FAU Report – Public Engagement and Graduate Education

Previously, we covered the Future of American University Report regarding commitments, academic civics, research focus, affordability, race relations, and the FAU Forum. This part covers the remaining two topics.

Two sections of the Report address the related areas of how to refocus Cornell in light of a possible era of decreased federal research funding and how to adjust Cornell’s advanced degree programs to best adapt to that environment. In an era when knowledge is expanding rapidly while the size of the professoriate has stopped growing, higher education and research universities must refocus to better serve society.

Public Engagement

Chapter 5 of the Report, “Public Impact and Community Engagement,” calls for a reimagining of Cornell’s mission. Historically, Cornell’s product was divided into teaching, research, and extension, which had an important public impact component since its founding. As society becomes more polarized, decisions about what to teach, what questions to research, and how Cornell engages beyond the campus have become more polarized as well. The entire report repeatedly discusses these tensions, particularly in light of recent changes in the Federal Government’s relationship with higher education. Chapter 5 addresses the difficult challenges that Cornell faces as it struggles with the question of whether Cornell is an isolated Ivy Tower or an institution driven to best serve the public in response to society’s needs.

The Report notes (p. 102):

“[T]he erosion of the public’s trust in higher education … speaks to the visibility of higher education’s contributions to society and to addressing challenges well beyond campus walls. Showcasing, valuing, expanding, and improving public impact and community engagement can help address the significant decline in public trust and the changing relationship with the local, state, and federal governments.”

The Report continues (p.104)

“Cornell is well positioned to contribute to existing efforts across higher education through its integration of knowledge, teaching, and discovery with extensive public impact. As the only land-grant institution in the Ivy League, Cornell is at once a leading private research university and a land-grant institution with a responsibility to serve the people of New York State and beyond. This dual identity is not a contradiction — it is one of Cornell’s greatest strengths. It allows the university to be at the cutting edge of scientific discovery, creative output, and knowledge creation on the one hand and, on the other, to disseminate and translate these advances into tools, policy recommendations, and activities that will benefit the broader public (i.e., “putting knowledge to work,” as described by Cornell Cooperative Extension).”

The Committee then addressed a variety of barriers to greater public impact. It then makes a number of detailed recommendations under headings such as:

• Foster a two-way relationship between universities and the public. 
• Recognize, reward, and expect external public engagement. 
• Increase public impact coordination, integration, and effectiveness across the university.
• Define, conceptualize, and measure impact thoughtfully and robustly.
• Leverage public impact infrastructure to address emerging societal needs, such as navigating the opportunities and challenges posed by AI.
• Create a public impact advisory council to work with and advise leadership. 
• Leverage public impact infrastructure to support communities affected by technological disruption. 

Graduate and Professional Education

Graduate education is being reshaped by both a shift in society’s needs and also Cornell’s recognition of the Graduate Students United – UE as a collective bargaining agent for its Ph.D. students. The Committee discussed a number of “disrupting” factors in graduate education. (p. 125) Graduate degrees represent expertise in a field, and AI will arguably reduce society’s value of expertise. Regarding government funding (p. 126):

“[T]he demise of the longstanding partnership with the federal government has precipitated a sharp decline in doctoral enrollments, imperiling the pipeline of scholars that has driven America’s research apparatus for the last seventy years. Data from fifty-five Association of American Universities member institutions show a 15 percent drop in Ph.D. admissions for fall 2026, following an 11 percent reduction in 2025, a decline driven primarily by funding uncertainty not strategic reallocation of resources.”

Further, the Trump Administration has made visas difficult for international students (many of whom are graduate students), and has limited federal loans for graduate students. Finally, the percentage of Ph.D. that go into academia has dropped from 52% in 1992 to 33% in 2022. Landing a tenure-track faculty job “can no longer serve as a measure of a successful Ph.D.” (p. 130)

The key feature of a Ph.D. degree is to prepare a dissertation or capstone project that demonstrates that the student can research and write academic papers independently. If only one third of Ph.D. students actually go into academia, a traditional dissertation may not be the best vehicle for students who do not continue as professors. So, the Committee questions whether dissertations are the best measure of Ph.D. students in the future. If a Ph.D. student wants to leave Cornell without completing a dissertation, what “off-ramps” are available to give that student marketable credentials to reflect the student’s work to that point?

The report notes, “Shrinking graduate cohorts create shortages in the classroom, laboratory, and beyond that have not been anticipated.” There is no ready substitute for the graduate students to teach the First Year Writing Seminars.

The Committee recommends, “Establish a portfolio of stackable microcredentials in public communication, teaching, public impact, and applied AI fluency, with oral communication, ethics, and research design as candidates for future expansion given how often they already appear as stated learning outcomes across Cornell’s graduate fields.” (p. 140)

Currently, Cornell has separate administrative units for its professional schools and an umbrella Graduate School for all Ph.D. programs that share faculty with undergraduate units. The Committee debated replacing this with a new “College of Advanced Study.” The Committee’s recommendation punts the question into the future:

“Conduct a full strategic and financial review of the costs and benefits of greater centralization across advanced study, the Graduate School, the School of Continuing Education, eCornell, master’s programs, and professional schools, including the possibility of unifying them in a school or college of advanced study.” (p. 143)

Master’s degree programs

The number of Cornell master’s degrees has increased, but those programs lack the necessary coordination to assure quality and to avoid duplication.

The Committee disagrees on the question, “Should master’s programs be expanded to respond to the American workforce’s continual need for reskilling and reinvention, or do they need to be restrained following two decades of explosive growth?” Some foresee the workforce returning to Cornell to get new master’s degrees, while others see Cornell already at an optimum size for those degree programs. The Committee also said, “Online and hybrid degree programs, especially at the master’s level, are a fast-growing feature of the national graduate education market and yet remain largely invisible to most of the Cornell community.”

Regarding lifelong learning, the Committee recommends studying a subscription model for Cornell’s efforts to promote lifelong learning. This might relate to various advanced degrees as well as programs such as eCornell or the Cornell Adult University.

Recommended “Core Principles”

The Committee recommends six ‘core principles” to guide graduate education in the future:

• Retain a commitment to scholarly independence.
• Provide a barometer of public needs: “While undergraduate education trains students in the broad skills of citizenship and their application to a wide array of issues, post-baccalaureate education is the arena where the university responds to wider societal calls for expertise.”
• Cultivate judgment 
• Renew the university’s truly global vision, at home and abroad.
• Build thick relationships with alumni.
• Commit to lifelong learning 

The Committee operated with logistical and financial support from the Provost’s Office. However, neither President Kotlikoff nor Provost Bala has publicly endorsed all of their recommendations, leaving each member of the Cornell community free to debate any and all of these thought-provoking issues.

The Report is already prompting widespread discussion, and the Cornell Review will follow these ideas as they are debated.