Editor’s note: This is Part Two of a series about proposed changes to the nature of the state’s relationship with the University of Vermont. Read Part One.
“UVM cannot continue, as some might wish, to be all things to all people.” So concludes a report recently released by an advisory committee appointed by Gov. Peter Shumlin last November which makes recommendations about the future of the relationship between the university and the state. The report also makes a case for appropriations tied to state-identified priorities: Vermont, it states, “should pay for what it wants and expect excellent outcomes.”
Shumlin’s advisory panel offers 11 proposals in the report, among them doubling engineering, targeted appropriations, better branding, and a change in the public-private board balance.
A familiar theme, consistent with traditional appeals to the state’s sense of exceptionalism, runs through the document: Vermont as a national leader.
Interim President John Bramley, a key member of the panel, argued that developing sustainable food is one of several areas in which UVM and the state can jointly burnish a national image. In the case of food systems the proposed institutional goal is to contribute models and approaches that “help us feed the world’s population while preserving the integrity of our planet.”
“We need to create momentum and build our reputation,” Bramley said during a recent press conference. “We’re at the cutting edge in so many of these areas.” His explicit contribution to the report is a related proposal for a Vermont Institute, described as “a kind of Aspen of the east,” that brings together great minds to look at complex systems.
The project will be launched this week at a week-long summit with regional food leaders and a June 28 conference on “The Necessary (r)evolution for Sustainable Food Systems.”
The governor’s panel has incorporated Bramley’s institute concept on its list. A separate recommendation deals even more directly with branding.
“It is essential that the public at large feel pride in the state’s university for it to succeed,” the report continues on branding. “It is time for Vermont to stop hiding its light underneath the basket of modesty.” The committee advises the university to build on its existing iconic brands and add new stories that sell what UVM has to offer in “an export-oriented world.”
Funding and the future
When he named the committee last fall, Shumlin said no serious revision of UVM’s public funding and governance had been completed in nearly 60 years. “The time to do so is now,” he challenged.
His advisory group recommends an increase in the number of private trustees, or a reduction in the public members. In either case, the result would be a shift in the balance of power from appointed public representatives to self-perpetuating, private members.
Although neither the committee nor the governor has directly linked a re-balance in representation to looming fundraising challenges, a section titled “Financial History and Current Position – Public or Private?” provides a hint.
The 2012 annual budget was just over $600 million, it notes, but only 7 percent or $40 million was a state appropriation. More than two-thirds of general fund revenue comes from tuition, but only 6 percent of that comes from in-state tuition. Vermont’s support for higher education “has been and continues to be among the lowest in the nation,” the report adds. An accompanying graph shows the dramatic decline in state appropriations as a percent of the total budget.
The committee pointedly adds that if Vermont wants to seriously change its public investment in higher education and bring it in line with the national average, state funding would have to increase by $60 million a year. No one expects that to happen. Aside from increasing tuition – also not a popular option — the main sources of revenue are gifts, grants and sponsored projects, the latter funded mostly by the federal government for specific research projects in areas such as the health sciences, agriculture, energy, biotech and engineering.
In response to budget pressures, the university launched the Vermont Foundation last January in order to “professionalize” UVM’s private philanthropy in line with its strategic mission. As of April 30, total raised last year stood at $30.3 million including gifts, pledges and deferred commitments, up almost $10 million from just one year before.
Recent commitments include $1.5 million from an estate to establish a professorship in electrical engineering, $1 million for scholarship support, half a million for an endowed chair in nursing, and another $500,000 in support of Alumni House renovations.
The larger picture includes a competitive scramble to develop and test new educational models, combined with an intensified push for private funding.
As outlined by Shumlin’s panel, the main prescriptions for the UVM-state relationship going forward are more specific targeting of the state’s limited public investment, a sharper focus on innovation and entrepreneurial partnerships, better branding of what the university does best, and, perhaps most delicate, redefinition of what it means to be a public university in the 21st century.
Revisiting Morrill’s legacy
During the May board of trustees meeting, Bramley was optimistic about the short-range forecast. But he was “anxious about the future of higher education and our ability to adapt to the challenges.” Economic changes are undermining the old wisdom of investing in a college education, he warned.
“Sadly, higher education is often presented or discussed now as a private benefit rather than a public good,” he mused. “We must convince others that we are a public good, worthy of public investment and essential for the future success of the nation.”
Bramley made a populist argument — that economic inequality could turn higher education back into “a preserve of the wealthy and the privileged, very much just the thing Justin Morrill was trying to leading the nation away from.”
