FACULTY FOR THE RENEWAL OF PUBLIC EDUCATION: Bruininks appeals Legislature for lighter cuts

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Bruininks appeals Legislature for lighter cuts

"If the governor’s recommended cuts go through, University funding from the state would revert back to its 2006 levels." I'm all for getting more money for the U, but I'm still a bit puzzled about why working with the same budget that we worked with four years ago is causing a total financial meltdown. We haven't had raises for a while. Hiring "pauses" are in effect in many colleges. Where is all the money going? "The University is required to submit a detailed budget report to the Legislature outlining its plans for applying possible cuts by March 15." Stay tuned for that report.
http://www.mndaily.com/2010/02/25/bruininks-appeals-legislature-lighter-cuts

1 comment:

Mr. B.March 4, 2010 at 7:56 PM
This was magnificent political theater

and I followed it on twitter.

e.g.

Rukavina: I am going to have a hard time making any cuts. We've already made terrible cuts in the past... #UMN

Rukavina Does tuition subsidize research mission? Pres B. tuition dollars do not subsidize research mission. #UMN

Admits that state residents more likely to stay if they go to U of M. NOT the policy that is being pursued... #UMN pres B to lege

Need vision for higher education in Minnesota - Pres B - Needs a covenant with state that lays out mutual responsibilities. #UMN

I am not hanging crepe, but we have reached our limits. Deeper cuts cannot be passed on to students... Pres B #UMN

President Bruininks thanks Rep. Rukavina for stimulating him to do something about scholarships at the U of M #UMN

-------------above tweets from wbgleason-------------

President Bruininks claimed that debt at graduation for U students was about average for the BigTen, that simply isn't true:

http://ptable.blogspot.com/2008/06/there-he-goes-again.html

We lead the Big Ten public universities in this category.

He also claimed that tuition was not being to used to support other than educational goals. He stated that the cost of out of state tution - in state + $2000/semester - fully covers the cost of education. If this is so, then in state tuition + $2k/semester per student, should cover educational costs. I am sure that the lege gives more than this. Therefore, there is no reason to keep jacking up tuition unless it is being used for other ambitious aspirations.

Time to come clean, Dr. B? Shortly there will be no other options..

Dr. Bruininks also made the claim that the fire sale on out of state tuition was not leading to more Minnesotans being squeezed out at the UofM TC campus, although he did admit that the percentage of Minnesota residents has gone down.

For more on this interesting topic, please see:

http://ptable.blogspot.com/2009/10/on-maximizing-tuition-revenue-at.html

e.g.

Data from the Wisconsin Provost's Office:

Non-Resident Tuition
BigTen Public Universities
[Academic Planning & Analysis, Office of the Provost, UW-Madison]

Minnesota $15,293

Iowa 22,198
Ohio St. 22,278
Wisconsin 23,063

Purdue 25,118
Indiana 26,160
Illinois 26,650
Penn State 25, 946
Michigan St. 27,781

Michigan 36,163

Now these number seem quite remarkable. Why is it that we are charging so much less than our competitors at Iowa and Wisconsin? If you can't compete on quality, compete on price? And apparently Michigan can get away with charging out of state students more than twice what we do. Something does not make sense here...
ReplyDelete
Replies

Add comment

RECLAIM THE U!

As the administration has come to dominate instead of to serve the university, intellectual and educational values have been displaced by market ones like "efficiency" and "productivity." Faculty and students have been commensurately marginalized in the governance of the institution. We do not say that the university ought to be inefficient or unproductive, but we do demand that values central to scholarly and scientific inquiry and education be restored to the center of the university's endeavors, including (indeed, especially) the management of its finances. Our efforts have a fivefold focus:

1. Governance. The university should be governed by those who carry out its mission of teaching, research, and public service. At present faculty have little meaningful role in making decisions that are handed down from central administration. This state of affairs results from manifold causes, faculty in generations gone by having ceded governance responsibilities to an ever-growing body of administrators. We the faculty must resume our proper role in making, rather than merely reacting to, the decisions that govern our work and our workplace.

2. Transparency in budgeting. The administration should make all information about the university's finances, including expenditures as well as revenue sources, readily available to the public in comprehensible form. At present it is difficult or even impossible to find out how the university spends most of the funds at its disposal, effectively prohibiting people without privileged access and knowledge from scrutinizing the administration's allocation of financial resources. (N.B.: All these resources are public funds once they enter the land-grant institution's coffers.) We recommend an independent audit to open the university's budget to such scrutiny.

3. Accountability for the administration. Every office within central administration should be required to provide to the public an account of what it does, what relation its work bears to the university's mission, and why it costs what it does.

4. Workload. The administration demands greater "productivity" from faculty and staff at the same time that it reduces the resources we need to produce anything and increases the burdens that hamper our work. If resources are withdrawn, our workload must be reduced, not increased. We do not want to do less teaching or less research, rather, we demand that unfunded mandates handed down by the administration be eliminated. Meanwhile, adequate support must be provided to enable efficient and productive work.

5. Integrity of the university. We reject the notion that the university can somehow achieve excellence by cutting programs, faculty positions, and curriculum. All disciplines and all modes of inquiry are interrelated, whether directly or distantly; to excise one element affects others, and ultimately damages the whole. This principle of intellectual integration is encapsulated in the motto of the University of Minnesota, commune vinculum omnibus artibus, which is a phrase derived from the argument of Cicero that the study of poetry is essential to a career in law. To unbind the arts from one another, as if any form of human inquiry can stand in isolation from every other, violates not merely the motto but the principle of the University's existence.

FACULTY FOR THE RENEWAL OF PUBLIC EDUCATION

Saturday, February 27, 2010

Bruininks appeals Legislature for lighter cuts

1 comment:

RECLAIM THE U!

Statcounter

Followers

Blog Archive

Contributors