next »

[jonesey]

With states mired in their fourth straight year of budget shortfalls, many university presidents around the county seem willing to make deals like the one in Ohio. In states such as Oregon, Louisiana and Wisconsin, flagship universities are inching away from their traditional patrons in the statehouse, accepting lower levels of state funding in exchange for freedom from state regulations.

Full Story.

[gsawpenny]

Jonesey,

Thanks for putting this up.  This subject fascinates me, and I can not decide whichbside of the the fence to fall on.  I like the idea of powerful state flagships having more say in their day-to-day operations even if it means a tuition increase.  Indeed, the powerhouse R1s long ago abandoned their basic state education mission although they all still serve their home states in many ways.  The "system" schools can pick up the slack in offering affordable higher education to the state's population. 

Still, one of the articles final paragraphs says a great deal; "There is a concern, however, that granting state universities too much authority could jeopardize their original mission, to serve the state’s students. “There’s a sense of a broken contract here...There's an emotional tide to this sort of thing. It’s almost like a divorce.” I guess the question is, can the "system" schools meet the intent of the original mission and do so at an affordable price?  If they can, then "charter universities" are a great idea.  If not, then it remains the responsibility of the state to offer affordable higher education to it's citizens.

[zharkov]

I was at a conference at UVM a couple of years back, and one of the faculty there told that is basically how Vermont operates.  The state funding is, more or less, just the tuition discount that in-state students receive.

Let me suggest an acronym:  FINO = Flagship In Name Only.