The University of Nebraska System’s governing board recently decided to cut four programs at its flagship campus, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL). This move came despite protests from faculty members who expressed concerns about how these decisions were made.
The affected programs include Earth and atmospheric sciences, educational administration, statistics, and textiles, merchandising and fashion design. Chancellor Rodney Bennett stated that these cuts are expected to save the university $6.7 million each year.
Many faculty members are unhappy with the decision. The university’s faculty senate expressed “deep disappointment” after the vote, noting that instructors from other departments are now considering leaving the university. They feel the faculty is being disregarded in these major decisions.
In September, Bennett initially proposed eliminating six programs as part of a broader plan to cut $27.5 million from the budget. Faculty contested almost every aspect of the proposal, citing concerns over the rushed timeline and the questionable metrics used to evaluate the programs. They argue that essential data was kept hidden, making it hard to assess the impact of the cuts accurately.
For example, the educational administration program generates $1.2 million in tuition revenue each year, plus $3.6 million from active grants. Cutting this program could lead to significant financial loss. A recent financial review also suggested that the university’s finances are stable, putting into question the need for such cuts.
Despite recommendations from a universitywide committee to keep four of the original six programs, Bennett moved forward with the decision. Faculty members remain vocal about their opposition, and just weeks after the final plan was announced, the faculty senate voted overwhelmingly in favor of a measure to remove Bennett, citing a lack of confidence in his leadership. (Source) This was unprecedented in the university’s history.
Regents who supported the cuts echoed Bennett’s concerns about the university’s financial health. Regent Tim Clare acknowledged the challenges in balancing revenue and expenses and noted the difficult choices ahead.
Not everyone agrees with the necessity of the cuts. Critics, including UNL educational administration professor Sarah Zuckerman, argue that these decisions undermine essential academic programs and threaten the university’s mission and future.
In an era where educational funding is under constant scrutiny, this situation highlights ongoing tensions between fiscal responsibility and program value. As institutions navigate financial challenges, the balance between saving money and preserving academic quality becomes increasingly complex.
