UM has 'enrollment problem,' Engstrom tells regents

[bigtyme]

Here in Helena there is a crap load od scat commercials and updates, which includes the sports flagship ESPN radio. TV ads, billboards, you name it, MSU understands business.the arrogance in RE is absurd.

 

[curiousobserver]

So you imply that engineering is not "academic" ?? This seems to be part of the arrogance that is so prevalent in Missoula and other liberal arts campus's. The days when you go to undergraduate school and take anthropology courses and Renaissance literature and walk out into the job world and snag a good job are over. Employers are looking for applicants with relevant academic preparation for the positions they are being hired for---- they are calling the shots in the depressed Obama economy.

I'm curious as to why it's the "depressed Obama economy"? Since Mr. Obama became president both the economy and employment have grown.
Your point is well taken, although I don't think there was ever a time where graduates in Anthropology and Renaissance Literature fared particularly well in the job market.

It's grown because it damn near bottomed out, and it hasn't grown because of Obama backed industries( how well has the billions invested in green energy panned out in growing our economy) but instead the very industries that Obama chastised and swore to reduce like energy extraction companies have reignited our economy drastically. The shale oil revolution in our country is a driving factor behind our economy coming back. NOT OBAMA!

You are spot on, Badlands.

I will also add that if Montana were to be as aggressive in pursuing drilling on its side of the border as North Dakota has been the past several years, the state's economy would benefit tremendously and the ramifications of that would be felt all across the state, not just in eastern Montana. It is amazing to me that the so-called leadership (ahem, Governor) and his cronies insist on turning their backs on this opportunity for the state to prosper just to satisfy a severely misguided special interest group.

For those of you in the 'move up' crowd, there would even be money available to pay for that if you could convince the legislature to fund it. Money would no longer be an issue for you, just politics. Instead of lobbying on this board for your move up agenda, start lobbying in Helena with those who are preventing your 'move up' dream from happening. :idea:

 

[Tokyogriz]

Wouldn't that make our move up dream a "Pipe Dream"?

 

[Tokyogriz]

Engstrom inherited years of the previous administration that simply neglected a cogent plan for a future that most of on campus recognized, the most obvious is a building binge at the expense of classroom instruction.

Maybe RE was not the best choice, BUT if any recall, there was NOT long or stellar list of applicants for the job when Dennison stepped down. Most stayed away because they had a good idea of what awaited them....and it had little to do with football.

One thing RE has done is clear out enough of the "old Guard" to allow some change. It is very true there were few who wnated to follow Dennison and the mess he created, which will take years to recover form. Ifrastucture is not program. Its a shame he had to deal with the Athletic issues before he could really start to clean house. Foleys and Coutures departure was a good start. There have been other less known names leave that have had a great effect. He may pull it off yet. Nearly half the decline in enrollment was from the economy, but not quite in the way described here. The University (including the Vo-tech) was filled up with non traditional students whose way was being paid for by "grants" (mills shutting down, expanded voc rehab etc.) whether the change will come in time or not is anyones guess.

And yes the entire country is questioning the value of attending a University especially when the graduates aren't getting jobs......

I'm suprised thet PR didn't grab at the obvious which is the Freshman/Sophomore retention rate being high may indicate a recruiting problem, but will pay off the next two years UNLESS the transfer rate Jr levels say to , Nursing School being run in Missoula BY MSU (almost 200 of that two year total), out of state nursing programs, engineering schools etc is problematic

Your defense of Royce Engstrom is nonsense.

 

[rimrockgriz]

Couple points:

Anyone who thinks that declining enrollment isn't a problem needs to do some research on how those numbers effect all phases of our University, including the Athletic Department. More importantly, it effects the funding our University receives.

Montana will always be a Liberal Arts college. There is nothing that will ever change that nor should it. If a kid wants to be an Architect or Engineer, they go to MSU. If they want to be an Economist or a Pharmacist you go to UM.

