The 2016 National Association of Branch Campus Administrators Conference

The 19^th meeting of the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) was held in Delaware last week, and as usual, it was a fine success.  The meeting was hosted by Wilmington University, with attendance approaching 100 individuals.  Special credit goes to our extraordinary executive director, joyce gilley gossum, as well as to President Faimous Harrison, Conference Chair Rebecca Burton, Vice Chair Ali Crane, and site hosts Melanie Baldwin and Tom Hurd.

The program was excellent, as we’ve come to expect.  In particular, the two keynote addresses were both entertaining and inspiring.  On Thursday, educator Scott Paine spoke on “Where the Story Begins,” and on Friday, we heard from adventurer Matt McFadyen,  “Journey to the End of the Earth.”  Neither speaker was specifically addressing branch campuses or their issues, but they gave us a lot to think about.  Good decisions by the program committee!

I continue to urge branch administrators to learn more about NABCA.  It seems that people only realize the value of associating with branch colleagues after they attend NABCA or the Regional and Branch Campus Administrators conference in June.  NABCA, specifically, provides access to helpful information through its web site, www.nabca.net, on Facebook, and through the annual conference.  However, as I’ve said before, the greatest value may be the opportunity to meet and talk with other branch administrators, and almost any attendee will tell you that the conference is highly therapeutic!

Branch campuses represent a unique and critical delivery form of higher education, yet each institution seems to invent its own wheel, instead of taking advantage of those who have gone before.  There are best practices to be learned, and NABCA is a great place to learn them.

Being the senior attendee at NABCA these days, I feel that I should stress once again that the founders of NABCA would be immensely proud of the organization it has become.  In a world where so much seems to be random, NABCA’s founders were quite intentional about their vision for its development.  I was not a founder, but have attended for 16 of the 19 years, having first visited in 2001, I believe.  When I think of the years that I served on the executive committee, including as president, I can say that we knew where we wanted to go, and the recent leadership has taken us farther and faster than I could have imagined.  Well done!

Finally, I want to publicly (to the extent that people read this blog) thank President Harrison and the executive committee for the distinct honor of receiving the Presidential Service Award.  My time in the leadership of NABCA is long past, but it was a special experience to receive this recognition.  Thank you so much!

Once again, please consider visiting the NABCA web site, becoming a member, and attending next year’s conference in Tulsa, OK.  You won’t regret the decision, and you might make some new friends who understand your daily challenges at work.  You’ll find NABCA’s members to be friendly, concerned, helpful, and fun.

2015 End-of-Year Thoughts on Branch Campuses: The Macro View

I feel as if I should offer an end-of-the-year post, but I don’t see a lot of change in the past twelve months that would affect what I wrote last year.  (See http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2014/11/a-few-end-of-year-thoughts-on-branch.html  and http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2014/12/a-few-more-end-of-year-thoughts-about.html)

I do have a couple of suggestions for people interested in branch campuses.  First, in the past I wrote about immersing yourself in data.  It is only by digging into the information available to you that you can confidently identify trends.  It is equally important to take a “macro” view of things that are happening broadly, so that you can see the bigger picture beyond your own situation.

If you are looking for that macro perspective, you might consider using Google Alerts.  I have an alert for “branch campus,” and nearly every afternoon I get an email with one or more hits from the Internet that mention a branch campus.  Most of the alerts are of little or no significance to me, but some fill in information that I wouldn’t have received from the daily electronic newsletters that I receive.

Sometimes I see a newspaper story about a branch campus served by a member of NABCA.  That’s always entertaining, and if a friend is mentioned, I may shoot off an email of congratulations.  In other cases I may learn about plans, or at least ambitions, for a new branch campus, or perhaps I read about plans to expand programs on an existing campus.  Google Alerts doesn’t pick up everything, because my own posts show up sometimes, but not consistently.

Scanning the environment on topics that interest me, including branch campuses, has always been an important tool.  It’s a great way to discover ideas, for one thing, and it keeps me from being too focused on more narrow local concerns.  Newsletters, personal contacts, and Google Alerts all help with that.

Of course, scanning doesn’t replace the need for good research, but it does create impressions.  When I wrote recently about my concern that institutional leaders do not appreciate the full strategic potential of their branch campuses, that view came from my own experience, reinforced by what I read and discuss with others.

Here’s something that my scanning suggests, at least to me:  Even though I am concerned about the mission of existing branches being undermined by both external competition and short-sighted internal decisions, I also see that there is a surprising number of new branches being established in the United States.  Many of these new branches seem to have a narrow, focused mission, but others look like more established campuses, intended to serve a region that needs better access to higher education.  Interesting, especially in a time when most of the conversation is about online education.

