President Aloia's Housing Disaster: How Jimmy Carter Could Teach Greg Something New

Housing Disaster #1: Fall 2008

I remember well when I first came to Concord and the thoughts that were running through my head. I wondered if I would make any friends. I wondered if the professors were going to be nice. I wondered if I had made a terrible mistake in coming to Concord. I never for a moment thought that I wouldn't have a room to call my own. Indeed, I cannot think of a single student who didn't know if they'd have a room to sleep in their first night on campus. However, all of that changed in Fall 2008 when for the first time in many decades Concord saw an explosion of in the number of new students and on campus housing requests. Concord had not seen so many new Freshmen since our grandfathers returned from fighting World War 2 and put their new GI Bill to good use. While this was a success for the admissions team lead by Michael Curry, it was a disaster for Housing & Residence Life. For the first time they could recall, students would be forced to live in "temporary housing".

"Temporary housing" is a technical term designed both to explain the situation and to make the situation sound not nearly as bad as it is. Temporary housing means just that, a place where an individual can stay until additional space opens up elsewhere on campus. For Concord students however it means kitchens, closets, lounges and computer labs.Some students who submitted an application for on-campus housing, a $50 deposit and filled out their roommate information sheet were expecting four corners, a roommate and a broken air conditioning unit were shocked to find themselves living in Red Cross like conditions. In many cases, students found themselves living with 6 or 7 other people in a setup more akin to boot camp than college.

We cannot place any real blame for this disaster on the shoulders of people like Rick Dillon or his Residence Life staff. Based entirely on the enrollment figures for the past ten years and based on the projections admissions had made there was no way to expect incoming freshmen and returning student numbers to be anywhere near what they were. Even if they had known to expect the increases a few months in advance, what could be expected of them? Rome wasn't built in a day and scores of college freshmen aren't suddenly housed overnight. Indeed, Rick and his staff should be given a pat on the back for the innovative ideas they came up with. They put people where they could, slashed and pro-rated costs for students who lives in temporary or triple rooms and when space opened up they filled it.

Well, thank goodness that problem was solved!

Housing Disaster #2: Fall 2009

Concord staff and administration knew that the problem of too many students on campus wouldn't go away overnight, and they also knew that if similar retention and recruitment numbers were seen for Fall 2009 as Fall 2008 there would be new Freshmen facing the same problems as before. Another major problem facing administrators was that they had put a lot of effort into retention, hiring a director and creating new programs and incentives to keep Concord students coming back each year. Typically this would be a good thing as we'd have plenty of room for on-campus residents. However, If these programs were successful, it would be an even bigger problem to deal with.

With the United States gripped in a "great recession", many on campus suspected that enrollment would actually increase as opposed to decreasing. The Student Government Association warned the President's cabinet that due to increase federal government support for financial aid programs and because in times of hardship more students will seek better education for the future that Concord would be faced with a relatively high fall enrollment. This suggestion was brushed aside and the administration pointed to figures they conceded were only estimates that Concord would see a decrease of at least 100 students. No surprise here, while the Fall 2009 numbers didn't shatter the record breaking previous year enrollment and retention saw significant net gains from the 2005-2007 years. In short, the administration banked on the fact that we'd be down many students and our housing problems would go away. They didn't really prepare for the fact that if they were wrong, we'd be dealing with the same crisis we'd dealt with before.

The advantage of facing a problem year after year is that the first time you're almost entirely unprepared for it. However, in putting together temporary solutions a team is able to discover what works and what doesn't work and prepare a plan for the following year. While I am confident that Residence Life did a pretty fair job of preparing for this fall, Dr. Aloia fell well short of any meaningful attempts to keep students out of closets and kitchens and put them into quality rooms. He had nearly a year to consider short, intermediate and long term solutions to our Housing woes and rather than get cracking on those solutions he shifted the responsibility to those below him. Unfortunately for them, without the resources from the administration and without commitments from the President to actually address the problem effectively, they were left with the same choices as before.

