NSU: Almost Five Decades of Growth and Change in South Florida - Research Paper Example

? Nova Southeastern Almost Five Decades of Growth and Change in South Florida Here] [Your Here] In 1964, the small, private college of Nova University of Advanced Technology was established in Broward County, South Florida, in what was then the base of the Everglades and considered the Florida frontier. Founded by educators with a vision for contemporary schooling, and located near what is known as Alligator Alley, it held the vision of providing a new way of teaching students in collaborative groups, as opposed to large rooms filled with nameless, faceless students listening to rote lectures. It envisioned itself as the “MIT of the South”, providing first class education in math and sciences. Through the last forty-seven years, it has undergone numerous changes, including expansion, merge, dissolution of merge, and more expansion, to become the Nova Southeastern University that is known today. But why? Why did it have to change, merge, and reinvent itself? The political, social, and stakeholder forces tell the story of an institution struggling to overcome a negative image, and assuring itself of triumph in the face of adversity. Table of Contents Part I: Three Identifying Changes to Nova University……………………………………………1 Change Number 1: Distance Learning…………………………………………………………….1 Change Number 2: Federation with NYIT………………………………………………………. 2 Change Number 3: 1994 Merger with Southeastern University…………………………………. 3 Part II: Founding, History, and the Biggest Change to Nova University………………………... 5 Establishment of Nova University of Advanced Technology….………………….…………….. 5 The Biggest Change: Federation with NYIT…………………………………..………………… 8 Nova Southeastern University Today …………………………………………………………...10 Nova Southeastern University: Almost Five Decades of Growth and Change in South Florida Part I: Three Identifying Changes to Nova University Change Number 1: Distance Learning Changes came to Nova Southeastern University, as it is known today, less than three years after it opened in 1964. Financially broke and unwilling to release its original vision of collaborative learning, Nova leaned heavily on degree expansion, catering to the local community, and distance learning, which while not new to the United States was not a common concept in the 1970s. A key stakeholder in this venture was Dr. Abraham Fischler, who pioneered distance learning in this area for Nova (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). Together with the board of governors, he made it his business to take the concept of a small, collaborative effort of students working together across the nation by offering off-campus programs in as many states as possible (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). He has since said that it was not uncommon for a cluster of teachers to leave on Friday night, teach classes elsewhere on Saturday, and return Saturday night or Sunday morning (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). In a 2004 interview, Dr. Fischler stated that it was important to be responsive to the opportunities that existed in society, and to take the education to the people where they were located, when they wanted it, and in a responsive manner (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). The 1970s demanded work such as this. President Johnson, instead of holding over programs of former President Kennedy and the “New Frontier” initiative, pledged education for all in his Great Society speeches (Independence Hall Association, 2008). Nova responded to the challenge of equal educational opportunity and minority success by taking education to the student (Goldstein, 1989). However, not everyone was receptive to this program. As the programs became more visible and well-known, local institutions from the states that Nova offered programs in began to accuse Nova of intruding on their “turf” (Goldstein, 1989). The resulting backlash took years to die down, and Nova University, while never attempting to cease their distance learning programs, was constantly doing damage control. Nevertheless, Dr. Fischler did not give up his vision, and even today Nova is credited with having one of the most comprehensive distance-learning programs (“Nova southeastern university”, 2011). With the use of technology and communications, it has never wavered from this field, and continues to take education to those who wish to have it. Nova also made it a point in the early 1970s to take into account that society was changing, and seeing just how they could benefit from such change. They expanded the amount of degrees offered, looking more to the fields of business, psychology, and education in addition to the physical and social sciences that it had originally set out to excel in as well as the hours they were offered in, attempting to cater more to the local population (Goldstein, 1989). In the 1970s in Broward County there was interest in seeing schools stay open during evening hours in order to meet the academic, recreational, cultural and vocational needs of communities (“Broward County Public Schools”, 2010). Nova University was no exception, adding undergraduate evening programs for adults who wished to learn but could not leave a daytime working job. This served to bring Nova University closer to the community in which it resided and allowed older adults to obtain a degree while still providing for their families. For example, single parents could work during the day and obtain a degree at night. In addition, Nova was expanding their degree programs. It had become obvious that a handful of doctoral students studying the sciences were not going to keep