I would like to see UM de-emphasis programs that don't generate good job placement numbers and increase focus on programs that we compete well in (eg: Business, Accounting, Law, Econ, Journalism, Math, Sciences) and expand focus on programs that we should try to fill educational demands for such as Computer Science, IT, Pre-Med.

BigKid hit the nail on the head and I've heard this same thing with other parents. It is really disappointing to hear and something we need to improve on. It's clear that these efforts are going to have some influence on enrollment numbers.

The obvious, is that the negative publicity of the rape cases from last year has had a negative effect on this University. As the U promotes a safe culture, things will improve. Time heals.

Lastly, I really haven't seen much from RE on working on any changes that address the above. They aren't easy changes that don't happen overnight, but other schools have/are doing it. Status quo and finger pointing isn't good leadership.

Solid post... :egriz:

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

It's grown because it damn near bottomed out, and it hasn't grown because of Obama backed industries( how well has the billions invested in green energy panned out in growing our economy) but instead the very industries that Obama chastised and swore to reduce like energy extraction companies have reignited our economy drastically. The shale oil revolution in our country is a driving factor behind our economy coming back. NOT OBAMA!

Sorry, but the definition of 'economic depression' is when the economy shrinks. As you point out, the economy has grown under Mr. Obama's leadership, thus there can be no 'depressed Obama economy'.

I never once used the term economic depression or the term depressed economy, those were your words, I was simply stating that many of the sectors that are powering our economy now are not because of Obama and that many of them are in fact the very corporations that Obama said he was going to crack down on..that is until they started bailing his economy out of the cellar.

You did say 'depressed Obama economy'.

MCG..those are your words, I highlighted them! Read what I wrote, I never once used the term.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

So you imply that engineering is not "academic" ?? This seems to be part of the arrogance that is so prevalent in Missoula and other liberal arts campus's. The days when you go to undergraduate school and take anthropology courses and Renaissance literature and walk out into the job world and snag a good job are over. Employers are looking for applicants with relevant academic preparation for the positions they are being hired for---- they are calling the shots in the depressed Obama economy.

I'm curious as to why it's the "depressed Obama economy"? Since Mr. Obama became president both the economy and employment have grown.
Your point is well taken, although I don't think there was ever a time where graduates in Anthropology and Renaissance Literature fared particularly well in the job market.

It's grown because it damn near bottomed out, and it hasn't grown because of Obama backed industries( how well has the billions invested in green energy panned out in growing our economy) but instead the very industries that Obama chastised and swore to reduce like energy extraction companies have reignited our economy drastically. The shale oil revolution in our country is a driving factor behind our economy coming back. NOT OBAMA!

You are spot on, Badlands.

I will also add that if Montana were to be as aggressive in pursuing drilling on its side of the border as North Dakota has been the past several years, the state's economy would benefit tremendously and the ramifications of that would be felt all across the state, not just in eastern Montana. It is amazing to me that the so-called leadership (ahem, Governor) and his cronies insist on turning their backs on this opportunity for the state to prosper just to satisfy a severely misguided special interest group.

For those of you in the 'move up' crowd, there would even be money available to pay for that if you could convince the legislature to fund it. Money would no longer be an issue for you, just politics. Instead of lobbying on this board for your move up agenda, start lobbying in Helena with those who are preventing your 'move up' dream from happening. :idea:

While Montana's political climate and economic drivers are different from ND, the reason we aren't drilling in MT like we are in ND is 99.9% geology based, not politically based. But I get what your saying.

 

[PlayerRep]

I'm curious as to why it's the "depressed Obama economy"? Since Mr. Obama became president both the economy and employment have grown.
Your point is well taken, although I don't think there was ever a time where graduates in Anthropology and Renaissance Literature fared particularly well in the job market.

It's grown because it damn near bottomed out, and it hasn't grown because of Obama backed industries( how well has the billions invested in green energy panned out in growing our economy) but instead the very industries that Obama chastised and swore to reduce like energy extraction companies have reignited our economy drastically. The shale oil revolution in our country is a driving factor behind our economy coming back. NOT OBAMA!

