In support of visionary sustainable solutions for Vermont’s educational crisis

In response to the threat of the chancellor closing three campuses in the Vermont State Colleges system, thousands of community members, faculty, staff, students, and legislators banded together and forced the campus-closing option off the table for now. The real work is ahead of us as we try and re-imagine a college system that is sustainable and resilient. To that end, I wrote this white paper and delivered it to the state legislators as a kind of heads up. They are about to get a lot of ideas for how to fix the system, and I want to make sure the pathway for seemingly radical ideas is open.

Executive summary 
The current narrative justifying the closure of three VSCS campuses is incomplete, does not account for the human impact of such an action, and as such should not be used as a basis for decision-making. Rather, I present a perspective based in sustainability and resilience that offers a more inclusive way forward. It is possible to use the good energy and resources available through emergent crisis organizations in order to reframe the problem and gain deeper perspective not offered by current analysis. In closing, I offer four specific steps for taking action that are rooted in this perspective.

In addressing the complex problem of the sustainability and resilience of the Vermont State College System (VSCS), we are presented with a spectrum of possible solutions ranging from the nearsighted to the visionary. On the one end, we have the chancellor’s proposal to dismantle over a century’s worth of history and prosperity in the poorest communities in Vermont. On the other end, there is work happening right now underneath the resultant chaos that could result in a visionary re-imagining of an educational model that can thrive while still providing intrinsic (humanity-based) and extrinsic (economic-based) value to their local and statewide communities if we give it the time. This visionary work must be supported.

This white paper offers a justification and a framework for the state’s support of these emergent options at the visionary end of the spectrum and encourages the legislature to embrace a richer and more fertile narrative than the one so far presented by the chancellor of the VSC. I offer an approach to this problem through the lenses of sustainability and resilience, and I am in strong support of this groundswell of ideation and problem-solving. The emergence of this kid of movement is not unprecedented. Crises such as COVID-19, hurricanes and floods, and sociocultural-economic threats like the closure of these three campuses lead to powerfully energetic creative thinking in communities who feel or have been otherwise abandoned (Solnit, 2009). It will be necessary for the state to tap into this wave of ideas and emergent organizing to find the right solution to this problem.

Solnit found in her research that in times of crisis, natural or otherwise:

“Hierarchies and institutions are inadequate to these circumstances; they are often what fails in such crises. Civil society is what succeeds, not only in an emotional demonstration of altruism and mutual aid but also in a practical mustering of creativity and resources to meet the challenges” (Solnit, 2009).

In the case of educational funding, it is clear to most observers and stakeholders within and outside the state that the hierarchy has failed and that we must look for solutions beyond it with minds open to the possibilities of new ideas from previously unheard people. For whatever reason and over however many years, the system has reached a point requiring a necessary transformation if it is to survive, but that transformation must take into account a greater set of information than has been presented so far. It must take into account the intrinsic and qualitative values of the Johnson, Lyndon, and Randolph campuses and hold them up as ideals to maintain. It must take into account the value of higher education in the face of economically struggling communities. This transformation must be enacted with the courage and vision to defend and uphold each of these.

The value here is easy to see. It is documented in the Northern Vermont University (NVU) study of its impact to the region around its campuses (NVU, 2020). Ironically enough, it was also demonstrated by a 2018-2019 impact statement from the VSC Board of Trustees. The NVU study found that its two campuses deliver a value of approximately $113 million to the local and regional economies of Northern Vermont, the value of which is only increased if we consider the Randolph campus of Vermont Technical College (VTC). The VSCS impact statement is clear about the variety and depth of people served by its colleges and universities.

Additionally, the impassioned, reasoned, and intelligent statements and ideas from the community during the April 20th, 2020 board meeting demonstrate the massive impact that the campuses have on the people in this region. These stories included statements from nontraditional students with full-time jobs and parenting duties, disabled students unable to travel, out-of-state students who have moved to the region because of the schools, and community residents whose ties to the schools go back generations (Vermont State College Board of Trustees Meeting: 4/20/2020, 2020). It is clear, then, that the value of the system is not in question.

