r ep or t resum - eric · a. student affairs 9 responsibilities 59 b. student enrc!iments 10 vlil....
TRANSCRIPT
R EP OR T RESUMED 015 636
EF 001 259
A PROVISIONAL LONG-RANGE FLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN
WISCONSIN.BY- KOHLER, WALTER J. AND OTHERS
WISCONSIN COORDINATING COMMITTEE FOR HIGHER EDUC.
PUB DATE JAN 67
EDRS PRICE MF-$0.75 HC-$5.56 137F.
DESCRIPTORS- *EDUCATIONAL OBJECTIVES, *EDUCATIONAL
SPECIFICATIONS, *FINANCIAL POLICY, *MASTER PLANS, *STUDENT
COLLEGE RELATIONSHIP, COLLEGE FACULTY, COLLEGE PLANNING,
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
THE COORDINATING COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION PREPARED
A COMPREHENSIVE UPDATING OF PREVIOUS STATEMENTS ABOUT
LONG-RANGE PLANNING IN VIEW OF NEW DEVELOPMENTS. THE PURPOSE
OF THE STUDY IS TO PROVIDE A NEW PROVISIONAL FLAN BASED ON
THE GOALS OF HIGHER EDUCATION IN WISCONSIN FOR ALL
INSTITUTIONS IN THE WISCONSIN SYSTEM. THE STUDY IS BASED
PRIMARILY ON ENROLLMENT PROJECTION DATA AND EXTENDS TO SEVEN
BROAD AREAS--(1) STUDENTS--STUDENT AFFAIRS, ENROLLMENT,
FINANCIAL AID, (2) THE OUTREACH FLAN-BACKGROUNDS, NEW
DEVELOPMENTS SUCH AS VOCATIONAL AND ADULT EDUCATION,
COMMUTING, COSTS, (3) ACADEMIC PROGRAMS, (4) FACULTY, (5)
PHYSICAL FACILITIES --GUIDELINES, UTILIZATION,BUILDING
PROGRAMS, PLANNING, FUNDING, HOUSING, (6) FINANCE--CURRENT
BUDGET, STUDENT FEES, COST ANALYSIS, FEDERAL GRANTS, FUTURE
ESTIMATES, BUDGET RESPONSIBILITIES, AND (7) THE
INSTITUTIONS -- GROWTH, OFFERINGS, ENROLLMENT, FACULTY,
PROGRAMS AND DIAGRAMS OF CAMPUS LAYOUT. SOME SIXTY
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE GIVEN RELATIVE TO THE ABOVE AREAS. THESE
RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BASED ON THE POLICY THAT ALL AREAS BE
SUPPORTED AND DEVELOPED TO THE EXTENT THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH
SOUND EDUCATIONAL AND FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS. (HH)
t1
0
0
0
J
0
0'
'Lrt
hLftI
0
000
KC
iTi
1-7-
1/-0
11
rt
-LP
:.
=.
-,
0 0
3000.118
A ProvisionalLong-RangePlan forHigher Educationin Wisconsin
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION & WELFARE
OFFICE OF EDUCATION
THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE
PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT. POINTS Uf VIEW OR OPINIONS
STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDUCATION
POSITION OR POLICY.
Semi-Annual Report
Prepared by the Staff of
The Coordinating Committee for
Higher Education
January, 1967
Coordinating Committee Members
Thomas CheeksCitizen Member, Milwaukee
G. Kenneth CrowellCitizen Member, Neenah, ViceChairman
Arthur DeBardelebenUniversity Regents, Park Falls
Charles D. GelattUniversity Regents, La Crosse
William C. KahlSuperintendent of Public Instruction, Madison
Walter J. KohlerCitizen Member, Sheboygan, Chairman
Harold A. KonnakCitizen Member, Racine
W. Roy KoppState College Regents, Platteville
William M. KrausCitizen Member, Stevens Point, Secretary
Philip E. LermanVocational Board, Milwaukee
Eugene W. MurphyState College Regents, La Crosse
Joseph NollVocational Board, Kenosha
Frank H. RanneyCitizen Member, Milwaukee
John D. RiceCitizen Member, Sparta
John RocheCounty Teachers Colleges, Rio
C. 0. Wanvig, Jr.Citizen Member, Milwaukee
Arthur E. WegnerCitizen Member, Madison
December 31, 1966The Honorable Warren P. KnowlesGovernor of WisconsinState CapitolMadison, Wisconsin
Dear Governor Knowles:
Submitted herewith is the semi-annual report of theCCHE covering the period from July 1, 1966 throughDecember 31, 1966.
The emphasis of this report is upon a provisional longrange plan for higher education. It will be observed thata serious attempt has been made to delineate the pres-ent and future roles of our various types of public highereducation, their enrollments, their land requirements, andtheir missions.
The plan is provisional advisedly. In an effort to estab-lish the directions of our various systems in the shortestpossible time, it is clearly recognized that more attentionwill need to be devoted to the components that will makeup a more formal long range plan. It is intended that theprovisional plan will serve as a basis for sound discus-sion and that later presentations of more complete andfully-considered plans will result.
This report should be of assistance to those who mustmake immediate decisions about financial needs for boththe operation and facilities of our systems for highereducation. Recommendations and goals that are statedwill serve as a guide to the CCHE in the months ahead.With this information at hand, it should be clear that wedo sense the direction in which higher education is head-ed and that we are prepared to face the problemsinvolved.
Respectfully yours,
Walter J. KohlerChairman
Table of Contents
I. IntroductionPurpose of PlanGoals
II. The Organization of Higher Educationin Wisconsin
III. The Students
1
2
5
E. Funding FacilitiesF. Space RequirementsG. Student HousingH. Space Needs in Technical SchoolsI. Recommended GuidelinesJ. Building Program Review
5556565758
A. Student Affairs 9 Responsibilities 59
B. Student Enrc!Iments 10 Vlil. Financing Higher Education
C. Student Financial Aids 14 A. Comparative Support 60
D. High School Graduates and Percentage B. The Current Budget Request 61
Enrolling in Higher Education Facilities. .. 15 C. Quality Goals 62
IV. A New Look at the Outreach Plan D. Cost Analysis 62
A. Background 19 E. Student Fees 62
B. Recent Developments 20 F. Technical Education 63
C. Recommendations 24 G. Federal Funds and Private Grants 64
V. Academic Programs H. Future Problems 64
A. Undergraduate 26 I. Need for Efficiency and Economy 65
B. Two-Year Institutions 27 J. Estimates for the Future 65
C. Graduate 28 K. Financial Guidelines 66
D. Vocational-Technical Education 29 L. Budget Review Responsibilities 66
E. Extension 33 M. Enrollment Projections 68
F. Inter-institutional Cooperation 35 IX. The Institutions
G. Program Criteria and Procedure 38 A. University of Wisconsin 69
H. Educational TV 39 B. Wisconsin State Universities 87
I. Summer Sessions 46 C. Vocational-Technical System 108
J. Laboratory Schools 47 D. Dual-Track Institutions 110
K. Special Programs 48 E. County Teachers Colleges 111
VI. Faculty F. Private Institutions 112
A. Future Faculty Needs 50 X. The Coordinating Committee for
B. Vocational-Technical Faculty 51 Higher Education
VII. Physical Facilities A. History 115
A. Guidelines to Facilities Planning 53 B. Functions 116
B. Utilization of Facilities 54 C. Major Actions Since Reorganization 117
C. Building Programs 54 D. Operational Recommendations 119
D. Campus Planning 55 Summary of Recommendations 120
Coordinating Committee meetings are held in the Wis-consin Center on the University of Wisconsin campus.University of Wisconsin President Fred Harvey Harrington
is shown here addressing members of the Committeeat their Dec. 14 meeting.
f
Section I Introduction
Purpose
The need for constant re-evaluation . plans for highereducation is well established. Changing needs of ourstate, increased citizen demands for higher educationopportunities, new developments in technology, and thenational focus of attention on post-high school educa-tion require a continuous study of our present and future
status in this area.
Two previous publications have adequately presentedthe history and the philosophy subscribed to by theWisconsin Coordinating Committee for Higher Education.These were included in the "Design for the Future: De-velopment of Public Higher Education in Wisconsin,"published in December, 1960 and "A ComprehensivePlan for Higher Education in Wisconsin," published in
January, 1965. Duplication of information presented in
these documents will be avoided as far as practicablein order that attention may be focused upon problemsthat are pressing for attention.
It is the purpose of this publication to bring the previousstatements up to date in view of new developments and
to present a new provisional plan to be examined andrevised after thorough scrutiny by interested persons.When opportunity to react to this new statement ofpreliminary plans for higher education has been afforded,
work will begin to refine, restate, and amplify the presen-
tation.
Naturally, this presentation takes on the characteristicsof a report of recent actions of the CCHE. It is thereforesubmitted in compliance with the statutes which call for
the issuance of semi-annual reports.
It is hoped that the plan will be helpful to the Governor
and the Legislature as operating and capital requestsare presented to them for consideration. A seriousattempt has ;teen made to submit proposals which willcontinue to keep Wisconsin in the forefront not only inits systems of higher education, but also in its abilityto promote the general welfare of the state. The rela-tionship between a healthy economy and quality educa-
tion is recognized.
A new concept in the state's responsibility for the educa-
1
tion of its people has been developed in the past several
years. We can no longer divide a state's educationalprogram into four neat packages elementary, second-
ary, vocational, and college. Our responsibility nowextends from the nursery school to old age with morethan a fourth of the state's whole population beingcontinuously engaged in some full-time aspect of theeducational program. Clear lines of demarcation nolonger exist; new community agencies are establishing
nursery schools; advanced high school students nowelect college courses; vocational schools become techni-
cal institutes offering courses with credit that is ac-ceptable in universities; joint use of library facilities,
dormitories, and classroom facilities is being planned,and extension programs are offered that reach into every
corner of the state on an individual basis to fulfill variousgoals of life and upgrade types of services rendered.
Coordination of higher education is now more of a neces-
sity than at any time in our state's history. Programs,
facilities, and operating budgets of all public institutionsare responding to meet the increased demands of the peo-
ple. It is imperative that our needs shall be met within aframework that uses our resources efficiently, that makes
certain that voids in our offerings are corrected, andthat prevents unwarranted duplication of services.
Toward these goals this publication is directed. While
no plan could ever be prepared that would be acceptable
to all persons affected, it is hoped that this presentationmay serve to help us meet our primary higher educa-
tional needs during this highly significant period of our
history.
IT SHOULD BE NOTED AT THE OUTSET THAT THERECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THIS REPORT ARE
RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE CCHE STAFF, AND NOT
NECESSARILY RECOMMENDATIONS OF MEMBERS OF
THE COORDINATING COMMITTEE. IT IS ANTICIPATED
THAT THESE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS WILL BE
ACTED UPON IN THE NEAR FUTURE BY THE CO-ORDINATING COMMITTEE AND ITS SUBCOMMITTEES
BEFORE THE PREPARATION OF A LONG-RANGEMASTER PLAN FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN THE STATE.
TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS OF THE CCHE AND TO GIVE
FULL CONSIDERATION TO THE CCHE STAFF RECOM-MENDATIONS, THE GOVERNING BOARDS OF EACHOF THE SYSTEMS AND THEIR ADMINISTRATIVE PER-
SONNEL WILL NECESSARILY BE DEEPLY INVOLVED INCLOSELY COORDINATED OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES.RESPECT FOR THE MISSIONS OF EACH SYSTEM WILLBE MAINTAINED WHILE AT THE SAME TIME THE MOSTEFFICIENT AND JUDICIOUS MEANS ARE SOUGHT TOMEET THE NEEDS OF ALL OF OUR YOUTH AND THENEEDS OF OUR ENTIRE STATE.
Recommendations of the staff to receive future con-sideration have been placed in bold type to distinguishthem from E ling policies adopted by the CCHE andproblems as 1...,,rceived by the staff.
2
Goals
The following twelve goals for higher education in Wis-consin stand as fundamental principles of the Coordinat-ing Committee for Higher Education:
1. To maintain the "Open Door Policy" in highereducation.The State of Wisconsin has demonstrated its beliefin what is often referred to as the "Open DoorPolicy" so far as the ability of resident studentsto enroll in the public higher educational institu-tions is concerned. No qualified students have beenturned away except in the Vocational, Technical,and Adult Schools where facilities have not yet keptpace with demand. A goal of the CCHE is to pro-vide facilities and staff sufficient to accommodateall potential Wisconsin students in higher education.
2. To maintain and strengthen diversity in post-highschool educational opportunities so that programsare available within the state for youths of differingaptitudes, interests, and needs.
3. To permit each student maximum freedom tochoose his institution and program of study.
4. To provide a range of quality educational programsas institutions develop areas of specialization andavoid unwarranted duplication.
The three major systems of public higher educa-tion have achieved excellence in their distinctiveroles. The University of Wisconsin's mission is
clearly that of teaching, research, and public serv-ice. The State Universities, while maintaining theirprimary emphasis upon teacher edmation, are ex-panding their operations to meet the state's needsin selected areas in which individual institutionsare uniquely qualified. The vocational and technicalinstitutes have been assigned the responsibility ofmeeting all of the other needs of our adult popula-tion ranging from highly technical programs requir-ing concentrated and extended classroom andi
laboratory work to short-term local vocationalcourses.
5. To strongly support extensive basic and applied re-
search activity as an essential function of thestate's higher educational systems within their
major capabilities.
6. To expand the extension and public service func-tions of Wisconsin's higher educational institutions.
The University of Wisconsin is a recognized leader
in this area with a long history of successfulachievement. The State Universities will also un-doubtedly expand their activities in these areaswhile, at the same time, the vocational and tech-nical schools will become more service-oriented.Coordination at its highest level will be requiredto make certain that each system is permitted tomake its maximum contribution without unwarrantedduplication and with the greatest efficiency possible.
7. To expand vocational, technical, and adult educa-tional opportunities as rapidly as possible withinthe framework of the statewide technical "masterplan" authorized under Chapter 292, Laws of 1965.
8. To extend higher educational opportunities to amaximum number of students, the CCHE adopted
a policy in 1961 of gradually reducing tuition costsuntil it is eventually possible to offer free publichigher education in the state. Student tuition feesnow constitute about 20% of the operational costsof higher education. As the state's economy im-proves and as higher education becomes universal,it may be expected that the ultimate goal of freetuition may be achieved. Meanwhile, the 20%sharing by students has provided an acceptable
formula for the setting of tuition fees.
9. To carry out its decisions resulting from a con-tinuing study of the needs of the people of this statefor higher education, the CCHE will recommendneeded legislative proposals.
10. To promote economy and efficiency in the operationand construction of higher education facilities, theCCHE is committed to a policy of workiisg with the
3
various systems to coordinate and plan all activitieson an acceptably sound basis.
11. To determine whether the objectives of the "Out-reach Plan" have been substantially achieved, theCCHE will continue to re-examine its policy of ex-
tending public higher educational opportunitiesthroughout the state.
The CCHE an the governing boards should seekadditional means of assisting able youth who arenot within commuting distance of higher educationalopportunities. This is necessary if the principle ofequality of opportunity is to be recognized.
12. To fulfill its commitment to meet ne needs of highereducation in Wisconsin, the CCHE will promote co-operation between public and private institutionsand will recognize the significant roles that eachcan play.
Public Institutions of Higher Education: 'aiding and Planned
BAYFIELO
DOUGLASASHLANO
IRON
Ilk University of Wisconsin CampusesWProposed University of Wisconsin CentersWisconsin State University Campuses
4. Proposed State University Branch CampusesA County Teachers Colleges
VocationalTechnical Schools with Degree Programs
0 Other VocationalTechnical Schools0 Proposed DualTrack Institution
,rBURNETT
VIL AS
WASHBURN SAWYER
PRICEFOREST FLORENCE
P01 LK
ONEIDA
LINCOLN
MARINETTE
TAYLOR
ST CROIX
CLARK
(MARATHON
SHAWANO
PIERCE EAU CLAIRE
PEPIN PORTAGE WAUPACAKEWAUNE
BUFFALOOUTAGAMIE
JACKSON
JUNEAU AOAMS
LA CROSSE
MONROE
0
WAUSHAR A WINNEBAGO
MAROUET TE GREENLAKE
VERNONCOLUMBIA
0000GE
0
SHEBOYGAN
CRAWFORO
JEFFERSON
0El
WASHINGTON
MI WAUKEE
10ZAUKEE
Wt UK ESHA
00
GREEN
LA FAYET TE
AC
ROCK*0
RACINEA
SH A
4
Section II 5
The Organization of Higher Education in Wisconsin
Wisconsin's present network of public institutions ofhigher education includes more than 80 separate schools,ranging from vocational schools offering full-time post-high school instruction to the University of Wisconsin,which offers doctoral degrees in 93 different fields, 87on the Madison campus.
Public institutions presently include 13 campuses of theUniversity of Wisconsin system; 10 campuses of theWisconsin State University system; 20 two-year CountyTeachers Colleges, and 41 vocational schools among the63 schools administered by the State Board of Voca-tional, Technical, and Adult Education (SBVTAE), whichoffer full-time post-high school study.
Planning for programs, budgets, and facilities for all ofthese institutions is directed and coordinated by Wiscon-sin's Coordinating Committee for Higher Education(CCHE), established by the Legislature in 1955 to insurethe orderly development of higher education in the state.Reorganized in 1965 to be a more effective planningagency, the 17-member Coordinating Committee makesrecommendations for jurisdiction of the Legislature andGovernor.
In addition to Wisconsin's public system of higher edu-cation, 19 private colleges in the state offer 4-year liberalarts and teacher education training. Two private uni-versities offer liberal arts, professional, and graduateeducation to the doctoral level. Many seminaries, privatejunior colleges, independent professional schools andinstitutes, nursing schools, and proprietary schools lo-cated in the state also serve Wisconsin residents.
The University of Wisconsin SystemThe University of Wisconsin system includes graduateson campuses; 11 two-year campuses operated by theUniversity Center System, and University Extension,which combines the Extension Division, the Division ofRadio-TV, and the Cooperative (Agricultural) ExtensionService. Center campuses are located at Green Bay,Janesville, Kenosha, Manitowoc, Marinette, Marshfield,Menasha, Racine, Sheboygan, Waukesha, and Wausau_Two more center campuses are scheduled to open in1968 at Baraboo and West Bend.
The 1965 Legislature also has authorized the establish-ment of two new institutions io northeastern and south-eastern Wisconsin to offer, initially, third- and fourth-year work and to be operated by the University of Wis-consin. The two schools, UW-Green Bay and UW-Park-side, are scheduled to open in 1969.
The University of Wisconsin, Madison, founded in 1849,was the first state institution of higher education and isthe school with the largest enrollment in the state. Thefall, 1966 enrollment was 31,120, which included 8,222graduate students.
The University of Wisconsin system is governed by a10member Board of Regents, which is empowered toenact laws for the government of the University in all itsbranches; to act upon administrative and faculty ap-pointments; to authorize new programs of instruction,subject to CCHE approval; to establish branch campusesin communities approved by the Coordinating Committee,and to acquire land for University of Wisconsin use, toname a few of the Regents' functions and powers.
The Regents of the University of Wisconsin
Arthur DeBardeleben, President. . . Park Falls, WisconsinCharles D. Gelatt, Vice President. . La Crosse, WisconsinJacob F. Friedrick Milwaukee, WisconsinKenneth L. Greenquist Racine, Wisconsin
*William C. Kahl Madison, WisconsinDr. James W. Nellen De Pere, WisconsinMaurice B. Pasch Madison, WisconsinGilbert C. Rohde Greenwood, WisconsinA. Matt Werner Sheboygan, WisconsinBernard C. Ziegler West Bend, Wisconsin
*ex-officio member
The Wisconsin State University System
The Wisconsin State University system includes nineuniversities at Eau Cla;re, La Crosse, Oshkosh, Platteville, River Falls, Stevens Point, Menomonie (Stout StateUniversity), Superior, and Whitewater and a 2-yearbranch campus at Rice Lake operated initially by StoutState University. Authorized by the 1963 Legislature to
Higher Education in Wisconsin 6
Governor
1.2gislature
FinanceSubcommittee
ExecutiveSubcommittee
Coordinating Committeefor
Higher Education
Plans and PoliciesSubcommittee
Physical FacilitiesSubcommittee
Student AffairsSubcommittee
University of WisconsinBoard of Regents
State CollegeBoard of Regents
University of WisconsinUniversity of WisconsinMilwaukee
University Center SystemUniversity Extension
State Board of Vocational, Boards of CountyTechnical, and Adult Education Teachers Colleges
Wisconsin State UniversitiesBranch Campuses
Schools of Vocational,Technical, and Adult Education
establish branch campuses similar to previously authorized University of Wisconsin Centers, the WSU systemplans to open a second branch at Richland Center in1967 and two others at Fond du Lac in 1968 and Med-ford at a later date.
Originally founded as normal schools for teacher training,the nine State Universities now offer 4-year programsin the liberal arts and in specialized curriculums, as wellas programs leading to the Master of Science in Teach-ing and Master of Science in Education degrees. TheBoard of Regents of State Colleges, the governing bodyfor the State University system, has been authorizedby the Coordinating Committee to offer the Master's de-gree in fields other than teacher education, and legis-lative authorization is now being sought for graduateprogram expansion. A prix' ,ary purpose of the StateUniversities, according to Wisconsin Statutes, remains,however, "the instruction and training of students in thetheory and art of teaching."
Legal powers of the 14-member Board of Regents ofState Colleges include the government and control at allthe State Universities; authorizing new programs of studyat the State Universities, subject to CCHE approval; ap-pointing presidents for the schools; granting scholarshipsto State University students, and prescribing admissionstandards.
Board of Regents of State CollegesEugene W. Murphy, President.. .. La Crosse,Robert L. Pierce, Vice President
Menomonie,*William C. Kahl Madison,
Dr. Stephen H. Ambrose Whitewater,David H. Bennett Portage,Norman L. Christianson Roberts,John J. Dixon Appleton,Allan L. Edgarton Fond du Lac,W. Roy Kopp Platteville,Milton E. Neshek Elkhorn,James A. Riley Altoona,Siinto S. Wessman Superior,Mrs. Robert R. Williams Stevens Point,
*ex-officio member
Wisconsin
WisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsin
7
Schools of Vocational, Technical, and Adult EducationWisconsin's Vocational, Technical, and Adult Schools arelocated in 63 communities throughout the state. Foundedin 1911, the schools are now administered by the StateBoard of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education(SBVTAE). Included in the system are 15 comprehensiveschools offering the Associate Degree, 26 others whichoffer some full-time programs, and 22 which offer onlypart-time work in the evenings. Two of the compre-hensive schools, at Madison and Milwaukee, offer liberalarts college transfer programs.