My second suggestion is that you attend NABCA next April (see www.nabca.net).  The opportunity to interact with others who work on branch campuses and to attend a wide range of presentations during the conference sessions is invaluable.  My major point is that branches often appear to exist in isolation from one another, and they do, in fact, come in a wide range of forms and missions.  Often I meet people who tell me that they feel very alone in their work.  Attending NABCA, combined with seeking out the research that is available, dwelling in the campus data that are available to you, and continually scanning the environment can go a long ways toward appreciating that your own branch campus is surely part of something bigger.

My third suggestion is more personal:  If you haven’t seen or read my book, Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus life, please check it out.  It’s available on Amazon, in both electronic and print form.  Feedback has been very positive, and you might find it to be helpful.  You might even want to buy several copies to share with co-workers.  Again, just a suggestion.

Happy holidays!

The 2014 Regional and Branch Campus Administrators Conference

The annual Regional and Branch Campus Administrators Conference (RBCA) just concluded today.  For a number of years the conference has been held in June, meeting at the Longboat Key Club resort, which is a stunning venue.  RBCA limits attendance to about 60 participants and typically has just one program track for everyone, which has worked well for this group.

As usual, organizers did a fine job.  Jim Smith, campus dean at Ohio University Lancaster was the conference chair, and the program committee clearly worked hard to create a strong set of sessions.  I have attended RBCA most years since 1995, and I always have a great time.  Indeed, I believe that the annual NABCA and RBCA conferences are highly complementary, and I encourage branch leaders to consider attending one or both, whenever possible.

This year, I provided the opening keynote, discussing my new book, as well as offering some thoughts on future opportunities and risks for branch campuses.  On Monday, I was extremely pleased and flattered when it became apparent that at least a few folks had read my book and found it useful.  Book sales continue to go decently well, I think, although I have no benchmark for comparison.  My deep hope is that Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus Life will be helpful to those who work on branch campuses, especially if they are newly arrived.  Out on a Limb is my attempt to tell a branch campus story, but I also believe interested individuals could find quite a few potential research projects to test out whatever "claims" I've made.

I know that people working on branch campuses can feel under appreciated, and very often they have limited opportunities to network and share ideas.  RBCA and NABCA help speak to those issues, and I hope my book does, as well.  On branch campuses faculty and staff are all about providing access and opportunity to people who otherwise may have no reasonable expectation of realizing their educational dreams.  It is important work, done by remarkably dedicated professionals.  They deserve support and encouragement!

NABCA Conference for 2014

I attended the annual conference of the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) last week, and it was a great time.  The program was strong, but as usual a lot of the value in attending was the opportunity to network with people committed to the branch mission of providing access to higher education.

I presented a session, titled “Get Strategic to Compete:  New Directions for Branch Campuses” which turned out to be a lot of fun.  The audience was engaged and participated enthusiastically, which in turn gave me all the more energy for my topic.  In a later post I’ll share more about some of the new directions I’ve observed.

My book, Out on a Limb:  A Branch Campus Life was available for purchase at the conference, and I was pleased to have 34 copies picked up.  I also noticed an uptick in purchases of both print and Kindle versions on Amazon, so maybe word is getting around.  I’m not aware of any comparable book that is relatively comprehensive on the branch campus topic, but it is difficult to promote it in the absence of any sort of broad database covering branches.

In fact, I found sessions tied to members of the NABCA research committee to be especially interesting.  That committee has come a long ways over the last several years, and I noted enthusiasm for further steps.  The challenge simply to identify branch campuses and their characteristics is enormous. 

As one who has been around for most of NABCA’s existence, I felt real pride in the work of the current leadership.  I wish the original founders could have attended this year.  Their vision seems to have reached a tipping point, and the organization is definitely on a roll.  NABCA seeks to be a national, broad-based organization in support of branch campuses, and I was struck by the diversity of campus missions represented on the program, including both public and private institutions and growing participation from community colleges.

For years we hoped to establish a position of executive director to provide consistent leadership and better organization, and joyce gilley gossum is making a huge difference in that role.  My congratulations to joyce and to the members of the executive committee who hired her.  Susan Cooper, dean at California State University, Fullerton—Irvine Campus has been president for this past year, and her campus also hosted the conference:  Great job!  Leigh Atkinson, from Ohio University, was conference chair, and Allison Fitzpatrick, from Brookdale Community College was co-chair.  They and their committee had everything well organized, and if there were any glitches, I didn’t notice them.