To that point, the legislature has been made privy to these narratives that reach beyond the linearity of bottom-line finances and should be able to recognize the drastic and unnecessary severity of the chancellor’s recommendation. What is encouraging to me is that the legislature has already demonstrated the willingness to think beyond the bottom line in its search for sustainable and resilient solutions. For example, the Genuine Progress Indicator (GPI) has been mandated by statute as a companion metric to the Gross State Product (GSP) since 2012 (Zencey, 2018). Vermont was the first state to legislate this very important addition to economic understanding. It is now required by law to consider more than just the financial impact of budgetary decisions. We should act accordingly. Legislators themselves mandated that they should include indicators related to the social, cultural, and ethical impacts of economic changes. This is encouraging to me.

I see in this use of the GPI that the legislative body recognizes that financial measures are not the sole indicator of progress or success for a society. It is both sensible and lawful, then, to apply the same kind of context to this current crisis. Helpfully, the GPI includes metrics related to the value of education, and states that “The value of a college education is not captured solely by the person who obtains it. Education at every level has significant externalized economic benefits, i.e. benefits that accrue to the community at large” (Zencey, 2018). This was again made clear by the testimony during the April 20th board meeting.

Another piece of the narrative to consider is that higher education is recognized by the United Nations (UN) as one of the 17 methods by which a sustainable and resilient society is created (Rosa, 2017). Research shows that when higher education is supported and maintained in economically distressed or marginalized regions, the well-being of that society overall is improved. This recognition is encoded in the VSCS charter, despite current events indicating that is not being considered. Higher education is a key factor towards global sustainable development and is integral to any community’s goals for thriving in an uncertain future (Buckler et al., 2014). Specifically, Irina Bokova, Director-General of UNESCO in 2012 stated that “Education is the most powerful path to sustainability. Economic and technological solutions, political regulations or financial incentives are not enough. We need a fundamental change in the way we think and act” (Buckler et al., 2014).

The UN reports are specifically clear about the nature of opportunities and the kind of barriers that are in place around the world. These barriers include economic disparity, gender and racial barriers, distance from viable institutions of higher learning, political and social unrest, and familial obligations. While the situation in Vermont is not as dire as overtly denying education for political, racial, or gender reasons, the closure of these campuses will introduce economic disparity, unaccountable distance from institutions of higher learning, and issues related to familial obligations. We heard as much in testimony to the Board on April 20th.

The above provides a new framework for this crisis that is not limited by the apparent bottom-line accounting performed by the chancellor’s office, but rather one rooted in issues of resilience and sustainability. This becomes clear as soon as we look beyond the boundaries of the VSCS and consider the communities as integral to the overall finances of the state of Vermont, not just the VSCS itself. The chancellor’s recommendation has not considered this, nor post-closure impacts beyond his own system, and as such it demonstrates a lack of understanding of the nature of the problem at hand.

Using the above section as justification for a new approach to solving this problem, how should the state legislature, the board, or any other organization move forward from here? There are innumerable ways to go about it, but I will highlight a few of them and include appropriate next steps.

The first and most important step for the legislature must be to secure bridge funding of $25 million – ironically the same price tag for closing three campuses – for the upcoming school year. This props up the overall school-community-state system and provides the necessary time to move through this crisis successfully. Additionally, because there is no concrete plan, and because there was no consideration of reciprocating events, this announcement by the chancellor has likely already damaged the prospect of future enrollments (a point made by a member of NVU admissions staff to the VSC Board of Trustees). Action from the state legislature can be used as a counter to this current and detrimental narrative to stem this immediate loss of enrollment. In short, we cannot increase enrollment if students believe the school is being shut down, and the legislature must prove that it supports the system financially.

Second, the legislature should either tap into the emergent community organizations or encourage them to thrive outside of its purview so that all of the impacted stakeholders of this crisis can choose to be involved. As noted above, these emergent groups have been shown to weather incredible adversity and overcome significant obstacles to solve complex problems (Solnit, 2009).This is vitally important to finding a solution and stakeholders must include representatives from every segment that is impacted by this decision. The legislature is familiar with this process already and should have no trouble finding volunteers for this mission.

