WISCAPE Blog

Wiscape Banner
shadow

CONTACTING US

Main Office

WISCAPE
School of Education
UW-Madison
353 Education Building
1000 Bascom Mall
MadisonWI  53706-1326

Tel: 608/265-6342

Email: wiscape-info@education.wisc.edu
or by contact form

 

Facebook logo Twitter logo

 

A turning point for the UW Colleges

by Noel Radomski, WISCAPE Director and Associate Researcher | May 27, 2015

During this spring’s biennial budget deliberations on the UW System, most of the public's attention has focused on potential savings from the proposed UW System public authority and how the $380 million budget cuts would be distributed to the doctoral and the regional comprehensive universities. Much less attention, however, has focused on the future of the 13, two-year UW Colleges campuses.

Of all the UW System institutions, the proposed budget cuts would have a disproportionate impact on the UW Colleges, because their reserves are significantly lower than those of other UW institutions -- in fact most have zero reserves. The UW Colleges had already made cuts after the last biennial budget; have been instituting tuition freezes longer than other UW System institutions; and are the most dependent on enrollment, tuition, and state support.

What makes matters worse is that there are three additional forces, imposed by UW System leaders, which could decrease the financial stability and quality of the UW Colleges and lead to a turning point in their history -- perhaps even their demise.

  1. The UW System president and Board of Regents decided not to adopt the changes to the UW System’s general purpose revenue and tuition allocation formula that were recommended in the UW System Funding Allocation Working Group Report (2014). If the “equity variable” had been strengthened in the allocation formula, it could have reduced the cuts allocated to the UW Colleges and other resource-poor UW institutions.
      
  2. Both the UW System president and the UW Colleges/Extension chancellor publicly opposed the budget amendments proposed by Representatives Ed Brooks (R-Reedsburg) and Romain Quinn (R-Rice Lake), which would have exempted the UW Colleges and UW Extension from the biennial budget cuts. If they had supported these legislators’ proposal to hold the UW Colleges harmless, things would be very different.
      
  3. The third catalyst emerged from the UW Colleges Budget Task Force Report (April 10, 2015), which was co-chaired by the vice chancellor for administration and finance and the provost/vice chancellor for academic affairs, as well as UW Colleges/Extension Chancellor Sandeen’s May 15th decision to advance seven regionalization, standardization, and centralization recommendations as outlined in her Budget Decision Memo (May 15, 2015). These decisions arose from a series of reports initiated and advanced by now UW System President Cross with the Huron Consulting Report (November 18, 2013) and the Repositioning Task Force Report (January 21, 2014).
      

Finally, as a colleague explained, all of is taking place in the context of a budget crisis in which state leaders have neglected to have transparent and meaningful conversations about the purpose and goals of higher education in Wisconsin -- and absent a similar conversation within UW System leadership about the value of the UW Colleges mission. 

Proposed UW Colleges Reorganization and Opposition

As part of the proposed $380 million UW System budget cut, UW Colleges/Extension Chancellor Sandeen was instructed to reduce $6.7 million in expenses from the UW Colleges budget. Chancellor Sandeen made seven recommendations that are estimated to save $2.6 million. It is expected that Chancellor Sandeen will announce additional decisions to reduce costs after the governor signs the 2015-2017 biennial budget.

A large number of resolutions have been passed against Chancellor Sandeen's proposed reorganization. View a representative list of groups that have approved resolutions.

The resolutions express significant concerns about the proposed reorganization and other actions, including:

  • A reduction in student enrollment, loss of tuition revenue, reduction in classes, and increased in time-to-degree;
  • The diminution of efficiencies;
  • A reduction in community services and erosion of support from city, business, and county leaders;
  • An adverse impact on campus culture and morale;
  • Diminished services, which could lead to a reduction in student recruitment, enrollment, retention, and graduation or successful transfer;
  • A decrease in shared governance and concomitant poor decision-making;
  • The contradiction to the UW Colleges' mission and reduction in academic service to students;
  • Reducing the campuses' ability to provide real-time and in-person support to students, faculty, and instructional academic staff; and
  • Negatively affecting the ability to hire and retain high-quality faculty, instructional academic staff, and academic and university staff.

