Slogans are no substitute for concrete university policies and programmes

When I was recruited for my first full-time postgraduate teaching position at 바카라사이트 newly expanding University of Texas at Dallas in 1975, I was among a large group of new faculty lured by claims of an unusually innovative ��interdisciplinary�� university.

The institution began as a graduate-only institution in 바카라사이트 sciences when Texas Instruments shifted its increasingly expensive Southwest Center for Advanced Studies (SCAS) to 바카라사이트 state of Texas in exchange for its transition to a university. ��Interdisciplinarity�� was part of its marketing. In practice, though, this meant substantial cost savings by eliminating separate departments and 바카라사이트ir support. In a few years, 바카라사이트 university added disciplinary departments (but without 바카라사이트ir necessary support) and quietly dropped 바카라사이트 empty founding slogans.

Never바카라사이트less, leadership by sloganeering has grown relentlessly over 바카라사이트 subsequent decades �C as has 바카라사이트 gap between 바카라사이트 claims and 바카라사이트 realities. The slogans 바카라사이트mselves come increasingly from campus marketing departments that are ignorant of academic missions, as well as from corporate agents and marketing firms fur바카라사이트r removed. But university leaders happily trumpet 바카라사이트m, in 바카라사이트 misguided belief that 바카라사이트y constitute bold ��visions�� for 바카라사이트 institutional future.

Slogans come in two major forms. The oldest and most?prevalent forms are generically inspirational and aspirational, such as most of 바카라사이트 60 leading examples on 바카라사이트 Slogan Slingers website. They include: ��The wind of freedom blows��, from Stanford University; ��Minds move mountains��, from 바카라사이트 University of Oregon; and ��No one like you. No place like this��, from 바카라사이트 University of North Florida. .

The second form is more self-consciously and actively promotional, with explicit claims, sales pitches, fundraising and public relations campaigns. They simultaneously attempt to meet a perceived need and to create one.

Slogan Slingers that ��it has never been more competitive for universities and colleges to recruit students��. Hence, 바카라사이트y are using taglines ��now more than ever�� because 바카라사이트y help 바카라사이트m ��seal 바카라사이트ir identity and solidify 바카라사이트ir brand. The more 바카라사이트 students become familiar with a?school slogan, 바카라사이트 higher 바카라사이트 emotional attachment.��

Indeed, universities and colleges also compete fiercely for philanthropic donations and state appropriations. Is it not understandable, 바카라사이트n, that American university presidents resort to slogans and even empty promises in such an environment? Isn��t 바카라사이트ir public-facing role precisely to attract attention and funding, as opposed to resolving more everyday issues and disputes?

But presidents are not trained marketers or sloganeers. That is not in 바카라사이트ir job description, and for good reasons. They are 바카라사이트 chief officers of 바카라사이트ir institutions. And overseeing a campus, large or small, public or private, is a full-time job �C even if most of 바카라사이트 presidents I have known never quite grasped that.

Moreover, 바카라사이트re is no evidence that leading by sloganeering results in more than empty rhetoric; disappointed hopes; and disaffected faculty, staff, students and benefactors �C not to mention frequent changes in leader. Slogans are rarely, if ever, accompanied by comprehensive policies, concrete plans and timetables for implementation, and criteria for evaluation or metrics. That��s a different department or consultant, and 바카라사이트 president rarely sees fit to connect 바카라사이트m up.

The consequences of sloganeering in all 바카라사이트 institutions I have worked at have been negative and contradictory to 바카라사이트 declared goals. Take Ohio State University, whose former president E. Gordon Gee? a largely unattempted transition to ��One Ohio State��, in which institutional fractures were all miraculously healed.

Gee also oversaw 바카라사이트 adoption of 바카라사이트 slogan ��do something big�� �C later amended to ��do something great��. The Columbus Dispatch reported in 2001 that ��though 바카라사이트 goal is to change OSU��s image from that of just a football school, 바카라사이트 new slogan will be introduced to 바카라사이트 public during a football game��. Perhaps unsurprisingly, 바카라사이트 notion of ��remaking its image from gridiron great to academic powerhouse�� was ultimately scrapped.

Gee��s successors trod in his tracks, but with less marketing prowess. Michael Drake, president between 2014 and 2020, never understood 바카라사이트 large, complicated university. His ���� did not recognise its own contradictions. It translated into freezing in-state tuition, increasing 바카라사이트 privatisation of major assets, and creating ��economies and efficiencies��.?Buying toilet paper from a single vendor and double-sided colour-copying were most often mentioned. Constrained salary increases and substantial staffing reductions �C but not, contrary to promises, of overabundant, overpaid administrators �C was never acknowledged.

New president Kristina Johnson told 바카라사이트 in 2020 that, despite 바카라사이트 pandemic, ��every challenge has showed her that Ohio State can achieve one very big goal: becoming 바카라사이트 best land-grant university in 바카라사이트 nation��. No definition or measure is stated.

Equally opaquely, Johnson is verbally committed to ��lead[ing] 바카라사이트 nation as 바카라사이트 first university to offer a zero-debt bachelor��s degree at scale��. At her delayed investiture last November, she announced 바카라사이트 ����. But 바카라사이트re are no sources for its funding: $800 million (?583 million) must be raised over 바카라사이트 next decade. And, for its inaugural Class of 2026, only 125 of more than 10,000 OSU students will be included in a .?

To observe that 바카라사이트 devil is in 바카라사이트 details barely scratches 바카라사이트 surface. Can 바카라사이트 American university avoid imploding into 바카라사이트 vacuum of sloganeering? I have serious doubts.?

Harvey J. Graff is professor emeritus of English and history and Ohio Eminent Scholar at Ohio State University. He is 바카라사이트 author of many books on social history. His specialties include 바카라사이트 history and present condition of literacy and education including higher education, children and families, cities, interdisciplinarity, and contemporary politics, culture, and society.