Published: Friday, April 8, 2011
UW now faces an opportunity for change
Economic forces change things; sometimes for the better, sometimes not. But they change.
There is a point, though, when the pace or the sheer weight of change begins to reshape the character of an institution. We are approaching that point now with the University of Washington.
Changes at the UW aren't a recent phenomenon, and some perspective on them can be helpful as economic pressures force us to decide what we must keep and what we can no longer afford.
William Gerberding served as UW president for 16 years, the longest tenure of any in the history of the school. When we consider what Seattle, the United States, the world, and UW football were like in 1979 when he took office and in 1995 when he left, probably no other UW president had to deal with more change -- with the possible exception of Asa Mercer, who guided the school through its first two years of existence.
One major change involved money. Costs at the UW, just as at every college in the country, began an upward climb that gained momentum each year. By the 1980s, for example, attracting and keeping first-rate faculty members bore a remarkable resemblance to the competition for major league pitchers, NFL quarterbacks or film stars. And it was nearly as expensive.
Toward the end of Gerberding's term, funding for the UW had become an increasingly contentious issue in Olympia as the Legislature saw the school's soaring costs competing with other priorities.
At the time, budget constraints on universities across the country, especially those supported by taxpayer funds, created pressures on individual schools and departments -- physics, drama, business, etc. -- to become more self-sustaining. They had to cultivate their own sources of funds. They had to become more entrepreneurial.
Gerberding was well aware of the risks. These ventures had the potential to shift the focus of the university away from its educational mission. And they would also create a kind of "parental risk" because the university would be held responsible for what the departments did and the risks that they took.
His concerns were not misplaced. Entrepreneurial universities would present more and more challenges to their structure, mission and focus.
The extended period of economic prosperity in the 1990s tended to make us confident that we could absorb the increasing costs of higher education without altering the character of the institutions involved. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, along with the recession and misshapen economic growth that followed, provided recurrent challenges to that idea, but we still held on to it.
Mark Emmert, who became UW president in 2004, took a look at the funding picture after a few budget cycles and said that the school should start charging tuition at levels comparable to first-rate private universities. But we still weren't ready to accept that financial forces were reshaping the UW whether we liked it or not.
Now, though, the recession and its public budget effects are forcing us to confront the reality of change. And we are left but one choice: lead or follow.
The UW is shifting the composition of its admissions to increase the proportion of higher-paying out-of-state and foreign students. The Legislature controls tuition at the UW, so the university can bring in more revenue by increasing the number of students who pay nonresident tuition.
It is an entrepreneurial move, surely, but it opens a hole in the fuselage of its mission to provide higher education to the young people of this state. The funding cuts and tuition increases being proposed in the Legislature will only enlarge that gap between mission and reality.
Universities do lots of things for no reason other than the money they bring in, and with little concern for the effects on the character of the institution. Indenturing their students into credit-earning unpaid internships, for example, brings in cost-free tuition money. Outsourcing teaching responsibilities to a shadow faculty of contract irregulars lowers the cost per tuition dollar.
The budget crisis in Olympia hardly seems an ideal time for anything, but it is the best opportunity we will ever get to decide what we want the University of Washington to be -- and to match that with a financial plan that will allow it to become reality.
It might be possible, for example, that a privatized UW could fulfill its educational mission, if taxpayer subsidies were used instead to underwrite publicly funded scholarships that would allow our state's students to attend schools of their choice.
Whatever the people of Washington decide, at least it will be a decision. That is much better than letting economic forces change our state's leading university -- and simply hoping for the best.
James McCusker is a Bothell economist, educator and consultant. He also writes a monthly column for the Snohomish County Business Journal.
There is a point, though, when the pace or the sheer weight of change begins to reshape the character of an institution. We are approaching that point now with the University of Washington.
Changes at the UW aren't a recent phenomenon, and some perspective on them can be helpful as economic pressures force us to decide what we must keep and what we can no longer afford.
William Gerberding served as UW president for 16 years, the longest tenure of any in the history of the school. When we consider what Seattle, the United States, the world, and UW football were like in 1979 when he took office and in 1995 when he left, probably no other UW president had to deal with more change -- with the possible exception of Asa Mercer, who guided the school through its first two years of existence.
One major change involved money. Costs at the UW, just as at every college in the country, began an upward climb that gained momentum each year. By the 1980s, for example, attracting and keeping first-rate faculty members bore a remarkable resemblance to the competition for major league pitchers, NFL quarterbacks or film stars. And it was nearly as expensive.
Toward the end of Gerberding's term, funding for the UW had become an increasingly contentious issue in Olympia as the Legislature saw the school's soaring costs competing with other priorities.
At the time, budget constraints on universities across the country, especially those supported by taxpayer funds, created pressures on individual schools and departments -- physics, drama, business, etc. -- to become more self-sustaining. They had to cultivate their own sources of funds. They had to become more entrepreneurial.
Gerberding was well aware of the risks. These ventures had the potential to shift the focus of the university away from its educational mission. And they would also create a kind of "parental risk" because the university would be held responsible for what the departments did and the risks that they took.
His concerns were not misplaced. Entrepreneurial universities would present more and more challenges to their structure, mission and focus.
The extended period of economic prosperity in the 1990s tended to make us confident that we could absorb the increasing costs of higher education without altering the character of the institutions involved. The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, along with the recession and misshapen economic growth that followed, provided recurrent challenges to that idea, but we still held on to it.
Mark Emmert, who became UW president in 2004, took a look at the funding picture after a few budget cycles and said that the school should start charging tuition at levels comparable to first-rate private universities. But we still weren't ready to accept that financial forces were reshaping the UW whether we liked it or not.
Now, though, the recession and its public budget effects are forcing us to confront the reality of change. And we are left but one choice: lead or follow.
The UW is shifting the composition of its admissions to increase the proportion of higher-paying out-of-state and foreign students. The Legislature controls tuition at the UW, so the university can bring in more revenue by increasing the number of students who pay nonresident tuition.
It is an entrepreneurial move, surely, but it opens a hole in the fuselage of its mission to provide higher education to the young people of this state. The funding cuts and tuition increases being proposed in the Legislature will only enlarge that gap between mission and reality.
Universities do lots of things for no reason other than the money they bring in, and with little concern for the effects on the character of the institution. Indenturing their students into credit-earning unpaid internships, for example, brings in cost-free tuition money. Outsourcing teaching responsibilities to a shadow faculty of contract irregulars lowers the cost per tuition dollar.
The budget crisis in Olympia hardly seems an ideal time for anything, but it is the best opportunity we will ever get to decide what we want the University of Washington to be -- and to match that with a financial plan that will allow it to become reality.
It might be possible, for example, that a privatized UW could fulfill its educational mission, if taxpayer subsidies were used instead to underwrite publicly funded scholarships that would allow our state's students to attend schools of their choice.
Whatever the people of Washington decide, at least it will be a decision. That is much better than letting economic forces change our state's leading university -- and simply hoping for the best.
James McCusker is a Bothell economist, educator and consultant. He also writes a monthly column for the Snohomish County Business Journal.
Comments
(