If you see this post, then by all means track down NABCA.  You can become a member, “friend” NABCA on Facebook, and join their LinkedIn group.  Check out www.nabca.net and keep returning, because things are moving ahead quickly.

More Attention From Institutional Leaders May Not Benefit Branch Campuses

Through most of my career, I both enjoyed and benefited from the fact that people at the main campus paid little attention to their branches.  For all the frustration and difficulty of getting programs or courses approved, the circumstances worked to our advantage.  In addition, because we were financially separate from the main campus, we developed a deeper understanding of higher education finance than most of the chairs, deans and vice presidents with whom we worked. 

(Not bragging; just sharing the facts.  My experience with finance or budget administrators really was no different, because they tend to focus so strongly on cost control and risk avoidance that we found negotiations usually worked to our advantage.  Keep in mind that I am a devotee of mutual gains bargaining, so our success was mostly a matter of careful listening and addressing the interests of others, but with a strong understanding of our own interests.  Thus, it was the lack of others’ understanding of our interests that gave us an advantage.)

I’m saying this, because I am concerned that “flying under the radar,” or being “out of sight and out of mind” have become liabilities.  Branch campuses, along with online learning programs and main campus programs for adult learners, can best serve their institutions if they aggressively pursue an entrepreneurial tack.  Being entrepreneurial and highly service oriented tend to be natural for people who have served for a long time on branch campuses.  Bluntly, however, although I meet a lot of institutional leaders who talk about entrepreneurship, I meet very few who really get it.

Given the growing importance of outreach types of initiatives, we can expect institutional leaders to take more interest in branch campuses.  However, to the extent that they do not understand the mission, the student populations, and other elements that make branch campuses a unique form of delivery, branch leaders can expect some unfortunate choices to be made at the main campus.  Put another way, if main campus administrators do not understand the interests of branch students and communities (i.e., do not understand what they value or how they make decisions), those administrators will make assumptions that are off the mark, leaving the branch all that more vulnerable to competitors.

All of this makes me believe that the need for good research and literature on branch campuses will only increase.  It also suggests to me that the main campus individuals with oversight responsibility of branch campuses need to have a legitimate background in the area, or at least to have strong support people who can deliver good advice on important decisions.  Institutions need their branches and online programs to thrive, but thriving can only occur when there is deep understanding of those adult or non-traditional audiences we hope to attract and retain.

Revisiting "Characteristics of Branch Campuses"

By far the most read post on this blog is titled Characteristics of Branch Campuses, and it was posted July 11, 2007.  If you want to read it, you can find it at http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2007/07/characteristics-of-branch-campus.html.  Be warned:  When I first started posting, I wrote some relatively long entries.

One of the challenges in writing about branch campuses, never mind building a base of research on branches, is the lack of clear definitions or a shared understanding of what makes something a branch.  My piece on “characteristics” was an attempt to describe what I called an “idealized” branch, but there are many, many variations across the country.

A few days ago, I saw a list of “10 Satellite Campuses With Impressive Reputations All Their Own” on a site called thebestcolleges.org.  (http://www.thebestcolleges.org/?s=satellite)  I’m familiar with nearly all of these campuses, and there are interesting stories all around.  But calling some of them “branches” seems a stretch.

For example, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis is on the list, and I would insist that it is not a branch campus, by any reasonable definition.  It enrolls 30,000 students, in more than 200 programs, through 21 schools and academic units, according to its web site.  Similarly, they list the University of Michigan-Flint as a branch; they list another “campus” that is fully digital (hardly distinctive today), and still another that is a summer abroad study center, located in Europe.

I also have a complaint about all the attention recently to elite universities opening overseas branches.  Well, it isn’t the attention so much as the impression some articles leave that “international branch” and “branch” are synonyms.  I’m definitely interested in the trend, as well as the challenges and opportunities they create, but I’ve found many of the stories misleading about the branch world.

My bottom line on this is that the need for good research and shared vocabulary about branch campuses grows stronger all the time.  Fortunately, NABCA has been encouraging more research, and that work has progressed well from year to year.  Once we can agree on the defining characteristics of branches and begin to get a handle on best practices, maybe the critical contributions they make to higher education can be better appreciated. 

I maintain that branches are a unique delivery form of higher education, with some specific advantages for important populations.  Yet, the lack of connection and awareness of just how pervasive “satellite” operations really are is not helpful to encouraging branch development and growth.  I’m not worried about thebestcolleges.org, but I am concerned about helping branch campuses do well.

