Dear Editor,
The Superbuild Growth Fund involves all the Universities and Colleges in Ontario, but only at Trent has the application process been contentious. This is not just because, uniquely at Trent, the proposal was prepared in secrecy, circulated at the last minute, and submitted (in the part concerning Colleges and ‘consolidation’) against the wishes of Senate, but because the proposal is connected with a larger management plan to ‘reposition’ the University, and rationalise its operations.
The reasons given for this plan have not been convincing, at least for me. The numbers about the financial savings from closing the town Colleges and building a new complex at the Symons campus don’t add up. The academic issues – and considerable costs – have not been properly assessed. The thought that Trent might well be able to meet the challenges of the hi-tech and market-oriented future within its current framework of Colleges and locations has not been seriously considered. There seems to be an animus against the decentralized and autonomous spirit in which Trent has thrived, and a management will to change things, regardless.
As for the cry of economic necessity, no-one disputes the pressures of underfunding and the need to cope with inadequate budgets. But there is an element, here, of classical ‘change management’ strategy: first ‘create a crisis’ (last year it was about enrolments), then make the changes. Considering Trent’s undoubted success in its present form, there is an element of recklessness too. In any case, if Trent’s budget is especially strained we need to know why. Is it really because of the town colleges, or because of problems with administrative costs, or with past capital financing? Or is it something else? A solution needs to be lined up with its cause.
Much of this is for Trent itself to work out, though the closing of the town Colleges is of legitimate concern to the City, as indeed is the well-being of the University. There is, however, a wider public dimension to the kerfuffle at Trent which should not be lost sight of. This is that a Government program that is supposed to be addressing needs for post-secondary expansion is being linked to a managerially conducted rationalisation that will fundamentally alter a university. Whether the Board and Administration are acting on their own, or under the gun, not only is the future of Trent at stake – about which many care passionately – but a vital question of academic autonomy that has implications for universities throughout the Province, and indeed beyond.
Yours sincerely,
Andrew Wernick
(printed in the Peterborough Examiner on Tuesday, January 18th, 2000)