THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER … · 2020-01-14 · CONNECTION SUMMER 20025 ED I T O R’S M E M O CONNECTION, THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION,

Inside: • Issues in Campus Architecture • Save the Humanities • Will Faculty Learn to Love Distance Learning?• New England’s Economic Outlook

THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

CONNECTION

VOLUME XVII

NUMBER 1

SUMMER 2002

$3.95

NEWLEARNING

CURVES

Volume XVII, No. 1Summer 2002CONNECTION

THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

C O V E R S T O R I E S

13 Form Follows Function?Innovations in Education Demand Flexible Building Design

Arthur J. Lidsky

16 A Building Like a Tree, a Campus Like a ForestSustainable Design Comes to New England Higher Education

William McDonough, Michael Braungart and Diane Dale

19 Campus Architecture Is Campus MarketingFrom Celebrity Architects to Luxury Dorms, Colleges Make Building Decisions in an Attempt to Draw Students and Support

Elizabeth S. Padjen

21 The Shape of Things to Come: A Photo Essay

26 Stores of KnowledgeNew England Colleges Are Turning Retail Space into Classrooms

Albert E. Neal

29 Connecticut BuildsHow One Public University Became a National Model for Infrastructure Investment

Philip E. Austin

C O M M E N T A R Y & A N A L Y S I S

31 Save the HumanitiesWhy a Traditional Liberal Education Still Makes Sense

John C. Schneider and Sherry A. Darling

34 Transmission TransitionWill Faculty Learn to Love Distance Learning?

Michael F. Beaudoin

36 New England’s Economic OutlookA Mild Recession Followed by Slow Growth Promises Mixed Blessings for Higher Education

Ross Gittell

39 Crunch TimeState Budget Woes Squeeze New England’s Already-Low Public Investment in Higher Education

Michael K. Thomas

D E P A R T M E N T S

5 Editor’s MemoJohn O. Harney

6 Short Courses

11 Message from the PresidentFirst Impressions of Campus Form and Function

Robert A. Weygand

43 BooksCorporatized Higher Ed Inc. reviewed by Andrew G. De Rocco

Entrepreneurs The History of Teradyne reviewed by Alan R. Earls

Trustee Financial Responsibilities of Governing Boards reviewed by Jane Sjogren

47 Campus: News Briefly Noted

48 Data Connection

On the cover: The Learning Resource Center at ManchesterCommunity College, designed by Centerbrook Architectsand Planners. Photo copyright © by Jeff Goldberg/Esto.

CONNECTION SUMMER 2002 3


E D I T O R ’ S M E M O

CONNECTION, THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD

OF HIGHER EDUCATION, is published five times a year by the New England Board of Higher Education, 45 Temple Place, Boston, MA 02111-1325 Phone: 617.357.9620 Fax: 617.338.1577Email: [email protected]

Vol. XVII, No. 1 Summer 2002 ISSN 0895-6405Copyright © 2002 by the New England Board of Higher Education.

Publisher: Robert A. WeygandExecutive Editor: John O. HarneySenior Director of Communications:

Charlotte StrattonNEBHE/CONNECTION Interns:

Ried Artis, Albert NealDesign and Production:

The Publication Group

Director of Advertising Sales and Marketing: Myha Nguyen

Back Issues: Regular issues $3.95 each; annual directory issue $14.95.

Advertising rates are available upon request.

CONNECTION is printed in New England.

CONNECTION is indexed and abstracted in EBSCOhost'sAcademic Search Elite, Academic Search Premier andProfessional Development Collection, and indexed inPAIS International and ERIC's Current Index to Journalsin Education. A cumulative index of CONNECTION articles and abstracts of recent articles are also accessible on the World Wide Web at www.nebhe.org.

The New England Boardof Higher Education is anonprofit, congressionallyauthorized, interstateagency whose mission is to promote greater educational opportunitiesand services for the residents of New England.NEBHE was established by the New England Higher Education Compact, a 1955 agreement amongthe states of Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Chair: Carole Cowan, President, Middlesex Community College

President: Robert A. Weygand

CONNECTION Editorial Advisory Board

Kenneth HookerColumnist, Boston Globe

Richard Barringer Professor, University of Southern Maine

Laura FreidExecutive Vice President for Public Affairs and University Relations, Brown University

Betsy KeadyMarket Director, The Forum Corp.

Arnold KochArnold Koch and Associates

Thomas L. McFarlandFormer Director, University Press of New England

Ian MenziesHingham, Mass.

Neil RoldeSewall’s Hill, Maine

CONNECTIONTHE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

..

John O. Harney is executive editor of CONNECTION.

Just a year-and-a-half ago, Connecticut was boasting a $400 million bud-get surplus, Massachusetts voters approved a tax rollback, and publichigher education officials across the region were confidently expecting

significant budget increases. By early 2002, however, that was ancient histo-ry. The dot-com bubble had burst. New England had lost nearly 100,000 jobs,and the six state capitals were awash in red ink.

As it turns out, the late, great economic boom had done little to lift theNew England states out of the nation’s higher education funding cellar. Byfiscal 2002, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Vermont, Massachusetts and NewHampshire ranked 43rd, 46th, 48th, 49th and 50th, respectively in state sup-port of higher education operating expenses per $1,000 of personal income.Maine did a little better, ranking 35th.

Chronic underfunding of higher education compromises access and qual-ity in many intangible ways. But the cover stories in this issue of CONNECTION

are about something more concrete … and steel and glass and brick.Underfunding, of course, also results in deferred maintenance and deterio-rating buildings that must be rescued later by heroic measures such asUConn 2000, the billion-dollar program to upgrade facilities at the Universityof Connecticut, which is described in this issue.

Whether on the grand scale of the UConn initiative or the modest levelevident at dozens of New England colleges, campus-building raises a host ofnew edu-architectural concerns. There is the opportunity, and the mandate,for colleges to improve access for people with disabilities. There is the chance for colleges to practice in sustainable building design what they preach about stewardship of the planet. And there are challenges, from wiring buildings for a wireless future to sating the appetites of today’sconsumerist students.

The built environment on college campuses is shaped in part by market-ing concerns and has been at least since U.S. campuses chose Gothic build-ings and quadrangles to imitate the temples of learning of Oxbridge. Today,the look of housing options—including “luxury dorms”—is particularlyimportant in the student recruitment game. Campus planners know thatmore students are growing up with their own bedrooms and expect at leastequal comforts at college (to hell with the virtues of sharing close quartersand experiences with roommates of different backgrounds).

All the focus in campus architecture is not on luxury dorms, however.There is also new interest in functionality—in how daylight, flexible furni-ture and space to collaborate improve student learning. Above all, change-able ideas about teaching and learning demand that buildings be adaptable,lest form follow dysfunction. And high stakes may be spreading to buildingdesign. In an article about K-12 school buildings in Education Week, archi-tect Prakash Nair, suggests that “School officials responsible for planning,constructing and renovating facilities ought to be held accountable not onlyfor whether the cost estimates are met and the air conditioning works, butalso for the impact their decisions have on student learning.”

Amid all these functional concerns, we can also hope that New England’scolleges will continue to commission and preserve the kinds of bold, boundary-pushing architecture that inspires wonder in students and passersby as itenriches the regional landscape. As with so many other kinds of challengingexpression, if colleges don’t provide a safe environment, who will?

S H O R T C O U R S E S

Regionalism RevisitedSpring brought forth new initiatives in regional self-examination. In May,the National Endowment for theHumanities awarded the University ofNew Hampshire $378,900 to establisha Center for New England Culture.UNH beat out a competing proposalfrom Brown University to host one ofnine federally funded regional culturecenters across the country. The grantwill be matched 3-to-1 by private dona-tions to establish a permanent endow-ment. The center, to be directed byUNH Professor David Watters, willhost conferences on New England’shistorical and contemporary cultureand work to strengthen curriculum onNew England culture, especially theregion’s ethnic communities.

Meanwhile, Neal Peirce, author ofThe New England States, the 1972 bookon the six-state region’s people and pol-itics, has fixed his gaze on New Englandonce again. Peirce, the founding editorof the National Journal, and his part-ners in the Citistates Group are workingwith the New England Council conduct-ing interviews with leaders of business,higher education, government, founda-tions and others to find out if there is a

shared sense of New England’s futureand a shared agenda. The initiative is acooperative venture between the council,the Boston Foundation and theMetropolitan Area Planning Council.

Vacancies … More than 150 New England collegeswere still considering both qualifiedfreshman and transfer applications for the fall semester as of the tradi-tional May 1 admissions deadline,according to the New England Boardof Higher Education’s 2002 StudentVacancy Survey. An additional 18 cam-puses reported openings for transferstudents only.

Of the institutions reporting open-ings, 47 indicated that certain academ-ic programs, particularly in alliedhealth fields such as nursing and dental hygiene, were already filled.

NEBHE has surveyed New Englandhigher education institutions everyyear since 1960 as a public service tostudents who have not chosen a college by May and to measure collegeapplication trends.

The 2002 survey also found thatNew England campuses had receivedmore than 500,000 applications for the

6 NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

In and OutCONNECTION’S Spring 2002 issue [Trends & Indicators, Spring 2002] featured2000 data on students migrating into the New England states for college. Stateofficials, of course, also want to know about students going out—and about thenet gain or loss. For this, the federal government’s data goes only up to 1998.Here it is…

Freshmen Freshmen

State Leaving State Going to State Net Migration

Connecticut 11,812 7,335 -4,477Maine 3,799 2,375 -1,424Massachusetts 14,329 24,618 10,289New Hampshire 4,409 5,081 672Rhode Island 2,636 7,960 5,324Vermont 2,300 4,119 1,819


fall term—up 4 percent over lastyear. This follows a 3 percent one-year jump in freshman applicationslast year and a 5 percent increase inMay 2000.

One reason college applicationshave been rising is that the num-ber of traditional college-age NewEnglanders has grown steadily since1995, when the region emerged froma 15-year downturn in the number of18-year-olds. New England’s highschools are expected to graduatemore than 127,000 seniors thisspring, up more than 2 percent overlast year, though growth in NewEngland’s high school graduatingclass still lags behind the nation’s.

It seems that every year, admis-sions officers note that this year’sgraduating seniors are more con-sumerist, more organized than theone before. A few years ago, studentsbegan haggling over their financial aidpackages. The latest trend: studentscontesting admissions rejections.

Where Do Harvard Students Come From?The following chart shows the geo-graphic origin of students admittedto Harvard’s Class of 2006:

Comings and GoingsFormer University of FloridaPresident John V. Lombardi wasnamed chancellor of the University of Massachusetts Amherst. … Ann Weaver Hart, former provost

Snippets “Let me hasten to debunk the myth that kids who are good or even brilliantat science and math are more “intelligent” than those who are not. ... In thisincreasingly complex world, we need such “whiz kids” more than we ever didand we should do everything we can to encourage them to achieve theirfullest potential. But do we have to make the other kids who have no interestin science and math look stupid in the process? What happened to actors and musicians and artists and architects? The counselors and naturalists and chefs and jewelers and librarians and historians and writers, marathonrunners and entrepreneurs?”

—Architect Prakash Nair, who heads the New Jersey-based

Urban Educational Facilities for the 21st Century,

in an online discussion hosted by Design Share.

****

“Transforming the chicken to serve our various needs, we have, in turn, beentransformed. … How better to understand mankind’s manipulation of the natural world than through the fabled and troubled history of one of its mostimportant domesticates: the chicken?”

—Yale University political science professor James C. Scott, quoted

in the Yale Bulletin & Calendar promoting a May conference titled,

“The Chicken: It’s Biological, Social, Industrial and

Cultural History: From Neolithic Middens to McNuggets.”

Middle Atlantic 27%

New England 18%

West and Mountain

18%

South 17%

Midwest 12%

U.S. Territories 1%

Foreign 7%



It’s Not Whether You Win or Lose …To the Editor:

James Martin and James Samels’ characterization of Harcourt Higher

Education (HHE) as a “loser” that went “belly up” needs some clarification

[“Enrollment Winners, Losers, Turnarounds and New Players,” Spring 2002].

During the two years I worked with HHE, it assembled a professional acade-

mic staff that developed five degree programs supported by 111 courses, a full

range of support services, including a library, and a trained faculty. HHE was

licensed by the Massachusetts Board of Higher Education in 2000, becoming

the first entirely online degree program in New England.

HHE was preparing for candidacy status for regional accreditation and was

starting to enroll students and develop partnerships when it was sold to

Thompson Learning which shut it down. Since HHE’s advertising budget was

frozen, it never conducted a serious marketing campaign. Hence, the viability

of its business plan was not really tested.

James Fay, Project Director

Universitas 21 Pedagogica

Former Dean of Arts and Sciences

Harcourt Higher Education

and vice president for academicaffairs at Claremont GraduateUniversity in California, becamepresident of the University of NewHampshire, replacing Joan Leitzel,who retired after six years in charge.… William Farrell, former chancel-lor of the University System of NewHampshire and former president ofPlymouth State College, was namedpresident of Rivier College, replacingSr. Lucille Thibodeau, whoretired. Farrell is the first male andfirst lay person to head the nearly 70-year-old college. … Mary C.

Clancy, Canada’s former consul general to New England, becamepresident of Burlington College, succeeding Daniel Casey, whoretired. … Brian M. Barefoot, a former executive at PaineWebber andMerrill Lynch, became president ofBabson College. Barefoot is the firstgraduate of the college to serve aspresident. … James O. Ortiz, former vice president of academicand student affairs at Bunker HillCommunity College, became presi-dent of Southern Maine TechnicalCollege, replacing Wayne Ross, whoretired after 23 years. … Timothy D.

Crowley became president ofNorthern Maine Technical Collegeafter serving 11 years as academicdean. … Amherst College PresidentTom Gerety announced he wouldresign in June 2003 after nine years on the job. … Former MexicanPresident Ernesto Zedillo wasappointed director of Yale Univer-sity’s Center for the Study ofGlobalization. … Former U.S.Secretary of Agriculture Dan

Glickman was named director ofHarvard University’s Institute ofPolitics. … Evelyn Hu-DeHart, former chair of Ethnic Studies at the University of Colorado-Boulder,became director of BrownUniversity’s Center for the Study of Race and Ethnicity in America.


First impressions are said to be

among the most important.

Job interviewers often make

hiring decisions within the first five

minutes of meeting a candidate. More

than half of voters, it is said, judge

political candidates by their appear-

ance. Consumers may select a car by

the way it looks before they know any-

thing about how it runs. The same has

been true of how students and their

families choose a college or university.

Many of us remember that first

visit to the college we thought might

be right for us. We really weren’t sure

about that institution until we stepped

onto the campus. The building facades,

the interiors, the quadrangle, the land-

scape, the sense of space and form all

made a big impression on us. It made

us think, “This is where I want to be,”

or, “I don’t think I’d like it here.”

Much has changed in the way stu-

dents select colleges. Today, in-depth

information is available to prospective

students online at the click of a mouse.

Virtual tours of the campus, telecon-

ferencing and other interactive experi-

ences are all used to inform and entice

students. But for many, that first per-

sonal visit to the college campus is

still the clincher. That first impression

often seals the deal.

Today’s campus architecture and

landscape architecture are taking on

new forms and functions that have a

profound impact not only on that first

impression (form) but also on the stu-

dent’s larger educational experience

(function). Many campuses are now

emphasizing the functional features

of their buildings as an additional tool

to recruit prospective students.

The function of buildings and land-

scape spaces on campuses is changing

to reflect new academic philosophies,

tighter budgets and global perspec-

tives. New designs stress the impor-

tance of utilizing renewable resources

and developing sustainable buildings

and landscapes. New buildings feature

interior flexibility, mixed uses and

multiple academic disciplines housed

together in an attempt to enhance

teaching and learning.

The demand for innovative educa-

tional experiences is driving innovative

design and, in turn, shaping a new

vernacular on campus.

Sustainability, flexibility, individu-

ality, educational interfacing, interdis-

ciplinary academic design … Are the

new ideas improving higher education?

Or do they go too far—throwbacks to

the era of “open classrooms,” individual

academic programs and degrees in

General Studies? Are we losing the

structure and academic purity believed

so vital to the educational experience?

Are we back in 1966 again?