The 1965 Legislature directed the SBVTAE to place allareas not yet included in a vocational district into anarea vocationaltechnical school district by July 1, 1970.A 15district plan was approved by the Board and theCoordinating Committee for Higher Education after aseries of public hearings, conducted by the Board andthe Coordinating Committee, were held throughout thestate on redistricting plans. The 1965 Legislature alsoprovided for district boards of seven members whichhave the power to levy an annual tax for vocational -technical education.
Wisconsin State Board of Vocational, Technical, andAdult EducationPhilip E. Lerman, President Milwaukee, WisconsinJoseph Noll, Vice President Kenosha, WisconsinE. J. Fransway Milwaukee,A. E. Mueller Watertown,Arthur Hitt Alma,Martin Gunnulson Cambridge,Kermit Veum Westby,Harry Haycock Sussex,William Benzies Baraboo,Ex-officio MembersG. A. RowlandW. C. Kahl
WisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsinWisconsin
Madison, WisconsinMadison, Wisconsin
County Teachers CollegesTwo-year County Teachers Colleges are now in operationin 20 Wisconsin counties Ashland, Barron (will close inJune, 1967), Buffalo, Columbia, Dodge, Door-Kewaunee,Green, Juneau, Langlade, Lincoln, Manitowoc, Outagamie,Polk, RacineKenosha, Richland (will close in June,
1967), Sauk, Sheboygan, Taylor, Vernon, and Waushara.Originally founded in 1899 as the County NormalSchools, the County Teachers Colleges are now underthe jurisdiction of the State Department of Public In-struction, which has legal powers of supervision andcourse designations.
All County Teachers Colleges are scheduled to close in1971, since beginning in 1972, all teachers applyingfor initial certification must have 4-year college degrees.The CCHE has recommended that 5 County TeachersColleges those with fall, 1966 enrollments below 50be closed in June, 1967.
Private Colleges and UniversitiesThere are two private universities in Wisconsin, Lawrenceand Marquette. Liberal arts offerings and teacher edu-cation are supplemented by both undergraduate andgraduate work in other fields. The curriculum at Lawrenceincludes basic aid advanced work in the humanities,the natural sciences, the behavioral and social sciences,and the fine arts. In addition to the Bachelor of Artsdegree, Lawrence offers a Bachelor of Music degreethrough its Conservatory of Music, and a Master's andDoctor's degree in paper chemistry through its affiliationwith the Institute of Paper Chemistry.
Marquette University now includes 10 schools and col-leges which grant degrees. The School of GraduateStudies offers Master's degrees in 31 separate fields andDoctorates in 11 fields. Marquette also operates summersessions, a Division of Continuing Education, and anEvening Division.
Nineteen other accrejited private colleges in the stateoffer 4-year liberal arts and teacher education training.There are three private specialized schools offeringundergraduate work: the Milwaukee School of Engineer-ing, Layton School of Art, and Wisconsin Conservatoryof Music. Finally, there are 11 theological seminaries,three of which offer work at the graduate level, andthree private junior colleges with religious affiliations.
8
Higher Educational Aids CommissionAnother organizational resource in Wisconsin highereducation is the State Commission for Higher EducationalAids. This 15-member commission, organized in 1964and representative of both public and private highereducation, has primary program responsibilities in theadministration of Federal programs of aids to institutionsand the state's comprehensive student financial aidprograms. Its members include five from the CCHE,five from the independent colleges, and five citizens.Thomas H. Moran is Executive Secretary of the Com-mission.
Section III9
The Students
A. Student Affairs
The CCHE continues to focus its major attention uponthe development of a comprehensive state plan that willmaximize the availability of diversified quality curricularprograms most appropriate to student needs. Despite
the increase in the percentage of high school graduatescontinuing in higher education, too many qualified stu-dents either do not enroll or select post-high school pro-
grams not adapted to their interests, abilities, or motiva-tions. A full range of educationa; experience must be
provided and made accessible to prospective students.The early implementation of a comprehensive statewide
plan of vocational-technical education will expand theavailable opportunities and every effort must be madeto assure the quality, appeal, and availability of theseprograms.
The high incidence of dropouts from the universitycampuses continues and while the student dropout ratein Wisconsin is comparable to that experienced in otherstates, it is still disturbing in its educational and fiscal
implications. State and national studies indicate that
from 25 to 30 per cent of freshman enrollees do notcontinue into the third semester of college. This dropoutratio falls off sharply to about 6 per cent per year afterthe initial high attrition. While scholastic difficulties rep-resent one major reason for dropping out of college, asignificant number of students indicate personal, finan-cial, and other reasons for their withdrawal. A large per-centage of these students present academic qualifica-
tions which would indicate readiness to undertake suc-cessfully collegiate work.
In light of the critical nature of the dropout problem,particularly at the freshman level, the CCHE staff recom-
mends a cooperative study of admissions and retentionpolicies and the articulation between high schools andhigher education. Indiscriminate recruitment of highschool seniors must be avoided and college admissionspersonnel must assume a responsible role in matchingeach student's abilities, interests, and motivations withthe appropriate post-high school educational experience.
In all studies involving institutional and systems' policiesin these crucial areas the vital role of full faculty par-
ticipation is recognized.
The CCHE staff also recommends a continuing study oftuition and other fees and the adequacy of studentfinancial aids programs as related to the costs of highereducation to students. While these programs representa sizeable public investment in higher education, anational study indicates that student costs for highereducation are rising faster than aids. The many financialaids programs administered through different offices
and based upon different formulas for students pursuingdifferent programs in different institutions have compli-cated the aid picture for both parents and students. Acoordination of the efforts of the several agencies in-volved is recommended to maximize the impact of finan-cial aids in attracting and holding larger numbers ofqualified students in higher education. Institutionsshould share in state-financed aid programs in accord-
ance with the needs of their students, and such aidsshould be available on an equitable basis to studentsattending branch campuses and vocational-technical
schools.
The rationale for a student's choice of a particular in-stitution remains largely unexplained. Commuting op-portunities and geographic proximity plays a significant
but diminishing role. The comparative educational aswell as financial advantages and disadvantages of com-muting or residence hall living have not been sufficientlyresearched. The relationship of available residence hall
space to campus growth awaits a more definite answer.A considerable variance in charges among state institu-tions for similar residence hall rooms and food serviceis a legitimate cause of student concern.
The CCHE staff recommends an early study of thepatterns, policies, and problems involved in the transferof students from one institution to another, particularlywhen such transfer involves different systems of highereducation in Wisconsin. Students must be assured thatthe satisfactory completion of a prescribed course ofstudy in a collegiate transfer program will qualify themfor admission to upper division work or a professional
sequence without loss of credit or grade point averageand without sacrifice of financial aid opportunities. The
transfer picture is further complicated by the develop.ment of two branch campus systems, the growing appealof collegiate transfer curricula at the Milwaukee andMadison Vocational-Technical Schools, and the projectedpilot dual-track or junior college operation at Rhine-lander. If we are to continue to encourge state studentsto undertake their initial college work at an institutionclose to home, an effective student transfer policy is re-quired.
The CCHE has recommended a budget for the next bien-nium which would provide an additional staff memberwhose primary responsibility would be for the coordina-tion of continuing studies in the area of student affairs.A greater knowledge of the needs, plans, abilities, andproblems of students enrolled in Wisconsin institutionswould promote the best educational interests of highereducation.
B. Student Enrollments
Enrollment ProjectionsPlanning for higher education must encompass the needsfor research, public service, and instruction. Instructionrelates directly to the needs of the students. Therefore,it is mandatory to project future enrollments so that theessential educational programs and facilities can beanticipated to meet the needs of these students. Enroll.ment projections must be related to population, chang-ing enrollment patterns, and the development and re-vision of academic programs.
One of the main purposes of a state master plan forhigher education is to provide academic guidelines forthe long-range development of every institution. As pro-gram decisions are made, enrollment projections haveto be re-examined constantly to ensure their accuracyand their harmony with current academic policy. En-
rollment projections become a useful tool in planning forthe total, expected volume of students, and, in turn,aid in the development of each individual institutionwithin the systems. Indeed, the very purpose of theseprojections is to stimulate wise decisions in the long-range planning of academic programs and the physicaldevelopment of each of the state's public educationalinstitutions.
10
Table I
Comparison of 1965-1966 Enrollmentsat State Institutions of Higher Education
Fall of 1965 Fall of 1966Institution Men Women Total Men Women TotalUW-Madison 18,212 11,087 29,299 19,089 12,031 31,120UW-Milwaukee 7,700 5,118 12,818 8,273 5,903 14,176
Total-
UW Centers (2,893) (1,877) (4,770) (3,427) (2,484) (5,911)
Fox Valley 352 254 606 361 286 647Green Bay 556 375 931 548 449 997Kenosha 440 260 700 467 257 724Manitowoc 258 114 372 246 124 370Marathon 302 185 487 356 235 591Marinette 147 85 232 174 140 314Marshfield 166 145 311 161 181 342Racine 391 315 706 415 364 779Rock County 162 137 299Sheboygan 281 144 425 286 161 447Waukesha - - - 251 150 401
Total - UW 28,805 18,082 46,887 30,789 20,418 51,207
State UniversitiesEau Claire 2,377 2,140 4,517 2,671 2,655 5,326La Crosse 2,189 1,754 3,943 2,452 2,062 4,514Oshkosh 3,751 3,382 7,133 4,345 3,922 8,267Platteville 2,635 1,058 3,693 2,983 1,207 4,190River Falls 2,249 1,032 3,281 2,337 1,207 3,544Stevens Point 2,811 1,715 4,526 3,138 1,985 5,123Stout 1,639 1,188 2,827 1,878 1,373 3,251Superior 1,537 813 2,350 1,757 952 2,709Whitewater 3,612 2,710 6,322 4,048 2,956 7,004Barron County 62 54 116
Total 22,800 15,792 38,592 25,671 18,373 44,044
County Teachers CollegesAshland 43 44 87 52 48 100Barron 64 76 140 20 37 57Buffalo 16 21 37 9 29 38Columbia 19 18 37 24 33 57Dodge 25 38 63 32 44 76Door-Kewaunee 15 28 43 20 32 52Green 21 26 47 17 24 41Juneau 20 27 47 19 28 47Lang lade 34 39 73 23 32 55Lincoln 15 22 37 10 11 21Manitowoc 55 49 104 41 36 77Outaga.mie 42 57 99 36 77 113Polk 12 19 31 13 26 39RacineKenosha 38 95 133 29 97 126Richland 68 71 142 89 83 172Sauk 17 41 58 16 43 59Sheboygan 20 43 63 45 33 78Taylor 50 84 134 35 102 137Vernon 13 37 50 16 28 44Waushara 13 27 40 17 34 51
Total 600 865 1,465 563 877 1,440
It should be noted, however, that several policy factorscan alter the individual campus projections. These factorsare:
1. The question whether graduate opportunities are tobe spread broadly around the state or be concen-trated at a few campuses.
Table II
1966 Graeuate-Undergraduate Enrollmentsat UW-Madison, UW-Milwaukee, and the State Universities(First Semester)
UW-MadisonUW-Milwaukee
State UniversitiesEau ClaireLa CrosseOshkoshPlattevilleRiver FallsStevens PointStoutSuperiorWhitewaterTotal
Undergraduate Graduate
21,885 8,22211,929 2,247
5,163 1634,360 1547,892 3754,024 1663,431 1135,022 1013,140 1112,504 2056,730 274
42,382 1,662
Professional
1,013
ORM*
11
IM11
INIINO11
Total
31,12014,176
5,3264,5148,2674,1903,5445,1233,2512,7097,004
44,044
Enrollment Growth: 1953-1983University of Wisconsin and Wisconsin State UniversityCampuses
180,000
170,000
160,000
150,000
140,000
130,000
120,000
110,000
100,000
90,000
80,000
70,000
60,000
50,Q00
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
'53 '56 '59 '62 '66 '68 '71 '74 '77 '80 '83
11
2. The possible rapid development of continuing edu-cation on a part-time basis in the population centersof the state, such as in Milwaukee, Madison, Osh-kosh, La Crosse, Green Bay, and Racine-Kenosha.
3. The ultimate development of the state's vocational-technical system, which still is in an evolutionarystage.
Moreover, projections of enrollments should take intoaccount several basic assumptions. Those included inthe projections following are:
1. The per cent of high school graduates who go on tosome form of post-high school education will con-tinue to increase; however, at a decreasing rate untileventually a maximum level will be reached.
2. As programs in vocational-technical education are de-veloped, an increasing per cent of high school grad-uates will take advantage of these opportunities.
3. The per cent of high school graduates attending pro-prietary schools, private colleges, and out-of-statecollegiate institutions will remain constant.
4. The military situation will not change substantially.
5. The state will continue its commitment to providenecessary funds in support of the operating budget.
6. Student aids will continue to increase and tuitioncharges will not materially deter prospective enroll-ments.
7. Graduate enrollments will increase sharply.
The newest enrollment projections in this re2ort (TableIll) establish guidelines for provisional long-range plan-ning. The projections represent:
The distribution of students which can be expected un-der existing policies.
The distribution of students which is reasonable withinthe total state framework and which can be realized with-out imposing unnecessary restrictions on freedom ofstudent choice.
These projections reflect the decline in the birth rate in
Wisconsin which will affect higher education beginningin the late 1970's, the assumption that the populationmigration patterns will remain in relative balance, andthe 25-per cent limitation on out-of-state undergraduatestudents established by the CCHE in 1966.
Other projections have been made of the per cent of Wis-
consin's high school graduates in each of the severaltypes of post-high school education to 1983, a year forwhich pertinent data of birth statistics is available. By1983, the staff has estimated that 85 per cent of ourresident high school graduates will be distributed asfollows:
42% University of Wisconsin and Wisconsin State Uni-versities
30% Vocational-technical schools (all programs)5% Out-of-state institutions3% Proprietary schools (secretarial, nursing, beauty
culture, etc.)5% Wisconsin's private colleges and universities
OMI
85% -- Total enrollment in some form of post-high schooleducation.
More detailed projections for the vocational-technical sys-tems now are being prepared in light of the technicalschool master plan approved in December, 1966. These
will appear in the state's final master plan.
The CCHE staff recommends that uniform definitions andtechniques be developed for reporting higher educational
enrollments. Different techniques, for instance, havebeen used in the past it reporting part-time enrollments.These differences were relatively unimportant becauseUW-Milwaukee was the only institution with any substan-tial part-time students. Many evening students also areenrolled at Milwaukee who are not now calculated in theestablishment of needed facilities because they generallyhave been able to use the same facilities provided for theday students. This situation is changing, however, and willbecome more significant as evening students increase atMilwaukee and on other campuses, and as part-time en-rollments expand, particularly at the graduate level,thereby affecting long-range planning for facilities.
12
While long-range projections theoretically allow for plan-ning up to 18 years in advance, an annual review canincorporate the proper adjustments necessitated bychanges we arc; unable to foresee. The attempt to pro-ject enrollments several years in advance presents anextremely complex problem because there are so manyvariables which no one can fully anticipate and so manyfactors which may influence a student's decision to at-tend a certain college or some other form of post-highschool education. Projections must be reviewed eachyear, therefore, to reflect these variables birth trends,the number of high school graduates and percentagegoing on to higher education, increasing financial aid tostudents, collegiate admission experiences, the effect ofnew campuses and the expansion of the vocational-tech-nical system, new academic programs, the Vietnam war,trem.h> in student transfers, limitations on out-of-statestudents, and the increasing requirements for adulteducators.
2. Optimum EnrollmentsThere has been considerable discussion of the estab-lishment of optimum enrollment for the several state in-stitutions. An optimum enrollment can be very differentfor any given institution depending upon its academicprogram or its physical surroundings. In every knowncase, wherever specific enrollment limitations have beenset for campuses, they have been relatively arbitrary.Historically, Wisconsin has established educational op-portunities throughout the state in order, among otherreasons, to relieve extreme pressures on any particularinstitution, and has not imposed arbitrary limitations onenrollment size. Within the framework of Wisconsin'shigher education needs, the enrollment projections pre-sented in this report offer a reasonable approach to opti-
mum enrollments.
For instance, one of the functions of the new Universityof Wisconsin Green Bay and the Fond du Lac BranchCampus is to relieve some of the enrollment pressureat Wisconsin State University Oshkosh. With the de-velopment of these institutions, enrollment potentials atOshkosh and other campuses in the area will be sub-stantially altered. Modification of enrollments from theprevious estimates for Oshkosh permits the institution
Table III
Enrollment Projections for the University of Wisconsinand Wisconsin State Universities
University of Wisconsin
Year MadisonDay Enroll-
Milwaukee ments* CentersGreen
BayPark-side
1974 36300 20600 (15800) 8000 5400 66001977 38600 23400 (18000) 8100 6800 85001980 39900 25500 (19600) 8200 8000 95001983 39000 25900 (19900) 7500 7300 8800
Wisconsin State Universities
EauYear Claire1974 96001977 106001980 109001983 10200* Day enrollment
rience indicates
LaCrosse Oshkosh7600 151008300 161008500 170007900 16400
Platte. giver Stevensvilla Falls Point6400 5300 97007000 5800 106007300 6000 110006800 5800 10400
figures are used in calculating space needsthat 77 per cent of the trtal enrollment are
White. BranchStout Superior water Campuses6100 4800 11500 16006700 5200 12100 19007000 5300 12700 20006600 5000 12300 1800
at Milwaukee. Several years' expe-day students.
to concentrate more heavily on the development and en-hancement of its academic programs.
The projections in this report include an assumption thatthe two new University of Wisconsin campuses at Park-
side and Green Bay now scheduled to open in 1969, whileinitially limited by law to third- and fourth-year opportuni-ties, will develop into four-year institutions admittingfreshmen classes in 1971. The CCHE has endorsed theconcept several times that these campuses should be-come full four-year institutions in order to p,avide maxi-mum efficiency and better serve the students, and hasrecommended that this development should be completedby 1975. Some consideration now is being given to ini-tiating this development at an earlier date, and, if carried
out, it would require appropriate adjustinents in pro-jections.
The CCHE has further recommended that the two-yearCenters at Green Bay and Kenosha be discontinued assoon as the transition of the third- and fourth-year cam-puses to four-year institutions is completed. If the timingof this development is slowed down, the enrollment po-tentials at several other four -year State Universities and
two-year University Centers would be affected and appro-priate adjustments would be necessary.
It is recommended that the enrollment projections as
stated herein be considered enrollment goals for plan-ning. They should not be imposed as absolute figures,however, since requirements and conditions can change
rapidly, The broad statewide distribution of institutionsconnotes that these projections are realistic goals and ifprogram developments and planning go forward withinthe framework as outlined in this report, none of the cam-
pus enrollments as now projected suggests unnecessary
or too-rapid growth in the period noted. On the otherhand, these general guidelines indicate that the stateneed not establish additional campuses over and above
those now authorized. These optimum enrollment guide-
lines represent a reasonable and responsible planning
approach to meet Wisconsau nigher education demands
in the next seventeen year-,
13
3. Nonresident Admission PolicyWhile the open-door policy has been traditionally sup-ported for Wisconsin residents, the proportion of non-residents to resident students has been for some timea matter of concern to the Committee, the Legislature,and the operating systems.
In recent years the ratio of nonresidents has risensteadily in the State Universities located near state bor-ders, and at the University of Wisconsin in Madison. Netin-migration to Wisconsin's public institutions also in-creased with a resulting substantial imbalance.
In March, 1966, the Committee adopted a statewide guide-line for nonresident undergraduates (excluding foreignstudents) limlting to 25 per cent the total nonresidentundergraduate enrollment at any one campus. The Com-mittee felt that a nonresident policy should meet fivecriteria:
1. It should promote cosmopolitanism interaction withnonresident students of diverse geographic, social,and cultural backgrounds.
2. It should not interfere unnecessarily with studentmobility.
3. It should allow institutions administrative flexibility.
4. It should not close the possibility of interstate com-pacts for exchange of students.
5. It should not impose an undue strain on the state'sresources.
The statewide guideline meets these criteria.
It is recommended that the policy be continued and thatstrong efforts be made to diversify the geographical basefor nonresident students, thus realizing the full valuefrom student cosmopolitanism.
The Committee has established no restrictions on non-resident graduate students. The over-all migration ofgraduate and professional students in and out of thestate is in a reasonably close balance. A 1963 national
study revealed that Wisconsin had 4,090 out-of-stategraduate and professional students enrolled in its insti-tutions and 3,252 Wisconsin residents were enrolled ingraduate and professional courses in other states.
The UW, Madison graduate school particularly has longprovided a valuable teaching and research resource of
national stature. Graduate education receives a greatdeal of support from the Federal government and other
outside sources.
It is recommended that the CCHE recognize the na-tional character of graduate education and encourageincreased outside support for this phase of highereducation.
C. Student Financial Aids
Within the last two years, several new programs of finan-cial aid to students have been passed by both the stateand Federal governments. In addition, more private andinstitutional resources are being made available to stu-dents than ever before in the history of higher education.The way financial aids are being distributed also hasbeen undergoing significant changes. Scholarships andother kinds of aid still are awarded in recognition ofability and promise, but now the amount of aid grantedis closely related to the student's actual financial need.Both of these conditions more resources and distribu-tion on the basis of need have been the result of aneffort to provide an educational opportunity to every quali-fied student regardless of his financial circumstances.
The Wisconsin State Commission for Higher EducationalAids has been given responsibility for the administrationof most state programs of financial aid including the ex-panded Honor Scholarship Program, the improved State
Loan Program, and the Tuition Grant Program which provides financial aid to Wisconsin residents attending private institutions. In order to facilitate the distributionof financial aid, the Commission, in cooperation withWisconsin high schools and institutions of higher edu-
cation including the University of Wisconsin, the nineState Universities, private colleges, hospital schools ofnursing, and Vocational, Technical, and Adult Schools, has
14
developed a unique application procedure for high schoolseniors seeking financial aid to continue their education.Rather than applying for each of the many specific typesof aid available, a student applies for financial aid ingeneral using a single application. In addition to apply-ing for all forms of aid, the student may apply at severaldifferent schools simply by listing them on the applica-tion. The students submit their application forms to thehigh school guidance counselor who provides an evalu-
ation and recommendation and then forwards the appli-cations to the Commission. The Commission then assumesthe responsibility of forwarding copies of the applicationto all of the institutions located in the State of Wisconsinthat the student lists on the application form. The insti-tutional financial aid officer uses the application form andthe financial statement also submitted by the studentto develop an aid package designed to meet each stu-dent's financial need. Approximately 20,000 high schoolseniors use this simplified mechanism each year in apply-
ing for financial aid.
