Home » Voices » Editorial »

Closing the Leadership Institute is unfortunate but will help CMU solve budget woes

By on March 3, 2010 2:00 am in Editorial / 14 comments

 
email

Casualties are unavoidable in Central Michigan University’s battle to balance next year’s budget.

Some will inevitably be unhappy with the results.

The Leadership Institute is one program slated for the chopping block to keep the university above water. Given the current situation university officials find themselves in, closing the program for a time is a rightful consideration.

The Leadership Institute is no doubt a great program. As proven through the number of favorable comments on cm-life.com, a significant number of students are passionate about the educational opportunities it provides.

But in such tough economic times, cuts have to be made so the university can stay operable and attractive to most prospective students.

The program lost its main figurehead when Director Dykstra Heinze left in early January.

Closing it will save the university around $161,497 — an amount that may seem petty to some, but is one step closer to solving the current budget crisis.

Other campus programs have met the same fate. On the Fly Productions — the student RSO that specialized in planning events for CMU — also is planning to pack up at semester’s end. More could face budget trouble as the Senior Staff Budget Advisory Group mentioned in its responses to budget suggestions that the Campus Programming Fund will likely see a drop in funding.

This situation comes as an outrage to those focused solely on student life at CMU. But the alternative to closing down smaller programs is making significant cuts that affect the entire student body.

The university has to ensure that students are going to get a basic college education before being a part of specialty programs.

The administration has to avoid making cuts that would have an across-campus effect. Slicing programs such as the Leadership Institute affects a decent number of students, but not the entire student body.

That said, just because the Leadership Institute is cut does not mean students with a leadership minor will be abandoned.

Besides, it is unfair to tell hundreds of students who may have made a significant financial investment in leadership classes and tell them it’s time to find a new minor.

The entire situation at CMU is unfortunate, especially with big projects under way such as the $25-million medical school, and should not have to come down to cutting programs. No one wants to see an end to a program that builds leaders out of young
people.

Hopefully, if the Leadership Institute does close, it can be reinstated if Michigan’s economy bounces back.

Balancing a budget will require some give and take from the entire university community. Let’s keep an open mind and see where the next few months take CMU.

 

Tags

, , ,

Related Posts

 
  • GradStudent

    Can some one at CM-Life explain to me how they came up with the financial figure they did. If anyone at CM-Life really did their research they would know closing the Leadership Institute would really only save the salary of the two individual that work there. This department gets most of its funds from the Campus Programming Fund. As a past SGA treasurer and two time chair of the CPF committee I can let you know the money they get from this fund will just transfer from the LI to another department that recieves these dollars.
    So basically you are moving programming money from one department to another – no saving of any money. I wish this paper would actually get its facts right instead of feeding the students on this campus all the facts they want to highlight. MOVE ON and start covering some of the 200 other suggestion provided to the SSBAG.

  • Jason

    “Closing the Leadership Institute is unfortunate but will help CMU solve budget woes” is one of the most pathetic statements I have ever heard. Not because this is unfortunate, because trust me it is, but mainly because it will only make the University more strapped for cash.

    I have to repost what my close friend Steve said yesterday on the comments.

    “Leadership Institute runs the Leadership Advancement Program-$8,000 over 4 years. Approximately 40 scholarships are awarded each year. That means 40 students come to CMU. Estimated money the program brings in to CMU $15,000 x 4 years= 60,000 x 40 students = $2,400,000!

    Now there are 4 sets of 40 students here for a total of approximately 160 students involved in the program every year.

    160 x 60,000 = $9,600,000!

    If the LI was cut, the University saves approximately $161,497 a year from the two staff members they lay off. However, it would then be losing $2,400,000 a year from the students of the scholarship plus all the money that past and future Leadership Advancement Scholars would donate as alumni. Every 4 years following the cut of the LI the University will have lost $9,600,000 in revenue…and save 645,988 on the LI salaries. That is a net LOSS of $8,954,012!”

    Steve did the math exquisitely however he is much more eloquent then I am.

    So let me be a little blunt here.

    The University will lose more than $10million of revenue if you include tuition, room and board, and donations from students as Alumni. The LI keeps students, which we all know are just walking dollar signs for the administration, on this campus.

    Retention rates will drop significantly, enrollment will be down, and there will be less money flowing in.

    I can personally say I will not donate one red cent to this University if the LI is cut, Nor will I attend any events that will create a revenue for the University, and CMU can for sure forget about me even thinking about getting my MBA from this budget shot school. That’s going to be a big loss for the University if you ask me. The last thing an organization needs is angry alumni.

    Even if the LI is brought back in the future I will be FRIGHTENED to give my money to CMU because the past will have taught me that there is not one person working for the administration with a third grade mathematics education.

