The House budget includes a provision that would cap enrollment growth in the UNC schools. A story in today's N&O outlines the way it would happen: http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/05/29/505976/state-may-cap-uncs-growth.html
The idea could have merit, although not so much for the budget saving reasons this bill anticipates. Faculty have seen a long and steady decline in student preparation for work at the university level. Limiting access to only those students who come to the process with an appropriate educational background, the willingness and the drive to work, and holding students accountable for their education would significantly improve the academic environment on our campuses. We could, in such a scenario, get away from the idea of college as an extended period of adolescence where parents and students incur significant debt while the educational focus often gets lost.
Similarly, university level education is not the right match for every student and such limitations might assist in guiding people into careers and fields more suited to their skills and temperament. Moreover, we might actually be able to think about taking away the "professionalization" of disciplines where a specific degree is an entree to a given job and work again to encourage employers to hire people who can write, think, and create instead of simply putting people in place because they hold a given credential. More flexibility in employment could give our economy a real boost by bringing innovation to the fore.
BUT.......we must be careful. Some of the best performers may not look like the ideal student at the outset of a college experience and to deny them entrance may mean they get lost to a world of possibilities. Additionally, unequal distribution of resources and opportunities means that not all students have the same shot at preparation and we do not want to perpetuate discrimination. And we must remember that North Carolina constitutionally mandates access to affordable higher education. We know an educated population is key to economic recovery and development and to cut ourselves down at this important moment may do us great long-term damage.
What we should be thinking about is how we fund so many other things at our universities that may not be as necessary to our students and their classrooms. Must we really provide all the amenities we currently offer in order to be competitive for students? Or can we pare down what we do to the most basic functions? And keep the focus on getting students into the classroom and demanding that they do the work that the people of North Carolina support?
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Thursday, May 27, 2010
A New Statement on The House Budget
President Erskine Bowles today released the following annoucement on the House Budget and what employees of the UNC system should note about it. See in particular the concerns with stemming the access to education in our system. Please keep these concerns in mind when you contact your legislators.
UNC President Erskine Bowles today issued the following statement on the draft 2010-11 state budget released today by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Education:
The draft budget approved today by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Education presents an enormous challenge for the University, and more importantly, for our students. New cuts proposed for the University exceed $175 million, significantly higher than those proposed by either the Governor ($104 million) or the Senate ($54 million). These cuts are in addition to $50.6 million of cuts already incorporated in the 2010-11 budget during the last legislative session. If this budget were adopted by the full General Assembly, these cuts -- now in excess of $225 million in a single year -- would lead to the loss of 1,700 positions across the University. Fully understanding the impacts of these reductions will take some time; in all of our previous analyses, we never imagined that reductions would reach this level.
The House budget does allow the University to retain $34.8 million of receipts generated from the tuition increases. Additionally the budget provides enrollment funding for new students of $5.6 million. In response to the Board’s request for $34.9 million for need-based financial aid, the budget provides only $12 million. Financial aid is critically important for needy students and both the Governor and the Senate had proposed to fully fund the Board’s request. In addition, the House budget contains a special provision that caps the University’s enrollment growth in 2011-12 to 1%, denying qualified students access to the knowledge and skills they need to compete for jobs.
We clearly have an enormous challenge ahead of us as we try to improve this budget, both as it advances through the House and while it is under consideration by the conferees. This level of cuts would force us to reduce the numbers of students that we can accept on our campuses. Our current students would find themselves in far larger classes and would find that courses they need for graduation are no longer offered or are only offered sporadically. In the long term, this budget would have significant adverse effects on the State’s economy and the prosperity of all North Carolinians. We must have an educated workforce to attract the jobs of the future in a knowledge-based global economy.
UNC President Erskine Bowles today issued the following statement on the draft 2010-11 state budget released today by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Education:
The draft budget approved today by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Education presents an enormous challenge for the University, and more importantly, for our students. New cuts proposed for the University exceed $175 million, significantly higher than those proposed by either the Governor ($104 million) or the Senate ($54 million). These cuts are in addition to $50.6 million of cuts already incorporated in the 2010-11 budget during the last legislative session. If this budget were adopted by the full General Assembly, these cuts -- now in excess of $225 million in a single year -- would lead to the loss of 1,700 positions across the University. Fully understanding the impacts of these reductions will take some time; in all of our previous analyses, we never imagined that reductions would reach this level.
