Alarming Misconceptions About Universities

     Two recent articles show alarming misconceptions about the
nature of universities and the issues behind the pending
University of Manitoba strike.  The issues are not primarily
academic freedom (Students Will Pay the Price, October 14) nor
faculty salaries and the popularity of courses (Storming the
Tower, October 13).  The real issues are control of academic
programs and accountability of university Boards.
     The purposes of universities are to create and pass on
knowledge.  Professors are highly educated and obtain
considerable experience so as to perform these functions, and
have served Manitoba well over the years.  This service is
revealed by statistics on employment and income of university
graduates, by surveys of student satisfaction with programs, and
by objective studies of student learning.
     Who should make decisions about teaching and research
functions is one fundamental issue at the University of Manitoba,
and at other Manitoban universities that have received similar
proposals from their boards.
     Currently the University Senate, which is largely the
faculty, plays the primary role in governing academic programs. 
The proposed changes would put control of fundamental academic
decisions in the grasp of political and business appointments to
the Boards.  But members of the Board, who generally have limited
experience with university classes as students and no experience
with research, lack the expertise to make such academic
judgments.
     Also at issue is whether universities should make public
their finances before carrying out cutbacks.  Current clauses,
but not those proposed by the Boards, require universities to
document financial need through an open examination of their
books, something no honourable administration would fear.
     Openness is essential because otherwise universities can
simply manufacture operating deficits.  They do this by diverting
grant and tuition-based operating funds from teaching and
research functions to such questionable ends as unnecessary
capital projects, special contingency funds, losses for non-
academic continuing education courses, or excessive salaries and
benefits for senior administrators.
     So although faculty are understandably concerned about
academic freedom and salaries, especially for junior faculty
members, the primary issues concern unwarranted corruption of
sound academic decision-making processes and the desire of Boards
to hide financial information about our public universities.  All
Manitobans, including students and anonymous editorial writers,
should be similarly concerned.

Jim Clark
University of Winnipeg