You are spot on, Badlands.

I will also add that if Montana were to be as aggressive in pursuing drilling on its side of the border as North Dakota has been the past several years, the state's economy would benefit tremendously and the ramifications of that would be felt all across the state, not just in eastern Montana. It is amazing to me that the so-called leadership (ahem, Governor) and his cronies insist on turning their backs on this opportunity for the state to prosper just to satisfy a severely misguided special interest group.

For those of you in the 'move up' crowd, there would even be money available to pay for that if you could convince the legislature to fund it. Money would no longer be an issue for you, just politics. Instead of lobbying on this board for your move up agenda, start lobbying in Helena with those who are preventing your 'move up' dream from happening. :idea:

While Montana's political climate and economic drivers are different from ND, the reason we aren't drilling in MT like we are in ND is 99.9% geology based, not politically based. But I get what your saying.

Your statement is not correct. It is not 99.99% geology based. There are various other factors. The first major Bakken field, Elm Coulee, was in Montana, not North Dakota. Yes, the Middle Bakken (where most of the Bakken oil has been extracted) is thicker in North Dakota, some now believe the Upper Bakken is very promising, especially in Montana, and almost everyone believes the Three Forks formation is where the action is going to be in the future, especially in Montana. The Three Forks is the main reason that the Bakken/Three Forks oil estimates increased so significantly earlier this year. I represent various oil companies and oil service companies, know multiple oil geologists, and have part ownership of our family ranch in northeastern MT. I pay close attention to the Bakken.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Bakken-Oil-Boom-Moving-Back-Home-to-Montana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

 

[mcg]

Sorry, but the definition of 'economic depression' is when the economy shrinks. As you point out, the economy has grown under Mr. Obama's leadership, thus there can be no 'depressed Obama economy'.

I never once used the term economic depression or the term depressed economy, those were your words, I was simply stating that many of the sectors that are powering our economy now are not because of Obama and that many of them are in fact the very corporations that Obama said he was going to crack down on..that is until they started bailing his economy out of the cellar.

You did say 'depressed Obama economy'.

MCG..those are your words, I highlighted them! Read what I wrote, I never once used the term.

You are correct, another poster used the term 'depressed Obama economy'. I have simply pointed that there is no depressed economy during the Obama administration. A correct reference would be 'recovering Obama economy'.

 

[ranco]

I never once used the term economic depression or the term depressed economy, those were your words, I was simply stating that many of the sectors that are powering our economy now are not because of Obama and that many of them are in fact the very corporations that Obama said he was going to crack down on..that is until they started bailing his economy out of the cellar.

You did say 'depressed Obama economy'.

MCG..those are your words, I highlighted them! Read what I wrote, I never once used the term.

You are correct, another poster used the term 'depressed Obama economy'. I have simply pointed that there is no depressed economy during the Obama administration. A correct reference would be 'recovering Obama economy'.

which is depressing.

 

[tnt]

Unfortunately we had a president like Wayne Hogan. He was so busy empire building campus buildings and subdividing the Golf course so the ultimate Jock Sniffers, Rah Rah Boys, and Greek Society could once again relive their college days by living on campus pretending to be insiders and a "part of it" that the Guts of the university went to hell in a hand basket.

The athletic department ran itself (that didn't turn out real well) while the academic side of things was micromanaged by a "Vice President" who not only didn't have a terminal degree in anything but wasn't even qualified to be be a middle school vice principal. Tenure Track professors left were replaced by adjuncts who were treated like dog doo. Several departments were put on warning by various accrediting agency to shape up Not the least of which was the business department who sweat out formal visitiation for accreditation adding quickly regular faculty and reassigning teaching loads to comply with MINIMUM requirements to get accreditation renewed. They made it.

Anyone who thinks the mess over there can be fixed with a slicker promotional campaign, more TV spots, and enhanced marketing is naive and smoking the same thing as Tokyo. The encouraging thing is the BOR has learned from the Dennison Debacle and is watching very carefully the Capitalization/Expansion/Building going on at MSU very carefully to make sure the growth is sustainable and the Dennison mistakes not repeated.