Whatever your opinion, we hope

the articles and essays herein leave

you with new ideas and firmer resolve

about the importance of architecture

and landscape architecture in improv-

ing today’s educational experience, for

the campus provides not only a first

impression, but a lasting impression

as well.

Robert A. Weygand is president

and CEO of the New England Board

of Higher Education and publisher

of CONNECTION.


First Impressions of Campus Form and FunctionROBERT A.WEYGAND

M E S S A G E F R O M T H E P R E S I D E N T

The function of buildings and

landscape spaces on campuses is

changing to reflect new academic

philosophies, tighter budgets and

global perspectives.

The typical high school graduate, born in 1984 or 1985, will be entering college in the fall,never having known a world without comput-

ers, cell phones or TVs. The way this student will beeducated is remarkably different from the way manyof us over age 30 were.

There is a fundamental change occurring in highereducation—a pedagogic shift from teaching to learning.This shift is being driven by considerable and signifi-cant research into educational theory, behavioral andcognitive sciences and human development.

In the past, a common mode of teaching was lecturing. Today, many faculty facilitate discussions. The question “What should I teach to my students?”has evolved to “What should my students know?” and “How should my students learn?”

Students today are encouraged to be more proac-tive and to take responsibility for their own learning.They have more experiential and hands-on educationthan their parents. Most of us, in college, were expect-

ed to work independently as individuals; many stu-dents today work collaboratively in small groups.Creating a community of learners is an important goalof many educators.

Other forces are also changing higher education.The revolution in computer and communications technology has affected everything from groundskeep-ing to teaching to research. Off-campus and distancelearning initiatives are proliferating. Institutions compete intensely for students and for financialresources. State and federal requirements on collegesgrow apace. Through all this, there is an increasingneed to maintain, renovate or replace aging facilitiesand equipment.

At the same time, building designs are evolving to support the changes taking place in education. The relationship between education and architectureis symbiotic—one affects the other. Building designcan support and advance educational change, or itcan hinder change.

In the not too distant past, architects created build-ings for colleges and universities that were designed to meet the needs of specific programs or individualfaculty. It was assumed that these programs wouldremain constant, and buildings were constructedaccordingly. They were solid and often inflexible.

Today, in higher education, the assumption is that programs, teaching, research and technology will change over time, sometimes imperceptibly, oftendramatically, and that buildings must be designed toaccommodate change. The most successful academicbuildings are those that allow rational and plannedphysical and programmatic change.

Building featuresHere are some of the effects on facilities caused bythe changes in teaching and learning and the impactof education and architecture on each other.

Atria. Many new campus buildings are designedaround an atrium. Originally, a Roman concept, thesespaces were large open-air gardens in the center of residential buildings. Today, atria are large, dramatic,enclosed spaces, usually the focal point of a buildingdesign. There is an interesting, and perhaps accidental,

ARTHUR J. LIDSKY

The Haas Library complex at Western Connecticut StateUniversity features a five-story glass atrium. The library wasdesigned by Best Joslin and built by Konover ConstructionCorp. Photo copyright © by Richard Cadan.


F O R M f o l l o w s F U N C T I O N ?

Innovations in Education Demand Flexible Building Design


confluence of architects’ desires to create a dramaticand organizing space for their design and educators’desires to create collaboration and community space.

Colleges are often initially cautious about construct-ing an atrium because of added costs, but manyembrace the concept when the programmatic possibili-ties become clear. This space can be an exciting focalpoint for a variety of events, such as gatherings, lec-tures, presentations, musical and theatrical activities,luncheons and dinners and study—as well as a space for formal andinformal student and faculty collaboration.

Smart classrooms.

The most noticeablearchitectural changecaused by pedagogicalshifts has been in thesize, configuration andtechnological outfitting ofteaching spaces—class-rooms and laboratories.

“Smart classrooms”are equipped with ceiling-mounted digitalprojectors that are connected to the com-puter, DVD, VCR, insti-tutional network and the Internet. “Glorifiedoverhead projectors!”say some who see thetechnology reinforcingthe lecture style ofteaching. But othersbelieve the technologyenhances a skilledinstructor’s ability to entice students to participate in the learning experience.

A lecture style of teaching requires that the studentsface the front of the room, and most of the interaction is with the teacher. A teacher who uses the discussionformat needs to have students facing each other, semi-nar style around a large table or in a circle or u-shape,to facilitate interaction. The amount of space requiredfor a discussion-style room that provides more flexiblefurniture and furniture arrangements is more than theamount needed for a lecture-style classroom.

On many campuses, there are few small class-rooms and many large classrooms. This historicalimbalance has become more noticeable as facultyhave moved toward teaching class sections that aresmaller and more conducive to the seminar and dis-cussion style of interaction. The appropriate roomsize enhances this style of teaching, creating a closeconnection among participants and an informal intimacy that fosters dialogue and debate.

Lab design. A national movement to improve science, math and engineering programs and facilitiesis propelling dramatic changes in laboratory design.An informal national alliance of individuals and orga-nizations committed to strengthening undergraduateeducation called Project Kaleidoscope (PKAL), hasbeen instrumental in encouraging programmatic andarchitectural change on many campuses.

PKAL’s argument is that learning science and engineering requires a lab-rich, hands-on, experiential,

project-oriented collabo-ration of students andfaculty learning anddoing research togeth-er—especially at theundergraduate level. This style of teaching,learning and collabora-tion requires a differenttype of laboratory envi-ronment than typicallyseen in the past.

Large, long, labbenches fixed to thefloor are being replacedwith more flexible, andin many cases, moveablebenches designed forgroups of two to fourstudents working togeth-er. In addition, largerlabs are requiredbecause, often, the labsare designed with both a discussion area withmovable seating as wellas a lab bench environ-ment with small groupbenches. The goal is to capitalize on the“teachable moment” by

enabling faculty and students to move back and forthbetween discussion and experimentation.

Science and engineering disciplines now requirelarger buildings for a variety of reasons including theneed to provide the larger, more flexible labs, but alsoto provide student project and research space, at boththe graduate and undergraduate levels, as well as spacefor increasingly more sophisticated equipment. As fac-ulty adopt the idea that students learn more effectivelyby “doing” science and engineering, appropriate spaceneeds to be provided for that hands-on experience.

Meeting rooms. Architects are finding creativeways to provide informal small group meeting and collaboration areas in contemporary academic build-ings by designing them into alcoves within corridors,on open stairway landings and at the ends of corri-dors. These spaces are usually outfitted with movabletables and chairs for four to six people, network

Flexible lab space at Boston College’s Higgins Hall allowsresearchers to work closely with students and provide a hands-on approach to the science disciplines. The lab was designed by Shepley Bulfinch Richardson and Abbott of Boston. Photo copyright © by Woodruff/Brown Photography, 2002.

ports, power outlets and whiteboards or chalkboards.These resources promote spontaneous collaboration.

Faculty offices. Faculty offices are increasinglyrecognized as both personal workspaces and teachingenvironments affected by pedagogical and technologi-cal change. Today, the faculty office may be used as a seminar or meeting room for small groups of stu-dents. In addition, computer, keyboard, monitor andmouse have superseded the use of pen, paper andtypewriter. Along with the computer have comeperipherals including printers, external drives andscanners. And in some disciplines, it is not uncom-mon to have two computers in the office. All thisrequires a reevaluation of the size, use and configura-tion of the office. When multiplied across an entirecollege campus, the need for more faculty office space has a significant impact.

Libaries. The most dramatic change in campusbuildings is being seen in the library. Libraries areevolving from quiet warehouses to very specializedservice facilities melding books, technology, onlineresources and active collaboration spaces to supportvarious teaching and research needs. The changes are both internally driven by educational reform andexternally driven by changes in technology, costs and copyright laws. Today, no one can say what thelibrary of the future will look like. Because of themore varied demands placed on it, it is unlikely thatthe future library will require less space. But it will be a different and much more animated place.

Seeing starsOne trend in campus architecture that requires care-ful implementation is the increasing use of “star archi-tects” to provide highly visible, cutting-edge buildings.Colleges increasingly seek out these stars for a varietyof reasons, ranging from the ambition to create acampus building that is fresh, different and innova-tive, to the enhancement of name recognition andbranding, to the need to increase fundraising, and most of all, because it’s exciting.

Many of these standalone gems of buildings are func-tioning works of art that often are singularly differentfrom others on campus. For some types of college anduniversity activities, such a facility can be quite energiz-ing. But for most academic purposes, they are not appro-priate. All evidence supports the idea that programs,teaching, research and technology in higher educationwill change. Buildings must be designed to accommo-date such change. A building conceived as a work ofart—a piece of sculpture—won’t be changed easily.

Most colleges and universities know by now that ifthey don’t change, they won’t improve—and may notsurvive. What they may not know is that change can beenhanced or thwarted by the way in which it is antici-pated and reflected in campus architecture and design.

Arthur J. Lidsky is president of Dober Lidsky

Craig & Associates, a Belmont, Mass., consulting

firm that specializes in campus and facility

planning for schools, colleges and universities.

High-WiredUniversities are trying to make educational technology readilyavailable and easy to operate in all new classrooms. This facultyconference room at the HarvardGraduate School of Education,designed by The StubbinsAssociates of Cambridge, Mass.,features careful design of podiums,lecterns and wall-mounted controlpanels. With consistent user inter-faces and interactive touch screens,the facilities provide simplicity of operation and eliminate the need for multiple remote controls.A centrally located phone connectsfaculty to a media center to imme-diately address any technical issuesthat arise.

Faculty conference room at the Harvard Graduate School ofEducation designed by The Stubbins Associates of Cambridge Mass.Photo by Warren Jagger.

CONNECTION SPRING 2002 15

a B U I L D I N G l i k e a T R E E , a C A M P U S l i k e a F O R E S T

WILLIAM McDONOUGH, MICHAEL BRAUNGART AND DIANE DALE

Sustainable Design Comes to New England Higher Education

Among all the achievements of his long and productive life, Thomas Jefferson wanted to be remembered for three things. They are

inscribed on a stone obelisk over his grave atMonticello. “Here was buried Thomas Jefferson,” the inscription reads, “Author of the Declaration ofIndependence, Of the Statute of Virginia for ReligiousFreedom, And Father of the University of Virginia.”This from a man whose distinguished career includedeight years as president of the United States. ForJefferson, his activities were not as important as thethings that he designed, which suggests a mind keenlyattuned to the ways in which the thoughtful and poeticordering of things could create a vital legacy.

While we daily experience the legacies of theDeclaration of Independence and the Statute ofVirginia for Religious Freedom, which matured into the Bill of Rights, one can see the physical embodi-ment of Jeffersonian design on the campus of theUniversity of Virginia. Moved by the belief that publiceducation is the keystone of a democratic republic,

Jefferson secured land for the university, developed itscurriculum, pursued distinguished professors, stockedthe library and perhaps most importantly, designedthe campus.

His “little academical village” was laid out around a central, tree-lined lawn. Students and professors livedin sturdy brick residences linked by open arcades tothe stately presence of the central Rotunda, whichhoused the library and classrooms. At the other end of the lawn, one could gaze out on the nearby peaks ofthe Blue Ridge Mountains. The campus was, and is, abeautiful place—by design. Jefferson’s collegial villagewas intended to be an inspiring setting for the dynamicactivity of a community, a place where students andfaculty could mingle, gather, learn and create a vibrantacademic institution. It remains a living monument tothat ideal, and we see in the quads of universities fromNew England to the Pacific that it is a much-copiedicon of American campus architecture.

What legacy is today’s campus architecture leavingfor the future? As in other regions, development onmany New England campuses over the past 30 yearshas tended to be more random than planned. Followingthe same patterns of sprawl that have defined mostdevelopment in our era, the placement of new campusbuildings often separated them from the life of the university, while a hodgepodge of architectural stylesclashed with the vocabulary of the historic quad. Lost,or at least diminished, is a fundamental asset of acade-mic life in New England: the experience of communityon a campus uniquely and beautifully attuned to itssurroundings. In recent years, an evolving understand-ing of the environmental impacts of new buildings hasfurther separated campus architecture from a legacyuniversities can wholeheartedly embrace.

The University of Rhode Island, for one, is trying tochange that. There, planning is underway for a clusterof new buildings many hope will mend the fracturebetween forward-thinking new development and the his-toric campus. Though pencils have not yet been put topaper, planners foresee the new buildings as the founda-tion of a sustainable academic community, a model of“green design” that will project the values of environ-

Students at Oberlin’s Lewis Center for Environmental Studies are greeted by a soaring atrium, which allows ample daylight to enter the building. Photo copyright © by Barney Taxel, 2002.



mental responsibility while enhancing the traditionalassets of New England campus life. This melding ofsustainability with strategic planning is not only theshape of things to come in campus architecture but thesignal of a deeper cultural shift that may well changeour understanding of literacy.

What is sustainability?Sustainability is a descriptive term for a range of cultur-al responses to the environmental impacts of economicgrowth. It is often defined as “development that meetsthe needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”Described in this way, sustainability is just a minimumprecondition of survival—not very inspiring. More richly defined, it is an intelligent, creative and hopefulstance towards the future. In Jeffersonian terms, wemight say sustainability is an appreciation for the legacyof one’s designs—an interest in the long-term health of nature and human culture.

Sustainable design puts that sensibility into practice.Conventional approaches to sustainable design focusprimarily on outlining strategies for architectural sys-tems that make efficient use of energy and materials.Sustainable land planning and site design strategiesemphasize an environmentally responsive use of vege-tation, water and other natural systems. While thesestrategies represent a marked improvement over landdevelopment patterns of the past decades, they tend to rely on minimizing the human impact on the envi-ronment, striving only to be “less bad.”

And being less bad, or in this case, being more effi-cient, is not necessarily good. This is especially truewhen it comes to selecting architectural materials. Mostbuilding materials are not designed with human healthin mind. Many commonly contain toxic substances suchas formaldehyde and volatile organic compounds, whichoff-gas into building interiors. In energy-efficient build-ings, which tend to be tightly sealed to reduce heatingand cooling costs, toxic chemicals accumulate in con-centrations that make indoor air quality on averagethree times worse than the most noxious urban air. In buildings such as these, one can only hope for a draft of cool New England air.

We do not see sustainable design as being about efficiency. Instead, we encourage an affirmative designagenda, one that allows the human impact on the envi-ronment to be positive, vital and good. This new concep-tion of sustainable design finds its roots in the desire todiscover fit and fitting spaces for human habitation—thedesire to become native to one’s place. For us, naturalcommunities and ecosystems serve as models of interde-pendence, with each member relying on and contribut-ing to the well-being of the whole. Informing gooddesign, this vision affirms the possibility of developinghealthy and creatively interactive relationships betweenthe natural environment and human settlements.

The design process begins with an assessment of the natural systems of a place—its landforms,

hydrology, vegetation and climate. Combining anunderstanding of building and energy systems with thesite’s natural flows of sun, wind, water and vegetation,designers discover an “essay of clues” that suggestsappropriate patterns for development of the landscape.Building materials are selected with the same care;they are chosen only after careful assessments of avariety of characteristics, ranging from their designchemistry to the environmental impacts of their use,harvesting or manufacture. With this emphasis on sustaining and enhancing the qualities of the locallandscape, the resulting architectural and communitydesigns meet exceptional levels of performance andcreate beautiful, healthy environments for human andnatural communities.

Life-support systemWe like to think that every landscape can be fecund,every building a life-support system. The AdamJoseph Lewis Center for Environmental Studies at Oberlin College is such a building. Designed toreverse environmental stresses and restore the locallandscape, the building is like a tree: Enmeshed inlocal energy flows, it accrues solar income, filterswater—absorbing it quickly and releasing it slowly—and creates habitat for living things.

With 3,700 square feet of photovoltaic panels, theLewis Center will one day be a net energy exporter. Its other sustainable design features include geothermalwells for heating and cooling, daylighting and fresh airdelivery throughout, an extended botanical garden thatrecovers nutrients from circulating water on-site, and alandscape that offers social gathering spaces, instruc-tional gardens and orchards and a newly planted forest

Plants are instrumental in the “living machine” water-treatmentprocess at the Lewis Center. Photo copyright © by Barney Taxel, 2002.

Made of RecycledClassroomsWhen Middlebury College began replacing its old science center with a spanking newcollege library this spring, builders plannedto recycle 98 percent of the old six-storybuilding that even college officials hadreferred to as an “architectural mistake.”

