After nearly a decade of financial strife, media misrepresentation, and structural challenges, the University of the District of Columbia (UDC) received some positive encouragement regarding its future.

The twenty-one-year-old predominately Black university had its accreditation approved by the Commission on Higher Education of the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools after much speculation that UDC might not reopen its doors next fall. Worries about accreditation arose in June 1996, when an $18.2 million deficit forced massive program cuts and layoffs.

On the heels of a Clinton Administration rescue package granting the university nearly $40 million in support, the commission restored UDC's full accreditation late last month.

University officials were pleased with the announcement, noting that the public's general perception of UDC has been, in many cases, mishandled by the media, contributing to its struggle to retain enrollment.

"It's important to note that the only reason warning was given to us in the first place was because the commission was unsure of the financial support base for the school," explained Dr. Beverly Anderson, vice president of academic affairs and the university's provost. "We're pleased because a lot of people were unsure of why our accreditation was coming into question -- it was an uncertainty agitated by [the] media that our academic standing was in question. This gives us a chance to clear the air."

In the midst of Washington, D.C.'s, fiscal crisis and the development of an overseeing body known as the District's Financial Control Board, the campus community as well as the city's citizenry has been concerned in recent years about the plight of the only public university in the nation's capital. When the control board began assuming authority over most of the city's operations late last year, much of the District endured significant cuts in services and programs.

UDC's overall budgeted income from the city had already decreased from $76 million in fiscal 1992 to $43 million in 1995. UDC suffered a $30 million budget hit in 1996 and was again told to cut an additional $16.2 million within twelve months of the first cut. In its attempts to survive, the university laid off faculty and staff and cut programs and services.

"We're going to have to cut off some fingers and toes," said Dr. Reginald Wilson of the university's Board of Trustees last year. "But, the university will be saved."

Additionally, UDC endured an image crisis.

"Print media used the information in a way that distorted the problem," Anderson said. "The slant regarding the warning was taken that our students are not achievers and that the school offered a substandard education. It created a greater strain on enrollment."

In the fall of 1996, enrollment stood at 7,600 and dropped to 6,000 by the spring semester. In comparison, enrollment was at 14,000 in 1980 and dropped to 10,000 by 1995.

Area activists, student leaders, local public servants, and UDC leadership have long insisted that the university is a primary wellspring of opportunity for working and older students. Yet, as recently as June, the control board debated whether to keep the school as a four-year institution. The debate, cuts and restructuring left students and faculty in limbo.

"I felt like I was a kid in the middle of a bad divorce between my parents," said Veronica McDonald, a journalist and 1996 graduate of UDC. "We were all wondering what would happen with our futures. And the worst part was that we knew that our education was quality. It was as if the parents were doing a great job in raising us, but all anybody else saw was fighting."

Mark Thompson of UMOJA, an independent political party with strong roots in UDC, has been fighting for UDC's survival for more than five years.

"Supporting UDC and its future is a matter of what is right for the people of the District and the future of the nation," he said.

Still, the outcry from these sources alone did not seem enough to alter the tumultuous course of UDC. In the eyes of many Washington decision-makers, Howard University is seen as the primary Black school in the District while UDC has been perceived as an "academic stepchild" who is far too needy and not as bright. The average UDC student is twenty-nine years old with a full-time job.

Motivating area leadership and mobilizing broad-based support were the beginning of the turning tide for UDC. In addition to voices that had been stating the case for the school, others come to bear.

"We believe UDC should continue to be a four-year university and that the faculty should have more say in its future," Dr. George E. Holmes chair of coalition committee organized to support UDC and head of Howard's American Association of University Professors said to Black Issues earlier this year. The coalition garnered support from the area's academic community, as well as local and congressional political figures.

Although a number of leaders had already been involved in efforts to support UDC, the collective actions placed pressure on the Clinton Administration, the U.S. House of Representatives, the Senate Appropriations committee, and the Control Board to restore financial support to UDC.

"Much of what is happening started with the federal government," Anderson explained. "But city official and people who UDC can identify with have come out and responded.

"The decision-makers have come out and issued their financial support. Remember that even when we had to make the $16 million cut, we raised over $29 million in grants from the public and private sector," she continued. "Those are sources that never stopped believing in UDC."

COPYRIGHT 1997 Cox, Matthews & Associates

© Copyright 1997 by DiverseEducation.com
© Copyright 2007 by DiverseEducation.com

Top of Page