    Just knowing the facts, the math, and reading this article makes me sick to my stomach. I’ve been a student here for 3 years. I’ve taken 15 credits a semester, and lived on campus for one year, so therefore I have spent a total of $36,080 of my own money (no scholarships or government assistance) so far. I would like a break down of how much of my money is spent on my education and future leadership training and how much of it has been wasted on programs that I have never nor will never use.

  • WECAREABOUTLEADERSHIP

    Time to take some more journalism classes…your BIAS is showing! Ever heard of athletics????

  • Eric M. Kern

    I remain a strong supporter of the Leadership Institute. In the early to mid 1990′s public schools were faced with a similar decision and forced to cut optional “gifted” programs in favor of funding required special and remedial education programs with reduced budget dollars. In the days since, public school education has seen a widening of “Middle of the road” students, and a complete fallout of those who were considered “gifted” or above average, often times seeing increases in behavior problems among above-average students due to lack of positive ways to channel their energy. The moral of the story is that with proper funding, a potential leader can be developed; without it, however, these otherwise positively contributing members of society are forced into complacency, often times never otherwise having the opportunity to excel.

    The problems, however, don’t end there. A “rough estimate” of a $161,000 savings reflects only the immediate staff and faculty reductions. This number has not considered that strong leaders are a recruitment tool for other CMU students, or that those CMU students who are involved in Leader Advancement programs like the Leadership Institute are more likely to further their education at the Master’s and Doctoral level, often times bringing those tuition dollars to their alma mater.

    Unfortunately, like in public education, once these programs are eliminated, the base budget dollars become reduced or reallocated, and these programs are never brought back. When we compare price tag of $161,000 to the amount of good the Leadership Institute does for this university, for its students, and for the greater community by sending true leaders into the workforce to make a difference it seems fair to say that the price tag is small, and the rewards significant, not the other way around.

    At a time in our lives where the economic, political, and global landscape we face now and into the future is struggling, at best, I would hope that a program with a proven successful track record of developing emerging leaders would be the very last program considered for elimination.

  • http://CentralMichiganLife Kyle Post

    The fact that the Leadership Institute is even being considered as the next item on the “chopping block” here at CMU not only feels like a punch in the stomach, but my heart aches even thinking about it. First of all, I truly believe the Dykstra Heinze was an incredible, phenomenal director and friend to all those who entered the Leadership Institute. With that said, the Leadership Institute should not, and dare I say, will not go down in flames because he has decided to step down. I think that we as students on this campus are forgetting that the Leadership Institute isn’t just some club, some organization that, “Makes leaders.” The Leadership Institute is the heart and soul of every single individual on this campus that has shown interest in wanting to take that extra step forward in becoming the best possible leader, not only here at CMU, but after they graduate themselves, that they can be. I believe that we are forgetting that there are numerous incredible leaders on this campus right now that has been introduced to what this campus has to offer because of the Leadership Institute. This past year’s Male Homecoming Gold Ambassador, a Leadership Advancement Scholar; another two Homecoming Ambassadors male and female this past fall, both Leadership Advancement Scholars; The President and the Vice President of the entire Student Body, are both Leadership Advancement Scholars; the CMU Mainstage Coordinator for the past two years, is a Leadership Advancement Scholar; our Orientation Mentors are incredible, with countless numbers of them being Leadership Advancement Scholars and Leadership Minors; numerous Residence Hall Assistants and Multicultural Advisors on this campus are Leadership Advancement Scholars and Leadership Minors. I could go on and on about the numerous positions that have been given to students that revolve around the Leadership Institute, but that’s not my point. My point is that this program, this Institute is the sole purpose why Central Michigan University has that competing edge on other universities. Do we see other universities with a leadership minor? No, and do we see other universities making sure that leadership in high school is extremely important and letting those students know that there is a program for them out there that suits them perfectly? Absolutely not, but Central Michigan University does. If the Leadership Institute is taken from us, the students that have come to CMU and have realized that this is our life, our stepping stone into the future, our present, our future; then CMU will be making a decision that will tarnish it’s incredible reputation for as long as it remains a university.

  • Fran Stinklemen

    I hope the Leadership Institute closes, even if it doesn’t save money. Many of the people in that program are very full of themselves and tend to believe they are the only people on campus capable of being leaders. Maybe without a Leadership Institute the true leaders in that group will come forward and the people who are just there to get their egos stroked will finally dissipate and stop bragging about how great they are. True leaders don’t need an institute.

  • Steve Lambert

    Well Fran, unfortunately it seems you don’t care about the university you attend.

    Fact: CMU is in a budget problem.

    Fact: Eliminating the LI will put the university in a bigger budget deficit than if it is kept.

    Fact: Quick fix of saving 161,000 on the budget will get CMU closer to their goal of balancing it this year.

    Fact: Quick fixes don’t solve problems, they increase them. This is what this decision will do.