An onsite “crusher” is grinding the 35-year-old science center’s 600 tons of concrete intoproject fill to be used for the new library con-struction and on roads. Limestone exteriorwalls will be salvaged for reuse, and copper,steel, aluminum, glass and wood will be recycled. Much of the center’s old scienceequipment has already been donated toschools in Vermont and New Hampshire.

Middlebury in 2000 became the first U.S.college to adopt specific environ-mental policies on construction anddemolition waste. College officialssay the estimated $800,000 cost ofrecycling the science center is com-parable to the cost of demolishingthe building and shipping the wasteto a landfill.

The $40 million, 135,000-square-foot library is expected to open inthe fall of 2004. – J.O.H.

grove, which has begun the long process of re-establish-ing the habitat of the building’s northern Ohio location.

The building and its surroundings have become thecenter of a learning community. The comfortable sunlitclassrooms and public gathering areas encourage min-gling, communication and reflection. Inside and out,the building offers students and teachers opportunitiesfor learning about the natural world. In fact, encourag-ing fluency in the language of natural systems—whatOberlin Professor of Environmental Studies and PoliticsDavid Orr calls “ecological literacy”—was the guidingintention of the building’s design. As Orr has written,architecture always serves a pedagogical function; thedesign of buildings teaches us how we use resources,how we relate to nature and what our culture values. It is absurd, he believes, to teach young people aboutthe world in buildings that have no relation to their sur-roundings and express ignorance of how nature works.Instead, the Lewis Center teaches ecological literacy—the cultural currency of this new century, and the next.

This is an entirely new, restorative legacy—one thatis within the grasp of any campus building or landscapein New England, old or new. On the campus of theWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution, for example, weare renovating a 17-room, 120 year-old Victorian sum-mer home, transforming it into a model of sustainabledesign while preserving its historic character. And atURI, the university community will be determining theshape and feel of new buildings, imagining what fits inthe landscape of coastal Rhode Island.

Seeking a sustainable campus, they will probably belooking at the region’s natural energy flows, its soil andvegetation and climate. New England’s rich tradition ofvernacular architecture might be evoked, or the buildingcould be a contemporary design that suggests the uni-versity’s future relationship to human culture andnature in the region.

Though similar design principles will be applied,the URI sustainable community will not be a carboncopy of Oberlin’s. Sustainable design is not an ideologythat imposes foregone conclusions on a setting. But asplanning proceeds, students and professors at URI justmay decide they too want a building like a tree—and acampus like a New England forest.

William McDonough, an architect, industrial

designer and educator, is the founding principal

of William McDonough + Partners, Architecture

and Community Design. Michael Braungart, a

chemist and university professor, is founder of EPEA

Internationale Umweltforschung GmbH, a scientific

consultancy based in Hamburg, Germany. They

are co-founders of McDonough Braungart Design

Chemistry, a product and process development

firm. Diane Dale is Associate Partner and Director

of Community Design at William McDonough +

Partners. McDonough and Braungart’s new book,

Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make

Things, was published in 2002 by North Point Press.


The old Middlebury Science Center.

Architect Peter Kuttner is talking about trends in

campus architecture: “The latest thing is ‘live and

learn’—putting classrooms right in the freshman

dorms, so you go to class with the people you live

with. My son was in one. He liked it because he

could go to class in his pajamas.”

Architect Chad Floyd reports on the new recre-

ation center at Tulane (which boasts a Department

of Campus Recreation “to satisfy your fitness and

leisure needs”): “They have two pools—an outdoor

and an indoor. Kids sit around the outdoor pool

sipping piña coladas.”

Perhaps you had a father like mine, who admon-ished me that college isn’t about fun and games.Sorry, Dad. These days, college isn’t just an

education—it’s a lifestyle.No one knows that better than college and universi-

ty administrators—especially the directors of admis-sions, who are on the frontline of the competition forprospective students. They know that the size of theapplicant pool and the eventual admissions yield fre-quently depend on one factor: the campus tour. Andthat means that the weapon of choice in the marketingwars is architecture, specifically architecture thatmatches the expectations of prospective students.

“With the dramatic rise in tuition,” observes JamesCrissman, a Watertown, Mass., architect and consultantto academic institutions embarking on building pro-jects, “you might think the logical response would bemore Spartan facilities, to show that you’re holdingcosts down. Instead the opposite is true. Students want the most for their money.”

Indeed, today’s students are sophisticated con-sumers who shop for colleges the way they shop for anything else. Colleges have responded with equalsophistication, hiring celebrity architects and focusingon facilities that offer the cushy amenities that studentsexpect: posh dorms resembling condos; restaurant-likedining facilities with satellite “bistros”; recreation cen-ters resembling health clubs, complete with juice bars.With the exception of an uptick in laboratory construc-tion, the focus has been almost entirely on what mightbe called “lifestyle buildings,” which, as Peter Kuttner,

president of Cambridge Seven Associates in Cambridge,Mass., points out, also happen to be appealing “namingopportunities” for prospective donors.

Branding, lifestyle, naming opportunities … it wasn’t always this way. Many New England campusesare blessed with beautiful buildings that grew from other impulses. Architecture had an unquestioned place in cultural and intellectual life; some educatorsalso believed building design could contribute to moralas well as scholastic development—that it could even beinspirational. “Edward Thring, the Victorian headmasterof Uppingham in England, commented that ‘to have agood school, a man had to have good buildings,’” notesWilliam Morgan, a professor of architectural history atWheaton College who has studied campus architecture.“It was a pervasive sentiment in the 19th century.Educators were very conscious of civic responsibility.”

Others believed that good architecture couldsecure a place for their institutions in the intellectualfirmament. “As president of Princeton,” says Morgan,“Woodrow Wilson chose the Gothic style for the cam-pus, saying that with that simple move, he had ‘addeda thousand years to the history of Princeton.’”

But “adding history” eventually fell out of fashion.Following World War II, the GI Bill opened higher edu-cation to waves of new students, and colleges neededspace fast. The prevailing Modern style, a relatively lessexpensive style of architecture, allowed colleges tobuild more for less by touting the maxim that less ismore. Modernism also matched the growing spirit ofintellectual freedom; a progressive institution demand-ed progressive buildings. Like Le Corbusier’s CarpenterCenter at Harvard and Eero Saarinen’s hockey rink atYale, these tended to be buildings that deliberatelydefied the architectural traditions of the campus.

Perhaps inevitably, architectural defiance in turn fell out of fashion, following trends in design but also in response to an increasingly conservative student population. “Students are extremely conservative—shockingly so,” observes Chad Floyd, a partner inCenterbrook Architects in Essex, Conn. “They are themost conservative voices on campus committees andthe most determined protectors of tradition.”

ELIZABETH S. PADJEN

From Celebrity Architects to Luxury Dorms, Colleges Make Building Decisions in an Attempt to Draw Students and Support

C A M P U S A R C H I T E C T U R Ei s C A M P U S M A R K E T I N G


When the last of the baby boomers passed tradition-al college age, campus administrators confronted seri-ous demographic challenges. “Marketing” took hold ineducational parlance and in campus building decisions.For example, Floyd notes that prospective communitycollege students are attracted to buildings that look cor-porate, suggesting the work world that some of themcome from and to which many of them aspire. Afternearly two decades of marketing experience, it seemsthat colleges and universities have learned importantlessons. The difference today is that their target audi-ences have learned their lessons, too, and now comefrom a consumerist culture that makes them verydemanding customers.

Colleges are quick to adopt what works for the com-petition. “The strength of many small colleges has beentheir sense of community,” Kuttner notes. “Now the big-ger institutions that previously promoted their academicofferings are starting to focus on community.” “Lifestylebuildings” can solve that problem, instantly providingappealing communal and social spaces. Others are usingarchitecture to stand out from the competition. TheUniversity of Cincinnati is nationally known for its col-lection of new buildings by celebrity architects such asFrank Gehry, Michael Graves and Peter Eisenman. NowMIT is developing its own collection: with new projectsunder construction by Gehry, Fumihiko Maki andSteven Holl, it seems determined to return to its postwararchitectural heyday when its Kresge Auditorium andchapel by Eero Saarinen and Baker Hall dormitory byAlvar Aalto attracted international attention. But it’shard not to see a preoccupation with commissioning anew Gehry building as a somewhat more expensive ver-sion of, say, a student’s preoccupation with acquiring aNorth Face fleece or Prada shoes. Despite protestationsabout pursuing good design and good value, ultimatelyboth come down to wanting what all the other kids have.

With the growing tendency to see campuses as three-dimensional brochures and buildings as photo-ops forvirtual tours on Web sites, it’s refreshing to talk to PaulLeBlanc, president of Marlboro College, where there is

no sports program and the 320-member student bodyrecently voted against putting cable TV in the dorms.Marlboro is in the midst of an ambitious building pro-gram, with new structures by Deborah Berke, TurnerBrooks, Brian Mackay-Lyons, Roc Caivano and DanScully—all well-known in the architectural academy, but hardly brand names. “We started by posing threequestions,” LeBlanc recalls. “How should a serious intel-lectual community approach this process? How shouldwe respond to the Vermont ethic of small is better? Howcan we respect the vernacular? The goal is to build inharmony with the intellectual tradition of this place.”

LeBlanc acknowledges that Marlboro, like all smallinstitutions, is competing for students but says that marketing has not been the primary motivation. Cynicsmight suggest that Marlboro is only the most recentexample of the famed Vermont brand extension, butLeBlanc’s claim is borne out by the fact that no photosof the new buildings are yet on the college’s Web site.

Marketing breeds cynicism. As the academic worldemulates the business world and gets caught up in thenever-ending pursuit of customer satisfaction (“to satisfyyour fitness and leisure needs”), educators should look to the work of their colleagues, John MacArthur, formerdean of the Harvard Business School, and RobertEdwards, former president of Bowdoin College. Both are legendary for their advocacy of architecture as ameans of creating community, combining pedagogicalvision with design excellence to promote a sense of community and to sustain the tradition of the “academicvillage.” Great architecture—buildings that are inventive,that fit the needs of their occupants, and that demon-strate an enduring civic responsibility to their environ-ment—comes from the passion of individuals. Greatacademic buildings are the last bastion of symbolicarchitecture that reflects our intellectual traditions and highest humanitarian values. After all, no one isbuilding cathedrals anymore.

Elizabeth S. Padjen is an architect and editor of

ArchitectureBoston magazine.

MIT’s 224 Albany Street Graduate Dormitory designed by the Cambridge, Mass.-based S/L/A/M Collaborative includes a house master’s penthouse apartment with city views. Photo copyright © by Woodruff/Brown Photographers, 2002.

The simple Vernacular-style “Out of the Way” dorm at MarlboroCollege, where the main academic building was once a barnand the admissions building a milking parlor. Photo courtesy of Cullen Schneider.


Think of New England higher education and you probably think of ivy-coveredbrick. Or if you’re feeling cynical, perhaps 1950s concrete. But the built environment of New England’s college campuses is far more diverse, more

complex, more daring, more educational than the stereotype. And it’s changing fastthanks to profound forces such as consumerization among students, town-gownrelations, historic preservation and sustainability. Following are a few examples of recent campus building projects that together offer some sense of the shape ofthings to come …

Learning Resource Center, Manchester Community College,Manchester, Conn.Completed: August 2000Architect: Centerbrook Architects and Planners,LLC, Centerbrook, Conn.

Manchester Community College’s 113,000-square-foot

Learning Resource Center is at the new heart of the

campus. A two-story glass bridge connects the

Learning Resource Center to the Lowe Building’s

administrative offices and classrooms. The shiny glass

and modernistic details of the two-story oval gallery

express Manchester’s commitment to high-tech educa-

tion in support of Connecticut’s economy. Splaying out

from the two-story gallery are two rectangular wings

in traditional red brick, containing a library, class-

room and lab space, as well as faculty offices. Their

flat roofs are punctuated by large clerestory windows

that raise ceilings and brighten walls with natural

light. Classrooms and labs contain teacher worksta-

tions equipped with state-of-the-art video and audio

presentation systems, Web access, cable television, document camera and a user-friendly, touch-

screen control panel. A theme throughout the facility is that every space is a potential learning

space. Main pedestrian passageways are art galleries. Nooks, crannies and lounge spaces are

furnished with comfortable study furniture.

Special thanks to the Society of College and University Planning (SCUP), especially Solutions Designer Marc Johns, who generously aided CONNECTION in collecting examples of interesting campus architecture. SCUP used the exercise of gathering information for CONNECTION via the World Wide Web as a test of a pilot project for collecting and sharinginformation about projects at higher education institutions worldwide. SCUP is online at www.scup.org. Thanks also toCapelin Communications of New York City, which helped initiate CONNECTION’S arrangement with SCUP.

The entrance tower from the courtyard in the early evening. Photo copyright © by Jeff Goldberg/Esto.

t h e S H A P E o f T H I N G St o C O M E : a P H O T O E S S AY


Barus & Holley Additionand Renovation, Brown University,Providence, R.I.Completed: September 2000Architect: Payette Associates, Boston, Mass.

The infill addition and renovation of Brown

University’s Barus & Holley building and devel-

opment of a campus’s central pedestrian walk-

way, Manning Walk, fills the courtyard formed

by three existing buildings to form a coherent

engineering complex. The project integrates

disparate building elevations, creates a unifying

entry lobby linking adjacent buildings, allows

handicapped-accessible passage between existing lecture halls and applies consistent fixtures and

finishes to coordinate spaces stylistically. The project also creates a “front door” for engineering

while developing Manning Walk. Landscaping and an entry plaza form a focal point elevating

department identity and clarifying overall campus circulation. The project’s delicately inserted

form increases density on a central campus while reinforcing the formal campus plan. In keeping

with the Americans with Disabilities Act, a gracefully integrated ramp scheme allows access to

every teaching and lab space.

Wilbur Cross Building, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Conn.Completed: July 2001Architect: Arbonies King Vlock Architects, Branford, Conn.

Intent on applying standards of efficiency and accessi-

bility to the delivery of student services, UConn chal-

lenged the architects at Arbonies King Vlock (AKV) to

come up with an innovative design solution for the

four-story, 110,000-square-foot Wilbur Cross Building.

AKV’s workshops with the university community iden-

tified businesslike accessibility, efficiency, flexibility

and a friendly attitude as the desired improvements

to the gold-domed landmark at the center of campus.

Inspired by the collegiate Gothic doorways throughout

the campus, the architects created a playful and con-

temporary space with perforated stainless steel arches.

A skylit, two-story entrance lobby replaces a labyrinth

of narrow, windowless hallways. Moveable wood,

fabric and glass walls can be easily reconfigured for

future needs. The building was transformed

into an entirely wired center, where students take

care of business quickly and efficiently. Once time-

consuming, disheartening experiences with student

services have been eliminated by individualized,

consumer-friendly systems.

Arbonies King Vlock Architects was inspired by the campus’scollegiate Gothic doorways to create a playful, contemporary,skylit space in the lobby. Photo by Timothy Hursley.

The new entrance to the engineering complex clarifies the axial strength of Manning Walk. Photo copyright © by Jeff Goldberg/Esto.


International Center for Finance/Skinner-Trowbridge House, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.

Completion: August 2000Architect: Helpern Architects, New York City, NY

University-sponsored institutes organized around

world-class professionals and lecturers are often

housed in gracious mansions that confer heritage

and status on the programs. The Yale School of

Management established the International Center for

Finance to consolidate its prominent role in research

of global finance and economics and acquired the

170-year-old Skinner-Trowbridge House for the insti-

tute’s home. Originally the home of New Haven’s

mayor, the Greek Revival house had fallen into

disrepair when Yale acquired it. The university com-

missioned Helpern Architects to restore it for a new

mission as headquarters of the center and a grand

home for distinguished visiting dignitaries. Helpern

reclaimed much of the original interior, recreating

and refurbishing prominent historic features on the

main floor and grand staircase. The architects also

extended the basement, reconfiguring portions of the

house to yield offices and meeting rooms, and created

an ADA-accessible entrance and elevator. Outside, the

firm rebuilt the monumental steps on the streetside

portico and recreated a century-old knot garden.

Williams College Unified Science Center, Williams College,Williamstown, Mass.Completed: December 2000Architect: Einhorn Yaffee Prescott Architecture& Engineering, P.C., Albany, N.Y.

