The Dilemma of Reducing Student Enrollment in Poor Employment Outcomes Programs at Public Universities

Publicly funded universities often face the challenging question of whether to reduce student enrollment in degree programs that have statistically poor employment outcomes. This decision is not merely academic but involves complex factors that include institutional livelihoods, personal interests, and the broader objective of providing for the future of students.

Factors Influencing Program Decisions

During my time working at institutions of higher education, I have attended meetings where this issue was openly discussed. I was surprised to find that despite the statistical data indicating low employment outcomes, programs continued to be offered. The question “why should we keep offering a major if the data clearly shows it is not producing jobs?” often arose. However, the decision-making process is not as straightforward as one might think.

One of the key factors is the livelihood and career prospects of the staff and administrators. Faculty members who are close to retirement or have young families often cling to these programs as a means of ensuring their financial and professional security. Administrators, too, have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo to keep the institution running and to protect their personal and professional futures. This creates a complex interplay between institutional goals and personal interests.

Personal Interests Over Institutional Goals

There is a need to consider that people who work in higher education are disproportionately focused on maintaining their livelihoods. While the typical belief is that schools exist to serve students, it is important to recognize that the staff and faculty are equally concerned with their own stability and sustenance. This personal interest is a significant factor in the decision-making process, often overshadowing the broader academic and student-focused goals.

Program Relevance and Employment Outcomes

It is crucial to examine programs with a closer lens, particularly when employment outcomes are poor. For instance, the decision to discontinue an entrepreneurship program solely because its graduates are not being hired may be premature. Many entrepreneurship programs aim to develop startups that can potentially generate employment, either by the graduates themselves or by hiring others. Discontinuing such a program might stifle innovation and economic growth in the long run.

Therefore, it is essential to consider the various contributory factors before making drastic changes. Program focus, the potential for graduates to contribute to the economy through entrepreneurship, and the overall ecosystem of the institution must be taken into account. This holistic approach is necessary to ensure that educational institutions remain relevant and effective in preparing students for both the job market and future challenges.

Conclusion

Deciding whether to reduce student enrollment in poor employment outcomes programs is both complex and multifaceted. While data and statistics are crucial, they must be balanced against the practical realities of institutional livelihoods and the broader potential contributions of graduates. A closer examination of these programs and a more inclusive decision-making process can lead to better outcomes for both the institution and its students.