the institution open; therefore, diversifying their degree programs and implementing distance learning were viable options and changes for Nova. Change Number 2: Federation with NYIT The biggest change that came to Nova University was when it entered into a federation with New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) in 1970 (Goldstein, 1989). Seven of nine board members at Nova resigned and were replaced by the same number from NYIT, making the key stakeholders those of the New York institution, and not the campus in Florida (Goldstein, 1989). Nova had opened in 1964 with the vision of having small class sizes and having most of its funding come from outside donors. It was decided by the founders that the university would remain private, and not seek any state funding; this meant that almost all operational funding had to come from outside donors (Goldstein, 1989). Though fundraising efforts were made, it was soon found that donors, by and large, did not believe in any success for a small college in the backwaters of the Everglades (Goldstein, 1989). Funding rapidly became a problem, and no amount of fundraising was soon sufficient to cover mounting debts. Therefore, the federation was necessary, and Dr. Alexander Schure, president of NYIT and chancellor of Nova from 1970-1985, is widely credited with being the man that saved Nova from sure financial ruin (Travis, 2009). In all, the federation did not sit well with the community. Though the problem of backlogged debt was taken care of by a $1.2 million payment from NYIT to Nova, fundraising and donations were still needed. With most of the key stakeholders residing in New York, it was difficult to point to Nova as a “local” university, with “local” governors and trustees (Goldstein, 1989). It soon also became obvious that the two institutions were never going to mesh. Policies were a nightmare, faculty loyalty suffered, and the two schools were trying to blend different thoughts and curriculums in what would become, literally, a fifteen year nightmare for both. Change Number Three: 1994 Merger with Southeastern University The last major change to Nova University came in its merge with Southeastern University of the Health Sciences in 1994. Changing its name to what it is now known as, Nova Southeastern University, it once again was able to expand its programs to offer health sciences, as well as a college of Osteopathic Medicine, Pharmacy, Optometry, and Allied Health to its growing campus of degree programs (“Nova southeastern university”, 2011). Key stakeholders in this venture included the trustees for both schools and colleges, and unlike the previous federation with New York Institute of Technology, it greatly benefitted both schools by allowing them to merge their collective minds and educational philosophies. Both institutions had been on a rapid track of expansion, and with the constant population growth of Florida, it only made sense to merge and offer a collaborative curriculum (“Nova southeastern university”, 2011). As Nova Southeastern University, the institution is able to offer both undergraduate and graduate degree programs in the health sciences fields, while it continues to uphold the tradition of small class sizes and an immersed faculty (Visco, 2009). For example, in the audiology program, the enrollment is limited to fifteen students, with seven faculty members who are not only available in the classroom but all of whom hold “open-door” policies with office hours (Visco, 2009). Nova is still ahead of its time by these measures. There are no classes of medical students being churned out by the truckload, not knowing if they will pass or fail. Though Nova Southeastern University continues to have an extensive graduate program numbering about 25,000 students, it does not make research a priority outside of research programs by not offering a PhD program (Visco, 2009). The university savors low class sizes and getting to know the students, making sure that each comes for a personal visit before applying and being a student. It is important to Nova that no student is seen as a faceless number being churned towards graduation at an alarming rate. Instructors value the opinions of students, and take pains to make sure the material is understood. Part II: Founding, History, and the Biggest Change to Nova Southeastern University Establishment of Nova University of Advanced Technology Nova Southeastern University, located in Broward County, Florida, was founded on December 4, 1964 under the name Nova University of Advanced Technology (Goldstein, 1989). It was founded as a graduate school of physical and social sciences, as part of what is now known as the South Florida Education Center, on land that was originally a World War II airstrip known as Forman Field (Busey). On March 10, 1960, Dean Dessenberger, Chair of the Broward County School Board, proposed the development of the “South Florida Educational Park” on Forman Field in Davie (“Broward County Public Schools”, 2010). Referred to as the Nova Educational Experiment, the consortium of planned schools were considered very progressive, with students being given a “learning packet” and instructors serving as guides (“Broward County Public Schools”, 2010). This meant that the students worked as a collaborative effort, with peer review instead of teacher correction. In this way, the Nova schools were ahead of their time. The educational model of the day called for a “passive” approach to teaching (Smith, 2002). Though Jerome Bruner had pioneered a study that emphasized and called for activity learning, in which students learned in collaborative groups, the study had met such strong resistance that it was