Complex multidisciplinary research projects

like mapping the human genome sequence

require adaptable, automated and spacious

laboratories that simultaneously meet the

needs of the biochemist and physicist. Flexible

laboratories feature mobile workstations.

Sophisticated infrastructure is necessary to maintain this state-of-the-art environment. Teaching

and research laboratories must accommodate educators and students with private offices for

professors and classrooms and libraries that complement research activities. When science fac-

ulty at Williams College compared the laboratory space in their century-old buildings to that of

peer institutions, they knew changes were needed to remain competitive. Nine academic science

departments and libraries were spread across four buildings. This system did not support the

college’s interdisciplinary programs in fields like biochemistry. Williams officials undertook the

largest project in the college’s history and consolidated the laboratories and libraries of all the

science departments into the Unified Science Center. A 119,000-square-foot addition marries

new and old buildings that house offices, classrooms and lecture halls.

The east facade of the mansion shows the restored ceremonialstairs and double-height Ionic columns of the east portico. To theleft, the south portico features fluted Doric columns and stone stepswith an iron balustrade. Photo copyright © by Peter Mauss/Esto.

The state-of-the-art Unified Science Center marries new and century-old structures to bring Williams science programs into the 21st century. Photo byFrank Giuliani, courtesy of Gilbane Building Co.


Marine Science Center,University of New England,Biddeford, Maine

Completion: August 2002Architect: Van Dam & Renner Architects,Portland, Maine

The University of New England,

located at the mouth of the Saco

River, sought to integrate sustainable

design practices in developing a

state-of-the-art marine mammal

rehabilitation facility combined

with marine science education

and research. The university’s

new 27,000-square-foot Marine

Research and Education Center

houses research and teaching labora-

tories with continuously flowing

seawater (up to 350 gallons per minute), exhibits, a marine mammal rehabilitation

facility, classrooms and faculty offices. The building was carefully sited to minimize

disruption of existing trees and topography. Energy-saving elements include daylight-

ing, sun shades, high-performance lighting and building envelope, solar pre-heat of

make-up ventilation air and natural convective ventilation.

Laboratory for Complex Systems, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.Completed: December 2001Architect: Cambridge SevenAssociates, Cambridge, Mass.

Teaching spaces are beginning to

mirror modern corporate research

facilities both in design and func-

tion. Barriers between faculty and

students are breaking down, with

open space and flexible teaching

environments contributing to

increased communications and

opportunities for learning. At MIT,

for example, a new Steelcase office

system, modified for academic lab

space, defines the labs, giving

students and faculty the ability

to quickly hang partitions, white-

boards and projection surfaces

throughout the space, while provid-

ing overhead access to power and data. The renovation and expansion of the historic

Guggenheim Aeronautics Laboratory resulted in new integrated teaching laboratories modeled

after real-world technological and engineering processes. The highly flexible space allows stu-

dents and faculty to work in modern team environments on projects of varying size and com-

plexity. The design reorganizes the 50,000-square-foot building and its maze of corridors to ease

communication between different teaching, research and lab activities as well as between students

and faculty. A new 6,000-square-foot, two-story hangar and design loft supports work on unusu-

ally large-scale aerospace assignments and adds new connections to all three main student levels.


Interior hall with clerestory windows. Photo by Van Dam & Renner Architects.

New hangar for large-scale and independent student projects. Photo by Nick Wheeler.

Laboratory with overhead seawater system. Photo byVan Dam & Renner Architects.


Searles Science Building, Bowdoin College, Brunswick, MaineCompleted: September 2001Architect: Cambridge Seven Associates, Cambridge, Mass.

Much of the college and university learning experience happens in social settings. New campus

buildings are facilitating these interactions by providing “unprogrammed” space outside the

classrooms, fully networked for social interaction and informal learning. The infill addition at

Bowdoin creates a common space and circulation

spine where people from different disciplines con-

nect with one another. The new space encourages

interaction between faculty and students, creating

far more space for informal learning, group work

and social gatherings. The renovation of the

historic 41,000-square-foot Searles Building

demonstrates how older campus buildings can

be successfully revitalized to accommodate the

requirements of current technology, accessibility

and function, while preserving their historic quali-

ties. The renovation aims to increase classroom

space, simplify circulation and integrate new

technology. A 2,000-square-foot, three-story infill

addition links the two wings and resolves multiple

level changes within the building. By adding a

new lobby at the base of the infill, and enlarging

the bridge and landings, a myriad of open spaces

are provided for informal gatherings, discussions

and study sessions.

Pratt Hall, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Mass.Completed: March 2001Architect: MDS/Miller Dyer Spears, Boston, Mass.

A comprehensive renovation of Mount Holyoke College’s 1908

Music Building adds up-to-date teaching spaces while preserv-

ing the building’s historic character. A glazed two-story addi-

tion provides large classroom and studio offices and presents

a vibrant, contemporary image along a path to residence halls

across a lake. The expanded library consolidates dispersed

collections, with a wood-paneled reading room and computer

areas overlooking a river landscape. The main entrance is

redesigned to retain its neo-Gothic portal while providing

universal access. The west entry opens into a new glazed two-

story lounge outside the library and classrooms. Reorganized

layout and circulation routes link detached program spaces

and increase building functionality. The challenge was to meet the universal access standards

of the Architectural Access Board of Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety while restor-

ing the building’s traditional character. The Gothic entrance portal is preserved with custom

doors, the sill raised to main floor level to eliminate interior steps. A ramped corridor, divided

by a half-height wall resembling a wave, connects split levels of the 1908 building and 1960

wing and provides handicapped access to an auditorium stage and backstage area. A new ele-

vator cut through former offices serves all four floors. A program in high-tech music teaching

uses state-of-the-art classrooms and studio offices with built-in media racks, audiovisual/data

projection, motorized screens, sliding whiteboards and programmable lighting. A Virtual

Practice Room simulates acoustics of diverse environments. New audiovisual systems, finishes,

stage and window treatments complement the restored Gothic trusses and ornate woodwork

of the auditorium.

The new infill addition skillfully marries new to old, connecting thetwo wings of the building and creating and a new front entrance onMaine Street. Photo by Steve Rosenthal.

Main entrance facade withrestored Gothic portal and slopedaccess sidewalk, and West facadewith new connector addition.Photo by John Horner.

Kids are frequenting some old New Englanddepartment stores again. But they’re not buyingCDs and jeans; they’re investing in certificates

and degrees. The University of Rhode Island and theUniversity of Massachusetts Dartmouth have pur-chased former retail space in historic downtown buildings—and refurbished them for educational uses.Boston University houses its School of HospitalityAdministration in a former Cadillac dealership. MaineCollege of Art, the Rhode Island School of Design andMontserrat College of Art have all converted vacantdowntown stores to gallery space. After HousatonicCommunity College spent $27 million renovating thedilapidated Hi-Ho mall in Bridgeport, Conn., enroll-ment grew so fast, administrators began looking formore space—this time, in a former Sears building.

College officials find rehabilitating old downtownstores attractive for several reasons. Fixing up an existing building can be more cost-efficient than buyingland and building from scratch. Town-gown relations are improved as the institution’s investment helps

reinvigorate the central business districts and strength-en community ties. The college can also show the community its commitment to the environment byapplying sustainable architecture practices to the site.And the inherent charm and history of the buildingsmarkets the whole institution. Plus, department storestended to be located right smack in the middle of down-towns. So, in their new lives, the buildings offer a centrallocation for a sometimes-overlooked student market.

But redeveloping antiquated buildings also presentschallenges. Will the building meet the standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act? How will newtechnologies be integrated? What about preserving the building’s architectural integrity? Are special permits or zoning required? Some examples:

Shepard Building, Providence, R.I.

From the 1870s to the 1970s, Shepard’s symbolized thevitality of downtown Providence. Residents would meetunder the Shepard Co. store clock on Westminster Streetor charge inside where they shopped until they dropped.

Just as the bustle of Shepard’sechoed the verve of Providence, the store’s 1974 closing confirmedthe city’s economic malaise.

Jump to the 1990s. The Univ-ersity of Rhode Island begins eyeing the deteriorated ShepardBuilding as the new location for itsCollege of Continuing Education.Though the college’s dean publiclyvoiced skepticism about the build-ing, URI hired the architecturalfirm of Presbrey and Torrado andthe old Shepard Building was gut-ted, refurbished and transformedinto URI’s Providence Campus at a cost of $34 million.

Today, the 272,000 square-footbuilding features 60 fiber-opticwired classrooms, a 30,000-volumelibrary, a 500-seat auditorium, science and language labs, a book-The clock outside the old Shepard’s department store was a favorite meeting spot in

downtown Providence. URI photo by Nora Lewis.


ALBERT E. NEAL

S T O R E S o f K N O W L E D G E

New England Colleges Are Turning Retail Space into Classrooms


store, even a full-service restaurant and a fitness center (as well as an experimental high school).

But it wasn’t easy. The building sat idle for twodecades and there was no roof. “When we first turnedon the heat, the floor started to move,” says Directorof Facilities and Operations Gary Lulli. “We had a lotof nails popping through the vinyl tile.” (Six yearslater, the nail problem remains.)

In addition, the old store’s support columns werepositioned every 16 to 18 feet in each direction, whichwould have put them right in the middle of the class-rooms, auditorium and lecture halls. “Columns in themiddle of offices are great because you can use themfor a chase for wiring and for fiber-optics,” says Lulli,“but in the middle of a classroom they’re not so good.”

But security has been a nagging concern since theproject’s inception. Many of the 4,000 studentsenrolled at the college are suburban women who workduring the day. Security officers are on duty 24 hoursa day at two of the building’s entrances. A third offi-cer patrols the Shepard Building by foot. Still, stu-dents tell local newspapers they fear muggers as theytrek from classroom to parking lot late at night.

Cherry & Webb, Fall River, Mass.

The 67,000 square-foot Cherry & Webb building in Fall River, Mass., captured the imagination of plan-ners at two New England institutions. Roger WilliamsUniversity initially expressed interest in leasing onefloor of the building for corporate training programs.But city and state officials favored a University ofMassachusetts Dartmouth plan to lease both the second and third floors for its Center for Professionaland Continuing Studies and the rest of the building for education and research purposes.

Restoration of the building, which had stood vacantsince 1995, is part of a larger effort to revitalize down-town Fall River, including a planned $46 million court-house across the street from the Cherry & Webb building.

The project, slated for completion in fall 2002, has highlighted the regulatory and political challengesinherent in downtown rebuilding. Officials chargedthat the building contractor began demolishing andstripping the building’s interior and façade beforesecuring the required permits, setting off a local political drama over the proper authority for permitsand fee waivers.

The building is attractive to higher educationadministrators because of its downtown location and proximity to local high schools and communitycolleges. Fall River’s economic boosters, meanwhile,see the university’s presence as a way to ensure dayand night student traffic, which equates to cash forthe community.

UMass Dartmouth has also given new academic life to the former Star Store in nearby New Bedford.The university’s arts programs share the 70,000-square-foot former store with Bristol Community College.

Sprague & Carleton Maple Furniture,

Keene, N.H.

Antioch New England Graduate School prides itself as a progressive, down-to-earth institution with a genuinecommitment to preserving the environment. School offi-cials like to talk about how Antioch preserves the bestof the past, while looking ahead to the future. No placeis this more evident than in the school’s new digs.

Established in Vermont in 1964, Antioch NewEngland moved to Keene, N.H. in 1974 and soon out-grew its facilities. The Sprague and Carleton factory

and showroom, where Frank L. Spragueand his partner William Carleton once pro-duced and sold rock maple porch rockersand settees, emerged as an ideal locationfor the growing school.

The Sprague and Carleton building was an eyesore and a waste of nearly sixacres of real estate. Antioch New England spent $4.7 million to gut and refurbish thebuilding, which is twice the size of thegraduate school’s former site and roomyenough to house all five of the graduateschool’s academic departments.

“The factory was abandoned foralmost nine years and the property wasessentially just sitting there deteriorating,”says Antioch President James Craiglow.“We were able to purchase and rehab thebuilding for under $50 a foot, which wasclearly more economical than buying landand starting from scratch.”

The old Cherry Webb building in Fall River, Mass., getting a facelift. Photo courtesy of Fall River Office of Economic Development.


The Sprague and Carleton restoration reflectsAntioch New England’s “greenhouse” approach toeducation— cultivating students through holisticteaching practices, which address the individual in relation to the community and the community to the student. Natural light and air circulate in every classroom and workspace and the design of the building coincides with the slopes and shapes of the surrounding landscape.

Antioch New England Graduate School took theiron door of Sprague and Carleton’s original wood kiln and molded it into one of the walls in the build-ing’s reception area. Other factory artifacts adorn the facility’s conference rooms. Says Craiglow: “There is some virtue in preserving bits and pieces of our history because it helps to explain our roots.We sometimes forget how important that is.”

Foster Building, Worcester, Mass.

The Boston-based Massachusetts College of Pharmacyand Health Sciences (MCPHS) rescued, rehabbed andrefurbished the historic Foster Building in downtownWorcester to be home to its innovative, three-year doctoral program.

The building was constructed in 1898 by AlbertLowell who designed and sold women’s hats andclothing from the site. The building at various timeshoused a skating rink, a bowling alley, office space

and cigar store. By the time, MCPHS bought theneglected building in 1999, it had suffered deteriora-tion and fire and water damage.

The architects hired to redesign the Foster building,Boston-based Steffian Bradley Associates, faced specialchallenges meeting modern standards. The $17.5 millionrenovation preserved much of the historic structure,including cast-iron pillars, red brick walls and a granitefoundation. But dozens of cast-iron beams, which hadbeen used to support the building’s four upper stories,crowded a new auditorium’s sightlines and had to berepositioned to support the floors in a more strategicdesign. Brick facades inserted over street-level windowswere torn away to bring light into the lobby area.

Today, the five-story, 60,000-square foot buildingcontains contemporary classrooms, an auditorium,library, study lounge, computer lab, teaching andresearch labs, student café, offices and support areasfor 400 students and 50 faculty and staff. The campusis organized vertically with teaching functions onfloors one through three and administrative andresearch functions on floors four and five. The base-ment houses student activities and support spaces.

The renovation of the building, renamed forHenrietta DeBenedictis, an alumnus who gave $2 mil-lion to help restore it, also allowed MCPHS to play arole in revitalizing the community.

Building Town-Gown Relations

The Foster building was deliberately designed withouta cafeteria so MCPHS students would patronize localshops and restaurants. MCPHS also benefits the cityby offering internships in community pharmacies andmedical facilities and addressing the medical needs ofurban residents.

That’s the kind of benefit that should keep host communities receptive to turning abandoned storesinto colleges despite the fact that colleges don’t paylocal property taxes. As Lulli says of URI’s move todowntown Providence: “Now, you’ve got 5,000 peopledirectly in the heart of downtown that you didn’t havethere before. You have 5,000 people who are indirectlypaying for parking, they’re going to eat, they might goout after work for a drink, they go shopping downtownor at the new mall.”

For colleges, the biggest benefit in rehabbing downtown retail landmarks may be what it says about the institution’s role in the life of the city. SaysCraiglow of Antioch’s move: “It made a statement thatwe were here to stay and that Keene was our home—our permanent home.”

Albert E. Neal was a NEBHE/CONNECTION intern

during spring 2002. He earned his master of fine

arts degree from Emerson College in May 2002.

By rehabbing the Foster Building, the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences helped revitalize downtownWorcester. Photo by Steve Dunwell.


Billion-dollar investments in public higher education don’t come easily in the State ofConnecticut—or anywhere in New England.

So, when in 1995, Connecticut Gov. John Rowland andthe state’s General Assembly approved the $1 billioncomprehensive infrastructure improvement and privatesupport incentive program known as UConn 2000, this was something bordering on the revolutionary.

Looking back after seven years of dramatic transfor-mation, it seems as if the arguments for the initiativewere so compelling that theyalmost made themselves. Butit wasn’t that simple. It tookcourage on the part of ourelected leaders, advocacy by alumni and thousands of other concerned citizens,leadership by a committedboard of trustees and quitelikely the prominence of our basketball programs—including our women’s bas-ketball team’s NCAA nationalchampionship—to build thepolitical support needed tomake this investment.

