Posts Tagged ‘Higher education’
Endowed Chairs Report Earns an ‘F’ for Transparency
Given the fuzzy conclusions evident in the Centers of Economic Excellence (CoEE) program’s 2008-09 annual report, one might deduce that CoEE’s review board might want to consider pushing for an endowed chair in the area of philosophy.
Ponder the opening paragraph in program Chair Paula Harper Bethea’s message to the General Assembly and the Budget and Control Board:
At a time when much of the country is staring down the barrel of economic uncertainty, and the last thing anyone wants is “financial” in his or her job title, the Centers of Economic Excellence Program is celebrating unparalleled success. To date, more than $232 million in non-state funds have been invested into our state economy and nearly 3,200 jobs have been created through 45 public-private partnership research centers known as Centers of Economic Excellence, or CoEEs.
Unparalleled success? One of the original concepts behind the endowed chairs program was that money from the lottery would be matched by in large part by private investment to secure positions for top professors in areas that have the potential for raising the university’s stature or bringing economic returns.
But according to the most recent report, South Carolina has invested $183.6 million in lottery funds in the endowed chairs program since its inception in 2003 while receiving $145 million in “non-state” matching pledges. Of that $145 million, about $39 million has come from corporations and another $26 million from individuals.
The remainder was from foundations and non-profits (a little more than $49 million), federal funding (nearly $22 million) and health care providers (nearly $9 million).
That means the business community is chipping in one dollar for every $4.69 the state puts toward the program. Even if you combine the corporate and individual pledges, state funding is outpacing private contributions by nearly 3-to-1.
As to the statement that “more than $232 million in non-state funds have been invested into our state economy,” this figure is difficult to substantiate based on the annual report because there’s no breakdown of sourcing. Still, it’s apparent that a good bit of the money is coming from taxpayer pockets.
For example, in October, the University of South Carolina’s Center for Healthcare Quality received a $4.8 million federal grant from the National Institutes of Health.
According to Bethea, $113 million of the $232 million is comprised of “dollar-for-dollar partnership matches which each CoEE must raise in order to access state award funds.” The other $119 million is “composed of research grants awarded from corporations and federal agencies over and above program matching requirements.”
Without a breakdown, it’s impossible to tell how much support the program is getting from the private sector and how much is government-directed economic development.
Finally, there is Bethea’s assertion that nearly 3,200 jobs have been created by the Centers of Economic Excellence.
Actually, just seven pages after Bethea’s claim the job-creation numbers are modified: “To date, the CoEE program has resulted in 1,224 high-paying, knowledge-based economy jobs,” the report states. It adds that, according to the Darla Moore School of Business, another 2,000 new jobs are likely to have resulted from the impact of $120 million in extramural research funding brought into the South Carolina economy by CoEE chairs and their research teams.
So, nearly two-thirds of the jobs touted as being created by the Centers of Economic Excellence are nothing more than a guesstimate, an approximation made by an arm of one of the universities that benefits from the program.
The Centers of Economic Excellence has been unable to produce a detailed listing of jobs created through the Endowed Chairs program when requested by the Policy Council.
The uncritical assessment given by Bethea, who is vice chair of USC’s Research Foundation, is particularly embarrassing given that the University of South Carolina, for one, prides itself on being a research university.
Were a USC science student to turn in a report completed with the same methodology – poor research, lack of sourcing and dubious conclusions – they’d likely earn a failing grade.
Pastides Wants More Money for USC Railroad
In a move that should have surprised no one, University of South Carolina President Harris Pastides said Monday that when the economy improves he will ask the General Assembly for more money for the university.
Pastides, in a talk to the Columbia Rotary Club, said South Carolina now ranks last, with Arizona, in state taxpayer support of higher education, according to The State newspaper, adding that only 15 percent of USC’s funding now comes from state money.
“That’s no way to run a railroad,” he told the group.
No, it certainly isn’t any way to run a railroad – at least a profitable private one – as few railroads get 15 percent of their operating capital from state coffers. And willy-nilly expansion, operating with little to no accountability and pumping money into the rail equivalent of Innovista are also no way to run a railroad.
In fact, were Pastides the chief executive of a railroad and operated it as he does the University of South Carolina, he’d likely be run out of town on a rail by the company’s board of directors.
Pastides said legislatures in states that have successful universities, vibrant economies and educated populaces usually contribute far more money to their institutions of higher education than South Carolina.
But the fact is, if USC is in such difficult straits perhaps it should consider what other organizations do in difficult times, namely pull in their horns and concentrate on core areas, rather than expanding like kudzu on crack. Marshalling resources would enable USC to focus on its strengths, rather than spreading itself too thin.
