Saving South Carolina State

The vote on February 10, 2015 by the South Carolina House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Higher Education to recommend the two-year closure of South Carolina State University (SCSU)—the state’s only public Black institution and an 1890 land-grant university—on July 1, 2015 has sent concern throughout the HBCU community.

John Michael Lee, Jr.The proposed plan would close the university for the 2015-2016 and 2016-2017 school years, and students would be allowed to attend other state-funded institutions at the state’s expense if they maintain a 2.5 GPA. During the interim period, the state would also pay off all debts and bonds owed by the university. While the plan states that the university would reopen in the fall of 2017, many say they do not believe that this promise would be fulfilled by the legislature.

Many HBCU proponents have expressed their shock and disbelief that this drastic action could even be considered by the state of South Carolina. Supporters of the measure point to the history of the lack of transparency, fiscal management, leadership and oversight at the institution. It is true that, in the past, S.C. State has suffered from poor oversight by a dysfunctional board of trustees, instability in leadership and problems with fiscal management. These issues have landed the university on probation with its accrediting body, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.

An article in The State also reported on the four-year graduation rate of 14 percent for South Carolina State University and mentioned the institution’s declining enrollment. I would like to provide some perspective on that number.

According to the U.S. Department of Education’s 2013 Digest of Educational Statistics, the national 4-year and 6-year graduation rate for African-Americans at public 4-year universities is 17 percent and 36 percent, respectively. While omitted from the article, South Carolina State’s 6-year graduation rate is 36 percent; thus, the institution performs around the national average given its type and student population. It is also true the university has experienced sharp declines in enrollment though much of that decline was due to the harmful changes made to the Federal Parent-Plus Loan Program in 2012.

However, what is disturbing is the historic nature of the argument that is being put forth by the South Carolina legislature.

S.C. State not only suffers from the problems above, but also is plagued by the historic, current and persistent underfunding from the same legislature that is charged with providing fair and equitable funding. For example, S.C. State receives money from the federal government to carry out its land-grant mission through agricultural research and extension activities throughout the state. This funding received from the U.S. Department of Agriculture as a part of the Farm Bill also requires each state to provide matching funds to each university in the state that receives land-grant funding.