At the heart of the issuewas a compelling need. The recessions of the early1980s and early 1990s severe-ly impacted Connecticut,leading to cycles of budgetrescissions and endlessly“deferred” maintenance. Our main library was literallyfalling apart, covered in plas-tic wrapping to keep bricks from falling on passersby.Classrooms were in a state of disrepair. The condition ofresidence halls ranged from barely adequate to abysmal.Departments would try to keep candidates for facultyjobs from seeing laboratory facilities until the last possi-ble moment for fear that the sorry condition of the labswould drive away applicants. It didn’t always work.

But by the mid 1990s, another dynamic was emerg-ing. The earlier recessions hastened Connecticut’stransformation to a postindustrial, knowledge-basedeconomy. For Connecticut to retain existing business-es and attract new firms, it clearly needed a publicuniversity equipped to prepare a highly skilled profes-sional workforce and to stem a “brain drain” that hadseen a higher proportion of high school graduatesleave Connecticut for college than any other stateexcept Alaska.

Members of Connecticut’sbaby boom generation, nowsending their own childrento college, were searching forvalue—a reasonably-priced,high-quality alternative toexpensive private institu-tions or out-of-state collegesthat were increasingly out ofthe reach of middle-incomeConnecticut families.

The media caught on to the story of UConn’sdilapidated facilities, whichhelped generate supportfrom public-spirited citizenswith nothing to gain but an enhanced sense of pridein their state’s public institu-tions. Thus, in June 1995, theGeneral Assembly approvedUConn 2000, providingapproximately $1 billion for a 10-year construction pro-gram and committing up to $20 million (subsequently

increased by a total of $167.5 million) in state funds tomatch the private support that would, it was believed,be a natural outgrowth of the university’s move forward.

Notably, UConn 2000 gave the university theauthority to implement the rebuilding program independently, with the concomitant responsibility to manage, prioritize and sequence projects. The

C O N N E C T I C U T B U I L D S

PHILIP E. AUSTIN

How One Public University Became a National Model for Infrastructure Investment

UConn’s new South Campus and Hilltop Suites featurefour-person suites and a shared living area. Students inparticular majors may live and study near one anotherin academic clusters if they choose. Photo courtesy ofUniversity of Connecticut.


anticipation, now borne out by experience, was thatthis autonomy would be a key factor in ensuring timeliness and cost-effectiveness.

A billion dollars could have gone a long way just to fix up or replace dilapidated buildings. Instead, the university developed a master plan that set a moreambitious goal of integrating the best of the existinginfrastructure with new facilities and constructing what would be essentially a new campus at Storrs—pedestrian-friendly, technologically advanced, attractive and accessible.

The university also created a new urban campus indowntown Stamford to replace an out-of-the-way facilityon the city’s outskirts, began construction of a newurban campus in Waterbury, built a dramatic newMarine Sciences Building in the coastal community of Groton to capitalize on the university’s potentialstrength in a field that is vital to Connecticut’s econo-my, and made more modest upgrades at the otherregional campuses.

With more than 150 major construction or renova-tion projects completed or in progress, UConn 2000 isnow two-thirds of the way to completion. Each projecthas its own special attributes, but some are worthy ofparticular note:

• The new Chemistry Building houses the mosttechnologically sophisticated classrooms andchemistry laboratories on any university campusand won the 2001 Merit Award for Excellence inArchitecture from the New England RegionalCouncil of the American Institute of Architects.

• New or extensively renovated residence facilitiesdramatically expand the range of options availableto students. Some, focused on freshmen, offerextensive programs that ease the transition to college. Others, oriented to upper-division or graduate students, offer suite-style living or modern apartments.

• The Wilbur Cross student administrative building,housed at the extensively renovated former libraryfacility, provides high-tech, one-stop shopping forregistration, financial aid, housing, meal plan andother student services.

• The Lodewick Visitors Center, financed largelythrough private support, has changed the way the university greets the thousands of visitors to campus and created an attractive, welcomingatmosphere for prospective students.

UConn 2000 has become a fine example of a govern-ment investment that has succeeded in meeting itsobjectives and fulfilling important public goals. TheUniversity of Connecticut has been transformed physi-cally, and more importantly, repositioned in the eyes ofstudents and their families. Once the “safety school” forConnecticut’s best students, UConn is now a college ofchoice. Freshman enrollment at Storrs has grown by 56 percent since 1995; minority freshman enrollment

has grown by 62 percent. Average SAT scores have risensignificantly, and the university has recruited morethan 300 high school valedictorians and salutatorians.

Other indicators also demonstrate transformation.Private support skyrocketed from $8 million in 1995 tomore than $50 million in 2001, aided significantly by thestate matching grant program that was initiated underUConn 2000 and subsequently extended. The university’sendowment has grown from about $50 million in 1995 toabout $210 million, and in 1999, the university receivedthe largest single gift ever to a public university in New England: $23 million from alumnus Ray Neag (of which $21 million was focused on the School ofEducation—the largest single gift to a School ofEducation anywhere in the United States). Researchawards, meanwhile, have climbed from less than $100million in 1995 to an estimated $160 million this year.

This is a remarkable metamorphosis in a remark-ably short time. But the job is not done. The originalbillion-dollar commitment met less than half the needsof a group of campuses whose infrastructure had beenneglected for several decades. Despite major improve-ments, important needs at the University’s HealthCenter in Farmington, at the Law School in Hartford,at several of the regional campuses and at Storrs itselfremain unmet.

As of mid-June 2002, the Connecticut GeneralAssembly was considering an extension of UConn 2000proposed by Gov. Rowland earlier in the year. The initia-tive, called 21st Century UConn, is a $1.3 billion, 11-yearprogram that would, if adopted, play as great a role asUConn 2000 in enhancing the university’s appeal to students, its ability to contribute to Connecticut’s eco-nomic growth and its capacity to build on a strongrecord of research performance. Like UConn 2000, 21st Century UConn addresses facilities needs at Storrs,the regional campuses and the law school; going beyondUConn 2000 it also would invest in the revitalization offacilities and the enhancement of research capacity atthe Health Center.

State support in itself cannot make a great university;that requires a commitment by faculty, students, staffand all the internal and external constituencies thatcomprise an academic community. But if Connecticut’sexperience in the seven years since the adoption ofUConn 2000 is any indication, capital investment by thestate plays a major role in making a much-needed trans-formation possible. The University of Connecticut, long a very good regional institution of higher education, isnow clearly identified as a center of excitement where all the important trend lines are pointing upward. Wehave every expectation that the foundation laid in themid-1990s sets the stage for continuing progress in theyears ahead.

Philip E. Austin is president of the University

of Connecticut.


A February 2002 Chronicle of Higher

Education piece on the waning influ-ence of New England’s colleges and

universities suggests at one point that theundergraduate liberal arts curriculum withwhich the region has long been identified isout of date. Young people today focus morethan ever on the careers awaiting them aftercollege. They view higher education as jobtraining. To stay competitive in attracting thebest undergraduates from all over the country,one college official proposed, New Englandcolleges and universities need to adopt curric-ula that connect more directly to what stu-dents want to be doing after they graduate.

It is true that undergraduates and theirparents increasingly obsess about gettingtheir money’s worth out of education for what it can do for a lifetime of work andincome. Writing in Harvard Magazine in1998, James Engell, a professor of English and comparative religion at Harvard, and AnthonyDangerfield, who has taught at Dartmouth,observed that over the past 30 years, themotivation of students for choosing andattending college has shifted from an interestin learning for its own sake to a preoccupa-tion with jobs, from building a foundation forvalues to equipping graduates for high wages.

Still, the notion that a traditional liberalarts course of study is somehow out of stepwith modern realities and with the fundamen-tal purposes of education is unsettling.

Especially so because the liberal arts aregrounded in the humanities—language andliterature, history and philosophy, culture andreligious studies.

Engell and Dangerfield noted that collegesand universities nationally have been ignoringand downsizing the humanities. These depart-ments find it difficult to compete on campuswith those that study money, like economicsor business, promise students high-paying jobsimmediately after graduation, like computerscience, or bring in the largest governmentgrants and contracts, like the natural andphysical sciences. More than 30 years ago,journalist and author James Ridgeway por-trayed the American university as “a center for industrial activity,” feeding off defense and corporate research dollars which, in turn, infects the culture of the Ivory Tower.

Enrollments in the humanities are declin-ing, and the students that remain attracted tothe humanities are not always the strongest.Kenneth Jackson, president of the Organizationof American Historians, notes that the nation’scolleges and universities conferred an all-timehigh of nearly 45,000 undergraduate historydegrees in 1971—or 5 percent of the total. By1986, the number had plummeted to 16,000, or 2 percent of the total. In 2000, historymajors accounted for just 1 percent. English,philosophy, foreign languages and religion have declined as well, while computer science,public administration and business manage-ment, among others, increased dramatically.

Save the HumanitiesWhy a Traditional Liberal Education Still Makes Sense

JOHN C. SCHNEIDER AND SHERRY A. DARLING

The notion that a traditional liberal arts course of studyis somehow out ofstep with modernrealities and with the fundamentalpurposes of educa-tion is unsettling.

Illus

tratio

n co

pyrig

ht ©

by

Jeff

Kilb

urn.


In 1971, business majors outnumberedEnglish majors by 78 percent. By 1994, the differential had ballooned to 300 percent.

Engell and Dangerfield alsolamented that humanities scholarshave not used the power of senioradministrative posts—nor the oppor-tunity of faculty meetings—to stemtheir disciplines’ declining status oncampus. We found that more thanone-third of the presidents and chiefacademic officers at more than 20 ofNew England’s most highly rated pri-vate colleges and universities as wellas the six flagship state universitieshold graduate degrees in one of thehumanities. Yet, the decline is evidentin New England too. In the 1970s,one-third of Harvard students concen-trated in the humanities. By the late1990s, less than one-quarter did. AtTufts University, almost 25 percent ofgraduating seniors took degrees in thehumanities at the start of the 1990s.By the end of the decade, barely 15percent did.

Other trends are alarming. At theUniversity of Massachusetts Amherst,recent budget cuts have led to the closing of the foreign language lab andthreats to the language requirementitself as the administration merges or abolishes several foreign languagedepartments. Other humanities depart-ments such as English and Theater arein danger of losing new faculty hiresand graduate teaching assistants.Humanities programs are often thefirst to be slashed in budgetary crises,partly because university administra-tors woefully misjudge the relevance of the humanities and liberal arts education to every course of study.

Making the caseA strong liberal education enhancescommunications skills and encouragescritical thinking. A course of studysteeped in the humanities and relateddisciplines produces truly well-roundedpeople prepared for whatever the mod-ern business and job world can throwat them. The new chief executive ofIBM, Samuel Palmisano, was an undergraduate history major at JohnsHopkins. Carly Fiorina, his counterpartat Hewlett-Packard, studied medievalhistory and philosophy at Stanford.

Daniel A. Rabuzzi, the associatevice president at the KentuckyCouncil on Postsecondary Education,has written that the new knowledge-based economy with its fast-pacedstyle places a premium on “creativity,rhetorical deftness, structured spon-taneity and critical thinking—all qualities that are at the heart of liberal education.” When asked howcolleges could best prepare peoplefor jobs in the technology economy,

former New Hampshire state repre-sentative and high-tech executive BillBelvin was fond of displaying a chartshowing that the vast majority of people earning six figures at one hotRoute 128 high-tech firm had eitherno college degree or degrees in “non-IT” fields from art history to music.

What’s more, the humanities arenot, as some may think, stuck in place.New approaches and creative scholar-ship have enhanced the humanities no less than other disciplines in recentyears. Fresh readings of traditionaltexts and a focus on new texts, suchas those from non-Western cultures,have enlivened the study of literatureand cultural expression. Historianshave adapted social science theory and methodology to the specialdemands of their own craft while turn-ing to new kinds of source material,including objects of material culture,to explore the past from new perspec-tives and give voice to groups whoseexperiences were never included in the curriculum. Philosophers now engagewith psychologists and neuroscientiststo understand consciousness andthought while also pursuing programsto apply ethics theory to policymakingin such areas as community healthand criminal justice.

It makes no sense to pit thehumanities and related fields againstscientific, business and technicaltraining in the claim for relevance.The point is not the superiority of one over the other, but rather theimportance of the humanities to anycourse of study. As colleges attemptto give students the technical profi-ciency required of some of today’sbest jobs, they should not squeeze out the humanities.

Moreover, there is another reasonfor colleges to value the humanities.

It has to do with how they prepareand encourage students to becomeactive and effective citizens.

Preparing citizensMost people would like to believe that education is about enlightenment,about broadening one’s awareness and ways of viewing the world, aboutexpanding intellectual horizons andcuriosity. It is also about perspective,about deepening one’s understandingthrough a knowledge of and apprecia-tion for what has gone on in the pastand how the modern world hasevolved. All disciplines contribute inone way or another to these aspects of learning, but the humanities do it in a fundamental way.

In a just-published study, politicalscientist Henry Milner concludes thattoday’s young people in the UnitedStates have more formal educationthan older generations and are morewilling to get involved in communityservice—a measure of social capital.But they are less politically active andthey vote less. Milner says this isbecause they are less knowledgeableabout the political world and less ableto make sense of it to form opinionsleading to active involvement in thedemocratic process. In short, socialcapital alone does not make for astrong democracy—knowledge,awareness and informed discoursedo. Milner blames the low quality oftelevision and other sources of infor-mation for the poor state of our civicliteracy. Might it also be becausemore of our young people are going to college to be trained for jobs?

Colleges and universities every-where have begun to appreciate therole they can play in encouraging civicengagement. Tufts has established aUniversity College of Citizenship andPublic Service as the centerpiece ofits commitment to educating for a lifetime of active citizenship. A keystrategy is to enhance the capacity of the faculty in all Tufts’ schools todevelop projects, teach courses andconduct research that promote civicengagement. But at its core, theUniversity College is an enterprise in undergraduate education where the liberal arts curriculum can instillthe values and perspectives that help


students understand why and how voluntarism and public service areimportant. The University College isnot a separate program of study, nor isthe intent to offer specialized degreesthat might only compartmentalize theeffort. Rather, the point is to let eachacademic discipline explore the connection on its own terms.

The humanities play an especiallyimportant role here in providing thehistorical and philosophical basis forthe commitment to the community andcivic engagement. Stanford educationprofessor William Damon reminds usthat civic life is invigorated because of the power of ideas, not because ofsocial policies and requirements. Justas understanding the law deters crimemore effectively than fear of punish-ment, so a robust civic culture willflow from respect for its virtues ratherthan from artificial insertions of com-munity service into schooling or frommeasures that would require people to register to vote.

By providing the critical thinkingskills, the historical and cultural per-spective and the philosophical inquiryinto human morals and behavior, thehumanities help us make the informedjudgments that generate interest inpublic issues and infuse civil societyand, ultimately, the democraticprocess. The richness and increasinginclusiveness of humanities curriculaforges a natural connection betweenlearning in the classroom and some of the most pressing social or politicalissues churning beyond the walls ofthe university. Interdisciplinary pro-grams to which the humanities make a strong contribution, such aswomen’s studies, peace and justicestudies, or international studies, carry with them an impulse towardcivic engagement, often nurturedthrough class projects or programinternships that involve students inthe wider community.

Perhaps most of all, the humanitiesbuild the case for tolerance—the inher-ent respect for others that may be thesingle most important feature of arobust civic culture. The humanities do this because they study diversity

for its own sake. Consider, for exam-ple, the way a student of marketingmight think about diversity. Age, gen-der and other characteristics definepeople differently as consumers of var-ious products. They are important forhow they buy, not for who they are.The humanities, on the other hand,view the community more broadly,taking the full measure of all the partsthat comprise it. This encourages stu-dents to think about what they can dofor the larger community of which theyare a part. People are more likely torespond to difference with suspicion if they have not been ushered into theinner life of diverse cultures throughstudy in the humanities. Through therichness of language and literary imag-ination, for example, the humanitiesopen a revealing window into the expe-riences of other people—cultures thatstudents might otherwise never havecome to know and therefore neverhave cared about.

Martha C. Nussbaum, the distin-guished University of Chicago profes-sor of law and ethics, describes thehumanities’ emphasis on diversity asan effort “to produce adults who canfunction as citizens not just of somelocal region or group but also, andmore importantly, as citizens of acomplex and interlocking world.” If the undergraduate curriculumbecomes more fully organized aroundcareer training, will our newly educat-ed young people be as capable ofbecoming civic-minded and taking an active role in our democracy? LetNew England embrace and strengthenits leadership in a humanities-rich liberal education. Our civic culturewill be better for it.