The reference to Morrill is especially relevant. A progressive merchant and Republican Party founder, Morrill was a U.S. senator from Vermont for 30 years. Motivated by the concept of public property as a public trust and commitment to a scientific approach in agriculture, he became instrumental in creating the land grant system that subsequently assisted agricultural colleges.
At first, however, UVM made only limited use of the opening Morrill provided. In response, the Grange pushed for rural education reform, and brought pressure on both the university and the state Department of Agriculture. An 1885 Grange resolution complained that farmers in Vermont had “received no adequate returns or benefits from the government fund for establishment of agricultural colleges.” On the contrary, it charged that UVM employed policies that placed the children of farm families in a secondary position, and also suggested that the university preferred high tuition students in the humanities and liberal arts.
Tinged with charges of class warfare, the fight led to a Grange demand that the Agricultural College separate from the university. In the end a compromise was struck. The governor was given the power to select some trustees, mostly members of agricultural societies, to represent farm interests.
Today, the state’s governor appoints three of 23 members on the Board of Trustees. Gov. Shumlin and UVM’s president also participate ex-official (without voting). Nine more members are elected by the state legislature, which gives the publica narrow majority. There are also two student seats, and nine private trustees who elect their own replacements.
Shumlin’s panel has concluded that, although it would be reasonable for UVM to consider returning to “its former private status,” that would leave Vermont as the only state without a public university. On the other hand, they insist that the nature of UVM’s public status be examined since the current governance structure “is out of balance in relation to state appropriation and does not reflect the interest of the University or the true relationship to the state.”
This is also related to branding and fundraising. According to the report, the Board’s present make up hurts UVM’s “ability to raise its profile within the state and nationally, raise needed dollars and recruit future trustees and supporters.” In other words, the trustees aren’t landing enough whales. The report also points to several long-term trends – shrinking public dollars, increased dependence on private philanthropy, mounting student debt, and a tuition bubble about to burst.
The state’s priorities
One of the recommendations discussed with the governor at a June 22 press conference, suggests targeted appropriations and other forms of state support for agriculture, health, natural resources and STEM studies. The latter is an acronym for science, technology, engineering and math.
Recommendation 5 – STEAM Investment and Initiatives – suggests how UVM can help to prepare students for the jobs of the future. (Building on STEM, an A is added (for the arts) to create an investment priority list called STEAM.) The focus is mainly educating engineers and scientists, but the report argues for the utility of incorporating the arts, humanities and social sciences, among other disciplines, in an effort to help produce a generation of holistic thinkers.
Specifically, the panel urges that the size of UVM’s engineering programs double. This “will require significant focus and investment,” and will mean recruiting new faculty members who are not merely leading scholars but also know the value of building partnerships with business and industry.
The report adds that, given the state’s limited resources, it would also be reasonable “for in-state institutions to have favored status” in the awarding of grants and contracts.
Partnership is also at the center of recommendation 9: creation of a Vermont University Innovation Center. The goal here is to combine UVM’s existing strength as a research institution with business and industry projects that create jobs and “drive economic prosperity.”
During its review, the panel learned that 90 percent of UVM grads already engage in some form of experiential learning – from study abroad and internships to business development partnerships. The plan is to build on this trend by using the Innovation Center to connect public and private “innovators in education and research.”
The ambitious plan also calls for “new delivery models that address Vermont’s economic development needs with agility and speed to link students and faculty with the private sector in an innovative learning and delivery system that prepares students for and supports employees and citizens in life-long learning and work.”
A related thread is investment in agriculture and food systems programs. Acknowledging that new enterprises have been building clout and winning recognition for many years, recommendation 7 – Investing in Vermont’s Sustainable Food Systems — piggybacks on this success. The committee thus“endorses Vermont’s important role in developing sustainable food systems, and believes that it is imperative that UVM takes a leadership role working with the Vermont State Colleges.” The report enthusiastically describes a commercial and agricultural “revolution” that includes diverse growers, bioenergy generation, community-supported agriculture, breweries, wineries, bakers and much more, all tied to food-based tourism and changes in the workforce.
“Vermont’s soil and water will be protected by the increased use of sustainable practices and the working landscape will be a significant source of renewable energy,” the committee concluded. “Major opportunities exist to design and develop the sustainable food system, from growing to distribution, using Vermont as the model.”
Members of the governor’s advisory committee include Nick Donofrio, John Bramley, former state Secretary of Administration William Gilbert, attorney and UVM graduate William Wachtel, former banker Deborah Grandquist, former Lyndon State College President Peggy Williams, St. Albans Messenger Publisher Emerson Lynn, and UVM student Alma Arteaga.
The full report is available at:
http://governor.vermont.gov/blog-advisory-group-presents-working-report-to-governor-shumlin
