[mmooss]

> When a university program is not profitable they close the program.

That's moving the goalposts. Universities are not for-profit organizations (with a few exceptions).

By insisting on focusing on 'profit', the enemies of liberal education and liberalism can shut down much of it. Business school is of course profitable, and science has patents. What about the history department?

[codeddesign]

That would be up to the school. After all, it does have a $1.4 billion dollar endowment. (ASU is not struggling at all)

Every university has to decide what is profitable and what is a loss leader. You have to be well rounded to attract students, but also make money.

In this case, the school decided that this studio had less benefit to them than reward. If this studio attracted more students (tuition $$) then it would be a benefit.

People are getting mad at the White House, but in reality the school decided that this studio wasn’t worth keeping.

Just trying to be rational here.

[mmooss]

> make money

> the school decided that this studio had less benefit to them than reward

Again, you are assuming that is a goal of higher education. You're making a circular argument.

> reality the school decided that this studio wasn’t worth keeping.

That's obvious, and possibly because of political pressure.