Breaking Away
Top public universities push for ‘autonomy’ from states
By MARIAN WANG
ProPublica
The chancellor of Oregon’s higher-
education system currently oversees all
seven of the state’s public colleges and
universities. But as of July next year,
she’ll be chancellor of four.
The schools aren’t closing. Rather,
Oregon’s three largest state schools are
in the process of breaking away from
the rest of the public system.
The move, long pushed by some
university leaders in the system, will
give the University of Oregon, Portland
State University and Oregon State Uni-
versity more freedom to hire and fire
presidents, issue revenue bonds, and
raise tuition.
Across the country, a small but
growing number of public universities
are making similar pushes, looking to
cut deals with state lawmakers that
scale back direct oversight, often in re-
turn for less funding or for meeting cer-
tain performance targets. Over the past
few years, schools in Texas, Virginia
and Florida have all gotten more flexi-
bility to raise tuition. Other plans have
recently been broached, though with
less success, in Wisconsin, California
and Louisiana.
The proposals vary in scope, but
their proponents generally argue that
more autonomy allows public universi-
ties to operate with less red tape and
with greater freedom to raise revenue
as state funding has fallen.
But many within higher education
point to the potential downsides. They
worry that these universities — often
the better-known and wealthier public
universities — could end up sidelining
broader state goals such as access and
affordability, in pursuit of their own
agendas, such as moving up in college
rankings.
“My fear is that if public flagships
become so focused on revenue and
OCTOBER 18, 2013
prestige, and so focused on autonomy, tonomy from the Commonwealth.
they will minimize their commitment Those agreements mandated that the
to the public agenda,” said Richard No- schools still meet various benchmarks
vak, who was previously director of — but they also gave the universities
public-sector programs at the Associa- wiggle room.
Three years after the deal, a state au-
tion of Governing Boards. “They
should be leading the public
agenda. If they privatize too “It’s not an accident that you
much, they’re not going to be
see this happening among
doing it for much longer.”
Others have similar con- big, well-funded publics.”
cerns.
“I think there’s a potential
for confusion, unhealthy competition dit report concluded that while the
and misuse of resources,” said Robert schools were meeting their “access”
O’Neil, who headed the statewide Uni- goals, the number of low-income stu-
versity of Wisconsin system and was dents at each of the universities — as
also president of the University of Vir- measured by federal Pell grants — was
ginia. In O’Neil’s experience, central- actually decreasing. (A university
ized oversight helps keep in check am- spokesman said enrollment of low-in-
bitions that might lead colleges to come students has gone up since then.)
Even some supporters of moving to-
pursue wasteful projects or duplicative
ward privatization have begun to have
programs.
There’s relatively little research on second thoughts.
James Garland, former president of
the overall benefits or drawbacks of
schools gaining autonomy, but it does Miami University, a public university
appear that such universities often end in Ohio, was once a strong proponent
up resembling private colleges, moving of what he calls “semi-privatization” of
toward a “high tuition, high aid” model American public universities, having
in which schools hike sticker prices sig- headed a university that he describes as
nificantly while offering big discounts “public in name only.” In 2009, he
to students schools are trying to attract. wrote a book arguing that public uni-
(As ProPublica has detailed, state versities should be autonomous and
schools have been giving a growing deregulated by their states.
In the years since, Garland said, his
portion of grants to wealthier students
and a shrinking portion to the neediest.) views on the autonomy question have
State and university officials push- “mellowed.” Though he still believes
ing for more autonomy often balk at the autonomy can make sense for some
term “privatization,” noting that the uni- schools, he’s also concerned about the
versities aren’t severing all ties with the potential pitfalls.
state.
As one planning group at the Uni-
versity of Virginia wrote last month,
“Autonomous is not the opposite of
public.”
The University of Virginia, along
with two other state universities, struck
deals in 2005 that won it significant au-
NORTHWEST LABOR PRESS
“Some of these flagships would like
to make decisions that benefit their own
financial future and give them the abil-
ity to build posh dining halls or giant
stadiums or create new nanotechnology
centers,” Garland said, “when what re-
ally may be more needed than that is
simply providing a high-quality rigor-
ous college education for legions of stu-
dents in the state who can’t afford that
now and have no place to go and get it.”
“It’s not an accident that you see this
happening among big, well-funded
publics,” Garland added.
At the University of Virginia, inter-
nal discussion of further steps toward
privatization has continued. As the
Washington Post recently reported, a
draft report from a university planning
committee recommended “another ma-
jor restructuring of the relationship be-
tween the University and the Common-
wealth.” The document notes that the
change “would not mean complete pri-
vatization.”
University of Virginia spokesman
McGregor McCance said the draft re-
port was part of early discussions about
possible models for public higher edu-
cation, and that there are no plans for
the university to ask for additional au-
tonomy.
Colleges and universities that do
seek to move in this direction need to
have candid conversations about their
goals, said Garland: “As more and
more schools argue successfully for
some kind of autonomy from their
states, there has to be a real under-
standing about what the mission of
those schools is going to be in the fu-
ture and there has to be some way of
evaluating their conformity to that mis-
sion.”
In Oregon, they’re still feeling their
way through. All of the state’s public
colleges will still be overseen in some
way by a coordinating commission.
That includes the three largest schools,
which, even with their new freedoms,
will still need the commission to ap-
prove certain items, such as tuition
hikes beyond 5 percent. The details of
how that system of checks and balances
will work — and how the change will
affect the smaller universities still part
of the system — remain to be seen.
“It’s such a turbulent time for higher
education, there’s a lot to be said for
helping to position institutions to be
much more nimble when it comes to
shaping the business and delivery of
higher education,” said Ben Cannon,
the governor of Oregon’s education
policy adviser, who was recently ap-
pointed head of the commission.
As to whether the new autonomy
will actually help schools become more
nimble, Cannon acknowledged, “It’s
kind of unproven.”
Asked what they will call the new
structure and whether the “Oregon Uni-
versity System” will nominally con-
tinue to refer to all seven universities,
Cannon said that was still being de-
cided.
“That’s a complicated question. The
labels are still up for grabs,” Cannon
said. “The structure really isn’t. That’s
done.”
PAGE 5