Middle Tennessee State University 2008 Budget Cut Impact Study Submitted by Dr. Alfred Lutz MTSU Faculty Senate President 2008-2009 October 3, 2008 Contact information: Dr. Alfred Lutz Office of the Faculty Senate, JUB 100 MTSU P.O. Box 621 Murfreesboro, TN 37132 [email protected] (615) 898-26552 Summary On September 11, 2008, the MTSU Faculty Senate distributed to the entire faculty a document entitled “Budget Cut Impact Feedback” in an effort to assess the impact on the work of MTSU faculty members of the 6.1% reduction in state appropriations for fiscal year 2008-2009. MTSU faculty members were asked to respond to the following question: If the recent budget cuts have affected your work in any way, would you please be so kind as to send the Faculty Senate (preferably by October 1) a brief description of those effects? The Faculty Senate received 81 responses from both individual faculty members addressing primarily, though not exclusively, their own situations as well as from department chairs, program and support-center directors, and leaders of other campus units, speaking for larger groups of faculty members and staff. This survey thus represents the views of a representative segment of the MTSU faculty. Most respondents (all except two) are convinced that the budget cuts are having a negative impact on both their own work – their teaching, their research, and, in several cases, their service – and the proper functioning of their department or unit.3 Table of Contents Introduction....................................................................................................................4 Major Concerns.............................................................................................................5 Travel Budgets......................................................................................................5 Technology.............................................................................................................6 Technology Required for Research Purposes ...............................................6 Technology Needed for Instructional or Pedagogical Purposes..................6 Faculty and Staff Positions...............................................................................6 Other Concerns..............................................................................................................7 Program Development.....................................................................................7 Recruiting .........................................................................................................7 Supplies.............................................................................................................7 Reassigned Time...............................................................................................8 Related Concerns.............................................................................................8 Conclusion.......................................................................................................................8 Acknowledgments.........................................................................................................94 Introduction This report is an attempt to assess the impact of the 6.1% reduction in state appropriations for fiscal year 2008-2009 on the work performed by the MTSU faculty. Although the faculty feedback covered a wide range of concerns, the following three were listed by at least 40% of respondents: • Cuts to the travel budgets • Technology-related cuts • Cuts in academic and support positions In the estimation of those responding to the survey, these cuts have a negative impact on research (both by faculty members and by undergraduate and graduate students), teaching and pedagogy, and departmental, institutional, and professional service. In affecting those essential aspects of faculty members’ work, these cuts also impede the university’s primary mission as well as MTSU’s pursuit of the goals stated in the Academic Master Plan, certainly Goals I and II: Goal I: MTSU will promote academic quality by enhancing learning, teaching, scholarship, and service and by celebrating MTSU’s distinctive strengths. Goal II: MTSU will promote individual student success and responsibility for accomplishments through fostering a student-centered learning culture. Although this document may strike readers as critical of MTSU and the university administration, this is neither its purpose nor intent. The MTSU administration is not responsible for cuts that originate elsewhere. This report, then, is offered in a spirit of cooperation, offering information that we hope will be useful in helping the institution respond to a difficult situation. This report does not focus on particulars, i.e., no effort has been made to provide a detailed description or analysis of a particular issue. In addition, we have not conducted any research into any topic mentioned in this report. Instead, this report summarizes, accurately we hope, faculty members’ views in order to provide a sense of what they perceive to be the most serious and severe consequences of the recent budget cuts.5 Major Concerns This section covers the major categories of concerns identified by respondents: travel budgets, technology, and problems related to faculty and staff positions. Travel Budgets More than 80% of all respondents consider the reduction in travel support as one of their major concerns, and a sizable minority of those has either already missed a conference they would have attended had funding been available or have decided not to attend a conference or a professional meeting in the course of this academic year. The travel budget is always among the first resources to take a hit. Since cuts to travel budgets don’t make a perceptible difference in the way a college campus functions on the surface – no classes have to be cancelled – these cuts might be called ‘invisible’ cuts. The travel budget is one of the ‘usual suspects’ rounded up whenever budgets have to be reduced. Yet, as the responses suggest, the impact on all aspects of a faculty member’s work can be drastic. Even before the cuts, travel budgets in many departments were inadequate. In many cases, an individual faculty member’s share of the departmental travel budget would