scene eleven

Pursuing “First in 2009” Prestige

Customers Like other universities, Miami at the end of the twentieth century was an institution engaged in far more than traditional academic activities. It sought to enhance a public image that it could provide young people with unparal- leled opportunities for reflection on ideas in a cozy learning environment, and it treasured its nonprofit status as a state-supported institution. It functioned, however, more and more like a complex business. As the nation’s neoconser- vative political revolution took deep hold on public policy in Ohio, traditional sources of state support declined relative to increasing operating costs. Some doubted that the tuition strategies in place could continue to offset the cost of maintaining Miami’s Public Ivy advantage in an increasingly competitive edu- cation marketplace. Nowhere was the new customer orientation more evident than in the uni- versity’s efforts to satisfy intensifying expectations of students—and parents— that Miami and Oxford provide a living environment to support lifestyles of young people coming from prosperous middle-class communities. Making the case that Miami could meet that challenge would become a major effort in the Corporate University era.

National Rankings Miami administrators told the university’s constituents and prospec- tive students a story of first-rate facilities, strong student organizations, high academic expectations, noteworthy alumni success, and sterling financial value, via press releases, Web sites, and media. In support of these claims,

363 364 the corporate university, 1996–2009

national rankings of prestigious universities scored Miami highly. In 2006 the most popular evaluator of American higher educa- tion, U.S. News & World Report, continued Miami’s long record of high standings by ranking it twenty-first among the nation’s public national universities, describing it as offering “outstanding examples of academic programs that are believed to lead to stu- dent success.” Kiplinger’s ranked Miami thirty-eighth nationally and the top bargain in Ohio, and the Fiske Guide to Colleges de- scribed it as “one of the rising stars among state universities.” Sim- ilar praise came from The Insider’s Guide to Colleges, the American Association for Higher Education’s Student Success in College, the Kaplan-Newsweek College Catalog, and BusinessWeek. The National Association of College and University Food Services gave Miami five awards as a top campus food program. Such rankings were believed to have a significant impact on admissions. They were typically based on empirical information about such items as expenditure per student combined with sub- jective information such as peer reputation surveys. While most thoughtful educators could readily critique the methods of the ranking agencies and explain their perceived deficiencies, when their university’s score was high it was promoted to seek advan- tage in the admissions market. This was not a new phenomenon at Miami, for it had ap- peared in the U.S. News & World Report college rankings since they began in 1985. Aspiring to rise in a hierarchy of “America’s Best Colleges and Universities,” in the late 1980s and early 1990s Miami did tantalizingly well, yet did not reach the top. Soon Mi- ami’s president would announce a goal to become “First in 2009.”

U.S. News and World Re- port and Newsweek issues Student Life in Oxford promoting college rankings, 2005 editions Successfully meeting such an objective meant continuing to recruit tal- ented students, and that meant responding to their evolving expectations, sometimes in locally controversial ways. By 2004 most students could offi- cially register the cars that many had earlier brought to campus anyway, grant- ing them greater freedom of movement. This change encouraged students to live in a growing number of rental properties well removed from campus, and required expansion of the Miami Metro bus system along with construc- tion of more parking areas. A lot was built at Ditmer Field east of Oxford in a former greenbelt, and previously disallowed parking garages, open to fac- ulty, staff, and students for a fee, were built on the Oxford campus. A visible price of more automobile autonomy was congested traffic in Oxford’s clogged pursuing “first in 2009” prestige 365 streets, which retained the scale and configuration they had when first laid out for the village in 1810. Relaxing restrictions on cars sent a clear signal of accommodation to stu- dent desire for autonomy over their personal lives. Students living in off- campus apartments enjoyed new levels of personal freedom even as they dealt with landlords, fell victim to petty and sometimes serious crimes, ran the risk of injury or death by fire in old homes refitted for rental, and had to deal with the consequences of sometimes abusing the property where they lived. Just as in college towns of Athens, Kent, and Bowling Green, Ohio, many permanent residents of the City of Oxford welcomed students for the money they spent while deploring raucous and sometimes destructive behavior at all hours of night. Conflicts between students and university officials tended to center on- ex cessive consumption of alcohol, especially at parties in rental properties and in Uptown bars. On occasion, big weekend celebrations led to serious con- frontations between police and intoxicated students. In the first decade of the twenty-first century, robbery and sexual crimes, at times perpetrated by indi- viduals not affiliated with the university, were not infrequent occurrences. In the spring of 2005 three students died in an off-campus house fire. In spring 2007 another student died after being hit by a train in early morning hours, and Oxford Police charged four of her acquaintances with permitting under- age alcohol consumption at a private place, and a fifth for furnishing alco- hol to an underage person at a bar. In coverage of this story, the Cincinnati

Campus Avenue Garage (2006), Miami’s first auto- mobile parking structure, South Campus Avenue, Ox- ford. Photograph by Rob- ert S. Wicks, 2008. Miami Archives. 366 the corporate university, 1996–2009

