Wednesday, October 21, 2015

The International Branch Campus Trend

Perhaps you’ve seen articles about universities establishing branch campuses in other countries.  Check out this piece, which is the most informative I’ve seen on the subject:  It was written by Nigel Healey, at Nottingham Trent University.

Follow the links embedded in the article, and I think you’ll have a good overview of the trend.  Note that quite a few international branches have failed and, if you are associated with what I’ll call “domestic” branch campuses, you’ll also see that there are extra challenges that come with working internationally.

The article mentions that universities in the United States currently have 50 international branches and United Kingdom universities have 27.  Other countries have smaller numbers, yielding a total of well over 200, in all.  Of course, these numbers are probably a tenth of the number of domestic branches in the United States, alone, so the true impact of international branches is likely to be modest, at least in terms of numbers served or net revenue generated.  I suspect the fact that a number of “elite” institutions have gone the international route has done more to draw attention than anything else.

My own experience with international branch campuses is quite modest.  I’ve visited branches in Russia, Mexico, Hong Kong, and Canada, but all of these campuses were domestic, in the sense that the main campus was in the same country.  Still, the experiences were informative.

Ohio University, like most institutions has many international relationships and has offered programs in other countries, but we’ve not had anything I’d call an actual branch campus.  We did have a center in Hong Kong for more than 20 years, based at Hong Kong Baptist University, and that center reported up to me in my years as vice president.  We employed a small on-site staff and local faculty to teach traditional face-to-face classes.  We sent Ohio faculty to teach intensive courses in the summers and during the winter intersession we had at the time.  Hong Kong students also had access to online or correspondence courses.

I loved the Hong Kong center, and we learned a lot through the work we did there.  The center occasionally helped with other relationships in the region, but it was never highly profitable.  Eventually, the center closed, partly because of the emergence of online programs, but mostly because local universities expanded the opportunities they could provide in a way that cut into our enrollment.  I suspect other institutions may find a limited timespan for international branches, as well.  That doesn’t make them a bad idea, but it does suggest being careful about investment in facilities or in permanent local faculty.

Personally, I’m skeptical that international branches will bring the sort of enrollment and financial contributions that domestic branches often achieve, but there may well be other reasons to proceed, even if the branch is likely to survive only for a relatively brief time.  In any case, although the international story is interesting, I wish domestic branches and their good work were receiving as much attention as the international trend.

Wednesday, August 26, 2015

Branch Campus Quality: Tell Your Story

Years ago, when I was associate dean of the Mansfield Campus of Ohio State, I was talking with a department chair on the main campus who had been especially resistant to allowing one of our tenure track faculty members teach a course for which he appeared to be well qualified.  The chair said, “We have to be sure that the quality of a regional campus course is equivalent to that on the main campus.”

I jumped on his use of the word “equivalent.”  “You mean,” I said, “We should make sure we have 300 or more students in introductory sections and make sure that we have TA’s teaching most of the lower division courses, rather than using full-time faculty?”  The chair was surprised by my directness, but I was tired of the nonsense.  It took some more work, but eventually the faculty member was cleared to teach the course.

At about the same time, a local business leader and main campus alum challenged me on that same issue of quality.  My response was, “The only time we differ from the main campus is when we can do better.”  I repeated the point about class size and described our hiring standards for full-time faculty, as well as our practice of following main campus department requirements for hiring adjuncts.

My point is that branch campus faculty and staff members know that we often engage with students in ways that yield a stronger educational experience than many students have at the main campus.  No, we probably don’t have a climbing wall in a fancy student fitness center, but our students aren’t looking for a climbing wall.  We don’t get a lot of recognition, and the mythologies of higher education will never give us (or our students!) the credit we deserve. 

To be sure, regional and branch campuses differ enormously in their practices and just how closely they work with main campus departments on faculty qualifications.  Sometimes branches emulate the main campus when it makes no sense for the branch mission, and I’m sure that some branches have compromised quality at times in order to get things done.  But branch campuses deserve positive recognition, when positive goals have been attained.

Institutional politics are real, of course, so one shouldn’t react to every insensitive or uninformed comment that comes along.  Nevertheless, I encourage faculty and staff members to speak up in order to tell a positive story that documents an important mission achieved.  Tell your story!

To that end, here is a very positive, polished video from the University of San Francisco, a Jesuit institution with branch campuses.  I should note that I have no experience with this university, so I am simply sharing an impressive message that tells a nice four-minute story about the value of branch campuses:

Thursday, April 30, 2015

The 2015 National Association of Branch Campus Administrators Conference

The 18th annual conference of the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) was held in the Quad Cities of Iowa and Illinois, on April 15-18.  As perhaps the longest serving member who still attends, I thought it was the best conference yet.  The founders of NABCA should be proud of what they started, and as I told attendees, what NABCA has become is very much what the founders intended.  (I was not a founder, by the way.  I began attending the conference, then known as the Western Association, about five years after the launch.)

