Washburn University
FY08 Public Budget Comments
July 27, 2007, 4:00 pm
By: Mary Lou Herring
Transformational Experience v Faculty Development
In 2005, the WU Board of Regents approved an $850,000 budget for a new graduation requirement, Transformational Experience (TE). The budget dollars for this initiative have been scattered throughout the operating budget – dollars are budgeted in the Non-mandatory Special Accounts and in a distinct TE budget, but have also been distributed to other departments to fund new faculty positions and to increase salaries. Now, the accountability for the approved budget has been lost in the numbers. This year, the budget page for TE, has a footnote for $288,750 of “new” money. So, either the budget has increased beyond the approved $850,000 limit, or this isn’t “new” FY08 money.
Either way, the administration should be encouraged to take a hard look at what this program has done, before it goes any further. Seven committees, made up of 6 to 11 members each, were formed to implement this program. A draft document of the TE responsibilities gives a good sense of the administrative nightmare that has been created. Significant money was spent to develop posters, brochures and a website specific for this new graduation requirement.
In the meantime, this additional burden has been laid squarely upon your faculty. Although $178,750 has been included in the budget for faculty load, the distribution of these funds is destined to be disparate, at best.
I would suggest that a better use of these funds would be an investment in professional development for the faculty. Teachers transform students. The transformation is enhanced with a faculty that has sufficient resources to stay current & involved in their own discipline. The money currently allocated to the administration of TE for the students could provide $3,000 per faculty member for journals, conferences, and other professional development.
TE appears backward to me - you are asking the faculty to support students as they stretch themselves beyond the classroom – while providing no funds for faculty to serve as role models while they do the same.
Program Review – Budget Concerns
Each year, the administration provides a summary of the annual program reviews to the Board. These program review summaries indicate areas that need more resources, both budgetary and facilities. The summaries also include various faculty concerns and student issues that should be addressed. As a taxpayer supporting this institution, I would like to know that the administration and board are actually addressing the issues brought forth through this time-consuming process. It appears that the Transformational Experience graduation requirement is being built on a weakening foundation.
Miscellaneous Comments
Finally, I have two miscellaneous comments to make.3rd Party Reimbursement
First, the third party that is reimbursing the university for the professor’s salary in the Leadership Institute should be disclosed. The students and the taxpayers need to be aware of the potential influence or bias that may be present in this position, due to the funding source.
Accountability
Second, last May the Board approved Innovation Grant funding for two projects that required annual progress reports which apparently have not been presented. Who is accountable for preparing the reports and approving the progress reported?
Although the Board members may be comfortable relying solely on this administration for information, the taxpayers would be better served with the independent verification that could be provided by an internal audit function, reporting directly to the Board.