Time Is Now Our Most Important Asset
Posted May 23, 2025
This article was originally published in Trusteeship magazine’s May/June 2025 issue. Read with an account online
It seems higher education has been on the brink of disaster since the University of Bologna was founded in 1088. This is at least the historical narrative presented to us. In one sense this is true. Whatever form it has taken, in whatever part of the world identified, and through whatever time period defined, the enterprise has, at times, struggled.
In another sense this is not true based on the lived experience of institutions across the long arc of time. Enduring periods of plenty and scarcity, amidst societal turmoil and calm, and with an ever-expanding body of knowledge, higher education has coped with change by reinterpreting and readapting. It’s not always an orderly affair. Controversies abound and conflict arises as the demand for change is declared. The process by which change occurs, however, is recursive, incremental, and episodic.
For many, 2025 may feel like the national higher education enterprise is about to be fundamentally redefined. I would argue despite the intensity of the rhetoric, the change process ahead will, in the end, be peripheral to the core of our work: teaching students, engaging in research, and serving our communities. The alterations may indeed be consequential, even frustrating, in certain aspects of our work. We will be very likely doing some things differently. Yet, whatever program and policy adjustments endure through this immediate period of tumult, the need for human learning persists and our response will seek to accommodate the emerging needs and interests of our institutions in the context of these evolving conditions. Such efforts are not always timely and sometimes miss the mark. But we work with what we have, as imperfect as it may be in the moment. In time, the innovating and conserving energies of the academic community lead to evolving change. Through all this history there remains one important reality: we are still here.
Across the long arc of time, the postsecondary universe has changed immensely, but not in the way many stakeholders prefer. Change occurs through assimilation over long periods of time, which is both a strength and weakness. Its strength is found in the reassurance of reliability and durability; its weakness is found in a slavishness to conformity and conventional wisdom. The paradox of higher education is that innovation and compliance are joined at the hip. Through time, new ideas, which lead to novel practices, eventually become rigid patterns leading to hardened expectations adopted by myriad organizations and associations comprising the vast postsecondary universe. Change in the college and university context is responsive to many competing interests in society but is governed by an invisible hand collectively manipulated over long periods of time.
The number of external entities staking a claim on the policies and processes of higher education is breathtaking. The list includes categories such as federal, state, and local governments involving an untold number of agencies, offices, departments, and jurisdictions seeking to shape and define the work of educators through an array of legal, regulatory, policy, and financial frameworks. Regional organizations and compacts designed to coordinate cross-state activities add to this mix. Dozens of accreditors, both regional and professional, have standards to be applied at the institutional level, each of their own design and purpose. Institutional, academic, and professional associations in the postsecondary landscape abound and seek to establish and maintain best practices. Foundations look to influence the direction of higher education by way of their philanthropy. Athletics associations set rules and boundaries with consequences for institutional operations. Religious affiliations and other defining relationships set expectations for how an institution will conduct itself. Together, these external entities represent hundreds, perhaps thousands, of points of reconciliation for colleges and universities. It can only be described as a spaghetti chart.
The combined content presented by these entities is encyclopedic in scope and completely inaccessible for the uninitiated. It’s a culture in which jargon is a native language and acronyms abound. Most importantly, it’s a universe of activity where conformity and convention combine to provide the force of gravity that holds it all together. This is a self-referential enterprise contained within a closed intellectual universe. There is limited tolerance for anything that changes the status quo too quickly or too comprehensively. The system is not in anyone’s control and moves in a stimulus-response pattern. An emergent idea is vetted unpredictably through a meandering path of interactions and communications. Some of these are formal; many are informal. Occasionally something seemingly new surfaces, but it is rarely new. It tends to be refreshed jargon repackaged for a new generation with a sprinkle of new technology added, and almost always with a new acronym. An innovation is declared to be both new and profound. The problem, as the adage reminds us, is that “what is new is not profound and what is profound is not new.”
Critics of this perspective suggest it is just cynicism. To the contrary, I find hope in the realization there are immense virtues in the national enterprise of higher education. Despite its many vices, it is notably durable. It is designed to be built over generations, allow for gradual development and last a very long time. It never quite feels like it’s done.
“Whatever happens, we should remember the national higher education enterprise predates most, if not all, of these governing structures.”
Letting go of the eye-rolling lament regarding these conditions is the first step forward. The vast “system” of the postsecondary universe is not going to suddenly be revised despite protests regarding its recalcitrance and inefficiency. If anything, it will become more complex through time, reflecting the increasing complexity of society. It’s enough to seek incremental change. Even with a gradual approach, however, it’s easy to get lost in a system of this scale given its complexity. The tendency of actors in this enterprise is to focus on the moving parts and tinker with the mechanisms by which they are manipulated. This practice results in a lot of activity but produces little in the way of meaningful improvement.
A better focus would be on studying antecedents to the present conditions, the foundational elements that make them unyielding, and the fundamental characteristics of design. From there it is possible to change the condition through time by assimilation. The patient discipline required to treat the underlying condition rather than the symptoms begins with the acknowledgment that pursuing the initiative intended will take time. Otherwise, the tyranny of the urgent intensifies the exasperation of innovators seeking change.
Will the U.S. Department of Education cease to exist? Perhaps. Will regional accreditation return to being a voluntary association of institutions seeking to ensure educational quality? That might be a good thing. Will states need to play a bigger role in the higher education landscape? Probably, which many would see as a move to a patchwork design. Will the Higher Education Act, last reauthorized in 2008 and expired in 2013, reemerge in a new form? Maybe.
Whatever happens, we should remember the national higher education enterprise predates most, if not all, of these governing structures. Some changes coming our way are inevitable and time is best devoted to cooperating with the inevitability of change. Focus time and energy on shaping its emerging patterns through assimilation. It will be a far more effective strategy and serve our institutions well across the arc of time.
About the Author
I'm the lucky individual who carries the title, 21st president of Central College in Pella, Iowa. Passionate about higher education and the issues facing it and the world today, I hope to invoke an engaging conversation with all who are ready to dig in, make a difference and build for the future. Share your thoughts. I'm listening and interested.