Administration of the greatly expanded state-sponsoredleadership and need grants has remained with the Uni-versity of Wisconsin and State Universities. Likewise, theFederal-State Work-Study Program, which has grown sub-
stantially, is administered by the institutions,
The extension of financial aid to Wisconsin students at-tending non-public institutions in the state through theTuition Grant Program is a new and important conceptin educational finance. This program emerged as a recom-
mendation of a special "Governor's Scholarship and LoanCommittee," which, in recommending the program, re-ported that:
"A student grant program alternative should be adopted
which, by equalizing the student assistance structure,will give the student equal freedom to attend a public ora private institution, placing the State in a substantiallyneutral position in the student's choice, neither coercing
nor discouraging the student to choose one kind of schoolover another. A student will then be able to chose aninstitution based on educational rather than financialconsiderations."
The potential effect of this program has been recognizedin the CCHE enrollment projections. It has been assumedthat the per cent of high school graduates enrolling inprivate colleges will remain constant. The validity ofthis assumption and the full effects of this program can-not yet be ascertained since the program is only in itssecond year of operation and is available only to fresh-men and sophomores at this time.
The extension of student aids in the form of grants,loans, or employment has been inclusive and it is reason-able to state that few Wisconsin students are now deniedopportunities for post-high school education due to lackof financial resources. However, a continuing study ofcosts and aids is recommended.
The State Commission for Higher Educational Aids is re-quired by statute to provide the Governor and Legislaturewith an annual report which reviews the status of thestudent financial aid structure in Wisconsin and makerecommendations for change. The CCHE staff recom-mends that the CCHE, University of Wisconsin, State Uni-versities, and Technical Schools, along with all privateinstitutions, cooperate with the Commission in studyingand reporting the whole area of financial aid requirements.
D. Maps: Students Enrolling in Higher Education Facili-ties by County
The following comments help to explain Map A, the ratioof new freshmen in Wisconsin's public and private col-legiate institutions to the number of 1966 high schoolgraduates:
. High school graduates from Wisconsin's public andprivate schools totaled 66,473 in 1966, an increaseof 55 per cent from 1959, tie first year the Coor-dinating Committee had reliable statistics for thesestudents.
Nearly two-thirds of the 1966 high school graduatescame from 16 counties, each of which supplied morethan 1,000 students. These counties are Kenosha,Milwaukee, Racine, and Waukesha in the southeast;Marathon and Wood in the center of the state; Dane
15
and Rock in the south; most of the Fox River Valleycounties; and Eau Claire and La Crosse to the west.
. .Thirty-five per cent of the high school graduates wrfrom the southeastern counties in 1966. Milwauke4County alone provided more than one-fifth of thetotal. Seventeen per cent of the students were gradu-ated from high schools located in the Fox River Valley.
. The ratio of the state's total new freshmen to Wis-consin's total high school graduates has increasedeach year from 29.9 per cent in 1959 to 36.6 percent in 1966. Not included in these ratios are thosehigh school graduates who enrolled in the vocational-technical schools (see Map B), the collegiate trans-fer students at the Milwaukee Institute of Technologyand Madison's School of Vocational, Technical, andAdult Education (see Map B), in out-of-state colle-giate institutions, or in the state's private proprietaryschools; i.e., nursing, secretarial, beauty culture, etc.(This figure includes new freshmen who graduatedfrom high school before 1966.)
. in 1966, the ratio of resident new freshmen to Wis-consir1 high school graduates of 36.6 per cent wasexceeded by 27 counties. Sixteen counties providedratios over 40 per cent.
... Thirty-seven per cent of the total new freshmen in thestate were residents of the southeastern counties ofMilwaukee, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, Racine,Kenosha, and Walworth. Sixteen per cent were fromthe Fox River Valley area, and 13 per cent residedin the south central counties of Dane, Rock, Colum-bia, Dodge, Green, and Jefferson. These areas arethe most heavily populated in the state and have thelargest concentration of public and privat' collegiateinstitutions.
In 1966, eighty-six per cent of the resident newfreshmen in Wisconsin enrolled in the public collegiate institutions in the state.
. ..Although it appears that counties with collegiate in-stitutions yield a high number of new freshmen, a
Map A
Ratio of Resident New Freshmen Enrolled in Wisconsin's Public and Private Collegiate
Institutions in Fall 1966 to Number of 1966 Wisconsin High School Graduates
(Does not include collegiate transfer program at Milwaukee Institute of Technology
and Madison School of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education)
16
II DOUGLAS
II
75646,8%
II
16633.1%
pOLK
53241.2%
ST cRc,x
49540.2%
PIERCE
49742.9%
16942.0%°.
20741.5%
BARRON
141 ........7 26.2% vi L1t-"4 a - 4312
I- t.45 8% 114
33.3%
Legend
top -- high school graduates by countybottom - new freshmen ratio by county
152 25834.9% 38.8%
PRICE
65243.6%
DUNN
40137.4%
RUSK
32532.6%
CHIPPEWA
87233.1%
TAYLOR
ONEIDA
44135.8%
31831.8%
LINCOLN
42333.1%
FOREST
12842.2%
LANGLADE
40928.1%
EAU CLAIRE
110645.5%
BUFFALO T REMPE ALEAU
255 51932.2 %' 30.4%
CL ARK
62532.8%
MARATHON
147831 5%
FLORENCE
6026.7%
MARINETTC
OCONTO
MENOMINEE
52028.1%
68732.7%
-11419
26.0%
26227.9%
r.CC '1,1 0 ISSCMONROE
JACKSON
WOOD
117236.7%
PORTAGE
66535.3%
WA UPACA
77830.6%
SHAWANO
OUTAGAMIE
196834.8%
BROWN
1220 56238.5% 28.5%
VERNON
49835.3%
CRAWFORD
38523.1%
JUNE AU ADAMS
8728.7%
34030.6%
WAUSHARA
KEWAUNEE
WINNEBAGD ALUMET
1818
444 135732.6% 4107.7%4 31.8°/ 33.9 % /
FOND DU LAC Irti SHEBOYGAN
1519
MARQUE T TE GREEN LAKE
12145.4% 339
SAUK COLUMBIA
RICHL AND
20351.7%
GRANT 83935.5%
IOWA
70732.5%
35937.6%
LA FAYET TE
34029.7%
DANE
859
36,3% 32.1%DODGE
35.2%
346844.8%
GREEN
1
WALV/ORTHROCK
71936.9% 917 r
32.4%
JEFFERSON WAUKESHA
961 330637.8% 42.6%
72739.5%
MILWAUKEE
384 1749 90939.8% 36.8% 36.3%
RACINE
j KENOSHA
= = - nes swimm me
14,17636.3%
225839.9%
-156333.6%
glance at the map will reveal that many countieswhich do not support a large population, and few,if any, collegiate institutions, also provide a high pro-portion of new freshmen. Clearly other factors thanthe proximity of an insr.ution alone must enter intoa student's decision whether or not to attend college.Some of these factors, for example, could be thefinancial aids available to a student and his scho-lastic ability, ethnic origins, educational attainmentof his parents, their income level and that of the resi-dents in their area, the influence of the student'speers, his teachers, and counselors in his high school,the lack cf job opportunities in certain areas of thestate, and the increase in automation and mechani-zation.
The following comments help to explain Map B, the ratioof first-time resident students enrolled in 27 vocational-technical schools in the fall of 1966 to the number of1966 high school graduates:
...A total of 9,288 resident students were enrolled, astheir first post-high school experience, in 27 of Wis-consin's vocational-technical schools in 1966. These27 schools are those which offer the Associate De-gree or full-time programs approved by the SBVTAE
only, and do not include 36 other vocational-technicalschools in the state which offer part-time eveningprograms and some full-time work.
...Of the total 9,288 resident first-time students, 5,451were graduated from a Wisconsin high school in
1966; the rest were graduated in previous years,even though this program was their first post-highschool experience since that graduation.
...Of the 3,218 resident first-time students enrolled in1966 at the Milwaukee Institute of Technology, 777chose Milwaukee's collegiate transfer program. Sixtyfirst-time students out of the total 463 at Madison'sSchool of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Educationenroll7d in the collegiate transfer program. The Mil-waukee Institute of Technology is the only one in thestate at the present time which offers collegiate trans-fer programs accredited by the North Central Asscci-
17
ation in addition to vocational-technical offerings. TheMadison School's collegiate transfer program re-ceived preliminary approval by North Central in 1966.
Most of the first-time students who selected the col-legiate transfer program at Madison and Milwaukeewere residents of the counties in which these schoolsare located. Waukesha County, however, provided59 of the 777 students enrolled in this program atMilwaukee; 11 more came from Ozaukee County and8 from Calumet County.
The ratio of the total number of resident first-timestudents enrolled in the 27 vocational-technicalschools in 1966 to the total number of Wisconsinhigh school graduates in 1966 was 14.0 per cent.Combined with the 1966 new freshman ratio of 36.6per cent, approximately 50.6 per cent were engagedin these two types of post-high school education in1966. Other Wisconsin residents attended out-of-state colleges (a national study indicates 15 per centin 1963) as new freshmen, and many also enrolledin private proprietary schools in the state.
The combined ratios of resident new freshmen andvocational-technical students to the number of 1966Wisconsin high school graduates ranged from a lowof 28.3 in Iron County to a high of 62.2 in KenoshaCounty. Twenty-two counties provided combined ra-tios from 50 to 60 per cent; 40 counties from 40to 50 per cent.
Kenosha County enrolled almost as many studentsin vocational-technical schools (447) as new freshmenin collegiate institutions in 1966 (525). Other coun-ties with a large number of vocational-technical stu-dents were Milwaukee (3218), Dane (463), Racine(416), Waukesha (372), Marathon (287), and LaCrosse (203).
Map B
Ratio of First-Time Resident Students Enrollad in 27 Vocational-Technical SchoolsOffering Approved Associate Degree or Full-Time Programs, Fall 1966, to Numberof 1966 Wisconsin High School Graduees(Includes collgiate transfer programs at Milwaukee Institute of Technologyand Madison School of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education)
28
oP. /...1
#4? Legend
top - 1966 high school graduates by countybottom - ratio of vocationaltechnical students
to high school graduates by countyDOUGLAS
BAYFIELD
ASHLAND
756 199 IRON
12.8 % 12.1 %
BURNETT
1668.4%
Roo(
5326.9%
312 141
WASHBURN SAWYER 4,2% 2.1%
20716.9%
15211.8%
BARRON
65212.7%
ST CROIX
4954.6%
DUNN
40113.2%
PIERCE
4975.6%
169"10.6%
wa
RUSK
3256.5%
C HIPPE
87213.3%
EAU CLAIRE
110612.0%
BUFFALO
P EP IN
PRICE
25814.7%
VIL AS
1149.6%
ONEIDA
FOREST
4417.5%
TAYLOR
3188.2%
CL ARK
',,AcKscfT1
255 1 519 2629.0% 11.00/03.7%
REMPEALEAU IMONROE
6259.8%
LA CRC SE
12201 56216.6% 10.5%VERNON
49810.0% RICHLAND 707CRAWFORD 203 12.2%
385 6.9%9.9%
GRANT
LINCOLN
MARATHON
147819.4%
WO OD
117212.7%
JUNEAU
L A NGLADE
423 1 4099.0% 13.2%
1289.4% 687
FLORENCE
6018.3%
MARINET TE
LOCONTO
MENOMINEE
SHAWANO
52011.5%
PORTAGE WAUPACA
5.2%
41916.0%
OUTAGAMIE
665 778 19686.2% 6.7% 6.9%
A, W-T-
AUSHARA
87181
wiNNEBAGo
17.2%71.768%411.6%
340MAROUETTE1 GREEN
" LAKE121 2-J339
8.5 %FOND DUIAC
COLUMBIA DODGE
1105.027%12.4%i 1.°110/07_1
7°
BROWN KEWAUNE
A LUMET' MANITOWOC
cI444 1
'113.3%
-1-SHEBOYGAN
24229.1%
SAUK
83911.0%
IOWA
3599.7%
DANE
GREEN
7OziuKEE859 719 917
15.6% rl 6.6%[i
WASHINGTON
JEFFERSON TWAUKESHA MILWAUKEE
10.7%
346813.3%
LA FAYET TE
340 38414.4% 10.7%
39412.9%
- 36812.2%
-135711.4%
- 72710.6%
9619.0%
ROCK
17497.1%
330611.2%
WALWORTH I RACINE
6.9%909 ...1.iKENospiA
14,17622.7%
-225818.4%
_156328.6%
Section IV
A New Look at the Outreach Plan
In 1958, the Coordinating Committee adopted as its"cardinal" tenets educational opportunity, diversity, andquality. Relevant to this section are the following ex-cerpts from that statement:
The general welfare of the state will be best servedby making it possible for any deserving and qualifiedyouth to continue his education to the level of hisability and ambition. Since the major cost of educationto the student occurs when the training must besecured away from his home, the welfare of the stu-dent and the state will be best promoted by providingpost-high school educational opportunities as widelyover the state as is consistent with sound educationaland financial considerations.
As a major step toward implementing these principles,the Coordinating Committee created a Long-Range Plan-ning Subcommittee which, assisted by the CCHE staff,fully explored the need for additional two-year public col-legiate opportunities throughout Wisconsin and recom-mended a statewide plan for their distribution. The planwas then reviewed and endorsed by the CCHE in 1963,and a bill was later enacted in the fall session to allow theState College Regents to "establish branch campuses...in communities approved by the coordinating committeefor higher education and not otherwise provided withdegree-granting public institutions of higher learning..."In the same legislation, the University of Wisconsin Re-gents were given formal statutory authority to establish"extension centers" at locations approved by the CCHE.From that point on, the Coordinating Committee wasable to enter into direct negotiations with communitiesthat qualified under CCHE criteria as potential sites fortwo-year facilities.
Major developments since the adoption of the outreachplan have convinced the staff that a thorough reassess-ment of existing policies is both desirable and necessary:(1) the passage of Chapter 292, Laws of 1965, to ex-pand vocational, technical, and adult education opportuni-ties throughout the state; (2) the authorization of newUniversiy of Wisconsin campuses at Green Bay and Park-side; (3) recent findings concerning the relative import-ance of geographical proximity of higher educational op-
n1111MINNMI
19
portunities, and the relationship of this factor to educational quality and cost; (4) progress to date in dispersingpublic collegiate opportunities throughout Wisconsin, and(5) developments in other states.
It is the intention of the staff in this section to explorethe background of "outreach", to discuss the factorsenumerated above, and to advance certain conclusions.
A. Background
To determine how the "outreach" plan evolved, it isnecessary to re-examine the series of policy positionstaken by the CCHE.
In 1962, the CCHE stated its "conviction that the two-year teacher training program of the county teacherscolleges should be terminated as soon as practicable,"and that as such colleges "are phased out of existence,"the University of Wisconsin and the State Universitiesshould be developing "two-year liberal arts offerings inextension centers and on branch campuses, respeztively,in selected areas of the state."
In addition, the Coordinating Committee recognized thatthere were students in various parts of Wisconsin "whofind it impossible to leave home to secure collegiate education," and that "many others who do leave home tosecure an education find the financial load extremelyheavy." As a result, the Committee reaffirmed its previous statement on providing post-high school educationalopportunities "as widely over the State as is consistentwith sound educational and financial considerations."
In the same document, the CCHE set the conditions whichlocalities must satisfy to obtain a freshmansophomoreinstitution. Among the requirements are the following:
(1) The county or community must agree to furnish"suitable physical facilities" and provide for theirmaintenance and for one-half of the cost of custo-dial service.
(2) The operating costs of the center or branch campus"must be relatively economical in terms of appropriated state funds."
1
(3) The locality must meet certain quantitative criteriarelating to potential enrollment and the proximityand "drawing power" of existing collegiate insti-
tutions.
In October, 1963, establishment e six centers or branchcampuses in the following communities was recom-mended by the Coordinating Committee for the 1965-67and 1967-69 biennia: Waukesha, Janesville, and RiceLake for 1965.67, and West Bend, Baraboo, and Clinton-ville-Shawano for 1967.69,
In addition, other communities were singled out as "pro-jected" locations for two-year facilities beyond 1965-69;however, no "definitive timetable or order of establish-ment" was mentioned. These locations included: BeaverDam, Richland Center, Tomah, Rhinelander, Lake Geneva,
and Fond du Lac. The Coordinating Committee statedat the time that "while these locations, on the basis ofevidence [now] available. ..appear as suitable locationswiLain an over-all pattern of development, each should becontinually assessed in terms of educational, economic,and other factors which will affect any future prioritylist." Moreover, the potential of Wisconsin Rapids foreither a center or branch campus was, in the language ofthe Committee, to be "carefully scrutinized" in an on-going evaluation of possible two-year unit sites.
Finally, in Working Paper #4, 1965, the CoordinatingCommittee designated Rice Lake, Rhinelander, and Wis-
consin Rapids as locations for dual-track institutionsoffering both vocational-technical training and liberal
arts transfer courses. It was the determination of theCCHE that such an arrangement would produce greaterefficiency and economy. Last July this policy was reaf-
firmed. (See later section on dual-track concept.)
To summarize, these were the paramount considerations
in the adoption of the outreach plan:
(1) the need to fill the vacuum created by the "phasingout" of the County Teacher College operations;
(2) the desirability of reducing financial barriers tocollege attendance through the provision of liberal
20
arts opportunities within effective commuting dis-tance to all or most Wisconsin students;
(3) the "popularity" of the centers, as evidenced bytheir more rapid enrollment growth at the time;
(4) and, implicitly, the "demonstration effect" of havinga liberal arts institution in a community, e.g., expo-sure of the residents to the values of collegiateeducation.
B. Recent Developments
Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education7 = -ssage of Chapter 292, Laws of 1965, designed
to broaden vocational, technical, and adult educationopportunities through inclusion of the entire state inarea districts by 1970, marked a turning point in thedevelopment of the V.T.A. system. Implementation of thelaw should enable Wisconsin youths and adults to pur-sue vocational-technical training on a much wider scalethan was true in the past. CCHE enrollment projections,prepared in March and December of 1966, suggest thatby 1983, 30 per cent of Wisconsin's high school gradu-ates will be enrolled in all types of programs in V.T.A.
schools. Reflected in this estimate is the assumptionthat as area districts are formed and necessary facilitiesconstructed or enlarged, an increasing proportion ofhigh school graduates will elect such programs, as op-posed to strictly collegiate courses of study. Obviously,the attractiveness and prestige of vocational-technicaleducation vis-a-vis collegiate education will be signifi-cantly enhanced as an outgrowth of the rapid expansionof the V.T.A. system and specific program offerings,particularly technical curricula. Already a number of theschools that award the Associate Degree are serving an
area or, in some cases, state-wide clientele. The per centof full-time students from outside the home county of thevocational-technical school is 68% at the Eau ClaireVocational-Technical School, 53% at the La Crosse Voca-
tional-Technical School, 52% at the Green Bay Voca-tional-Technical School, and 51% at the Madison Voca-
tional-Technical School.
New University of Wisconsin InstitutionsIn April, 1964, the CCHE recommended to the Governorand the Legislature that a "sequence of four years ofeducational opportunity" be made available in the FoxValley and Racine-Kenosha areas, partially to relieve en-
rollment pressures at the Madison, Milwaukee, White-
water, and Oshkosh campuses. Enabling legislation,Chapter 259, Laws of 1965, was subflequently approved
charging the Coordinating Committee with the formula-tion of "a plan and schedule for the devolopment. .. ofthe new institutions. .." The question now arises: What
will be the impact of the campuses on future enrollment
patterns?
It should be recognized that the Coordinating Committee
has defined as a major purpose of UW-Green Bay andParkside the provision of collegiate opportunity on aregional basis within a radius of 50.75 miles. As aresult, dormitories have been recommended to accom-modate students beyond convenient commuting distance.In essence, the northeast and southeast institutions willsubstantially affect enrollment patterns throughout wideservice areas; the staff's latest projections show 7,300students at Green Bay and 8,800 at Parkside by 1983.However, in terms of freshman-sophomore opportunities,the major impact will not be felt until the 1973-75 bien-nium when first- and second-year operations become con-
solidated with third- and fourth-year academic work (to
be offered initially).
Factor of Geographical AccessibilityAs indicated earlier, the major aim of the outreach planis to place freshman-sophomore liberal arts programswithin effectiv?. commuting distance of students unableto "leave home to secure collegiate education." The staffbelieves that while geographic accessibility of such oppor-tunities should always be considered in long-range plan-ning for higher education, the relative weight of thisfactor should be re-appraised in light of:
1. recent studies focusing on the importance of geo-graphical proximity as an element in both the deci-sion to attend college, and the choice of a collegiateinstitution or program;
21
2. other determinants of college-going patterns, includ-ing the increasing availability of student financial aids;
1 the proportion of students in our public collegiateinstitutions who actually commute on a daily basis,
and the distances traveled;
4. the relationship between geographic accessibilityand educational quality at reasonable cost;
5. the relationship between availability of collegiate op-portunity and economic growth or location of newindustry in an area, and
6. the extent to which commuting opportunities have
already been provided throughout the state.
Studies of the Proximity FactorAmong the significant studies bearing on these questionsis a 1965 University of Wisconsin doctoral dissertationby Robert H. Fenske which probes the strength of therelationship between "the presence or absence of institu-tions of higher education in selected communities and
the plans of high school graduates in these communities
to attend college."
Information on both the post-high school educationalplans of graduating seniors in the selected communitiesand their socio-economic characteristics was obtained
through a specially constructed questionnaire admin-istered to all seniors in their schools in 1963.
The study produced these principal findings:
1. The presence or absence of a local collegiate oppor-tunity was not a determining factor in the "decisionsof the great majority of . . . graduating seniors . . . toattend college;" the availability of such opportunityproved to be insignificant in comparison with othervariables: the student's scholastic ability, parents'educational attainment, or type of father's occupation.
2. Communities having public collegiate institutions"yielded" a larger over-all proportion of college-bound high school graduates than those communities
without such facilities, but the "yield" differenceamounted to only 4.5 per cent.