NABCA, RBCA, and Google Alerts

As always, the recent meeting of the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) was well worth attending. We met in Orlando, hosted by Central Florida University, from April 11-14. This was the 15th annual conference, which I believe includes the first several years, when we met as the Western Association. Next year’s conference will be hosted by Brookdale Community College, in Long Branch, New Jersey, April 10-13.

I have participated in NABCA for at least 10 of the 15 years, and I was honored to serve as president, several years ago. I appreciate the effort made by a large number of individuals over the years to make the NABCA conference so valuable, as well as to encourage research on branch campuses, through our very active research committee. Personally, I suspect that the opportunity to meet and develop friendships with people working in our too-often-overlooked sector of higher education provides the single greatest value of the conference. However, participants always indicate that the formal sessions are of real benefit, and they take home at least a few good ideas for exploration. Check out www.nabca.net for more information about the organization.

You might also want to check out the Regional and Branch Campus Administrators (RBCA) conference, which will meet on Longboat Key, June 17-20. RBCA is somewhat smaller, but allows even more opportunity to network, in a beautiful venue. RBCA is a single-track conference that typically concentrates on the interests of branch campus chief administrators, although it is not at all restricted to those individuals. The web site is at www.outreach.ohio.edu/rbca/. If it isn’t obvious, RBCA is organized these days by Ohio University. Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend this year, but it’s definitely my loss.

Here’s a tip: Awhile back, I created a “Google Alerts” item for “branch campus.” If you have a Google account, it is easy to set up, and I receive a daily message from Google, with a list of online/internet items that referred to branch campuses. (If you don’t know how to do this, get someone to help you find the right tab. Be sure to put quotes around “branch campus” or you’ll get far too many irrelevant items.) I can’t say the alerts are stunning or surprising, but it is a simple way to keep an eye on relevant stories or announcements. I find it useful, at least, and it takes virtually no time to review, each day.

Developing a Typology of Branch Campuses, Phase 2

All of us interested in branch campuses recognize that we need more research, if we are to develop a good description of typical variations in academic and administrative practice. For that reason, the NABCA executive committee created a research committee, to encourage and support studies that help inform its membership.

For several years, Phyllis Bebko, at Florida Atlantic University, chaired that committee. It’s new chair is Jack Krueger, at Adelphi University. Among other activities, the research committee conducted a survey of branch campuses that was reported in the recent special issue of Metropolitan Universities Journal. Abstracts from the issue can be checked out at www.cumuonline.org/muj.aspx.

The specific article is titled “Developing a Typology of Branch Campuses, and it is by Phyllis Bebko and Dennis Huffman. If you are interested, you can purchase the special issue of the journal, or you can purchase this or any other individual article that interests you.

I am writing about this, because Phase 2 of this research is now available online, and I’d like to encourage anyone who sees this blog to go to the web page and submit a response. It is not necessary to have participated in the previous survey nor to consider yourself a NABCA member, in order to respond. The survey is only 15 questions long and will take very little time, especially in comparison to the benefit we will receive from a strong number of responses.

To complete the survey, simply go to www.nabca.net. You will see a link on the right side of the page that asks you to “assist our research team.” While you are on the site, you also can find information about the next conference, in Orlando, from April 11-14, 2012, and you will see a link to submit a program proposal, if you are so inclined. If you haven’t already done so, you also can click on the Facebook symbol and “like” NABCA, as another way to stay connected.

NABCA—Your full-service connection to branch campus colleagues!

Special Journal Issue on Branch Campus Topics

If you are involved with branch campuses, then you may want to know about the most recent issue of Metropolitan Universities Journal. It is Volume 22, Number 1, and it is dedicated to branch campuses. It includes ten articles on a variety of topics.

Many of the authors are friends and colleagues of mine, and I know they carry both a strong commitment to the branch mission, as well as valuable experience they chose to share. I have an article on the future of branch campuses, but others provide relevant case studies and survey results that will be helpful to readers.

Ken Shaw’s case study of issues at Florida State University-Panama City captures the challenges of branch leadership as nicely as anything I’ve seen. An article by Norton and Pickus brings attention to what I consider to be a major issue for branch campuses: having the ability to create their own course schedule, in order to meet the needs of their students, and (related) having enough budget control to assure they get those courses.

