The school year started off with concern that typically comes with having low enrollment yet again, followed by the burden of budget cuts. Some projects, like the business-engineering convergence center or steps toward law school study, were put on hold again, several departments’ adjunct professor contracts were not renewed, and programs such as the men’s tennis team had to be cut entirely.
As would be done in any business situation, resources had to be assessed and reallocated, and some sacrifices had to be made.
But now we are registering for classes, and the overflow of problems resulting from the budget cuts has trickled down into Webster.
A simple glance over the course offerings for the spring 2015 semester poses questions of why there are so few electives, what happened to the more diverse options of class times and course topics, and at what point we will be able to stop combining classes.
We’re not saying all the electives are gone, but the range of options that should be available have been reduced to the bare minimum. Some departments are even working with their graduating students on substituting or even waiving courses for the sake of being able to graduate on time.
This is a natural result of university budget cuts, but this isn’t a drastic or unexpected course of history. In fact, Bradley has had low enrollment the last few years. We have been unable to fill the classes of 2015, 2016 and 2018.
So, if this is nothing new, then why is it still a problem? And what steps are being taken to solve it?
Of course, one could argue that it takes time. But what is ‘it’ that is taking time?
Out of all the problems an academic institution could have, the inability to attract enough future students or provide a greater variety of classes should be two of the biggest red flags that could ever fly.
So, is it the academic programs we offer? The price of the education? The city Bradley is located in?
All three of these seem to be okay. Our price is competitive with similar universities, our city is big enough to serve us but not swallow us, and our academic programs have been consistently recognized with rankings of “national distinction.”
So, if we turn to the marketing model of product, price, place and promotion, there’s really only one that seems to be off-kilter. Promotion.
And promotion comes down to this: how are we showcasing the Bradley image to prospective students, and is it truly representative of Bradley?
No college campus is or ever will be perfect – not in crime rates, not in classes offered, not in dorm features, not in academic programs. But people accept that real life is not perfect, and they value the honesty in admitting it.
We know that Bradley isn’t untouchable, and we also know that people are working every day to improve that. Thank you. We appreciate your efforts.
But if the effort put into delaying or sugar-coating problems was instead redirected toward targeting root causes, the Bradley image we promote would, ideally, become a reality.
We recognize the importance of planning for five, 10, 15 years down the road. It’s an intelligent business plan. However, we operate as a four-year business for those who have made the Hilltop their college home.
And when that business model isn’t conducive to the four-year term, it’s not a simple consumer relationship that is harmed. It affects the Bradley experience and the future of each student, which, in turn, shapes the Bradley image.
We know it’s a lot to ask, but it’s time to take those 15-year plans and start looking for ways to apply them to four-year terms. It’s not going to be easy, but then again, neither were budget cuts.
Bradley image is a crucial topic, and the ever-constant need to recruit never leaves the university’s to-do list, but there needs to be more of a focus on the here and the now.
Bradley’s image is the fruit of the experience of current and past Bradley students. It’s time to work more on meeting us where we are currently in order to see us thriving in where, one day, we could be.
