Serious question about UM/MSU

[CDAGRIZ]

Why have two different "systems" if they are both governed by the same Board of Regents? Shouldn't all the campuses just be UM - [blank]?

Follow up question: Are there any other states that have the same Board of Regents/Board of Trustees govern both the "U of" and "State U" systems?

 

[Griz66]

Yes, i live in Georgia and the BOR governs UGA, GA Tech, GA Southern, GA State and numerous other smaller colleges and universities. Seems strange but that is the way it is

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Why have two different "systems" if they are both governed by the same Board of Regents? Shouldn't all the campuses just be UM - [blank]?

Follow up question: Are there any other states that have the same Board of Regents/Board of Trustees govern both the "U of" and "State U" systems?

We have a state with 56 counties that needs maybe 10. Unless the goal is to have everyone work for the state, why would we need more than one BOR?

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Why have two different "systems" if they are both governed by the same Board of Regents? Shouldn't all the campuses just be UM - [blank]?

Follow up question: Are there any other states that have the same Board of Regents/Board of Trustees govern both the "U of" and "State U" systems?

We have a state with 56 counties that needs maybe 10. Unless the goal is to have everyone work for the state, why would we need more than one BOR?

I agree, both schools are very different universities with very different curriculums and programs offered, whats best for UM is not always best for MSU and vice versa.

 

[griz8791]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

 

[NDSU grad]

All of North Dakota's universities are governed by one board.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

 

[Zootown Rox]

I don't know if there are glaring examples in our state's history, but it seems like what happened at UAB was due to the Board of Regents favoring one university over the other. Hurting one program (by shutting it down) in order to help another. At least that is what UAB people are saying happened.

 

[stilwtrgrizz]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

A serious, not smart ass, question. In your mind, what difference does it make? To me, it seems like a game of semantics. As an example of why I'm thinking I like it the way it is, would be the three high schools in Billings. They all have there own campuses, traditions, rivalries etc., but are all governed by one school board. I would assume that Gt. Falls, Missoula, Helena, and Kalispell would all be the same. Seems to have worked fine in those instances, so I see no need to change the setup for the Universities in the sate. Just sayin.......

 

[griz4life]

Why have two different "systems" if they are both governed by the same Board of Regents? Shouldn't all the campuses just be UM - [blank]?

Follow up question: Are there any other states that have the same Board of Regents/Board of Trustees govern both the "U of" and "State U" systems?

Because one system is anchored by a land grant college MSU and the smaller campuses under MSU are part of the greater land grant institution, which by definition serve agriculture and mechanical arts interests. Land grant schools are typically called 'state' schools because the federal government appropriated land to each state for the purpose of funding and creating colleges for the purposes stated.

The UM schools do not serve those interests with the exception of Montana Tech, which was established under federal land grant legislation.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

A serious, not smart ass, question. In your mind, what difference does it make? To me, it seems like a game of semantics. As an example of why I'm thinking I like it the way it is, would be the three high schools in Billings. They all have there own campuses, traditions, rivalries etc., but are all governed by one school board. I would assume that Gt. Falls, Missoula, Helena, and Kalispell would all be the same. Seems to have worked fine in those instances, so I see no need to change the setup for the Universities in the sate. Just sayin.......

I don't think it matters, I just think it's odd. I thought most states had a State U system and a U of system that are separate (California). Maybe that's wrong. Even so, the states that have one governing body over both systems generally still have separate BORs for individual universities (Oregon, Washington). I'm an idea man; I'm just trying to get the ball rolling toward UM absorbing MSU and joining the PAC 13. :thumb:

 

[stilwtrgrizz]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

A serious, not smart ass, question. In your mind, what difference does it make? To me, it seems like a game of semantics. As an example of why I'm thinking I like it the way it is, would be the three high schools in Billings. They all have there own campuses, traditions, rivalries etc., but are all governed by one school board. I would assume that Gt. Falls, Missoula, Helena, and Kalispell would all be the same. Seems to have worked fine in those instances, so I see no need to change the setup for the Universities in the sate. Just sayin.......

I don't think it matters, I just think it's odd. I thought most states had a State U system and a U of system that are separate (California). Maybe that's wrong. Even so, the states that have one governing body over both systems generally still have separate BORs for individual universities (Oregon, Washington). I'm an idea man; I'm just trying to get the ball rolling toward UM absorbing MSU and joining the PAC 13. :thumb:

Oh, OK then. Never thought of that...... :clap:

 

[Grizzoola]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

The short answer is, forget it.

