Chubin noted that at MSIs “there are strong communities that have developed around these initiatives.”
“This (new program) will have a devastating effect on them,” he said. “I’m skeptical because more questions are raised than are being answered including what’s going to happen in terms of how will the administration of the new programs work and what outcomes do they expect that they currently aren’t getting.”
Dr. Lorelle Espinosa, director of policy and strategic initiatives at the Washington-based Institute for Higher Education Policy, says that while the proposal was crafted to foster collaboration and partnerships she’s worried the new program would help undo existing collaborations among institutions.
“(The proposal) is surprising and my initial reaction is not positive,” Espinosa says. “By cutting these programs and putting them all into one bucket, and then asking institutions to compete for the resources, I think that is incredibly problematic.”
She explained that “when you’re asking institutions that are serving populations that have a lot of the same issues and (the institutions) have worked very hard to have a collaborative environment amongst themselves to compete for resource” the risk is that the existing infrastructure may be pulled apart with alliances that benefit fewer people and reduces the total number of participating institutions.
“I think that is a dangerous road to travel,” Espinosa said.
Ronald Roach and Frank L. Matthews contributed to this report.
