UM Spring Enrollment Numbers?

[PlayerRep]

I believe the WWAMI kids now go 2 years to MSU. I doubt that anyone chooses the WWAMI program so that they can go to MSU at the outset.

Why do you doubt that? Are you saying that they would pick Wyoming, Alaska, or Idaho over MSU?

To get into the MT WWAMI program, you have to be from MT. Cost is reduced. It’s easier to get into Med school through the WWANI program. UW is a good med school. You then have to go to MSU for the first two years. You don’t have a choice.

 

[argh!]

The University of Montana is simply selling the wrong things. I don't care how they combine and rename degrees...people are not fooled. I also don't think better marketing, branding, recruiting, or campus visits will matter much.

Degrees have to be worth the money spent to get them. UM simply has too few of them.

Rock bottom is nearing, and the BOR will have to make transformational changes.

Soldier, it seems that you have identified the heart of the problem. Ok, what are some of the degrees UM should offer? How about a Medical School? We continue to hear one of the issues restricting growth is the Union. If true, let’s break our Union agreements. What is the down side? It is apparent that UM is in a desperate position called survival, so let’s get the show on the road and turn UM around. Finally, we have a first rate president with Bodnar, so let’s all support him rather than the ongoing negative lip service. I don’t mean you Soldier, but others on the board.

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

 

[kemajic]

Soldier, it seems that you have identified the heart of the problem. Ok, what are some of the degrees UM should offer? How about a Medical School? We continue to hear one of the issues restricting growth is the Union. If true, let’s break our Union agreements. What is the down side? It is apparent that UM is in a desperate position called survival, so let’s get the show on the road and turn UM around. Finally, we have a first rate president with Bodnar, so let’s all support him rather than the ongoing negative lip service. I don’t mean you Soldier, but others on the board.

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

That's about the 200th time you've made a point of your love for Bodnar. Fine, we get your opinion, but most in MT have a different opinion. You don't dig out of the hole he climbed into quickly.

 

[tnt]

Don't think Meaningful programs/degrees is the issue..... 10 Years after graduation the highest Average salaries by graduates from Montana Colleges has Caroll College in first Place and a tie between Highland College an Montana Tech for Second and third place Sou you have the best three college in Montana for "success" a Liberal Arts, college, and engineering school and a technical/vocational school (also offers a non degree RN program.)Did I mention by far and a way the lowest cost of Attendance is Highland College?

 

[Spanky2]

Soldier, it seems that you have identified the heart of the problem. Ok, what are some of the degrees UM should offer? How about a Medical School? We continue to hear one of the issues restricting growth is the Union. If true, let’s break our Union agreements. What is the down side? It is apparent that UM is in a desperate position called survival, so let’s get the show on the road and turn UM around. Finally, we have a first rate president with Bodnar, so let’s all support him rather than the ongoing negative lip service. I don’t mean you Soldier, but others on the board.

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

 

[PlayerRep]

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

 

[wbtfg]

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

George Clooney?

 

[CatGrad-UMGradStu]

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

Steve Daines...

 

[CatGrad-UMGradStu]

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

Steve Daines...

And all joking aside (even though this cesspool of useless trivia question is being asked) there is a bill in our other cluster fuck town that owns (and the fucking idiots are proud of it) called malfunction junction that will allow the sale of alcohol at sporting events at Montana Colleges. Tech is going to get rich!

 

[Griz til I die]

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

PR? :lol:

 

[argh!]

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president.

no, the job he's done as president is what provides evidence for or against him being a first rate president. he has no previous track record as a university president, and i don't see any current numbers to support the assertion that he's a first rate president. maybe he'll turn it around, we all hope so.

 

[argh!]

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

That's about the 200th time you've made a point of your love for Bodnar. Fine, we get your opinion, but most in MT have a different opinion. You don't dig out of the hole he climbed into quickly.

so many, many are saying that he's a great president, that's what you are hearing in montana? or do you have actual numbers to support your assertion? as for your last sentence, it's perfect, because it appears that's what he's doing to the hole he climbed into, digging it deeper, instead of climbing out. see, we agree on something!

 

[Iowagriz]

In my opinion, there are 3 factors that got us to this point of low enrollment, 2 of the 3 won't be fixed anytime soon. The first is slowly disappearing with time.

