Use Budget Shortfalls to Clean House

Use Budget Shortfalls to Clean House

In his own, peculiar way, University of Idaho history professor Dale Graden makes a fine case for program elimination. "[W]hat am I just supposed to do, some song and dance every day to entertain 50 students at a time?" Well, no actually, he's supposed to teach history, not entertain anybody.
Graden was complaining about looming budget cuts at the University of Idaho and how previous budget cuts have affected his ability to teach. The liberal arts feel that their nearly 100% reliance upon state funds leaves them more vulnerable to budget reductions.
I'm not entirely clear what Graden means. It's hard to imagine what expenses he incurs while teaching history, unless it's for handouts. But killing trees should be going the way of clay tablets. The University of Idaho is well wired and web pages should be replacing photocopiers anyway.
Students are required to buy their own books and can be asked to purchase their own blue books for exams. And until we invent a time machine and can change the past, history, being historic, really doesn't change much. So history really shouldn't cost all that much to teach. Graden needs to lecture, not dance.
It is true that there are those who attempt to edit and falsify history so that it conforms to their ideologies. And if historians don't have enough money to do that, then I'd say that budget cuts are a good thing.
But if all liberal arts programs are suffering under broad swath budget cuts, then program cuts should be seriously considered. The day may be past when all universities are capable of being all things to all people. Particularly within a statewide system of higher education, it may make far more fiscal sense for certain programs to be offered uniquely at one university within that system.
Too often, in fact I would say almost every time, higher education responds to budget shortfalls by some combination of across the board budget cuts and leaving vacate positions unfilled. Such strategies may pass the fairness and pain reductions test, but they don't pass the leadership test.
It's worth a university's time to examine and reevaluate its mission, and afterwards decide if it is directing its resources toward the fulfillment of that mission. The University of Idaho is a land grant college founded to teach agricultural and engineering. Related fields such as biology, chemistry and physics clearly fit neatly into that mission, establishing the essential didactic foundations. That said, it is in the interest of the student that he not be turned out into the world as a barely literate, narrow-minded Neanderthal. Therefore some resources should be dedicated to fleshing out a properly educated graduate who can function outside of a cubicle or a combine.
Among the questions that should be asked of liberal arts programs are: Is the program essential to producing a well-rounded student? Such departments as English and History should be considered as essential. Some others, well, they simply are not. And if the answer to the first question is, "no," then it should be asked: Is this discipline taught elsewhere within the state's university system? Not every university has a mining or forestry program. Not every university necessarily needs to offer a major in psychology. Indeed, there is little that is more grating to the senses than the know-it-all diagnoses dispensed by someone who took a single introductory psychology class.
And in a time of budget cuts, when essential programs are being trimmed to the bone, does it really make sense for a financially strapped university to keep a Program in Women's Studies, a Program in Latin American Studies, or even a Sociology Department? When core departments like English are threatened, might such fringe disciplines qualify as frivolous extravagances that the university could get along just fine without? If the choice is maintaining both a mediocre history department and a mediocre theatre department, wouldn't it be better to have a fully funded, vibrant history department and allow aspiring thespians to go elsewhere?
Interim UI President Gary Michael certainly has his work cut out for him. But, he also has the advantage of being a short timer. He can clean up the messes, make the necessary changes and get back to his real life. He is uniquely situated to leave UI in a stronger position than he found it.