OPINION: UI picks a strange time to burn bridges

The most disturbing segment in the ongoing saga of the University of Idaho’s $685 million acquisition of for-profit online University of Phoenix was not UI graduate Christopher Birkinbine’s assessment, as critical as it was.

With a UI degree in physics, Birkinbine has risen to the ranks of a project manager at NASA. So he knows a thing or two about the value of a degree and he says a University of Phoenix degree isn’t worth much.

“I’ve spoken to numerous partners who won’t even consider graduates of the University of Phoenix unless they have real-world experience,” Birkinbine emailed UI President Scott Green on May 17 — the brief period between the time the State Board of Education raised the curtain on Green’s planned acquisition and then gave it the green light. “This is not a reputation the University of Idaho should want to take on.”

Nor was former UI student body President Scott Fehrenbacher’s initial reaction to the acquisition the most troubling element of this story. Like Birkinbine, Fehrenbacher also weighed in during the brief comment period Green and the State Board allowed him. He took that opportunity to inform Green that during the period of 2008-15 when he worked for another for-profit university, Grand Canyon University, Fehrenbacher observed Phoenix shedding key staffers, closing campuses and losing students.

Neither are the concerns of UI faculty expressed during May 17-18 — heartfelt and sincere as they were — the most ominous reason for alarm:

Acting English Department Chairperson Alexandra Teague said the deal “demeans this hard work that we all do to maintain the UI’s reputation and serve our students.”

Associate professor of English Michael McGriff expressed frustration at being “patently overlooked and underrepresented concerning these matters.”

Research scientist Erich Seamon argued Phoenix “is looking for a buyout — and legitimacy,” while the UI is willing to “sacrifice its reputation for a scheme it thinks can make money.”

Associate professor of Spanish and Latin American studies Ashley Kerr noted the Phoenix reputation for aggressive marketing and high-priced degrees will create a exploitative relationship with the UI “built on the backs of (Phoenix’s) adjuncts and working class students.”

Even the predictions of political turbulence over the deal — as astute as they proved to be — are not the greatest reason for alarm.

Former state Rep. Caroline Troy, R-Genesee, and now the UI’s lobbyist, noted that legislators who were briefed about the matter were demanding more details: “Although the Idaho Legislature has ‘no involvement,’ it doesn’t mean it won’t get involved.”

And State Board member Linda Clark acknowledged: “Our authority will be strongly questioned.”

No, what’s more unnerving is what’s happened since.

After securing emails that more than two dozen people sent to the UI or the State Board during that brief public comment period through a public records request, Idaho Education News’ Kevin Richert followed up to see what kind of response they got. His story was reprinted in Thursday’s Lewiston Tribune.

Some, such as Birkinbine, got boilerplate replies about process and promise — that due diligence was followed and that the UI will benefit from the transaction.

Others, notably Fehrenbacher, heard nothing.

“I thought with the unique experience I had, that I would be able to at least get a modest response from the president’s office,” he told Richert. “It’s not about me. ... I’m not sure if anyone around President Green is giving him accurate counsel.”

Everyone from Clark to Green has rebuffed the media.

And members of the Legislature remain perplexed.

Rather than evaluating these points — or at least using the feedback to refine its message — the UI and the State Board stuck with their 6-month-old talking points.

With the State Board’s approval already in hand, perhaps the UI believes the conversation is closed. It could take that stance if it were a private law firm. But the UI remains a public institution that operates in a public arena. It still requires the support of taxpayers and the Legislature.

It needs stability in the faculty ranks.

It relies on alumni who not only make contributions but also serve as ambassadors to a broader community.

It depends on public confidence.

So the worst part about this story is how the UI has squandered its opportunity to make the case to its allies.

It’s not as if the UI — or higher education in general — can dismiss its friends or ignore their counsel.

The Legislature that convenes next month has demonstrated a skepticism, if not downright antipathy, toward higher education.

Last year, 13 Republican state senators — including Cindy Carlson of Riggins and Dan Foreman of Moscow — and 28 Republican House members — including Mike Kingsley of Lewiston, Brandon Mitchell of Moscow and Charlie Shepherd of Pollock — voted against the college and university budget.

Appropriating $1 million to the UI to help cover expenses associated with the murder of four students in late 2022 was too much for 14 House Republicans — including a substitute appointed to fill in for Kingsley — and eight Senate Republicans — including Carlson and Foreman.

Even providing Idaho students with access to medical education through the Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho program drew opposition from nine Senate Republicans, including Carlson and Foreman — as well as 25 House Republicans, including Kingsley.

Is this any time to burn bridges? — M.T.