3. For a small segment of the graduating seniors intend-ing to enter college, the local availability of a colle-giate institution was crucial to post-high school plans.These students, data showed, ranked markedly loweron the author's socio-economic scale than seniorsreporting that the presence of a college did not mat-ter in their plans. Fldwever, the difference betweenthe two groups in scholastic ability was slight.
Other surveys regarding the effect of a local college onpost-high school education decisions have been con-ducted; in 1962 the Coordinating Committee staff sum-marized the rosults of five such investigations:
"there was no definite evidence that the proximity of acollege to the homes of high school students encouragedthem to take advanced learning. The presence of a collegealone does not cause large numbers of resident studentsto enroll, the surveys state, and it is pointed out thatsome Wisconsin state colleges would have a relativelysmall enrollment if they did not attract students from allover the state. The Wisconsin study found that perhapsthe extent of urbanization of a community and the educa-tional and income levels of its residents are more im-portant than the presence or absence of a college in thevicinity."
In the opinion of the staff, the available literature indi-cates that:
1. while proximity of collegiate opportunities should notbe ruled out as a factor in the educational directionsof Wisconsin high school seniors and may evenprove critical for co,tain groups of students,
2. neither should it be assigned such over-riding im-portance as to obscure the significance of other vari-ables, or possible alternatives to a plan of furtheroutreach.
Other VariablesWith regard to these and other variables, no agency hasyet assessed in Wisconsin the impact of expanding pro-grams of student financial aid. Many of the programsare of very recent orif 4;%1 it is difficult at this pointto analyze their full rare ,A.":.:1` ins. However, in the staff'sview, the growing avaiLvaly f:f such aids may be a con-siderably more potent a.:-.:(ns,,Ii"fant of college-going pat-terns than geographical ne ;ozv)ss of a college campus.Obviously, other factors are also relevant, e. g., dormi-tory space, family background, size and type of the highschool attended.
CCHE Paper #53, 1965, is particularly significant be-cause of its explicit recognition of student mobility trendsthroughout the state:
"there is some evidence that though commuting oppor-tunities are being made available, a substantial percent-age of st idents, when given the opportunity, prefer tolive away from home when attending college. It alsoappears that increasing student freedom resulting fromhigher family incomes, higher levels of scholarship aid,and the availability of self-amortizing or privately-operateddormitories will enable students to exercise their prefer-ence."
CommutingMore complete information on geographical proximity ofcollegiate opportunities and student mobility patternscould be obtained through detailed studies of: (1) theproportion of students who actually commute to ourpublic colleges (including the centers and developingbranch campuses) as opposed to those living in resi-dence, (2) the distances traveled in the large percentageof cases, and (3) the preponderant characteristics ofeach group.
Student housing data, compiled by the State Universitiesas part of their first semester enrollment report for1965.66 and 1966.67, are revealing. (See Table IV)
To be noted, first of all, is the sizable majority of full-time students who live in either university or privatehousing: about 74 per cent in 1965.66, and 75.5 per
Table IV
Residence of Students at the Nine State Universities
Fulltime Students Semester 1 1965.66 Semester 1 1966.67
(8 credits or more)
University housingPrivate within 15 milesOwn home or home
of parent or relativewithin 15 miles
Commute beyondUnknowr,Total
No. ofStudents
15,65010,604
6,30215 miles 3,136
% of No. of % ofTotal Students Total43.9 20,233 49.929.7 10,380 25.6
17.6 6,297 15.68.8 0.5
3,4 16 8.4205
35,692 100.0 40,531 100.0
cent in 1966.67. (The proportion residing in dormi-
tories rose sharply between 1965 and 1966 six per-
centage points.) Parttcularly significant in terms of our
study is the relatively small and apparently declining
segment of students living in own home or that of aparent or relative within 15 miles, or commuting beyond
15 miles: 17.6 and 8.8 per cent respectively in 1965.66,
and 15.6 and 8.4 in 1966.67.
Clearly, the inference to be drawn is that many or most
State University students, for a variety of reasons (greater
financial resources, attraction of a particular program,etc.), seem to prefer living in residence to commuting
while receiving their education. It might be argued, of
course, that certain students are forced to attend college
away from home because of the absence of educational
opportunities in their own community. Yet, cases of this
type are probably infrequent, given the wide geographical
dispersion of present or planned collegiate facilities in
Wisconsin.
Relationship to Educational Quality and Cost
Thus far, geographical accessibility of higher educational
opportunities has been discussed with sole reference to
students served; in addition, one must consider the rela-
tionship between the geographic factor and educational
quality and cost. The basic query is this: what are the
effects in terms of program depth and breadth and costs
per student of spreading publicly-supported collegiate
opportunities "widely over the State. . . ?"
CCHE Paper #56, 1962, spelled out the guidelines for
measuring potential enrollments for two-year units of the
23
University of Wisconsin and State Universities namely,
annual high school graduate pool requirements. In large
part, these high school graduate concentrations weredetermined according to best estimates of the minimum
number of students needed to support a high-quality
freshman sophomore curriculum: 200 to 250.
At the present time, all public twoyear liberal arts facili-
ties easily meet this former criterion, except the Barron
County Branch Campus, which opened with 116 first-
year students in September, 1966. However, the depth
and breadth of offerings at the University Centers seem
to vary with the size of the enrollment base involved, as
Table V below indicates.
In general, it would appear that a correlation exists be-
tween enrollment size and the scope of a center's cur-
riculum. Green Bay, for instance, with the largest
1966.67 student body, offers 31 first semester subject
areas and a total of 90 courses, whereas for Marinette,
the smallest center in the system prior to this year, the
figures are 21 and 40 respectively. We immediately note
certain deviations, of course: Racine, with the second
highest number of students, shows less program depth
and breadth than any one of the campuses at Kenosha,
Menasha, and Marathon. Quite simply, these deviations
mean that student enrollments, though fundamental in
any consideration of program quality, are not the sole
determinant of curricular range and depth; other factors,
which the staff is now exploring, must be taken into
account.
Table V
Enrollments and Number of Subject Areas andCourse Offerings at U.W. CentersFirst Semester, 1966.67
1966Center' EnrollmentGreen Bay 997Racine 779Kenosha 724Fox Valley (Menasha) 647Marathon (Wausau) 591
Sheboygan 447Manitowoc 370Marshfield 342Marinette 314
No. of Total No.Subject of CoursesAreas Offered
314
9024 6626 727 78225
683 51
22 5222 4221 40
The Waukesha and Rock County centers, having launched theirprograms only this fall, are excluded from this analysis.
In addition, there is wider variation among the centersin number of courses taught during a semester than in
number of subject areas. Each two-year unit providesa "core curriculum" in the natural sciences and mathe-matics, the social sciences, the humanities, and selectedpre-professional fields: a minimum of about 21 areas(not including Janesville and Waukesha). Moreover, the
courses are identical or very similar in content to thoseoffered on the UW, Madison and Milwaukee campuses.
However, while a center student is assured of a minimum
level of program offerings, he undoubtedly enjoys greaterfreedom of choice or broader opportunity at certain cen-ters than at others; e.g., Menasha vs. Marshfield, sim-ply because he has more subjects available to him at acampus like Menasha as opposed to Marshfield. Uponcompletion of his 2-year program, is he then betterequipped in terms of credits earned to transfer directlyinto the junior year at a 4-year institution?
In light of the above analysis, this general conclusion
seems appropriate: the greater the enrollment at a pub-
lic two-year collegiate campus, the greater the range and
depth of its curriculum.
Since program quality and quantity appear to be, in
large measure, a function of student enrollment or de-mand, the staff is now reviewing criteria for public two-year institutions in other states.
Not only are we concerned with program depth andbreadth, but with per-student costs as well. Specifically,
how does the average instructional cost per student atthe centers compare with that for UW, Madison and Mil-waukee? Examining Level I (freshman-sophomore) costdata for the two types of campuses, 1966-67, we findan average cost of $505 at UW, Madison, $457 at Mil-
waukee, and $734 (over-all average) at the centers.
Because the centers enroll much smaller numbers ofstudents, it is hardly surprising that their per-student
costs should be higher than those for Madison and Mil-waukee. The same cost differential is becoming evident
in the State University system with the development ofbranch campuses. In future months, the comparativecost structure will be studied intensively by the CCHE
staff.
24
Relationship to Economic Growth andLocation of New IndustryAt times the argument is advanced that placement of a
collegiate institution in a community stimulates thatarea's economic growth by attracting new industry; yet,many objective surveys cast serious doubt on the propo-
sition that availability of higher educational opportuni-
ties at least at the freshman-sophomore level is adecisive or leading factor in new plant locations.
Obviously, much hinges on the size, nature, and objec-
tives of the firm or industry invdved. For a companywith a significant research as well as production focuse.g., a major electronics firm access to a universitymay be "extremely important to permit researchers totake graduate evening courses and rub elbows with fel-low scientists." But even in this case, higher educationalfacilities are only one of many factors considered. On
the other hand, industries dealing with heavy bulky rawmaterials or products might be especially interested inrail service, not collegiate education.
One should be wary of the assumption that proliferatingtwo-year collegiate opportunities throughout Wisconsinwill by itself materially affect plant location trends invarious areas. To justify the establishment of a center
or branch campus strictly or primarily on this basis,
rather than on educational grounds, seems most unwise.
C. Conclusions and Recommendations
As previously mentioned, the Coordinating Committee in
1963 recommended the establishment of centers orbranch campuses at the following sites during the1965.67 and 1967.69 biennia: Waukesha, Rock County,
Rice Lake, West Bend, Baraboo, and Clintonville- Shawano.
Certain other communities were designated as "pro-jected" or "possible" locations for two-year facilities be-
yond 1965-69: Beaver Dam, Richland Center, Tomah,Rhinelander, Lake Geneva, and Fond du Lac. At thattime, the CCHE called for continuing review of the poten-
tial of each area within the second category.
Since 1963, UW centers have been opened at Waukesha
and Janesville, and two additional campuses under Uni-
versity jurisdiction are scheduled to begin operations in1968: West Bend and Baraboo. Moreover, thr) first StateUniversity branch campus is now functioning in RiceLake (and will, as the Board of Regents and CCHE en-vision it, cooperate closely on programming and facili-ties utilization with the Rice Lake V.T.A. school), andWisconsin State Universities freshman-sophomore unitsat Richland Center and Fond du Lac will be enrollingstudents in 1967 and 1968 respectively. Finally, Rhine-lander has been singled out as the location for a "pilot"dual-track institution, offering both liberal arts coursesand vocational-technical training (see subsequent sec-tion of the plan), and the program scope for the Medfordbranch campus is now under discussion between theCCHE staff and the State Universities.
Implementation of the outreach plan has significantlybroadened public collegiate opportunities for Wisconsinstudents; however, in view of the impressive progressto date, major developments since the adoption of theplan, and other factors considered in this section, thestaff recommends a moratorium on the approval of anynew centers or branch campuses.
In addition, the staff believes that the firm commitment ofthe Coordinating Committee to a dual-track operation inRhinelander eliminates the need at this time for a four-year public university in the northeastern tier of Wiscon-sin. According to the most recent estimates, the arealacks sufficient enrollment potential to support a high-quality "University of the North" at a reasonable per-student cost; latest population projections for L.arta innortheastern counties indicate a rather sharp decline be-tween 1960 and 1980 in the number of persons of col-lege age (the 15-19 and 20-24 age groups). Also, theestablishment of a University of the North could not byitself be expected to generate substantial economic orindustrial growth in the region. Moreover, three StateUniversities Superior, Eau Claire, and Stevens Pointalready serve the northern and north central areas, anda University of Wisconsin campus at Green Bay will en-large collegiate opportunities for students living in north-eastern Wisconsin.
Therefore, while acutely aware of the higher educational
25
void in the northeastern section of the state, the staff hasconcluded that the desires of residents for liberal artsand vocational-technical education can best be fulfilledthrough a public two-year institution combining bothtracks. In addition, the staff recommends that the pro-posed Rhinelander facility, along with the extension activi-ties of the various systems, become the focal point for alarge-scale, coordinated program of adult education andcommunity services in the area. At the same time, theCCHE should continue to pursue the possibilities of aninterstate agreement with Michigan whereby students innorthern Wisconsin could avail themselves of public col-legiate opportunities in Upper Michigan. (The necessaryenabling legislation was passed by the 1965 Wisconsinlegislature.)
Finally, the staff recommends that all needy students,particularly those living outside effective commuting dis-tance of an existing or planned higher educational facility,be guaranteed, through present scholarship and loan pro-grams, the financial resources to choose a collegiate orvocational-technical institution in the state.
Section V 26
Academic Programs
Pursuant to the legislative mandate in the Laws of 1965,the CCHE will continue to evaluate higher education inWisconsin in order to determine "what overall educationalprograms shall be offered in the several units . . so asto avoid duplication and to utilize to the best advantagethe facilities and personnel available." Moreover, "nonew educational programs shall be developed or institutedat any institution of higher education except with com-mittee approval."
Dramatic err ailment growth accompanied by the increas-ing complexity of higher education has prompted curricu-lar aspirations from several segments of Wisconsin highereducation. As buildings, budgets, and faculty recruit-ment should evolve from rather than precede academicplanning, criteria for the evaluation of new curricularprograms have been developed. CCHE #78, 1966, Aca-demic Program Criteria and Procedures, approved by theCommittee on October 14, 1966 and discussed later,contains guidelines and pertinent policies through whichcurricular revisions are considered by the CoordinatingCommittee. Such procedures are intended to implementimaginative, careful curricular planning and to promotethe orderly growth of academic programs in Wisconsinhigher education.
Wisconsin continues to endorse and support a widerange of higher educational opportunities dispersedthroughout the state and available on the basis of talentsand motivation rather than ability to pay. Insofar as itis consistent with mission and effectiveness, studentsshould not be subjected to geographic or institutionaldiscrimination. Comparable academic programs upondifferent campuses should receive equitable state support.Chapter 292 of the Laws of 1965, designed to assureall state residents access to vocational-technical schools,will, when fully implemented, bring Wisconsin close toits goal of providing excellent and diverse post-highschool educational opportunities. The range of availableand projected programs reflects this educational phil-osophy.
A. Undergraduate Degree Programs
In 1956, the second public university campus, the Uni-versity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, was authorized. In 1964,
the nine Wisconsin State Colleges whose academic ma-turity had accompanied their physical growth were granteduniversity status. The 1965 Legislature authorized twonew University of Wisconsin campuses scheduled to re-ceive their first students in 1969. While initially limitedto third- and fourth-year collegiate programs, the CCHEstaff recommends that a full four-year academic programbe implemented by 1975.
Expanded facilities and faculties have provided improvedhigher education opportunities in Wisconsin. Fortunately,academic excellence and diversity have accompanied thedramatic physical growth, and we face escalating enroll-ments confident that Wisconsin public higher educationwill continue to expand with excellence. During the nextdecade, the major emphasis must be directed towardproviding appropriate educational experiences throughbroadened and strengthened curricular offerings.
Providing a diversity of academic programs in Wisconsininstitutions, while at the same time raising the qualitystandards, will require the concentration of selectedcourses of study upon a single or limited number ofstate campuses. Such a diversity of mission will encour-age each institution to develop distinctive peaks of excel-lence while maintaining appropriate, broad, and diversegeneral curricular offerings. Requests for duplicatingcurricular concentrations will be critically evaluated interms of the readiness of the applying institution to un-dertake the program as well as the impact of such anew program upon similar programs on other state cam-puses, public and private. Future academic developmentmust emerge from a discriminate evaluation of manpowerneeds and institutional strengths as related to new pro-grams in teaching, research, and public service.
One of the prime goals of higher education in Wisconsinduring the next decade will be the development of institutional peaks of excellence in specialized high-cost aca-demic areas to accompany and enrich a continued concen-tration upon a wide and diverse curriculum in the tradi-tional academic disciplines on each major campus. Exist-ing institutions should expand and improve the scope andquality of its offerings in the liberal arts, teacher educa-tion, and business administration areas where society'sneeds and student demands warrant duplicating pro-
grams. No institution should develop such a high degreeof specialization that the academic diversity attractiveto students seeking various vocational or personal goalsis lost. A basic core of academic programs should existon all university campuses.
B. Two-Year Institutions
It has been stated that the two-year college by its severalnames has been the most important educational innova-tion of the past quarter-century. By 1968, Wisconsinwill have established, through joint community-stateefforts, a network of 16 branch or center system cam-puses very similar in their goals to the junior collegesin some states. These 16 two-year institutions, whencombined with the 13 existing or authorized public uni-versities and the many excellent private colleges, willprovide diverse educational opportunities well-distributedthroughout the state. As the liberal arts curriculum ofa two-year program must be both broad and excellentto meet the rigorous standards of upper division andprofessional schools, proliferation of courses and cam-puses must be avoided until a substantial student enroll-ment potential on each campus is assured. As the pres-ently authorized campuses will provide maximum efficientdistribution of state-supported educational opportunitieswithout dilution of quality, no further expansion of thenumber of branches or centers should be considered.Expanded liberal arts opportunities can be provided, tocommunities presently not served, through extensioncourses or within projected vocational schools or tech-nical institutes where, in selected communities, limitedcollegiate transfer programs can evolve or be made avail-able on a contract basis in cooperation with the appro-priate university.
The common and significant mission of the two-yearinstitution either under University of Wisconsin or StateUniversities' jurisdiction is to provide high quality, fullytransferrable, freshman-sophomore, and associate de-gree programs to an expanding number of students ona commuting basis. Baccalaureate degree programs ineither liberal arts or professional schools require a basicarts and science curriculum during the first two collegeyears. The branch campus or center brings such a com-
27
mon core to Wisconsin comm.. nities where a four-yeardegree program could not be justified.
Generally, the student on a two-year campus has met thesame admission and retention standards, is eligible forsimilar loan and scholarship opportunities, and may takethe same courses as a student on any public universitycampus. Each two-year campus provides a truly colle-giate experience with a full range of academic, cultural,and extra-curricular programs. It is expected that theavailability of university-level work within geographic andfinancial reach will Encourage an increasing percentageof qualified high school graduates to enroll in college.Such an increase is desirable for both the prospectivestudent and for the state of Wisconsin.
While an integral part of a larger university and sharingthe strengths of such an association, the two-year campusretains distinct values. The two-year institutions withtheir smaller enrollments are student-oriented withgreater stress upon classroom instruction, close studentfaculty contact, and comprehensive counseling services.The total program should focus upon giving the studentan opportunity to discover himself his strengths andhis weaknesses. Given such an emphasis, studies indi-cate that the student transferring from a two-year pro-gram does as well as students of comparable ability whostart at four-year universities. For many, the completionof a two-year course of study, particularly with an associ-ate degree, may be both terminal and rewarding. It af-fords the student the considerable values of a two-yearliberal arts exposure which may be the most appropriateeducational experience for his vocational and personalgoals.
The freshman and sophomore requirements for mostcourses of study are similar, if not identical, and thusduplicating academic programs on each two-year campusbecomes desirable. Common liberal arts offerings willassure the successful student on separate campusesease of transfer to any upper division program or pro-fessional school without loss of credits or change ofobjectives. While the two-year institutions are partiallyfunded through local resources and should respond tocommunity needs in adult education and public service,
their major focus will continue to be upon quality lowerdivision courses prerequisite to a broad range of profes-sional aspirations.
Many states have expanded the scope and availability ofhigher education through the development of comprehen-sive junior college systems. These dual-track communitycolleges generally follow admissions policies designedto make higher educational opportunities available toany high school graduate in the state. While Wisconsin'sdevelopment of two-year branch campuses has providedoptimum geographic distribution of higher education andhas precluded the junior college development, it has notsignificantly extended the availability of associate degree,liberal arts and collegiate transfer work except on aspecial basis to those students ineligible for admissionto four-year colleges and universities. The vocational-technical schools admit a wider range of high schoolgraduates as measured by high school rank in class andcourse of study, but with the exception of students inMilwaukee and Madison, a collegiate transfer course ofstudy is not available.
The CCHE staff recommends that the several two-yearcampuses and centers, in cooperation with the CCHEand the systems involved, study ways to extend highereducational opportunities by the revision of admissionsstandards to attract more students, particularly thosethird- and fourth-quartile high school graduates who mightprofit from a collegiate experience. Such an expanded"open door" policy on the two-year campuses wouldmake available Associate Degree or collegiate transferprograms to the many Wisconsin students whose highschool programs or rank in class would exclude themfrom the University of Wisconsin, the State Universities,or private colleges. The satisfactory completion of theappropriate two-year academic program at a branchcampus should qualify the student for admission to apublic university. Because of the administrative orienta-tion to a parent university, the branch campus has givenprimary emphasis to collegiate transfer liberal arts pro-grams. Associate Degree programs attractive to studentsshould be stressed as an integral part of the curriculumof all centers and branch campuses as well as in tech-nical institutes and dual-track institutions. Formalized
28
cooperative efforts among all state public two-year in-stitutions should be established to develop common ad-missions and retention policies adapted to the needs ofstudents and designed to provide broadened and equalpost-high school educational opportunities to all whocan profit from them.
C. Graduate Programs
While we experience escalating enrollments at all levels,the most dramatic recent growth and projected demandare for expanded educational opportunities at the gradu-ate level. A national survey indicates that nearly 50%of present freshman classes plan to enroll in graduateschools. Wisconsin higher education not only must pre-pare for more students, but must enroll these studentsfor longer periods of time in order to provide the num-ber of Master's and Doctoral graduates that will beneeded. The University of Wisconsin, Madison continuesto maintain its enviable position in the forefront of gradu-ate education by consistently ranking third nationally inthe production of Doctor's degrees. However, as thenumber of institutions offering Doctoral level work in thestate is severely limited, the total state picture is lessfavorable. Statistics continued in Report #1677 of theHigher Education Amendments of 1966 indicate thatfrom 1954.1964 Wisconsin's percentage increase inDoctoral production lagged considerably behind bothnational figures as well as those of other midwesternstates. We must now prepare for the type of expansionin graduate education that we have recently experiencedat the undergraduate level.
Wisconsin is indeed fortunate both in its long historyand in its recent developments at the graduate level. TheUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison, as the state's leadinggraduate facility and research center, has a distinguishedinternational reputation both in the quality and the quan-tity of its Doctoral programs. The University of Wiscon-sin-Milwaukee will continue to implement distinctive,non-duplicating Ph.D. offerings in areas of specializationas well as in needed graduate areas where student de-mand exceeds the capabilities of the Madison campus.The nine State Universities have initiated successfulMaster's degree programs particularly designed to meet
the critical and continuing shortages of qualified instruc-tional staff for public schools, colleges, and technical
institutes.