Why "Temporary Housing" Hurts Everyone

The problem with "temporary housing" is that it doesn't just impact the poor students who are forced to live in the miserable conditions. When you take a kitchen and turn it into a Red Cross shelter, you deprive students of the ability to use those facilities. When you unplug the technology in a computer lab and slide up a few beds, you deprive scores of students the ability to write their papers, work on projects or just surf the web. Community areas that are turned into temporary residences fix a problem in the short term, but they create another in its place. So the images you see on the Housing website of laughing students using community resources - that won't be you. The pitch that an admissions counselor gave you about cooking your own food if you're hungry late at night? Not you either. Indeed, even the Hall Council dollars that students pay that should go into fixing up lounges and keeping the DVD collections up to date are wasted because now students are sleeping there.

Beyond just the community resources that students are losing out of as a result of "overflow" there is the issue of Concord's reputation as an institution. I've been at Concord long enough to love it for what it is, but also for what it can be. As much as "The Campus Beautiful" might grow on you after a while, it doesn't impress new students very much to cram them into a closet rather than a room. Those questions I mentioned before running through their minds like "Did I make the right choice?" start flooding back. You cannot expect students to pay higher tuition every single year (and higher tuition than schools like Marshall) and at the same time give them almost third world conditions.

Perhaps the most disturbing reason why "temporary housing" hurts everyone is how it becomes permanent housing. For those of you doing the math, if you have too many students to house in the first place but over time Concord moves them into more permanent residences then only a few things could be happening. Either Concord's rooms are reproducing, students are being put into triple rooms or students are leaving the school. While some students were indeed put in triple rooms, Concord banked on the fact that some students would fail out or leave in order to make room for others. Doesn't it just turn your stomach to know that Concord's solution to "overflow" in part is to hope that some of your friends and classmates go somewhere else? It certainly does mine.

Zero Effort ≠ Good Faith

President Aloia used the university's PR office to release a Press Release defending the administration's efforts to find housing for students. In it, Dr. Aloia said “The University is making a good faith effort to accommodate students with the priority being on access to education and not denying students the opportunity to realize their dreams.” He pointed to the fact that the university had purchased several modular units (FEMA trailers) and had opened up several spaces in College Courts in order to make more room. What the press release doesn't say is that most of the effort made this year was made last year and aside from opening up a few College Courts spaces the university didn't make any real effort to solve the problem.

The President says the trailers ordered will not be ready until the end of the semester, so that is hardly a solution for students living in closets starting the first week of school. College Courts will house around 6 students or so, but this hardly puts dent in the number of "overflow" students. The SGA can again point to the fact that it warned the administration not to make foolish decisions in the past and they made them anyway. The SGA supported keeping all of College Courts rather than destroying a portion of them, insisting that married students should be given plenty of space. Now, the university is kicking itself for destroying space it could have used. When the university was faced with a significant shortfall in funding for University Point, the SGA reminded the administration that the money could be used to create additional residences or remodel existing facilities but they again didn't listen.

The press release quickly moves from providing details about housing solutions to the "other things" Concord provides students. It points out the new fitness center that students are enjoying and the other student life oriented projects like additional flex dollars and a new camera system. Do you know what students can't live in? A camera system. It's a nice attempt to distract people from the real issues, but the smoke and mirror games that the administration is playing won't get too far with many students.

The best way for the administration to tackle the questions surrounding student living conditions is for them to say "would you rather us turn students away?" The answer is clearly of course not. We want as many students as possible to come to Concord and get a quality education. However, we've got to run a university responsibly and fairly. If we cannot accommodate students on-campus, we've got to provide them spaces off campus. If we cannot find them spaces off-campus, then we need to ask ourselves if we're really ready to accept more students. I'd much rather Concord turn students away than be begging for more. We're not running a prison camp, so we don't need to pack students 3 to a room or put them in unreasonable conditions. It's not possible to focus on your work and be a successful student if you're living with 7 other people in a lounge. What Dr. Aloia considers a dream quickly turned into a nightmare for many new students. They don't deserve it.