Articles by gossom and Pelton and by Bebko and Huffman, present new data on leadership and on branch characteristics. Other articles make strong contributions, and I especially like the case elements that enhance the story of branch campuses.

I don’t have space here to describe each article, but you can read the abstracts at www.cumuonline.org/muj.aspx. You also will find information for subscribing to the Journal, ordering a copy of this issue, or even purchasing a copy of individual articles. Incidentally, Metropolitan Universities Journal also dedicated an issue to branch campuses about ten years ago, in Volume 12, Number 2. That issue may also be found on the web site.

One of the consistent themes for those who care about branch campuses is that we need a more developed literature on best practices, as well as more and better research that focuses on branch issues. We all owe a debt to Jack Krueger and Phyllis Bebko for their work to organize and produce this special issue.

On a much sadder note: NABCA lost one of its founding fathers and an all around great colleague, when Hal Dengerink passed away, September 14. Hal was Chancellor-Emeritus at Washington State University-Vancouver, and he was one of the best thinkers I know about branch campus challenges. In fact, Hal wrote the lead article for the previous Metropolitan Universities Journal issue dedicated to branch campuses. Hal had a great sense of humor, a sense of fun, and a great deal of savvy. He will be missed.

NABCA Conference for 2010

The 13th annual conference of the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) was held in Tulsa, last week. We were hosted by Northeastern State University-Broken Arrow, and the folks there did a great job. As far as I could see, everything went smoothly, pretty much on time, and met the needs of participants.

I thought the program was especially good, this year. We had some folks moving to new positions during the year, and that could have had a negative effect on the event, but if it did, I sure didn't recognize any signs. Cece Rivers, our president, from the University of Central Florida, presided over the conference with the efficiency that I've recognized in her for years.

We were welcomed by Northeastern president, Don Betz, and from his remarks, I feel sure that the Broken Arrow campus will continue to thrive and to serve the region creatively and effectively. The Broken Arrow Campus story is a great one of university-community partnership and rapid growth in an underserved area.

We had two excellent keynote addresses, from Trevor Wilson and Gary Conti, that engaged the audience effectively. I enjoyed the fact that Trevor Wilson grounded his presentation in positive psychology. The impact of Phyllis Bebko, Florida Atlantic University, and her NABCA research committee also is becoming evident. Phyllis's work is a great example of the impact a "champion" can have, especially on a relatively small organization.

I believe we had about 66 attendees, which is smaller than a few years ago, before budgets had such a negative effect on travel, but enough to assure financial success and to allow for great networking. As always, the opportunity to meet people from around the country, who wrestle with similar challenges, is the highlight of the experience. I love watching first-time attendees, seeing their excitement and relief at having discovered so many kindred spirits. It could be that the therapeutic value of the NABCA and RBCA conferences is worth the price of admission, alone.

Next year, we are meeting in Seattle. That promises to be another great venue, and we hope to see more of our western states colleagues re-engage with the organization. After all, NABCA was founded as the WESTERN Association, and I've missed seeing more participation in recent years, as the conferences have been in eastern and midwestern locations. David Williams, University of Connecticut, is our new president. He has a number of years' experience with NABCA and as an executive committee member, so I'm sure he'll do a fine job.

Please make every effort to support this important organization, by attending the conference next year. I am confident that you'll enjoy the experience and learn much that is valuable from the presentations. These regional and branch campuses are a growing, critical part of higher education, and sharing ideas, finding colleagial support, and engaging in discussions about the future are helpful all around.

You can check out the NABCA web site, at www.nabca.net. You may also want to check out the RBCA site, www.outreach.ohio.edu/rbca. That conference is coming up at its usual home on Longboat Key, June 20-23.

Branch Campus Growth is International

One of the challenges faced by people associated with branch campuses is the lack of literature or other obvious resources to help identify best practices, mistakes to avoid, or typical challenges. As a result, branch campuses come in a wide range of "flavors," around structure, programs, budgets, and mission. I hope this blog and the conferences organized by NABCA and RBCA help provide a sense of connection for people in the branch campus world.


In this context, I thought it would be worthwhile to draw attention to my impression that the number of branch campuses is growing, not only in the United States, but around the world. To be sure, there are the well publicized examples of American institutions launching international branches, usually in Asia or the Middle East. However, I am most interested in the simple reality that universities and colleges around the world often create branches, within their own country, in a manner that appears to be very similar to what happens in the U.S.


