To meet proposed budget cuts, UNLV would eliminate 33 degree programs with more than 2,000 students in them, killing 315 jobs, UNLV President Neal Smatresk told school employees and students Tuesday.When you have a university willing to sacrifice entire disciplines at the altar of "fiscal responsibility," you know something has gone terribly, terribly wrong. Philosophy is an essential subject, indeed the foundation of many other subjects (putting the "Ph" in PhD"), including law. (side note: it's nice to see UNLV will continue its mid-major athletic existence even while sacrificing its ****ing low-cost philosophy department; I'm a huge sports fan, but c'mon!).
...
Philosophy, Women's Studies and Social Work would go under Smatresk's proposal, which would ultimately require approval from the higher education system's Board of Regents.
Of course, given such drastic measures, these cuts will go down to the The Boyd School of Law, which is ranked 78th according to the latest and greatest USNWR rankings. And the President is concerned, according to Legal Skills Prof Blog (also cited on the faculty alliance page, below):
These additional increases [in tuition] will undermine the Law School's successful formula and render it a mediocre institution."Mediocre, n., Moderate to inferior in quality; ordinary. See Synonyms at average."
What is the Boyd School now, if not mediocre? This is not Boston U. we're talking about. Of course, it's also not Thomas Cooley. But UNLV frankly can't drop that far. It's the only law school in Nevada, meaning it has a virtual monopoly over the students who most want to go there. And it's not like Nevada is unique in its severe budget troubles and the desperate need for cuts or tax increases no one wants.
And furthermore, what is the law school going to do, faced with these budget cuts?
From their Faculty Alliance blog:
Tuition increases will be used to cover the cuts. This will bring tuition increase totals more than triple the cost of just three years ago.Yikes. In an age when law school demand is dropping, these counter-revolutionaries are going to raise tuition even further, as if students continuing to come are a foregone conclusion.
And according to this, despite this perilous situation, they're not cutting a single dollar of law professor salaries.
Look at this salary list from 2008:
Douglas Grant, Prof. of Law: $176,910.48
Joan Howarth, Prof. of Law: $170,468.67
Jeff Stempel, Prof. of Law: $169,206.54
John White, Prof. of Law and Dean: $167,423.65
Elaine Shoben, Prof. of Law: $164,341.98
Christopher Blakesley: Prof. of Law: $163,068.00
And so on. By the way, the cost of living in Las Vegas, Nevada is about 50-60% of what it is in New York. A salary of $160k in Nevada is similar to a salary of about $288k in New York.
Yet, with the state budget in peril and the flagship University possibly dumping its philosophy department, the school of law has chosen to drastically increase tuition rather than cut faculty positions. Tenured professors are going to get the unceremonious axe and these charlatans - in a class of people who often espouse this drivel about "public service" and "social justice" - won't take a pay-cut or see one of their own go, instead choosing to saddle the burden on students who they know will probably come to UNLV anyway.
This is absolutely deplorable, immoral decision-making. The dental school is cutting $1.3 million in salaries, but the law school can't spare a buck and would rather send tuition skyrocketing, which will inevitably put students who are actually dedicated to legal study deeper in debt.
Christ, the a public university is going to completely wipe out important programs (if you're a state institution, you should have a social work department), sending numerous professors into unemployment and the entire law faculty will continue living as comfortably as they did yesterday. They're like gluttons who eat a fourth meal while people starve next door, and if this proposal goes through, the law faculty who went along with it have no standing to tell anyone about "justice."
of course they won't cut the salaries of the law profs- the law school though mediocre is a cash cow for the university- the women studies program- the social work dept and the entire philosophy certainly are not cash cows and the dental department probably is a net drain. Is this immoral, of course but it makes economic sense. Remember there are still all those lemmings out there ready to identure themselves for a now nearly useless law degree
ReplyDeleteThey don't call Las Vegas "sin city" for nothing! Every "sin" is LV involves rip off's in every way, shape and form. They are not limited to gambling and casinos, but higher education as well!
ReplyDeleteA couple reactions: First -- the problem is unwillingness of the state legislature and governor to fund the schools -- the fat has been cut and now we see the cutting of flesh and bone. Folks want no tax increase and they will get the education system resulting from that decision. As to the law school, a couple things: (1) The law professors, all of them, are taking a pay cut of about 5% -- that is system-wide, regardless of teaching discipline. (2) Law professors are indeed paid more than virtually any other professional/grad school instructors --- because the market provides that. Med School instructors earn a lot, too, for the same reason. They can go elsewhere or go into the profession itself (practice medicine, practice law) and be paid better than they are as professors. The world might well be a better place if the dedicated professor of whatever stripe were paid the same, be that person a teacher of philosophy, art, literature, or law --- and if all those professors were paid the same as someone who practices as an attorney --- but the market isn't that way. (3) If law schooltuition is raised significantly, the quality of the law school will suffer --- qualified applicants will choose to go to a similarly rated school that costs less, or a simlarly priced school that is more highly rated. But some quick figuring shows a similar decline if positions are cut. To hold the line on tuition, the law faculty would have to be cut by maybe as much as 20% --- the curriculum would shrink to very nearly a completely required curriculum (students would simply have to take whatever courses would be offered -- not enough professors to offer any electives). Students attending the school would get a $10,000 education for $20,000 rather than a $20,000 education for $30,000. Take your pick --- damned if you do (raise tuition), damned if you don't. The answer, it seems to me, is this -- if you want to keep tuition down (for undergrad, grad, professional schools of all kinds), you need to publicaly fund it. Other states do, Nevada doesn't. And the state of Nevada will have the educational system it deserves for making that choice.
ReplyDelete