University of Utah President Taylor Randall said he can’t ignore concerns about the integrity of arts and humanities at Utah’s universities if H.B. 265, a bill that would require Utah universities to “strategically reinvest” certain funds, passes, mostly because he understands the rationale behind those concerns.
“I don’t think we can ignore what I think has some logic,” Randall told The Daily Utah Chronicle during a news conference. “I think it would be wrong to say we’re looking at eliminating those things. Those are the areas that make us strong as a university, and always will.”
H.B. 265 would give each university three years to implement a strategic reinvestment plan based on six criteria. This is intended to reallocate funding towards programs with a better “return on investment” or career outcomes. If a university can reduce or eliminate areas worth at least the same amount as its reinvestment funds, it can earn that money back.
Randall said since the beginning of the legislative session, U administration’s and his interpretation of what H.B. 265 could mean for the U has “broadened.” This is considering recent political happenings at both the state and federal level.
“Some of it has had to do with the recent federal action with respect to the National Institute of Health,” Randall said. “There’s been a willingness to discuss reallocation towards the research activities of the university.”
Discussions about H.B. 265 have raised concerns that the evaluation criteria for reinvestment favors programs that teach technical skills, such as engineering or accounting, rather than those focusing on communication or critical thinking skills. One of the six criteria suggests that a program’s pertinence to an institution’s academic mission should also be considered when it’s evaluated.
Randall also addressed concerns surrounding some of the vague language used in the bill’s criteria. He said that what the application of those criteria will look like in the U’s plan won’t be clear right away. The Utah System of Higher Education (USHE) will issue guidance during the plan’s development.
“That system governance has a real good feel of the roles and responsibilities of institutions that rely on the USHE board of trustees and their knowledge of what programs are succeeding and perhaps those that aren’t,” Randall said. “The real clarification will come at that level, rather than during the legislative process, and I think we’re comfortable with that.”
Throughout his discussion of H.B. 265, Randall continually reassured that students shouldn’t see any big or harmful changes right away
“With respect to cutting programs, the legislature has been very sympathetic to the students that are in those programs,” Randall said. “You’ll read about kind of a phased approach and a teach-out language.”
These approaches can be employed by the university to ensure that students who are in programs that may be cut can finish their degree.
“I think the important thing is one, we have time. Two, the basic principles are to try to do no harm to individuals in existing programs,” Randall said.
But Randall didn’t give any direct insight into what the U’s strategic plan could look like if H.B. 265 is passed.
He did say U administrators intend to communicate with staff, faculty and students on new developments through the Academic Senate, dean’s meetings, newsletters and other publications.
“We have challenges trying to get the, as they proverbially say, water to the end of the row. It’s not an easy challenge in a big organization like this,” Randall said.
