Want to Change the Academic Lineup? First Analyze Offerings as a Whole

Chronicle photo by Julia Schmalz

Academic programs are the lifeblood of higher education, and they need to be relevant and valuable — to students as well as to the institution. Offerings have evolved over time, but often without thorough examination. These days, mounting financial pressures and increased competition for students are making regular re-evaluation of the academic lineup a crucial move.

The Chronicle recently released a special report, “The Right Mix of Academic Programs: Making Decisions to Add, Cut, Grow, or Shrink Departments and Degrees,” to explore how to approach a program audit or prioritization process and where to go from there. The report discusses how to close, adapt, and expand programs, as well as optimize course scheduling. Here is an excerpt.

In response to financial challenges, colleges often focus on cutting costs, perhaps putting certain programs on the chopping block. Campus leaders are less likely to examine the core of what they do — particularly to analyze their academic offerings as a whole, says Richard Staisloff, a former chief financial officer at a small college who is now a consultant.

“Academic programs should be considered as a portfolio, not merely a collection of program offerings,” he says. The portfolio concept lets colleges see the finances of individual programs, as well as how they fit within the institution, including their contributions to enrollment and student success. Each program, says Staisloff, should be evaluated in terms of mission (the specialties of the institution), market (what students want), and margin (generating revenue to support the mission). Here are three crucial steps.

Scrutinize student yield and progress. Data visualization can help, using four quadrants on a grid to plot programs by the number of applications they draw and the rate at which admitted students enroll, Staisloff says. A program with few applicants and high yield may simply need better marketing and recruitment. A program with many applicants and low yield could redesign courses to better capitalize on interest, and in doing so, distinguish itself from similar offerings elsewhere. Programs with low applicants and low yield should “be tested for mission relevance as well as institutional contribution,” such as credit hours offered to nonmajors, he says. Further layers of analysis could incorporate data on retention, completion, and outcomes. How do different programs stack up?

Measure efficiency and productivity. Colleges may be able to run programs at a lower cost without compromising quality, Staisloff says. An evaluation should examine such factors as the mix of courses, number of sections, class size, fill rate, and faculty course-release time. Students’ credit accumulation can be another revealing factor: Are they often taking more courses than they need to graduate? Adjustments to course schedules — like offering fewer or more sections of a course, at different times — might better accommodate demand.

Take a hard look at administration. What does an institution need to support its academic programs? Any portfolio review should consider administrative services and how they can be delivered more cost effectively, he says. “Taken together, an academic and administrative review can allow for the transparency and accountability institutions need to create sustainable models in support of mission and student success.”

Scott Carlson is a senior writer who covers the cost and value of college. Email him at scott.carlson@chronicle.com.