Remarks to the Oregon State Board of Higher Education
15 February 2002
Eugene, OR
Vice President Lussier,
Chancellor Cox, Directors and Guests:
Good afternoon. Since I haven't met all of you
personally yet, let me introduce myself.
I am Elaine Deutschman, the IFS president for 2002, and a mathematics
professor at OIT where I've been on the faculty for 19 years. I thank you for this opportunity to
update you on IFS activities.
The IFS met most recently
at the University of Oregon in early February with special guests Provost
Moseley, Professor Geri Richmond, President Frohnmayer, Professor Nathan
Tublitz of the University Senate, Director Roger Bassett and State Senator Tony
Corcoran. Most discussion centered
on the impacts expected at the U of O and across the system from the budget
cuts. Key words in those
discussions were student access and program quality; the balancing act to
maintain both in the face of proposed cuts is a tough one on all our campuses. Unfortunately, we don't know a lot more
now than we did two weeks ago about those cuts; we have our fingers crossed for
the best-case scenario, as I'm sure you do.
Topics at our Saturday
business meeting included the chancellor's search, the independence proposal
from OIT, possible IFS policy initiatives in the upcoming legislative session
and the increasing use of contingent faculty on some of our OUS campuses. I'd like to speak briefly to each.
First, on behalf of the
IFS, I would like to formally thank the Board for opening up the chancellor's search
process. Several faculty
members took time to give their ideas about the person OUS needs to replace
Chancellor Cox at the meeting that I attended in Medford. More are attending the sessions in
Portland, Salem and LaGrande.
Others, who were unable to attend one of the meetins, have sent Virginia
Thompson email responses. The
faculty of the OUS are concerned about and deeply committed to finding the best
person for this important position.
To that end, the IFS wants to assist in the process when the list of
candidates is reduced from 5 to 7 to the short list of 3 candidates; we believe
a non-Board faculty member's perspective is essential to the deliberations.
A brief presentation on
the OIT privatization proposal evoked a great deal of discussion. Senators raised many of the same
concerns as I'm hearing from faculty on my campus. Among these are: (1)
access for students under the proposed tuition
increases, given the
students OIT serves (first-generation-college students, low-income students,
place-bound students); (2) the loss to the state of Oregon of a public higher
education institution – both on philosophical and financial grounds;
(3) motivations for the
strings attached to the gift (withdrawal from the OUS and a seat on the board
of trustees for the donor); (4) the means of the funding (stock in a privately
held corporation); (5) the opacity of the offer that leaves so many unanswered
questions; and (6) the size of the gift which doesn't appear to be large enough
to sustain an independent institution without heavily supplementing from
tuition and other sources. The IFS
will be carefully watching the ongoing investigations at OIT by its faculty
senate and an internal steering committee.
On budget initiatives, the
IFS is convening a committee to develop policy options for inclusion in the
system's budget for the next biennium.
We came late to the table for the current biennium so our requests for
funds couldn't be completely met.
We intend to be in the process from the beginning this year and want to
be included at the table when the presidents and others bring forward their
requests. I have requested
procedural information and time lines from the Chancellor's Office so that we
may participate fully in this process.
Lastly, a number of our
senators raised concerns about the growing use of contingent faculty –
part-time, non-tenure track and adjunct faculty – at some of our
institutions. Please understand that IFS is not broad-brushing all contingent
faculty as substandard; many are excellent, dedicated teachers working under
less than ideal conditions, doing the best job they can. Our interest is in maintaining the
quality in our institutions and heavy reliance on contingent faculty dilutes
that quality.
A senator from PSU noted
that 5 years ago, about 37% of student-credit hours at his institution were
delivered by contingent faculty; according to his research, that percentage has
grown to 44% currently.
Extrapolated linearly, that could mean a student at PSU 5 years from now
might have a 50-50 chance of taking a class from contingent faculty. Similar
statistics for the whole system indicate that by 2005 (again extrapolating
linearly), nearly one-quarter of class sections might be taught by contingent
faculty. When figures for graduate
assistants are added, that number gets closer to one-third.
This is certainly not the
quality college experience you would choose for your child or grandchild; I'm
sure you would want small classes, taught by well-prepared professors who have
the time and a place to hold regular office hours and be available to students
when needed. Quality academic
programs require involvement from
permanent faculty who take
responsibility for curriculum development and assessment, setting requirements
and designing programs and majors; reliance on contingent faculty deprives
departments of the faculty they need to carry out these functions and deprives
the institution of long-term commitment and devotion from its faculty.
Though applications for
fall entry to OUS institutions have risen dramatically, we must resist the urge
to save a few dollars by hiring more contingent faculty; we must opt for
quality. As President Frohnmayer
has remarked, sacrificing quality on the altar of access is fraught with peril.
Where you get your degree does matter. A reputation for quality is an institution's
most precious commodity. The IFS
would like to urge the Board and the individual institutions to do all that's
possible to reduce dependence on contingent faculty even though enrollments are
rising and state support is declining.
Thank you.