What’s Happening in SC on Tuesday, 12/1
Clemson’s Wind Turbine Center Represents More ‘Mission Creep’
Clemson University’s tuition has nearly quadrupled over the past decade but the institution is committing millions of dollars in school resources to build a wind turbine testing center.
The Energy Department announced earlier this week it would give Clemson $45 million in stimulus money. State and private sources provided $53 million in matching funds, for a total of $98 million, according to the Associated Press, which did not provide a breakdown of the funding.
Clemson offered a mix of facilities, labor, land and cash to satisfy a federal requirement that grant recipients share 35 percent of the project’s total cost, according to Nick Rigas, director of the Restoration Institute’s renewable energy program.
The wind turbine testing center will be constructed at the university’s Restoration Institute in North Charleston.
Officials estimated that the facility will initially employ at least 100 people, but some say the overall job benefit could be exponentially greater.
The Energy Department has estimated that the wind industry in South Carolina could eventually provide anywhere from 10,000 to 20,000 jobs.
However, it should be noted that that figure is pure conjecture at this point. It’s based on a Department of Energy plan in which 20 percent of U.S. power would be produced by wind by the year 2030.
The 10,000-20,000 jobs figure for South Carolina is an extrapolation from the Energy Department’s plan that includes several major assumptions, including:
- That 80 percent of turbine blades will be produced in the US by 2030, compared to 50 percent when the study was done in 2004;
- That half of all wind towers will be manufactured in the US by 2030, compared to 26 percent five years ago; and
- That 42 percent of turbines are made in the US by 2030, compared to 30 percent in 2004.
The Restoration Institute conducts research in six areas: advanced materials, processes and systems, community revitalization, historic preservation and materials conservation, renewable energy, resilient infrastructure and restoration ecology.
Its best-known project is the conservation of the Confederate submarine H.L. Hunley.
In 2007, the State Budget and Control Board approved the issuance of $10.3 million in bonds for the institute, despite criticism that the move amounted to “mission creep,” the expansion of the university beyond its main campus.
A year earlier, North Charleston gave Clemson 82 acres of property at the old Charleston Navy Base, land appraised at $15 million.
While the school has continued expanding in willy-nilly fashion, tuition has jumped from just over $3,000 in 1999 to more than $11,000 this year, according to the S.C. Commission on Higher Education.
Ironically, on the same day in 2006 that Clemson approved fee increases that ended up costing some students up to $400 or more annually, it accepted the Hunley laboratory, setting the stage for the school to begin its North Charleston satellite campus.
Amid Rising Tuition, Winthrop Spends Thousands on Gimmick
Winthrop University spent $14,000, mostly from student fees, for 18 Kindle DXs, given to students in a Human Experience course. Student response has been less than overwhelming.
Winthrop University is at the forefront of South Carolina public institutions experimenting with e-book devices and, not coincidently, Winthrop students are at the forefront of undergrads not overly thrilled with the trial run.
Winthrop spent $14,000, mostly from student fees, for 18 Kindle DXs, which were given to 18 students in a Winthrop Human Experience course at the start of the semester in August.
In addition to the Kindle DX, Amazon’s newest e-reader, the devices came loaded with the syllabus, textbook and assigned readings.
The experiment has been met with disdain among Winthrop students, according to an article in the Rock Hill Herald.
“There’s got to be someone in here who doesn’t hate it,” asked Mark Herring, Winthrop University’s dean of library services.
“Where?” a student said.
The class laughed.
“I don’t really like it,” senior Cindy Satta said after class. “We used to highlight things we read, especially with complicated texts. We can’t do that now.”
And Satta prefers leafing through paper pages over fumbling with the Kindle key pad. But, she added, it was nice not having to buy a book.
The novelty seems especially impractical given the rising cost of higher education in South Carolina. This summer, Winthrop’s board of trustees voted to hike tuition to $5,803 per semester, a 4 percent increase.
Over the past decade, in-state tuition costs at Winthrop have increased 172 percent, from $4,262 to $11,606, according to the S.C. Commission on Higher Education.
True, $14,000 might seem like a drop in the bucket when one considers the overall size of Winthrop’s budget, but try telling that to the students and parents of students who year after year have to face increasing tuition bills.
Winthrop isn’t the only public institution in South Carolina to make an ill-advised foray into e-book technology, as the Policy Council pointed out in a report earlier this month.
Indeed, the school would have been better off waiting until some of the bugs were worked out before shelling out student funds for an unproven gimmick, particularly given the state of higher education economics in South Carolina.