    If you care about your school then you should support it by helping it make long term financially savvy decisions, regardless of your personal feelings towards anyone. If you don’t care about CMU, then please transfer.

    Unfortunately the SSBAG is not thinking long term and is focused on balancing the budget as soon as possible.

    Cutting future income is not a feasible means to do that and I believe it is lazy on their part to use quick fixes to balance the budget.

  • lollerskates

    Steve Lambert, SAE….Kyle Post, SAE….Eric Kern, SAE…In the last article you had Dan Gaiken, Timmy Foster and a few others out of this fraternity complaining. Cut it. Why is money being spent for some frat to rush guys? Look at most of the people involved with LI, it’s all the same fraternity. Leadership Safari is majority their guys who try to rush people.
    Fran has it pretty much right. Most of the people in LI act like anyone who isn’t in LI can’t be a leader whatsoever. Funny thing, for leaders you never see any of these people come up with ground breaking new ideas or really lead anyone outside of LI. Leaders don’t have to be trained. Leadership comes naturally. Take a natural leader and put them up against any of these laughing stocks who spew the same drivel over and over and see who comes out on top.

  • lollerskates

    oh and ps Dykstra Heinze is their faculty advisor

  • Fran Stinklemen

    Steve Lambert, can you please tell me when I said I didn’t care about CMU? You need to calm down. I said that I don’t stand behind the Leadership Institute because I don’t believe in its cause. That doesn’t mean that I don’t care about CMU.

  • Steve Lambert

    Fran my comment about caring was geared towards helping the university. I understand if you don’t agree with the point of the LI. Everyone can havean opinion. As a fiscal decision for CMU though to close the LI means greater debt in the future. Causing greater stress on future CMU budgets.

    If there was a new idea to create the millions of dollars that the LI brings in which would cost less than the salaries that the LI pays for then I wouldn’t argue because they would be fiscally responsible. There isn’t a program or idea to do this unfortunately and if it’s closed CMU will lose millions, CMU needs to make smart decisions.

    Lollerskates- I don’t see why you don’t show your name, step up and be a man instead of hiding

    Not sure why you keep bringing up SAE since the group has done nothing to you that I know of, however, I don’t know who you are. If there was an issue, then I am sorry on behalf of my group. I am willing to rectify the situation if there is one.

    P.S. Leadership Safari is not LI related, its put on through Media Graphix office.

    Also the Interfraternity Council, which is made up of all of the presidents and general members of fraternities passed a unanimous decision to support the LI staying open. My organization is not the only group invovled in the LI or the only one who wants it to stay open.

  • Ryan

    I’m confused. Can someone clear up the scholarship issue? If the LI is giving away $9.6 million in scholarships, how is that considered revenue? Where is the $9.6 million coming from – private donors? As I see it, they are allocating the money from the university – so it is not revenue, but an expense. So then, closing the LI would save $10 million?

  • Steve Lambert

    The Scholarship is privately funded, and it is a total of $8,000 over four years.

    The University only gains revenue from the from the program because the other appx. $13,000 goes to CMU every year per student, unless that student has more scholarships from CMU.

    Because of the Leadership Institute, it brings in at least 40 students every year – couple million dollars in revenue at the cost of the universities 161,000 for the two salaries of the LI staff.

    Some may argue that these students were already coming to CMU anyway, however, many scholarship recipients will say they decided to come to CMU after they were accepted into the program. If they hadn’t gotten accepted, they would be at another school such as MSU, UofM, etc.

  • ugh

    The LI is a great resource for student leaders, however, leadership is best learned when practiced. Books and articles can be written about communications and leadership, and they are quite good, but if one cannot apply those basics in a real life scenario, what good is it?

    Seriously, as an alumni who was an involved student leader outside of the LI, I was incredibly annoyed by the treatment I got from some LAS recipients who treated me like I wasn’t really worth much because I was not one of the “chosen ones” dubbed a leader out of high school. In fact, when I was an executive board member with an RSO, I was quite infuriated every time one of my fellow board members would immediately quit a position because of lack of time management or dedication.

    Ironically, those individuals were LAS recipients.

    I firmly believe the LI has its place, and the LAS program is an intrigal part of recruiting motivated student leaders who positively affect like at CMU. Things should be revamped to save money such as…

    1. Rerewarding the LAS recipients with scholarship money when protocol is barely met. Many, many student leaders emerge at CMU, and it is unfair to see college juniors and seniors getting the money based on being elected to leadership positions back in high school. People change in college, and to see unmotivated leaders attempt to serve the CMU community merely for money is pretty sad.

    2. The LI should really publicise to make it more marketable to the entire campus. I really thought that it was weird that the Office of Residence Life did not have many collaborations with the LI, especially when Residence Life has many chances to reach many incoming freshmen. If there is a reason Residence Life is not working with the LI, maybe relations should be improved on both sides.