1) bad press around rape charges - some of that press was certainly justified, but not all of it - this will only disappear with time
2) the move towards engineering and other hard science degrees - Business, Teaching degrees and pharmacy are all down, the upside of potential earning don't match to the current engineering push - law school is a small enrollment and law/politics has gotten nothing but increasing bad press in the past 10yrs
3) current political climate - Montana is what...70% Republican ??? - Liberal Missoula is not high on the list for these parents to send their kids and money. Right or wrong, the divisiveness has made Missoula and the "liberal education" a negative for U of M

 

[kemajic]

In my opinion, there are 3 factors that got us to this point of low enrollment, 2 of the 3 won't be fixed anytime soon. The first is slowly disappearing with time.

1) bad press around rape charges - some of that press was certainly justified, but not all of it - this will only disappear with time
2) the move towards engineering and other hard science degrees - Business, Teaching degrees and pharmacy are all down, the upside of potential earning don't match to the current engineering push - law school is a small enrollment and law/politics has gotten nothing but increasing bad press in the past 10yrs
3) current political climate - Montana is what...70% Republican ??? - Liberal Missoula is not high on the list for these parents to send their kids and money. Right or wrong, the divisiveness has made Missoula and the "liberal education" a negative for U of M

Right on - and 3) is a bigger deal than UM and Missoula would like to accept.

 

[retiredpopo]

what's the evidence that um has a "first rate president"? because people like him personally? because he didn't come from academia and doesn't have university administration experience? all i've seen is a continued drop in enrollment, a continued failure to recruit montana kids, etc, etc... why should i support that? bodnar might look and sound competent, but his performance measurables so far don't look good to me, and he can hardly be considered "new" anymore. maybe he's not making some positive moves because he doesn't know they exist, due to a lack of experience in academia and/or poor advice from those under him who do have experience? before i get jumped, i don't know if that's the problem, i'm just speculating. i do know, however, that based on measurables alone, his performance hasn't been stellar. i'm curious, has he started to phase out tenure? fired unproductive professors with tenure (yes, you can do this)? that's just one issue. i get the feeling people believe that simply because he came from the private sector it means he's automatically "right" for the job. on the other hand, cruzado continues to deal a stellar job, and she has to deal with the same board of regents, tenure issues, etc (don't know about a union). i'm not hating on the guy, i just don't see evidence to back up the claim that he's "the one" to lead um out of it's spiral.

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

well one thing that hurt was a book by Jon Krackwhore (sic)

 

[SaskGriz]

A review of Bodnar’s educational and professional background provides evidence he is a first rate president. His predecessor came from academia, however, I won’t comment further about his success at UM.
I don’t know the reasons for the collapse of enrollment at UM, but I do know it can’t continue and I also know the downward spiral started long before Bodnar arrived. Another poster said he doesn’t think the degrees offered is the issue. I believe it is probably part of the problem.
We have a new Governor who has an excellent business background and I’m hopeful he will help president Bodnar fix the problem. I would anticipate positive changes will soon be forthcoming.

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

Is the answer Jesus?

 

[GRIZ PHAN]

In the 2020 Montana general election 57% of the votes were for Trump. In Missoula County 61% and in Gallatin County 52% of the votes were for Biden. If Missoula is a liberal, socialist hotbed, looks like Bozeman is not far behind. There must be some profs at MSU pushing their liberal mantra to naive Montana teenagers.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

Trivia question: Who first introduced Bodnar to Gianforte?

Is the answer Jesus?

I was going to go the other direction.

 

[Griz til I die]

In my opinion, there are 3 factors that got us to this point of low enrollment, 2 of the 3 won't be fixed anytime soon. The first is slowly disappearing with time.

1) bad press around rape charges - some of that press was certainly justified, but not all of it - this will only disappear with time
2) the move towards engineering and other hard science degrees - Business, Teaching degrees and pharmacy are all down, the upside of potential earning don't match to the current engineering push - law school is a small enrollment and law/politics has gotten nothing but increasing bad press in the past 10yrs
3) current political climate - Montana is what...70% Republican ??? - Liberal Missoula is not high on the list for these parents to send their kids and money. Right or wrong, the divisiveness has made Missoula and the "liberal education" a negative for U of M

I really don’t think anyone gives a shit about #3. Bozeman is quickly becoming just as liberal as Missoula, and that trend will continue as more Californians continue to pile in to Bozeman.

 

[Griz til I die]

Is the answer Jesus?

I was going to go the other direction.

I actually was gonna say that last night but I didn’t want a bunch of posters jumping down my throat :lol: