In May of 2008, CSULB will be hosting the 2008 Social Science Research and Instructional Council (SSRIC) Student Research Conference here on campus.  This event is organized by Stafford Cox (scox@csulb.edu) and will feature panels and presentations by students on their research from across the social sciences.  More details will be forthcoming soon. Keep an eye on http://www.csulb-cla.org/conferences/ for more information!  

Today’s New York Times featured an interesting article about the rise of the demand for Masters Degree program and the benefits seen by institutions and students.  You can read the original here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/12/education/12masters.html?ex=1190347200&en=f42a87c54c31a7e4&ei=5070&emc=eta1The article features a quote by Gary Reichard, our ex-Provost and now executive vice chancellor.I’ve replicated the article here if you don’t subscribe to the NYT. 

Master’s Degrees Abound as Universities and Students See a Windfall

By HANNAH FAIRFIELD

 

Published: September 12, 2007

The number of students in the University of Chicago program that bestows a Master of Arts degree in social sciences has quadrupled since 1989, jumping to 160 from 40, and despite a tuition price tag of $37,000, every year more students clamor for admittance.“It’s an expensive degree, but students have calculated how fast they get their investment back,” said John J. MacAloon, an associate dean at the University of Chicago and director of the program. “And it is beneficial for the university because there is a lot of tuition income to be had.”More students than ever have started master’s programs this fall, and universities are seeing those programs as potentially lucrative sources of revenue. The number of students earning these degrees around the country has nearly doubled since 1980. Since 1970, the growth is 150 percent, more than twice as fast as bachelor and doctorate programs.“Master’s programs are the most obvious targets of opportunity,” said George L. Mehaffy, a vice president of the American Association of State Colleges and Universities. “The degrees are in high demand, and this is an optimal time to enter or expand the market.”For students, the degrees are often expensive; at private universities, many students take out $50,000 in loans for every year of school. And scholarships and fellowships are rare, unlike doctoral programs, which are usually fully financed by universities.Still, many say the price is worth it. In his two-year master’s program in science technology and environmental policy from the University of Minnesota Craig Nelson had $35,000 in loans. Now, he works in regulatory affairs at the 3M Company.“Without the degree, I wouldn’t have the job,” he said. “So even though I’ll be paying the loan for 10 years, it was a good move for me.”Getting into the business of offering these degrees can be a good move for universities, too, with some that have traditionally focused only on undergraduate students now entering the master’s market. The California State Universitysystem, for example, has introduced many new applied master’s degrees and is expanding its master’s of business administration programs.“We are really conscious of the fact that master’s degrees are becoming the coin of the realm,” said Gary W. Reichard, the executive vice chancellor and chief academic officer for the California system. “And because M.B.A.’s can offer tremendous salary boosts down the road, we can charge higher tuitions to students.”Universities also do not have to provide dormitory rooms and dining halls for master’s candidates, because graduate students typically do not live on campus.Some university officials say the explosion of these programs has less to do with revenue than it does with the marketplace pressures on students to get higher degrees and credentials.Thomas Ehrlich, a senior scholar at the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and a former president ofIndiana University, said that although many master’s programs could be good revenue streams for universities, “We’re not in the business of making money.” He added, “We’re in the business of educating students.”But some schools are in the business of both. The University of Phoenix, a commercial institution with 60 branch campuses and around 200,000 students, awarded 24,788 master’s degrees last year, mostly for work completed online in business and education. That was at least a thousand more than the number of bachelor’s degrees it awarded.Many university provosts say a graduate education can be more expensive to provide than an undergraduate degree, merely because class sizes are usually smaller in graduate courses. But for universities that already have established doctoral programs, adding paying master’s students to the mix means they get a bump in tuition dollars without a heavy outlay of resources.“Sometimes there is unused capacity in graduate classrooms,” Mr. Mehaffy said. “If there are 10 people in a graduate course one year and 15 the next, there is a 50 percent growth but no real drain on the institution.”Universities are also luring master’s students into staying for multiple years by offering dual-degree programs: two master’s degrees at twice the cost. Some programs join international affairs and journalism, science and public policy, business and education. Other schools extend programs; for example, the University of Wisconsin’s two-year master’s degree in anthropology can be lengthened to three years if students want to add a museum studies concentration.And many students believe that these multiple degrees are highly valuable in today’s competitive job market.Rey A. Phillips Santos has three graduate degrees gracing his résumé: two master’s and one in law. After completing the master’s of arts program in the social sciences from the University of Chicago, he decided to go on to the Chicago-Kent College of Law, in a joint-degree program in environmental management with the Stuart Graduate School of Business.“There is a huge demand for credentials in high-level jobs now,” said Mr. Phillips, who is a lawyer for the Chicago city government. “Each of my degrees helped me to get a leg up in the job market, and earn higher salaries than I would have otherwise. They were great investments.”

 

The general purpose of this blog is to enable CLA folks to contribute message, thoughts, comments, ideas, and announcements regarding their research, students, the campus, the college, etc.  It is intended to compliment “push-driven” email since blogging allows messages to remain persistent.  Everyone is encouraged to register and get a login so they too can post. To do so, simply click on the “Register” link in the upper menu bar.  Enter your login for your CSULB email account and whatever password you normally use.  Note: this blog is not currently linked to the broader CSULB system so you will have to register before you can participate in the blog – but this is very easy.Once you register, you will be able to post comments, write a new post, and contribute to the blog.   If anyone is interested in having their own personal blog, please let me know (clipo@csulb.edu). I can set one up using the same server that runs the CLA Blog or point you to a free location where you can create your own blog site (e.g., http://www.evolutionbeach.org). I have started linking CLA blogs to the front page of this one (see the “Links” list on the left hand side of the front page).  