John C. Schneider is director of

corporate and foundation relations

at Tufts University and adjunct

senior lecturer in history. He is also

co-editor of the Tufts book series on

civil society published by the

University Press of New England.

Sherry A. Darling is completing

her doctoral dissertation in drama

at Tufts University and is an adjunct

lecturer in theatre at Boston College.


In an increasingly digitized society, bothproviders and consumers of education areadapting to new ways of teaching and learn-

ing across time and space. The transition fromface-to-face classroom teaching at a fixed timeand place to asynchronous mentoring from a distance is being played out at hundreds ofacademic institutions worldwide. There willcontinue to be a market for the traditionalcampus-based experience for large numbers of recent high school graduates. But a growingportion of even this population will take advan-tage of computer-assisted courses, whetherthey live on campus or 1,500 miles away.

The New England higher education market-place is especially well-suited for distancelearning. With its many small rural communi-ties, difficult driving conditions over long winter months, overflowing technical collegesand, in some states, lack of a well-developedcommunity-college system, New Englandneeds increased access to postsecondary edu-cation opportunities. Yet, despite heightenedinterest in distance education nationally andglobally, New England institutions lag behindtheir counterparts in other regions of thecountry. While some have attributed this lagto the region’s compact size, the more likelycause is a well-established “campus-centric”model that caters to a traditional, residentialstudent population.

Moreover, even national surveys reveal con-tinued reluctance on the part of many profes-

sors to use any form of technology. Only 20percent of college faculty make use of electron-ic course tools made available by their institu-tions, according to the most recent survey of 600 institutions by the Campus ComputingProject at Claremont Graduate University. The survey also found that faculty incorporateWeb pages into only about one third of courses.

But what about the growing number of faculty who, by individual choice or institu-tional direction, are now engaged in, or atleast flirting with, some aspect of teaching at a distance? Most spent some years in themore familiar role of content expert deliveringlectures and dispensing assignments at thefront of a classroom to a group of studentsassembled at a fixed time and place. Whilemany faculty already integrate some form of instructional technology to augment theirclassroom teaching, others face the prospectof adapting to instructional duties that mayeliminate the need for any face-to-faceencounter between teacher and learners. How are they making the transition from the classroom to cyberspace?

PerceptionsI recently examined the transition and self-perception of a sample group of faculty currently teaching in distance education programs, all of whom have taught previously(or still are teaching) in traditional campus-based academic settings. The study examinedand analyzed how these faculty have adapted

TransmissionTransitionWill Faculty Learn to Love Long Distance Learning?

MICHAEL F. BEAUDOIN

The New Englandhigher educationmarketplace is especially well-suited for distance learning.


and adjusted to their new teachingmilieu, how effective they feel theyare, what tools they use, how satisfy-ing this new role is compared to theirearlier instructional tasks and whattheir perception is of their students’satisfaction with them and withcourses delivered in a distance learning context.

About 100 full-time and part-timefaculty at six U.S. institutions (two inNew England and four in other regions)that offer graduate degree programsthrough distance education were askedto complete a 35-question survey. Onlyfaculty members with at least two yearsof teaching in a classroom environmentand at least one year of distance teach-ing experience were surveyed. Fifty fac-ulty members responded.

Despite the adjustments involved in moving from a classroom to a dis-tance learning format, some institu-tions apparently do not place a highpriority on training, monitoring orevaluating faculty to make sure theyfunction effectively in this new envi-ronment. Indeed, fully one third of thesurveyed faculty reported receiving notraining from their institutions to pre-pare them for their new instructionalroles. And nearly three-quarters ofrespondents reported that they neversaw the results of student evaluationsnor receive any feedback regardingtheir teaching. It may be that someprogram administrators are reluctantto impose training on faculty for fearof offending experienced teachers.

Yet the majority of respondentshave a clear sense of their new roles.Nearly three-quarters refer to them-selves as mentors or facilitators of stu-dent learning, and nearly two-thirdssee their main function as providingfeedback. Surprisingly, even though afew express frustration that they donot feel they really contribute much totheir students’ learning, more than 90percent say that their students recog-nize and appreciate the role they play.And nearly three-quarters of these fac-ulty say that even those students whomaintain a low profile in their coursesare nonetheless learning.

It seems that most of these facultyhave come to recognize that facilitatingself-directed learning is as critical tostudents’ success as disseminating

content. The study also confirmed find-ings of other research activities whichhave concluded that the quantity andquality of interaction between studentsand faculty and between students andother students are the factors mostclosely associated with faculty satisfac-tion with distance teaching. A strongsentiment among the distance educa-tors was that this work is very labor-intensive and that they receive littleappreciation for their efforts from their colleagues and institutions. Onlytwo respondents say they are compen-sated more for distance teaching thanfor classroom instruction.

Faculty are somewhat more satis-fied once they become acclimated toteaching at a distance. Fifty-eight percent feel more positive about dis-tance education, yet only 8 percentfeel more satisfied with their distanceteaching than with classroom instruc-tion. They miss face-to-face, live con-tact with students. This is reflected in what they want changed to improvetheir new roles; most advocateincreased interaction through variedmedia, and some want live, synchro-nous sessions to augment the distance instruction.

Another area for improvement is inadministrative support. Just as somedistant students sense an “out of sight-out of mind” attitude at their institu-tions, distance learning faculty, manyof them adjuncts, say administratorsdo not respond in a timely manner totheir questions or concerns about tech-nology glitches, do not share usefulinformation with them about programchanges and student withdrawals, andrelate to them as utility personnelrather than valued colleagues.

EfficacyThe skepticism toward distance learning by the traditional academicestablishment continues despite theproliferation of innovative programsusing technology to provide access to educational opportunities for thoseseeking anytime-anyplace learning. In 1998, 1,690 postsecondary institu-tions enrolled 1.6 million students in54,000 distance courses. Yet manystill believe that only fringe institu-tions desperate for new enrollmentsengage in such practices.

The American Journal of Distance

Education and others have publishedsubstantial and credible research documenting the efficacy of this modeof teaching and learning. More than 30 years of studies comparing achieve-ment in face-to-face settings and tech-nology-supported environments, fromtelecourses through interactive televi-sion and now fully online courses, consistently and convincingly showthat students in distance courses per-form as well or better than residentialstudents, and that student satisfactionis generally equal in both learning situ-ations. Yet the argument persists thatdistance learning is not as good asface-to-face education. Critics, mostlyfaculty members who have not usedthe technology in their courses, main-tain that teaching at a distance is tooimpersonal for students and thereforenot satisfying.

The American philosopher JohnDewey observed that a critical ele-ment of the teaching process is to create the conditions for “productiveinquiry” that takes place independentfrom the teacher. In the distance edu-cation environment, this inquiry, how-ever invisible, is occurring, facilitatedby technology. Indeed, my research of students enrolled in an online graduate course in the fall of 2000revealed that even those who postedcomments infrequently were activelyengaged in reading postings fromtheir classmates, in completingassignments and satisfying othercourse objectives through their ownself-directed inquiry. Just as studentsseem to readily adapt to an asynchro-nous online learning environment, so too can faculty.

With institutional encouragementand sustained support, faculty whomake the transition from the class-room to teaching at a distance havean opportunity to not only foster andfacilitate student learning, but also toreflect on and enhance their practicein both instructional settings.

Michael F. Beaudoin is a professor

of education at the University of New

England, and has been an adminis-

trator, teacher, evaluator and scholar

in the field of distance education

since 1980.


The 2001 recession appears to be over inNew England and the nation. Like the winter of 2001 (and unlike the last reces-

sion of the early 1990s) it appears to have been relatively short and mild. The effects of September 11 sharpened the business cyclein New England and the nation and made for a v-shaped downturn in the region. The deep andprolonged recession feared after September 11has not materialized.

Data analyzed by the New England EconomicProject (NEEP) indicate that the nation experi-enced negative overall growth in gross outputonly in the third quarter of 2001. New England’speriod of negative economic growth (as mea-sured by aggregated gross state product) waslonger than the nation’s, but still much shorterthan the previous recession. The 2001 recessionin New England began before September 11 andlasted three quarters from the second quarter of2001 through the end of the year.

Moderate growthNew England’s overall economic growth isexpected to rise over the next few quarters butremain modest. The growth in aggregate grossstate product in New England over the next fiveyears is expected to be about 40 percent lowerthan during the late 1990s and just below theU.S. average of 3 percent per year. The mainreason for this is the end of the information andhigh-technology boom and its disproportionate-ly strong impact on the New England economy.

Information technology investment is notexpected to rebound until the end of 2002.Investment in computer software and hardwarewill be helped by increased replacement demandand improved business confidence. The relativelyshort product life cycles of this equipment andleaner inventories will support a turnaround.Investment in communications hardware andinfrastructure, however, is not expected torebound until well into next year because theeconomic life of this equipment is longer andthere is remaining inventory and excess capacity.

New England will have experienced a totaljob loss of 1.5 percent from the peak in the firstquarter of 2001 to the expected trough in thefirst quarter of 2002. This compares to theregional job loss of 5 percent in the last reces-sion. The recent decline was concentrated inmanufacturing, which suffered a total job lossof 7.5 percent. In the recovery, total employmentgrowth in New England is expected to be below1 percent per year on average. This is one-halfthe rate of growth during the late 1990s, andjust three-quarters of the nation’s expectedemployment growth. The sector of the NewEngland economy that is expected to growfastest will be services, albeit at a rate aboutone third that of the late 1990s and just three-quarters that anticipated for the nation. In particular, growth in business services, includ-ing software, is expected to lag behind overallgrowth and put a drag on overall employmentgrowth in New England’s service sector.

New England’sEconomicOutlookA Mild Recession Followed by Slow

Growth Promises Mixed Blessings

for Higher Education

ROSS GITTELL

Over the next fewyears, no single academic programarea is likely toboom in the way, for example, that e-commerce did in the late 1990s. Nor will any singleindustry or occupa-tion lead the econo-my so much that itcreates as strongpressure for newacademic programs.


While there are indicators that boththe U.S. and New England economiesare out of recession, five of the last sevenrecessions have been “double dips,” inwhich the economy rebounded for awhile only to relapse. Numerous factorscould precipitate a recession relapse in2002 or 2003. These could include adecline in investor and credit marketconfidence in reaction to new cases ofcorporate malfeasance along the lines ofEnron and Arthur Anderson, or a sharpincrease in energy prices related toevents in the Middle East. A third risk isthat consumer resiliency could finally bebroken by some combination of declin-ing equity markets, increased interestrates and persistent unemployment.

Higher-ed investmentState support for higher education, his-torically very low in New England, is fur-ther threatened by significant and likelygrowing budget deficits in all six statecapitals related to the recession. Highereducation tends to be used as the bal-ance wheel in bad times to make endsmeet. Of the 43 states that either cutoverall spending or raised additional revenue in the past year, 29 cut highereducation spending, according to a sur-vey by the National Conference of StateLegislatures. This was the most popularmeans of closing budget gaps, ahead ofmeasures such as tapping reserve funds.

Lawmakers across New England are taking aim at higher education.In the past nine months, for example,Connecticut has seen a $300 millionbudget surplus turn to a $200 millionbudget gap, and Gov. John Rowlandasked public colleges to plan on budgetcuts of 5 percent. In Maine, Gov. AngusKing asked for a midyear rescission of 2 percent in state spending on publiccolleges. In Massachusetts, theLegislature slashed 7 percent from thestate’s higher education budget, in orderto help close a projected $1.1 billiondeficit and about $10 million has beenslashed from the state’s need-based aid program for 2001-02.

In New Hampshire, Gov. JeanneShaheen asked state agencies to preparefor a 1 percent cut in the current fiscalyear and a 2 percent reduction in thesecond year of the biennial budget, andmore reductions are likely as businesstax revenues fall below expectations.Rhode Island faces a projected deficit

of $70 million in the current fiscal year,and the shortfall could grow to about$200 million for the 2002-3 fiscal year.Rhode Island higher education officialsbelieve their appropriation might bespared, but do not expect to get all themoney they are seeking in the next fis-cal year because of the state’s slowingeconomy. In Vermont, Gov. Dean hascalled for a 2.5 percent rescission inspending on public colleges.

Despite the forecasted economicrecovery, the fiscal condition of theNew England states will not improve in any significant way until fiscal 2004.The states’ fiscal situations willimprove with an approximate one-to one-and-a-half-year lag behind theirimproved economies, particularly instates with significant dependence onbusiness taxes such as New Hampshire.This will most likely result in decliningstate support of public higher educationinstitutions and scholarship money forresidents. In Washington, meanwhile,rising deficits and priorities shifting todefense will mean that federal supportto higher education for both student aidand basic research will likely diminish.

Endowment investment income and donor contributions are also inrecession from the growth years of thelate 1990s. The average rate of returnfor all college endowments in 2001declined for the first time since 1984.This is in sharp contrast to 2000 whenendowments of $1 billion or more post-ed an average return on investment ofover 29 percent.

Private giving to higher educationgrew by over 4 percent last year, despitea weak stock market and an economyin recession. The increase, however,was much smaller than the previousyear, when private contributions tohigher education increased 14 percent,marking the fifth consecutive year ofdouble-digit growth.

Silver liningThe recession and relatively slowrecovery do provide some opportunityfor higher education. When the econo-my is soft, many younger workers exitthe labor market and enter collegesand graduate schools as an alterna-tive to working or being unemployed.Colleges and universities then havethe opportunity to target programsand services for these students.

The current increased interest inprofessional education is reminiscentof the early 1990s, when the last reces-sion hit. Applications to law schoolsare up about 21 percent compared with this time last year, according tothe Law School Admission Council.Sixty-five percent of the MBA programssurveyed by the Graduate ManagementAdmission Council said applications for full-time programs were up for thisacademic year—the highest proportionof programs in four years. Even nurs-ing schools (finally) have good newsthis year. Enrollment in bachelor’s pro-grams was up 4 percent at the schoolssurveyed by the American Associationof Colleges of Nursing.

The aging of the New England popu-lation will also present opportunities forhigher education institutions. All NewEngland states rank high nationally inbaby boomers (born between 1946 and1964) as a percentage of their total populations and all six states havemedian ages above the U.S. average. In the three Northern New Englandstates, the 45-to-64-year-old cohort willovertake the 25-to-44-year-old cohort asthe largest age group in the next fouryears. Higher education can help agingbaby boomers “retool” for new, differentand better paying and more fulfillingjobs. There will also be an increasingdemand among aging baby boomers—with and without college degrees—forlife enrichment and “experiential” cours-es, whether for degree credit or not, inthe humanities, arts and sciences.

Yet, over the next few years, no singleacademic program area is likely to boomin the way, for example, that e-commercedid in the late 1990s. Nor will any singleindustry or occupation lead the economyso much that it creates as strong pres-sure for new academic programs.

The Resource Center for CybercultureStudies at the University of Maryland at College Park estimates that courses on the topic of the Internet increasedfrom five nationally to more than 400 in the late 1990s. The MassachusettsInstitute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management now offers five coursesand seminars in electronic commerce,two years after introducing its first e-commerce course. However, enrollmentin Internet-related courses at MIT andelsewhere has dropped by an estimated


10 percent to 20 percent this semester.The proliferation of new courses and programs has ended.

There has been a lot of discussionabout biotechnology as a possible eco-nomic driver for the region, and as a an area of increased curriculum andprogram opportunities for higher edu-cation. However, the reality is that theindustry is very small. For example inMassachusetts, employment in phar-maceutical manufacturing and biotech-nology research combined is 15,000, orless than one half of 1 percent of totalBay State employment.

There are signs that the New Englandeconomy is improving modestly but alsofaces significant challenges—so will theregion’s higher education institutions.

Ross Gittell is James R. Carter

Professor at the University of New

Hampshire’s Whittemore School of

Business and Economics and vice

president of the New England

Economic Project (NEEP). For

more information about NEEP,

visit http://www.neepecon.org.

Crunch TimeState Budget Woes Squeeze New England’s Already-Low Public Investment in Higher Education

MICHAEL K. THOMAS

Even during the mostlygood economic timesfrom 1988 to 1997,the composition ofrevenues at publiccampuses shifted fromstate appropriations to tuition and fees.

