Questions about University Resource Alignment at UW Oshkosh

 

Open Forum University Resource Alignment (URA) for Academic Programs

April 17

2:00 to 3:00 p.m.
Clow Lecture 104

1. Has the committee reflected on the fact that cuts to the humanities and social sciences happened at Superior, that they are happening at Stevens Point, and that they are coming to Oshkosh? Have they considered how the committee charge is antithetical to the Wisconsin Idea, the idea of a university, and the Strategic Plan of Oshkosh?

What do I mean by antithetical to the Wisconsin Idea? Well, a large part of the Wisconsin Idea was equal access to educational opportunities throughout the state. Paulette Feld, retired Local 579 President, said:

"UW Oshkosh, the third largest UW System school, has traditionally offered a variety of programs, as compared to other UW campuses. All Colleges were equally important in offering education to students who are often 1st generation college students. Having Humanities available, because let's face it, that's what we are talking about, offers these students facets of the world that they may not have had exposure to. I know that was true in my case. Suddenly, that is no longer important. We talk about being civil and understanding all people, no matter what. By eliminating Humanities, by reducing those budgets, we stop offering the tools that make this world better, not just for those in the growth career fields. We are not a Technical College."

2. Regardless of what the original intention of URA and Program Prioritization was stated to be, I see a clear and troubling connection among these things:

• our campus submitting high needs proposals for the 19-21 biennium in these areas: Engineering Tech, College of Nursing, and IT degrees 
• adding a Bachelor of Science in Software Technology 
• when, apparently, we can't afford to support existing programs
• URA determining where it is "fair" to make cuts
• the COLS Dean calling for cuts to social sciences and humanities
• cuts to the social sciences and humanities at Superior and Stevens Point

Do you see how the playbook is reading? If we let them take Oshkosh, they will go 3 for 3 against public higher education in Wisconsin.

3. Has the committee established who is in favor of this ill-considered and poorly-timed plan? We know that Chancellor Leavitt has called for it. We know that Ray Cross and the Board of Regents have called for it. What do they stand to gain? Is it good for our students? Is it good for the future of our communities? No, of course it isn't! Since it isn't, why are we doing it? I can't imagine how doubled class sizes in USP English and social studies could ever be a good thing for recruitment and retention. We have lowered admissions standards to allow for growth. Since we have done that, we need to keep general ed class sizes small, or the students who need the most help will never make it. Helping all of our students succeed should be our number one priority. 

4. Has the committee considered dissenting from completing the charge? Or is everyone just following orders and maybe not thinking?

5. Has the committee asked the question, why are we doing this right now, when we are in the process of restructuring the way we take in revenue, and it might not be necessary in a year or two to do this at all?

6. Would the committee consider stalling the process while the tuition and fee restructuring process is underway?

7. Has the committee consulted with each and every department and program to find out if the information provided to you all is correct and complete? How can you develop a measuring instrument? The data you measure doesn't tell the complete story. A fair measurement requires treating each person and each department as an individual, not as widgets in a machine. We are more than the sum of our numbers.

If we are going to make cuts at Oshkosh, the clear area for cutting is the upper-level administration. The staff are overburdened. We are top-heavy, and that is what has thrown us out of balance. The administrative structure was created in a different budget climate. We can't justify as much highly-paid administration as we currently support.

Frankly, If we are serious about being student-centered, there needs to be a study, not of our academic programs, but of our upper administrative spending, including the compensation we are giving newly-hired administrators to move here. Some numbers need to be posted, so the campus community can get some clarity. It's outrageous.

Until we have numbers that we can see and judge for ourselves, and by we I mean everybody, then we don't have transparency and the URA shouldn't be making any recommendations.

- Heidi Frey, President
   AFSCME Local 579