The House budget does allow the University to retain $34.8 million of receipts generated from the tuition increases. Additionally the budget provides enrollment funding for new students of $5.6 million. In response to the Board’s request for $34.9 million for need-based financial aid, the budget provides only $12 million. Financial aid is critically important for needy students and both the Governor and the Senate had proposed to fully fund the Board’s request. In addition, the House budget contains a special provision that caps the University’s enrollment growth in 2011-12 to 1%, denying qualified students access to the knowledge and skills they need to compete for jobs.
We clearly have an enormous challenge ahead of us as we try to improve this budget, both as it advances through the House and while it is under consideration by the conferees. This level of cuts would force us to reduce the numbers of students that we can accept on our campuses. Our current students would find themselves in far larger classes and would find that courses they need for graduation are no longer offered or are only offered sporadically. In the long term, this budget would have significant adverse effects on the State’s economy and the prosperity of all North Carolinians. We must have an educated workforce to attract the jobs of the future in a knowledge-based global economy.
Monday, May 24, 2010
Budget Woes and Worries
Here we are in May waiting to see what will happen with the budget for the upcoming fiscal year. The Governor has put out her budget. The Senate version passed last week. And the House is working on their take.
We have worries as the University of North Carolina about what may come and how many cuts we need to face.
But the problems are far bigger than this year.
North Carolina is now on year 2 of a two-year budget cycle. That means we are simply trying to make ends meet. The lawmakers then all get to go home and run for reelection.
But we are not doing the planning for what is looming out there. This AP story says it best:
Published Sun, May 23, 2010 11:28 AM
Modified Sun, May 23, 2010 11:28 AM
2010 NC budget debate brings 2011 into view
RALEIGH, N.C. -- Republicans complained during Senate debate last week over the chamber's $19 billion budget for next year that Democrats haven't prepared North Carolina state government for the fiscal woes facing the state in 2011.
That's when lawmakers won't have more than $1.6 billion in federal stimulus funds currently used to fill holes for increasing Medicaid costs, the public schools and universities. Temporary income and sales tax increases generating $1.3 billion annually also are set to expire. And pent-up demands from the state employee pension funds and health insurance will have to be resolved.
"This budget total ignores the $3-plus billion cliff the state is about to go over in the next fiscal year," Senate Minority Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, said last week on the day the bill passed largely along party lines.
Democrats acknowledge the trouble ahead but argue they're cutting spending and making tough choices so the state can jump out of the blocks as the economy recovers - helping tax collections in 2011 rebound and partially fix the problem.
"I believe this is the budget that we need for this day and time," said Sen. Linda Garrou, D-Forsyth, the Senate's chief budget-writer.
But with interest groups howling about a second year of painful cuts and voters looking for someone to blame this November, Democrats are choosing political survival over instituting sweeping changes in the "short" session. Any dramatic changes will wait until next year, when they hope to still have the majority in the chambers and perhaps get a little more stimulus money from Capitol Hill.
Republicans are "absolutely right, it's going to be worse next time, and I do wish that we could do more," said Rep. Jim Crawford, D-Granville, co-chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, which will offer its version in two weeks, but "we're not going to cut everybody off in an election year."
The partisan budget rhetoric is similar to discussions during last year's session. Democrats said they're closing large budget gaps in part through stimulus money and spending cuts. They also approved tax increases in 2009 that will expire in 2011 to make up the rest. Republicans countered the true gaps were much lower and didn't require higher taxes.
This year, Democrats put the gap at between $800 million and $1 billion. The Senate budget cut the spending plan already approved to start July 1 by another 3 percent. But Republicans argued the $19 billion plan actually raises spending by more than $400 million compared to what Gov. Beverly Perdue actually will spend in the year ending June 30 because she delayed spending to have enough cash to pay the state's bills.
Members of both parties agree about next year's budget gap - it will probably be $3 billion unless the economy roars back to life soon. They differ about just what they can do to prepare for it.
Crawford said there's very little the General Assembly can do beyond refusing to expand budget items that aren't part of entitlement programs like Medicaid and protect public education. Berger said freezing spending at the current year's levels would possibly save another $450 million. But Republicans presented only two amendments during last week's Senate budget debate and haven't rolled out a plan on how they would do things differently.
