By Barbara Soderlin

Today I was trying to put together a little story about the search committee that’s going to be helping to hire the next Board of Regents executive director (I posted about this yesterday).  I called a Mines student who’s on the committee to ask him some basic questions like what he would be looking for in a Regents director and whether it’s exciting to be part of the process.

I was surprised by what he told me — that the new Regents president Terry Baloun had told the search committee members they weren’t allowed to talk to the media without permission from him. That seemed really weird — my story is pretty innocuous and anyway I can’t imagine what any of the committee members could possibly say about the search that would compromise the process.

I mentioned this to a colleague, who pointed out a story the SDSU student paper, the Collegian, had done recently about confusion surrounding the retirement of current director Tad Perry. Seems there are conflicting stories about when the Regents hired the search firm that’s going to be helping find Perry’s replacement.

Maybe they thought I’d be calling about that.

By Barbara Soderlin

Kudos to the person who must have called the Board of Regents this morning after the board’s staff issued a press release announcing an executive session for 10 a.m. tomorrow, April 9. “No official action will be taken,” the press release said, but what it didn’t say is why the board was meeting in private.

There are just a few reasons why governments can meet behind closed doors, and they’re required to specify which one it is (I don’t know that they’re required to specify in a press release necessarily, but they are if someone asks). An hour and 15 minutes later, the Board issued a second press release saying the purpose of the meetings was “to discuss personnel matters.” My assumption is they’re going to be talking about their search to replace executive director Tad Perry, who’s retiring.

Maybe it was one of the Regents themselves who noticed the omission. Anyway, it’s good to know someone’s paying attention.

By Barbara Soderlin

On Saturday we had a story about the Board of Regents annual tuition hikes. The average full-time in-state student will pay some $300 more for tuition and fees next year.  There’s some griping, of course, but I have to say, I can’t think of a good argument against it. The cost is still pretty cheap compared to higher education elsewhere, and I still don’t think the price tag in SD is the biggest barrier to a higher education. If you went to school full-time for four years here as an in-state student, including room and board, it would cost less than $50K, much of which you could pay by working during school; the rest of which you would certainly make up in short order with the difference in the quality of job that’s going to be accessible after graduation. It’s not the most prestigious degree in the world, but I think most folks have learned that it’s not what it says on your degree, but what you do with it, that counts.

I’d worry more about other barriers to higher ed, which the Regents are working to knock down. There’s the distance barrier — for people who don’t go to college right out of high school (and there are a lot of good arguments to be made against this) there are now myriad online degrees, and the two new urban higher ed centers (Rapid City will break ground on ours this fall). I hope our state universities keep adding more degrees to the list of ones available at a distance. Kudos to the Regents from this journalist for this week approving an online master’s degree in journalism/communications from SDSU. It starts this fall — if I can figure out the details, you may see me there (or not, because I’ll be home studying in my pajamas).

There’s one thing missing from the South Dakota higher ed system, though, that I think would go a long way toward helping more folks take the leap toward at last achieving the bachelor’s degree they’re looking for, and that’s a better developed system of tw0-year degrees. I’m working on reporting a story this week about South Dakota is unusual among states in that our universities are totally disconnected from our technical schools, and that our technical schools offer just that — a technical education. The problem is, technical certificates do not always lay the groundwork for two-year associate’s degrees, which easily flow into bachelor’s degrees.

Some of our universities offer some selection of two-year degrees, but really it’s an underdeveloped offering. Wyoming’s integrated system of community colleges offers a wealth of BOTH technical degrees and two-year associate’s degrees and students can easily make the transition from AAS to BA, in some cases without even leaving the community college, since UW has such good articulation agreements with the two-year schools.

I’ll have to check into the numbers, but I wonder if South Dakota doesn’t have a lot more people who have “some college” under their belts but no degree to show for it, while in another state they would at least have an associate’s to build on. In addition to building higher ed centers, I would think this would be a growth area for the Regents, a market that’s currently served mostly by NAU.

By Barbara Soderlin

The state’s Opportunity Scholarship Program seems to be helping students make a positive transition from high school to college.

According to a report that was presented at today’s Board of Regents meeting in Aberdeen, “Establishing the rigorous curriculum requirements has resulted in a decline in the need for remedial education, increased ACT performance and college readiness as well as enhanced retention once they transition into the higher education environment.”

Under the program, the Associated Press reported today, students can get up to $5,000 in scholarship money over four years by taking rigorous high school courses and attending college or vocational schools in South Dakota. Qualifying students also must get a score of at least 24 on the ACT college entrance exam.

The report says that in 2008, 28 percent of South Dakota high school graduates got a score of 24 or higher on their ACT tests. That’s an improvement over the 24 percent the year the program started.

Also, the percentage of high school grads with an ACT score of 24 and higher who enter the regents’ system has increased 52 percent over the past two academic years, the report says.

If you want to read the full report, it’s within this document:

http://www.sdbor.edu/board/items/documents/FULLBOR0409C.pdf

That’s a pretty big increase for a relatively small investment – just $5,000 per student, and that’s assuming the student hangs onto the scholarship for all four years, which just 58 percent do.

I’m glad the program is helping high school kids figure out what classes they need to be successful in college, since a lot of parents wouldn’t have that information and high school counselors are probably too busy to help each student through it one on one.

By Barbara Soderlin

Here’s some news out of today’s Board of Regents meeting in Aberdeen. The Associated Press reports:

After 10 consecutive years as president of the South Dakota Board of Regents, Harvey Jewett has decided it’s time to step aside and let someone else fill that role.

He will remain on the board, which elected new officers Thursday.

Terry Baloun of Highmore will replace Jewett as board president. Kathryn Johnson of Rapid City, formerly board secretary, will be vice president.

Jewett was appointed to the Board of Regents in 1997. He was elected president in 1999 and has been re-elected president each year since then. His term on the board runs until 2011.

The new board president will have a big responsibility in overseeing the search for a new Regents executive director, after Tad Perry’s recent retirement announcement. And together, those two will set the pace and tone for the state university system over the years to come.

What changes or advancements do you hope for?