The objections to program duplication and proliferationat the baccalaureate level are even more compelling ingraduate education where per-student costs may be four
to six times as high. Graduate work, particularly at thePh.D. level, requires the research facilities, the depth oflibrary holdings, the faculty strength and establishedacademic maturity that evolves from continuing substan-
tial and success, Master's level programs.
The expansion of graduate offerings is necessary anddesirable for institutional development, but must not beattempted without assurance of a high degree of excel-lence. Understandably, most universities will wish toextend their graduate offerings in response to needc, but
in light of heavy demands upon limited budgets, facilities,and faculties, most Doctoral programs will continue tobe centered in the University of Wisconsin, particularlyupon the Madison campus where the graduate strengthin collateral fields and the established reputation forPh.D. work already exist. Graduate programs built uponestablished peaks of excellence will develop on the Park-
side and Green Bay campuses as strong research-orientedmajor fields of study become identified at :he under-graduate level.
The CCHE agrees with the State College Board of Regents
that the State Universities, as instruction-oriented insti-tutions, "should not attempt to duplicate the researchfacilities of the University of Wisconsin graduate school."
The State Universities should strive for appropriate de-velopment of Master's degree programs to meet estab-lished needs. Such expansion is desirable and shouldbe implemented upon the identification of subject matterareas of concentration. Pursuant to the endorsement ofthe Coordinating Committee in their approval of CCHE#48, 1966, it is recommended that an amendment tothe present law be adopted which would authorize theRoard of Regents of State Colleges to award graduate67;grees, subject to CCHE approval, in fields other thanteacher education. A differential pattern of offeringsamong the Universities will assure continued high qualitywhile meeting total state needs.
29
Educational factors including library holdings, researchexperience and resources, as well as financial considera-tions, require that Doctoral level graduate work in Wis-consin be concentrated in a few large universities wheredepartmental size and faculty strengths would assurequality programs. While final ".cisions concerning theapproval of post-Master's degree programs on othercampuses must await the successful mounting of com-prehensive programs at the M.A. and M.S. levels, grow-ing needs would indicate that large, strong, rapidly-growing institutions such as Wisconsin State University -
.Oshkosh be evaluated in terms of their Doctoral potential
in areas of outstanding strengths. WSU-Eau Claire, be-cause of its academic strength, its geographical locationand wide service area, might also develop Doctoral pro-grams in selected fields. Other State Universities withestablished reputations in specialized fields, should con-centrate their advanced graduate curricular developmentin the areas of recognized excellence. The critical andexpanding need for qualified instructional staff for tech-nical institutes requires the early development of a Def;-toral program in technical education in an institutionsuch as Stout State University.
To capitalize upon curricular specializations on the sev-eral campuses and to extend the availability of neededgraduate programs particularly in education the Uni-versity of Wisconsin, in cooperation with the State Univer-
sities, is urged to consider the development of cooperativeDoctoral programs in appropriate areas of specialization.For example, some Ph.D. level work in mathematics mightbe considered for an institution such as La Crosse tohelp meet the industrial needs of the area. New pro-grams will be carefully evaluated in light of societalneeds and institutional capabilities in accordance withcriteria and procedures as outlined in CCHE Paper #78,
1966.
D. The Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education
1, stem
As used by the State Board of Vocational, Technical, and
Adult Education, the term "vocational education" refersbroadly to all formal instruction for youth and adults, atthe post-high school and "out-of-school" levels, which"prepares individuals for initial entrance into, and ad-
vancement within, an occupation or group of relatedoccupations." Technical education, in turn, is defined asthat facet of vocational education which equips thestudent for mid-management or "semi-professional"(technician) careers requiring a more rigorous theoreticalbackground in science and mathematics, and more exact-
ing skills. Adult education can be characterized as in-
struction of a vocational, technical, or general nature,
designed for adults not enrolled in elementary or second-
ary schools. Finally, general education is of three types:
(1) courses in support of vocational and technical pro-grams (the most prevalent type), (2) a terminal sequencefor self-enrichment, and (3) a liberal arts transfer cur-riculum (Milwaukee and Madison).
Underpinning the Wisconsin V.T.A. system is this basicphilosophy: (1) educational opportunity of highest pos-sible quality should be provided for all people in thestate; (2) educational programs should be geared todiverse and changing student needs; (3) the elementaryand secondary schools and the collegiate institutionscannot satisfy all educational needs; (4) training forproductive employment is one of the paramount needssuch instruction not only enables the individual to earn
a living in a socially useful manner, but is vital to the
total prosperity of the state, and (5) the strength of thenation hinges in large measure upon the productivecapacity and resourcefulness of its citizens.
The State Board of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Edu-
cation is empowered by statute to control "all state aid"allocated to V.T.A. schools, and to determine "the organi-zation, plans, scope, and development" of V.T.A. educa-
tion. Currently, the Board exercises supervision overthe programs of 63 V.T.A. schools, 22 of which areevening schools exclusively, 26 day and evening schools,
and 15 technical institutes. In addition, vocational agri-culture and vocational homemaking programs in the
high schools fall within the purview of the Board.
Since the overriding aim of the V.T.A. system is tofurnish a broad spectrum of educational opportunities
for individuals throughout their lifetime, program offer-ings are varied and extensive:
(1) Two-year Associate Degree programs
(2)(3)(4)
(5)
30
One- and two-year vocational-technic& programsApprenticeship programsFirst- and second-year college parallel programs (at
two schools)Numerous other educational services: general con-tinuation; occupational extension; adult education
of a civic, cultural, and vocational nature; adulthigh school; adult counseling and guidance, etc.
Two-year Associate Degree and college parallel offeringsare a primary concern of the Coordinating Committee,since it is charged by law rith determining "the col-legiate transfer and technical education programs" ofthe V.T.A, schools. In March, 1966, the Committeerecommended that these educational values be imparted
to the Associate Degree technical student:
(1) the ability to sustain himself and his family finan-cially after completion of the program; (2) the ability touse cognitive skills to solve difficult occupational and lifeproblems, and (3) a learning experience which: (a) piquesthe student's curiosity about the world around him andstimulates him to seek additional knowledge followinggraduation; (b) furnishes him with the ability to gainthat knowledge at other higher educational institutions,and (c) exposes him to values acquired from other kinds
of education.
To implement these goals, the CCHE adopted, or reaf-firmed, these policies:
(1) Under Chapter 292, Laws of 1965, vocational-tech-nical programs and liberal arts transfer opportuni-ties should be offered in combination at selectedlocations in the state. (See later section on dual-track institutions.)
(2) The CCHE and the SBVTAE should encourage theUniversity of Wisconsin and State Universities toenter into agreements with the Vocational, Techni-cal, and Adult Schools to allow maximum trans-ferability of earned Associate Degree credits topublic university programs.
(3) The over-all instructional quality of genera/ educa-tion courses for vocational-technical students shouldbe equal to that of the liberal arts transfer offer-
ings, and in addition, the student should be pro-vided with sufficient general education options toenable him to round out his vocational or AssociateDegree course of study.
In Associate Degree program development, the followingprocedures and criteria are employed: (1) a school de-siring to offer a new program submits its proposal tothe State Board, where it is reviewed by the Board staffwith a state advisory committee; (2) the State Directornotifies the school in writing as to the advisability orinadvisability of its proceeding with a full study of theschool's capacity to establish the program; (3) a reportembodying information on need, institutional resources,funds, and services is then prepared by the school andBoard staff and forwarded to the State Board; (4) theBoard, if it acts favorably on the program request,transmits it to the CCHE with recommendation forapproval; (5) in its second year of operation the pro-gram is evaluated, and if the results of the quality evalu-ation are affirmative, the State Board authorizes theschool to grant the Associate Degree for the program,subject to CCHE endorsement. In essence, this proce-dure allows the Coordinating Committee to take actionon both the initiation of a new technical program, andthe authority of a school to award the Associate Degreefor a program already under way.
It should be emphasized that programs are developed inresponse to thoroughly established local, regional, statewide, and national needs so as to avoid unnecessaryproliferation or duplication of curricula. Continuing re-sponsiveness to changing needs is assured through closeworking relationships with occupational advisory com-mittees, joint apprenticeship committees, various ad hocprogram development groups, and the Wisconsin StateEmployment Service. The Employment Service provideslabor force and occupational data, and conducts area andstatewide surveys, while the State Board and local schoolscarry on their own studies of local employment needs.
In many cases, of course, cooperative surveys are under-taken. Requests for such studies come from a varietyof sources: administra- ors, faculty, curriculum personnel,employers, labor unions, business and industrial associ-ations, and the like.
31
Vocational-technical programs are offered in six basicoccupational areas:
Trade and IndustryBusiness and DistributiveGraphic and Applied ArtsHealth and ServiceHome Economics and Home Economics Wage-RelatedAgriculture and Agriculture Wage-Related
As mentioned earlier, 15 schools are classified as tech-nical institutes on the basis of their accredited AssociateDegree programs. The accompanying table (Table VI)reveals the scope of each institute's technical offerings;Milwaukee has the most comprehensive Associate De-gree curriculum, followed by Madison (ten programs);Green Bay, Kenosha, and Wausau (seven each), andAppleton and Eau Claire (six each). In addition, otherschools are moving ahead rapidly. The technical pro-grams range from accounting, electronics, marketing,mechanical design, and secretarial science offered atmost of the 15 schools to commercial art, constructiontechnology, highway technology, etc., offered at only twoor three schools.
In the development of V.T.A. districts (See Section VIIIVocational Schools), it is essential that vocational -tech-nical programs of sufficient depth and breadth be pro-vided. Specifically, each district should strive to offercurricula in four of the six subject areas of vocational-technical training mentioned earlier (program depth),and a range of programs within each of the four areas(program breadth). This approach should enable thedistrict to meet local and regional needs particularlyto specialize in areas of greatest need and demandand to accommodate varying occupational and skilllevels in the community.
Program PlansThrough continuing contacts with the Employment Serv-ice, advisory committee labor and management organi-zations, and numerous other groups, the State Boardand V.T.A. schools attempt to keep abreast of manpowertrends, to anticipate new program needs, and to reviseor update existing curricula as necessary. For the im-mediate future, these program developments are en-visioned:
Table VI32
Associate Degree Programs Offered atVocational-Technical Schools
X Two Year Associate Degree Program
E Two Year Program, To BeEvaluated for Associate Degreein 1966-67 Year
Appleton X
I .1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
X
1 I IX
1 1 1 1
X X
1 " 1 1
X
" 1
Eau Claire X X E X X X X
Fond du Lac X E X E E X
Green Bay X X X X X X X
Kenosha X X X X X X X
La Crosse X E X E X X
Madison X X E a X X X X X E X X E E X E E
Manitowoc XE X
Milwaukee X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X
Oshkosh X E E X X X X
Racine X E X X X X E
Sheboygan X X E E X
SuperiorX X X X
WaukeshaX X E E
Wausau X X E X X X X X
1. Business and Distributive EducationUnder this heading, additional "occupational-mix" cur-ricula programs embracing more than one field arein the planning or implementation stages, itdr instance,banking, insurance, florist work, petroleum marketing,and real estate. A leading example is the florist programinitiated this fall; second-year students may elect one oftwo tracks: a concentration in plant propagation, soils,turf growing, and landscape work, or a business manage-ment and sales option. Moreover, a number of schoolsare introducing programs in fashion merchandising, courtand conference reporting, medical secretarial work, officemid-management, food merchandising, and credit man-agement.
2. Trade and Industry EducationIn the trade and industry area, twelve new technicalprograms were approved for the Associate Degree withinthe past year, and 25 schools have been designated tooffer full-time training opportunities in such subjects asarchitectural aides, industrial architecture model making,instrumentation, civil technology, chemical technology,dental and dental laboratory assistants, power mechanics,and numerical control. New fields being explored in-clude: rural and urban planning, solar energy, hygiene,radiology, sanatorium work, optics, two-year registerednursing, automated drafting, and others.
3. Home Economics EducationThe home economics field is taking on a service dimen-sion outside the home, as these examples indicate: in-stitutional foods, clothing and textiles, interior decoration,and certain health service occupations. A survey is nowin progress to identify needs that can best be metthrough home economics programs. One significant areaunder study is the training of assistants for professionalhome economists employed by business and industry.
4. Agriculture and Agriculturally-Related EducationTraining in this category has been extended to areasother than production; for instance, a new post-highschool program in horticulture with a retailing optionwas launched this fall at the Kenosha Technical Institute.Other program offerings being considered are: farmcredit, dairy and food processing, agricultural mechanics,
33
dairy plant technology, conservation and forestry, busi-ness management and marketing, and additional trainingfields with a processing or distributive focus.
The program areas outlined above are generally con-gruent with manpower need projections. Both the StateBoard and the Coordinating Committee recognize that inlong-range program planning for the V.T.A. system, con-stant assessment of industrial and labor force trends isimperative to insure the "meshing" of program develop-Ments with present and future occupational requirements.Among the many factors to be analyzed are: the expan-sion or decline of specific industries and employmentfields, changes in job descriptions, and worker mobilitypatterns.
Given 'the critical nature of future labor force needs inWisconsin and the rapidly increasing student demand forvocational-technical training, the staff believes that ex-pansion of Vocational, Technical, and Adult programsshould be assigned high priority. (See Recommendationin Section VIII.)
E. Extension Services
The knowledge explosion, the changing occoationalmarket, the shift in age patterns, the increase in leisuretime, and the resultant escalating enrollments in formalhigher education have prompted an accompanying dra-matic upturn in the public demand for adult educationand extension services. Mobility from dead-end or dis-continued occupations requires continued educationalopportunities. It is estimated that current'v one out offive adults is engaged in some systematic effort to acquirenew knowledge and skills. All studies indicate a con-tinued acceleration of requests for comprehensive andvaried courses and extension-sponsored activities.
The "Wisconsin Idea," the title ascribed to the wide andeffective University of Wisconsin extension services, isexemplified in the efforts of all higher education in thestate to meet the many requests for instruction, researchassistance, and public service from labor and the pro-fessions, from agriculture, business, industry, and gov-ernment.
The University of Wisconsin Extension richly deserves itsnational reputation for full, effective, and far-reachingparticipation in service to the state and nation.1965-66 alone, the Cooperative Extension consulted wit)507,462 individuals and 53,959 organizations, dis-tributed 2,421,620 publications to the public, and gave21,350 radio broadcasts and 1,539 telecasts. The nineState Universities have for many years served a vitalfunction through their extension programs directedmainly to upgrading the professional qualificationi ofWisconsin teachers. The private colleges have expandedtheir educational services to adults, and the vocational-technical schools offer extensive programs adapted tothe changing demands of the Wisconsin economy, anddesigned to train or update Wisconsin residents in awide range of needed occupational skills.
As the number of agencies prepared to meet extensionneeds increases, state coordination of the available edu-cational resources becomes desirable if maximum serviceis to develop with a minimum of waste and duplication.A clear delineation of respective institutional roles andthe assignment of prime areas of educational responsi-bility for the extension function should be established.Competing programs must be avoided through the state-wide coordination of systems and institutions participat-ing in providing extended services. A potential conflictof interest and effort is apparent in the multiple develop-ment of industrial, business, and service occupation-oriented programs by the Vocational, Technical, and AdultSchools, the State Universities, and the University ofWisconsin The state resources presently involved inextended services will not be sufficient to meet theprojected demand. Each state institution should developnonduplicating extension services most appropriate to itsstrengths. Action programs, designed to meet the criticalneeds of the educationally, culturally, and economicallyunderprivileged and the occupationally displaced, mustreceive highest priority.
While further expansion of cooperative efforts is requiredto strengthen statewide services, inter-institutional co-operation in extension already exists through joint ap-pointments, cooperative use of specialized staff andfacilities, and a state council on extension functions.
Recent state coordination of joint programs funded underTitle I demonstrates the potential for cooperative ven-tures.
The University of Wisconsin and its several branches,when combined with the resources of the State Universi-ties and the vocational-technical institutes, could providethe geographical distribution and the range of specializedfaculty and facilities required to establish a statewideprogram of excellent and diverse extension services.Such a program should receive a high priority in stateeducational planning.
To promote expanded and nonduplicating extension serv-ices throughout Wisconsin, it is recommended that theState Advisory Committee on Extension be reactivatedand expanded to include representation from the CCHEstaff and all state higher education agencies participatingin extension work. The statutory responsibility of U.:University of Wisconsin Extension Division should berecognized and coordinated with the unique cont, ibutionsof the State Universities and the Vocational, Technical,and Adult Schools.
CorrespondenceAs society has created an insatiable demand for con-tinuing education, organized correspondence and inde-pendent study seek to extend the values of educationto those indMduals unable to come to a campus orattend organized extension courses. Correspondencecourses originally approved by a faculty resolution at theUniversity of Wisconsin in 1891 remain an integral andvital part of University Extension services. Through thepostal service and a range of other communicationsmedia, a far-th..5g student body can be reached regularlyand systematically without traditional campuses or class-rooms. Recording tapes, records, radio, TV, films, andslides are now used to back up the traditional "learn-by-mail" lesson.
Enrollment increases in University of Wisconsin cor-respondence study have roughly paralleled that of resi-dent undergraduate enrollments with 11,129 correspond-ence enrollees in 1966 in comparison to 5,500 ten yearsearlier. Four hundred forty-seven courses are availablethrough correspondence: 212 for college credit, 144
adult non-credit, and 91 for high school credit. In addi-
tion, the University of Wisconsin Extension conducts on
a contract basis the worldwide USAFI correspondenceprogram. The clientele for correspondence study comesmainly from adults whose major responsibility is thecare and support of families, but who wish to continuetheir education. Such independent study programs also
serve college and high school students and dropouts,long-term hospital patients, prisoners, the elderly, andmembers of the armed forces.
A major and unique strength of correspondence courses
is that they can be individualized to any academic levelor subject matter and progress can be adapted to the
time schedule of the student. A wide range from literacytraining programs to college degree level courses areconducted through extension-sponsored correspondence
courses.
An experimental program, AIM (Articulated InstructionalMedia), conducted through U.W. Extension in coopera-
tion with State Universities and center campuses, seeks
to expand independent study opportunities through the
use of the new technology in audio-visual equipment.Living in a society committed to the values of continuingeducation, increased opportunities in independent instruc-
tion must evolve. The nature of correspondence study,however, limits the value of competitive participation bythe several state higher educational agencies in thisfunction. Cooperative ventures in independent studyprograms have been initiated and should continue.
A diversity of patterns of financial support is requiredfor the funding of extension and correspondence work.Some programs can be supported by those served. Some,
such as action programs aimed at helping to solve social,financial, and educational problems of depressed urbanneighborhoods and rural areas, must be wholly supportedby local, state, or Federal funds, or private benefactions.
Fees for college credit work in correspondence or special
classes should not exceed those for similar on-campuswork. Development of extension programs must begoverned by the needs of the people of the state, not bythe ability of the programs to support themselves finan-
cially.
35
F. Inter-Institutional Cooperation
One of the consequences of the recent explosion ofknowledge has been the consolidation of smaller educa-tional units to provide the specialized facilities andfaculties required to deal with the sophisticated andchanging concepts of modern education. While a sig-nificant increase in the number of junior college-typebranch campuses has taken place, Wisconsin has alsowitnessed a dramatic escalation in enrollments at itspublic universities. A large comprehensive university isbest able to meet the diverse qualitative demands ofhigher education at a high level of competency and atacceptable levels of per-student cost. However, even thelarge university must not attempt to be all things to allstudents and cannot maintain the library holdings, thespecialized facilities and staff required to meet all edu-cational needs. Because of the continued increase inthe complexity and depth of human knowledge, highereducation is placing a greater emphasis upon arrange-ments whereby the separate strengths of several uni-versities might be cooperatively shared. The centralpurpose of such coordinated efforts is to improve thequality of the higher educational experience, but sucharrangements can also eliminate duplication and theconsequent waste of limited resources.
The 1965 Legislature authorized the CCHE, subject toJoint Finance Committee or Board on Government Opera-tions approval, to enter into interstate compacts wherebyeducational opportunity might be increased or qualityimproved. An example of the former would be a re-ciprocal fee-waiver arrangement with Michigan whichwould increase the educational opportunities for Michi-gan residents near Menomonee, Michigan, and Wisconsinresidents from the Hurley area. The CCHE staff will con-tinue to explore and encourage such compacts withneighboring states.
The Committee for Institutional Cooperation is an example
of a successful interstate compact among Big Tenschools to enrich the curriculum of the students of theparticipating schools. Through this program, an ex-
change of students is encouraged which enables stu-dents to spend a semester or year on another campuscapitalizing on the distinctive academic strengths of that
institution. A similar intra-state student exchange planshould be developed in cooperation with the institutionsand systems to enrich the educational experiences ofqualified students enrolled in Wisconsin universities.
While the list of current intrastate cooperative programsamong higher educational systems in Wisconsin is modestin its influence on large numbers of students, it isnevertheless indicative of a favorable climate for thedevelopment of further projects as well as the expansionof present efforts. Most of these projects now involveonly a limited number of institutions, but there appearsto be a growing consensus that with some leadershipand statewide support, cooperative efforts will multiplyand contribute to common goals of excellence, diversity,and efficiency in Wisconsin higher education.
A representative list of ongoing intra-state cooperativeefforts between two or more institutions which haveexperienced some measure of success would include:
1. Limited inter-library loan privileges2. Limited sharing of staff for special courses or in-
service programs (agriculture, vocational-technical)3. Limited sharing of facilities in selected areas (stu-
dent unions, food services, physical education fa-cilities, libraries, special laboratories, planetarium)
4. Limited cooperative efforts in specialized studentservices (high school career days, financial aid in-formation, admissions policies, guidance and coun-seling services, testing programs)
5. Transfer of credit agreements between selectedvocational- technical schools and selected universities
6. Joint adult education councils in severai communi-ties having both vocational-technical schools anduniversities or branch campuses
7. Cooperative M.S. programs in educational adminis-tration between University of Wisconsin and StateUniversities at Stevens Point and Eau Clair.:
8. State committees in selected fields to assist in pro-gram development, transfer policies, curricular in-novations, etc.a. Special Education (University of Wisconsin, Car-
dinal Stritch, Eau Claire, Oshkosh, and White-water)
36
b. University of Wisconsin Research and Develop-ment Center assistance to State Universities
c. University of Wisconsin Center for Studies inVocational and Technical Education
d. Summer United Nations seminar for Universityof Wisconsin and State University students
e. Migrant literary program (University of Wiscon-sin Extension, UW-Milwaukee, SW/ME, StevensPoint)
f. Engineering Education Improvement Committee(established by CCHE in 1960 to assist in trans-fer procedures between University of Wisconsinand State Universities)Law School Advisory Committee to improve ar-ticulation between pre-law students in StateUniversities and University of Wisconsin
9. Cooperative use of WHA radio and TV facilities andtechnical consulting services
10. University of Wisconsin-Marquette nonprofit cor-poration to fund medical research and weekly gen-eral medical seminars
11. University of Wisconsin-State Universities coopera-tive efforts in securing Title I Federal funds forcommunity service problems
g.