I have been fortunate to visit branch campuses in Mexico, Canada, Russia, and Hong Kong, and I have met individuals from Australia, Mexico, and other countries, who attended NABCA or RBCA. The issues faced in those countries seem similar to issues that arise here, but I don't know that to be a fact. There's a nice research opportunity for someone doing a thesis or dissertation: Comparing main campus and branch campus operations in different countries!


Recently, I visited campuses of the University of Northern British Columbia. It was an outstanding experience. There weren't any stunning surprises, during my visit, but the differences from my own experience were enough to be both interesting and engaging. Like most institutions, the UNBC story had unique elements, particular challenges, and highly recognizable points of view, both from branch and central campus folks.


Beyond supporting the general call for more research on branch campuses, I want to suggest that one might get especially interesting perspectives, by looking at branches in different countries, while "controlling" for as many dimensions, as possible: How would a branch in Mexico be similar to or different from one in the U.S., if the institutions are of similar size, in similarly populated areas, and so on. Are there differences in how they use technology? Do they attract similar or different student markets? Are main campus-branch issues similar? Can we learn things that will help us be more effective at our own campuses?


A quite different idea would be to partner with a branch in another country on courses or programs. A business course could use technology to have students in both countries working together on an international business problem. Guest lectures could be provided from both locations. Study abroad opportunities, often a challenge for branch students, could be relatively brief and intensive, with students and faculty members interacting by technology, both before and after the visit. I'd guess that branches from different countries could have a lot of fun, through partnership, as well as create outstanding learning opportunities and grow in cultural awareness. I know these things have happened, and sometimes they have been difficult to make work, but it seems well worth the effort.


In other aspects of my work, I've had some wonderful opportunities in the international arena, and they have enriched my life, enormously. In today's world, not only is it important to develop a global (heck, just a nonparochial) perspective, but technology can make it possible to do things that could not have been done effectively, just a few years ago.


Branch campus faculty, students and administrators have a natural platform to initiate a relationship. Go for it! Then, let me know how it works out. Or, better yet, come to NABCA or RBCA and tell everyone about it.

Thoughts after the RBCA Conference

The Regional and Branch Campus Administrators conference was held at Longboat Key, near Sarasota, FL, last month. The conference venue has to be one of the nicest anywhere, and the conference continues to provide an outstanding opportunity to meet people who help lead branch campuses of various types. Since the conference, I have been thinking about a couple of things that made a strong impression on me.

First, and even acknowledging what I have written in the past, I was struck by the incredible variety of branch campus models or "types" around the country. The campus deans from Ohio University provided a session that allowed the audience to respond to various questions about branch governance and other matters. Everyone seemed to enjoy the session, but what grabbed my attention was how difficult it is even to ask questions that make sense to everyone. With so many community college branches, upperdivision/graduate branches, two-year feeder university branches, and branches with a comprehensive mission, common ground isn't that easy to find. Governance and budget variations, among other things, add to the challenge.

I have a growing sense that an important dimension of "branchness" to consider is whether the campus is located in a rural or more urban setting. In the context of my last couple of posts, it seems to me that a branch in an urban area, with a reasonably large number of students (say, more than 2000), will be in a better position to adjust to challenges from online competitors. Urban campuses should be able to segment their market and deliver services and a range of programs--face-to-face, online, or blended-- that are valued by each segment. Rural, smaller campuses may find the competitive environment more difficult to address, as the audience for traditionally deilvered classes becomes smaller and the range of available online programs expands. (Rural campuses may be less hampered, and even enhanced, if their infrastructure costs are low, and if they are tied to institutions that support extensive online or blended delivery.)

Related to the difficulty of understanding the range of branch campuses and missions, the National Association of Branch Campus Administrators (NABCA) has established a task force on branch campus research, chaired by Phyllis Bebco, of Florida Atlantic University. The task force will be discussing and developing an agenda for research that seems most urgent or promising. You can check out all of NABCA's activities at http://www.nabca.net/.

On a different subject, I have the impression that more institutional leaders are beginning to recognize that their branch campuses should be included in a comprehensive strategic approach to growth. At the conference, I was especially impressed by our keynote speaker, Joel Hartman, who is Vice Provost for Information Technologies and Resources , at the University of Central Florida. UCF appears to have done an excellent job of developing a strong strategy to make "learning available on demand," through their various campuses and a strong emphasis on online and blended delivery. At UCF, it was reported, 55% of regional campus credit hours are online or blended. The financial advantage of online and blended delivery also has been strong, which is surely an important consideration in these difficult budget times.