I have no clue whether RE can fix the mess. RE fired the right people but his hires haven't shown much. He got a late start. The support he HAD from the faculty is now tentative. As much as at hurts to say it there is a lot broken at UM our academic rating research $$ etc etc reflect it. 10 years of neglect can't be fixed in 2. As far as marketing goes, you can't polish a turd.

A vibrant successful Athletic department will help with the PR, and RE has made the changes to allow that to happen. BUT the flagship unit of UM has got to offer better than the colleges to grow.

Economy, positioning if Liberal arts, recruiting etc are all factors. But there is a lot more to fix.

 

[ALPHAGRIZ1]

Obama has done NOTHING for our economy but keep it down.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 4

 

[Washgrizfan1]

Unfortunately we had a president like Wayne Hogan. He was so busy empire building campus buildings and subdividing the Golf course so the ultimate Jock Sniffers, Rah Rah Boys, and Greek Society could once again relive their college days by living on campus pretending to be insiders and a "part of it" that the Guts of the university went to hell in a hand basket.

The athletic department ran itself (that didn't turn out real well) while the academic side of things was micromanaged by a "Vice President" who not only didn't have a terminal degree in anything but wasn't even qualified to be be a middle school vice principal. Tenure Track professors left were replaced by adjuncts who were treated like dog doo. Several departments were put on warning by various accrediting agency to shape up Not the least of which was the business department who sweat out formal visitiation for accreditation adding quickly regular faculty and reassigning teaching loads to comply with MINIMUM requirements to get accreditation renewed. They made it.

Anyone who thinks the mess over there can be fixed with a slicker promotional campaign, more TV spots, and enhanced marketing is naive and smoking the same thing as Tokyo. The encouraging thing is the BOR has learned from the Dennison Debacle and is watching very carefully the Capitalization/Expansion/Building going on at MSU very carefully to make sure the growth is sustainable and the Dennison mistakes not repeated.

I have no clue whether RE can fix the mess. RE fired the right people but his hires haven't shown much. He got a late start. The support he HAD from the faculty is now tentative. As much as at hurts to say it there is a lot broken at UM our academic rating research $$ etc etc reflect it. 10 years of neglect can't be fixed in 2. As far as marketing goes, you can't polish a turd.

A vibrant successful Athletic department will help with the PR, and RE has made the changes to allow that to happen. BUT the flagship unit of UM has got to offer better than the colleges to grow.

Economy, positioning if Liberal arts, recruiting etc are all factors. But there is a lot more to fix.

The University would not be having this many major problems if Dennison was still the president.

The University would be better off if Jim Foley, Jim O'Day and Robin Pflugrad were still employed at UM.

Engstrom's bad decisions and statements created most of the public relations problems that the University has had. The Missoulian also contributed to the problem.

The athletic department has done just fine, especially given the bad decisions made by Engstrom to hurt it.

Most of the statements/opinions in the quoted post are nonsense and not supported by the facts.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

It's grown because it damn near bottomed out, and it hasn't grown because of Obama backed industries( how well has the billions invested in green energy panned out in growing our economy) but instead the very industries that Obama chastised and swore to reduce like energy extraction companies have reignited our economy drastically. The shale oil revolution in our country is a driving factor behind our economy coming back. NOT OBAMA!

You are spot on, Badlands.

I will also add that if Montana were to be as aggressive in pursuing drilling on its side of the border as North Dakota has been the past several years, the state's economy would benefit tremendously and the ramifications of that would be felt all across the state, not just in eastern Montana. It is amazing to me that the so-called leadership (ahem, Governor) and his cronies insist on turning their backs on this opportunity for the state to prosper just to satisfy a severely misguided special interest group.