Dr. Aloia and his cabinet seem to have a difficult time understanding what the term "good faith effort" really means. The Legal Dictionary @ Free Dictionary defines it as "a sincere intention to deal fairly with others." If this is the case, Dr. Aloia's efforts fall well short of good faith into the realm of half assed. You cannot do the same thing as before and call it innovation, and you cannot be months behind in planning and call it success. Those policies might fly at Florida Atlantic but they certainly don't fly at Concord. Students are deeply upset with the failure to address the most basic of needs and they demand answers. To be honest, "we're trying" isn't good enough for everyone. In short, Concord isn't living up to the most basic expectations of a new student. The blame falls squarely on the shoulders of President Aloia who needs to step up to the plate and start accepting responsibility for his actions. The honeymoon period is over, and the "new car smell" of Dr. Aloia's administration is fading quickly.

(Link to the Press Release: http://www.concord.edu/news/2009/08/14/concord-university-employing-good-faith-efforts-accommodate-full-house)

What Jimmy Carter Can Teach Greg Aloia

Many of our more recent Presidents have been in the news lately. President Clinton just returned from a trip to North Korea where he negotiated the release of several hostages. President Bush has been defending his decisions while in office and his father continues to leap out of perfectly good airplanes on his birthday show he's still got it. With all of this attention focused on the high profile actions of our former commanders-in-chief, we often overlook a little old man from Georgia.

Jimmy Carter was a controversial leader and is still a controversial man. He keeps his opinions out in the open and he sails pretty close to the wind when it comes to mainstream politics. But one of the most important contributions he's made to American society since he's left office has been his work with the Habitat for Humanity charity. The charity raises money, finds volunteers and builds homes for those who don't have them. When Hurricane Katrina hit, they were some of the first to begin the rebuilding process. When fires ravage sleepy communities, they're soon to show up with a bag of nails and a challenge to help out your neighbour.

What can Jimmy Carter teach President Aloia? Sometimes you've got to roll up your sleeves and grab a hammer. You don't see Jimmy having people sleep in closets at the Carter Library, and you don't see him pointing the finger of blame at other people. Carter will tell you that things might not be the best, but they're getting better so long as people assume responsibility and take action. President Carter doesn't just wave his hand and have his supporters start building homes, he climbs up the ladder and drives in the nails himself. Every person has a role to play and a leader is a leader all the time, not just when it's convenient or when the press is looking. Dr. Aloia should follow the example of Jimmy Carter and take some responsibility for his community. New dorms don't build themselves.

Although my analogy is clearly tongue in cheek, it does bring up one thing for people to consider. Should we have asked Jimmy Carter to be President of Concord? At the very least, every student would have a decent place to live.

New Appointments move Concord in the Right Direction

New appointments validate old positions...
I'd like to start by tipping my hat to Marshall Campbell for his recent advancement to the position of Interim Director of Human Resources. Mr. Campbell is a very intelligent man and has taken his Student Center Director/Director of Student Activities position to new heights. We've seen him tackle issues from the gameroom to institutional planning and Concord is better for it. I for one think he will do an excellent job in the Human Resources area and if he continues to advance I'd imagine we'll be seeing him as a Vice President before too long. Dr. Aloia can certainly see talent where it exists and rewards that talent. I hope he continues.

It should be pointed out however that the Student Government Association has been calling for a top Human Resources director for some time. It's entirely inappropriate for a university not to have a full time HR Director with only those duties and a clear mission. Dr. Beasley didn't understand that fact, and we discussed it with him on one occasion in particular that I am reminded of. While at his home discussing tuition increases two years ago, he recognized that the HR position hadn't really been filled but he noted "we've seen fewer HR complaints that ever!". Well yes, he was right about that. When you have no HR director, you tend to have few HR complaints. We reminded him that if you have fewer police, you'll have fewer reported crimes but he didn't seem to get the joke. It wasn't suppose to be funny anyway.

With the appointment of Greg "Coach" Quick to be the Interim Vice President for Development ("or institutional advancement") we've again seen Dr. Aloia look for talent and reward that talent. There are many people who've attacked Coach Quick for the football team's rather disappointing win/loss ratio and they've carried those attacks over to his new position. That is not a far criticism of Mr. Quick, because while his football record might be questionable (and i'd be more than happy to discuss NCAA football in another post) if there is one thing he can do its raise money. He had a significant role to play in the June O. Shott field and he's been known to pull in some big money when the school has needed it. Alumni seem to really like Mr. Quick and he's used that to his advantage in the past and I'm sure he'll be able to use it in the future. Even if its only a temporary position, it moves us in the right direction.