Enquirer reported, “In Oxford, police cited 243 people as underage drinkers during the 2006–07 school year.” The report noted that Miami “took disciplinary action against 747 students during the last school year for alcohol-related violations” and “23 students were suspended.” An “After Dark” social program was begun earlier to attract students to alcohol-free functions on campus, and in 2006 Miami began taking more active steps to address excessive alcohol consumption. Forty-one recommenda- tions of a presidential Alcohol Task Force were quickly adopted. These included ending delivery of alcohol to resi- dence halls, increasing education fees for students with al- cohol violations, requiring those who used fake identifi- cation in bars to take a class on ethics and honesty, and creating a group intervention program. The Office of Off- Campus Affairs was established as a Miami-Oxford part- nership to foster academic success via education for per- sonal and social responsibility, including appropriate use of

“Green Beer Day,” celebrated alcohol. In 2007 a proposal to build a new student center on campus envi- in Oxford since the 1980s. sioned it in part as a social alternative to Uptown bars, without alcohol. Recensio, 2005. An annual Uptown ritual named “Green Beer Day” epitomized these is- sues. Some Oxford businesses encouraged a tradition of devoting the Thursday before spring break to drinking, by opening at early morning hours to serve green beer all day, allegedly in honor of St. Patrick’s Day. Complaints about dis- ruptive and potentially dangerous consequences failed to check the popularity of what many regarded as fundamental rights to sell, to consume, and to party. Named in 1982, as Green Beer Day evolved in subsequent years some alumni began to return to Oxford for annual alcohol-consumption festivities, even as university officials reminded faculty that classes were to be held without inter- ruption. In a related alcohol issue, during 2007 an effort by Oxford City Coun- cil to place limits on outdoor drinking games was contested at length and re- sulted in minor restrictions. While student culture was tightening its grip on Oxford’s inner city, Mi- ami employees were joining a national trend toward commuting. Oxford’s “Mile Square” had provided homes for most Miami faculty and many staff through the National University era, and that tradition, augmented by expan- sion of Oxford subdivisions, lingered well into Miami’s Public Ivy phase. A tally of full-time continuing faculty who provided their home addresses for the Miami Directory suggested a clear trend. In the three decades marked by academic years beginning in 1974, 1984, and 1994, the percentage of faculty living in the Oxford Zip Code area dropped from 92 to 88 to 80 percent. In 2002 it was 74 percent, and in 2007, 65 percent. pursuing “first in 2009” prestige 367

Oxford’s League of Women Voters reported in 2007 that over several decades the City of Oxford changed from 70 percent owner-occupied housing to 33 percent. Remaining permanent residents of the “Mile Square” often complained about the so- cial strain of living in close quarters with students who viewed partying late and loud as a basic part of the college experience. Meanwhile, the city installed more traffic lights at intersections and joined Miami in an effort to create new regional transportation routes by supporting plans for a federally and state- funded bypass as well as a locally funded thorough- fare system. By the early twenty-first century a visible seg- ment of the Oxford student body, with its strong ac- ademic qualifications and professional aspirations, was also known among college-going peers for a life- style showcasing very trendy clothing, constant net- Student on cell phone at Tuffy’s in Shriver Center, 2008. Photo- working via cell phone, expensive automobiles, and graph by Robert S. Wicks. Miami Archives. night-time party life. Many students also marked their four-year passage through Oxford by a vigor- ous competition to bestow memorable names on the houses where they lived. In the 1970s residents christened a student rental “The Ivy League,” and by the 1980s a house-naming contest sponsored by a local merchant had turned a fad into a naming tradition. A study by an anthro- pology class in 2004 claimed that most house signs employed witty slogans referring either to sex, drugs, or alcohol, or to the Christian faith of house occu- pants. They documented distinct signage groups. The largest reveled “in the ability of their signs’ sexually charged double entendres to give onlookers pause,” even though sign-makers went “to great lengths to decry their responsibility” for this effect. The smaller group offered “an invitation to onlookers to share Christian ‘fellowship.’” By the time city council acted to limit the scale of all such forms of public expres- sion in 2006, letters of complaint had appeared in the local newspaper about the potential negative effect of risqué signage on young children. Student rental property house sign. Recensio, 2005. 368 the corporate university, 1996–2009

Student Life on Campus As Miami approached its 200th year, the collegiate ranking culture had produced many indicators of strong academic quality, and in 2007 the Miami “Recognition” Web page noted these achievements. Miami’s Farmer School of Business was highly ranked at a time when, in 2007, the largest undergraduate major in the United States was business—with 22 percent of degrees nation- wide awarded in this field. As the twenty-first century moved forward, national and state climates for outcomes assessment—efforts to determine what and how well students were learning—intensified. To augment regional accreditation, in 2007 the Board of Regents asked each Ohio college and university to create a Student Success Plan that acknowledged unique institutional strengths while showing com- monalities with other Ohio institutions. This plan was to focus on assessing learning outcomes from general education and undergraduate majors, setting higher expectations for content, competencies, abilities, and successful com- pletion, and engaging faculty and staff in continuous improvement.