For those of you in the 'move up' crowd, there would even be money available to pay for that if you could convince the legislature to fund it. Money would no longer be an issue for you, just politics. Instead of lobbying on this board for your move up agenda, start lobbying in Helena with those who are preventing your 'move up' dream from happening. :idea:

While Montana's political climate and economic drivers are different from ND, the reason we aren't drilling in MT like we are in ND is 99.9% geology based, not politically based. But I get what your saying.

Your statement is not correct. It is not 99.99% geology based. There are various other factors. The first major Bakken field, Elm Coulee, was in Montana, not North Dakota. Yes, the Middle Bakken (where most of the Bakken oil has been extracted) is thicker in North Dakota, some now believe the Upper Bakken is very promising, especially in Montana, and almost everyone believes the Three Forks formation is where the action is going to be in the future, especially in Montana. The Three Forks is the main reason that the Bakken/Three Forks oil estimates increased so significantly earlier this year. I represent various oil companies and oil service companies, know multiple oil geologists, and have part ownership of our family ranch in northeastern MT. I pay close attention to the Bakken.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Bakken-Oil-Boom-Moving-Back-Home-to-Montana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't need a history lesson on the Boom bud, I work with various oil companies and infrastructure companies on a daily basis as well as attend numerous conferences and legislative sessions in Bismarck, not to mention meeting with Gov Dalyrymple on a monthly basis. I know where it started, I know what formations are involved, I deal with the statistics on a daily basis and have a direct roll in planning for future development in North Dakota.
Tax holidays and legislature have little to do with the production numbers in Montana compared to North Dakota. If the oil is in the ground, the production would follow, but in MT the geology is nowhere near as ideal compared to Western ND. While the Elm Coulee field is very good still, the production numbers aren't the same as say anywhere in McKenzie County.
The information you gave can be found at any local eastern MT or western ND café at 6 in the morning, look for the group of old men drinking coffee. Maybe to give you some satisfaction I will change my last % number to 99.1%.

 

[84GRIZ]

Obama has done NOTHING for our economy but keep it down.

Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 4

Spot on. With our historically low interest rates the last 6 or 7 years we should be worried about inflation at this point. The point that the Obama administration does not understand is that the huge amount of increased regulations coming out of D.C. is the same effect as putting your left foot on the brake of the economy as you are pushing the gas with your right foot with lower interest rates.

The U.S. Dept of Labor, the EPA, the banking regulators are all are at fault. I had a banker tell me the only people that they can make a business loan to now are the ones that do not need it because they can not do anything that will neg. effect their regulator stress test.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Oh and PlayerRep, I also noticed your article was from 2012, I suggest using a more current source of information, specially when dealing with the oil industry. I would suggest trying to find something within the month next time you reference something with oil or gas being the topic, the industry tends to change drastically on a monthly basis....that is all

 

[AllWeatherFan]

 

[PlayerRep]

You are spot on, Badlands.

I will also add that if Montana were to be as aggressive in pursuing drilling on its side of the border as North Dakota has been the past several years, the state's economy would benefit tremendously and the ramifications of that would be felt all across the state, not just in eastern Montana. It is amazing to me that the so-called leadership (ahem, Governor) and his cronies insist on turning their backs on this opportunity for the state to prosper just to satisfy a severely misguided special interest group.

For those of you in the 'move up' crowd, there would even be money available to pay for that if you could convince the legislature to fund it. Money would no longer be an issue for you, just politics. Instead of lobbying on this board for your move up agenda, start lobbying in Helena with those who are preventing your 'move up' dream from happening. :idea:

While Montana's political climate and economic drivers are different from ND, the reason we aren't drilling in MT like we are in ND is 99.9% geology based, not politically based. But I get what your saying.

