In my last article, I discussed some obstacles that we in student government have had to face in terms of transparency of budgetary information and administrative accountability. After the article ran, I was met with a variety of fascinating responses-mostly of appreciation for being a voice to people within our college who apparently fear that they could lose their jobs if they were to speak out the way that I can.
Others made it clear that I’ve made some people in the college very uncomfortable or hot under the collar, so to speak. Student Government even voted to remove the student government logo from this column-just to be safe.
You see, as a student, I have nothing to lose by voicing these concerns. And I’m sure that to some people, my voice may sound a bit like fingernails scraping the chalkboard, but I happen to be a firm believer that honesty can never be a wrong choice-no matter how bad it sounds.
My honest observations and my legitimate questions were met with comments like, “You know they’re going to burn you at the stake, don’t you?”
As humorous and fun as these comments are, they speak to a problem that undercuts the reputation and character of this institution.
Organizations must be willing to take criticism-the good ones actually invite it. I happen to believe that this organization is filled with excellent people with unbounded capabilities. Unfortunately, they sometimes seem to be held back, kept apart, and kept from having free and open communication, and that is a shame.
But, for what it’s worth, I’ve located the only piece of budgetary information available to the public-the UC Budget FY 2007, viewable to all at . This cumbersome document holds a dozen new questions that ought to be answered.
For example, did you know that for every $1000 a main campus student spends in tuition, approximately $230 is paid back to students and faculty by the University through scholarships and fellowships? And a little less than $30 comes back to Clermont students and faculty for each $1000 in their tuition paid. So, what does RWC give back to its faculty and students for each grand you pay them? About $3.50, which is about half what was given back to Raymond Walters’ students and faculty last year.
Another interesting note: one our greatest increases in expenditures this year is in the area of Public Service (programs like Continuing Education and other services offered to members of the community external to the University-in other words, not students.) While the University and Clermont dramatically lowered these expenditures, RWC increased them. To quantify-we spend three times as much for these programs as we do for scholarships and fellowships, whereas Clermont spends about a fifth of the amount paid out for scholarships on their Public Service programs.
Now, does this mean that Raymond Walters is wrong in offering these programs to the community? Absolutely not! Programs like Continuing Ed are part of the backbone that make this institution the unique and incredibly valuable place that it is. However, the trends at main campus and Clermont did include cuts in the Public Service arena.
Clermont additionally indicated its support of Student Services by surpassing RWC in actual dollars allotted for their students this year, plugging in roughly $180 for each $1000 in tuition, whereas RWC allotted $106 and even cut Academic Support.
Sadly, Student Services includes the following: “funds expended for those activities for which the primary purpose is to contribute to the student’s emotional and physical well being, as well as his/her cultural and social development outside the context of the formal instructional program. Included in this category are Admissions and Registration, Counseling, and Student Financial Aid.”
Perhaps even more disheartening is the definition for Academic Support, which includes “all funds expended for activities primarily to provide support services that are an integral part of one of three primary missions-instruction, research, and public service. Included in this category are Academic Affairs Administration, Libraries, Museums and Galleries, and the Deans’ offices.
NOTE: Because there are no open venues of communication and no public documentation available to students at Raymond Walters, I was unable to find any official information about these numbers other than what I found on pages 5 through 16 of the previously mentioned budget online. I compared the Undesignated General Funds for Uptown Campus (p.11), Branch Campuses Clermont College (p. 16), and Branch Campuses Raymond Walters College (p. 15). The calculations included within this article are based solely on the budgeted Gross Tuition, Fee and Other Student Charges.
I have said it before, and I will say it again: this college is an incredible place-but something must be done to answer these and dozens of other questions being raised by entities all over the school-and within the University.
A very wise man recently recommended a book to me called “Leadership Is an Art,” by Max DePree, and I found the following pertinent question:
“What is it without which this institution would not be what it is?”
Perhaps at least this question might be considered for response?
Want to help? Contact the Student Government office at or email me at .