never implemented (Smith, 2002). Thus, most American children still sat in classrooms listening to a teacher talk about a subject, with very limited hands-on activities. However, at Nova, the “collaborative” approach (group work) was encouraged and teachers served only to guide and help students work through any issues that arose (“Broward County Public Schools”, 2010). It was a striking model of going against the grain of the time, especially on a southern Florida Everglades frontier. The founders of the South Florida Education Center possessed a desire to see future generations better than the ones before them. Mr. Hamilton Forman, along with his wife Blanche, possessed a great love of education; he believed above everything else that a person could accomplish whatever he set his mind to, as long as they didn’t look for credit and worked hard (Wagner, 1982). The 545 acres that contained the airstrip known as Forman Field were sold to the U.S. Navy during World War II in return for a promise from a state senator that they be used for nothing but educational purposes, and after the war, these acres were given back to the community for that purpose (Busey). A large part of the reasoning behind the schools, although they were a more progressive model, was the fact that the city was expanding at a rapid rate. Though farmers had lost almost everything in two major catastrophic events, a 1926 flood and a 1947 Category 3 hurricane, a population boom was moving westward, and the existing schools were simply not adequate, already providing 14 temporary buildings to house the children in addition to one main building of eight classrooms (Wagner, 1982). The schools that were being proposed would provide a necessary supplement the existing school while also providing a progressive education. Possibly the biggest reason, however, was the lack of available educational opportunities in the South Florida area. Harvard was over 200 years old by this time, yet the options for education in the Everglades were few and far between (Wagner, 1982). Unless students went north to institutions such as this, from which they almost never returned, population would continue to decline even as it boomed. Having a school in the South would enable the students, and thus future generations, to remain loyal to the area and yet raise their options from limited to seemingly limitless. The Biggest Change: A Federation with NYIT One of the biggest changes came to Nova Southeastern University in 1970, when it chose to merge with the New York Institute of Technology. The choice was not a hard one; the institution was in danger of closing its doors forever due to lack of funding. It was clear that a drastic solution was needed, and quickly. The new University certainly did not lack for starting funds. It boasted assets, pledges, and contributions of $10 million upon opening its doors (Goldstein, 1989). It was supported by the Broward County community that had organized a cross-section for this specific purpose (Goldstein, 1989). Gold key business memberships were offered to local business executives, bringing in $1000 per year in unrestricted operating funds (Goldstein, 1989). Part of the problem was simply timing. Nova had been dedicated during a time when Sputnik was fresh in the minds of all Americans, and President John F. Kennedy had set aside educational funding for the purpose of beating the Soviet Union in the Space Race (Independence Hall Association, 2010). In providing the best education to all Americans, it was felt, particularly in the subjects of math and the sciences, that the Americans would put their best minds forward in winning the space race and bringing pride to their country (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). However, President Johnson emphasized education for all, the civil rights movement, and the development of a Great Society unhampered by poverty and racism (Independence Hall Association, 2010). Funding was no longer coming in for math and science programs. Even the oceanography department, who had managed to secure private grants, was using the monies for its own department, not the funding of the university (Goldstein, 1989). The second issue lay in the operational funding of the university. Though all students that first entered were given free tuition, it took an annual budget of $1.7 million to run the institution (Goldstein, 1989). The founders of Nova had decided that it should be private, not state funded, and therefore outside donors were needed; donors whom, it turned out, did not believe in the success of a small private college in the Everglades (Goldstein, 1989). It was not in any way set up to survive on student tuition alone to cover its operating expenses. Therefore, in the absence of outside donors, the funding was, to put it bluntly, nonexistent. Other alternatives were needed, and quickly. On June 23, 1970, Nova University entered into a Federation with the New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) (Goldstein, 1989). Dr. Alexander Schure, President of NYIT, became the chancellor of Nova, while Dr. Abraham Fischler became the second president of the institution at that time. Dr. Fischler inherited an economic problem so vast that unfortunately he was forced to sell off eighty acres of land; otherwise, there would have been no funding to continue the school (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). However, once NYIT stepped in, funding was resolved. The federation was profitable for the institution in that it received $1.2 million as “pre-paid rent”, which allowed the university to pay off almost all operational debt (Goldstein, 1989). NYIT benefitted from Nova allowing it to