Messages

An easy peasy, back-of-the-envelope answer to "how much endowment income is available for immediate spending?" is to multiply the current endowment by 4 percent, which is the standard draw to ensure that the principle continues to grow.

Bigger percentage draws because the endowment just had a fabulous year are a possibility, but it may be much wiser to hold onto the money to ensure that you can draw more than 4 percent during down years for the market.

Agree with the philosophy presented by David81, but from my experience talking with advancement and finance people within universities the annual draw is usually 5 percent unless, for individual items, doing so draws the item under the original donation amount.

Most, if not all, universities have visiting professors - but it is never more than a few at any given time.

[Marian University sees nearly 18% increase in enrollment of Latino students]

It appears that Marian University has employed a nearly identical growth strategy with excellent results. On one hand it suggests that Valpo is on the right path. Conversely, it could suggest that it is behind the 8-ball. Time will tell.

Marian University sees nearly 18% increase in enrollment of Latino students

https://www.wrtv.com/news/education/marian-university-sees-41-increase-in-enrollment-of-latino-students#:~:text=INDIANAPOLIS%20—%20Marian%20University%20enrolled%20its,in%20enrollment%20for%20this%20population.

It may not be anything consequential, but statements like "18% increase" and "most Latino students ever enrolled" can be misleading. For example, 18% increase from what to what? What is the total percentage of Latino students in the student body?

An area that has improved over the last couple games has been our three point shooting.  At Bradley, we shot 42%, and we shot 35% at UIC (we were shooting at a 40% clip before the last eight minutes).  In those games our accuracy outside of the 3 pt line was as been as good as that within the the line.

Should there be any discussion about the use of timeouts for the team that has been running out of gas.  In the second half, Coach Powell sat on all of his timeouts until there was just over a minute left...

Great point. I find it very odd that very few coaches call timeouts to give players a rest. Perhaps they think that the four minute timeouts should be enough, but if a team is gassed you could really give them a break by calling another timeout shortly after a four minute timeout. I have seen it done, but it is rare.

I don't know the percent requirement for accreditation, but it varies by college (and sometimes even major). While universities are accredited, the far more important accreditations are by college with unique boards that are specific to each discipline (i.e., nursing, business, engineering, etc.) - and that is where the "percent of classes taught by tenured faculty comes into play." My other comment is that this 'winnowing' of tenured faculty has started and is being done to some degree at most universities that are not state flagship universities.

Some might say, "why worry about accreditation?" The answer is that most companies only recruit and hire graduates from programs that are accredited at the highest level (e.g., business and engineering) or only hire people from the most highly accredited programs for the better positions in the field (e.g., nursing). Accreditation certifies that experts are teaching classes and that the programs have sufficient depth and rigor.

There is also a wide range of non-tenure track faculty (NTTs). On one end, you have people with PhDs who don't want to do research and people who have developed tremendous practical expertise. I know some who left industry that use their expertise, experience and connections to start new programs. They bring tremendous value and connection to the university. On the other end, there are people who just come in and teach classes. Universities are much better when they are hiring NTTs who bring value beyond just filling teaching slots.

Part of "being nimble" for universities is to replace tenured faculty who retire (or depart for other reasons) with faculty who are on one, two or three year contracts (which the university can choose or decline to renew). These positions are typically referred to as professors of practice or clinical faculty and usually are filled by people with Masters degrees who also have a some (or a lot of) professional experience. Individual colleges in universities cannot do this to the nth degree, as accreditation requirements include a certain percentage of courses being taught by tenured/tenure track faculty. I wish this was not so necessary (though some professors of practice can bring tremendous and unique value), but the reality is that a business can't have excessive fixed costs (which is what tenured faculty are) when enrollment might not create the necessary level of revenue.

I think that one area where this team still needs to develop (quite a bit) is connectedness on both the offensive and defensive ends. There are very few possessions (on either end) in which it is not 5 guys playing individually.