Again, this isn't something profound or philosophical. The SGA has called for a Vice President for Development for years, and it fell on deaf ears. President Sean Noland '06-'07 for example took the time to develop a proposal for duties and an organizational chart for the office and presented it to President Beasley and the Strategic Planning Committee. Dr. Beasley wasn't exactly known for his visionary leadership, so the proposal was left behind and the committee ended up folding but the proposals stayed with many SGA members from then on. Indeed, this year we reminded Dr. Aloia of the need for such a position and how the university could not continue to rely only on student fees and tuition increases to sustain the university. Let's face it, we were being beaten about the head and neck by our competitors in terms of grants and research based funding, and we needed a quick fix or else we'd fall even further behind. We never got any real answers from Dr. Aloia about the proposal until it was announced at an 11th hour meeting (literally! it was 11PM) that Coach Quick had been hired. We've yet to see too much in terms of what his duties will really be, but I hope he whips the Alumni Office and Development into shape.

Still a lot to be done...
The recent appointment to the Presidential cabinet and of Marshall to HR Director put us near where a real university ought to be, but there is still a lot of work to be done in terms of hiring and direction. When John Ferguson retired (or was pushed out), we lost the only person working on pre and post grant work (these terms were new to our Interim VP for Business and Finance, which we should find a little shocking). The need to replace this position quickly should have been evident to all of us, but just in case the SGA was quick to place a few phone calls and set up a few meetings to make sure our point was made. There has been an opening posted on the Concord website and I assume the Chronicle for a "Grant and Contract Administrator" which will work full time on grants and contracts. We need a quality individual in this position, and we don't need any interim workers either. We've got a nasty habit of not hiring Concord graduates who go on to get excellent experience, and instead pulling people from the inside and filling our vacancies with interim officers. I recognize (but disagree with) the fact that for classified positions we've got to give current employees a crack at the job, but we must remember that while interim means they'll only be there temporarily stupidity is never temporary.

Concord is not a research institution, but that should not hold us back from seeking research opportunities. Now I've done the song and dance to the state legislature about funding our research, but we've got to do more than that when seeking funding. I'd love for Concord students to work on research projects and for that research to be supported by state or national foundations. This would give students real experience they need to get into a decent graduate school, and would put our name out there as the excellent school that we are. Marshall and WVU shouldn't get all of the money just because they are the biggest schools. We should consider working closely with schools like Shepherd, Fairmont and Glenville in order to combine our resources and seek common benefit from it. It isn't a battle against other schools, but so long as we're pit against each other we might as well fight back. A quality grant administrator should be given the tools and staff he/she needs to get out there and get the big bucks. Over time they will be able to pay their salary and we'll still be making money. This will move us away from tuition based support and towards self sustainability as an institution. Just a thought.

Looking outside our box...
As a rule of thumb, we should be looking outside of our institution to fill positions. Now, as I have stated before sometimes we cannot do that and the law and institutional policy forces us to give classified staff who are already here a chance to apply for the positions first. However, I'm really speaking about Vice Presidents when I say we should be looking outside. I have a lot of faith in some of our Vice Presidents, and almost no faith in others (I'll leave that to you to figure out). However, I do not fault people for having mostly academic experience and being thrust into institutional leadership roles. Just because a person has been working at Concord for a while or because they have a Ph.D. doesn't mean they are the right fit for a job. Interim positions don't really help us in the long run they just allow us to save a buck or two in the short term. When we choose a professor to be a Vice President for this or that, we in effect lose a professor (most of their classroom time) and we don't gain a professional. Interim in my view is only temporary if we are actively seeking to replace them with a professional from either the workforce or other institutions.

As a future member of the Board of Governors and as a Student Government Association leader I support national searches to fill vital cabinet positions at Concord. We'll be having our Vice President & Academic Dean retire before long (after years of dedicated service to two institutions!) and we need to search for a youthful, energetic, experienced professional to take his place. It'll not only serve Concord well in the short term but in terms of long term leadership and vision it only puts us on par or above our competition. We've got a Vice President for Business and Finance who has done an excellent job keeping up with the pack but we've got to find someone who can provide financial leadership and clever solutions to our financial problems. Our professors are best at what they do best-teaching. While we might save a few bucks right now by only promoting what we have "on a temporary basis", it really does hurt us in the long run.

