Today, the day after incoming Rutgers football coach Kyle Flood announced the commitments of the most successful class in his team’s history, there is a story on NJ.com and affiliates that Rutgers faculty have asked that cuts be made in the athletic budget. Faculty spokespersons in the university’s College of Arts and Sciences have asked that students be allowed to vote on how the portion of their fees dedicated to athletics are spent. Rutgers was the first school profiled on EducatedQuest, so the story was worth some follow-through that was not done by the reporters.
The gist of the story, from the faculty members’ perspective, is that the university has walked away from its obligations under a faculty union contract while the football program and the coaching staff got more money from the university and from the students. That part is understandable. The union and the university administration negotiated a contract, which provided for raises, supposedly in good faith, and the university has not made good. They deserve a raise. Fair enough.
But the students and their families would come out the losers no matter what.Rutgers would be trading cuts in one place for spending increases in another. The $211 per undergraduate and graduate student ($8.44 million divided by 40,000 students) that went to athletics in 2010, and is presumably still going to athletics in 2012, could be put towards a tuition increase instead. Someone must come up with the money to pay the faculty. Who better than the students to foot the bill, especially those who are already there?
And there’s more.
Too much is being made of the comment that student fees and a university budget are subsidizing an athletic program.
The truth is that student fees and a university budget subsidize many things that are not used by every student. There are hundreds of student organizations at Rutgers and a student affairs office built around supporting them, among other services. Some student groups, that primarily run meetings and events, have low budgets. Others, such as the band or the glee club, require special skills and/or have travel and equipment expenses. The band and the glee club, among other organizations, also demand more of a faculty adviser. Here’s the point: Not everyone can be in the band or the glee club, but the students who can’t support the students who can. This is no less true for sports.
One faculty member said in the story that: “Parents got to know that the value of a Rutgers degree is under threat.”
Where is the proof?
The faculty members who had tenure in 2010 are, for the most part, the same people who are there in 2012. Did they care less about their careers while more money went to sports? Did they decide not to do as much research or to become less accessible or less effective teachers? Quite likely, no.
While the faculty are members of a union, they do care, as individuals, where they stand in their discipline. And they do care about student opinions on their teaching style. Otherwise, they would be hypocrites for taking a position that puts a greater fiduciary responsibility on their students.
The faculty who are the least likely to care about the students will be the most secure, who are at the top of the pay scale and well connected to an outside world, whether it be for funding sources for their research or potential employers or investors. One thing you never hear from a tenured faculty member: they can earn an income outside the university while they draw a salary from the university. As one example, Lawrence Summers, former Secretary of the Treasury, earned $135,000 for giving a single speech at Goldman Sachs, after he had been forced to resign as president of Harvard, and had returned to the faculty. Not every economist can get paid that much for so little time, but a bright one can earn good money after s/he has received tenure.
Rutgers has brilliant scientists, famous authors and business analysts, among others. Rutgers faculty at the full professor rank are paid exceptionally well. On average, they earn more than their peers at Georgia Tech, Carnegie Mellon, UVa., UT-Austin, Penn State, Illinois, Pitt, Ohio State, Rochester and Case Western, among others. They’re not home flipping the couch cushions to find spare change.
One issue where student-faculty relations are of concern is with the hiring of new faculty. No doubt popular departments have had to pull back positions that they used to fill when a professor left to the university. This reduces the number of courses and increases the size of classes. This hurts the students. But this is not being raised by the faculty in the media. The average salary of an assistant professor at Rutgers-New Brunswick ranks 38th among the larger public and private national research universities; the average for the full professors ranks 28th. Those who have the least seniority, and are under the most pressure to publish and teach, are the ones who are more likely to leave. They’re less likely to get tenure, so they would have more freedom to go.
If the spokespersons had framed their argument around the status of the more junior faculty, it would be understandable. But they chose not to. Instead they framed the argument, which appeared in the print version of the story in the Trenton Times, that Rutgers has dropped in academic rankings made by several important publications and organizations.
Academic rankings are made by peer academics, who usually work at other universities. They are the best qualified to assess scholarship. But that goes back to an earlier point: Do the scholars follow their passion and profession, or their school’s politics? One can wonder about the scholars who spoke to the reporters, but it’s doubtful they are in the majority.
But, more important are the measures of how students fare, especially freshmen. The Rutgers freshman retention rate is 91 percent, better than most public or private research universities. Retention is dependent, in part, on the quality of the students, but also the academics and the support structure around them.
Entering freshmen have had mean SAT scores (Critical Reading and Math) of around 1,200 for more than a decade. While there are questions about the value of the standardized test, the scores are regularly used as a measure of quality. Based on that measure, Rutgers-New Brunswick students have not gotten “dumber”. And bright students have not been scared away from going to Rutgers as the football team has gotten better. Nor are they less attractive to potential employers or the graduate and professional schools when they are ready to leave. There’s never been a statement by an employer that they would no longer recruit Rutgers students because the university has invested in a football team.
Rutgers’ six-year graduation rate is 77 percent. It could be higher, but the main campus has been organized like a traditional state university for only six years. Before, there were five distinct colleges, each with their own degree requirements, which caused delays and confusion. The four-year graduation rate is 53 percent. That could be higher, too. But only 20 state-supported research universities are doing better.And some of them have fielded better football or men’s basketball teams.
Among state-supported universities, Rutgers has a huge upside. While it does not have the endowment of Wisconsin or Texas, its performance is quite equal to those schools, which have achieved more recognition for academic and athletic achievement. Things can only get better as the university acquires more resources. But don’t blame the sports program for the “diminished quality” of the school unless you can back the statement up. It appears that scholarship and sports performance are improving at Rutgers, but both are not improving as fast as some people would like. Such is life at any emerging public university, Rutgers included.