For whatever reason, I am hearing more stories about presidents and other institutional leaders, who recognize the enrollment growth and revenue enhancement that branches, especially those that make powerful use of technology, can bring, while advancing an important educational mission. One implication may be a move away from treating branches as "colonies," at some institutions, and if those are the ones that thrive in the future, I am very much okay with that!

Branch Campuses as Colonies of the Main Campus

I am definitely not a professional historian. However, I enjoy reading in certain areas of history, and I suspect that some insights into main campus-branch campus relations could be gained by considering the relationship between an established nation and colonies it attempts to control at a distance. My own reading has included some coverage of the relationship between England, in the 18th century, and the American colonies, so my basic question is whether that situation has similarities to the relationship between a university and its branch campuses. Maybe someone more knowledgeable in this area can consider whether or not the analogy has value.

For example, branches don't just magically appear. Rather, they are created to meet some main campus need. The need might be to accommodate more students than the main campus can handle, to generate additional revenue from some more lucrative market, or to respond to some pressure from state-level policy makers. A branch campus might even be started simply to block another institution from expansion. The key point is that a branch will only be established, if there is some belief in its value on the main campus, at least at the leadership level.


(Indeed, I found a quote, which I can no longer locate, from Novice Fawcett, President of Ohio State University, when it first opened its branch campuses. President Fawcett said that he started the branches, in part, to block Ohio University from taking over the entire state!)


The result may be that main campus faculty and staff believe they hold a proprietary interest in the branch campuses, especially from an academic and financial point of view. Most likely, main campus people will feel that the branch exists only for whatever limited purpose was initially intended. Thus, the main campus faculty has a right to oversee who teaches what on the branches, to limit programing, to direct student services, and to charge branches for services, for use of "its" courses, and so on.

I'm quite sure that a lot of branch campus personnel feel like unappreciated colonists. Hal Dengerink, Chancellor of Washington State University Vancouver, says that branch campus faculty and staff need to understand that they aren't the "main thing," from the point of view of institutional leaders, and that fact has a significant impact on effective institutional political strategy. Too much boat rocking may well produce unpleasant results for the branches, given that the branches were originally created to help solve a main campus problem, not to create new ones.

I'd also expect the perspective of branch campus "colonists" to change over time. Early employees on a new branch campus often describe a sense of being pioneers, off in the academic wilderness, depending on one another for support, and engaged in holy work to create new access to higher education. Assuming enrollment grows and staffing increases, expansion of programs will seem logical to students, faculty and staff, and community leaders. It will not seem so logical to people at the main campus, who will tend to maintain perceptions (stereotypes) about the branches, as originally created.

Still another issue may relate to predictable conflicts over scarce resources. If money is tight, one can predict that the main campus faculty and staff will be concerned about any real or perceived drain of "their" resources. If main campus people perceive competition for students or dollars, they will almost certainly move to restrain branch campus growth. (I have lots of war stories on that score!)

A colleague at the University of South Florida Sarasota-Manatee Campus, Peter French, has correctly observed that, if there is turmoil on the main campus, it will affect the branches, even if there is no mean spirited intent. Political battles can lead combatants either to court branch campus support, to attempt to deny the branch campuses participation in important decisions, or to use the branches as examples of the institution's "problems."

What happens if a branch campus grows to the point that it wants independence? I have no personal experience with a campus going its own way, so I don't know what struggles occurred, if any. There are examples around the country of one-time branches that became free standing institutions (e.g., Coastal Carolina University was once a branch of the University of South Carolina), as well as examples of relatively typical branches that gained a measure of self-determination (perhaps housing a school or college of the university, or pursuing separate accreditation and reporting lines to the president or trustees).

It isn't surprising that expectations held on branch campuses change over time. Especially if a branch was established a generation or more ago, that campus is by now the center of the academic world for its faculty, staff and students. Local program needs or the opportunity for personal professional growth are important. Limitations that seem unnecessary or even disrespectful will produce resentment in branch campus faculty and staff. Over time, the local perception of mission is likely to grow somewhat distant from the original main campus intention, and the branch campus folks may bristle at the "uninformed" or biased perceptions at the main campus. I've actually heard, on more than one occasion, a main campus faculty member or administrator refer to the branch campuses as "running amuck," when I didn't see anything happening except an effort to expand opportunities for place bound students.



Then, again, it is true, in my experience, that branch campus faculty and staff underestimate their dependence on the support of the main campus, including the value of its "brand." In their frustration, they will sometimes push the boundaries, break the rules, or (much like an adolescent challenging parental authority) try to sneak a course, or even an entire academic program, past the main campus authorities. That may look like running amuck to someone on the main campus and reinforce their biases. It might look more like the Boston Tea Party on the branch! (By the way, I do understand that there are very serious issues that occur with colonization that are quite different than the relatively narrow aspects I am wondering about.)


