Opinion: Editorial

Not on TAUWP of it

If recent events are any indication, the two most important issues when it comes to higher education in Wisconsin are financial aid and professor retention. The Madison Initiative for Undergraduates dedicates the majority of its funds to these two issues, the Joint Finance Committee has decided not to increase tuition for University of Wisconsin students whose families make less than $60,000, and we have a $15 million faculty retention fund in the Wisconsin budget — thanks to last year’s efforts by Gov. Jim Doyle and the more sensible lawmakers contributing to cutthroat budget process.

Yet, in most circumstances, lawmakers, education professionals and UW administrators are working for both.

This past week, one group of faculty decided one should take precedence.

The Association of University of Wisconsin Professionals endorsed a proposal to move money from the state’s faculty retention fund to financial aid for UW System students, saying the fund has been mismanaged and dollars are only give to professors who are “politically connected.”

The UW-Madison Faculty Senate’s Public Representation Organization voted down that idea, saying there is no other way to recruit and retain quality faculty than with the fund created for that very purpose.

While we understand TAUWP is a group comprised of UW System faculty, we also understand it is more oriented toward non-Madison UW System concerns, chief among them accessibility of education.

The dialogue has always been about quality and accessibility. This proposal begins to suggest this has never been the case. A world-class research institution, which also doubles as a cost-effective state university, must strive to recruit the best professors in their fields while trying to make this education as accessible and affordable as possible for students.

The UW System, as a whole, however, should not model itself in any radically different manner. While no one will call the other UW System campuses top-tier universities, there are specific departments unique to these schools that do provide high-quality, respected research and education in specialized fields.

Perhaps TAUWP is right when it says most retention funds are going toward UW-Madison — and considering the concentration of star faculty here, maybe it should. But there’s no doubt that removing funds from the retention package will stop any fund from going to those genetics researchers at UW-Parkside or business school professors at UW-Whitewater. Sure, maybe it’ll get by, but it puts an upper limit on the quality of education at non-Madison schools.

And in the end, it sends the wrong message: Financial aid is more important than quality education.

You can give low-income students all the aid you want, but it doesn’t mean a thing if they end up in a crowded classroom with inexperienced professors fumbling their way through bottlenecked classes.

So, we commend those members of the Faculty Senate for their stand and encourage them to make one thing clear to Wisconsin lawmakers and residents: We want it cheap, but not if we feel cheap.