High Academic Standards adapted from Recognition, Miami University Web site, 2007

In Business Week magazine’s 2007 ranking of under- In 2005—and for the second year in a row—three graduate business programs, Miami’s Farmer School of Miami students received the Barry M. Goldwater Scholar- Business ranked fourteenth among the nation’s public ship, the most prestigious award of its type for undergrad- universities, the best showing of any in Ohio. Describing uates in mathematics, engineering, or the natural sciences. Miami as a “tight-knit community,” Business Week also Nationally, Miami was one of 33 schools—and one of only ranked our business school twentieth among both public twenty public schools—to have three or more recipients. and private universities for “Return on Investment.” In 2004, Miami joined a select group of universities in Because our academic reputation is a magnet for the nation that has produced a Rhodes Scholar, a Truman employers, Miami sponsors one of the largest collegiate Scholar, and a Goldwater Scholar in the same academic career fairs in the country. Compared with on-campus year. recruitment programs at other universities our size, nearly A U.S. News & World Report online ranking for 2005 twice as many employers recruit at Miami, and four times listed Miami’s graduate program in speech pathology and as many on-campus interviews are conducted. audiology in the top ten among universities nationwide According to the NCAA, Miami’s graduation rates for that offer a master’s degree in this field. Miami’s under- student-athletes are among the highest nationally, ninth graduate and master’s degree programs in accountancy among NCAA Division I public universities (80 percent), were ranked twelfth and fifteenth in the nation, respec- and first in Ohio. tively, by Public Accounting Report. Of all qualified students applying to medical school, For ten years in a row, Miami placed among the 67 percent of Miami students are accepted, compared top twenty universities in the nation for the number of to 50 percent nationally. The figure rises to more than 93 students studying abroad; in 2005, Miami ranked tenth percent for Miami students who earn at least a 3.2 grade- among research or doctoral institutions. Nearly 30 percent point average and score at least average on the MCATs. of Miami students study abroad before they graduate. pursuing “first in 2009” prestige 369

Premier Student Organizations, 2007

adapted from Recognition, Miami University Web site, 2007 2004: At the North American Interfraternity Conference in April, Miami’s Alpha chapter of Beta Theta Pi was named the best undergraduate fraternity chapter in the nation.

For the sixth time in seven years, Miami’s Gamma Gamma chapter of Pi Sigma Epsilon, a national marketing fraternity, was named top chapter.

First-place honors went to Miami’s team of paper science and engineering students, who designed and built a paper snowboard for the national Energy Challenge competition, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy and other organizations.

2005: For the second year in a row, Miami students won the RecycleMania competition, a ten-week contest held among forty-eight colleges nationwide.

2007: Miami’s speech team won the state title at the Ohio Forensics Association tournament in February. Results from the American Forensics Association and National Forensics Association show that since 1999, Miami’s speech team has won twenty-one national championship titles—more than any other university in the country.

One feature of a Miami education for most students, from Old Miami through all subsequent eras, was par- ticipation in organizations. In spring 2007 Miami Asso- ciated Student Government recognized 273 organized groups on the Oxford campus alone. The enormous di- versity reflected the interests of students who organized to promote political, religious, and professional agendas, as well as social fraternities, musical groups, intramural and club sports, support for racial and ethnic minori- ties and women, honoraries, hobbies, and community and social service. The University Office of Community Engagement and Service assisted any student who de- sired to earn added academic credit through extended RecycleMania competition scorecard, Recreational Sports study or service learning in a liberal education course, Center, 2008. Photograph by Robert S. Wicks. Miami Archives. and offered an array of resources and opportunities for community-based experiences aimed at liberal educa- tion goals of thinking critically, understanding contexts, reflecting and acting. For most students, however, noncontroversial as- pects of college life apparently attracted the greatest at- tention beyond the classroom. That included personal attention. On February 13, 2006, Miami’s News and In- formation Office released a story on a “Miami Mergers” initiative of the Division of University Advancement Safe Zone display card, 2008. Miami GLBT Services. 370 the corporate university, 1996–2009

“Miami Merger” valentines. Private Collection. Photo- graph by Scott Kissel, IT Ser- vices, 2008. Miami Archives.

that reached across Miami’s two most-recent eras. Since 1973 it had mailed annual valentines to alumni who married other alumni. Among 151,000 living alumni, it was believed that in 2006, 25,570 were married to other alumni— almost 15 percent, compared to an alleged national average of 3 percent.

Expectations for Residential Living Student expectations for quality and amenities in on-campus life rose markedly in this era. Miami students wanted greater degrees of convenience and comfort than in the days when their predecessors arrived at college with a couple of suitcases full of clothes, a manual typewriter, a pocket full of change for the pay phone and a few personal items, then headed for the bookstore. Residence hall rooms had to be ready to handle many innovations in elec- tronic communication—computers, television, fax, CD and DVD players and recorders, as well as digital technology devices of various kinds. In the Public Ivy era Miami had begun an ambitious effort to hardwire all facilities for digital communication, but now the demand was for instan- taneous wireless communication everywhere on campus. A new division and vice president for Information Technology were created by President Gar- land and charged to move the university into the twenty-first century with intensive enhancements in digital technology support. The new division for- mulated an Information Technology Strategic Plan that met the demand for campus-wide wireless connectivity by 2006. Dining halls were no longer cafeterias alone. They offered a variety of