First Volley: Taking Aim at Dr. Aloia's Tuition Increase

Just a starting point...
I don't expect to convince a lot of people that raising tuition can be avoided every year, and I'm not convinced of it entirely myself. A certain increase (and by this I mean the rate of inflation) in tuition is likely to be required every year in order to keep pace with the changes in our economy and to keep the lights on and the water running. So when I am critical of tuition increases, I don't really consider anything up to a 3.7% or so increase to be included in that but if individuals care to debate that rate also I have a view on it.

Why increases always hurt students
Tuition increases, no matter how small they are always impact students. This is a concept a lot of administrators in particular do not understand, and even some of our student representatives do not fully grasp. When you consider a cost/benefit analysis, whenever you make things more difficult to do (in this case attending a university), less people will do it. Now the way to skirt hurting students is to claim that the majority of students will not be impacting, and insist that the burden being shifted to a smaller group is the best thing for everyone. If you ice the cake with the fact that these students supposedly are more able to handle the burden of the increase, its a rather well packaged lie. The best way to gain support in a constituency for a controversial plan is to divide that constituency into groups and cause those groups to turn on each other. As students, we must be united in solidarity with other students in most matters and particularly when it comes to tuition. All students are impacted by tuition increases because even if the vast majority of students who receive financial aid will never really feel the impact of that increase, our friends and classmates who receive little aid certainly will. Let us not forget that while the rest of us may not pay those costs upfront, we will pay them eventually when our loans are due. We're better than those who would pass the buck onto us, so we must never pass the buck onto other students. As a member of policy, the Student Government Association must never endorse an increase that students will not receive direct benefit from on the basis that the increase will only impact a small number of students. I will never support that argument as your representative to the Board of Governors, and I will call out any administrator who attempts to use it.

Increases are a cowards way out
Increases in tuition show a variety of things about an institution, but for Concord University it shows we're not as dedicated to institutional improvement or creativity as we ought to be. For years Dr. Beasley was told to create a Vice President for Development in order to search for grants and other sources of revenue for the university. I know, because I told him on more than one occasion that we were light years behind our peers in institutional development and the costs were being directly passed on to students in the form of tuition increases. Now, Dr. Aloia has decided to fill the position by naming a Vice President for Institutional Development but has given him (Greg Quick) no clear mandate for grant searching or alternative revenue sources. I think Mr. Quick is an excellent choice in the short term as we need a person to fill the position, but we must look quickly beyond him and fill the position via a national search to really show our commitment. The Board of Governors has stated several times over the last few years that the institution cannot continue to rely on students to fund the university, but each time it has voted for an increase. Dr. Aloia likes to say that colleges and universities were once state supported, and now have moved to state assisted and will eventually move to state endorsed. While this very well may be true, it shows us that we have to work as an institution to make sure we're able to retain our financial stability and viability in the future. It is cowardly to return to student wallets every year for more money and refuse to dedicate ourselves to the goal of alternative revenue. It shows narrow mindedness and shortsightedness in running a university.

Dr. Aloia never takes personal responsibility for his decisions
Dr. Aloia is the higher education equivalent of a used car salesman. He's an individual that will use any rhetorical technique he knows in order to tell you a nonsensical argument or talk you in circles long enough to distract you from your question. But when it comes to decision making, he's the Tim Tebow of Concord, passing down field the responsibility that comes with the job. When it was time to increase tuition, he did not propose a single increase and put his support behind it. Indeed, he admitted he had almost no preference when it came to the increases, and it was shocking to see him work his way out of the questions I asked him during our meeting. He proposed 4 different increases, and let the Board of Governors make the decision almost blindly. When it comes to actual policy implementation, he passes it along to his vice presidents to both develop a policy, and then implement it. That isn't really leadership at all, its delegation of power. At least Dr. Beasley took a stand when it came to decisions (even if he rarely made any) and took responsibility for them. When you debate Dr. Aloia's ideas, he'll constantly skirt the issue and then defer to the individual he's delegated the responsibility to, to take the heat for the decisions. Now that is the type of leadership we don't need at a university and the type that certainly does not deserve a 3 year contract extension.

