Keeping our alumni informed of the changes taking place in engineering and in higher education as a whole has always been one of my goals in writing this column. In particular, I have used this space as a forum for discussing the funding issues that push and pull against the continued progress that we must make to move Auburn Engineering ahead.
This has been a particularly daunting challenge this year, because the playing field seems to change almost daily. Indeed, there is a lot of confusion surrounding higher education funding today, and many of our alumni - some of whom have children of their own in our programs - have contacted me.
Their questions can be easily divided into two categories: where we stand now, and where the College of Engineering is heading. In a sense, I feel better about the future, because our track record indicates that we have in the past succeeded in the face of adversity. To get there, however, we will have to marshall our resources and adapt to change.
The Legislature, which failed to pass an education budget during the regular session this spring, must convene in special session to reconsider and pass a package that is acceptable to the governor, who is calling for further cuts to higher education. It is anticipated that Auburn will receive an increase of slightly less than 1 percent - the first increase of any kind in the past three years, when appropriations were cut nearly 8 percent. (It should be noted here that Auburn's state appropriation per student is approximately $5,000, compared to a regional average of $7,000.)
The university's board of trustees, while expressing concern about the effect of tuition increases on Alabama's middle-income residents, increased tuition 8.9 percent effective in the fall to maintain academic quality. The new tuition rates will be $855 per quarter for in-state students.
President Muse indicated that the board of trustees endorses the implementation of annual increases that will allow Auburn to reach Southeastern institutional averages. In exact terms, Auburn's annual resident tuition for 1996-97 was $387 below the regional average for similar institutions, a gap the administration proposes to close over a five-year period.
At the same time, the university will implement a wide range of internal measures designed to cope with revenue shortfalls. These include gradually reducing its debt service, pursuing lease/leaseback arrangements to obtain funding for deferred maintenance, and reallocating 1 percent to 2 percent of the university budget to enhance high-priority programs in areas consistent with the university mission.
As the university reallocates its resources, some departments and programs will be steadily reduced in size, some will be combined with other departments and some will be closed. How will this affect engineering? Because we are at the leading edge of this process, it is too early to tell. I have, in effect, been charged by the administration with prioritizing, and defending, all of our programs in engineering - and I can tell you now that there will be some uncomfortable decisions to be made not too far down the road.
At this time it would be presumptuous of me to second-guess the outcome. But as we begin this decision-making process, our goal will be to retain the mission, the integrity, and the future of Auburn Engineering within a framework that is fair to our students, our faculty and staff - and our alumni. I welcome your input and your support as we undertake these difficult steps into the future.