Government agencies unjustly targeting GCU

https://news.gcu.edu/press-releases/government-agencies-unjustly-targeting-gcu/

Now, for political or ideological reasons we don't understand, some in our federal government want to undermine those efforts. While we have taken the high road and continuously worked cooperatively and professionally with these individuals over the past five years, given their clear motivations and recent actions, we can no longer stay silent and allow their coordinated efforts to impugn the reputation of this university and the many faculty and staff who go above and beyond to ensure we provide the best possible service to our students.

This looks like a frivolous lawsuit to me from a hostile liberal administration hell bent on tarnishing the good reputation of a legitimate conservative Christian College. The article linked above refutes each and every frivolous charge which should be rejected by a court of appeals. Another example of an administration weaponizing various government agencies against its political and ideological opponents. This has no place in a legitimate government. This is the stuff of autocrats and tyrants.

The Dept. of Education in the U.S. Government previously rejected Grand Canyon's application for non-profit status because of the shady (to say the least) linkage between GCE (the publicly traded part of Grand Canyon) and GCU (the university). Funny thing - this was in 2019 and the federal government's judgement against GCU was made by a Republican administration (which GCU referred to as being arbitrary and capricious). I do not really have any opinion on the most recent fines imposed by the U.S. government, but GCU (and GCE) overall are deeply fraudulent in their business model.

I agree that someone considering a PhD needs to understand the reputation of universities and job prospects from each PhD granting university (as well as the pay and job prospects in their field).

To my knowledge, GCU has no PhD programs. There are likely two reasons for this: 1. No university or firm/research center (mainly in sciences and engineering) would hire someone who was 'taught' to do research at GCU. Accreditation is a big part of this, as is the reputation of GCU. 2. Universities pay students to get PhDs. There is no tuition (and most classes are very small since a PhD program is far more like an apprenticeship) and a modest stipend to cover living expenses while students are completing their PhDs. This would not be consistent with GCU's "profit regardless of the quality of education or job placement" model.

I would rephrase your statement to "GCU graduates won't build my bridges or operate on my heart". Nor will they fill a lot of other professional positions, though I am sure that GCU's administration will try to show prospective students that (one day) they will.

Quick clarification - a PhD program is a type of doctorate program, but the terms cannot be interchanged. A PhD program teaches the student how to do research, while most or all other doctorate programs have little or no development in research. You cannot get a tenure-track faculty position without a PhD.

This is from Grand Canyon's website on its business programs:

Grand Canyon University has been accredited by the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) since 1968. Additionally, many of our business degrees have attained elite accreditation from the Accreditation Council for Business Schools & Programs (ACBSP)

The problem with this is that the top accreditation board for business schools is AACSB, which is the accrediting body for Valpo, Purdue, Indiana, etc. - any good or better business school. Companies will definitely consider degrees from ACBSP schools as being vastly inferior (look at the list of schools accredited by ACBSP) - despite GCU's claim that they have attained "elite" accreditation for many other their business degrees.

Just one of many many ways in which GCU misrepresents itself...it is part of their culture.

FWAlum - I am sorry that you have been having a tough time. Thank you for posting and Merry Christmas to you (and everyone else) as well.

Quinn Buckner may have been the GOAT in Illinois HS basketball.

Isiah Thomas. Glenn (Doc) Rivers. Dwayne Wade could also be considered (but he blossomed late).

Universities are under no obligation to provide a roster spot or scholarships for athletes who gained a year of eligibility because of COVID. Thus, those decisions should be based solely on merit and fit.

valpopal - Thanks...and I should have said thanks previously when you posted the update.

While I certainly hope that enrollment is going well, I suggest being cautious when any general comments about enrollment that are not accompanied by data. Further, there are really only three measures that are good indicators: # of visits, prospective students who have stated that they will enroll, and deposits. Given that applying to more universities is easy once someone has applied to one, the number of applications is essentially meaningless.

Good job recovering from a poor start. Great bench play, especially Williamson.

Any university seeking this grant needed to submit a proposal. We do not know if Valpo submitted a proposal.

There are programs that emphasize connection and team development, And then there are programs like Memphis.

And the medium and smaller sized schools will be very motivated to seek legal recourse, since most have spent large sums to build new facilities, etc.