Your statement is not correct. It is not 99.99% geology based. There are various other factors. The first major Bakken field, Elm Coulee, was in Montana, not North Dakota. Yes, the Middle Bakken (where most of the Bakken oil has been extracted) is thicker in North Dakota, some now believe the Upper Bakken is very promising, especially in Montana, and almost everyone believes the Three Forks formation is where the action is going to be in the future, especially in Montana. The Three Forks is the main reason that the Bakken/Three Forks oil estimates increased so significantly earlier this year. I represent various oil companies and oil service companies, know multiple oil geologists, and have part ownership of our family ranch in northeastern MT. I pay close attention to the Bakken.

http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Bakken-Oil-Boom-Moving-Back-Home-to-Montana.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I don't need a history lesson on the Boom bud, I work with various oil companies and infrastructure companies on a daily basis as well as attend numerous conferences and legislative sessions in Bismarck, not to mention meeting with Gov Dalyrymple on a monthly basis. I know where it started, I know what formations are involved, I deal with the statistics on a daily basis and have a direct roll in planning for future development in North Dakota.
Tax holidays and legislature have little to do with the production numbers in Montana compared to North Dakota. If the oil is in the ground, the production would follow, but in MT the geology is nowhere near as ideal compared to Western ND. While the Elm Coulee field is very good still, the production numbers aren't the same as say anywhere in McKenzie County.
The information you gave can be found at any local eastern MT or western ND café at 6 in the morning, look for the group of old men drinking coffee. Maybe to give you some satisfaction I will change my last % number to 99.1%.

Why don't you provide some support or proof for your statement that 99.1% of the difference is geology driven? You are still incorrect with your revised figure. Why don't you just admit. Your unsubstantiated statement is just not going to cut it with me.

 

[PlayerRep]

Oh and PlayerRep, I also noticed your article was from 2012, I suggest using a more current source of information, specially when dealing with the oil industry. I would suggest trying to find something within the month next time you reference something with oil or gas being the topic, the industry tends to change drastically on a monthly basis....that is all

You realize that most of the drilling in the Bakken area occurred prior to 2012? Are you telling us that the geology changed since 2012? That's pretty funny. Stop making unsupported and dumb statements, so I don't have to call you on them.

 

[justanotherfan]

Engstrom inherited years of the previous administration that simply neglected a cogent plan for a future that most of on campus recognized, the most obvious is a building binge at the expense of classroom instruction.

Maybe RE was not the best choice, BUT if any recall, there was NOT long or stellar list of applicants for the job when Dennison stepped down. Most stayed away because they had a good idea of what awaited them....and it had little to do with football.

One thing RE has done is clear out enough of the "old Guard" to allow some change. It is very true there were few who wnated to follow Dennison and the mess he created, which will take years to recover form. Ifrastucture is not program. Its a shame he had to deal with the Athletic issues before he could really start to clean house. Foleys and Coutures departure was a good start. There have been other less known names leave that have had a great effect. He may pull it off yet. Nearly half the decline in enrollment was from the economy, but not quite in the way described here. The University (including the Vo-tech) was filled up with non traditional students whose way was being paid for by "grants" (mills shutting down, expanded voc rehab etc.) whether the change will come in time or not is anyones guess.

And yes the entire country is questioning the value of attending a University especially when the graduates aren't getting jobs......

I'm suprised thet PR didn't grab at the obvious which is the Freshman/Sophomore retention rate being high may indicate a recruiting problem, but will pay off the next two years UNLESS the transfer rate Jr levels say to , Nursing School being run in Missoula BY MSU (almost 200 of that two year total), out of state nursing programs, engineering schools etc is problematic

Come on...you gotta quit blaming Dennison for RE's screw ups. What problems? Do you mean those that resulted in the poorly advised self-imposed NCAA sanctions for what amounted to being busted for jaywalking? We keep hearing about Dennison's messes, but tell us what they were! We are all still waiting.....

This is classic "blame the guy before me for my screw ups". Any publically traded company would have fired Engstrom over this mess he created. The drop in enrollment and resulting financial pressures are a direct result of him not being qualified for the job.

The University of Montana deserves better!

P.S. Using the term "Vo-tech" shows your ignorance as this term hasn't been used since they were equivalent to high schools. Major changes have occurred on these campuses as they continue to evolve towards needed community college models...and those impacts are felt by both U of M and MSU.