By early spring, the effects of the currenteconomic slowdown were painfully clearin New England, as budget battles brewed

in every state capital. Lawmakers wrestledwith mid-year cuts to fiscal 2002 budgets andstill more spending reductions for fiscal 2003.How will the fiscal squeeze affect NewEngland’s historically below-average stateinvestment in higher education—and its above-average tuition?

New England state appropriations for highereducation—including support for state collegesand universities and financial aid programs—grew by 51 percent (unadjusted for inflation)between fiscal 1992 and fiscal 2002, roughly 5 percent annually. Massachusetts led the waywith a 73 percent increase; followed by RhodeIsland at 65 percent; Connecticut, 52 percent;New Hampshire, 43 percent; Maine, 39 percent;and Vermont, 31 percent.

During the same period, tuition and manda-tory fees at New England’s four-year publicinstitutions increased, on average, by 4 percentannually (in current dollars). Massachusetts,for one, froze or cut tuition for state residentsduring several of those years, though mandato-ry fees have grown. Increases for two-year public institutions were held to even lowerrates. The Maine Technical College System, for example, has frozen tuition for three years.

Yet the current fiscal environment raisesgreat concerns about future state support andattendant tuition increases.

A recent forecast by the National Associationof State Budget Officers warns that while anational economic recovery may occur, its posi-tive impact on state budgets will be a while incoming. The report notes: “State revenue growthwill lag several months behind the beginning of anational economic recovery—as much as 12 to 18months, if the early 1990s are a reliable guide.”

This is bad news for public investment inhigher education and, in turn, bad news for stu-dents, for when state budgets run red, statesalmost invariably turn to tuition and fee hikesto make up for the loss of direct state support.

What’s more, even during the mostly goodeconomic times from 1988 to 1997, the composi-tion of revenues at public campuses shifted fromstate appropriations to tuition and fees, accord-ing to the National Commission on Costs ofCollege. Between academic years 1988-89 and1997-98, tuition as a proportion of total educationand general revenues increased by eight percent-age points at comprehensive public institutionsnationally, while state appropriations as a pro-portion decreased by over 11 percentage points.

Commenting in a companion piece to theNational Commission study, Macalaster CollegePresident Michael McPherson and WilliamsCollege President Morton Owen Schapiro notethat operating costs per-student grew nationallyby less than 1 percent annually from 1986 to1996. Yet, they argue, a growing proportion of thecosts of public higher education was shoulderedby students and their families. In 1985-86, state


appropriations accounted for 61 percentof the revenues of public colleges anduniversities, while tuition provided 18percent. By 1995-96, appropriations pro-vided just 51 percent of revenues, whiletuition payments contributed 24 percent.

“The issue is much less one of risingcost than of a shifting of costs from oneset of payers to another,” say McPhersonand Schapiro. “The burden has beenshifting from taxpayers to families.”

Though more recent comparisonsare difficult to make due to changes inaccounting by the U.S. Department ofEducation, state appropriations in NewEngland, on average, made up just over35 percent of the revenues of publicinstitutions in 2000.

Déjà vu all over againDecreased state support has practicalconsequences. Rhode Island’s publicinstitutions had to delay $3.6 million in capital projects. The University ofMaine will leave numerous staff andfaculty positions vacant as it cuts trav-el, material purchases and professionaldevelopment in areas from liberal artsto biochemistry.

Fewer resources will be available to aid student learning. For example,funding for library acquisitions atMassachusetts public institutions fellfrom $14 million to $5 million during2002. Libraries at the University ofMassachusetts Amherst reduced bookacquisitions by 15,000 from the previous year.

Bristol Community College PresidentJohn J. Sbrega described how his institu-tion has coped with the fiscal crisis: “Our success (if that is the right descrip-tion) thus far stems in large measurefrom keeping a sizeable number of posi-tions vacant, implementing painful reduc-tions in administrative costs across allcollege operations and reaching heavily ...into the college’s reserves.” Sbregalikened the latter to using a family sav-ings account to buy the weekly groceries.

Patrick Callan, president of theNational Center for Public Policy andHigher Education, observed that therecession of the 1990s taught severaltough lessons. First, higher educationwas likely to absorb larger cuts thanstate budget items because lawmakersfigure public campuses have greater fiscal and programming flexibility than

other areas, with separate budgets, rev-enue streams and reserves. Second,Callan argues that public sources ofstudent aid are very likely to be reduced

and states are unlikely to invest infinancial aid to offset tuition increases.

Yet beyond their preoccupationswith across-the-board budget cuts or

Connecticut—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $450 Million (3%)

Cuts to Higher Education to Change in Tuition & FeesBalance Fiscal 2002 Budget for Fall 2002

University of Connecticut University of Connecticut• Initial appropriation of $177 million In-State: ..............................$4,622, up 4%

reduced by $900,000 cut and Out-of-State: ....................$14,096, up 4%subsequent $3.5 million rescission Fees:....................................$1,424, up 4%

State Universities State Universities• Initial appropriation of $189 million In-State: ..............................$2,313, up 4%

cut by $3.1 million Out-of-State: ......................$7,485, up 4%• Hiring and equipment purchases deferred Fees: ......................................$706, up 4%

Community Colleges Community Colleges• Initial appropriation of $122 million In-State: ..............................$1,764, up 5%

cut by $2.7 million Fees: ......................................$216, up 4%Out-of-State: ......................$5,292, up 1%Fees: ......................................$608, up 4%

Maine—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $58.3 Million (2.3%)


University of Maine System University of Maine System• Midyear cut of $2.6 million later restored In-State:....................................$3,991, up 5%

Out-of-State: ....................$10,767, up 5%Fees: ..................................$755, up slightly

and restructured

Maine Technical Colleges Maine Technical Colleges• Governor ordered 2% cuts to operating budgets In-State: ....Frozen at about $2,040, annually

for second, third and fourth quarters Out-of-State: ....Frozen at about $4,080, annually• Some personnel layoffs; travel and conference Fees:....................................Vary by college

budgets cut

Massachusetts—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $800 Million (4%)


University of Massachusetts University of Massachusetts• Initial appropriation of $484 million cut by nearly In-State: ....................Frozen at all campuses

$25 million in fall 2001, then additional $3.5 Fees: UMass Amherst ......$6,482, by up 13%million based on early 2002 revenue receipts UMass Boston ............$5,222, up 14%

• 275 positions, including part-time faculty, eliminated UMass Dartmouth..........$5,129, up 24%• Seven intercollegiate sports teams UMass Lowell ............$5,213, up 13%

at Amherst campus eliminated

State Colleges State Colleges• Initial appropriation down $9.3 million from In-State: ....................Frozen at all campuses

fiscal 2001; followed by $1.4 million reduction• Some campuses limited class offerings, closed

health centers or reduced construction required by federal Americans with Disabilities Act

Community Colleges Community Colleges• Largest-ever enrollment increases • Tuition not determined as of mid-June 2002• $5 million cut in appropriations• Library resources, scholarship reserves, reduced• Funds for Adult Basic Education and

MCAS assistance to school districts cut

Other• $10 million reduction in state financial aid funds

New Hampshire—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $10.8 Million (0.9%)


University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire• 1% rescission (accomplished by slowing rate of (Projected as of May 2002)

draw down of state funds, allowing state to earn In-State: ..............................$6,340, up 6%additional interest income) Out-of-State: ....................$16,040, up 4%

Fees:....................................$1,790, up 6%

Technical and Community Colleges Technical and Community Colleges• 1% rescission In-State:....................up $10 per credit hour• Freezes on travel, equipment purchases and hiring

A Sampling of Higher Education Budget Cuts and Tuition Hikes


the manipulation of tuition and fees,leaders of government and higher edu-cation institutions should seize the cur-rent challenges as an opportunity to promote and implement innovative

preparations for the future. As Callannotes, higher education faces impor-tant challenges that demand earnestattention and foresight, regardless of tight budgets.

Most specifically, the diversity ofthe college-going population will con-tinue to grow. New England’s whitepopulation declined by 0.7 percent over the last decade, while the region’sminority population grew by 55 per-cent. Clearly, larger proportions of theregion’s college students will comefrom low-income, historically underrep-resented ethnic groups. This reality hasenormous economic and educationalimplications for New England, particu-larly Massachusetts, Connecticut andRhode Island. Perceptions of affordabil-ity, of the availability of financial aidand concerns about debt limit collegeaspirations among minority students.Despite the preeminence of NewEngland’s private institutions, over half the region’s college freshmenattend public institutions. Such institu-tions, and in particular, the two-yearcolleges, are and will remain keyaccess points for minority students.

Michael K. Thomas is director

of policy and research at the New

England Board of Higher Education.


Rhode Island—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $70 Million (2.8%)


All Public Institutions University of Rhode Island• No rescissions as of May 2002, but revenue (Projected as of May 2002)

estimates indicated “hold-harmless” designation In-State: ............................ $3,770, up 5%may change Out-of-State: ....................$13,014, up 5%

• $3.6 million in capital projects voluntarily delayed Fees:..................................$1,989, up 10%

Rhode Island CollegeIn-State: ..............................$2,990, up 5%Out-of-State: ......................$8,700, up 6% Fees: ......................................$675, up 2%

Community CollegeIn-State: ..............................$1,688, up 1%Out-of-State: ......................$5,050, up 3%Fees: ....................................$250, up 32%

Vermont—Fiscal 2002 State Budget Shortfall: $23 Million (2.5%)


University of Vermont University of Vermont• Initial appropriation of $35 million (Projected as of May 2002)

reduced by $876,000 as a result In-State: ..............................$8,320, up 4%of 2.5% rescission Out-of-State: ....................$20,810, up 4%

Fees: ........................................$50, up 8%

State, Technical and Community Colleges State, Technical and Community Colleges• Initial appropriation of $21 million, reduced In-State: ..........................................up 5%

by $500,000 as a result of 2.5% rescission Out-of-State:....................................up 5%Fees: ................................................up 3%


CorporatizedAndrew G. De Rocco

Higher Ed, Inc. The Rise of the

For-Profit University, Richard S.

Ruch, The Johns Hopkins

University Press, 2001; $32.50.

This expansive essay challenges manyof the fervently held beliefs of our tra-ditional institutions, especially thosein the middle and lower tiers, where astruggle goes on daily to maintainmarket relevance and yet retain thesemblance of a scholarly community.

It is written by a loyalist, a scholarwho made the transition from acade-mic dean of what he labels middle-tierinstitutions. He is adept at brushingaside questions of education as an endin itself, though not without reserva-tions, and stakes out for the readerhigh ground for associating employa-bility with investment, and “product”with profit—virtues deemed to beintrinsically “American.”

By for-profits, Ruch does not meansmall, locally owned proprietaryschools with highly focused trainingcurricula, nor “corporate universities”or correspondence-based diplomamills. Rather, he focuses on fivebroadly accredited outfits grantingdegrees from associates to doctor-ates. In lieu of endowment, they haveinvestors and they pay taxes. The fiveare: the Apollo Group Inc. (whichoperates the University of Phoenix),Argosy Education Group, DeVry Inc.,Education Management Corp. andStrayer Education Inc. Ruch describes

each in sufficient detail to reveal theessential contrasts between for-profits and their traditional nonprofitor public counterparts. Among Ruch’strenchant observations is the tenden-cy of traditional institutions to be“comprehensive,” often in unproduc-tive and costly ways. By contrast, thefor-profits are driven by managementto be clear about what they will notdo. Big library collections are notprofitable enough to pursue, for exam-ple, while access to the most currentinformation technology certainly is.

In tracing the history of the for-profit sector, Ruch reveals the long-standing tension between practical outcomes and learning as an end untoitself. In recent decades, the growth ofthis sector has been robust. In 1991 just one for-profit, DeVry, was listed onthe stock exchange (these enterprises are publicly traded). In less than adecade, the number had risen to 40, including, in Ruch’s estimation, atleast 16 “major players.” One particu-larly incisive observation concerns themarket. While both for-profit and tradi-tional institutions market exhaustively,the for-profits trust the market andbase their operating credo and manage-ment strategies in that trust.

So it is not surprising that indescribing the financing of the for-profit institutions, Ruch makes a clearcase for the alignment of purpose with profit, both for the institution and forthe “customer,” namely a graduate withskills and aptitudes that ensure employability. Curricula are adapted todemand. Rapid response to the market

is both a must and a norm. How often inthe traditional sector can a facultydesign and implement a course of studyin a year or less?

On the matter of profit Ruch makesthe point that in the traditional, not-for-profit sector, the equivalent of profitis couched in such language as “anexcess of revenue over expenditures,”an excess that is, however, shelteredfrom any tax burden and not slated to be returned to its stakeholders. In the for-profit world, stakeholders are replaced by investors who expect areturn on their stake.

What sort of academic culture canexist in an institution driven by a prof-it motive? Are all the traditions lost?Well, some yes; tenure for example.And in matters of governance, seniorleadership behaves as would any well-run corporate enterprise. Faculty arethe instruments by which the productis delivered, in typically conventionalways. (Very little at Phoenix is done online, contrary to widespread opinion.) The curriculum is decidedby management not by faculty committees and is market-driven. Yet,as Ruch points out, issues of academicfreedom are not shunted aside.Faculty are expected to comply withthe curricular objectives, but individ-ual styles and approaches are not mandated. On the other hand, persis-tent unsuccessful performance, withno sign of improvement, is not tolerat-ed and severance is likely.

In all this, the role of the academicdean becomes crucial and Ruchemploys his experience in each sector

B o sko


to compare and contrast the opportuni-ties for effective leadership. The academ-ic dean is at the nexus of the academicand business enterprises, a position call-ing for an appreciation of each cultureand a sensitivity to the needs of each.

Ruch invites the reader to considerwhat traditional institutions mightlearn from the for-profit sector. Thereis abundant evidence that the contem-porary student, whether of traditionalage or older, views employability andearnings as the outcomes most closelyallied with a degree—a credential ofcertification in a sense. In this, the twosectors share a common student ethos.But they respond differently. Ruchoffers four suggestions for nonprofitinstitutions to more effectively servetheir audience: make a dedicatedresponse to market forces; make adap-tations in organizational structure;redefine shared governance; and devel-op a strong consumer orientation.

In closing his cautiously provocativeessay, Ruch provides a splendidly craft-ed excursion into the long history ofwhat constitutes a proper education. Inthese closing pages, he reveals a deepunderstanding of higher education’shistory, present state and prospects.However strong an advocate he may befor the for-profit institutions being inthe mix, he has not lost sight of thequest for an educational enterprise thatis broadly conceived, widely availableand instrumentally effective in provid-ing more than employment skills. Foranyone dedicated to the liberal arts, it isa welcome conclusion.

Andrew G. De Rocco is former

commissioner of higher education

in Connecticut.

EntrepreneursAlan R. Earls

Teradyne: The First Forty Years,

Frederick Van Veen, Teradyne Inc.,

2001; $19.95.

Corporate histories are often a refugefor banalities and self-congratulation.This volume largely escapes that fateand provides an entertaining and infor-

would later become manifest inTeradyne’s global business expansion.

As ambitious young men in the post-War era, d’Arbeloff and DeWolf eachacquired valuable corporate experienceat other area high-tech startups such asTransitron—one of the most successfulearly semiconductor companies. Theylaunched their company toward the endof a brief era when New England firmswere among the most advanced in thenew field and when Greater Bostonseemed to have a chance of becominghome to the industry. Companies likeClevite Transistor, Transitron andRaytheon were breaking new groundand earning their shareholders millions.While much of the semiconductor business and almost all the “chip” business ultimately moved elsewhere,Teradyne—like those who profited selling shovels in the California Gold Rush—found ways to makemoney selling the tools of the trade. The company harnessed the newesttechnologies to solve the industry’sincreasingly complex and demandingtest and measurement problems.

Within the industry, DeWolf hadalready earned a reputation as some-thing of a wizard for the testing appara-tus he had developed internally forTransitron. But, according to Van Veen,although Transitron was growing andmaking fantastic profits, there were fewincentives (read, equity) for ambitiouspeople like DeWolf to stay on. So, aftersome soul-searching, the Beacon Hillresident decided to start his own compa-ny to develop test equipment. Through amutual acquaintance, d’Arbeloff, withexperience in sales, was also broughtinto the company. They were assisted in their entrepreneurial efforts bymonies from American Research &Development, the first non-family, ven-ture capital fund in the world, which hadbeen launched 14 years earlier under theleadership of Harvard Business Schoolprofessor Georges Doriot.

