Vote Matt Lisk for Penn State Board of Trustees
If you haven’t voted in the BOT election yet…well, what are you waiting for?!
Unfortunately I had to reschedule my original slot, but take a listen to my discussion with Andy Nagypal and the crew at Radio Free Penn State on the Lion 90.7 FM. They asked some great questions, and quite frankly, I thought I gave some great answers!
Radio Free Penn State Interview with Matt Lisk
The folks at Undefeated Broadcasting were nice enough to offer all candidates 15 minutes of time to further discuss their candidacy. Unfortunately I was on a cell phone so the audio quality was not as good as if I was in person, but give a listen for some more insights on who I am and for what I stand. Click below to be taken directly to the audio clip.
1. In view of sharply declining state appropriations, what steps should Penn State be taking to secure its financial future?
Shrinking state appropriations is not a problem unique to Penn State. State funding has not kept pace with the growth in college enrollments. According to a study recently completed by my company, The College Board, state appropriations per full-time equivalent student declined by 23% in inflation-adjusted dollars over the last decade while enrollment in public colleges and universities increased by 33%.
Institutions that rely on state funding, wholly or partly, are subjected to the widely varying economic conditions of the state. Under these conditions longer term planning is nearly impossible. When hard times lead to a decrease in funding a university is left to cut critical expenditures at the last possible moment with very little planning. During good times, if a university tries to stash appropriations for a rainy day, they are penalized in future years when the state feels the school does not need the funds. As such, universities are forced to rely on tuition for an increasing share of their revenues.
Given that Penn State is not a truly “public” institution (it is “state-related”…essentially trading BOT seats for funding) it needs to assess all viable options to deal with the funding shortfall. It is critical that the University finds alternative funding sources that meet the objectives of the colleges and departments. Whether through sponsorships or finding ways to get students to graduate faster (to more quickly generate tax revenues for the state to reinvest in Higher Education) no option should be considered off the table.
2. The rising cost of tuition nationally is making college less affordable for many students. Outline the steps you believe Penn State should be taking to address the issue.
Having the highest in-state tuition for a state university in the entire country is not a distinction of which Penn State should be proud. Competition for students has forced universities to expand the services offered to students and increase the amount of merit aid distributed, with disastrous effects on the bottom line. Despite this, the University is poised to be a thought leader in making college affordable for all students. To solve this growing problem Penn State needs collaboration and innovation followed by execution.
Through collaboration with other flagship state and land grant universities, Penn State may be able to trim program offerings without negatively impacting the breadth of courses available. Penn State can stop trying to be everything to everyone and leverage established programs at other universities while redirecting attention to core competencies. Collaboration should not end at program offerings. Penn State should seek to learn from other schools, share efficacy data and open a dialogue to ramp down admission competition and ramp up value to students.
Innovation through the use of labor-saving technology must improve the learning experience while also cutting costs. Some will argue that the increasing cost of technology has, in part, contributed to the rising tuition. However, having the infrastructure in place to support new modes of learning should be viewed as a worthwhile investment. This does not mean simply putting courses on line but seeking to help students learn more quickly and easily. Penn State must strive to be a “first mover”.
3. What form should Penn State’s land-grant mission take in the 21st century?
The original intent of the Morrill Land-Grant Acts was to create institutions that integrated the practical and applied skills of agriculture, science and technology with classical liberal arts and sciences to create a higher level of knowledge and increase American economic prosperity. As we have moved into the 21st Century, one which has brought globally-impacting challenges like the search for alternative energy sources, climate changes, exhaustion of precious resources, poverty, hunger, and crippling disease, the need for a higher level of knowledge for the betterment of society has not changed. Penn State is well positioned to expand the land grant ideals beyond American borders and advance the global discussion.
Searching for solutions to these large-scale problems will require continued innovation and advancement in the fields of agriculture, science and engineering. The land grant philosophy of sharing the findings and benefits of the University’s unbiased research with the public and engaging with partners to create and implement what they learn will be critical to the global landscape.
