With the current trend of education budgets being cut year after year, a new budgeting proposal for the state universities is on its way to the Arizona state legislature.
The current budgeting system is based purely on how many students are enrolled in each university and the amount of credits that are taken, but not necessarily completed.
The proposal headed to the state legislature would begin performance-based funding, a system that would provide equal base funding to NAU, ASU and UA. Also, under the new system, a bonus would be awarded based on the percentage of graduates each university produces, their research output and how many credits are completed by their students.
Although the proposal has the support of both the NAU administration and the Arizona Board of Regents (ABOR), the former may be forced to look at how classes are offered, and to make sure the classes students need are accessible to as many people as possible.
Blaise Caudill, president of ASNAU, said he would like to know more about performance-based funding given his concerns about NAU lowering standards for students.
“I think that as a student, I’d like to know more about its direct effect on students as a whole,” Caudill said. “Because, as of right now, my understanding is that it turns universities into a degree mill. I’d want to know more about how the university is going to deal with that, but still ensure quality of education and make sure we don’t become a degree mill.”
Dayle Hardy-Short, a communication studies professor, said the university may face some difficulties with performance-based funding if the curriculum continues to change.
“The curriculum changes regularly, and the longer a student takes to complete his or her degree, the more difficult it becomes to get the classes that he or she needs because courses get dropped, courses get changed, titles get changed, prefixes get changed . . . and so that makes it more complicated,” Hardy-Short said.
NAU President John Haeger said he is concerned about NAU keeping the same quality of education while raising student success rates.
“What can happen — and you have to be very careful — is you have performance metrics, but there isn’t an established performance metric for quality,” Haeger said. “So, how do you guarantee that — even though you’re making it possible for more students to complete courses and more students to get a baccalaureate degree — [you are] going to maintain the quality of the institution?”
Haeger also said he has addressed his concern when speaking with instructors.
“As I’ve talked to faculty groups, I always say what we’re asking you to do is to spend more time teaching students in particular subject matters in order to make them successful,” Haeger said. “We’re not asking you to lower your standards; in many ways we’re asking you to raise your standards.”
Caudill also said he worries about the direction of public education.
“I’d be very concerned that we’re solely focused on the economics of the university and turning the university into an industry versus an educational institution,” Caudill said. “That’s a huge thing about performance-based funding is it’s looking at [it] as an industry . . . where public education should not be an industry —it is public education.”
Haeger said he does see a benefit in changing funding for NAU.
“I think one benefit is it will change the behavior of the institution,” Haeger said. “We will, by definition, get far more focused on producing more graduates for a 21st century economy, and I think that’s a good thing.”
Haeger also said instructors would be held to the same productivity levels that the university would be.
“Certainly, performance-based funding will extend down to the individual departmental level,” Haeger said.
Recent Comments