Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: MONDAY, December 13, 1993 TAG: 9401140027
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: DAVID A. de WOLF
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
We at Virginia Tech don't see it in that adversarial way. Staff, faculty and administration understand very well that a time of diminished revenues to the commonwealth of Virginia implies less allocations to state agencies. We've not been deaf to the message conveyed by five successive budget decreases in two to three years, which reduced the state-allocated portion of our budget by about 35 percent (of which we were allowed to recoup only 10 percent by tuition increases). We're not oblivious to (or surprised by) the comments in the press and elsewhere, telling us we're less appreciated than we were before this economic downturn of 1990-1993. After all, higher education is not a mandated program such as Medicaid, corrections and prisons, and K-12 public education. These three major programs require increases in funding that almost exclude the possibility of maintaining the funding levels of all other programs.
We know we're being told to ``do more with less.'' For almost a year now, administration, faculty and staff at Tech have been working cooperatively on strategies to restructure our university to cope with smaller financial support. We call this effort ``Phase II,'' and it will require cooperation from all sectors of the university. It's an effort to prepare us adequately for a long period of operating on a reduced budget. In this, we're no different from many Virginia institutions of higher education. Many out-of-state colleges and universities are following our lead, now that they too must cope with revenue shortfalls in their states.
Unlike the situation at some other universities, our leadership doesn't regard faculty as an obstreperous, cantankerous obstacle to needed change. It's recognized here that faculty members are very talented and will work as hard as they can to help ease the university through this painful period. After all, the university provides a resource to our state and country that no other institution can. It's the only institution providing education and learning at the highest level without serving any particular interest group. It's also the last repository in society in which fundamental knowledge is generated and stored for present and future generations, also without taking special interests into account. Fundamental knowledge may seem frivolous in times of economic hardship, but some measure of it is required to address the needs of society in the future. Tenure of faculty is a guarantee that such can continue.
We realize that tenure does f+inoto mean that we're free to do what we want. We know we must respond to the needs of our employers - the students - and, in hard times such as these, that means we must do so even more effectively than before. Faculty members in general work at least as hard as people in any other sector of society, and it's nonsense to think that faculty work starts and ends with five to 10 hours of weekly classroom teaching in 30 weeks. That's like saying that your church's minister only works one hour a week in delivering a sermon.
We agree with Garland about many issues. We can't afford shirkers now, and we can't afford some of the ``luxuries'' of the past, such as a high percentage of ivory-tower research in splendid isolation. And perhaps a three-semester/year program should be considered. However, there's an important point to be made in stating that Tech is a research university. Classroom teaching is only part of a student's education here. Our students can be either directly or indirectly involved in research. We see that as an advantage in teaching, because we believe that faculty members involved in research are better equipped to educate and train students than those who don't keep up with changing technology and trends in society. The direct benefit of research to the economic interests of Virginia and the United States is something I hardly need mention; even our most voracious critics don't touch that one! It's time for those who criticize us to become acquainted with what we do, rather than rebuke us for what we don't do!
The point that bothers me most about many criticisms of universities is the idea that an autocratic approach to effecting change is desirable. We've found it much more fruitful to engage in teamwork. That's why we may be more successful than others in meeting the challenges of these hard times, and why other institutions are looking at how we're dealing with change. I doubt that many others are going to accept an adversarial model as something to emulate!
David A. de Wolf is president of the faculty senate of Virginia Tech.
by CNB