Every four years, as the nation focuses on a presidential election, the College plays out its own version of "politics" with "Cedar What." Faculty candidates are chosen, full campaigns are staged, and a closing election convention is held. favorable to the college, the greatest value of the report was the examining team's careful analysis of what they considered the strengths and weaknesses of the institution. The college was commended for having a strong sense of mission and a dedicated staff who were "interested in students ... supportive of the college ... and appreciate the mission."20 The college was also commended for such things as their planning process, valid institutional purposes, the academic preparation of the faculty, the computer system, well-staffed and well-organized student services, buildings, equipment, maintenance, and intramural and intercollegiate athletics. The committee was favorably impressed by budgeting procedures and controls as well. The committee listed several areas of concern. The majority of these could be summarized under three headings: first, a continuing need for institution-wide planning, with a particular emphasis on "academic goals and objectives"; second, space - both quantity and quality - in order to carry out the many activities of the academic community; third, finances - in order to provide the necessary space, adequate library support, an all-college placement service, more adequate offices, and an increased endowment. The committee urged the college to give gift income a "high priority in the development program." They expressed concern over the high dependency upon student tuition and fees. 2t The North Central evaluation provided a challenge for the Cedarville community. While everyone took great satisfaction in the many positive things that had been accomplished, all recognized there was room for further growth. The North Central accrediting body reaffirmed Cedarville's accreditation in 1980 and scheduled the next review for 1987. In the intervening years, under the direction of Paul Dixon and the administrative team, Cedarville College carefully examined its role in the world of Christian education. In the process, the institution created a unique niche which has become increasingly important in light of the fact that the United States has entered what has been described as "the ice age of higher education." The pool of college– age young people peaked in 1979 and has been declining dramatically each year since. This process will continue until the mid-1990s. Already many institutions of higher education have faced serious problems. As a result, faculty members were released and programs cut as private institutions struggled to survive. State-supported schools offered an inexpensive alternative, usually very close to a student's home. For a private college to flourish in the 1980s required careful planning, attention to mission, and well-focused programs. The key to Cedarville's success was in finding that unique niche that enabled it to be on the cutting edge of Christian higher education. 1. James T. Jeremiah to Board of Trustees, December 29, 1976. 2. Don Tyler, Taped Reflections, October 1985. 3. James T. Jeremiah, personal interview, August 14, 1986. 4. Don Tyler, Taped Reflections, October 1986. 5. Paul Dixon, personal interview, February 3, 1986. 6. Paul Dixon, personal interview, August 6, 1986. 7. Don Tyler, Taped Reflections, October 1985. 8. Paul Dixon, personal interview, August 6, 1986. 9. James T. Jeremiah, personal interview, August 14, 1986. 10. Paul Dixon, personal interview, August 6, 1986. 11. Kenneth H. St. Clair, personal interview, August 20, 1986. 12. Paul Dixon, personal interview, August 6, 1986. 13. James T. Jeremiah, personal interview, August 6. 1986. 14. Paul Dixon, President's Report to the Board of Trustees, 1978-79. 15. James T. Jeremiah, personal interview, August 14, 1986. The statistics on Jeremiah's preaching were based upon his report to the trustees for 1978-79. 16. Paul Dixon, persona} interview, August 6, 1986. 17. Paul Dixon, personal interview, February 3, 1986. 18. Ibid. 19. North Central Evaluation Team, Report of a Visit to Cedarville College, April 20-23, p. 21 20. Ibid. 21. Ibid. Chapter XVIII/153