Including the major technical institutes, there are morethan 50 public higher education institutions in Wiscon-sin, each with certain distinctive human or physical re-sources. The CCHE staff continues to support the po-sition that wherever appropriate, every effort should bemade to expand the availability of such distinctive fea-tures. Further, the Coordinating Committee staff sup-ports coordinated physical facilities and campus planningwhere two or more public institutions are established in asingle community.
The CCHE staff recommends the expansion of the con-cept of inter-institutional cooperation and urges theearly consideration of more comprehensive programs inseveral areas of statewide interest.
In the field of library and library services, recent innova-tions in retrieval and communications systems could beutilized to make specialized library holdings of a singleinstitution available on any campus in the state. Library
holdings found at the University of Wisconsin, Madisoncould not be duplicated even if unlimited funds were tobe available. While there is need for some duplicationin each library, individual libraries have acquired uniquetitles and areas of strength. A coordinated statewidesystem, linked by a telecommunications network andtied to a central computer center, could handle muchof the acquisition, cataloging, and book processing aswell as making the library resources of all institutionsavailable to any other library. While such equipment is notnow available to Wisconsin higher education, the CCHEstaff requests an early review of the application of suchmethods to future library development.
The University of Wisconsin hopes to develop on theMadison campus a computer installation unparalleled atany other educational institution in the country and withan operational capacity suiTiciently great to meet majorhigher educational requirements for large scale comput-ing capability. The CCHE staff supports the positionstated by the University of Wisconsin in an administrativememo that "the expansion of the University of WisconsinComputer Center's equipment capability provides anexcellent opportunity for inter-institutional and inter-system cooperation." The staff recommends that reviewbe made to see if the computer capability iiow beingplanned for Madison can be extended throughout thestate, thus providing a major improvement factor to allof Wisconsin's public higher education while achievinglong-range economies. While the availability of this re-search and teaching facility is still some time in thefuture, a coordinated state effort in the development ofthis vital function is suggested.
One of the persistent problems in Wisconsin highereducation with its several systems and traditions ofcampus autonomy is the difficulty of transfer betweeninstitutions of the same or different systems. One im-portant factor in the decision to provide higher educa-tional opportunities throughout the state was that astudent could pursue at least part of his collegiate ex-perience on a commuting basis. This philosophy, whichis supported by the CCHE staff, becomes subverted if astudent is in any way penalized for beginning his highereducation at an institution other than the one where he
later expects to matriculate. Different admissions require-ments in terms of either rank in class or specific highschool academic prerequisites unduly complicate thearticulation between the major universities of the sameor different systems. The CCHE staff recommends thata statewide committee representing the University ofWisconsin and the State Universities be formed toclarify and set appropriate admission and transfer policiesand practices for all two-year campuses as well as forthe major university campuses. Such a committee shouldalso be asked to make recommendations concerning pos-sible duplication and dispersal of resources in high schoolcareer days, pre-college testing, resident hall applica-tions, financial aid procedures, probation and drop poli-cies. Serious consideration should be given to standardadmission forms and some central state clearance ofall freshman applications to minimize the impact ofdouble enrollments upon state educational planning. Itshould be emphasized that the purpose of such co-ordination is to better serve the student and thy) institu-tions through improved articulation. No interferencewith the student's freedom of choice is implied.
Joint use of residence halls by vocational-technical anduniversity students may be both educationally and finan-cially desirable. Such an arrangement must be part ofconsidered long-range planning and not on a year-to-yearbasis when empty rooms exist on a particular campus.
Many other programs involving inter-system and inter-institutional cooperation can be implemented as the con-cept of cooperation in Wisconsin higher education grows.The branch campus or vocational-technical school ex-perience can be enriched academically and culturallythrough faculty and student exchange, shared line artsexperiences, special artist-in-residence short courses,as well as through inter-library loans and the availabilityof other teaching aids. The establishment of a stateeducational television network would provide expandedopportunities for cooperative efforts.
The challenges posed by the continued explosions ofknowledge and of students, particular'y at the graduatelevel, will require the total efforts of all Wisconsin highereducation. Cooperative efforts at all levels in research,
in teaching, in extension, in public service, and student
services are required. The CCHE staff has recom-mended the early acceleration of inter-institutional andinter-system cooperation in the interest of quality highereducation to increasing numbers of Wisconsin students.Specifically, committees with representation from the sys-
tems and the CCHE should be formalized and strength-ened to encourage further cooperative efforts in libraryand instructional materials, extension, computer applica-tions, research and Federal programs, educational tele-vision, admissions and transfers, residence halls policy,
and financial aids.
G. Collegiate Program Criteria and Procedures
In 1960, the Coordinating CommittEo, charged by statutewith determining what educational programs shall beoffered in state institutions of higher education, adopted
specific criteria for determining the need for new
academic programs and for allocating programs to aparticular institution. A year later, the Committee de-cided to consider for approval all new higher educationalprograms at the level of a major, regardless of the fieldof study, and requested the University of Wisconsin andthe State Universities to furnish the CCHE statementsof justification as part of their program proposals.
The Coordinating Committee approved revisions in these
criteria and in the procedure for consideration of neweducational programs at its meeting of October 26, 1966.
The CCHE staff had reviewed criteria and proceduresand recommended a number of changes based on thesefactors: the reorganization of the CCHE in 1965, theneed for comprehensive long-range planning, and theanticipated volume of program requests accompanying
the development of UW-Green Bay, UW-Parkside, andgraduate programs at UW-Milwaukee and the State Uni-
versities.
The revised criteria adopted by the Coordinating Com-
mittee for determining the need for a new program are:
1. Contribution of the program to the advancement of
human knowledge, and/or cultural enrichment
2. Present and projected need for well-trained man-power in the field
38
3. Desire of students for work in the area and proba-
bility of securing a sufficient enrollment now and inthe future to insure a reasonable per-student cost
The criteria for allocation of new programs to a particularinstitution are:
1. Relationship of the new program to the long-range
educational plan for the state2. Relationship of the program to the over-all academic
mission of the institution involved and to existing
programs offered at that institution3. Impact of the program on other institutions including
the Vocational, Technical, and Adult Schools andprivate colleges and universities
4. Institutional capability as related to:a. Adequacy of present resources in program field:
faculty, library holdings, facilities, and equipment
b. Adequacy of i3sources in related or supporting
fieldsc. Proposed basis for program fundingd. Estimated beginning and continuing net cost of
the programe. Pattern of program initiation over the past several
years, and consistency of new program requestwith the orderly curricular development of the
institution concerned5. Availability of the program to students who seek
work in the area6. The desirability of attracting students to a particular
institution7. Interest of the administration and staff in the estab-
lishment of such a program8. Interest of citizens in the area
Since a statutory responsibility of the CCHE in program
review is to avoid "unnecessary duplication," the staffhas attempted a definition of the term; namely, the offer-
ing of like programs particularly those of a graduate or
professional nature by several different institutionsunder most or all of these conditions: limited studentdemand, limited need, limited number of faculty special-
ists in the given field, need for expensive facilities orequipment, and insufficient utilization of plant and faculty
resources.
To insure adequate time for full appraisal of new programrequests by the Coordinating Committee, the Committeeapproved the following time schedule:
1. For new programs which the University of Wisconsinor State University system hope to launch in the fallsemester (or quarter), specific requests should beforwarded to the CCHE staff no later than February15
2. For new programs anticipated to begin in the springsemester or in the summer sessions, requests shouldbe received by the CCHE staff no later than August 15
3. Since academic program planning is a key elementof comprehensive long-range planning for publichigher education, it is essential that the systemsinform the CCHE of their major program policy in-tentions as far in advance as feasiblepreferably twoyears prior to actual program initiation. For long-range planning purposes, it is both desirable andnecessary that the University of Wisconsin and StateUniversities estimate future program requirementson a five- or even ten-year basis where possible, tothe end that diverse student needs will be met andbudgetary and facilities planning will be integratedwith program planning. On the sc-ond point it is
indisputable that the academic programs offered atan institution should largely determine its physicalfacility requirements, rather than the opposite.
The staff recommends that in light of the anticipatedvolume of new program requests from the University ofWisconsin and the State Universities particularly ingraduate, professional, and specialized fields academicprogram priorities be established for each system overthe next biennium. Definition of priorities is essential tothe accomplishment of key CCHE objectives and the exer-cise of creative educational leadership for Wisconsin.Only within the framework of institutional academic missions and program priorities can discrete program re-quests, in the final analysis, be properly evaluated. Suchpriorities should be related to the academic strengths ofthe institutions involved, and should be developed by thesystems and the CCHE staff, working in close cooperationthrough the vehicle of standing committees. Obviously,success in this effort hinges on the full participation of
39
not only central administration personnel but also thefaculties and academic deans of the individual institu-tions.
H. Wisconsin Educational Television System
In 1962, the CCHE was designated by the Governor asthe agency responsible for the development of a stateplan for Educational Television, particularly as related tothe application for Federal matching grants under theprovisions of the Educational Television Facilities Actof 1963. A state Advisory Committee was establishedby the CCHE with representation from all systems ofWisconsin higher education, from the State Departmentof Public Instruction, and more recently from the com-mercial segment of television broadcasting.
Proposals to establish a statewide Educational Televisionsystem, utilizing Federal support, were submitted to theLegislature in 1963, 1964, and 1966. While no statefunding has been provided, there continues to be wideinterest in the mounting evidence supporting the con-tribution that television can make at all levels of educa-tion. The Milwaukee Vocational, Technical, and AdultSchools have received two Federal grants to assist thedevelopment of ETV facilities and the utilization of tele-vision in Milwaukee schools has been extensive and suc-cessful.
During the past few months, the CCHE staff has metseven times with the sixteen-member Advisory Committeein an effort to develop an effective state plan that wouldserve all segments of Wisconsin education, be adaptableto continuing innovations, and qualify for appropriateFederal matching grants.
Several comprehensive studies such as those conductedrecently in Minnesota, Iowa, and on a wider level by theCarnegie committee point toward the need for a stateplan in Wisconsin. Additional impetus has been providedin the budget message statement of President Johnsonwhich as given rise to optimism concerning increasedFederal support for Educational Television.
A bill to establish a state ETV system has been intro-duced into the Wisconsin Legislature. It reflects severalearlier CCHE and Advisory Committee recommendations.
While the CCHE staff and Committee would support manyof the features of Bill #82, we suggest that the staffrecommendations attached might meet educational needs
within a lower state financial commitment. The majordifferences between the two proposals include:
1. CostAssembly Bill 82 $4,300,000Staff recommendations 2,535,000**The net cost to the state is listed as $1,265,000 asmatching Federal support for eligible items wouldamount to $1,200,000. While Bill #82 does not antici-
pate Federal assistance, the provision to receive suchfunding is included.
2. ProgrammingAssembly Bill 82 would provide substantially greatersupport ($100,000) for the development of instructional
materials.
The staff recommendation assumes that programmingwould be the responsibility of the separate systems in-
volved. A $50,000 interim videotape fund would be pro-
vided.
3. AdministrationAssembly Bill 82 would establish a reconstituted StateRadio Council with broader responsibilities.
The staff recommendation establishes a larger inde-
pendent commission with responsibility exclusively in
Educational Television.
The CCHE staff recommends the endorsement of theattached plan containing the following specific proposals:(either new legislation or amendment to Bill 82)
1. The establishment of a Wisconsin Educational Tele-
vision Commission.2. The appropriation of $1,265,000 to implement the
proposal during the 1967-69 biennium, assuming
Federal support of $1,200,000.
The staff proposal was approved by the State EducationalTelevision Advisory Committee on February 21 and thePlans and Policies Subcommittee with certain minorrevisions.
40
NeedWisconsin needs a statewide educational television serv-ice.
For several years this has been the considered judgmentof all major educational interests in our state. Theconviction grows stronger as the educational problemsin the state and elsewhere continue to mount. Faced
with the big push for more and more schooling, therapid rate at which new knowledge is developing, in-
ternal changes and improvements taking place in educa-tion, educators must utilize every opportunity to main-tain and improve the quality of instruction and itsrelevance to the rapidly changing age in which we live.
At the level of the elementary school, those in Wisconsin
who already have considerable experience with classroomtelevision see in a statewide television service a real op-portunity to meet several vital needs. The first is forspecialized instruction in subjects as varied as driver edu-
cation, Mc: new math, the sciences, music and art, Eng-
lish and foreign languages fields in which it is oftendifficult, if not impossible, for local school districts toobtain properly qualified special teachers to cover everyclassroom. In many of these same fields there is alsothe problem or putting into effect important curriculumimprovements, and this can be done instantly when tele-vision is utilized instead of waiting until a teacher eventu-ally can attend a summer workshop. School peoplealready using television also cite its usefulness in pro-viding in-service traiWng for teachers. Presently teachersresiding in areas where educational television service isavailable enjoy a distinct advantage over those in otherparts of the state. They also point out television's abilityto give every student a "front row seat" for a closeuplook at an intricate scientific experiment, to let him seeand hear Robert Frost himself reading his own poetry, orPablo Casals playing the cello, or to show farm young-sters what a Milwaukee factory looks like inside, or take acity child into the Wisconsin countryside. These thingsdo not happen in a classroom unless television is there.
Vocational and technical education is playing an increas-
ingly vital role in Wisconsin. Those who at this momentare deeply involved in planning an area complex of voca-
tional schools throughout the state, see in a statewidetelevision service an opportunity to make available to all
of these schools a basic curriculum, fitted to particularneeds by local participation yet raised in quality by use
of carefully prepared and effectively executed TV dem-
onstrations by the state's very best vocational and tech-
nical instructors. Beyond this, specialized courses in
fields where there is a high degree of teacher shortage
could be offered at all vocational schools via TV; basic
instruction woula come over television and practice ses-
sions and follow-up would then be handled by local in-
structors. seminars in vocational and technical educa-
tion featuring visiting national and international experts
could be sent by television to all schools in the state.
Also, as in the case of elementary schools, the network
would be used for in-service education of teachers.
Our universities are already beginning to make use of
closed circuit television instruction to help solve the prob-
lems attendant upon rapidly rising enrollments whichbring extremely large class sizes in the face of a short
supply of well-qualified instructors. Six of the State Uni-
versities and both the Madison and Milwaukee campuses
of the University of Wisconsin have, or soon will have,
operable closed-circuit systems. Other campuses will have
them as soon as budgets permit. To these campus c'r'sed
circuit systems a statewide educational television service
would furnish the best possible college-level courses
taught by recognized experts, augmenting courses pro-
duced locally.
Both the University of Wisconsin and the State Univer-
sity system anticipate that one of their principal functions
will be production of televised courses for use by the
branch campuses and centers around the state. Thus
students in the branch campuses will come into contact
with the finest professors available on the several cam-
puses. Large lecture courses presented by the best
scholars thus could be presented with local faculty con-
ducting subsequent quiz and discussion sessions. The
new Green Bay and Parkside campuses will participate in
like manner, both by producing courses when such facili-
ties become available and receiving them from elsewhere.
As inter-institutional cooperation grows, it will be pos-
sible for several campuses to cooperate in selecting pro-
41
fessors to teach certain basic courses, releasing other
faculty to give personal attention to either gifted or slow
students or to undertake the teaching of other courses.
Also envisioned are conference hookups involving origi-
nations from various campuses, enanng interchange of
ideas between faculty and students on one campus with
those on another, cultural telecasts as valuable ;upple-
mental resource material, including televising of appear-
ances by distinguished guest speakers, forums, sympo-
siums, concerts, opera, ballet, and special events. Thus
the statewide television network would provide to astudent anywhere in Wisconsin's higher education sys-
tem an array of academic and cultural experiences
broader and richer than any single campus could offer
alone. And as a fringe benefit, the general public and
elementary and secondary schools could tune in, too.
Wisconsin also has a long tradition of encouraging the
independent student to continue his education. A state-
wide educational television service would enable our uni-
versities to offer courses for college credit to people in
their homes, on farms, in offices and industrial plants
all over Wisconsin supplemented by proper counseling
and testing at the nearest campus or University Center
or by correspondence through Extension faculty. Special
kinds of refresher courses and post-graduate education
would be offered for doctors, nurses, lawyers, and engi-
neers. These are people whose heavy professional respon-
sibilities do not allow them to get to any campus but
television is available to them anywhere.
Beyond these groups who are vitally interested in con-
tinuing their education stands the great body of ourWisconsin citizens who are too involved with daily respon-
sibilities to enroll in a campus course, but who must face
the increasingly critical decisions of life in a democracy.
Our government cannot function without a properly in-
formed and alert body of citizens, but our peoplecannot be good citizens unless they are provided with
a way of widening their horizons and deepening theirunderstanding of public problems. The responsibility
to reach these people, to stir their minds, must be
shouldered by higher education. Yet our universities
can no longer put enough workers in the field to
seek out these people in small groups. The only answer
is to make it possible to communicate directly withthese adults in their homes. A statewide educationaltelevision service would provide an opportunity to sharpenthe awareness and extend the knowledge of the averageWisconsin citizen by such program efforts as the following:
(1) Citizenship education dealing with public affairs suchas highway safety, air and water pollution, urban prob-iems, juvenile delinquency, welfare, rising crime, mentalhealth.
(2) Special programs for low-income families and mar-ginal cultural groups. These people are unlikely to ap-proach a campus, but have a television: set which playsa large role in their daily lives. Television may offer thebest, perhaps the only means of serving their needs.
(3) Agricultural and industrial institutes and workshops,built around televised demonstrations relayed statewidewith local follow-up by Extension staff.
(4) Child guidance and parent education.
(5) Health and physical fitness.
(6) Continuing education for women.
(7) Self-improvement: re-training of those displaced bychanges in our industrial or economic patterns, trainingfor greater leisure in retirement, cultural betterment.
A statewide television system offering credit and non-credit courses backed by the personal effort of trainedfaculty members and specialists on every campus andin every county .af the state would provide our peoplewith a modern educational communications facility ap-propriate to the pressing needs of today's changing world.
These, then, are some of the more important reasonswhy the various educational institutions of Wisconsin areunited in their conviction that we need a statewide edu-cational television system.
42
Basic PrinciplesAs the result of many months of discussion among repre-sentatives of educational interests, the following princi-ples are suggested as a basis for statewide educationaltelevision planning:
(1) The ultimate objectives of a statewide educationaltelevision system must be to serve all segments of edu-cation and all segments of the state's population as theirneeds dictate and as those needs may change from timeto time.
(2) All sectors of the state's formal educational complextogether with several spokesmen for our citizenry at largeshould participate in the making of policy with respectto statewide educational television.
(3) No single existing educational institution or agency,acting on its own, can properly coordinate statewideeducational television, since each has its own specialobjectives and its own constituents to serve.
(4) Therefore, there must be established a representa-tive policy-making and coordinating entity as a generalguardian of the interests of the people of the state ineducational television as a public resource of great value.
(5) This new entity must be conceived and set up as aneducational service agency of the state rather than be-coming another separate and competing educational in-stitution itself.
(6) Programming and program production for a statewideeducational television system must remain the preroga-tive of the educational institutions themselves. The policy-making body should establish appropriate proceduresfor coordinated planning of program production, forscheduling the use of the network facilities, and shouldencourage the planning and funding of additional pro-duction centers at various locations throughout the state.However, actual program production for either instruc-tional or general uses should be undertaken by thestate's various educational institutions and other appro-priate agencies under the guidance of their own facultiesand in cooperation with their own communication arts
specialists. Funds for the planning, development, andproduction of such television programs, including moniesfor faculty compensation as well as the cost of construc-tion and operation of the physical facilities, should beprovided within the various institutional and agencybudgets.
(7) Based on the prevailing opinions of those who noware operating state television networks in other states,and considering the many developments (technical andotherwise) which seem to have some effect on net-working in the future, it is the firm recommendation ofthe TV Planning Committee that at this point in time, thestate would be wiser to lease interconnection facilitiesthan to construct its own system.
Guided by these principles, and in consideration of themany pressing needs which a statewide educational tele-vision system would serve, we submit the following pro-posal to the Coordinating Committee for Higher Educa-tion with the recommendation that its substance be em-bodied in legislation without further delay.
ProposalWe recommend that the Legislature act to authorize andestablish a nonprofit governmental body to be knownas the Wisconsin Educational Television Commission. TheCommission shall issue reports and recommendations tothe CCHE, the Legislature, and the Governor.
The Commission shall act as a representative policy-making and coordinating agency. It shall consist of 21members, 14 representing educational institutions andagencies, 6 members-at-large to be appointed by theGovernor, and one official representative of the Governor.
Of the 14 members representing education, the follow-ing arrangement is suggested:
2 from the University of Wisc.. ;isin2 from the State Universities2 from vocational education1 from private colleges1 from State Department of Public Instruction5 from local school districts: one school board mem-
ber, one school administrator, and three classroom
43
teachers1 from private/parochial schools
Of the 6 members-at-large, it is suggested that one mightbe from the libraries or historical society, one mightbe from organizations active in education and schoolaffairs such as P.T.A., one might be a commercial broad-caster, one a publisher, one from the legal profession,one from the corporate or business field.
The Commission shall be empowered to receive and dis-burse governmental (state and Federal) and private funds,to engage or contract for such personnel and operatingstaff as may be needed to carry out the following duties:
(a) To initiate, develop, and maintain a comprehensivestate plan for the orderly operation of a statewide edu-cational television system which will serve the best in-terests of the people of the state now and in the future;
(b) To work with the educational agencies and institu-tions of the state es coordinator of their joint efforts tomeet the educational needs of the state through tele-vision;
(c) To furnish leadership in securing adequate fundingfor statewide joint use of television for educational andcultural purposes;
(d) To lease, purchase, or construct television facilitiesfor joint use, such as network interconnection or relayequipment, television mobile units, or other equipmentavailable for statewide use;
(e) To apply for, construct, and operate television trans-mission equipment in order to provide broadcast serviceto all areas of Wisconsin;
(f) To establish and maintain a continuing evaluationof the effectiveness of the joint efforts of all participatingeducational institutions in terms of jointly-establishedgoals;
(g) To act as a central clearing house and source ofinformation concerning educational television activities
in Wisconsin, including the furnishing of such informationto legislators, offices of government, educational institu-tions, and the general public.
