@vu84v2 The bolding means that those departments contested the discontinuance, submitting their own proposals for moving forward, but ultimately were denied in these cases.
The asterisks are a bunch of comments about the discontinuances. The triple asterisk (***) that you asked about says that the Supply Chain and Logistics Management minor will be retained.
Great, So now we have a German House and no German major. Perplexing.
STEM is the new liberal arts: The changing trends of college majors BY WADE ZHOU STACKER UPDATED JULY 29, 2024 10:56 AM
Read more at: https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/business/article290538154.html#storylink=cpy
Valpo is following current market trends to a tee in its reorganization strategy:
• STEM is the new liberal arts.
• Current growth in STEM and Healthcare markets is red hot.
• STEM and Healthcare career earnings potential makes today’s exorbitant college costs far easier to sell.
I understand the disappointment people are feeling, but not the disgust being expressed about the wisdom of the decision making.
@vu72 - I repeat, why is a German major necessary, and how does it keep the university afloat?
With the decreased enrollment, they have to bag majors. Please provide a better solution given forecasts that college enrollment will drop in the next decade.
STEM is the new liberal arts: The changing trends of college majors BY WADE ZHOU STACKER UPDATED JULY 29, 2024 10:56 AM
Read more at: https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/business/article290538154.html#storylink=cpy
Valpo is following current market trends to a tee in its reorganization strategy:
• STEM is the new liberal arts.
• Current growth in STEM and Healthcare markets is red hot.
• STEM and Healthcare career earnings potential makes today’s exorbitant college costs far easier to sell.
I understand the disappointment people are feeling, but not the disgust being expressed about the wisdom of the decision making.
More the reason why eliminating Statistics is such a poor advertising unforced error. They won't save any money as most courses that formed these majors still continue serving students in other majors. Instead, you have a place that wears the STEM badge and cutting Stat. I am sure this is the case with other majors that were gutted: very little if any cost savings (especially if those courses still run and the personnel to teach them is still needed) but a big serving for bad publicity
STEM is the new liberal arts: The changing trends of college majors BY WADE ZHOU STACKER UPDATED JULY 29, 2024 10:56 AM
Read more at: https://www.sanluisobispo.com/news/business/article290538154.html#storylink=cpy
Valpo is following current market trends to a tee in its reorganization strategy:
• STEM is the new liberal arts.
• Current growth in STEM and Healthcare markets is red hot.
• STEM and Healthcare career earnings potential makes today’s exorbitant college costs far easier to sell.
I understand the disappointment people are feeling, but not the disgust being expressed about the wisdom of the decision making.
More the reason why eliminating Statistics is such a poor advertising unforced error. They won't save any money as most courses that formed these majors still continue serving students in other majors. Instead, you have a place that wears the STEM badge and cutting Stat. I am sure this is the case with other majors that were gutted: very little if any cost savings (especially if those courses still run and the personnel to teach them is still needed) but a big serving of bad publicity for the public to enjoy
@dejavu STEM majors, unless taking a mathematics based degree, typically need only 1 or 2 stats classes and even then you would be using Matlab for that class in tbe STE areas. No reason to have a whole degree for a few required classes right @usc4valpo
@dejavu STEM majors, unless taking a mathematics based degree, typically need only 1 or 2 stats classes and even then you would be using Matlab for that class in tbe STE areas. No reason to have a whole degree for a few required classes right @usc4valpo
That's not my point. The point is, why cut anything if it does not clearly save the money? The bad publicity rap is what I am concerned with some of these cuts. IN some cases, program cuts involve course cancellation and ultimately personnel cut. As much as the latter is painful, I can see the mathematics of saving money if you fire someone. But if none of these happen, then where is the meaningful saving? The usual explanation is the vague "administrative costs" of keeping these majors in the books. What does that mean? Will they fire people in the registrar? Will they save paper for printing these majors in the catalog? Did not see any clear numbers on even a ballpark savings projection
Meanwhile, the bad publicity takes a toll NOW.
@vu72 - I repeat, why is a German major necessary, and how does it keep the university afloat?
With the decreased enrollment, they have to bag majors. Please provide a better solution given forecasts that college enrollment will drop in the next decade.
I guess I perhaps should have said "disappointing" rather than "perplexing". The Duesenberg family has been so generous and part of that generosity was providing the funds necessary to build the German House. Obviously, if nobody wants to live there or study German then it makes no sense to provide or support its future on campus. Maybe it could be sold to one of the fraternities on campus who presently don't have house.