There are a variety of other odd aspects of the Master Plan (at least to me). No mention, for example, is made about alternative forms of transportation and the means by which the increased faculty, staff and students will access our campus.  For example, are there any plans to make bicycling to work safer and more efficient – with many students and faculty living nearby campus bicycling to work has become increasingly popular. Yet the campus has no obvious connection with the City of Long Beach as far as traffic is concerned (i.e., car traffic and bike traffic). The bike lanes are the most egregious examples — they simply stop just before campus. Students and faculty are often seen riding on sidewalks or, in the case of 7th, the wrong way down the street to avoid having to cross over 7th as it turns in to highway 22. The City of Long Beach has a master plan for bicycle transportation within the city.  You can read it here:  http://www.ci.long-beach.ca.us/gov/bmp.asp Oddly, this plan makes no mention of CSULB and the CSULB Master Plan makes no mention of Long Beach. Shouldn’t there be a more comprehensive and integrated effort? If the campus is to become more of a “community,” shouldn’t accommodations be made to make the campus more accessible, easier to move around in, and very importantly, better integrated into the City around us?   As always, comments, ideas, thoughts, replies, additional posts, are welcome. 

If you haven’t done so already, I urge everyone to check out the latest revision of the Master Plan for the campus.  This document is available at:  http://ppfmoas.ppfm.ad.csulb.edu/web/docs/masterplan.pdf. The plan was released in June 2007 and was prepared by Facilities Management as part of a vision that will eventually allow us to support education for 31,000 FTE in 2015/2016 (from a 2007/2008 FTE of 25,000). While there are a variety of projects planned within this document, there are a number specific construction phases that will impact CLA faculty, staff and students.

The first phase is intended to build a new building in place of what is now PH-1 (Peterson Hall 1). PHASE 1:

  “The Liberal Arts Replacement Building project will demolish Peterson Hall 1 (#37) (40,000 ASF/65,000 GSF), Peterson Hall 2 (#38) (50,500 ASF/80,000 GSF). Phase 1 (54,708 ASF/87,725 GSF) is planned to accommodate 1,401 FTE (1,375 FTE in lecture space, 13 FTE in LD laboratory space, 13 in UD laboratory space) and one hundred and seventy-two (172) faculty offices.” (Page E-3)  

The second phase will add an additional building on the south side of what is currently PH-1. PHASE 2:

 ” The second phase will construct 38,408 ASF/62,380 GSF replacement space for the College of Liberal Arts. Phase 2 will accommodate 50 FTE (31 LD laboratory space, 18 UD laboratory space) and 99 faculty office. General administration, instructional activity, and media space are also planned for this building.” (Page E-3)

 

Below are the proposed footprints of these buildings. North is oriented to the left of the image.  The building on the left is Phase 1 while the right hand building in blue is part of Phase 2.  The target date for the completion of these buildings is 2012/13.  

 

An additional portion of the Master Plan calls for the demolition of LA-2, 3, and 4 as well as Lecture Halls 150 and 151.  A new building would be put in place of these existing structures. No time line is given for this part of the project. A conceptual drawing of the building is shown below:

 

 

Given the generally acknowledged unmet needs of CLA, I encourage everyone to look at the new Master Plan for themselves.  

There are a number of questions that come to mind when I read this new Master Plan. Primarily, it would be interesting to know exactly what information was used to determine the priority for the projects as well as some of the details (square footage, laboratory requirements, etc.).  Undoubtedly, these numbers were generated by Facilities Management using values and calculations based on current usage of our campus and our educational activities.  Some allowance, obviously, was made for growth particularly to accommodate the project 31,000 FTE.  

What I wonder, however, is whether any consideration has been made for program growth and changes in philosophy of the University.  If we are to become a school of “teacher/scholars” has there been consideration that our basic facilities needs will certainly change.   If, for example, allocated laboratory and research space based current course classifications, what happens if we double the number of “activity” courses to meet the needs of a more hands-on and activity driven education (i.e., “active learning”).  If we start having more intensive classes with laboratory requirements, won’t the demand for large lecture halls also go up as FTE would need to be balance to support smaller classes?  It is a bit perplexing that we are given a vision of the future without a more comprehensive campus/college discussion about where we are going.  Is the mission simply to build a campus that is exactly 124% larger than the current one?  I, for one, hope not since 124% of the existing inadequate facilities will do little to resolve even current needs.

 

Comments, ideas, thoughts, replies and new postings are welcome…

As a means of organizing the participants of the 2008 CLA Student Research Poster Showcase (scheduled for Spring 2008), we have established a registration web site. This web site enables students/faculty to submit titles and abstracts for poster submissions. Having each student (individual or group) register will enable us to coordinate the numbers of poster boards need, provide a means for tracking who is involved, and will enable us to communicate more efficiently.  To check out the website (in its initial state), please see: http://huxley.cla.csulb.edu/conferences/index.php/CLA/