By Lisa Levine

At the start of the global pandemic some national pundits claimed the crisis would be the great equalizer as it shed light on disparities in health care and economics. Since then, others have more appropriately referred to the crisis as the great amplifier as the gap between those on the top and those on the bottom continues to widen. One of the most impactful ways to close these inequity gaps will be through higher education.

In Nevada, part of the economic recovery will be getting people back to work through workforce development and economic diversification. Higher education will play a critical role in this. The traditional focus on enrolling students out of high school into four-year degree programs has shifted to offering flexible curriculum that is reflective of Nevada’s workforce readiness needs. Community colleges are on the front line when it comes to providing career and technical education certificates that train, reskill, upskill, and help Nevadans connect with employers. Universities fulfill the need for more graduates in STEAM fields that attract innovative industries, like engineering, which is UNLV’s fastest growing college. When it comes to health care infrastructure, colleges and universities play an important role in reducing the physician and nursing shortage, which is why every public college in Nevada offers nursing studies. These shortages are why it is so important to have thriving medical schools in both the northern and southern part of the state.

When it comes to higher education, it truly does take a village of public and private partnerships. We are stronger together, and for the Nevada System of Higher Education (NSHE) to be the best advocate for the institutions it represents, public trust needs to be front and center. Systemic mistrust that goes back many years is an issue that the Board of Regents and NSHE must overcome; how it got to be this way or who is to blame is not what the discussion needs to be focused on. The blame game some Regents are playing is a deflective mechanism. We cannot get stuck looking backward; we need to look forward and move onward.

While it is not surprising that some of the old guard seem concerned about change or are accepting of the status quo, there are so many reasons to be optimistic for the future of higher education in Nevada. By the end of 2020, the Board of Regents will welcome four new members, a new chancellor, and both UNLV and UNR will have new presidents. Together on day one, the Regents and new leadership, will need to foster public trust, strengthen partnerships with community, philanthropic, and business groups, and preserve student success and academic achievement; all in the midst of overcoming health care, economic, and social justice crises. This is no small feat to accomplish but go big or go home should be the new motto and I am confident that together we can get this done.

For inspiration, I am encouraged by the grit and tenacity of Nevada’s students. When I was a freshman at UNLV, first-generation like many students today, I did not know who the regents were and I did not have time to focus on their politics. I had little to no money in my bank account, mounting student debt, and I spent every moment I had doing well in school so I could land a career in something fulfilling and stimulating. Had it not been for accessible and quality education, parents who empowered me, and dedicated mentors, I doubt I would have succeeded. This is not unlike most students enrolled in Nevada’s public colleges and universities who are also juggling multiple jobs, serving as caregivers for their family, or facing fear of discrimination especially for vulnerable and underserved students.

We cannot expect students or the classroom to take the brunt of NSHE’s budget cuts. The Board of Regents have a meeting on Aug. 7 to discuss how to implement an additional $25 million budget shortfall. In addition to the reduction of state monies, colleges and universities are also facing declining revenue from generating areas, like athletics and dormitories, as well as less philanthropic contributions. The board needs to look holistically at how NSHE monies are spent, organizational structure inefficiencies, and we need to do everything we can to continue to invest in higher education.

Here are some areas the board and NSHE ought to consider:

— Students are the number one priority. Their safety and wellbeing are of the utmost concern. We cannot let their academic success suffer due to the economic times. Their success is our success.

—Retaining talent and avoiding layoffs, especially positions critical to student success and academic achievement, are vital.

—More flexibility and autonomy for college and university presidents will allow them to respond to these challenging times better. At NSHE, we trust them enough to have given them the job; now let us trust them enough to do their job.

—Partnerships with K-12 on dual enrollment are very successful. Expanding these partnerships to bridge the digital divide will connect students with regional colleges, and could be a way to share internet connectivity services during the pandemic. 

—Consolidation of campuses is an idle approach to cutting costs and does not save as much as some Regents claim. When discussing consolidation, the Board should look inward at NSHE’s organizational structure for areas of redundancy and inefficiencies. Ask the question of why there are two separate legal departments within the same government agency, which spurs inner conflict. Also look critically at System Computing Services and determine if this in-house model is the most efficient and cost-saving approach, or if relocating it elsewhere makes sense.

—Creating more equity between NSHE institutions requires looking at the funding formula as a whole and consider modernizing it so that the way community colleges and universities are allocated resources is a fairer and more sustainable model. 

—I have heard time and time again there is not enough shared sacrifice in NSHE’s cuts. One way to create more equity in the temporary salary reduction is to consider a scaled approach because the range of salaries is far wider at NSHE than perhaps other state agencies. Someone making $45,000 a year should see less reduction in their pay than someone making $450,000. This could save millions of public dollars that can be invested back into the classroom.

—A hiring freeze has been implemented, but NSHE also needs to put a salary cap on future contracts. Car and housing allowances, as well as host accounts, should be reduced or put on freeze, too.

Higher education can change the trajectory of somebody's life, it can revitalize entire communities, and it is what equips a generation to be empowered to make change. That is what is at stake if the Board of Regents and NSHE do not give this the attention it deserves and get this right. I look forward to working with them toward transformative and equitable change.

Lisa Levine is a member of the Board of Regents.