Maine State Consortium: You say tomato, I say tomahto

Isn’t it interesting how two people can look at the same picture or read the same novel and walk away with different interpretations, or reach different conclusions based on the same data set? A week ago, the chancellor and board of trustees of the University of Maine System released their final version of the system’s strategic plan. While administrators at the seven campuses have all rallied around the chancellor and the plan for a job well done and crafting a bold vision for the future, and, while the board of trustees unanimously approved the plan, many faculty, staff, and their unions are frustrated and disgusted with the so-called revisions. One faculty member at my institution referred to the vision as a hallucination.

A poet might use synonyms, metaphors and similes to enhance her palette and repertoire; however, the crafters of the latest version of the University of Maine System’s Strategic Plan have simply embellished their earlier version, apparently having used a photocopier to cut-and-paste words and ideas from that draft. One example is the Maine State Consortium (MSC) – a collaboration of the Universities of Maine at Fort Kent, Presque Isle and Machias.

The revised plan states that the MSC is “a key element of the strategic plan and creates a vibrant, multi-disciplinary entity with high-quality educational programs and the opportunity to become a significant economic engine and cultural focus for the state.” The consortium will offer a single general education program, and the campuses will engage in joint academic program planning. The consortium will have a single budget, one facilities master plan, and a single advisory council. The revised plan states that this consortium, “will be able to meet the needs of its region with greater breadth and depth of cultural offerings,” and “will be of significant size and stature, and able to offer strengthened baccalaureate and professional programs as well as selected graduate programs.”

What did Yogi Berra say about d?j?-vu all over again? The draft plan introduced the world last April to the University of Northern Maine (UNM). The revised plan changes the word “merger” to “consortium,” and uses nearly identical language from the first draft to describe this new idea. Did the chancellor and board of trustees think that a clever synonym would hide the transparency of this folly? How delighted and smug someone must have felt when they developed the brilliant equation: Consortium equals merger.

.

When faculty at the Fort Kent campus met with the chancellor and board or trustees representatives on April 22 they reminded them that during the past 30 years, three separate attempts to create, develop and implement program consortium between UMFK, UMPI and UMM had been a disaster. In the 1980s, an Environmental Studies consortium was formed. In the 1990s, a Behavioral Studies consortium was formed, and, most recently, an attempt was made to form a Liberal Arts consortium.

Each failed not because faculty didn’t try to make them work, but because it was too difficult for the students. Students either didn’t want to travel the distances that the programs required or wanted real, living people in a live classroom. The present plan calls for further developing and expanding distance education courses and programs.

Another example of listening, but not hearing is this notion that every campus, except the flagship in Orono, will be forced to select a new name to “better clarify its identity” and “distinguish it from the University of Maine.” Having attended UMM from 1975-1979 and worked in various capacities here since 1985, and, having been a Ph.D. student at Orono in the early 1990s, I am astounded that someone could possibly confuse the Machias campus for the Orono campus. Perhaps this part of the hallucination.

In June, the board of trustees was presented with more than 1,200 signatures from Washington County residents imploring UMaine System representatives to preserve the name “University of Maine at Machias.” This name is meaningful, has a market niche, and has been recently associated with a U.S. News and World Report’s northern comprehensive college ranking that places UMM within the top five institutions of its kind. If it ain’t broke…

The revised plan thankfully “gives back” a president to the UMM, UMFK and UMPI campus. Although the presidents will report to the chancellor, they will also “report to the vice chancellor for academic and student affairs for all matters related to the Consortium.” So, if the MSC is a key element of the plan, if joint academic planning is to occur, if there is a single budget, if there is a single facilities master plan, if there is to be streamlined admissions, financial aid, bursar and loan-collection processing systems, what non-consortium activities are there? Fund raising? Well, the plan is pretty clear that the rich will get richer.

The revised plan paid little attention to the wishes of the people it purports to help – Maine citizens, whether they are students, faculty, staff, or members of the communities who cherish their individual institutions. It does not provide a shared vision for the future of higher education in Maine, but a corporate vision. The process did not engage people, it made them react to hair-brained ideas disguised as jargon and wrapped in purported financial savings.

Tomato, tomahto, Consortium, merger … Let’s call the whole thing off.

Brian F. Beal is a professor of marine ecology at the University of Maine at Machias.