The Administrative Overgrowth in Education: A Threat to Teaching and Scholarship
It has certainly been interesting to witness the increased attention paid to administrators and their role in education. Over the past few decades, education (and higher education, in particular) has witnessed a significant expansion in administrative roles and numerous specialized offices. This growth, often attributed to increasing regulatory demands and a desire for greater institutional complexity, has led to a larger proportion of university budgets being allocated to administration, rather than direct instruction or research.
How has this impacted teachers in the classroom, or professors in the lecture hall? Administrative bloat can have both direct and indirect impacts on faculty. To start, it can lead to a greater bureaucratic burden, requiring educators to spend more time on paperwork and compliance, rather than teaching and scholarship. It can also divert resources away from academic departments, potentially impacting faculty salaries, research funding, and the availability of teaching assistants and other support. Beyond that, a growing administrative structure implies a more top-down management style that diminishes faculty autonomy and input in academic decision-making. Considering these factors, how might the increasing administrative costs in higher education ultimately affect the quality (and accessibility) of education for students?
In Newsweek, you can read about the efforts of Alex Shieh, a student at Brown University, who is, in fact, advocating for greater transparency in the university's administrative spending. Shieh has created a website, “Bloat@Brown,” to track the growth of administrative positions and offices at the institution. Shieh’s research indicates a substantial increase in non-instructional staff and associated costs, and his concerns that these expenditures are not always clearly justified or aligned with the university's core academic mission. Shieh argues that this “bloat” could be diverting resources from areas that directly benefit students, like financial aid and academic programs.
In a sense, Shieh's concerns reflect the most traditional mission of universities: teaching and the pursuit of knowledge. While some administrative functions are undoubtedly necessary for the smooth operation of a university, the significant expansion of non-academic roles raises questions about priorities. Are these burgeoning administrative structures truly enhancing the educational experience, or are they primarily serving to create a more complex and less efficient institution? Shieh is not the only student to express concern that an overemphasis on administrative staff could lead to a dilution of the faculty's role as the central pillar of the university, along with a shift away from the traditional model of shared governance rooted in academic expertise. The focus, from this viewpoint, should always remain on supporting the faculty, and ensuring that resources are primarily directed towards their teaching and research, which ultimately benefit students through a high-quality academic experience.