Possible Vote of No Confidence

In a May 21, 2015 memo, seven UW Colleges academic department chairs initiated a faculty referendum process, as outlined in the UW Colleges Constitution (Section 2.10), which could lead UW Colleges faculty to pursue a vote of no confidence in Chancellor Sandeen. The fact that UW Colleges faculty leaders are considering pursuing this vote is highly unusual and merits significant public attention. The memo explains that the initiative is based on the following concerns about the seven reorganization decisions:

  • They precede the actual announcement of the budget reductions imposed by the Joint Finance Committee (JFC);
  • They do not accurately reflect the substantial, negative impact on the quality of services to students the proposed changes will inflict;
  • They will impede the campuses’ abilities to provide students with information resources, technology assistance, extracurricular and co-curricular support, advising, financial aid support, academic support, and veterans’ services;
  • They will weaken departments' abilities to mentor faculty, monitor the curriculum, assess professional development and instruction, manage student and instructor concerns, support the development of its members, and adequately reflect the diversity of academic disciplines in higher education;
  • They will have a particularly negative impact on low-income students' abilities to access technology in order to complete their academic responsibilities;
  • They place an unethical and unsustainable workload burden on university and academic staff;
  • They would outsource or minimize critical campus functions that will impact the quality of facilities and the substantial investment by counties in the UW Colleges campuses;
  • They are yet another of many, many cuts campuses have endured –- including to information technology, to sections of courses, to instructional academic staff, to library services and collections, to practically every budget item in UW Colleges campus funding;
  • They not include a proportionate cut to the central offices of UW Colleges administration and, instead, would likely increase the number of Madison-located staff at the expense of campuses;
  • They do not reflect the Colleges' mission, which is to effectively provide the first two years of a liberal arts curriculum to students throughout the state of Wisconsin; and
  • They minimally reflect the values articulated by campuses, by departments, by functional units across the Colleges' campuses, and by other groups, who have provided feedback in good faith to the chancellor and the UW System president.

Little Public Attention Beyond the UW Colleges and Local Communities

Unfortunately, the conditions leading to the UW Colleges faculty decision to initiate a vote of no confidence have been overshadowed by several factors, not least the debate over the ill-fated UW System public authority, which took valuable time and attention away from developing a statewide coalition focused exclusively on reducing the proposed $380 million budget cuts.

Several county boards have passed resolutions decrying the proposed cuts to the UW System budget and the impact it will have on their local campuses. However, most UW Colleges campuses are in smaller communities and smaller media markets, which has contributed to their getting less media attention. On the whole, there has been substantially less public dialogue about the likely impact of the proposed budget cuts on the UW Colleges.

Is There an Alternative?

It appears likely that the UW System will receive significant state budget cuts, and the UW Colleges will not be spared. Unlike the comprehensive and doctoral campuses, the UW Colleges cannot raise tuition revenue by increasing the number of non-resident and international undergraduates and graduate/professional students. Non-resident undergraduate students make up only a tiny percentage of UW Colleges' enrollment. The UW Colleges do not offer graduate programs. City, county, and state elected officials view international students as outside the scope of the UW Colleges mission -- these campuses are a destination for place-bound students to complete their college education at reduced cost in their local communities.

One alternative that is garnering public attention is to eliminate the Madison-based UW Colleges central office and staff and then reconnect UW Colleges campuses with their closest UW System comprehensive regional university or doctoral university -- in short, to establish a regional university system.

Unlike Chancellor Sandeen’s proposal which would generate $2.6 million in savings, a regional university system could generate $6 million in savings -- close to the budget cut stipulated by UW System President Ray Cross. As important, the creation of an integrated and regional university system could lead to more academic program collaboration; increases in UW Colleges enrollment; higher rates of student transfers between the UW Colleges and UW System four-year universities; and new ways of designing and delivering instructional, research, and public service opportunities for students, staff, and faculty.

Next Steps

My hope is that those of you who read this will share it with others, learn more about the issues impacting the UW Colleges, and share your views with the UW Colleges chancellor, UW System president, and the UW System Board of Regents. I hope that the media will help inform the public and elected officials by shining a light on the challenges confronting the UW Colleges and future opportunities in a period of state revenue cuts.

A potential vote of no confidence strongly suggests that the current decisions to advance regionalization, standardization, and centralization to address budget cuts have limited support from within the UW Colleges and their local communities. The reorganization decisions emerged when UW System President Cross served as UW Colleges/Extension chancellor, and many individuals now believe that on this important issue President Cross has a perceived or real conflict of interest and an inability to remain objective. The UW System Board of Regents cannot and should not remain on the sidelines, especially if the UW Colleges faculty referendum passes and there is a vote of no confidence.

The UW Colleges campuses play a critical role in attracting and educating a diverse student base, many of whom work in their local communities, and others who transfer and complete undergraduate degrees or even go on to earn master’s or doctoral degrees. There is more than one path to generate savings while strengthening the roles, quality, and relationships of the UW System's two-year colleges, regional comprehensives, and doctoral universities.