"It's a little bit disingenuous of them to say that we could spend at last year's levels," said Chris Fitzsimon, executive director of the liberal political watchdog group NC Policy Watch. "Would they rather lay off thousands of teachers to prepare for next year?"
Democrats don't feel the need to make rash decisions because the state retained the top credit rating of the three major bond-rating agencies - a sign of fiscal stability - which they attribute to prudent fiscal decisions in 2009.
Still, they haven't exactly been willing to make bold decisions that say would put the state's tax base on firmer footing in the years ahead.
They've punted for a decade on overhauling the tax system, which would have probably narrowed the revenue shortfall by tapping into the growing service economy. They've also declined to reduce the scope of the state's $10 billion Medicaid program by eliminating optional services other states don't provide.
Democrats appear willing to wait to until 2011 before deciding on difficult choices, said John Hood with the conservative John Locke Foundation: "It is a reasonable argument to make that the Democrats are simply waiting until next year to raise taxes and wait for a partial (federal) bailout."
But Crawford said Republican complaints are partially selfish, too - the GOP doesn't want a $3 billion problem on its hands if it wins a majority in the House or Senate. The problem will be "painful for whoever is going to have it," he said.
Now, back to me. We need to be working NOW to come up with solutions for what we will do on our campuses to meet the budget demands of the upcoming two-year cycle. We cannot simply hope for an economic miracle.
It is time to be thinking about what the universities do and how. We will need to revision what education means and how we deliver on it. If we do not take the lead, we will lose some of our most precious resources without a fight.
We have worries as the University of North Carolina about what may come and how many cuts we need to face.
But the problems are far bigger than this year.
North Carolina is now on year 2 of a two-year budget cycle. That means we are simply trying to make ends meet. The lawmakers then all get to go home and run for reelection.
But we are not doing the planning for what is looming out there. This AP story says it best:
Published Sun, May 23, 2010 11:28 AM
Modified Sun, May 23, 2010 11:28 AM
2010 NC budget debate brings 2011 into view
RALEIGH, N.C. -- Republicans complained during Senate debate last week over the chamber's $19 billion budget for next year that Democrats haven't prepared North Carolina state government for the fiscal woes facing the state in 2011.
That's when lawmakers won't have more than $1.6 billion in federal stimulus funds currently used to fill holes for increasing Medicaid costs, the public schools and universities. Temporary income and sales tax increases generating $1.3 billion annually also are set to expire. And pent-up demands from the state employee pension funds and health insurance will have to be resolved.
"This budget total ignores the $3-plus billion cliff the state is about to go over in the next fiscal year," Senate Minority Leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, said last week on the day the bill passed largely along party lines.
Democrats acknowledge the trouble ahead but argue they're cutting spending and making tough choices so the state can jump out of the blocks as the economy recovers - helping tax collections in 2011 rebound and partially fix the problem.
"I believe this is the budget that we need for this day and time," said Sen. Linda Garrou, D-Forsyth, the Senate's chief budget-writer.
But with interest groups howling about a second year of painful cuts and voters looking for someone to blame this November, Democrats are choosing political survival over instituting sweeping changes in the "short" session. Any dramatic changes will wait until next year, when they hope to still have the majority in the chambers and perhaps get a little more stimulus money from Capitol Hill.
Republicans are "absolutely right, it's going to be worse next time, and I do wish that we could do more," said Rep. Jim Crawford, D-Granville, co-chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, which will offer its version in two weeks, but "we're not going to cut everybody off in an election year."
The partisan budget rhetoric is similar to discussions during last year's session. Democrats said they're closing large budget gaps in part through stimulus money and spending cuts. They also approved tax increases in 2009 that will expire in 2011 to make up the rest. Republicans countered the true gaps were much lower and didn't require higher taxes.
This year, Democrats put the gap at between $800 million and $1 billion. The Senate budget cut the spending plan already approved to start July 1 by another 3 percent. But Republicans argued the $19 billion plan actually raises spending by more than $400 million compared to what Gov. Beverly Perdue actually will spend in the year ending June 30 because she delayed spending to have enough cash to pay the state's bills.
Members of both parties agree about next year's budget gap - it will probably be $3 billion unless the economy roars back to life soon. They differ about just what they can do to prepare for it.
