Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: SATURDAY, September 25, 1993 TAG: 9310280334
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A11 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAVID A. de WOLF
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
It is not my intention to defend what we do. I prefer to leave that to others. But it is my duty to tell you that the articles by Philip Walzer and others seriously misinform you about our activities. In fact, some, perhaps even many, of their statements border on being intentional untruths because the authors were supplied with the full facts, at their request under the Freedom of Information Act, and in long interviews with key players, so that they truly could have known better. It is my intention to supply you with some missing facts. To do so, I'll restrict myself to a few items.
Allegation No. 1 (Sept. 13): Schools have made stealth cuts, not hotly debated nor widely felt. Implication: Universities have not really made cuts. Truth: Since the first budget cuts of 1990 - and how can a university not cut deeply when it suddenly has to return 10-15 percent of its operating budget! - we at Virginia Tech have had an advisory council of faculty, staff and students in place to deal with administrative propositions regarding the reduced budget. This council has been kept properly informed, and it has had substantial input. It serves just under the president in the university's governance, and it is intermediate between him and the University Council (the highest governance body of administrators and faculty at Virginia Tech). I need hardly add that the imposed reduction of faculty in '90-'92 was widely felt in larger class sizes and diminished possibilities for our growing responsibilities toward our students - your children!
Allegation No. 2 (Sept. 14): Professor Castagnoli earns a high salary and he did not teach a single course last year. Now he feels that was a mistake. Implication: He's been caught wasting the taxpayer's money. Truth: Professor Castagnoli fills a special research slot that is not funded with state money allotted for instruction. His position is supported by private funds donated solely for the purpose of neurochemical research. He is nevertheless deeply committed to undergraduate teaching and has a long-standing career of such teaching, as emphasized in a two-hour interview with the reporter. His actual "mistake" was a commitment to developing a graduate course that used up the time he usually allotted to teaching. Realizing mid-year that he wanted to continue teaching an undergraduate course the following semester, the department informed him that the teaching assignments had already been filled. Walzer's quote is nowhere near the mark.
Allegation No. 3 (Sept. 14): Professor Bostian says he'll leave if made to teach more than two courses a year. Implication: Like so many highly paid professors, he hates teaching. Truth: Professor Bostian is one of the most highly rated and honored teachers of undergraduate courses at Virginia Tech, having won nine teaching certificates (probably more than any other professor at Virginia Tech). His fame as such stretches out over a 25-year period, and a legion of alumni testify to his influence. Needless to say, he said nothing of the sort in a one-hour interview.
Allegation No. 4 (Sept. 15): Professors at Virginia Tech teach less than two three-hour courses per semester. Implication: The teaching load is very light and professors lead a luxurious life doing whatever they wish. f+iTrutho: Most professors work far more than a 40-hour week. An hour in class usually requires quite a number of hours of work outside the classroom at Virginia Tech. Two courses per semester typically represent a full load when it is combined with out-of-class instruction, student advising, research work and other related activities that are needed to provide graduate-student training. Then there is curriculum development and faculty-administration duties (monitoring of quality, handling of students concerns). Almost all of us devote largely extracurricular time to either sponsored or unsponsored research.
Allegation No. 5 (Sept. 13): Schools have done little to restrain expansion, despite budget cuts. Implication: They've expanded at the cost of the students. Truth: We at Virginia Tech were told to return to the state $37 million in two years from a general-fund allocation of about $105 million a year. Raises in tuition brought in less than $11 million to us. Tuition raises were needed to offset mandated new expenses as well as new programs. No business or institution can survive without innovation; educational materials also become outdated and need replacement. With some exceptions (duly noted and exaggerated), faculty have received no raises since July 1990. Salary levels fell from being somewhere above the median of our peer institutions to a point in which four of five peer institutions pay better ... and that in two years. Please explain to me how one can expand on a net cut of 10-15 percent per year in operating expenses!
I could go on. There seems no point in doing so, other than lengthening this sorry detailing of misinformation. It only remains to counsel caution in trusting anything written by these reporters. While we feel strongly that the image of higher education in the state has been compromised through these articles, the ultimate judges are you. As such, you owe it to yourselves and your children to seek out factual evidence about your institutions. Please keep in mind that shoddy and tendentious reporting is putting your children's education at peril!
David A. deWolf is president of the Faculty Senate of Virginia Tech.
by CNB