Again we are back to the overarching theme of collaboration and innovation. Penn State needs to continue to be a trusted research leader, make investments to ensure the best staff, infrastructure and resources remain available, work with other college and universities to validate findings and devise recommended advancements, and engage industry leaders to act in meaningful ways.
The lead-up to the Penn State Board of Trustees election has been fascinating indeed. I find it hard to separate my experiences as a voting alumnus versus my experience as a candidate, so I figured I would share with you some of my observations “from the inside” to give you a taste of just how concerned I am about the way things are unfolding in the lead-up to the opening of voting on Tuesday. If you are serious about fixing Penn State and returning it to the place of prominence and trust it deserves I hope you’ll read on.
E-mail Conspiracies: I’ve seen several of these over the past couple of months. We’ve got the candidate who gathered email addresses and sent campaign emails in a less-than-above-board fashion, and the “leaked” email that shows a candidate who garnered the support of a Facebook group only to personally endorse a different trifecta of candidates.
Then there are the two email threads to which only the candidates are privy (thankfully): one was a generous offer from the folks at Undefeated Broadcasting and the hosts of The Goon Show to do 15 minute interviews on their own dime/time which turned into a “reply all” nightmare of epic proportions with some candidates spewing some pretty misguided vitriol (by the way if you haven’t heard my interview with the great folks from The Goon Show take a listen here).
The second came when Roger Williams, the executive director of the Penn State Alumni Association, reached out to the candidates to offer two additional opportunities to have their voices heard. One was an offer for candidates to answer three additional questions about challenges facing higher education institutions to be posted on the website for The Penn Stater. The other was an offer for a meet-and-greet on the morning of the Blue-White game at the Intramural Building (yours truly has committed to attend in person). Again another “reply all” fiasco which bordered on a personal attack of Mr. Williams – classic “shooting the messenger” kind of crap.
So what is the big deal? There’s a serious lack of professional behavior that plagues some of the candidates in the pool, and that will only retard progress in the long run. If other members of the BOT are distracted by having to babysit and police this kind of nonsense then that takes their attention away from the bigger issues. Not to mention that it is generally a violation of the collaborative spirit that is required to fix this mess! Please keep in mind that every one of a candidate’s actions in this election are clues to the kind of leader they will be. If you don’t like something they did leading up to the election, chances are you won’t want them representing you on the BOT.
Losing Perspective: Some candidates are promising some pretty heady stuff and bashing those who don’t “take a position”. Some voters are jumping up and down to get the entire current BOT to resign. Both trends are pretty concerning and I’ll tackle them in order.
First, the candidates need to remember that they will be 1 of 32 members. Having new ideas and perspectives is great. Shitting on candidates who want to take a more measured approach? Not so good. Having the skills to navigate and negotiate a pretty politically charged environment is a critical trait for the candidates selected. Change won’t happen overnight, and it is ok for a candidate to say that they don’t have it all figured out. Here’s what I think IS critical to determine about a candidate:
Second, please stop with the calls for the sitting BOT to resign en masse. It won’t happen, and you don’t want it to happen. If you think things are chaotic now, imagine the situation where you have a complete lack of leadership?! Change needs to be gradual, and you must continue to make your voices heard. The fight doesn’t end in early May! We need to continue to get qualified alumni candidates cycling through each year to dramatically change the balance of power and push the change agenda. By the way, this applies not just in the BOT election, but also in the PA gubernatorial elections in 2015 and the Presidential election in November. Education policy can and should be affected at all levels.
