A number of different organizational structures at the College have been tackling the issue of what programs should be delivered by which campuses. Committees such as curriculum and finance, working groups such as the planning council, and chain of command sessions such as the weekly chairs and cabinet meetings have all wrestled with this issue.
Almost a year ago The Onion outlined a plan for downsizing the College in the event that future budgets were significantly less than current budgets.
Since then centripetal forces - forces that tend to pull the College in many different directions - have continued to act on the College. Internally our state campuses want to deliver programs that are beneficial to their state. Externally organizations such as the Chuuk State legislature have proposed setting up a two-year institution independent of COM-FSM, or so I am given to understand from cafeteria table talk.
One solution to the issue of what programs are offered where would be to grow the College. This is not as financially foolhardy as it must sound in the wake of a document such as The Onion.
Allow the state campuses to become semi-autonomous two-year degree granting institutions. Completely separate all financial functions at each of the six campuses. Each campus would float or sink on their own budget. State campuses would be free to run any certificate or two-year program they could implement and support.
The Palikir campus would begin work with the senior accreditation commission on becoming a four-year institution. Bachelor degree programs would be developed in education, business, Micronesian studies, and nursing. The Learning Resource Center would need to expand their collection and support capabilities.
This expansion would shift the College's focus from wrestling over who gets which piece of the same pie to a focus on enlarging the pie. The development of four-year programs would also remove the element of competition for students and turf that lurks behind national campus concerns over releasing two-year degree granting authority to the state campuses. Issues such as program quality would move from discussions wherein the national campus presumes that only they can deliver quality programs to discussions of how program quality can be improved system-wide.
The first four-year degree program would be in Education and could be implemented in the manner in which Northern Marianas College implemented their four-year education degree. This move does not require working with the senior accreditation commission.
Four-year degrees in business and Micronesian studies would be the next programs to be developed and implemented. These programs would, in all likelihood, require only the beefing up of the Learning Resource Center collection and the addition of some doctoral degree faculty for senior level courses. The College would have to move to the senior commission with the implementation of these programs.
Other shifts in administrative structure would have to occur internally. At the national campus the divisions would likely evolve into colleges each led by a dean. The state campuses would have chairs for their own divisions and state chairs would consult with the dean in their area at the national campus.
Structurally the six campuses would be an affiliation of schools under a common board. There are models such as those in use in Hawaii and California for such affiliated structures with common governing boards.
The Palikir campus would also begin work on a full-service English Language Institute (ELI). Admissions would be open to anyone with a pulse and/or the ability to fog a mirror on a cold day. The ELI would include direct entry into two and four year degree programs.
The English Language Institute would eventually be housed in its own facilities at the Palikir national campus. With the ongoing expansion of the presence of foreign workers on Pohnpei from non-English speaking countries, there might be opportunities to expand the student base of the ELI beyond our traditional student base.
The four-year program in Education appears to only need additional faculty, a computer laboratory for pre-service teachers, and about a $60,000 per year additional annual investment in the College's Learning Resource Center. The laboratory could be funded out of the computer turn-over fee, it would shift the turn-over schedule to a six-year cycle. The additional salaries could be covered in part by a higher tuition rate for "upper level" (junior and senior year) courses. This would not be unusual in the world of higher education.
The four year business and Micronesian studies programs would also require increased Learning Resource Center investment and the hiring of appropriate faculty. Again, the bulk of these costs should be defrayable via tuition charged at a higher rate than the $75 per credit hour of the first two years.
The four-year nursing program would have to be developed more slowly as there would additional costs beyond books and salaries. Upper level science laboratory courses would require some capital and equipment investment. The health care needs of the nation, however, demand that the College play a role in supplying health care workers in the long run.
The English Language Institute would also have its own unique credit hour rate, and would include both a resident and non-resident rate. The ELI would be delivering courses that have the highest return over cost for the College: developmental English and developmental math courses.
In light of the possibility that the ELI might eventually also serve the needs of foreign guest workers, the ELI should probably be internally separated in the budget so that it is clear that the ELI is self-sufficient and is not using FSM national or state monies.
The upshot is that the bulk of the growth would be funded by increasing the number of students served by the College.
The state campuses would run under their own separated budgets. State legislatures would need to be made aware that they might have an increased role in the viability of their state campuses.
FSM Congressional money would be reserved to the national campus. There is a potential political downside to this approach due to the inherent parochial outlook of the members of Congress. The role of the national campus in building and strengthening national identity as a foundation for the continuation of the nation and ultimately the future existence of the national Congress itself would have to be emphasized. The College is the only FSM national institution outside of the national government.
The present efforts of Faichuuk and of some of the leadership on Pohnpei indicate that centripetal forces also threaten to rend the nation. The College's national campus is the only place that young people come together and live together as FSM citizens. The College is arguably the only unifying force in this nation. Thus the Congress cuts funding at their own future peril.
There would be some unresolved issues of import if the above plan is implemented. Would the College become the University of Micronesia (U of M) or the Micronesian University (MU)?
Dana Lee Ling
Palikir 2001