college or university, as well as giving institutional stakeholders a direct opportunity to interact directly with the board. Institutional members must be clear that this is NOT an invitation or process to short-circuit or make an “end run” around the university president. Issues that are brought to the committee must be “blessed” by the president. One way to get this right is to have the president as an ex-officio member of all committees of the board, and this does not preclude the committee from going into executive session if there is an issue that must be discussed without the president in attendance. Shared governance also needs to be embraced more by higher education boards. This approach, which involves sitting down and interacting with faculty, administration, staff and alumni, has strong implications in higher education. A lack of shared governance and/or ignoring key stakeholders’ inputs can result in faculty or other groups sending a vote of no confidence about the administration or board, which sends a negative signal about the institution to the broader institutional community. Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion also have been highlighted in recent months. While much work has been done at the administrative level, most boards have not leveraged these values into strategic policies and decisions. From an optics perspective, student enrollment has become much more diverse; however, faculty and board composition have not evolved to align with their customers, and board must take a proactive approach to DEI, especially in relation to representation on the board. Strategic relationships require listening and hearing differences of opinion. Unrest is becoming more common, so boards and administration need to be prepared to establish justice and equity. The pandemic has extended the levels of inequity since the historically marginalized communities have been disproportionately weighted by the impacts of the pandemic. Boards also need to engage in building strategic crisis communications playbooks to be prepared when this societal unrest comes to campus. Continuing Fiduciary Duties Trustees still have a responsibility to ensure that students receive a quality education and the institution remains sustainable. Trustees’ fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and obedience are the same for higher education boards as they are for corporate boards. Boards also need to be involved in the strategic planning for the institution, but should not micromanage. Instead, they should focus on ensuring that planning is done holistically and there are sufficient risk mitigation processes in place. More and more, people are looking for work-force education, but at the same time, institutions need to be creating lifelong learners and collaborative participants in society. However, boards and institutions often don’t know who the institution’s customers are. While the main focus needs to remain on students, there also is a difference between customer and consumer. In higher education, the person paying the bill—often the parent—is the customer. Students are the consumers since they absorb the content. Three Recommendations for Higher Education Boards and Leaders Stoever suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders: Strategic transformation is critically important because higher education won’t be the same once the pandemic is over. Both the general population and the number of traditional students are declining so the demand for higher education may decline. Therefore, boards need to be thinking strategically about transformation. Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion need to be part of every conversation, board agenda and strategy. Board membership should not viewed as an honorific position. Instead, board members need to be actively engaged and contributing their talents and time to further the higher education institution’s mission during this pandemic. Bullet Points Higher education boards frequently are made up of individuals who are appointed as trustees because they have made significant philanthropic contributions. However, this approach is shifting. The selection of board members should be based on individual attributes, including specific knowledge of key areas, such as finance, marketing, strategy, legal, regulatory and international experience. Boards are proactively identifying these necessary skills through using a skill set matrix. Both individual trustees as well as the entire board need to learn how to work in strategic partnerships with higher education presidents and the institution’s leadership team. Christian institutions are moving from primarily preparing pastors and missionaries to preparing professionals. Strategic board leadership can create well-informed, more holistic strategies for both student success and long-term institutional vitality. Boards have to lean in from an oversight perspective, which requires working in partnership with the higher education leadership, but not doing the work of the management team. Shared governance and listening to differences are important. This approach involves the board sitting down and interacting with faculty, administration, staff and alumni, which has significant implications in higher education. Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion are important for the board to consider. This needs to involve creating board policies as well as the composition of the board. Trustees continue to have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that students receive a quality education and the institution remains sustainable. These responsibilities include care, loyalty and obedience. Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges Guests Social Media Links LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/henrystoever/ Twitter: @henrystoever The Change Leader’s Social Media Links Website: https://staging9.changinghighered.com LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ Twitter: @thechangeldr Email: podcast@changinghighered.com Keywords #governance #university #highereducation #education

The AI-powered Podcast Player

Save insights by tapping your headphones, chat with episodes, discover the best highlights - and more!

Get the app

Changing Higher Ed

Episodes

Mentioned books

Strategic Transformation for Colleges and Universities Post COVID

Saving Sweet Briar College through Transformational Change Management

Higher Ed Change Leadership: The "New Normal" After COVID-19