This year, especially, I thought there was a spirit and collegiality that was remarkable.   Presentations were excellent, and the organization of the event was spot on.  Everyone involved in planning and executing the conference deserves praise, and I offer special congratulations to joyce gillie gossum (executive director), James McCaslin (president), Allison Fitzpatrick (conference chair), and Joseph Rives (site host).

There were two keynote speakers.  Mary Landon Darden, author of Beyond 2020:  Envisioning the Future of Universities in America, spoke on Thursday offering her thoughts on how branch campuses can thrive in changing times.  I was honored to be the Friday keynote, speaking on the mission and significance of branch campuses. 

If you are not a member of NABCA, I encourage you to visit the web site:  NABCA leaders have worked hard to create significant value to membership, even beyond the annual conference.

Please consider becoming a member, and I hope you also consider attending next year’s conference, which will be hosted by Wilmington University, in Wilmington, DE, April 13-16.  If you work on or with branch campuses, I promise you will enjoy and appreciate an opportunity to spend time with people who do what you do!

Update:  I am pleased that you found your way to this blog post, and I hope you check out other posts I’ve made over the years.  In addition, if you find the blog helpful, please take a look at my recently published book, Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus Life.  The book is available on Amazon, in both print and Kindle versions.  You can find it at

Sunday, December 7, 2014

A Few More End-of-Year Thoughts About Branch Campuses

Continuing my end-of-the-year observations, I urge you to spend a lot of time studying your budget.  Take a close look at the gross revenue generated at your campus, as well as your direct costs of delivery.  (By direct costs I mean actual costs of instruction, local staff and facilities.  Do not include any overhead or other charges levied by the main campus.)  In most cases that I’ve seen, the net revenue per student credit hour is significantly positive.  In fact, generally, the net revenue is higher at branches than at a residential main campus, precisely because the branch has a more focused, limited mission.

Your main campus finance people may insist that you consider allocated costs from the main campus, such as for admissions and financial aid support, registrar, and so on.  For some purposes they are absolutely correct, but at the same time, you should know that the overhead you pay (or the branch income they keep) probably is free cash to the main campus.  Would the main campus really save money if your campus disappeared tomorrow?  Even if your instructional cost is buried in main campus academic budgets, I’ll bet the answer is no.

Your president and others may need help to understand that you are a profit center, but do your homework.  Ask your financial aid director how many positions could be eliminated if you disappear.  Ask your admissions director, head librarian, registrar and others.  The answer will almost always be “none.”  From an accounting perspective it may be legitimate to charge you a fair share of underlying costs at the institution, but from a business development perspective, I’ve found that branch-driven costs are almost always marginal.  That may be the real reason your campus is effectively a cash cow.

Finally, it is tempting to think that branches are an outmoded delivery method and that online programs can serve the same audience just as well and, perhaps, less expensively at scale.  But I argue that branches serve a different audience than either the main campus or fully online programs.  This is far too big a topic for a blog post, but I think many branches can make a compelling case for an aggressive growth strategy that will generate enrollment that neither the main campus nor online programs can attract.  Why shouldn’t an institution take distinct approaches in all three worlds and expect all three to perform well?

Here’s a little lagniappe:  Check out Marc Freedman’s piece in the Harvard Business Review blog on the opportunity presented by Boomers. (  Please consider how you might create innovative programs to serve this audience.  It is a special interest of mine, and I have written about the encore stage, both in this blog and in my other blog, Creating the Future, at 

As always, I am available to serve as a resource, coach or consultant.  Get in touch if I can be of help, and I hope you have a great 2015.

Sunday, November 30, 2014

A Few End-of-Year Thoughts on Branch Campuses

I post infrequently on this blog, especially since the publication of my book, Out on a Limb.  I’m pleased that people are finding the book through Internet searches and word of mouth, as well as through their connection to NABCA (  For that matter, I’m also pleased that I occasionally hear from someone who has discovered this blog and found it useful.

As I continue to scan the environment, visit various campuses, and think about branch campus issues, I will occasionally comment on what I observe, although I may wind up repeating ideas I’ve expressed before.  Thus, here are a few end-of-year observations.

First, I feel increasingly frustrated by the failure of most institutions to fully exploit the strategic potential of their branch campuses.  (Check out this post:  The branch campus audience is not the same as that on a residential main campus, so why are people who have no experience with the branch audience making decisions about recruiting, class scheduling, and student support?  Take a look at my posts over the past couple of years on branch campus trends and on concerns that may interfere with branch campus enrollment growth.

Second, if you are a branch campus administrator, dig into your enrollment patterns.  I talk about “dwelling in the numbers,” and it is so important.  Understand what students are telling you through their decisions on courses and programs and let their preferences help drive your marketing, scheduling, etc.  Make sure you understand what your competitors are doing, as well, and the extent to which your own potential students are choosing them over you.

In this same way, take note of trends across the country.  Some branches are growing rapidly and others are fading.  Why?  And how is technology affecting enrollment?  Should you be doing more with hybrid delivery and online options?  Joining NABCA and engaging more with colleagues from other institutions may help jumpstart your thinking. 

