After the Arts and Sciences Council Budget Task Force recommended several options last week for resolving the Arts and Sciences budget deficit, professors are reacting primarily with frustration.
The task force's charge was two-fold: to evaluate whether a substantial budget shortfall was likely in the near future and to conduct a "fairly limited investigation of cuts" in faculty and research support, said Professor of Public Policy Studies Philip Cook, who headed the task force. Many faculty, including Cook, questioned the narrow target of the latter charge.
"The way the report was created was as though all the other considerations were taken in and then the University gave Arts and Sciences its budget last," said Arts and Sciences Council Chair Ronald Witt. "The faculty looked at it from the other side: The heart and soul of the University is Arts and Sciences, and that should be the first thing taken into account."
Specifically, the budget task force considered faculty size, compensation and research support, as well as doctorate research support.
"Of the very unfortunate set of possibilities, the least unfortunate would be to cut the faculty size," Cook said. "But that is worst case--[offsetting the deficit] could be done in a variety of ways." He suggested raising tuition or making cutbacks in non-faculty areas--like construction--that the task force was not charged to consider.
Instead of cutting faculty resources, Department of History Chair John Thompson agreed he would prefer that Arts and Sciences spend less than its current $71.1 million payment for the University's "allocated costs."
"I'm discouraged there was so little reference to the University's mission," he said. "[The report] hardly seemed like something that came from Arts and Sciences--it sounds like something that came from upper management."
Because the $6 million budget shortfall is forecasted to occur in three years, Cook said faculty size may have to be reduced by up to 17 positions per year until then, which will result in a 10 percent smaller regular-rank faculty size.
Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences William Chafe predicted a reduction closer to five faculty positions a year, noting that more severe cuts are very unlikely because of revenue variables like tuition, indirect cost recoveries and continued education.
Maureen Quilligan, chair of the English department, said she would prefer to see cuts in the administration, which may "have far outgrown the faculty."
"The heart and soul of this University is what the students and faculty do--everything else is just add-on," she said. "To reduce the faculty is to deeply compromise where the key activity at the University goes on."
Faculty cited a long list of services that could suffer from a reduction: teaching, research, specificity, class size and tenured faculty instruction.
"Size and quality certainly are not the same thing, but the question is whether size affects quality," said Wesley Kort, religion department chair. "Size does have an effect on the quality of faculty when they are asked to do more to take up the slack."
The budget task force also considered cutting faculty compensation, which has grown about 3 percent per year over the last decade.
Kort, who began his term as chair this summer, said he has not yet experienced a "bidding war" with another school over a faculty member, but he thought faculty loyalty is high enough to retain members, regardless of a small change in compensation.
Quilligan disagreed. "It's hard enough to get people to come here from other fancy places that pay well and support their faculty," she said.
Coupled with a possible increase in the size of the student body, cuts could affect both the student-to-faculty ratio and the percentage of classes taught by tenured faculty, which could affect rankings. According to U.S. News and World Report, fourth-ranked Duke's 8-to-1 student-to-faculty ratio is higher than eight of the other nine schools in the top 10.
Since 1995, the University's faculty has grown by 46 members, which some faculty credit to its increasing quality and reputation. "Morale at Duke is fantastic right now," said Alan Biermann, chair of the computer science department. "Everything is growing, climbing, getting bigger--I don't want to see that reverse."
Chafe said a small reduction to the 580-member faculty pool would not adversely affect the University.
"There are some departments where you could let the faculty shrink and nobody would notice," Michael Munger, political science chair, said.
With its emphasis on small-group experiences and writing training, Curriculum 2000 further complicates reducing faculty.
FOCUS Director Seymour Mauskopf worried decreasing faculty size could potentially affect the program, but Chafe said FOCUS would not suffer because it is one of the University's "signature programs."
Both faculty and doctorate research support are too small and important to cut, Cook said.
Dean of the Graduate School Lewis Siegel said cuts to doctoral support would directly impact support like stipends and summer program support. "We wouldn't be anywhere near as competitive for the best students as we are now," he said.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.