Crawford said there's very little the General Assembly can do beyond refusing to expand budget items that aren't part of entitlement programs like Medicaid and protect public education. Berger said freezing spending at the current year's levels would possibly save another $450 million. But Republicans presented only two amendments during last week's Senate budget debate and haven't rolled out a plan on how they would do things differently.
"It's a little bit disingenuous of them to say that we could spend at last year's levels," said Chris Fitzsimon, executive director of the liberal political watchdog group NC Policy Watch. "Would they rather lay off thousands of teachers to prepare for next year?"
Democrats don't feel the need to make rash decisions because the state retained the top credit rating of the three major bond-rating agencies - a sign of fiscal stability - which they attribute to prudent fiscal decisions in 2009.
Still, they haven't exactly been willing to make bold decisions that say would put the state's tax base on firmer footing in the years ahead.
They've punted for a decade on overhauling the tax system, which would have probably narrowed the revenue shortfall by tapping into the growing service economy. They've also declined to reduce the scope of the state's $10 billion Medicaid program by eliminating optional services other states don't provide.
Democrats appear willing to wait to until 2011 before deciding on difficult choices, said John Hood with the conservative John Locke Foundation: "It is a reasonable argument to make that the Democrats are simply waiting until next year to raise taxes and wait for a partial (federal) bailout."
But Crawford said Republican complaints are partially selfish, too - the GOP doesn't want a $3 billion problem on its hands if it wins a majority in the House or Senate. The problem will be "painful for whoever is going to have it," he said.
Now, back to me. We need to be working NOW to come up with solutions for what we will do on our campuses to meet the budget demands of the upcoming two-year cycle. We cannot simply hope for an economic miracle.
It is time to be thinking about what the universities do and how. We will need to revision what education means and how we deliver on it. If we do not take the lead, we will lose some of our most precious resources without a fight.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Shared Governance
Doing the business of a university requires us to think differently in this day and time. Many faculty complain about the rising cadre of administrators on campus and the increased application of business models in an academic environment. While sometimes motivated by fear of altering the status quo, such critiques also have real resonance. Work that faculty once accomplished via "service" now gets done professionally and by people often pulling down significant salaries. And faculty, tenured or tenure-track, focus instead on scholarship/research or teaching while non-tenured faculty increase in numbers and handle much of the undergraduate lower level teaching and do not hold any service expectations.
Shared governance suffers. Administrators often do not include faculty in discussions of policy and many faculty show great reluctance to stand for election to any office or serve on the committees required to make shared governance a reality. Moreover, when on 9-month contracts, faculty often miss out on a good deal of what happens in terms of setting policies simply by not being on a campus.
Here in North Carolina, the General Assembly convened last week and will ideally produce a budget before June 30th. That schedule means most faculty have scattered while decisions that will have a direct impact on our future are being made. Potential cuts and furloughs, for instance, are all on the table. And where are the bodies that should be helping shape how we think about these items? Scattered.
If we want to have a voice on our campuses, we need to open lines of communication with top leadership and create new patterns of interaction. We must show ourselves to be capable partners and creative thinkers in meeting the challenges. That means education in how our systems work and why things are done as they are so that we can speak directly to the issues without needing to be "schooled." We must raise our junior colleagues into the mindset that service matters. And we need to generate structures to work on these issues year round.
Shared governance requires work and presence. If we leave the arena, we cannot participate meaningfully.
Shared governance suffers. Administrators often do not include faculty in discussions of policy and many faculty show great reluctance to stand for election to any office or serve on the committees required to make shared governance a reality. Moreover, when on 9-month contracts, faculty often miss out on a good deal of what happens in terms of setting policies simply by not being on a campus.
Here in North Carolina, the General Assembly convened last week and will ideally produce a budget before June 30th. That schedule means most faculty have scattered while decisions that will have a direct impact on our future are being made. Potential cuts and furloughs, for instance, are all on the table. And where are the bodies that should be helping shape how we think about these items? Scattered.
If we want to have a voice on our campuses, we need to open lines of communication with top leadership and create new patterns of interaction. We must show ourselves to be capable partners and creative thinkers in meeting the challenges. That means education in how our systems work and why things are done as they are so that we can speak directly to the issues without needing to be "schooled." We must raise our junior colleagues into the mindset that service matters. And we need to generate structures to work on these issues year round.
Shared governance requires work and presence. If we leave the arena, we cannot participate meaningfully.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)