By Guest Writers: Marco Li Calzi and Norbert Oros
This article is a complementary student opinion to “St. Lawrence to Address Widening Budget Gap,” published in The Hill News on Feb. 9th 2018. We find it deeply unsettling that there is a practice and an intent to potentially reduce the academic budget.
We acknowledge that St. Lawrence University cannot run with a budget deficit and appreciate that the school wants to consult the student body. St. Lawrence is an educational institution, and as such, its purpose is not only to maintain the quality of the student experience, but to also provide an excellent education that prepares students to succeed in the future.
What concerns us the most is the issue related to tenured-track professors. Let’s go back in time for a moment and remind ourselves that tenure was created to grant professors the freedom to teach any way they wanted without (political) repercussions. Therefore, asking professors to retire early because they have tenure would remove academic freedom from the classroom.
There is relevant research and progress being made here as demonstrated by published work of our faculty. Tenure track faculty in all departments frame the quality of student experience. Most associate professors have published numerous papers, conduct research, have years of classroom experience, and last, but not least, have connections and networking capabilities. These things contribute directly to the students, and by no means are less important than ‘having the third largest alumni network in the country.’ These members of faculty are essential to providing high quality education. We believe that how good the school is at teaching and conducting research determines whether it will survive and succeed at attracting bright students and faculty in the future. It sounds counterproductive to take away resources from something so important and central to an educational institution in order to save money in the short run. Why would we encourage faculty to retire early given that they contribute in a major way to the student experience, despite being costlier? Another potentially controversial issue is ageism as a form of determining should retire. To retire, there is an age component, and we assume professors do not want to be singled out because of their age.
By no means do we claim that adjunct/visiting professors are less capable than those who are associates. But, visiting professors have that position because they are, indeed, visiting. Visiting professors teach as well as conduct research, which benefits the students. Sometimes these professors leave in one or two years, taking their research and experience with them.
If the purpose of the budget cuts is to reduce the expenditures “without affecting the experience of the student,” then it is important to define what the student experience is comprised of. What defines our experience are the professors, classmates, and staff who keep this place clean and running. We are certain that we are not the only ones who think this way. From the perspective of numbers, a person can physically perform two jobs at the same time. But, how does that affect the student?
Lastly, the issue of giving a market value to an educational institution is arguably problematic. We understand and agree that the university operates in a market, and thus, it needs monetary sustenance to survive. We suspect that this might be a matter of priorities and, to a greater extent, a misalignment between the budget and the needs of the student body. It seems that the hope is not to affect the student experience, but the reality of adjusting the academic budget would do just that. Our wish is to encourage those who make decisions about resource allocation to remember at all times that St. Lawrence is first and foremost a school and our home away from home. We as students are perceptive of where the school spends and saves money, and we believe that the student body should be consulted about how satisfied it is with the current situation.
Our goal is to invite the Laurentian community to talk about what we stand for and what is important to us as a university. We also wanted to share our sentiment with others in the hope that the school will align its current practices with its long-term goal of improving SLU’s status as a place where you can get superior education. It is possible, but saving money on teaching will not get us there.