• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Intelligentsia putting academia on notice.

CatGrad-UMGradStu

Well-known member
What say you? Fifty over three years? Will it stop the downward spiral or not? Will the BOR demand further cuts be made?

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/university-of-montana-proposes-faculty-cuts-over-years-in-strategy/article_50ee0c85-3248-550e-b68a-adcb06b3372c.html
 
CatGrad-UMGradStu said:
What say you? Fifty over three years? Will it stop the downward spiral or not? Will the BOR demand further cuts be made?

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/university-of-montana-proposes-faculty-cuts-over-years-in-strategy/article_50ee0c85-3248-550e-b68a-adcb06b3372c.html
Some context needed (and not provided in the article): 50 FTE out of how many professors and lecturers?
 
statler & waldorf said:
"...2 in chemistry/biochemistry..." better mean Royce is gone. He is a cancer on the UM body.
Don't hold your breath, unless it gets to crunch time. The wording of the proposal (which is all it is, right now) suggests they'll be looking for retirements and "voluntary" resignations. Engstrom's technical resume is not likely to get him an offer as a chemistry professor, except (maybe) at a JC. He might find a job in "educational outreach," but he seems a bit too old for that. ( I know, "ageism," but I'm old myself and can tell you it does matter.)
 
IdaGriz01 said:
CatGrad-UMGradStu said:
What say you? Fifty over three years? Will it stop the downward spiral or not? Will the BOR demand further cuts be made?

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/university-of-montana-proposes-faculty-cuts-over-years-in-strategy/article_50ee0c85-3248-550e-b68a-adcb06b3372c.html
Some context needed (and not provided in the article): 50 FTE out of how many professors and lecturers?

Great point. I have heard for a while now that the University of Montana is heavily bloated in that department compared to like or similar schools
 
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!
 
SoldierGriz said:
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!

This plan doesn't spread the cuts. Some departments aren't being cut at all. There are going to be forced cuts
 
PlayerRep said:
SoldierGriz said:
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!

This plan doesn't spread the cuts. Some departments aren't being cut at all. There are going to be forced cuts

PR - look at the list...1-3 position cuts across 32 different programs...it's a wide swath. We'll see about forced cuts. My bet is they won't have to force any. The numbers likely accommodate natural attrition...we'll see.

Either way - this reveal does not contain BIG ideas...
 
SoldierGriz said:
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!

Old marketing tactic, deliver the bad news first. I am not sure what the good news is, but it’s sequenced appropriately.
 
Our school seems to be in deep trouble. I’m too far removed to understand the reasons, but it seems Bodnar is the man who can fix it, if it can be fixed.
 
I want to know how an organization has a $10 million budget deficit but only has a plan to cut $5 million in expenses. Does not compute for this old bean counter.
 
SoldierGriz said:
PlayerRep said:
SoldierGriz said:
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!

This plan doesn't spread the cuts. Some departments aren't being cut at all. There are going to be forced cuts

PR - look at the list...1-3 position cuts across 32 different programs...it's a wide swath. We'll see about forced cuts. My bet is they won't have to force any. The numbers likely accommodate natural attrition...we'll see.

Either way - this reveal does not contain BIG ideas...

Have you even looked at the report?

23 department heads to 10. That's down 13.

16 departments have no reductions. That isn't consistent with across the board.

English down 6.

Modern and Classical Languages and Literatures down 7.5.

I counted only 26 departments with 1 - 3, not 32, in a quick skim.

Disagree. Cutting this much and this deep is big idea by definition.

And aren't these six communities of interdisciplinary excellence new?

Artistic Expression & Communication

Science & Technology

Business & Entrepreneurship

Environment & Sustainability

Health & Human Development

Justice, Policy & Public Service
 
This seems to be necessary considering the 30% slide in enrollment since '10. Cutting administrative jobs and cutting teachers in departments where students just aren't enrolling in as big of numbers. Has to be done.

It's the next steps that will make or break UM.
 