Playing the “Joe” Card Too Much: I love Joe Paterno – always have, always will. He embodies everything I wanted to be in an adult – working hard to be the best at what you do but not willing to compromise your principles. I admit I second-guessed him at first. It was counter to everything I believed, but I am not so whitewashed that I could not keep an open mind that he may have actually done something wrong. Ultimately I do not think that he was treated fairly at any point in this process, and I do think that he acted correctly. But correcting the wrongs heaped upon Paterno should not be the focal point of anyone’s campaign – I would think even the Paterno family would agree with that. A candidate must be committed to first fixing the governance issues, revisiting the Charter and Bylaws to ensure that a proper system of checks and balances is in place, and rewriting policies that give super-clear guidance to all employees on the proper procedures for reporting issues and the repercussions for not doing so correctly and in a timely fashion. That does not mean that the BOT shouldn’t try to make formal amends for the way Paterno was villainized but we have to take steps to address the bigger issues first.
Oooh, Shiny: I never begrudge anyone their financial successes in life. Everyone has their own path in life and makes their own decisions. For some that leads to financial success, for others it leads to a different kind of fulfillment. So if someone has the resources to invest their own money into a slickly produced commercial, more power to them. However, I do take offense to a couple of aspects of this much ballyhooed media campaign. First, telling a reporter how much you spent is a bit crass to say the least. Second, and this goes to you voters, pledging your vote based on that commercial is lazy – lots of people out there who said “he has my vote” based solely on watching the video. Yes it was well done, but it plays the “Joe” card way too heavily and didn’t appear genuine – credibility issues aside. Don’t agree? The snarky sports website deadspin.com has a very similar take to mine. Some of you will say “sour grapes” to which I would respond that Penn State needs leaders, ones with stellar credentials and experience in fixing messes like the one Penn State faces – if this commercial tells you those things about that candidate then I think you need to re-read the bios and platforms a few more times. Don’t get distracted by shiny things.
In summary, there are some extremely talented people from 1-86 who have achieved great things in their careers – some are just getting started on their journey, some are at the halfway point in their professional careers, some are in the twilight of their accomplishments. Some candidates have the name recognition but don’t have the experience. Some candidates are boisterous but misguided. And yet others have been trustees before, yet can we trust this time will be different? This isn’t some ESPN poll where you can blindly pick the answer based on your heart (like “best college gameday environment ever!”) or a name you know.
Now for the shameless plug. I live and breathe the challenges of getting students prepared for life beyond high school on a daily basis. In fact, in the week leading up to the Blue-White game I will be traveling the great state of Idaho engaging students to define their own roads in life by doing what inspires them. It is a joint partnership between the College Board and Roadtrip Nation, and fits perfectly with what inspires me – continuing the legacy of my dad, who challenged me to make a difference in the lives of students everywhere. I have fixed governance, policy and process issues since my very first day out of Penn State, and I have the endorsements of some pretty prominent people in the non-profit and education spaces. You don’t have to go far to find the most qualified candidate on the ballot – Vote Matt Lisk #1 on the Ballot.
The tragic events in recent months have been more than any University community should ever endure. To heal and move forward, the leadership of Penn State needs to find a meaningful balance that preserves the storied history and traditions of the University, enhances the business interests of a seminal public higher education institution with a successful athletic program and builds upon the essential nonprofit foundation of education.
The current issues within the leadership structure of Penn State are broad and evoke tremendous emotion. While it is imperative that the Board makes sweeping changes in the way the University is governed, any solutions must be both measured and objective, considered carefully by those who best understand the intricate landscape of higher education and its influence on all aspects of society.
I propose that such balance be achieved swiftly and with the utmost integrity by those charged with serving. The Charter and Bylaws of the Board should be revised to guarantee an appropriate distribution of power, and should be based upon the best practices of successful non-profit and education-based Boards. A culture of collaboration in which alumni, faculty and students all have a greater voice in shaping the policies of the University is critical to the future of Penn State. I believe my background and expertise will help shape a Board willing to work with the entire University community to find common ground and create solutions that will work for the greater good and rebuild the luster of an American educational icon.
Google Alerts – "Penn State Board of Trustees"