Circ activation contest

Performance measures must be applied carefully

2013-03-28T00:00:00Z 2013-03-28T00:02:02Z Performance measures must be applied carefullyBy Lawrence K. Pettit Helena Independent Record
March 28, 2013 12:00 am  • 

I do not know anyone in higher education who does not accept the need for performance evaluation. Those I know also believe in accountability to stakeholders, including taxpayers who provide funding — albeit a diminishing share of budget needs — to public institutions. So, as an experienced and worn-out warrior from those minefields where academic and political imperatives clash, I wish here to urge not all-out resistance, but caution, as the regents, the governor and legislative leaders get set to implement their agreement to impose new performance measures on Montana’s public universities.

First, there is the constitutional issue. Article X, Section 9, of the Montana constitution confers full authority on the regents to manage and control the university system. In the beginning, some of us bloodied our heads repeatedly to protect that provision. Neither the governor nor the Legislature has authority to make university system appropriations dependent on acquiescence to management directives from them. The regents may agree to negotiated claims, as they have in this case, but when they do so, they should file a written disclaimer that their voluntary action does not indicate an intention to give up any of their constitutional authority or independence.

Next, I urge Montana to buck the misdirected trend in this country to use an English-French dictionary to translate a tome from the German. Let me explain. The United States is distinguished in one way from other developed nations by our deification of business and abject worship of “free market” magic. Thus, we measure everything with a yardstick appropriate to profit-making enterprises, and we actually believe that anything is managed better if “run like a business.” This should be avoided in evaluating any not-for-profit organization, especially universities.

In my experience, using the business model to evaluate universities results in addressing only those variables susceptible of quantitative measurement, and these, inevitably, are not the most critical ones. This approach ignores those elements of a university’s “product” which often take years before the payoff is evident. The value of these intangibles is not captured in the idiom of cost accounting.

If you ignore the life-changing experience of students, whether or not they graduate; if you disregard the quality-of-life and economic impacts of campus museums, symphony orchestras, dramatic productions, or the laboratory and library resources, the rapidly growing and externally funded research, faculty publications and professional linkages around the globe, or student public service; if you cannot measure Missoula’s Nobel laureates, Rhodes Scholars or Pulitzer Prize winners, or the impact of Bozeman’s Sloan fellows in physics and other faculty and student award winners — then you come down to this: you are in danger of squeezing the soul from the university as you re-conceptualize it into an assembly line to produce interchangeable human widgets for beginning-level niches in American business.

Universities will invest their energy and resources in maximizing those measures that attract public money. This not only distorts what a university is, but is dehumanizing for those students who wish to be risk-taking intellectual explorers while students, or who see themselves someday playing significant roles outside business — in the arts, journalism, religion, teaching in our public schools, serving in government or in the human services. None of these fetches a large starting salary, and in no case is later “success” measured by how much money one makes. Yet the assumption of the business model is that the essential purpose of a college education is to get a good job and make a lot of money.

Universities sometimes will game the system when being measured against each other to determine the allocation of scarce resources. It is rather easy, for example, to improve the retention rate from freshman to sophomore year, or the graduation rate, by lowering standards and reducing the number of students who “flunk out.”

There are also legitimate reasons that make these two measurers difficult to use. Tracking transfer students, in and out, is difficult, and then there are students who drop out for financial reasons. Some universities lose more transfers and have a larger portion of financially disadvantaged students than others. Should they be penalized as a result?

Finally the use of “productivity” measures usually is coupled with the use of “efficiency” measures. This runs up against the reality that the best universities are often the least efficient, as measured by cost accounting. They are good because they continually attract resources to sustain more and better laboratories, more books and subscriptions in the libraries, state-of-the-art technology and more and better student housing and recreation facilities. They also have smaller classes, requiring more faculty, whom they pay more. An efficiency expert might say a university is squandering money by having in its main library more books than anyone could ever read, or by having six nursing students rather than 26 surrounding a hospital bed in practicum.

Montana’s universities are much better than we deserve, considering their minimal level of state support. Let us hope that the imposition of “performance measures” will be done with care, and will not trigger an erosion of those unmeasurable things that define a great university.

Lawrence K. Pettit was Montana’s first Commissioner of Higher Education, after which he was president of universities in Texas, Illinois and Pennsylvania. He lives in Helena.

Copyright 2015 Helena Independent Record. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

(2) Comments

  1. steeline
    Report Abuse
    steeline - March 30, 2013 9:17 am
    Run education like a business. If it isn't cost effective don't spend money on it. There has to be some form of oversight to these well read word merchants. In the polyanna world of the Professors, that are specialist in their field of study, there has to be be a common grounding in overall reality. We need to have results in outcomes not wishful thinking.
  2. WhiskeyJack
    Report Abuse
    WhiskeyJack - March 29, 2013 10:40 am
    A well written explanation of the importance of not trying to micro-manage higher education. What Dr. Pettit does not get into but is, none-the-less, implicit and very significant is that the state and the nation have a vested interest in educating its children to the highest and most comprehensive level possible. Universities in particular must not be arenas wherein the students are merely trained and fed the beliefs of the current dominant political ideology. Rather, a university should be a cauldron where students can and should encounter many different intellectual demands and challenges lest they graduate as merely trained, not truly educated.

Civil Dialogue

We provide this community forum for readers to exchange ideas and opinions on the news of the day. Passionate views, pointed criticism and critical thinking are welcome. Name-calling, crude language and personal abuse are not welcome. Moderators will monitor comments with an eye toward maintaining a high level of civility in this forum. Our comment policy explains the rules of the road for registered commenters. If you receive an error after submitting a comment, please contact us.

If your comment was not approved, perhaps:

    1. You called someone an idiot, a racist, a dope, a moron, etc. Please, no name-calling or profanity (or veiled profanity -- #$%^&*).

    2. You rambled, failed to stay on topic or exhibited troll-like behavior intended to hijack the discussion at hand.

    3. YOU SHOUTED YOUR COMMENT IN ALL CAPS. This is hard to read and annoys readers.

    4. You have issues with a business. Have a bad meal? Feel you were overcharged at the store? New car is a lemon? Contact the business directly with your customer service concerns.

    5. You believe the newspaper's coverage is unfair. It would be better to write the editor at This is a forum for community discussion, not for media criticism. We'd rather address your concerns directly.

    6. You included an e-mail address or phone number, pretended to be someone you aren't or offered a comment that makes no sense.

    7. You accused someone of a crime or assigned guilt or punishment to someone suspected of a crime.

    8. Your comment is in really poor taste.

    9. Don't write a novel. If your comment is longer than the article you're commenting on, you might want to cut it down a bit. Lengthy comments will likely be removed.
Add Comment
You must Login to comment.

Click here to get an account it's free and quick