The University of Minnesota announced on Feb. 9 that the graduate school would undergo a reorganization, effective fall of 2010. According to the U, the reorganization is a way to cut costs. With the current economic woes the country is facing and the state’s higher education budget cuts, it may seem like a good idea to cut costs wherever possible. Especially if, as the University claims, this reorganization will not negatively affectthe quality or prestige of graduate programs in any way.
The way things are done currently, graduate programs are run through the freestanding Graduate School. All graduate degree programs report directly to the Graduate School.

Under the new system, however The Graduate School will be disbanded, and a new Office of Graduate Education will be constructed. This new office will mirror the Office of Undergraduate Education and will fall under the control of the Provost’s office. The Vice Provost and the Dean of Graduate Education will be responsible for the oversight of the graduate programs and will report directly to the Provost. According to the plan sent to President Bruininks on Feb.9, this new structure will allow for better communication and help the University toward its goal of being a top-three public research institution. Other universities that have a similar structure include Stanford, MIT, the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Chicago.

According to the plan, titled “Restructuring the Oversight and Support of Graduate Education to Enhance Excellence,” the Graduate School employs 50 full-time employees and runs on a budget of $4.5 million.

The memo sent to Bruininks explains that the responsibilities are unequally divided within the school and that some fall on the shoulders of many different departments. For example, responsibility for admitting students is given to both the Graduate School and the individual degree programs. Thus, a student seeking admission has to file applications with the school and with the degree program.

This new plan is said to benefit graduate students, graduate programs and the University. Students should see reduced costs and more funding due to the reallocation of funds, programs will enjoy more control and personal responsibility, and the University will benefit from the increased prestige and fewer budget constraints. At the same time, this places a much larger burden on the individual programs. Without the aid of the graduate office, individual programs are now forced to take on a number of duties that they may not have the personnel or know how to adequately complete. While the University claims that none of the University’s 150 graduate majors will be lost in the change, it is a claim that can only be verified in time. Furthermore, it has the potential to reduce the amount of applicants that are screened and, thus, accepted. The Graduate School, with over 10,000 students, is second only to the College of Liberal Arts.

The plan has also come with its share of controversies. On Feb. 13, a group of Regent’s professors sent an e-mail to the Board of Regents, urging postponement of the changes. According to their complaint, graduate students and professors were not consulted adequately before the plan was finalized and there was not enough transparency in the decision making process. By Feb. 19, 23 professors had signed the petition—16 current professors and seven retired. The title of Regent’s Professor is the highest honor a professor can receive, and there are 27 current professors total. This incident illustrates the crux of the debate: not whether or nor the structure is effective, but whether or not the University is ready and able to make such a change at this time. The sudden nature of the change caught many by surprise, increasing apprehension among critics.

The Board of Regent’s, however, will not take action. According to them, the University’s announcement was just that, an announcement. Since no programs will be ended, no action is required, explained Board Chair Patricia Simmons in an e-mailed response. She also said that Bruininks and Senior Vice Provost Tom Sullivan would be contacting the Regent’s Professors directly.

This reorganization comes after that of both the Medical School and the Academic Health Center.