8.76% doesn't lead to increased services for students...unless we propose them
Each year the SGA makes the argument that to justify even a single percentage point's worth of an increase students should see an increase in services, and each year the administration doesn't understand the point. A great deal of student services are promoted or provided by the Student Government Association in one way or another, and without institutional support these programs cannot be the best of quality. Consider that the gameroom renovations, the 24 hour library, the improved website, the fitness center all were proposals that came from the SGA in one form or another and of those only a small percent were funded from increases. I have heard that the Student Sponsored Tutoring program will recieve a dedicated budget from now on thanks to a presentation by myself and other SGA members, but this again returns to the SGA promoting programs and not administrators. The proposal brought by former President Prince and being considered by President Yeager to keep the library open longer is one that may be funded by a split with SGA funds! Its absurd to think that the SGA should have to split the cost of services that other universities always provide, and its a slap in the face for Dr. Aloia to present a large tuition increase and back that up with almost no service changes. Its shameful, and Dr. Aloia should reconsider the direction he is leading the university in.

Our Duty: To fight increases at every level with any means
We as students and student advocates must understand that every increase that is approved means another student who cannot return, or another student who is priced out of coming to Concord. For this reason, we must accept the responsibility of fighting increases that will be proposed each year. We've got to organize at the local level and convince vice presidents and department directors to find ways to cut costs and become more efficient and effective in running their programs. Campus offices for example need to stagger their lunch hours rather than having all of their staff leave at once. We must organize at the university level and convince Board members to require annual reports on alternative revenue projects and benchmarks towards keeping tuition low. We've got to organize at the state level by capturing the chair of the HEPC Advisory Council and focusing the efforts of representatives from all colleges and universities in the state on keeping costs low and keeping students in school. We've got to finally keep legislators updated round the clock on measures they can take to rebuff the trend of abandoning state colleges and convince them that investing in the future of higher education is investing in the future of West Virginia.

If we do not work together to find common sense solutions to these problems, we will be divided and we will see increases each year that are beyond our means. We've been given the opportunity, the information and the tools to disrupt the plans of higher education theft, now lets put that to work in making sure it never happens again. I'm dedicated to that cause and I hope you'll sign on to it too.

Founding

Let me begin by thanking Chris Slater for the inspiration to create a blog covering my thoughts and ideas surrounding the various events at Concord University. His blog has brought about a lot of discussion related to SGA issues and campus events, and that is a very positive thing. I intend to use my blog to serve a somewhat similar purpose, and I will use it to report on issues related to my positions as Student Representative to the Concord University Board of Governors and Representative to the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission's State Advisory Council of Students. Additionally, I will from time to time comment on matters as a legislator in the Student Government Association but I hope that happens only every so often.

I think the greatest thing we can do as students is hold our university to the highest of standards. In the first place, as students we are both consumers of a product (Higher Education), and members of our campus community. As such, we have to approach the majority of issues that arise from both of those perspectives. We cannot afford to be laissez-faire students in an environment when we are constantly at odds with faculty and administrators. We are not at odds because we want to be, but because that is the natural course of things. Administrators for the most part are primarily concerned with the survival of the college, and student representatives are primarily concerned about the survival of fellow students. Faculty members are concerned about promoting their own constituency, and while they are at times stronger critics of administrators than we are they will side with them far more often than they will side with us. That being said, we must always organize and "arm" ourselves with new knowledge and information to take our opponents to task. A free and open student press in any form is a way to help achieve that goal, and I hope this blog will serve a small role in that.

I want to conclude this small founding post with just a few words about my overall attitude and philosophy on student advocacy. I have absolutely no fear of higher powers, and I am not intimidated by individuals of authority. I have been duly elected by members of the Concord University student body to represent them both at the institutional level, and at the state level to influence higher education policy. How could I as a representative help my constituents if I did not constantly work to hold people accountable? I will work to build bridges and networks of support with my fellow board members, and I will reach out to state and local officials to achieve my policy goals. However; when the time comes to point the finger of blame or occasionally chew out a vice president I will be more than happy to accept my responsibilities. I hope I can be of service.