The long answer is, then, we would have, "UM-Missoula (UMM); UM-Bozeman (UMB); UM-Northern (UMN), etc. There are six 4-year schools and eight 2-year schools in the Montana University System (MUS). Missoula College, a 2-year school, for example, is officially, Missoula College-UM (MCUM).

What the MUS is, is a hodgepodge of 14 higher ed. schools in a state of barely 1 million people. The 4-year schools, have too much duplication of majors, esp. education and business. There should be only two 4-year schools: UM and MSU. The other 4 schools should be community colleges, feeder schools to the universities.

But, it's all political, not according to common sense, economics, whatever. Changing things as suggested in these posts would involve more than turning an aircraft carrier in time to avoid a collision. It's more like a train on a track: In order to turn the train from the track it's on, you have to build a new track. How practical is that in MT, given the politics?

Montanans get set in their ways, and the way has been the current MUS configuration. And, the 1972 MT Constitution has put governance of the higher ed. system solely under control of the BOR, which have chosen all higher ed. institutions be under university control. The only power of the legislature is the purse.

 

[IroneagleXP]

"The board of regents of higher education shall serve as regents of the Montana university system, shall use and adopt this style in all its dealings with the university system, and:
(1) must have general control and supervision of the units of the Montana university system, which is considered for all purposes one university . . ."

Mont Code Ann. § 20-25-301 (emphasis added).

That's the main point, I suppose. Why not call everything UM at blank, instead of making it seem like UM and MSU are separate entities? Especially when it's codified that they are the same.

A serious, not smart ass, question. In your mind, what difference does it make? To me, it seems like a game of semantics. As an example of why I'm thinking I like it the way it is, would be the three high schools in Billings. They all have there own campuses, traditions, rivalries etc., but are all governed by one school board. I would assume that Gt. Falls, Missoula, Helena, and Kalispell would all be the same. Seems to have worked fine in those instances, so I see no need to change the setup for the Universities in the sate. Just sayin.......

I don't think it matters, I just think it's odd. I thought most states had a State U system and a U of system that are separate (California). Maybe that's wrong. Even so, the states that have one governing body over both systems generally still have separate BORs for individual universities (Oregon, Washington). I'm an idea man; I'm just trying to get the ball rolling toward UM absorbing MSU and joining the PAC 13. :thumb:

Lol..academically speaking (which is what really matters) um would definitely not absorb MSU. YOU are definitely the "little brother" in this respect.

 

[grizpsych]

IMO, the two schools have different missions. On one side, UM is primarily a liberal arts university. Specifically, a liberal arts education means that you will leave with all of the knowledge that you will need to not be a slave to others for the rest of your life. For example, you should be able to do your taxes by yourself rather than paying someone to do it. You should be able to critically think about politics without having to simply take a pundits word about what a law means. Etcetera (how is this word not recognized as a word is beyond me). On the other side, MSU is primarily an engineering school. Thus, students will leave with an outstanding ability to solve physical problems. For example, discern what is the best available material to build a road. Solve technological problems with putting a satellite into orbit. Etcetera.

True, you can get both types of education at either UM or MSU. However, the above description is their emphasis and is thus what they excel at... mostly.

Edit: The above does not apply for graduate programs, which have more leeway for their missions.

 

[IdaGriz01]

... Because one system is anchored by a land grant college MSU and the smaller campuses under MSU are part of the greater land grant institution, which by definition serve agriculture and mechanical arts interests. Land grant schools are typically called 'state' schools because the federal government appropriated land to each state for the purpose of funding and creating colleges for the purposes stated.

The UM schools do not serve those interests with the exception of Montana Tech, which was established under federal land grant legislation.

And, just be different, and weird, the University of Idaho is the land grant school in this state. Among other things, it runs all the ag experiment stations around the state. UI is also about the only public university whose location is specifically defined in the state constitution (don't ask). Idaho State University, which was the "Southern Branch" of the UI for many years, was named that way strictly for convenience. (Trust me, UI as not about to give up the Land Grant status -- and all the Federal $$$ that goes with it.)

For many years, UI consider itself the only "true" research university in the state. As to the governance, only the UI has a Board of Regents. That Board seems to be "co-equal" with the State Board of Education (SBOE). That looks to me like a (political) "distinction without a difference." That is, the combination BOR/SBOE oversees all the state-supported colleges/universities (including the JCs).

FWIW, Boise State has long since overtaken UI in enrollment (graduate as well as undergraduate), and, I believe, is close or has overtaken them in grant money.