use the campus to utilize its undergraduate programs and MBA program (Barnes, Harrington & Pineda, 2004). However, while Nova sought to broaden its horizons through distance learning programs and the federation with NYIT, the backlash of the press was quickly negative and biting. Nova finally sued a national newspaper over being called a “diploma mill” (Goldstein, 1989). Other problems were far from public, but still visible. Almost immediately, a tension had existed between the leadership at NYIT and the leadership of Nova. No one could figure out how to build two institutions into a working whole (Goldstein, 1989). Part of the issue was that Nova was in Florida, and NYIT in New York, separated by a rather long distance. The board of trustees in New York could not live in Florida full-time, and the faculty in Florida was too busy trying to keep Nova afloat to move to New York. To make things harder, both institutions had completely different working models of education, and faculty loyalty was a strained topic. The federation was a unique corporate structure, and hammering out matters of governance, finance, and academic policy so that the public could understand them, let alone the faculties of the two institutions, soon became impossible (Goldstein, 1989). The community of South Broward gave less and less support as well. It was hard to point to Nova as a “local university” when most of its board of governors was in New York, for just as the chancellor was a faculty member of NYIT, so were seven members of a nine-member board (Goldstein, 1989). Potential donors and supporters were troubled by monies that they wished to stay local possibly going to New York; others were in disbelief that anything was done by those that remained in Florida. Eventually, the federation was dissolved, and all seats on the board of governors were reverted to Nova University once more. The community breathed a sigh of relief that they had their local university back, and Nova breathed a sigh of relief that they could continue running the school. There is no question that Dr. Alexander Schure and the NYIT federation saved Nova University financially (Travis, 2009). Speculation exists, however, on the premise that they would never have been able to run the school effectively and indefinitely in this arrangement. In the 1960s, the technology of today was not available, and things such as e-mail and other forms of communication did not exist. It is hard to imagine what the telephone bills must have been like with two universities constantly talking to each other. In 1985, Nova bowed to pressure from not only the academic community but also the local community, and reverted back to a single institution until 1994, when it merged with Southeastern University to become Nova Southeastern University (“Nova southeastern university”, 2011). Nova Southeastern University Today Today, Nova is a bustling school serving 3,000 undergrad students and 25,000 graduate students. It prides itself on diversity with its graduate programs, with more Hispanic and African-American students earning doctoral degrees at Nova than any other university in the United States (Visco, 2009). Some of the goals have changed; it no longer wishes to be the “MIT of the South” that it was originally founded to be. It also does not seek to become a university solely focused on physical and social sciences. In 2011, Nova boasted offering over thirty undergraduate programs, spanning fields of education, allied health, and business in addition to the sciences ("Nova southeastern university," 2011). Other goals have not changed; according to its own website, it remains committed to small class sizes that offer innovative academic programs combined with distance learning alternatives. It has also set the goal of, by 2020, being recognized by the academic community and the general public as a premier private not-for-profit university. Given the changes and the path that Nova has already taken to get to where it stands today, there is no doubt that it can achieve this goal. References Barnes, F., Harrington, W., & Pineda, J. (2004). Dr. abraham s. fischler: insights into his vision and leadership - the building of a university. Journal of Applied Management and Entrepeneurship, Retrieved from http://www.allbusiness.com/education-training/teaching-teachers-college/13477684-1.html Broward County Public Schools. (2010). The history of broward county public schools 1960-1979. Retrieved from http://www.browardschools.com/history/1960.htm Busey, P. (n.d.). History of the south florida education center. Retrieved from http://www.sfec.org/history/index.html Goldstein, S. (1989). The search for nova: an essay on its first twenty-five years, 1964-1989. Nova University. Retrieved from http://cdm15159.contentdm.oclc.org/u?/p15159coll2,213 Independence Hall Association. (2008). U.s. history online textbook. Retrieved from http://www.ushistory.org/us/56e.asp Nova southeastern university. (2011). Retrieved from http://www.nova.edu/index.html Smith, M. K. (2002). Jerome s. bruner and the process of education. Retrieved from http://www.infed.org/thinkers/bruner.htm Travis, S. (2009, November 23). Nsu's former chancellor, alexander schure, dies. Florida Sun-Sentinel. Retrieved from http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2009-11-23/news/fl-schure-obit-20091123_1_nsu-nyit-chancellor Visco, F. (2009, September 14). College corner: nova southeastern university. Advance for Hearing Practice Management, Retrieved from http://audiology.advanceweb.com/Article/Nova-Southeastern-University.aspx Wagner, V. (1982). The davie dilemma. Retrieved from http://www.davie-fl.gov/Pages/DavieFL_Programms/dilemma Read More