The greatest push in the direction of the medium & smaller sized schools seeking legal recourse is the financial strain that the pandemic blind sided these schools with in 2020. Without that financial situation I don't think you would see those schools go to a legal recourse. Reminder, they are basically suing themselves as they are member schools of the NCAA.

A split in which the medium and small sized schools are left behind would cause them to lose millions in tangible revenues (TV revenue, NCAA tournament) and perhaps more in intangible resources (loss of reputation by not playing top tier sports). Their argument would be that a huge fee (having to put aside $30K per year per athlete) would be an excessive barrier that restricts (business) competition.

The NCAA threads a needle on trying to appease and maximize returns for the large schools while maintaining its status as a non-profit and avoiding anti-trust lawsuits. If the NCAA tries to create a higher tier, including creating one by having a set aside per athlete per year, the remaining schools will go to court - legal proceedings that could ultimately cost the major universities billions in taxes. And the medium and smaller sized schools will be very motivated to seek legal recourse, since most have spent large sums to build new facilities, etc.

Had to Google him. 6-10. Kansas State. Suspended for issues. Baggage.  For one semester? Does he fit Roger's target player profile - no. Could he help us to a couple more wins - maybe. Could he disrupt the chemistry that is being built - maybe.  Is the gamble worth it?  No.

My view is that Coach Powell is trying to build a system that can be sustainable for the long term. That system is built on being connected with teammates and seeing the value of team. Bringing anyone in for a few months can only be detrimental to that goal.

valpopal - Thanks for the post. It is a positive if all information from the consultant is being shared with all faculty (can't say that is common across most universities - so kudos to the administration). Also agree that the greater challenge is developing strategies and subsequent moves from that data.

In the "good for us" category, Southern, whom Valpo beat 71-59 last weekend, upset #21 Mississippi State today by 60-59! Miss. St. was on its home court and had been favored by 26 points.

That is surprising. I saw Southern on Tuesday get beat badly by Marquette.

While I see historyman's points about lots of speculation with no knowledge and uscvalpo's points regarding the value of an outside perspective, I do have some general concerns about hiring an outside consultant:

-I will return to points from some posters about Valpo not using its own resources. I mention using people from the colleges to gain acceptance and foster involvement in implementation later in my comments, but is the university actively seeking involvement from alums? All I see, as an alum who cares greatly and tries to engage more than the average alum, are requests for money (which is fine and appropriate) and garbage requests looking for people to share their Valpo memories. There are a lot of alums with successful professional histories, yet I have not seen requests to be actively involved in more than a decade.
-When any organization, including a university hires an outside consultant, the consultant often tells the leadership that hired the consultant what they want to hear. In a basic sense, the consultant is trying to justify their pay and create further business with the organization - so the best way to make the customer happy is to confirm rather than offer alternative perspectives. Thus, the value of a consultant can be minimal.
-Building on historyman's point, we don't know what the consultant was hired to do. For instance, they might be hired only to provide external data on trends...in this case, there could be a lot of value.
-However, a university hiring a consultant will often only have direct engagement with the consultant from a small group that is mostly or completely from the administration. This is very problematic, since any tactics or strategic directions need buyin and active participation from faculty and staff in all colleges. "Coming down from on high" and telling everyone that "we met with the consultant and have decided to pursue these directions and we now need your involvement" will get minimal involvement...but lots of pushback.
-While I see the value of outside, unbiased perspectives, I do not think that a consultant can be effective without having people who have worked and managed in the context for which they are consulting.

Some other points related to the prior discussion:
-Valpo22: I really hope that things work out well for you in your new direction. I, of course, do not know the circumstances of where you worked at Valpo...but I must admit that I am concerned if you can get 2.25x the pay for the same responsibilities. Nothing against you at all...who wouldn't do the same thing? But Valpo has real problems with sustainability if it is underpaying people that much.
-usc4valpo mentions making major investments. I generally agree with this statement, but that means selecting the right places to invest which often requires a much harder action - choosing where to reduce or discontinue investment (or have solid real commitments for additional funds). The university did make the choice to buyout Matt Lottich, but let's not forget that the athletic department also had a major windfall from the New Mexico State buy game.