That's not my point. The point is, why cut anything if it does not clearly save the money? The bad publicity rap is what I am concerned with some of these cuts. IN some cases, program cuts involve course cancellation and ultimately personnel cut. As much as the latter is painful, I can see the mathematics of saving money if you fire someone. But if none of these happen, then where is the meaningful saving? The usual explanation is the vague "administrative costs" of keeping these majors in the books. What does that mean? Will they fire people in the registrar? Will they save paper for printing these majors in the catalog? Did not see any clear numbers on even a ballpark savings projection
Meanwhile, the bad publicity takes a toll NOW.
DejaVu makes an excellent point. The purpose in this discontinuance of programs and majors is not simply to trim classes, which saves no money. Even cutting a whole major does nothing except eliminate a page in the curriculum catalog unless faculty are fired. My understanding is that the goal is to cut about ten faculty jobs in the next year or so through this process plus make the situation unpleasant enough for a number of other tenured faculty, who will no longer have the opportunity to teach advanced or specialty courses, to look elsewhere for employment so they can be replaced by low-salary part-time adjunct faculty without benefits or chance of tenure as instructors of basic gen ed classes.
Deceptive as it might be, it just looks better to say the university is saving money by cutting less needed programs than to actually announce firings of faculty and the termination of full-time positions. Still, this adds to more bad publicity for the university, even in the NWI Times, which had VU TO ELIMINATE 30 ACADEMIC PROGRAMS as the banner headline to the top front-page story this morning.
So if the standing belief that if a University starts a major it must then keep it in perpetuity whether it has students or not? That seems unrealistic. Also, saving money is not always just "cutting" it's putting human labor towards more beneficial work. If you have majors you have to provide certain classes, which means professors have to teach those classes where there are five people in the major or fifty, which means they can't teach others. If you eliminate some majors you eliminate the amount of classes you have to provide and can replace them classes that might have a higher need.
I also just struggle to believe that the administration is out to maliciously cut professors to do so. It does not make business or even logical sense. I understand the adjunct concern but I've also seen the criticism that "good" professors will not teach somewhere that they can not teach these higher level courses either so what is a realistic way to get rid of a major that has low enrollment?
Also, saving money is not always just "cutting" it's putting human labor towards more beneficial work. If you have majors you have to provide certain classes, which means professors have to teach those classes where there are five people in the major or fifty, which means they can't teach others. If you eliminate some majors you eliminate the amount of classes you have to provide and can replace them classes that might have a higher need.
I also just struggle to believe that the administration is out to maliciously cut professors to do so. It does not make business or even logical sense. I understand the adjunct concern but I've also seen the criticism that "good" professors will not teach somewhere that they can not teach these higher level courses either so what is a realistic way to get rid of a major that has low enrollment?
I know your comment sounds logical; however, "putting human labor towards more beneficial work" to save money is usually a myth. Whether a faculty member teaches a major class with fewer students or a full gen ed class, that individual makes the same salary and benefits. The only way there is a "saving" is by "cutting"; that prof. reassigned to a basic course simply replaces another who would be teaching the class, so is now terminated, or the reassignment to gen ed classes causes enough frustration that the faculty member leaves the university.
a math degree is largely undesirable unless you are taking a math minor to pad your STE degree or are trying to get into education. In fact, the only reason STEM is the word still is because it sounds nicer than STE. More bad press comes from this yes, but it is all too easy to post more bad press now because of the bad press from the other circumstances. It generates clicks. I agree with the argument that a unicersity shouldn't keep a degree in perpetuity if it is not in demand. Schools do that all thw time without tbe press down their throats. I also am in agreement with the downsizing measures, but if tenure is tk be stripped from this that is unacceptable.
Also cutting classes would then save on course materials would it not? Other schools list their excess for sale to other institutions and sell off course materials when a degree is no longer offered. Yoy also no longer pay to provide these materials as well. This number certainly adds up when a massive cut is made does it not
The numbers (students applying for and enrolling) for a math major should drive whether that major is continued, but I have a different perspective on math as a major. Some majors are foundational, meaning that you have a better chance of leveraging the skills and abilities into other fields than other majors. I believe that math is one such major, as it can be leveraged into many quantitative areas. If you gain the "chops" and credibility in a quantitative area, it can open a variety of doors for you.
In regards to saving on course materials (and equipment, etc.), there is not much to be saved (or gained from sale) unless the major requires a lot of higher cost equipment to support teaching (such as engineering and nursing). I did not see any such majors or minors in the list of programs to be discontinued.
@rezynezy I never took a statistics class in college at Valpo or USC, and in reality, statistics education and those bogus formulas was never truly necessary in an engineering curriculum.
I took probabaily. Random theory and estimation theory at USC which was awesome.
We need to get true estimates the long term savings would be cutting these majors.
but again, why is bagging a German major so devastating? Tradition? I can hear the first major song in Fiddler on the Roof in my head…