What are your thoughts? Please comment using the form below or email us.

Share this post with friends and colleagues using:

5 comments

Leave a comment
  1. D Jensen
    5-28-2015

    I think you're right in pointing out the hugely negative impact the budget cuts can have on UW Colleges. And sadly, if you're at some of the other UW schools, the cuts could prove even more disastrous. But unfortunately, there's much in here that perpetuates a lot of needless infighting and finger pointing about what went wrong, and who should take the blame.

    You mention that "If they had supported these legislators’ proposal to hold the UW Colleges harmless, things would be very different." I don't believe that for a second. UW Colleges campuses play a vital role in higher ed in our state and in their local communities. But so does Parkside. And Superior. And Green Bay. To get the Regents and legislature to spare UW Colleges the cuts, while sticking a little extra to already hurting schools that are already hurting seems highly unlikely.

    In discussing the no-confidence vote, which to me seems to merit public attention if only because of the remarkable misplaced energy put into it, you fail to mention that while seven chairs have initiated this vote, the other TEN have not signed on. This hardly seems like a popular uprising over her leadership. The frustration at the situation is completely understandable, especially when friends and hardworking colleagues might lose jobs, but the chancellor's likely decisions have been endorsed and recommended for years by multiple groups. Zero viable alternatives have come forward.

    The idea of eliminating or dramatically scaling back a central UW Colleges office may seem appealing to the seven professors pushing for the no-confidence vote, but it fails to take into account that you don’t become more efficient - something that is demanded in times of budget cuts and stagnant revenue - by replicating the same function 13 times or performing the same task 13 separate ways.  And for the suggestion to "reconnect UW Colleges campuses with their closest UW System comprehensive", that may indeed be something to look into over time, but not for the reasons some would hope for. Wouldn't this new regional model consolidate administration (and probably faculty and support staff) in much the same way as what's being proposed by the chancellor? Why would we be so naive to think that UW-Oshkosh or UW-Green Bay would just absorb the added costs of a UW-Fond du Lac or UW-Marinette campus, change nothing, and let them go about their business like they've always done. And this says nothing about maintaining the access mission or the complications regarding county/city support.

    This isn't an easy time for anyone, but I think we need to use our energy in a way that can actually make a difference on a big scale, not drive the institution further apart. 


  2. William Tishler
    5-28-2015
    This blog post reminds me of the 2005 report, "Opportunities for Consolidation of Administration Between UW Colleges and UW-Extension" https://www.wisconsin.edu/news/download/news_documents/2005/february_2005/Read-the-independent-study-of-UW-Extension-and-UW-Colleges.pdf

  3. Gwen Drury
    5-28-2015

    Prescient January 2015 article related to UW Colleges:  

    "Assembly 'Term Papers' Offer Insight Into GOP Lawmakers' Ideas"

    http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/assembly-term-papers-offer-insight-into-gop-lawmakers-ideas/article_3d02d06d-1b12-5efd-bcea-a75a28bd9e95.html


  4. Anon
    5-28-2015
    Spreading the pain to two-year campuses seems like a move meant to ensure that the UW budget cuts aren't limited to only blue districts. How else can UW gain sympathy from the party in charge?

  5. John Poole
    5-28-2015

    I only hope your article gains the widespread coverage it deserves.  You bring out many very valid points and come to a conclusion I suggested to Chancellor Sandeen when she visited the UW-Richland campus in April--and that was to dissolve the UW Colleges central administration and have the campuses return to their roots as "branch campuses" of various baccalaureate campuses.  Of course, she did not give that thought much credibility at all, but it seems to me a logical step.

    I worked on the UW-Richland campus for 42 years until my retirement two years ago.  In fact, I was a student at what was then known as the Wisconsin State University-Platteville, Richland Campus, the very first year of its existence.  My emeritus status allows my continued connection with the campus and it has been extremely disheartening to witness what I'm witnessing now.  I have never seen morale as low as it is.  What's equally devastating is that students are aware of the problems and some are choosing to transfer early.  Clearly, lower enrollment won't help the matter at all, but only make it much worse.

    Many feel Chancellor Sandeen came into her position with an agenda to regionalize the campuses--a move President Cross had endorsed while he was our Chancellor.  She has not listened to the campuses, but has cloistered herself in her central Madison offices and surrounded herself with the 'yes' people that will carry out her deeds.

    Thank you for your research into this matter.


    Leave a comment

    © 2017 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System • Please contact the School of Education External Relations Office with questions, issues or comments about this site.