We further recommend the following plan for immediatedevelopment of a statewide educational television system
and the appropriation by the Legislature of the fundsnecessary for its completion during the 1967-69
biennium:
(1) File applications after appropriate engineering studies
and feasibility surveys for the construction and operation
of noncommercial educational television transmitters
as follows:
Channel 20 in the vicinity of Wausau: serving especially
the State University at Stevens Point, the Wisconsin Cen-ters at Wausau (Marathon) and at Marshfield (WoodCounty), vocational and technical schools in that area,as well as elementary and secondary schools and thegeneral public.
Channel 28 in the vicinity of Colfax: serving especially
the State Universities at Menomonie (Stout), River Falls,and Eau Claire, the branch campuses at Rice Lake, voca-tional and technical schools in that area, as well as ele-mentary and secondary schools and the general public.
Channel 31 in the vicinity of La Crosse: serving especially
the La Crosse State University, vocational and technicalschools in that area, and the elementary and secondary
schools and general public.
Channel 38 in the Fox River Valley: serving especially
the State University at Oshkosh, the branch campusesat Fond du Lac and Menasha, the Wisconsin Centers atGreen Bay, Manitowoc, and Marinette, and the new cam-
pus of UW-Green Bay, together with vocational and tech-nical schools in that area, elementary and secondaryschools, and the general public.
(2) File applications after appropriate engineering studiesand feasibility surveys for the construction and operation
of two translators as follows:
44
Platteville area: specifically to serve Platteville StateUniversity and the branch campuses at Richland Centeras well as other educational institutions in the area andthe general public.
Ashland area: specifically to serve the city of Ashlandand its educational institutions and the general publicin that area.
(3) Establish and operate as soon as practicable a two-way, two-channel interconnection between Madison andMilwaukee: one channel for broadcast interchange, anda second channel for closed circuit inter-campus inter-change with extensions to the UW Madison campus, the
campus of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, toWhitewater State University, and to the Centers atWaukesha, Racine, and Kenosha, as well as to the UW-
Parkside campus.
(4) As soon as outlying stations become operational,extend single-channel interconnection to each to permituse of broadcast instructional materials and generaleducational and cultural programming fed from Madi-
son or Milwaukee.
NOTE: This does not mean that all programming willbe produced at Madison or Milwaukee, since it is recom-mended that additional production centers be established
as soon as possible. It merely reflects the necessity forestablishing these as initial origination points for thenetwork facility.
(5) Capability to feed into the network system should
be provided to additional production centers r thanthose existing when the quality and volume of theiroutput and the expressed desire for their materials onthe part of other stations and institutions makes itfeasible to do so.
(6) Additional channels to carry closed-circuit materials
to the various campuses should be furnished as needscan be shown and as experience dictates. Experiencegained by experimentation with the extensions proposed
in Item 3 above will be useful here.
(7) After all ETV stations within the boundaries of thestate of Wisconsin have been interconnected, similar in-terconnection should be extended to Channel 8 in Duluth,thus enabling this Minnesota station to serve SuperiorState University and the educational institutions and gen-eral public of the Douglas and Bayfield county environsincluding the branch campus at Rice Lake.
(8) Throughout this development the Commission shouldseek to cooperate with similar bodies in other states andto participate in regional and national network planningso as to insure maximum educational benefits for thepeople of Wisconsin.
Estimated Appropriations for Implementing theRecommended Plan for a Statewide EducationalTelevision System
1967-1969 Biennium
Commission Expense: staff personnel, officeexpense, meetings, postage, travel, etc.. .$ 155,000
Fees for engineering consultation, legalwork, feasibility studies, evaluations, etc.. . 35,000
Capital Expense: 4 transmitters, includingantennas, towers, and associated necessaryequipment, including installation cost.... 1,600,000
Two translators 25,000
Operating Funds: to cover partial year'soperation of completed stations priorto June 30, 1969 70,000
Interim videotape bank fund 50,000
Allocation for interconnection leasing andassociated operating costs of network ... 530,000
$2,465,000
45
NOTES ON COSTS:
1. According to present projections subsequent annualcosts should run about $700,000, not including de-preciation, but including funds for evaluation studies.
2. All program and production expense is eliminatedfrom consideration here, since it is assumed thesefunds are to be part of the various institutional andagency budgets.
3. Federal matching funds for construction of new ETVstations should be available to cover 75% of the$1,600,000 capital expense. Thus:
NET COST TO STATE OF WISCONSIN . .$1,265,000
Urgency
Action on these recommendations is urgent for the fol-lowing reasons:
(1) The onrush of problems facing Wisconsin educationis picking up strength and speed. Educational television,used statewide, can indeed help to solve many of thesedifficulties.
(2) Plans are being made by individual institutions fortheir own TV facilities on their own campuses. A centralcoordinating agency is needed immediately to assist inplanning compatible installations.
(3) Wisconsin is far behind other states. Many of themhave activated similar plans over the past five years andbenefited greatly from the first ETV Facilities Act, noware enjoying the improvement in quality of instructionand general public good that is herein endorsed. Ala-bama'c state network is ten years old, Nebraska andGeorgia have just completed theirs, South Carolina'sis complete, Kentucky has just approved a network ofeleven brand new stations.
(4) Expectation of further aid from the new Congress,spurred on by the report of the Carnegie Commission andthe enthusiasm of states already working on their net-works, means we must establish our state Commission
and appropriate funds so that we are ready with ourapplication for Federal matching monies by this summer.
Echoing the words of President Johnson in his State ofthe Union address on January 10, 1967:
"We should develop educational television into avital public resource to enrich our homes, to edu-cate our families, and to provide assistance in ourclassrooms."
Clearly, educational television in recent months has beengiven a new sense of purpose and direction. Its role hasbeen recognized more widely than ever before, andeach new test brings added proof of public need andpublic approval.
I. Summer Sessions
After studying the academic calendar policy at state in-stitutions of higher education, the Coordinating Commit-tee recommended in March, 1966, that the present two-semester summer session calendar be continued andthat efforts be directed toward strengthening summersessions to induce greater summertime attendance. TheCCHE specifically recommended experimenting with thelength of summer sessions, increasing financial aidsfor summer students, and studying possible curricularexpansion as ways to encourage greater summer at-tendance.
Trimester and quarter systems were studied by the Co-ordinating Committee's staff, but they concluded thatthe drawbacks of such plans outweighed the advantages.
In recommending the continuation of the present aca-demic calendar arrangement, the Coordinating Commit-tee noted last March the increasing summer enrollmentsat state campuses in summer sessions and in specialcredit and noncredit institutes and workshops. Experi-ence this past summer indicates an even greater interestin summer learning in the state. Total summer sessionenrollments alone increased by 10 per cent this summerat Wisconsin State University and University of Wisconsincampuses, with a 17-per cent increase; at the Universityof Wisconsin-Milwaukee and a 44-per cent increase at
46
UW Center System campuses. In addition to the 35,000persons enrolled in summer sessions, 40,000 youths andadults enrolled in special credit and noncredit workshopsand institutes on state campuses this past summer.
Summer sessions of varying lengths were offered on statecampuses again this summer. The University of Wiscon-sin, Madison, for example, offered 27 credit sessions,ranging from 2 to 12 weeks in length. The bulk of theenrollment (83%), however, continued to be in the8-week general session. Stout State University also ex-perimented with a number of 2-week sessions beforeand after the 8-week general session and reported morethan 900 students attending these short sessions. Con-tinued experimentation with summer program lengths isurged for maximum utilization of facilities during thesummer. A 12-week session, however, seems to beunable to draw a sufficient number of students, sinceboth WSU-Oshkosh and the University of Wisconsin,Madison have dropped it.
Again this summer, very few scholarships were availablefor summer session students at state institutions ofhigher education. Only 100 "legislative" fee remissionscholarships, for example, were available for undergradu-ates from the state at University of Wisconsin campuses.None were available for graduate students at the Uni-versity of Wisconsin or for students at Wisconsin StateUniversity campuses, although a few scholarships wereavailable from individual schools. More summer tuitionscholarships and other types of financial aid programsshould be available for both undergraduates and gradu-ate students attending summer sessions. Financial aidprograms now available on a 9-month basis should alsobe available on a year-round basis. Financial aids forsummer students are especially important since thesestudents incur a double expense: they must pay forsummer study and at the same time sacrifice incomefrom a summer job. Thus scholarships covering morethan tuition alone may be necessary to encourage sum-mer attendance.
Summer course offerings have been expanded consider-ably in recent years. The University of Wisconsin, Madi-son, for example, has increased the number of credit
courses offered in the summer from 600 to 1,000 inthe past ten years. However, to make summer offeringsmore closely reflect academic-year offerings, summer cur-riculums must be increased even more, particularly in
upperclass and graduate work. Both the University ofWisconsin and the Wisconsin State Universities reportmore upperclassmen during summer sessions than first-or second-year students, with UW, Madison reportingalmost twice as many graduate students as undergradu-
ates this past summer. Experimentation with specialsummer course offerings also should be increased,particularly for elementary and high school teachers,who comprised one-fourth to one-half of those enrolledthis summer at most public institutions in the state, andfor freshmen beginning in the summer. More than 800freshmen began their college work at the State Uni-versities this past summer, including many taking quali-fying courses to determine their eligibility for admission.
State campuses also are used extensively during sum-mer months for special programs, both credit and non-credit. These include clinics for high school students,programs for returning professionals, University Exten-sion programs, alumni sessions, and government-spon-sored programs for teachers. The State Universitiesoffered 166 such special programs this summer, enroll-
ing 5,196 persons, while the University of Wisconsin,Madison hosted more than 30,000 youths and adultsin special summer prograrni. Such programs should beencouraged throughout the summer months to utilizecampus facilities and to introduce higher educationalopportunities to many who might not otherwise haveaccess to them.
J. Laboratory Schools
All of Wisconsin's public universities except for the Uni-versity of Wisconsin, Madison and Stout State Universitymaintain campus or laboratory schools as an adjunctof their teacher education programs. The University ofWisconsin, Madison, after considerable faculty study,discontinued its high school laboratory school in 1964.Eight State Universities and the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee operate elementary and junior high schoolclasses.
47
Historically, the laboratory or training school provideda proximate and controlled classroom on campus forthe student teacher who was required to spend a partof each day in a realistic teaching situation while at thesame time enrolled in other college classes. Today,however, the typical campus school plays a progres-sively smaller part in this role as the numbers of studentsenrolled in education and the nature of the modern edu-cational experience have made it both necessary and de-sirable to move the practice teaching function into thearea public school systems on a "block" basis whereinthe student teacher is essentially full-time in his assign-ment. Recognizing the value of the experience in thepreparation of needed teachers, public school administra-tors have cooperated in providing the supervised class-room experience.
A second justification for the continuance of laboratoryschools has been the need for controlled observation op-portunities for students enrolled in the School of Edu-cation. However, the physical limitations imposed by thesize of the laboratory school classrooms and the in-creasing number of observing students have made theuse of the lab school impractical for this purpose. Recog-nizing the space limitations, some institutions hope toestablish closed circuit television operations to allowlarge numbers of students to observe a "typical" class.Other schools have eliminated the observation require.ment or have substituted appropriate off-campus ex-periences.
The need for continued research in all phases of theeducational process is supported by the authorities inthe field. There is some support for the position thatthe campus school provides a ready laboratory for con-trolled experimentation and should be retained on thisground. In response to the research need, public andprivate schools in Wisconsin and in other states havejoined together in cooperation with teacher educationschools to encourage educational research. The FoxValley Curriculum Study Council with its Executive Officeon the WSU-Oshkosh campus and the Lake Shore Cur-riculum Study Council cooperating with UW-Milwaukeeare examples of such joint efforts. The CooperativeEducational Service Agencies and the State Department
of Public Instruction are becoming heavily involved in
educational research and cooperate closely with stateschools of education. The Federal government also con-
tinues to support a wide range of cooperative educational
research projects involving universities and the public
schools.
Examples of available research assistance are found in
the University of Wisconsin's Research and Development
Center for Learning and Re-education and the Upper
Midwest Regional Educational Laboratory (UMREL) with
central offices in St. Paul, Minnesota. Both programs
assist and fund educational research projects designed
to strengthen and improve the quality of education in
the elementary and secondary schools. The full partici-
pation of all State Universities, private colleges, and ele-
mentary and secondary schools is encouraged. While
research activity must be encouraged, the CCHE staff
is not aware of any definitive study which would indicate
the irreplaceable research contribution afforded by labora-
tory schools.
The triad of educational functions practice teaching,
observation, and research remain important to anyeffective teacher education operation and must be con-
tinued in some form. However, the Coordinating Com-
mittee staff questions whether the considerable facili-ties, facultirs, and resources presently committed to lab
schools could not be more profitably utilized in expand-
ing the observation, practice teaching, and research
activities in the public schools. Evolving cooperativeinternship programs may also minimize the traditionallaboratory school role. At least one of the State Uni-
versities is considering innovations which would replace
its campus school.
While it is difficult to assign specific costs, it is evident
that the resources expended in staffing and maintaininglaboratory schools are considerable. In the nine stateinstitutions maintaining campus schools, some 2,145students are enrolled from the nursery school level
through ninth grade. The full-time equivalent of 130faculty and 10 classified personnel with total annualsalaries of over one and one-half million dollars areidentified with teaching these elementary school students.
48
Approximately 250,000 net assignable square feet repre-
senting a replacement cost of up to ten million dollarsare required in laboratory school classroom space.
In light of changing conditions and the heavy investmentof limited resources and space on already crowded cam-
puses, the CCHE staff questions the justification for thecontinuance of laboratory schools. An immediate re-evaluation by the systems involved and the CCHE of thetotal contribution of the campus school to higher edu-cation in Wicconsin is recommended. As these schools
may have a significant impact upon public school plan-ning in the several communities, local school officialsshould be kept fully informed of any projected changein operation.
K. Special Academic Programs under Study
Just as no university can be all things to all students,no single state the size of Wisconsin can provide the
quality of higher educational experiences appropriatefor entry into every conceivr:Jie occupational or profes-
sional field. It is better, for both a single institutionand for a state, to insist upon excellence in a limitednumber of educational endeavors rather than dilutequality by offering programs in every discipline. Only
a continued re-evaluation of cost and need factors candetermine at what point the expenditure of state re-sources can be justified in mounting a new field of study.
In the relatively high cost low demand fields of Archi-tecture, Veterinary Medicine, Dentistry, and Forestry,Chapter 257 of the 1965 Laws of Wisconsin provided a
Tuition Reimbursement Program for partial financial
support of students enrolling in approved programs inthese fields.
Approximately 190 Wisconsin students are currently en-
rolled in out-of-state architectural programs and 130 of
these receive assistance through the Tuition Reimburse-
ment Program. However, there continues to be consider-
able support for the development of architectural educa-
tion within the state. The CCHE has studied archi-tectural 3roposals from both the University of Wisconsin
and the State University systems. Such studies have in-cluded inspection of the three state campuses seeking
to develop programs. At its March 9 meeting, the CCHE
approved the establishment of a School of Architectureat the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee and sanctioneda 3-year preprofessional Architecture program at WSU-Platteville and 2-year pre-professional programs at fourother State Universities.
In light of cost, need, and benefit factors, the CCHEstaff recommends th3 continuance of the present policyin the fields of Veterinary Medicine and Forestry. Nonew programs appear to be needed at this time and the80 Wisconsin students currently enrolled in each pro-gram along with other qualified applicants should receiveappropriate aid through the Tuition Reimbursement Pro-gram. The staff will continue to study needs in theseareas.
The CCHE staff, in exploring needs for new or expandedprograms, has been in contact with the Wisconsin Wel-fare Council and several social Work and mental healthagencies who indicate a critical and expanding need forsocial workers. The CCHE staff has established an ad-visory committee to identify specific manpower needsand to recommend the development of additional pro-fessional or sub-professional educational programs asappropriate. Undergraduate and graduate degree pro-grams in Social Work are now available at the Universityof Wisconsin campuses in Madison a,,d Milwaukee.Several State Universities as well as University of Wis-consin Extension and the SBVTAE have indicated interestin social welfare education programs. The CCHE staffis continuing its study and will recommend appropriatedevelopment in the various higher educational systemsin response iu established needs.
The total area of medical education and the supportingparamedical fields require a continuing study. Despitethe heavy financial commitment required and the highcosts involved, the State of Wisconsin must accuratelyanticipate and take appropriate action to meet establishedneeds. The natural expansion of existing and authorizedprograms in Nursing and Medical Technology shouldprovide sufficient personnel in these fields for the nextfew years.
The highly successful School of Dentistry at Marquette
49
University represents a considerable asset to highereducation in the State of Wisconsin and reduces theneed for additional public dental education facilities atthis time. Approximately 300 Wisconsin residents areenrolled in dentistry at Marquette and receive financialsupport under the Tuition Reimbursement Program. Acontinuing restudy by the CCHE staff and the involvedinstitutions and agencies of projected state dental needsis required.
Wisconsin faces a major policy decision concerning theexpansion and relocation of existing state medical educa-tion facilities and the development of a second majorSchool of Medicine. Prior to a final decision, a compre-hensive study involving the Governor, the Legislature,Marquette University, the University of Wisconsin, andthe CCHE will be required.
The CCHE staff will continue to study the educationalneeds in special fields and recommend programs ap-propriate to efficient state educational planning.
Section VI 50
Faculty
The continued excellence of higher education is de-pendent upon many factors, but the essence of educa-tion is found in the personal equation in the dedicationof an outstanding faculty to teaching, to research, andto public service. The potential of Wisconsin higher edu-cation, particularly in the new universities to be estab-lished at Green Bay and Parkside and in the evolvingState Universities, will be directly related to their abilityto attract and hold a distinguished faculty. Future ex-pansion and CCHE approval of new programs at thegraduate and undergraduate level will be based upon theinstitution's academic leadership as demonstrated inthe quality of its faculty. Students reflect the vigor of astrong faculty, for it is the faculty that sets the environ-ment under which teaching, research, and effectivegraduate programs will flourish.
Many studies have attempted to qualify the teachershortage at all levels and in all fields. Most studies,verifying the experiences of those actively engaged infaculty recruitment, indicate that there will continue tobe a critical shortage of the type of higher educationfaculty Wisconsin institutions must attract in large num-bers to meet the qualitative and quantitative demandsfaced in the next 15 years. A California study indicatesthat the higher educational institutions in that state willneed 50 per cent of the tctal U.S. doctorate productionfor the next 10 years. Illinois projects a need for about25 per cent of the available supply. Whatever the yard-stick, it is apparent that higher education faces a pro-fessor's market for at least another ten years, and Wis-consin must remain competitive and aggressive if theprojected program, institutional, and student explosionsare to be met without sacrifice of quality. The shortageof qualified vocational-technical instructors, discussedlater, is even more critical.
A. Future Faculty Needs College institutions
Enrollment projections for all of Wisconsin's segmentsof higher education indicate a continuing rapid growthin faculty requirements. In addition to burgeoning under-graduate enrollments, an increasing per cent of studentsare enrolling in advanced degree and professional pro-grams for which relatively more faculty are required.
The current biennial budget request reflects the effectof graduate enrollment growth on faculty need. Thecurrent budget requests faculty for the State Universitysystem in an approximate 1.18 ratio for undergraduatestudents, but an approximate 1.10 ratio is requestedfor graduate students.
The University of Wisconsin employs 4,769 full-timeequivalent regular faculty members, plus 1,388 full-timeequivalent research and teaching assistants for 1966-67.In most cases, the assistants are on half-time appoint-ments, indicating that about twice the number of full-time assistants are being paid by the University and areactively engaged in teaching or research activity.
The number of graduate assistants clearly demonstratesthe importance of the large graduate program at theUniversity's Madison Campus in the teaching and re-search program. Without this resource, an additionallarge number of permanent faculty would be required.As graduate programs develop at other campuses, thisteaching resource may become more available.
The State Universities currently employ 2,932 perma-nent faculty members. Almost all of these persons arefull-time regular faculty members, since it is a Boardof Regents of State Colleges' policy that graduate stu-dents shall not assume classroom teaching responsibili-ties. Current trends suggest that the need of permanentfaculty in the University of Wisconsin and State Uni-versity system would grow to at least 17,000 personsby 1980, in addition to approximately 3,500 assistants.
A significant factor involved in the recruitment, retention,and upgrading of a strong faculty is the provision ofbudgetary support for meaningful research. No uni-versity can achieve distinction without some researchobligation, and higher educational institutions in Wis-consin must be encouraged to undertake those researchefforts most appropriate to their capabilities and mis-sions. Such research functions, either in the search fornew knowledge or in the application of knowledge, mustremain an integral part of higher education, particularlyat the graduate school level.
It is unlikely that qualified, well-prepared new facL'ltycan be attracted to Wisconsin higher education in suffi-cient numbers without a vigorous recruitment effort.The CCHE staff recommends the expansion of existingefforts and the early development of new programs toincrease the supply of faculty and to spread the influenceof outstanding faculty members to larger numbers ofstudents.
Implementation of the above recommendations shouldinclude efforts in the following areas:
1. Continued emphasis upon competitive salary andfringe benefit programs for faculty.
2. Expansion of the successful teacher improvementgrant program and the development of an appropri-ate sabbatical leave plan.Expansion of summer school programs to providesummer employment opportunities for staff mem-bers who have achieved terminal degree status;provision of summer support for advanced work offaculty members working toward terminal degrees.
4. Further utilization of teaching aids, both human andmechanical, to enable the excellent teacher orresearcher to devote more time to his areas ofstrength.
5. Inter-institutional statewide use of outstandingteachers through the development of appropriateinstructional materials or media linkage.
6. Expansion of student loan, fellowship, and otherfinancial aids as well as guidance programs toattract able students to teaching careers in highereducation.
7. The development and expansion of graduate de-gree programs at selected Wisconsin universitiesdesigned to prepare well-qualified staff membersfor all facets of higher education.
8. The recognition, promotion, and support of researchas a vital function of higher education.
9. Recruitment of leading figures from business, in-dustry, and the professions for part-time or full-time teaching responsibilities in their areas ofspecialization when appropriate to institutional goalsand missions.
