WERITAS
Ed. The issue of privatizing the “public ivies” .. flagship state universities that rank with the Ivy League … is VERY real. Berkeley and the Univ. of Wisconsin are already well along that path.
The debate places the commitment of faculty and, often the business community, against state legislators dealing with an impossible budget issue. Schools like the Udub, along with Univ Illinois, U. Wisconsin and U Michigan, stand out because these public ivies are located in states with no other major research university. Lose the UW as a world class school and it is hard to imagine that we will not also lose Microsoft.
Privatization is an attractive answer, seemingly “free” for the legislators. Assuming that the UW would then greatly increase the number of “full boat” students coming from a world wide market anxious to give its kids the best possible education, this seems to some the ONLY answer.
So .. how much does WA state contribute to each student’s education?
From the UW Higher Ed News, OPB News and Announcements by Jessica Thompson
Were you surprised to learn in the Chronicle of Higher Education this week that, in 2008, the UW received over $19,500 in state appropriations per student, the second highest rate in the country? Well, so were we!
Office of Planning Budgeting staff worked with the Chronicle to clarify that they were not reporting state appropriations per student, but what the Delta Cost Project calls the overall educational ‘subsidy’ enjoyed by students, which includes state appropriations but also other revenues such as gifts and endowment income. (Ed. the correct figure appears to be $9,797 for the UW. Overall state appropriations per student might seem like a clearer way to directly measure legislative support. The U.S. Education Department data showed that the University of Washington ranking 28th among the 50 flagships.)
The Chronicle agreed to revise the text of their chart to match the measure they were actually reporting, and they also wrote up an accompanying article to explain why the revision was important, using the UW as an example. Please read our brief for more detail and links to the revised publications.
We don’t think the overall ‘subsidy’ figure that DELTA produces by looking at IPEDS finance survey data is a very useful one when comparing institutions on education related funding per student, nor do we think that 2008 funding levels tell us much about where public flagship institutions are now, but it is very important that the Chronicle narrative now matches the data and the chart is no longer misleading.
UW is a typical state university that puts its reputation and programs ahead of its people. The Deans and Trustees are all too ready to put big $$, effort and PR into their new programs and do little to support their existing talent unless they happen to be lucky enough to be swept into one of their new programs.
It is this mentality that recruited Leroy Hood and then let him go, and to many other talented people at the UW. If fact you could probably populate the faculty of an Ivy League school with talent that UW forgot about. Perhaps if the UW was private they could do better and begin to think outside the box, but that would take complete house cleaning of all the administration, trustees, etc.
I do not see this ever happening.
I think you misjudge the UW. While I am VERY critical of our admin, I think the real fault lies in their belief that the legislators of WA state and the people of this state can not appreciate what the UW actually is .. a great university, essential to our State’s future.
You may not know the whole Lee Hood story.
Lee was a prof at Cal Tech. Cal tech is a great place but it is small and has no medical school. Lee came here, with actually rather modest funds from Bill Gates, to build a genome sciences program crossing the borders between a great medical school and a great comp sci department. Without being specific, tthere were disagreements between Lee and the Dean over Lee’s entrepreneurial style not being consistent with the UW’s small labs or with the conservative funding approaches that have always been true here. Lee could not build the kind of research institute he wanted within those strictures.
I worked some with Lee and he is pretty amazing. So is Bob Waterston, Lee’s successor. UW Genome Sciences today is very successful while “fitting” better with the style the Dean (and most of the faculty) accept. I am VERY proud of our Genome Sciences effort.
My gripe is that we (the admin) do a LOUSY job of explaining what we do to the state, Sometimes I think we need a Ronald Reagan to stand outside the UW’s virtual ivy covered wall and yell, “Dr. Emmert, TEAR down this this wall!”