FEATURED
Key Takeaways
- The University of Oklahoma may eliminate 16 underperforming degree programs due to a review by the State Regents for Higher Education, which has identified these as low-producing programs since their review began in 1996.
- Recommended cuts include advanced degrees in languages and geography, as well as specific bachelor's degrees, with broader implications for 41 programs across all state universities.
- Expert opinions suggest a structured and transparent evaluation process for program cuts, indicating that this trend is part of a larger national movement among universities to phase out low-enrollment degrees.
The University of Oklahoma may cut up to 16 underperforming degree programs following a review by the State Regents for Higher Education.
The state board conducts a regular review of degrees at its campuses across the state and has done so since 1996.
It recently identified 16 “low-producing programs” at the public university in Norman that should be cut. In total, the regents said “41 programs [should] be deleted and 21 programs [should] be suspended” across all universities.
Specifically, the University of Oklahoma should cut its doctoral program in French, along with its masters’ degrees in drama, French, German, and two in “Interdisciplinary Programs.”
Bachelor degrees in various languages, along with both the bachelor of science and bachelor of arts in geography should also be cut, the board recommended. The minutes for the December regents’ meeting lists the remaining programs that should be ended.
A spokeswoman for the board provided further details on the review process.
“Programs that are not suspended or deleted as a result of that review are then placed on a five-year review cycle,” Associate Vice Chancellor for Communications Angela Caddell said in an email to The Fix. “This effort reflects public higher education’s ongoing commitment to aligning academic programs with workforce needs and ensuring optimal allocation of state resources.”
Caddell also pointed The Fix to the meeting agenda for further information
Some programs may be “exempt” from the productivity requirements if they are “no cost” or “shared cost,” according to the board’s minutes. “Programs that require no additional cost or justifiable costs may be exempt from meeting the minimum standards for productivity as listed in policy,” the board wrote.
Formerly low-productive programs that have been “restructured” can also be exempted.
The College Fix reached out to various professors and departments to ask for their comments on the process and if they felt their concerns were heard. However, no one responded to emails and voicemails left in the past month.
This includes Professor Michael Markham, the dean of the college of arts and sciences, and Professor Mary Margaret Holt, dean of the college of fine arts.
Professors Betty Harris and Michael Givel, who also lead the Oklahoma American Association of University Professors chapter, also did not respond to two emails.
However, a higher education expert with the Heritage Foundation said universities and policymakers are correct to regularly review programming.
Madison Doan said Oklahoma is taking “a step in the right direction” with its decisions. She said the school is right to “[create] action plans for certain programs to boost enrollment and productivity.”
Doan researches higher education and co-authored a book about curriculum requirements at Ivy League universities.
“Oklahoma’s decision to cut and suspend programs, along with creating action plans for certain programs to boost enrollment and productivity, is a step in the right direction and will help to ensure fiscal responsibility and responsiveness to changing needs,” she said.
Doan recommends colleges look at enrollment, “return on investment,” and “specific graduate placement and salary standards,” when considering what programs to keep or cut.
“Programs that consistently provide poor financial returns for students should be eliminated,” she said.
However, school officials should not undertake program cuts unilaterally, Doan said.
“In coordination with the university governing boards (to the extent they should be involved), institutional leaders should establish a clear and transparent process for how they will evaluate and review programs,” she said.
“Universities may also institute a public comment process after releasing draft evaluation criteria,” she said. This process would “[allow] department heads and faculty to provide feedback on the process outlined and advice on restructuring plans for programs deemed to be in decline.”
“Ultimately, any final program cuts should be left with institutional leadership and governing boards to ensure accountability,” Doan said. “Students should be informed of program cuts as soon as possible so they can prepare effectively for enrollment or the need to switch degree programs.”
“Students should also be given teach-out options for discontinued programs,” she said.
Oklahoma is not alone in phasing out certain degrees, the Heritage Foundation expert said.
She cited Indiana, Ohio, and West Virginia as examples of states that have “largely focused on individual programs with persistently low enrollment or very few graduates.”
Purdue University, in Indiana, is currently reviewing its own “low-enrollment programs,” as previously reported by The Fix.
Degree mergers at Ohio University drew cautious optimism from a faculty union leader, The Fix reported last September.