Fortunately for the City of Boston,both DeWolf and d’Arbeloff were Hubresidents and both were urbanites;they wanted to be able to walk towork. So the company was launchedin low-rent space on the fringes of

mative inside view of one of the region’smore progressive and successful employ-ers. In addition to being underwritten byits subject, Teradyne, the author,Frederick Van Veen, was employed therefor many years in a senior position.Notwithstanding these facts, the bookrises above mere corporate hagiography.

Two things commend the story ofTeradyne to our attention. The first isthe longevity of the company—no smallachievement in the hurly burly of hightechnology. The second is the continu-ity of management for so many years—without any appreciable symptom of“founders disease,” the tendency forenterprises to be held hostage to limitsof the skills, intellect and imaginationof their original management.

As with many other high-tech suc-cesses, the story of Teradyne is, at leastin part, a story of New England’s acade-mic enterprise. Founders Nick DeWolfand Alex d’Arbeloff were both productsof the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology. Both also had access to adegree of privilege in their upbringing.DeWolf’s mother was the great-grand-daughter of Civil War-era financier JayCooke and his father, an Annapolisgraduate. The d’Arbeloff family boastedroots in Russia that passed for aristo-cratic in the post-Revolution exile com-munity. But the d’Arbeloff clan was alsofull of entrepreneurs. Much of Alexd’Arbeloff’s youth was spent moving, aspursuit of fortune shuttled the familyelders between Europe, South Americaand the United States. Thus, d’Arbeloffwas ever the internationalist, a trait that

CONNECTION SUMMER 2002 4545 NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

downtown. Although later lauded forbringing jobs to the inner city,d’Arbeloff and DeWolf freely admittedthat it was their own needs rather thanaltruism that kept the company rootedfar from the suburban beltways that,even then, had become almost synony-mous with high tech. Teradyne’s principal offices remain on the edge ofBoston’s Chinatown to this day.

Even with the launch of the simplediode testers, which DeWolf had delivered as a first product, the com-pany was already becoming “global,”thanks in part to the fortuitous selec-tion of a particularly skilled Europeansales representative.

Meanwhile, the industry continued tomove at breakneck speed—almost likean arms race both in its speed and inten-sity and in terms of the consequencesmeted out to those who fell behind.

As the volume and sensitivity ofdiscrete devices increased, traditionalmethods of manual component testingbecame inadequate. Similarly, the newintegrated circuits were growing evermore complex. Teradyne was the com-pany that seized leadership in usingcomputers to automate both kinds oftesting—lowering costs and improvingaccuracy in the process.

Despite Teradyne’s still small size(others in the testing field likeConcord, Mass.-based General Radiohad hundreds or even thousands ofemployees) the Boston company regularly surprised the industry withan ever-expanding range of new products. The secret was a modularapproach to design that DeWolf hadinsisted upon. This strategy allowedmany new designs to be built from asmall number of adaptable subassem-blies and, along with other innova-tions, made Teradyne an instant starin the electronics firmament.

Well established by the end of itsfirst decade, the firm went public in1969 and rode the successive waves ofgrowth and retrenchment in the semi-conductor industry through the 1990s.It even survived a large defection of per-sonnel determined to start a competingcompany in the late 1970s.

Just a few of the challenges includ-ed competition from Japan, wide fluc-

tuations in international exchangerates, brutal and rapid shifts indemand and fierce competition nation-ally and internationally.

Both founders managed to be excep-tional—DeWolf by leaving the companyto pursue his own interests in the early1970s, and d’Arbeloff by staying on andadapting. When the latter gave up hisleadership in 1997 the once tiny startupboasted net sales of more than $1.2 bil-lion (net sales topped $3 billion in 2000).To acknowledge their debt to academia,in 1999, d’Arbeloff and his wife Brit,gave $10 million to establish the Alexand Brit d’Arbeloff Fund for Excellencein MIT Education. Theirs was the fifth-largest gift to MIT over the prior 10years. Unique in its focus on the processof education itself, the d’Arbeloff fundwill support innovations by MIT facultyin teaching science and engineering.

While there is much that is unre-markable in this story of a high-techsuccess, when one considers how few ofthe promising technology companies of1960 are still with us today, Teradyne’sachievements become more impressive.

Alan R. Earls is a freelance writer

based in Franklin, Mass.

TrusteeJane Sjogren

Financial Responsibilities of

Governing Boards, William S. Reed,

Association of Governing Boards

of Universities and Colleges,

2001; $29.95.

Many of my students approach a courseI teach on “Finance and ResourceManagement in Higher Education” withwariness and anxiety. And many colleagues in the academic and non-profit communities share their predilec-tions. Prudent fiduciary behavior andsmoothed endowment payout rates,after all, are bone-dry subjects—andcertainly not the stuff of the proverbialbook you can’t put down. But WilliamS. Reed’s Financial Responsibilities of

Governing Boards succeeds remark-ably in covering these arcane topicsand others in a lucid and admirable

way. The book is a small gem that is as valuable to faculty leaders, admin-istrators and other stakeholders in institutions of higher education as it isto their board members.

Reed writes with authority andfrom experience. He recently steppeddown as vice president of finance andadministration at Wellesley College.But he continues to chair two organi-zations he helped establish: the BostonConsortium for Higher Education,whose members include the CFOs of13 Boston-area colleges and universi-ties, and School, College and UniversityUnderwriters Ltd., the nation’s largestprovider of liability insurance to colleges and universities.

Reed approaches his somewhatmysterious topics from the broaderbase of his knowledge about managingnonprofit institutions. He has a view ofwhat makes nonprofits tick that manyobservers, especially those from thefor-profit world, neither understand norappreciate. So when dealing with whatsome view as the inefficiencies (oreven poor management processes)inherent in academic institutions, Reedmanages to acknowledge the idiosyn-crasies of academic life and the needfor practical financial management.This is important because many boardmembers come from outside acade-mia—as do most parents, managementconsultants and other stakeholders.

Reed brings an unusual ability tokeep focused on institutional mission,recognize the complexity of the often-divergent perspectives of stakeholdersin nonprofit enterprises, and articulatethe odd combination of idealism and


practicality that characterizes collegesand universities (as well as other non-profit enterprises). This perspective,combined with his clear writing andcalm tone, permeates the book.

He begins by outlining the fiduciaryresponsibilities of board members, some-thing that most members of academiccommunities, not just the board, need to understand. After defining steward-ship and basic financial responsibilities(including references to the “prudentman” rule), he outlines how these applyto the collegiate institution and gives anexample of a Statement of Activities as anonprofit equivalent of an IncomeStatement. (He also includes reference toanother surprisingly good book titledUnderstanding Financial Statements.)As in subsequent chapters, Reed alsoincludes recommended readings—anexample of the thoughtfulness that characterizes this book.

The next two chapters focus on therelated issues of budgeting and settingtuition. The discussion of tuition is particularly relevant. The use of tuition

(the equivalent of “price per unit”) andtuition discounting as enrollment man-agement tools continues to increase inprivate institutions as well as publicones. Reed reviews how this is done,whether to maximize revenues or adjuststudent body characteristics, endingwith a reminder on “transparency and honesty.”

A chapter on endowment manage-ment, a major aspect of board responsi-bility, describes in quite readable detailsuch nuts-and-bolts issues as investmentguidelines, portfolio management anduse of custodial banks and/or externalinvestment management. Reed also pre-sents these considerations in the con-text of two other concerns of collegesand universities: institutional missionand social responsibility.

In covering capital budgeting and debtand the audit process, Reed acknowl-edges that these are board responsibili-ties without losing sight of the fact thatthese processes affect other stakeholdersas well. He reviews the concept of mate-riality, but also notes how some institu-

tions augment their required financialreporting with supplementary informa-tion in order to provide context andunderstanding of tier institutions—anadmirable and sometimes surprisinglyworthwhile effort.

The remaining chapters, which dealwith the prickly topics of managingemployment and containing costs,should be required reading for facultymembers and academic officers. Theserelated topics, given the context of thelabor-intensive operations and individ-ual-based cultures of academic institu-tions, are the ones about which Reed isparticularly sensitive and clear.

Though the order of the topics is distracting at times, this book is indeeda gem, a concentration of the complex,sometimes messy issues of board andfinancial management into clarity.

Jane Sjogren is a Massachusetts

higher education consultant and

faculty member in the doctoral

program in education leadership

at Johnson & Wales University.


C A M P U S

MIDDLETOWN, CONN.—Wesleyan Univ-ersity received a four-year, $1.9 milliongrant from the Vermont-based FreemanFoundation to support study of Asia andAsian people living in other parts of theworld. Among other things, the grantwill help Wesleyan bring visiting distin-guished scholars in Asian-Americanstudies to campus for teaching andresearch, create a two-year postdoctoralfellows program and provide need-basedscholarships for students to spend asummer studying in Asia.

HARTFORD, CONN.—Hartford Seminarywas awarded a two-year, $50,000 grantby the H.A. Vance Foundation tostrengthen its 100-year-old program inChristian-Muslim relations. The grantwill support a course in Christian-Muslim relations for Christian leadersand provide scholarship money to bringtwo Indonesian Christian leaders toHartford to help their American coun-terparts develop interfaith relationswith Muslims.

COLCHESTER,VT.—Saint Michael’s Collegebegan working with the Burlington, Vt.,public schools on a federally funded project to train K-12 teachers in strategiesto help students whose native language is not English succeed in other subjects.The program is funded by a five-year,$1.25 grant from the federal Office ofBilingual Education and MinorityLanguage Affairs. As part of the initiative,dozens of Burlington teachers haveenrolled in Saint Michael’s summer insti-tutes, which include cultural awarenesstraining by liaison workers representingTibetans, Vietnamese and Bosnians—Burlington’s three largest refugee groups.

BOSTON, MASS.—The University ofMassachusetts Boston opened a satel-lite campus in Plymouth, Mass., focus-ing on professional developmentprograms for public school teachers,local business people and high-techprofessionals. UMass Boston, whichalso runs off-campus programs indowntown Boston and in Westbor-ough, Mass., projected an initial enroll-ment of about 300 students at thePlymouth site.

research in the university’s Departmentof Natural Sciences, as well as mainte-nance of the campus mineral collec-tion. Dexter taught geology classespart-time at Farmington after retiringfrom Union College of New Jerseywhere he was a full professor.

NEW BRITAIN, CONN.—Central Connec-ticut State University introduced thefirst ever online master’s degree program in data mining. The program is designed to prepare information technology professionals with theskills to analyze database informationfor decision-makers in business.Offered through the Connecticut StateUniversity’s virtual classroom system,OnlineCSU, the master’s program can be completed in four semesters by students who have completed prerequisite courses in calculus andcomputer science.

HAMDEN, CONN.—Quinnipiac Universityannounced it will require all freshmen tohave laptop computers with specifichardware configurations and software,beginning in the fall of 2003. Campusofficials said laptops already have beenprovided to all full-time faculty whowant them and distribution to adjunctfaculty is underway. Many Quinnipiacfaculty use the online course manage-ment program called Blackboard to postsyllabi, schedules and grades and to con-duct online tests, chats and discussions.Several departments are expected tointroduce laptop-only sections for thefall semester. Quinnipiac will negotiatewith laptop vendors and allow freshmento place orders for laptops with the chosen vendor through a link on the university website.

NORTON, MASS.—Wheaton College wasawarded a $144,677 grant by theNational Science Foundation to create a digital imaging facility for researchersin all disciplines. The Imaging Centerfor Undergraduate Collaboration, com-prised of networked computers, micro-scopes and specialized cameras, isdesigned to engage students in scientificinquiry by allowing them to create andanalyze digital images.

DURHAM, N.H.—The University of NewHampshire received a $7.5 million giftfrom Marcy Peterson Carsey, a 1966UNH graduate and producer of televi-sion programs such as “The CosbyShow” and “Roseanne,” to establishthe Carsey Institute for EffectiveFamilies and Communities. The newcenter will link a range of existingUNH research centers focused on childdevelopment, family violence, healthpolicy, disabilities and justice studies.The center will provide interdiscipli-nary training, including appliedresearch opportunities, and share find-ings with relevant organizations.

NORTHAMPTON, MASS.—Smith Collegesigned agreements with Greenfield andHolyoke community colleges to make iteasier for students to transfer from thetwo-year, public institutions in westernMassachusetts to the four-year privatecollege. About 100 students transfer toSmith from community colleges everyyear, many through the Ada ComstockScholars Program in which womenbeyond traditional college age, whoseeducation was interrupted earlier inlife, can pursue bachelor’s degree pro-grams at Smith. The new agreementsdon’t guarantee admission to Smith,but offer guidelines to help communitycollege students plan for transfer.Smith has similar agreements withMiami-Dade Community College inFlorida and Santa Monica CommunityCollege in California.

PROVIDENCE, R.I.—Brown Universityreceived $15 million from the StarrFoundation to endow undergraduatescholarships. In early 2002, Brownadopted a need-blind admissions poli-cy and announced plans to increase itsendowment for student financial assis-tance by $100 million.

FARMINGTON, MAINE—The Universityof Maine at Farmington received a $1.3million gift from former geosciencesprofessor Bill Berry to establish theuniversity’s first-ever endowed chair,the Forrest P. Dexter, Jr., Chair inGeology. The gift will support a newfaculty position and undergraduate


D A T A C O N N E C T I O N

■ Approximate annual spending by government at all levels on U.S. elementary and secondary education: $400,000,000,000

■ On U.S. higher education: $100,000,000,000

■ On education for children from birth to age 5: $25,000,000,000

■ Minimum additional spending needed to extend access to free, part-day, part-year preschool programs to all children ages 3 and up,

including those currently enrolled in child care centers: $25,000,000,000

■ Average total savings of Connecticut single mothers who have moved from welfare to jobs under welfare reform: $400

■ Average debt: $4,700

■ Percentage of U.S. executives who say the average employee has too much to do in his job: 70%

■ Number of hours a minimum wage worker would have to work per week to pay the federally set fair market rent for a two-bedroom

apartment in Massachusetts: 110

■ Change in hours worked per week by the average working mother in Massachusetts since 1979: +50

■ Percentage of jobs in southern New Hampshire that pay enough to support a single parent with two small children: 13%

■ Percentage in northern New Hampshire: 8%

■ Difference in number of New England telecommunications job postings on Monster.com, February 2002 vs. March 2001: -85%

■ Difference in number of New England Internet/E-commerce job postings: -89%

■ Difference in number of biotech job postings: 0%

■ Enrollment at public two-year colleges nationally as a share of undergraduate total: 42%

■ Enrollment at public two-year colleges in Maine as a share of undergraduate total: 15%

■ Increase in enrollment of degree-seeking students at Maine technical colleges, 1989 to 2001: 78%

■ Percentage of Maine technical college students pursuing degrees in information technology: 15%

■ Approximate number of students from Greenfield and Holyoke community colleges who have transferred to Smith College in the

past 25 years: 410

■ Higher education’s share of expenses by all public charities in the United States: 11%

■ Higher education’s share of expenses by all public charities in New England: 19%

■ In Vermont: 29%

■ Chance that a major Massachusetts general contractor’s largest recent job was a higher education project: 1 in 3

■ Number of the 25 largest Boston law firms that are more than 100 years old: 11

■ Students per Internet-connected computer in Connecticut schools: 8.7

■ Students per Internet-connected computer in Connecticut schools with high minority enrollment: 19.8

Sources: 1,2,3,4 Committee for Economic Development; 5,6 Yale University; 7 OfficeTeam; 8 University of Massachusetts Lowell Center for Family, Work and Community; 9 MassachusettsInstitute for a New Commonwealth; 10,11 University of New Hampshire; 12,13,14 Mass High Tech; 15,16,17,18 Maine Technical Colleges; 19 Smith College; 20,21,22 Urban Institute; 23,24CONNECTION analysis of Boston Business Journal data; 25,26 Market Data Retrieval

Non-ProfitOrganizationU.S. Postage

PAIDManchester, NHPermit No. 1926..

CONNECTIONTHE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION

New England Board of Higher Education45 Temple Place, Boston, MA 02111-1305

Documents

THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER … · 2020-01-14 · CONNECTION SUMMER 20025 ED I T O R’S M E M O CONNECTION, THE JOURNAL OF THE NEW ENGLAND BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION,