As we have noted the last two days, the cuts in the UW System’s state funding threaten the quality of a UW-Madison education. Important programs like the Madison Initiative, which seeks to recruit and retain top faculty, may be delayed indefinitely, and capital projects — including two new Biostar buildings — have already been put off.
These projects and all other UW-Madison expenditures are subject to the whim of legislators and the governor. UW-Madison is treated no differently than any other state agency — an unfortunate circumstance, since few other state agencies will have a more profound impact on Wisconsin’s future.
More importantly, UW-Madison is treated no differently than any other school in the UW System (except for budget cuts — UW-Madison usually bears more than its fair share). This is problematic because no other school in the system purports to be a world-class university — in other words, UW-Madison’s needs and priorities are dramatically different from any other school in the system.
Despite these limitations, UW-Madison is one of the top schools in the country, but trouble lies ahead. Administrators generally receive lower pay than their peers, limiting UW-Madison’s ability to attract top-notch leaders. Faculty turnover is twice that of competitive schools like Michigan. Twenty-six percent of the faculty is expected to retire over the next decade; new recruitment efforts and higher pay are necessary simply to keep the status quo. Most significantly, state funds are being cut and they are not expected to return.
In light of these concerns and with a belief that UW-Madison “has the potential to be a great university and to lead the state of Wisconsin to higher levels of income for its citizens through greater participation in the new knowledge economy,” the Wisconsin Policy Research Institute last fall issue a report entitled “Chartering the University of Wisconsin-Madison.”
What exactly would a charter mean? For starters, the university would have vastly increased financial control. In addition to pre-defined levels of state funding, the university would be free to raise or lower tuition, increase research funding, license more intellectual property — in short, “UW-Madison would be responsible for generating the revenue it needs to succeed. It would also make all expenditure decisions.”
The benefits of such a system should be obvious. Consider advising — university officials know the chronic shortage of advisors is a problem, but their hands are tied because money for advising must be budgeted by the state legislature via the UW System budget. If UW-Madison controlled its own financial destiny, officials whose positions depend on a successful university could remedy the problem. The same principle would apply to faculty, building, research and every other component of a successful university.
UW-Madison’s charter would hold the university accountable. In exchange for independence the university would have to meet certain goals. These could include graduation-rate requirements, financial-aid requirements, minimum national rankings, etc.
At first read, this idea is incredibly appealing, and Gov. McCallum’s announced budget cuts make it doubly so. It is difficult to see how hands-on state control and UW System limitations will allow UW-Madison is to maintain and even increase the quality of education. Wisconsin’s future rests with its youth, and the best and brightest are at UW-Madison. UW-Madison is and should be treated different.