Somebody stop the creative math, okay? I initially questioned why 3 math positions are being eliminated, but...now?

http://www.umt.edu/home/stories/2011/10/enrollfall11.php
Fall enrollment in 2010 was 15,669.

http://www.umt.edu/institutional-research/sp2018_census.pdf
Spring 2018 9407 enrolled on the main campus and 1580 at Missoula College for 10,987 FTE of 9132?

https://mus.edu/data/enrollment/FY17-enrollment-report.asp
 
PlayerRep said:
SoldierGriz said:
PlayerRep said:
SoldierGriz said:
My only problem with these cuts is they don't go far enough...

They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses. Predicting retirements and attrition is not that hard. My guess is there will be very few "forced cuts."

Where are the ideas that fully divest programs? Where are the ideas that double-down on successful programs? Where are the ideas that make an investment in relevant, new programs to attract students?

There HAS TO BE an additional phase to this plan, right? Let's go Seth...time to shine!

This plan doesn't spread the cuts. Some departments aren't being cut at all. There are going to be forced cuts

PR - look at the list...1-3 position cuts across 32 different programs...it's a wide swath. We'll see about forced cuts. My bet is they won't have to force any. The numbers likely accommodate natural attrition...we'll see.

Either way - this reveal does not contain BIG ideas...

Have you even looked at the report?

23 department heads to 10. That's down 13.

16 departments have no reductions. That isn't consistent with across the board.

English down 6.

Modern and Classical Languages and Literatures down 7.5.

I counted only 26 departments with 1 - 3, not 32, in a quick skim.

Disagree. Cutting this much and this deep is big idea by definition.

And aren't these six communities of interdisciplinary excellence new?

Artistic Expression & Communication

Science & Technology

Business & Entrepreneurship

Environment & Sustainability

Health & Human Development

Justice, Policy & Public Service

Yes, I read it. Geez. It's ~50 cuts across 32 programs. Yes, some programs have more than others, and undoubtedly some are untouched. Yes, there are some program realignments with fancy, modern titles.

But, these are less than what the University requires. Bonder has a short window to rip off the band aid, and he should have gone further IMO. FULL divestiture of underperforming and underutilized programs, and FULL investment in are programs that produce graduates to actually perform in today's economy. This seems more like adjustments along the margins.

Phase 1 - Fix UM Admissions and reorganize administrative staff as required. Underway.
Phase 2 - Divest select programs and reorganize others. Incomplete.
Phase 3 - Stabilize enrollment and build new programs. ?

This is just my opinion...Recall I am in full support of Bodnar. I believe he is the best hire by the University in a very long time.
 
So, do you now admit that this prior statement of yours is not correct?

"They seem to "spread" the distribution of cuts across the breadth of programs. This is a minimalist approach that probably "cuts" many already known losses."

This is what Bodnar is quoted as saying. Doesn't seem to support what you said.

"He also has said across-the-board cuts are not strategic and do not best support students."

"he also said UM will use curtailment as necessary to cut tenured faculty if attrition doesn't hit budget targets."

I assume that increasing revenue is another way to offset a $10 million shortfall over 3 years.

Again, where did you get the 32 number from?

You may be right that these cuts and actions are not enough, but they are very significant.
 
"The preliminary recommendations call for cuts of an estimated 50 faculty over the course of three years. In October 2017, UM counted some 600 full-time faculty and 200 non-tenurable/part-time faculty."

"The proposal noted a 44 percent drop in degrees awarded across all languages (the time period wasn't immediately clear)."
 
the reduction in department heads, which if done right i think is a great idea, probably won't equal an actual loss of faculty. those not retained as administrators will likely just go back to being full-time professors.

also, about the only way to get rid of a tenured professor is 'financial exigency', which in this case can probably be invoked. um doesn't want to waste a bunch of time and money on lawyers, though, or so i would assume, so 'cutting' by not filling positions when people retire or take another job is unfortunately probably the best way to go about it.
 
Back
Top