On Being A Public University

Je mestime chanceaux d'etre ici particulierment maintenant quand on est en course de celebrer l'anniversaire de cent vingt-cinq annees de cette institution. I consider myself extremely fortunate to be here - especially now as we celebrate the 125th anniversary of this institution. Inaugurations and anniversaries provide wonderful moments for celebration and reflection. As we have addressed our anniversary, we have taken the approach of dividing the evolving history into periods on the basis of presidential eras. As most of you know, we might well have broken up history in terms of names of the institution. We have now had nine presidents, and seven names. The presidents are winning, but it's still too close to call.

Try to imagine what challenges Vetal Cyr faced as he started the educational process here one hundred and twenty five years ago. Imagine what it was like to be a young college graduate traveling here from St David on foot and realizing that you were it. No highways, no bridges, no phones, no faxes or computers, in fact no building; just as much cold and snow then as now, and a difficult job to do. As I do this exercise I think it is the concept of knowing and accepting that you are "it" that underlies much of what we have done here as educators over the century and a quarter. In the classroom and in many of the careers that our students are preparing for, they will be personally responsible for their actions and decisions. In this regard, I like the quote of Robert Kibbee, "The quality of a university is measured more by the kind of student it turns out than the kind it takes in."

Let's go back even before Principal Cyr for a moment. As daunting as his task was, and as successful as he was (as have all of our presidents been since) in steering a true course for the future, they all, even Cyr, began with a mandate and a charge from the state. The individual who is credited with encouraging the legislature to create this institution was Major William Dickey. Major Dickey moved here from Gardner essentially to prolong his life which was threatened by lung disease.

In Fort Kent, he prospered in terms of his health, his business and his calling as a civic leader. He ultimately represented this area for thirty years in the state legislature. In this latter capacity especially he was, above all, a champion of the rights of the people who inhabited this valley since 1785, the descendants of the Acadian people who, escaping the great deportation, found their way to the valley and settled as farmers. When first elected to the legislature from the town of Strong, Dickey served on the legislative committee that negotiated the Webster-Ashburton Treaty of 1842 settling the ongoing border disputes between the United State and Canada. From that time on, the rights of the people of this valley became a cause to which he dedicated his life.

The history of this institution demonstrates in a very unique way how and why education is a fundamental prerequisite of a democracy and a reason why it is in the best interest of the state to provide public higher education. The Acadians settled both sides of the St John River and thought of themselves as one people, but in 1842, by the stroke of a pen, those living on the southern shore of the river were declared US citizens, while their brothers and sisters and cousins across the river became Canadians. They had their own communities and did not understand US culture, or politics and did not speak English - but suddenly they were citizens of the United States and of Maine.

One can read newspaper accounts and reports in the legislative records regarding the extent to which these people were taken advantage of by outsiders. (We can discuss over lunch whether we think that is an ongoing Maine tradition). Dickey realized that only through education could these self sufficient French speaking farmers and their families become true participants in American society. And he further understood that the only way they could be educated would be to create a school for teachers here in the valley.

In the first years, the school operated for two terms each fall in Fort Kent and another two during spring in Van Buren. Eventually funds were allocated for a building and Fort Kent became the permanent home of this institution. Happily I might add as an aside, all of this took place during the lifetime of Major Dickey and among the wonderful panels that have been created as part of our anniversary celebration you may see a photograph of an early class with both Vetal Cyr and a seated and beaming Major William Dickey.

We will not walk through all of our institutional history today. What I want to establish is simply that this institution was created by the legislature of Maine to meet an exceptionally clear public need. Moreover it has fulfilled that need throughout its history in two important ways; first by providing access to higher education for the people of this region and the state, and secondly, by offering a curriculum that prepares students for careers important to the state.

With that example in mind; what does it mean to be a public university in the United States today?

At the level of the family looking to finance higher education, the meaning of public is simple. Because of state support public institutions charge far less to the student and his or her family. This fact is easy to see and simple to understand; and yet it is at the same time extraordinarily profound for it is the basis on which public institutions provide the open door to higher education in this country.

I have had the good fortune in my career to work for both independent and public colleges and universities. And I will tell you a secret, they are just like us. As educators they are just as dedicated, just as motivated, just as caring as we are. There is not a doubt in my mind that vitality of higher education in this country is a product of the dual systems operating in tandem. Both sectors bring important attributes that combine to create the strength of our system of education.

Within the public-independent balance the particular virtue of the public sector is access. It is the public sector that insures that all Americans can aspire to a four year college education. Eighty percent of American students today (roughly six million students) attend public institutions where low tuitions insure access. No other mechanism can so ensure that accessibility. It is suggested from time to time that we should raise the price of public higher education and use the additional revenues to preserve access through financial aid for those unable to pay. So long as there is an eligibility component to financial aid - that is, as long as some people qualify and some don't; then no matter how perfect you make the allocation system there will always be an element of doubt regarding whether I am going to qualify or not. And that doubt is going to be strongest among those who have the least experience with higher education. In short, the ones who need it most are the least likely to know how to make it work or to trust that it will.

Therefore, if the goal is access, there is no more effective way of providing that access than by holding tuitions low - to a point where anyone can say "well I guess I can find a way to do that." Are there some people of means who could pay more? - of course. But if the biggest downside to this policy is that a few people who could pay more get a bargain education, that's not a bad problem to confront. One of the joys of our profession is that education is not a zero sum commodity. Knowledge gained by one does not reduce the amount available to another; and an increase in knowledge across the board really does improve life for all.

Over time, we have as a nation tried other models to preserve access. The Basic Opportunity Grant Program was created in 1972 to provide a floor amount equal to the cost of education for all students in the United States. The goal was that every child would have at least the minimum required to attend college either through this federal program or through their families. A wonderful goal, but the moment the program was created, a phenomenon we might call political physics took over. That phenomenon says that natural forces will always outpace political action. In a word, inflation and therefore the costs of attending college grew faster than federal appropriations for the program. Today, while still an excellent program, the Pell Grant does not come near the actual cost of attending college.

Before the basic grants there was the original GI Bill. That was probably the closest we ever came (for veterans at least) to guaranteeing a college education of one's choosing to citizens. And what was the result? The outcome was a whole new generation of college graduates who went on to become civic and business leaders through one of the most prosperous periods in our history. Many factors contributed to the economic miracle that was the second half of the last century in the US, but I submit that the GI Bill combined with the unparalleled growth of higher education and the resulting extension of that education to vast segments of the population was a significant factor.

World War Two and the ensuing cold war shaped most of my life. This country learned in the early days of that war that we were grossly under-educating vast segments of our population and as a result bypassing a huge reservoir of talent. Given the desperate defense needs, the war and post war years saw enormous growth in higher education. They were the golden years for higher education and as a consequence our nation prospered beyond belief.

Nationally, I believe this commitment to universal higher education that so changed the lives of my generation and the vision of America is under siege today. Funding for public higher education as a national priority and as a percentage of state budgets has been slipping for decades and we are only now becoming aware that there may be a problem. An article in USA Today on August 25th begins with a headline that public tuition is up in 49 states this fall. Tuitions are up from 1.7% in Montana to 39% in Arizona. And the article points out that in many states, while paying more, students will be getting less in terms of services. The article labels the issue as a fraying of the social contract for the middle class.

The very next day an editorial in the New York Times described the same phenomenon. In their words "Public Colleges and universities which grant more than three-quarters of this country's degrees have been steadily undermined by state budget cuts and a mood of legislative indifference." The editorial concludes that "unless the country renews its commitment to public higher education, the universities will find their faculties decimated and their degrees devalued - and the students who can afford to pay looking elsewhere for college degrees [note even this statement overlooks those who would not be able to pay at all]. And it concludes, "The states will then learn that important institutions are easy to destroy and devilishly difficult to rebuild."

Compare this situation that I believe we confront as a nation today with the following quote from President Lyndon Johnson, "the idea of a college education for all young people of capacity, provided at nominal cost by their own states, is very peculiarly American. We in America invented the idea. We in America have developed it with remarkable speed." That statement was made at what we now know was the zenith of our growth period in terms of national access to higher education. I believe that we in America are in danger of losing sight of this ideal.

Education as a commodity provides a dual benefit, a value to both society and to the individual (the latter in terms of quality of life and financial reward). In recent years, Americans including those of us in education have focused far too much on the financial impact of additional education for the individual. What is the statistic we use over and over regarding the financial benefit for completing a college degree? One million dollars - that is the amount data suggest that a person with a bachelor's degree will earn over and above a high school graduate in the course of a lifetime. Unfortunately the response to that statistic seems to have been "well if they are going to make that much more money, let them pay for more of it themselves. The lessons of the 1940's, 50's and 60's concerning the benefits to all of society achieved by educating more Americans is quietly fading and is in danger of passing away. If that happens, our nation will be the worse for it.

If we honestly believe the educated individual is the principal winner in the equation, then we might allow market forces to drive up the price, turn higher education over to proprietary institutions and the market and live with far fewer persons being educated, and with significant segments of our population being left out altogether. But if we acknowledge as we learned during World War II that when the chips are down, we will all be better off if far more persons than can afford the market price are educated - then we will support lower public tuitions. During the course of my lifetime, there is no doubt about which course of action has been better for the United States - better not just in terms of equity and human dignity, as central as those factors are to our democratic way of life, but even at the practical level, better off economically and in terms of national strength. There is a correlation between the period when we built the finest system of public higher education the world has ever seen and at the same time became the most successful nation in the world.

This brings me to the role of the public institution as a pathway to specific programs needed by society. There was an article in the New York Times last Friday (September 12th) addressing the fact that high law school tuitions and student loan debts were driving young lawyers out of socially important but relatively low paying jobs in public interest law. The article begins with a young lawyer in Massachusetts who was thrilled with her job in the district attorney's office until she realized how difficult it would be to repay $70,000 in law school debt on a $26,000 a year salary. "I had to make a life decision," said Mrs. Clifford, who joined the Boston Office of a prestigious law firm, "I was 31 and living in an apartment in my parent's house, driving a car with 235,000 miles on it."

I use this example because it shows so clearly that tuition levels can directly impact what jobs are filled in our society - but of course it is impossible to say this to this audience without knowing that an entire auditorium full of educators are thinking - "and we've been living under the same conditions for how long?" Just to complete the irony in this regard, this article proposes the possibility of a student loan forgiveness program as one possible solution. Does anyone remember the National Defense Education Act? And if you went into teaching, what happened? a portion of your student loans were forgiven.

This university was created to serve the people and the state of Maine and we continue to do so. Recall if you will the first 46 "thoroughly interested pupils" who started right here in 1878 - they did not come hoping to earn one million dollars more than their contemporaries. They came because they wanted to teach, to serve young people and our communities. Service was their goal, not financial reward. And from that first class on, the people who have attended this university by and large have shared that commitment to accomplish something of personal value with their lives. A free market system of higher education will not produce those same outcomes. And this is where the two strengths of public higher education converge. Low tuitions guarantee access to higher education, but they also support a flow of people into jobs critical to our society including of course, education.

This leads me to an important aside; a point far less global, but vitally important to the future of this institution. Once upon a time the state provided all of the resources that were needed to operate this campus - (incidentally, the initial appropriation was $1000 to operate the Training School). Together with the small amount that was charged to students my predecessors were able to keep this ship moving very effectively. I have to tell you that as we look to the future, state support alone will not keep us going and we cannot afford to raise tuition to the amounts that would be needed to close the gap without threatening access. The difference will have to come from private support. That means gifts from alumni, friends, members of the community and corporations. Private colleges across the country have operated this way for decades and public colleges in other regions have made great strides in this direction. The third largest collegiate endowment in this country is at the University of Texas, a public institution.

We must and we will enter the arena. Supporters of this institution have traditionally been outspoken and aggressive when necessary. Now we need you to be equally forceful in helping us to generate the resources we will need to maintain the margin of excellence that has always characterized this university. Like all universities, UMFK needs an endowment to stabilize the vagaries of state funding. We have initiated a routine annual fund drive that we will be carrying on every year. Through the efforts of the U Maine system, we have also embarked on a program of planned giving, especially through Charitable Gift Annuities. We will soon initiate a bequest society for UMFK. Historically, the endowments at all major colleges and universities in this country have been created primarily through bequest gifts - gifts from one generation to provide stepping stones for another.

Let's take a moment to peer into the future. What might UMFK look like in five to ten years?

As a public institution, part of a strong state university system, UMFK will continue to be accessible and affordable and will continue to grow slowly over the next five years as recognition of the quality of this institution and of the total university system continues to grow. I expect that we will reach a headcount close to 1000 during that period (we begin this fall at 820) and that is probably just about right for us. For us the key indicator will be our student-faculty ratio. We do not want to change the nature of who we are, and since what we do occurs in the classroom, that means sustaining an appropriate balance of faculty, students and facilities in order to insure our ability to deliver personal attention.

The state is blessed with an outstanding land grant institution and premiere urban institutions. This is as it should be. But that is not the best environment for all students and this campus functions as a place where students who thrive best in a smaller environment can perform.

Last year we worked closely with our next door neighbor, Fort Kent Community High School to support their successful grant proposal to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. The funding description of the program under which the school applied states The initiative seeks to catalyze a shift from large, anonymous, comprehensive schools to smaller learning communities, in which strong relationships between students and adults are combined with challenging, inquiry-based curricula to offer students a learning experience that is at once highly motivating and rigorous and that provides meaningful preparation for college and work. Elsewhere it goes on, Several important intermediate student outcomes, such as engagement and academic self-concept, appear stronger at the small model and start-up schools. There was an OPED piece in the Times yesterday on this Gates Foundation Program.

Even the largest universities in America today go to great pains to explain that they provide a small caring environment - just like a small campus. Well we're not like a small campus, we are one, and have always been one. Maine should and does take great pride in its major research universities and land grant university - but as an educator, I am very happy that the system includes small regional institutions as well.

Is there a downside to being a small institution? You bet; enrollment pressures, financial pressures - a nagging sense of constantly living on the edge that can be a frustration and distraction from intellectual work. This has been a component of this institution throughout its history - maybe it really does build character - there's a scary thought. The other downside is a curious mixture of good and bad. It is the fact that everyone must do everything. In this institution everyone wears multiple hats and bears a wide range of responsibilities. Since the day I interviewed here I have been amazed at the number of different responsibilities our faculty and staff members perform - and perform well. The multiple roles mean we understand the total enterprise better than most, but it sure leaves us worn out at the end of the day.

Currently fewer than 20 percent of our students live on campus. With the new residence hall, that will increase to about 40 percent, closer to state and national norms. We will need a new classroom building sooner rather than later and we must look to create additional parking facilities. Currently only about 4% of our students come from out of the area (if we include nearby Canadian neighbors as part of our area). I think we should look to increase our population from Southern Maine, other New England and Middle Atlantic States to about 20 - 25%.

Why will students come here? They will come to be personally challenged and engaged. They will come for the small college experience, they will come because we will offer a high quality academic program with a great deal of personal attention at an affordable price, they will come because they love the outdoors and want access to some of the few remaining wilderness areas in this country as they study the environment and they will come because they love winter sports. Finally, I believe they will come because they love small communities and they hope to live and work and seek their livelihood in small rural communities just like this one. We will discuss more about our role as an educational institution in a rural environment this afternoon at 2:30 - I hope you will join us if your schedule permits. But I believe our rural nature will be a major factor shaping our future. For me, this brings us full circle back to our roots and our mission of service to this region.

We intend to build this institution over the next few years in order to sustain the kind of high quality personal education we have always provided and to contribute to the resurgence of the region. What will this community look like? I believe the week of the CanAm Crown sled dog race and the week of the World Cup Biathlon in Fort Kent in March (watch for us on national TV) will provide a taste of the future. Winter sports, tourism, our beautiful lakes and rivers and our forests - these are magnificent resources that we can offer in abundance. And they are fitting supporting elements for the warm and welcoming people of this region.

The future will be exciting and challenging and it will be different. I believe it will continue to tie this institution closely to the communities that sustain us and to the state we exist to serve. We will work to create endowed funding to bring art and music to the area. We will continue to guide our actions by always asking what is best for our students.

Allow me to conclude with one of my own favorite thoughts about education.

Back in the early 80's, I attended a session for institutional researchers in Princeton. It was a time when we were looking to numbers and quantifiable data to make our case as educators and there we were at the center of educational testing and evaluation. A professor from Syracuse University was the keynote speaker and he proceeded to poke holes in most of the data oriented theories we were toying with to justify the importance of education. Time and again he pointed out how the data failed to justify our conclusions. Finally he came to the centerpiece of his talk and he introduced what he called "the argument from laughter."

Everyone in the room reacted, some with snickers, some with quizzical looks and almost all with total disbelief. He then proceeded to explain to us that in every culture around the globe, and at every age and stage in life, when people are wrestling with a problem and suddenly the light shines, and they get it, or they catch on, or they grasp the concept - what do they do? they laugh. That laughter, that irrepressible joy that comes from learning, when all is said and done, is the most effective proof we have of its human value.

D'enseigner, de rire, et de partager en la joie c'est la raison d'etre de cette universite. C'est que les members de cette faculte et personnel marveilleux font si bien. C'est l'affair le plus extraordinaire de notre profession et c'est purquoi L'Universite du Maine a Fort Kent est une institution formidable! Et, c'est la raison que j'ai la meilleure occupation du monde. Un gros merci a tous pour avoir participier en cette moment joyeuse avec moi, ma famille et avec cette universite si speciale. Ensemble, on continue de servire les habitants de Fort Kent, del la Vallee St. Jean, et de le village mondiale.

Teaching, sharing that spontaneous joy and laughter is what this university is all about. It is what the members of this marvelous faculty and staff do so well, it is what makes this a wonderful profession and the University of Maine at Fort Kent such a wonderful institution, and by the way, it is the reason why I have the best job in the world. Thank you so very much for sharing this moment of great joy with me and my family and with this special university as we continue to serve the people of Fort Kent, the St John Valley and beyond.

IT'S A GREAT TIME FOR THIS UNIVERSITY - THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SUPPORT!