By the way, right now would be a good time to buy copies of my book for your staff and to create a reading circle to discuss ideas.  Judging from the response to Out on a Limb, it has helped plant seeds for some folks.  Maybe you can even engage some main campus people to consider new options.  (I feel as if I should put a smiley face here, but I’ll resist the urge.)

Next week I’ll offer a few more thoughts for the end of the year.

Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Branch Campuses and the Planting of Seeds: A Local Story

Last time I wrote about planting seeds and suggested that the mission of branch campuses is to plant seeds in the lives of their students and then nurture their growth.  Keep in mind, however, that a “campus” is just a place; it is people who plant and nurture those seeds.  In that context, I want to acknowledge the importance of individuals who had the vision and determination to establish those branches and launch the opportunity for their contribution.  Anywhere you see a branch campus, you can be sure that the campus reflects someone’s vision for reaching out to serve place bound students.  The motivation for that vision may have been financial, political, or pushed by some other force.  Regardless, a seed was planted, an idea was nourished, and it made a difference.

I feel drawn to offer a “shout out” to a few individuals who launched and built Ohio University’s branch campuses.  None of these men has a branch building, let alone a campus named for him, but without their vision and commitment, the campuses never would have developed as they did. 

Ohio University’s campuses were founded in 1946, primarily to serve returning World War II veterans.  An economics professor, Al Gubitz, was appointed to oversee their operation, which was expected to last only a few years.  However, Gubitz recognized that the branches, offering only evening classes in area high schools, were meeting an important need.  With the president’s support, the University gained state approval to continue operating.

I never met Al Gubitz, but I’ve talked with people who knew him.  They describe him as smart and crusty, and I’ve heard that he operated the campuses out of the trunk of his car, carrying textbooks, sometimes money, and other things from site to site. 

Beginning in the mid-1960s, under the leadership of Ed Pinson, our “campuses” acquired land and put up buildings to support broader day and evening programs.  From that time enrollment began to grow significantly and the campuses thrived.  I do know Ed, who is a great guy, living in Athens.  Ed went on to become a university president and, later, a consultant.  But that substantial physical plant on five branch campuses owe their existence to his good work.

Still later, my predecessor, Jim Bryant, brought 24 years of steady, well-grounded leadership to our campuses, as they continued to grow.  Jim was an outstanding dealmaker and partnership builder with great understanding of higher education finance.  From him, I inherited a financially solid organization.

Of course, hundreds of administrators and faculty members contributed to Ohio’s branch campus success, and quite a few community members and politicians stepped up at critical times.  My point, here, is that we all need to keep in mind the importance of planting seeds and nurturing their growth. 

More often than not, planting seeds won’t get us in the history books.  Yet branch campuses exist because someone cared and chose to make a difference.  Someone planted the seeds and across generations others continue to plant, nurture and harvest the results.  Not a bad legacy.

Monday, August 25, 2014

Branch Campuses and the Planting of Seeds

A couple of years ago I wrote a post for my Creating the Future blog, titled “Coaching, Consulting, and the Planting of Seeds.”  If you are interested, you can find it at

I mention it because four years into my encore career I’ve found myself feeling more and more as if planting seeds has been the underlying significance of almost everything I’ve done.  I enjoy the variety of professional activities that fill up my days, from consulting, coaching and speaking, to writing my blog posts and (at long last) finishing my book on branch campuses.  Looking back, I also enjoyed teaching and administration, which surely are seed planting endeavors. 

I maintain that the mission of branch campuses is access and outreach, providing opportunities for students to pursue their dreams.  Although online programs may be changing things, branches often are the best option for place bound students who want to continue their education, suggesting to me that branches are places where seeds are planted and their growth nurtured.

I don’t mean to be melodramatic here, but typically we don’t know the long-term outcome of our work.  (We don’t experience the harvest, to continue the metaphor.)  In fact, we may be planting seeds without even knowing we are doing so, especially as we affect the development of our institutions, contribute to our communities, and teach our classes.

Awhile back, a former colleague sent me an email, telling me the story of a fellow he met who had started his college education at Ohio State Mansfield.  This student went on to professional and financial success, but he told my friend that it was my general psychology course that turned him around and got him moving in the right direction.  That was great to hear, of course, but the truth is that I don’t remember this student at all, and I have no idea how a general psychology course could have had that type of impact.

Most educators have these types of stories, and I wish we heard more often how our work has mattered.  It’s a little scary, though, because we also know that students sometimes hear a message we didn’t even intend to deliver!

I’ve often said that we know education transforms lives, but on branch campuses we see the impact in especially dramatic ways.  It is a fine thing to plant seeds and nurture their growth.  It makes a difference to students, to their families and to their communities, even if we sometimes feel unappreciated or frustrated by the hurdles put in front of us by people who just don’t get it.

By the way, on the subject of planting seeds, I continue to hear encouraging feedback on my book, Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus Life.  In this context, what has been most gratifying has been hearing from campus leaders who bought copies for co-workers and are holding discussions around the chapter topics, as well as some who have persuaded their president or provost to read the book and consider the ideas around program development and finance.  Out on a Limb is available through Amazon in paperback ( or on Kindle (

Tell your friends!