Funding for General Education
I am writing today to clarify the issue of funding for general education.
Reports have reached my office characterizing the management of this funding in ways that are inaccurate and inconsistent with my intentions. It has been seen as a simple “pull back” or reduction in funding; I have heard rumors that I have placed restrictions on lecturers teaching upper-division courses, or that I have placed other types of restrictions on the use of general education funds.
These rumors are inaccurate, and I want to take the opportunity to explain what I have actually done. First, I am placing the decision-making about the courses that must be filled where it belongs: at the college and department level. Second, the provost’s office is not keeping any of the funds allocated for general education; it is all distributed to the colleges to, in turn, distribute to the academic departments.
For the current year I used the 05-06 recurring budget, which was the budget I inherited when I became provost. To this budget I added 2% for the salary increase for 06-07 and another 5% for 07-08. The new base budget is substantially larger than the 05-06 base budget and should be able to accommodate everything taught in 05-06. Since some lecturers will be hired at the same level as in 05-06 and some classes of employees did not receive the 2% and the 5% increase, the budget actually possesses more instructional potential than the budget from two years ago.
I then decided that I must make certain that certain courses are fully funded, courses that I would characterize as basic or essential skill courses: Written Communication (taught mostly in the English Department), Oral Communication (taught mostly in Communication Studies), and QR (taught mostly in the Mathematics Department). I added funding for the 80 or so additional students we admitted this fall. I targeted these courses for full funding since first-year students should enroll in these courses in their initial year, and since there are few alternatives available to them outside of the courses taught in English, Communication Studies, and Mathematics, respectively.
By contrast there are multiple alternatives for completing the remaining general education course requirements, and thus my office has returned the decision-making on the funding and offering of these courses to the individual colleges. The remaining money in the general education fund (after covering basic skills courses centrally) was distributed to the colleges in the proportion in which they had taught courses funded by general education funds over the past three years.
I made no judgment concerning the legitimacy of any course or courses, or whether funding was appropriate from monies dedicated to general education. Colleges were given instructions to maintain their level of support as much as possible, and to make certain that students were given access to the general education courses they need to complete their requirements for graduation. Decisions on individual courses and requests for funding are to be handled by the colleges, and not by my office. This delegation of responsibility and funding is appropriate given that the colleges are closer to the sites of instruction than we are in the provost’s office. In short, we trust college administrators to distribute general education funds in ways that ensure access to general education courses, and the current general education budget should be sufficient to accomplish this goal.
I don't conceive of these actions as a pull back or a cut in funding: I spent the entire base budget; I've kept nothing in that budget in reserve; I’ve given it all to the colleges to distribute. I gave no specific instructions to colleges except to urge them to help students with their requirements. With regard to these actions I'm not certain what departments are telling their faculty, and what colleges told their department heads. But I have no additional money in my general education budget, and I spent several hundred thousand dollars more than was originally in the base in 05-06.
One college has already asked for additional funding for this spring because of commitments that were made in advance of the announcement of this funding model in August. I am sympathetic to this request, but at the same time I have put all colleges on notice that next year they must budget within the funds set aside for general education. If we are going to proceed with budgetary integrity, then we must not believe that there exists a general education budget that is infinitely expandable.
19 October 2007
Opinions on matters of interest to the university and higher education.
Share your thoughts on this topic or other issues with the provost.