What can be done to allow for the natural maturation of branch campuses, without somehow losing the essence of what the main campus feels the institution is about? I suppose that is what many of us try to determine every day. I wonder if there are lessons from colonialism that could inform our thinking or, to be more scholarly, could lead to predictions about main campus-branch campus dynamics and evolution? At least in Ohio, most branches would not survive without ties to the trunk of the main campus, and they could not come close to providing the level of services they need for the money they have available. Are there models of colonies that have worked relatively well over time, or that relieved tensions and supported positive relationships? I invite your thoughts on this or other analogies and metaphors about branch campus life.

An Agenda for Branch Campus Research

Offering almost any generalization about branch campuses is difficult, because there is precious little research to support one's conclusions. Part of the problem is that we have no national-level data base on branches. In fact, the interested individual will find very little in the way of descriptive information that can be used to compare one institution's branches to another. The situation probably is less difficult within a given state, since policy makers will almost certainly have restricted the options pursued by various colleges or universities, but even within a state there are significant variations in, say, expectations of faculty or budget oversight.

The core problem is that branches developed "under the radar," and to meet some more or less local need. An urban institution may have opened a suburban branch, to make attendance more convenient; a rural institution may have opened an inner-city branch to offer graduate programs to adult learners; a university may have opened a branch on a community college campus to facilitate degree completion. The point is that, if you go looking for best practices to help you establish your first branch campus, you will be sorely disappointed.

Thus, this post is one of many calls for more research on branch campuses. However, I would like to propose something of a research agenda, at least from a macro perspective. To that end, in my previous post, I proposed a description of what I'd like to call an idealized branch campus. (Not ideal, from the perspective of people working on branches, but characteristic, in the sense of reflecting my own guess about what is most common.)

I suggested that the idealized campus is a permanent physical location, with at least some complete or nearly complete academic programs. There are resident faculty members, and services are available on site that are necessary to support faculty and students. There is a budget for this location, with day-to-day spending decisions made locally. On the other hand, academic control is located primarily at the main campus, which has to approve programs. Enrollment, typically, ranges from 700-3500 headcount.

Although I'd be happy to collaborate with other individuals who are willing to do most of the grunt work to collect and analyze data, I have no plans to conduct empirical research, myself. If I were to begin research, however, here is what I would do:

1. The first step would be to identify branches that fit my idealized model. I would distinguish between community college and university branches, but I'd collect data on both. My description is brief enough that finding campuses that fit shouldn't be too difficult, but it is important that they come from different states. I wouldn't worry about other aspects of mission or operations just yet, because I want the first cut to capture campuses that vary quite a lot on other dimensions.

2. Having identified my study group, I would construct a survey to obtain descriptive information about how these campuses operate. What types of programs are provided? What is the relationship of branch campus faculty to main campus departments? Where are decisions made about hiring and/or tenuring faculty? What is the title and authority of the branch campus's chief administrator? To whom does that administrator report? What services are provided? How is the budget obtained, and what is managed locally vs. at the main campus? All of these items could be teased out to create checklists or the like. The point is to expand the description of the idealized branch, including typical variations within the model.

3. It may reflect my own discipline, but I would probably try to do some more qualitative study on these campuses, seeking information about faculty and administrative perceptions toward the main campus, toward the formal mission, and toward worklife and career development issues.

The goal of this approach is to restrict the range of branch campuses being studied, in order to get a handle on typical variation within the study set. Having accomplished the goal, research can proceed in various directions. For example, one could study the idealized campuses more deeply, drilling into, say, the role and relationships of faculty members, or digging into mission or geographic differences to determine what effects they may have.

The obvious alternative is to use the idealized branches as a comparison group and to begin studying campuses that do not fit the description. Suppose everything is true of a set of branches, except that there are no full-time resident faculty. What follows? Can we get at least a sense of the value or the cost of maintaining a resident faculty? In the end, we might have a decent description, at least, of major types of branches, which future scholars could use to ask questions that can be meaningfully examined.

Through this post, I am trying more than anything to make suggestions about how research on branch campuses might be approached in a more programmatic way than seems possible today. If we create a more narrow, idealized picture of a typical or common branch, we might at least get something going. Comments or reactions to my post, including other ideas on how research might proceed, are welcome.