Two year state technical college president and staff do not have to report to anyone except board of regents.
I guess its okay since technical college presidents and deans are responsible for bringng manufacturing back to the U.S.A.?
I don’t understand your question. Are you saying that technical colleges are run more loosely or subject to less regulation? That can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how professional and committed the faculty and staff are. A really good set of instructors can do wonders in a loosely regulated environment where they can concentrate on teaching the material well rather than concentrate on filling out compliance forms and where the support staff can concentrate on supporting the end mission rather than spending hours doing compliance checks. A school with marginal teachers who veer off curriculum as soon as state inspectors walk off campus could stand to be improved by increased regulation.
Who else should they report to?
Yeah, I’m not sure what you expect. Maybe an analogy to business will help:
college president:board of regents::CEO:board of directors
In both instances, the specific powers of a president/CEO will depend on how the organization is set up and its form of governance. But in broad terms, the analogy’s not a bad one.
And even in cases where the chain of command on paper looks very similar, you might find many de facto differences in how the school runs. For example many teachers are granted very wide leeway to make their own professional judgments as to how to teach classes and how to assign grades. Other schools may tell teachers that they must use X textbook and administer Y exam.
And how is this different than a regular public university (states may vary in their implementation).
I work for a state U, and our governing body, above the university president, is the Georgia Board of Regents/University System of Georgia.
What’s your question?
I’m another person who doesn’t get what the OP is getting at. Who are they supposed to be responsible to? The Rotary Club? The YMCA? The corner wino association?
Note that there are a lot of groups involved in making sure a college thrives. Alumni need to be appeased to keep their donations coming in. Grants and such bring in a lot of money (sometimes more than either state support or tuition). If a college isn’t doing its job, grants go away. And there’s a lot of groups that hand out money and therefore are always sticking their noses in.
If it’s a state school, you wouldn’t believe the level of interference state legislators throw at schools. (Many private schools are affiliated with other organizations, churches are a big one, who exert control.)
Also, there’s the accreditation agencies. First, the major regional one that certify the college itself. And then individual programs might have accreditation agencies watching them.
The really big one is the US Dept. of Education. They are the ones that say if a college’s students are eligible for student aid, loans, etc. If the DoE gets unhappy with how a college is run, it’s in for a hard time.
The OP seems to be unaware of all these forces that act on college management.
Colleges who fail to obey all the expectations placed on them crater all the time. I had a near ringside seat to one college imploding once. The president and the treasurer cooked the books and spent a lot of money they didn’t have. The feds took away their student aid, they lost their accreditation and kaboom.
Since I don’t see a factual question in the OP, let’s move this over to IMHO.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator