Ellington

Interim president Phyllis Wise made it clear that she prefers excellence over accessibility when it comes to receiving an education at the UW.

With the debate between preserving accessibility or maintaining excellence increasing with the upcoming budget cuts, it has become a topic of discussion for the UW administration when determining how to accommodate diminishing state funding.

Wise said at last week’s Faculty Senate meeting that her main concern from the budget cuts is upholding UW’s merit and stature. She estimates that $750 to $800 million will be needed in total from all revenue sources to maintain the university’s level of excellence.

“For me, in all honesty, excellence is more important than access,” she said. “[Yet] I realize from a political point of view, that we have to talk about it in terms of access.”

As a public university, Wise believes that decreasing in-state acceptance to the UW will cause constituents to go to the Legislature with their concerns.

“The first message to go out with is that we are going to cut access so that we can maintain excellence,” she said. Wise said that if a little was taken out of everywhere, the cuts’ impacts wouldn’t be recognized by Washington constituents.

As a result of decreasing state financial resources, the 2011-2012 fiscal budget was a major point of discussion during the UW Faculty Senate Committee meeting Jan. 10. The issue of the university’s priority either being accessibility or excellence was addressed, and suggestions of how to make up for the lost state funding were presented.

Last year, UW received $300 million from the state and $400 million from tuition. However, financial support from the state is expected to amount to about $200 million.

Wise suggested that increasing tuition could not be the only answer.

“If [the Legislature] cannot support higher education the way it should, we have to figure out alternative ways of making up that gap,” she said.

Wise and other university presidents have worked with a group from state business and political leaders that Gregoire assembled as a task force to develop solutions to the state’s higher-education funding problems.

The result was the creation of a plan with three key elements: first, to provide universities with tuition flexibility that allows them to set their own tuition; second, to develop a $1 billion scholarship fund through endowment; third, to provide performance metrics to determine if money has been spent in the correct areas.

“[This] doesn’t relieve us from the responsibility of developing our own additional scholarships,” Wise said. “As we raise tuition, there will be an increasing number of students that go far beyond just the lines that qualify for Husky Promise.”

ASUW Director of the Office of Government Relations Quinn Majeski fears that the scholarship fund will take time to establish.

“We appreciate the effort and will take money wherever we can get it,” he said. “But we are concerned it’s being used as a substitute for state funding and there is no substitute for state funding.”

In spite of Wise’s preference for excellence over accessibility, others disagree with her. Majeski believes that quality, accessibility and affordability are all equally important factors.

“We as students believe there needs to be a balance between those factors,” he said. “We care about accessibility and affordability. A public university needs to do its job of serving the entire public, not just middle and upper-middle income brackets.”

Last year there were 22,000 students across the state who qualified for, but did not receive the State Need Grant. With the 11 percent increase of tuition currently in the governor’s proposal, Majeski thinks that more students will be eligible for and require the State Need Grant.

“[Currently, student’s] ability is hindered or completely removed because there isn’t aid to back up these tuition increases,” he said. “We need to rework the budget so that if you increase tuition, you make sure it’s matched to commitments of financial aid.”

Senior Anastasia Maksimenko believes maintaining merit should not be a priority over in-state student admittance to the university. Although she understands that increasing out-of-state students will result in more revenue, she thinks funds can be cut from other areas.

Maksimenko was concerned about the university’s accessibility, and whether in-state students who don’t get accepted into the UW aren’t able to afford tuition out-of-state.

Currently, the Legislature is in session and legislators are discussing the governor’s budget cuts. A final, concrete number will be available after the legislative session ends in April and UW administration will then determine where to reduce funds.

Reach reporter Daron Anderson at news@dailyuw.com.