Third, working groups must develop visionary goals and metrics that ensure success is not determined based on bottom-line finances, but instead in a way that ensures the system can thrive and meet its full potential. By nature, systems will keep running towards their established goals forever, regardless of any fallout or consequences (Gall, 2012). If the VSCS continues to measure its success based on passive income, enrollment dollars, capitalization of real estate, and whatever else, then the real value of the system can never be measured, and we will continue on this deteriorating path forever. It is what the system is designed to do: it will seek increased profits until it can no longer do so and then it will fail. The goals of the system must be altered in order to account for the rich intrinsic successes witnessed through public testimony in addition to operating costs. Operating costs and bottom-line accounting, however, should never be considered primary goals for the reasons stated above.

Lastly, allow for the opportunity to change the rules of the system itself in order to help it stay viable, be resilient, and thrive even in uncertain futures (Doppelt, 2010). By reimagining the very nature of the VSCS itself, the crisis we are currently facing may very well be averted in currently unimagined ways. As you know, this kind of imaginative and abductive thinking is hard work, and it must be given time to continue. Some examples of questions that demonstrate this kind of thinking that I have seen follow. What if the campuses were self-sufficient? Are there opportunities for educational cooperatives? Can new programs be created and/or transformed to attract a different kind of student? Could administrative duties be pooled? Do we need a chancellor’s office? Are there inter-school, partnerships that haven’t been considered? Some of this work is already happening within the emergent organizational groups touched on above, and it must be given time to continue. The legislature should listen for and support these efforts in order to maximize the chances of resting upon a viable solution.

In this brief white paper, I have adopted a sustainability/resiliency perspective in order to help broaden the narrative and provide possible insight into pathways towards solutions. First, the socio-cultural-economic value of the three campuses in question is far greater to the overall well-being of the state than the extrinsic loss would be to the VSCS as a corporation. The loss of these campuses, in other words, would damage the state far greater than finding a solution for keeping them viable would. Second, the legislative body of Vermont as well as the culture of the state itself have a history of considering the broader context of budgetary needs, as is evidenced by the use of metrics from the GPI in addition to those from the GSP. There is a rich history of non-traditional thinking in Vermont from our stance on slavery, to women’s suffrage, to the Civil War, to gay marriage, and on and on. This kind of thinking is embedded in the culture in and around these three campuses, that can be relied on as a resource for this crisis. Third, support for higher education is a key factor in building or creating a sustainable, resilient, and thriving society. It should be clear given the threat of COVID-19 that Vermont will need creative and courageous citizens to thrive into the future, and a viable and universally accessible higher educational system is necessary for us to get there. Finally, the legislature should adopt a four-stage process for solving this crises: secure $25 million bridge funding for 2020-2021 school year and make moot the chancellor’s proposal; take advantage of the creative and intellectual power of emergent crisis organizations to develop new ideas; write and adopt visionary goals that are not limited to bottom-line finances; lastly allow for the opportunity for the system to transform based on its newly adopted goals.

In closing, the bottom-line financial narrative presented by the chancellor does not adequately describe the crisis we face, so a new perspective must be taken. The sustainability/resilience framework presented briefly here allows us to see new ways forward, is in line with the best traditions of the Vermont State Legislature and can lead us to a solution for this crisis that will not cause institutional destruction, socio-economic trauma, or rampant job loss. Rather, this perspective allows time for us to consider the power of emergent ideas in the face of a crisis and will lead to creative and viable solutions that are as of yet unimagined.

References

• Buckler, C., Creech, H., & Unesco. (2014). Shaping the Future We Want: UN Decade of Education for Sustainable Development (2005-2014) : Final Report. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0023/002301/230171e.pdf 
• Doppelt, B. (2010). Leading change toward sustainability: A change-management guide for business, government and civil society (Updated 2nd ed). Greenleaf. 
• Gall, J. (2012). Systemantics the Systems Bible. General Systemantics Press. 
• NVU. (2020). Northern Vermont University Economic Service Report. 
• Rosa, W. (Ed.). (2017). Transforming Our World: The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. In A New Era in Global Health. Springer Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1891/9780826190123.ap02 
• Solnit, R. (2009). A paradise built in hell: The extraordinary communities that arise in disaster. Penguin Books. 
• Vermont State College Board of Trustees Meeting: 4/20/2020. (2020, April 20). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZhH3D1CNlus 
• Zencey, E. (2018). The 2018 Vermont Genuine Progress Indicator Report.