State-level changes should accompany cuts

Less than two years from today, this institution will be running on a budget slimmer by about $35 million. And ain't chump change, not even to an entity as financially expansive as a university. There's no doubt that somebody (many people, actually) will get the short end of this stick. And it's not just here, either. All the state's colleges and universities are in a fiscal hole.

So what do we do about it?

Since Mississippi Governor James Whitfield commissioned Michael O'Shea to analyze the state's higher education system in the 1920s, outside consultants have recommended restructuring the programs offered at each of the state's institutions so none were duplicated.
Let's examine this for a moment, using psychology as the field of study in this example. All three major universities in the state – Ole Miss, Mississippi State and USM – offer both graduate and undergraduate degrees in psychology.

Keep in mind that the shortcomings in the budget are due mostly to the state's coffers running dry, which in turn trickles poverty down into each of the state's eight universities. Now, imagine how much money could be saved across the state education system if we took the best parts of all three psychology programs, and all other duplicated programs for that matter, and moved them to one university. This would create a psychology program not only superior to any of the three already in existence, but would seriously reduce the money spent on psychology-based education statewide.

Sure, we would lose some teachers. Probably some pretty good ones at that. But that was going to happen anyway – the looming idea of faculty cuts is quickly becoming apparent as an un-dodgeable bullet.

University President Martha Saunders said herself, we face "unparalleled fiscal challenges." Let's make some light of this tragedy. If we have to send faculty packing, we should at least be able to walk out of it with a better state university system. And when times are good again, when resources are plenty, our beloved College

Board can pour these resources into highly focused academic areas which only appear at one university, getting the most bang for the state's education buck.

But why hasn't this happened already? Because sentiment and nostalgia have interfered with any past attempt at a restructuring like this. Historically, College Board members and other bigwigs with their fingers in the state education pie tend to quibble and bicker, always fighting for their own alma maters. This winds up splitting resources between universities in an attempt to secure the most for their own favored school.

Now is our opportunity to break this cycle. It won't be easy for everyone, but that is a certainty at this point no matter our chosen course of action.