Middlebury is a small college in the middle of nowhere Vermont with big dreams. In the last 10-15 years, the college has taken significant (financial) risks to help achieve those dreams (McCardell Bicentennial Hall, the New Library), knowing full well that at times it would reap the rewards and that at other times it would pay. Right now, it’s paying, and changes have to be made.
In December 2009, the Administration sent out surveys to faculty, staff and students asking direct questions about which (drastic yet necessary) changes to the college’s major cost drivers (salary, benefits, financial aid, infrastructure and student life) were most palatable and which were unthinkable. In two open meetings to the community today, President Liebowitz presented the findings.
With an overall response rate of 49% (that’s 1,924 surveys, 1,068 of which were from students), the survey results painted an interesting picture of agreement at the expense of ingenuity.
All groups were posed with six potential ways to cut costs: reduction of financial aid, salary reduction, reduction of building and landscape maintenance, reduction of faculty size, increase in the size of the student body, and a reduction in staff and faculty benefits. All groups found any sort of reduction in financial aid to be unacceptable, and all groups agreed that maintenance of buildings and grounds was the most acceptable change.
Each group was also presented with important budget items relevant to their position on campus. In general, faculty were against reductions in salaries and benefits but in favor of streamlining curriculum and eliminating discounts to college events. Staff were also in favor of cutting access to places like the Juice Bar and the Snow Bowl but, again, opposed to reductions and salary and vacation benefits. Students were most against reducing dining hall options and the possibility of double majoring but were, almost overwhelmingly, in favor of reducing funding for sports.
What the survey revealed overall was that all three groups–students, faculty and staff–are in agreement about the changes that need to be made. It’s time to streamline and reduce excess luxury without sacrificing the diversity and academic rigor of the institution. In other words, people are in agreement with the changes that have been recommended since the college’s budget began suffering. Liebowitz’s presentation also revealed that all things related to 51 Main and Monterey are here to stay.
What was missing in this presentation and these results was something radical, some ingenious idea that will not only save money but change the way the college operates in an innovative way. (Though reducing athletics would definitely change the definition of the college, I don’t view it as a radical solution.)
At the meetings, Liebowitz talked a lot about Middlebury needing to compete with its peers, Amherst, Williams, Bates, etc. But what if Middlebury lead them? By making the obvious cuts, the college is adapting to the environment more than forging ahead. Now is the time to set the tone of liberal arts colleges for the next decade, and why not put that responsibility on Middlebury’s shoulders? Why stop dreaming big now? Unfortunately, I have no super idea of my own to throw into the rink first, but I want to put the challenge out there.
So MiddBlog wants to know: what radical ideas, practical or crazy, do you have? In what other ways can the college take risks, forge ahead and cut costs at the same time?
(Note: Once the results of a survey of alumni have been received, a full report will be published by the college.)
Posts via RSS
Posts via Email
Comments via RSS
Follow on Twitter
Become a Fan!