10. Further utilization of Instructional Television (ITV),
51
audio-tutorial laboratories, programmed instruction,advanced placement, independent study, lecture-discussion sectioning, and other techniques de-signed to effect economies in handling routine staffassignments as well as to improve the quality ofinstruction.
B. Faculty Needs V.T.A. Schools
The rapid expansion of Wisconsin's Vocational, Technical,and Adult Education system under Chapter 292, Lawsof 1965, will create an unprecedented demand for vo-cational-technical instructors over the next fifteen years.Projections indicate that by 1970 the VTA schools willneed twice as many teachers as are presently employed,and by 1980, an additional 3,000 teachers plus re-placements for those resigning or retiring. The over-alldimensions of the teacher supply problem can be readilygrasped when one stops to consider that instructors arerequired in more than 100 specialty fields. Thoughserious in all program categories, shortages probablywill be more acute in business-distributive and trade-industrial education than in agrk:ulture and home eco-nomics. For highly complex Associate Degree and pre-paratory technical programs, it is becoming increasinglydifficult to recruit teachers with the necessary work ex-perience.
At the root of the problem is the unfavorable competitiveposition of the VTA schools. Primary factors affectingtheir ability to attract and retain qualified teachers are:
1. Certification requirements. Existing certification lawdoes not allow the employment of capable techniciansfrom industry as instructors in technical programsunless the candidate also holds a Bachelor's degree.This requirement, in effect, "eliminates thousandsof potential teachers who have displayed technicalcompetency on the firing line of industry." (More-over, many of these individuals already have acquiredconsiderable teaching experience in industry or themilitary.) As a result, schools may be forced toaccept persons who meet the degree requirement,but who lack the technical knowledge or competencedemanded by the teaching position involved.
2. Teacher training programs at collegiate institutions.Given the multiplicity of specialized 3rEas encom-passed within vocational-technical curricuia such ascomputer programming, dental technolcgy, instru-mentation collegiate institutions with teacher train -ir find it difficult to produce instructorsfore more than a handful of these areas. One aspectof the problem is numerical: although the VTA sys-tem faces a critical over-all teacher shortage, thenumber of teachers required in each specialty maybe small. Therefore, one can hardly expect the col-leges to mount costly programs that will graduateonly a few persons a year for each specialty.
3. Salary levels. Low salaries probably constitute themost significant deterrent to recruitment and reten-tion of qualified vocational-technical faculty. For in-stance, the 1965-66 placement record for StoutState University reveals an average starting salaryfor male teachers of $5,611, a figure considerablybelow the annual wages of a Madison carpenter orbricklayer. Today, it is not uncommon for a journey-man in any of the building trades to earn $10,000or more per year, and technicians in industry havecomparable earning potentials. Obviously, very fewtechnicians or journeymen are willing, or can afford,to leave their chosen field, return to college toobtain the Bachelor's degree, and then step into aVTA teaching position at one-half to three-fourths oftheir previous salary.
It should be recognized that teachers in VTA educa-tion must be doubly skilled: they must possess notonly the teaching skills and ability required of allteachers, but also the specialized skills which in-dustrial employment demands. Thus, the VTA schoolsare placed in the position of competing with industryfor staff rather than with other educational institu-tions; frequently, this competitive factor is over-looked when salary levels are established.
4. Prestige. In the past, vocational-technical traininghas not enjoyed the status or prestige of collegiateeducation and this, perhaps, has hampered facultyrecruitment. However, it would appear that the pub-
52
tic's image of VTA education vis-à-vis collegiate pro-grams is undergoing a profounr4 transformation asarea VTA districts, with comprehensive post-highschool offerings, are developed.
To alleviate present and projected teacher shortages, thesluff recommends that the Coordinating Committee en-dorse these measures for increasing the supply of voca-tional-technical instructors: greater salary inducements,particularly a special incentive formula applicable to full -tirr teachers in Associate Degree and one- and two-yearpreparatory technical programs; a scholarship fund toenable graduates of Associate Degree programs to con-tinue their education at a collegiate institution and earnthe baccalaureate degree; expansion of existing teachertraining programs and closer cooperation between theVTA system and the collegiate institutions in developingnew programs (Stout and Platteville State Universitieshave indicated a strong desire to move ahead in thisarea); internships in industry, and more vigorous, better-coordinated recruitment efforts, both in the state andoutside Wisconsin.
The proposed salary incentive program would involve asliding state aid scale ranging from 70 to 99 per cent:the state would cover 70 per cent of the salary at the$7,000-a-year level, 80 per cent at $8000, 90 per centat $9000, and 99 per cent at a maximum level of $9900.In effect, the program would greatly improve the com-petitive position of the VTA schools by enabling orstimulating them to offer higher teacher salaries. Esti-mated cost of the program for the 1967-69 bienniumis $500,000.
Section VII
Physical Facilities
It is the statutory duty of the Coordinating Committee forHigher Education to adopt "a coordinated plan for theintegration and most efficient use of existing facilities. . . and an order of priority for the construction of newfacilities at the University of Wisconsin and the statecolleges." While there is no statutory obligation for theCoordinating Committee to participate in the construc-tion of physical facilities for the area technical schoolsand no state funds are provided for their construction,the Coordinating Committee has recognized that facilityplanning for the technical schools is an integral part oflong-range statewide planning.
The sole purpose of physical facility planning, however,is to implement the academic mission of an institution.
Execution of the total planning and functional develop-ment nf facilities requires the involvement and coopera-tion of several state agencies outside of higher educa-tion as well as the CCHE and the operating systems.Considerable attention has been given to the proceduresnecessary to ensure an expeditious and orderly course ofaction within the several legally-assigned functions. Theseresponsibilities are outlined in CCHE #37, 1966, "Guide-lines to Planning Wisconsin's Public Post-High SchoolEducation Program and the Supporting Building Pro-gram."
A. Guidelines to Facilities Planning
In order to provide planning guides upon which buildingprograms may be based and justified, the CoordinatingCommittee has developed guidelines for most of theareas of physical facilities needs. These guidelines haveevolved from studies of curricular patterns and offeringsat each of the individual universities In some cases,such as in office space, statewide guidelines have beendeveloped; in other areas, substantial variation existsamong the guidelines for each institution dependingwholly on the difference in academic offerings. Thefacility needs for a school with a heavy science andlaboratory curriculum, for example, are far differentthan the facility needs for a school with a minimum oflaboratory offerings.
Since the guidelines assume that the utilization standardsestablished by the CCHE will be met, application of the
53
guidelines then produces only as much space as thecombination of the curricular needs and the utilizationstandards requires. For example, development of theclassroom guidelines are related directly to three factors:
1. Space required per student station2. The class hours per student per week3. The weekly station utilization standard
This equation will produce an over-all square footageallowance of assignable space for each campus. Theover-all allowance can then be converted into specificbuildings.
Guidelines were first used in the development of the1965.67 building program and have been further de-veloped for the 1967-69 building program. The follow-ing guidelines have been adopted:
Classrooms
Total Student ContactHours
Total EnrollmentHours of One Student in Class
14 sq. ft. x HoursOne Student in Class
Student UtilizationSq. Ft. per Student Enrollment
(67% x 30)=20
1970 EnrollmentProjections = Classroom Space Required
x sq. ft. per Student
Teaching LaboratoriesSame as classroom formula except:1. 40 sq. ft. per station for non-lab-oriented schools:
Eau Claire, La Crosse, Oshkosh, Stevens Point, Su-perior, Whitewater
2. 48 sq. ft. at Madison and Milwaukee3. 60 sq. ft. per student for lab-oriented schools:
Platteville, River Falls, Stout4. Student Utilization: 24 periods per week per room x
80% of station use = 19.2
Offices135 sq. ft. per full-time equivalent faculty and clericalstaff
Library (total of):
Reading Rooms: 25 sq. ft. per station x 20% under-graduate enrollment
Carrel Space: 25% of graduate students x 45 sq. ft.Office and Auxiliary Support: 135 sq. ft. per FTE staidStack Space: 10 volumes per sq. ft. (number of volumes
determined by library program)
Physical EducationStudents (undergraduate and 25% of graduate)
0 to 5,000 students: 47,400 sq. ft. (core)
5,000 to 10,000 students: 9.C., sq. ft. each10,000 to 20,000 students: 8.5 sq. ft. each20,000 and over students: 8.0 sq. ft. each
Plus 35 sq. ft. per student pursuing physical education
major.
The only majcr area in which guidelines have not been
developed is in the area of research. Currently, staffpersonnel of the University of Wisconsin, State Univer-sities, and the CCHE are working on the development or
a research guideline which, if approved, may he used in
submission of future building programs.
B. Utilization of Facilities
One of the earliest concerns of the CCHE was thatfacilities be used as close to capacity as possible.Minimum standards of utilization were adopted early in
the history of the CCHE and utilization studies have been
undertaken every two years. The current minimumutilization standard requirements are as follows:
Classrooms: 30 hours per week utilization during day-time periods at 67% capacity
Teaching Laboratories: 24 hours per week at 80% ofzCation capacity
With the development of the guidelines as noted, theseminimum utilization requirements become an integralpart of the building program development. The utiliza-tion studies provide a vehicle for a periodic restudy ofthe guidelines and for dealing with exceptions which
54
might arise at any given institution. For example, asmall institution may require certain specialized labora-tory facilities even though utilization may be low. De-
terminant of need will be the educational requirements.
Utilization studies continually raise questions of betteryear-round use of facilities as well as the adequacy ofthe standard school day. More intensive summer usage
and extension of the class day into the evening (aridscheduling of regular classes in these periods) can have
a significant effect on facilities requirements.
Table VII
Student Utilization of Facilities Fall, 1965AverageRoom
Periods
AverageRoom
PeriodsUsed Per Percentage Used Per PercentageWeek Per of Student Week Per of StudentRoom for Station Room for Station
Institution Classrooms Utilization Laboratories UtilizationEau Claire 35.6 83 24.8 99La Crosse 34.2 54 23.7 55Oshkosh 46.2 50 26.3 78PlattevilleRiver Falls
29.341.5
518 7
19.733.8
101
9Stevens Point 40.7 57 19 87Stout 35.5 65 26 89Superior 35 48 20.2 60Whitewater 42.7 952.i 25.5 102UW-Madison 31.8 5 20.9 64.5UW-Milwaukee 31.1 56.5 22.3 75.2
The CCHE reviewed the academic calendar question inconsiderable depth in the spring of 1966. A decisionwas made at that time to retain the current two semestersplus the summer session, but it wag recommended thatcontinued experimentation be carried un with the summersession and that its expansion by voluntary usage beencouraged by all possible means.
Nationwide, many different conclusions hive been reached
regarding the best ways to organize the academic calen-dar and resulting use of facilities. It is entirely possiblethat the best procedure for one state may not be appli-cable in another. This subject is to be periodically re-evaluated for Wisconsin.
C. Building Programs
Recent expanded building programs approved by the
Legislature (a total of $113,000,000 passed in the1965.67 biennium) have made it possible to provide
facilities needed for rapidly increasing enrollments tomake up accumulated deficits, and at the same time toallow for the elimination of obsolete structures. Therecommended 1967-69 building program should furnishadequate facilities to carry through currently projectedenrollments for 1970.
The recommended program for the new University ofWisconsin campuses at Parkside and Green Bay will pro-vide facilities for those institutions beyond those periods,since certain minimum facilities must be built at theoutset. However, they, too, will become subject to theover-all guidelines as they can be applied. The 1967.69building program requests that the state supply $118,-291,918 for academic construction and advance landacquisition. Most of the request is supported by thespace guidelines; however, several other factors areimportant:
1. Of the amount requested, fifteen million dollars wasfor construction that was authorized by the 1965.67Legislature, but had to be postponed because of theescalation in costs.
2. It is estimated that building costs will continue toescalate as they have in the past biennium.
3. Title I of the Higher Educational Facilities Act of1963, administered by the State Commission forHigher Educational Aids, has already provided inexcess of $18,600,000 for facility development atthe University of Wisconsin and the State Universitiesover the past two years. This support is expectedto continue into the foreseeable future. In addition,the University of Wisconsin, particularly, will continueto receive large grants for specialized facilities.
D. Campus Planning and Facilities Development
In recent years, very rapid growth has occurred on all ofour higher education campuses. Most campuses haveoutgrown their long-time boundaries and have beenseverely strained to provide the facilities necessary forstudent need. It has been extremely difficult to copewith the dynamic growth of the institutions, generallyfar beyond anyone's anticipation, and to attempt thedevelopment of comprehensive long-range plans.
55
During the past year considerable attention has beengiven to the need for comprehensive campus plans bythe State Building Commission, the State Departmentof Administration, Boards of Regents, and the Coordinat-ing Committee for Higher Education. Currently, detailedcampus planning is under way at several of thecampuses. The campus maps and plans shown in thisprovisional report may be modified, but they are pre-sented here as evidence of the best existing plan at thepresent time, with the full expectation that one of thebenefits of a provisional plan is that it will be examinedcritically and improved or ..-hanged whenever necessaryThe University of Wisconsin has developed campus plansfor Madison and Milwaukee which have been approvedby the Regents. Comprehensive campus plans are pres-ently being developed at the Wisconsin State Universitiesin Platteville, Whitewater, and Stevens Point and will befollowed by the other six State Universities.
One of the first requirements in the development of thetwo new University of Wisconsin campuses is to pre-pare comprehensive master plans which will accommo-date their ultimate academic plans and make provisionsfor eventual enrollments as yet unknown.
One of the outgrowths of comprehensive planning is todetermine the land and physical facilities necessary toaccommodate given numbers of students and academicprograms. A combination of good academic judgment inland acquisition and facilities development is a necessaryadjunct for sound planning in order to accommodateenrollment needs. The development of optimum enroll.ments and a comprehensive plan at any campus willaffect the planning at other institutions and must beintegrated into a total statewide plan to meet the state'sneed.
E. Funding Facilities
The State Constitution imposes a limit of $100,000 onthe state debt, and prior to 1957 all academic construc-tion was on a cash basis. A building corporation wasset up at that time to finance academic construction.Now most academic facilities are initially funded throughthe State Agencies Building Corporation. The Corporationissues bonds to pay for construction costs; the facilities
are leased to the state agencies, and rentals are pledged
over a 40-year period to retire the bonds. Costs for
minor projects and remodeling are financed through
direct appropriation.
Federal funds have been available for several years tohelp finance special projects, but have become moreeasily obtainable since passage of the Higher EducationFacilities Act of 1963 to stimulate comprehensive plan-
ning for facilities. Federal funds for public higher educa-
tion are not assigned in advance to any specific project,
but are regarded as a partial offset to the total buildingneeds and are ultimately assigned to any eligible project
required at the particular time. The money is provided
through the Higher Education Aids Commission (5 CCHE
members sit on the Commission). Federal regulations
provide that if a state body exists with over-all re-
sponsibility for planning public education, that body shall
be so recognized.
Grant funds assigned for public projects under thisFederal act in 1964.65 and 1965.66 were as follows:
Section 103 Technical Schools, Universities, Centers:
$3,924,700; Section 104 General Academic Construc-
tion: $7,523,816.
In addition, substantial grant funds were allocated forspecialized graduate facilities under Title II of the Fa-cilities Act, and Title lll loan funds at 3% interest werereceived for a large number of state facility projects.
Recent Congressional actions have significantly increased
the authorization limits; however, actual appropriations
have not followed suit. If appropriations ultimately areauthorized, a substantial reduction in state outlay is
possible.
F. Space Reqvirements for the Future
The enrollment projections in this report bear a directrelationship to several categories of space needs. We
may project the long-range need for space in several
areas, including classrooms, office space, laboratories,
physical education facilities, library facilities, and otherinstructional space, all of which are related directly to
56
enrollment. We cannot project the eventual need forresearch space or public service space in this samemanner, since no guidelines have been developed.
The space projection must be couched with severalqualifying features. For example, major changes in pro-
gram may dictate major changes in space needs. Thisis apparent today and is demonstrated by the widedifference in space allocations among the several cam-puses. The University of Wisconsin, Madison campus,with the largest distribution of educational programs,has the most comprehensive space needs of any institu-
tion in the state. Space needs c'e directly responsive toacademic program decisions as well as enrollments.
Using over-all statewide enrollment projections to 1983,Table VIII shows the amounts of space, excluding research, extension, and public service, that are necessary,
based upon existing guidelines and ratios of space use.
Space needs have not been expressed in dollars :Aricathy, current cost ratio can be extremely deceiving dmto the rapid change in costs, as has been witnessed in
the last several years. Expressing the needs in square
footage terms related to the current building situationprovides a better comparative yardstick.
The actual cost of providing this space will vary con-siderably depending upon the program to be accommo-dated. An indication of the variation possible can be
cited from studying other state master plans wherestudent costs range from $3,136 to $5,000 in othermidwestern states.
G Student Housing
A large amount of student housing has been constructed
on all campuses in recent years, financed through build-
ing corporations and paid for by charges made to stu-
dents and other users. Corporation financing has been
primarily through special housing loan funds supplied
by the Federal government.
The extensive housing program has had a great impact
on the growth of higher education, particularly at the
Table VIII
Higher Education Space Requirements Through 1983
57
Enrollment*Classrooms
((9.22)Labs
(10.93)Offices(13.06)
Libraries(11.79)
Other Instr.(7.47)
Phy. Ed.(8.69)
Available** 1,065,768 1,380,685 1,113,431 1,210,253 889,693 717,6011970 114,736 1,058,777 1,255,091 1,498,861 1,353,500 857,262 997,4761974 140,200 1,292,644 1,532,386 1,831,012 1,652,958 1,047,294 1,218,3381977 154,300 1,422,646 1,686,499 2,015,158 1,819,197 1,152,621 1,340,8671980 162,700 1,500,094 1,778,311 2,124,862 1,918,233 1,215,369 1,413,8631983 156,400 1,442,008 1,709,452 2,042,584 1,843,956 1,168,308 1,359,116
* Does not include enrollment at two year centers and branch campuses or UW-Milwaukee eveningenrollments which are not included when calculating state financed space needs.
** "Available" includes space now available or authorized by the Legislature.
State Universities. In some instances, especially in thesmaller cities, the size of enrollments can be tracedalmost directly to available university housing, becauseavailable private housing is completely exhausted.
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee has had almostno university housing available. The CCHE has recom-mended that housing be provided for up to 10 to 15per cent of the student body in order to allow studentsoutside the metropolitan area to take advantage of theacademic opportunities offered there. Therefore, a dormi-tory project is now under way.
The University of Wisconsin, Madison has substantialuniversity-owned housing, but for several years has seenthe development of many units of relatively high-cost,privately-owned student housing.
University-owned housing, available or under constructionand scheduled for opening in 1r.'57, would accommodatethe following percentages of the student enrollment:
Institution Per Cent
State Universities:Eau Claire 48%La Crosse 58Oshkosh 50Platteville 56River Falls 51Stevens Point 47Stout 64Superior 39Whitewater 55
University of Wisconsin, Madison 28University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee 2
Availability of student housing also will be important inthe long-range planning for the ultimate development ofthe new University of Wisconsin campuses at Green Bayand Parkside. Early planning by the CCHE (CCHE #45,1956) cites an over-all need for university and privatehousing for two-thirds of the students at Green Bay andone-third at Parkside.
As area technical schools are developed, some housingfacilities probably will be requi Id. Some highly special-ized courses should be offered in no more than one or twotechnical schools in order to avoid unnecessary duplica-tion and expense, and it will be necessary for studentsfrom all parts of the state to come to the particular loca-tion where these courses will be offered. In such loca-tions, therefore, housing may have to be constructed.In others, technical school students needing housingmay be able to obtain it in university-owned dormitories.This concept now is being discussed for La Crosse. Eachlocation will have to be studied for its individual problemsand their solution.
In some instances, there has been discussion about thepossibilities of constructing housing in conjunction withUniversity centers or State University branch campuses.This would change the current function and purposeof these institutions. While these facilities would be con-structed by local government not subject to CCHE con-trols, the CCHE should consider this matter very care-fully because of the long-range effect on the functionsand future of these institutions.
Student housing, therefore, becomes a very importantfactor in statewide planning. The Physical Facilities Sub-committee of the CCHE currently is studying the needfor student housing and its relationship to campus plan-ning. Over-all planning for student housing must care-fully evaluate enrollment impacts in the future, particu-larly if enrollments should drop, so that debt service re-quirements are not impaired. It is recommended that theCCHE, in cooperation with the operating systems, de-velop a detailed housing plan for all institutions includingtechnical schools and 2-year campuses.
H. Space Needs in Technical Schools
While it is currently the responsibility of the vocational-technical area districts to provide for the physical facilityneeds of technical schools, it is important that the Co-ordinating Committee periodically review the extent towhich these space needs are being met. Although sometechnical schools have resorted to extraordinary measuresto intensify the utilization of their facilities by renting
additional space and establishing fourteen-hour classdays, there is a current space shortage which contributessignificantly to the lag in expanding technical schoolenrollments. Among the total higher education facilityrequirements, the space needs of vocational-technicaleducation call for an extremely high priority.
The Department of Resource Development, cooperatingwith the State Board of Vocational, Technical, and AdultEducation and the Coordinating Committee, prepared adetailed report of existing space deficiencies in the vo-cational-technical schools throughout the state and pro-jected long-range space needs. The report revealed thatat the present time 2,236,030 square feet of space areavailable in Vocational, Technical, and Adult Schools inWisconsin and that there is a deficiency of 370,800square feet. This deficiency and the imperative need todevelop technical education as rapidly as possible in
this state make the construction of facilities vitally im-portant if Wisconsin's vocational-technical needs are to
be met.
Projections made by the Department of Resource De-velopment for future space requirements were based
upon anticipated minimum and maximum enrollments.These projections indicate that additional vocational-technical space will be required from 1.5 million to 2.2million square feet between 1965 and 1970, and be-
tween 3 million to 3.2 million more square feet between1970 and 1980, a total of 4.5 million to 5.5 millionsquare feet of space between 1965 and 1980. TheDepartment of Resource Development further estimatesthat investment in construction will need to averagebetween $8.3 million and $9.4 million per year to pro-vide a total up to $130 million for additional constructionby 1980.
This space requirement represents more than just thephysical space needed for technical education. It en-compasses the total needs for all vocational and tech-nical training, such as the necessary expensive equip-ment and machinery. These needs must be consideredtogether, however, since space in these schools usuallyserves all segments of the total vocational-technical cur-riculum.
58
Forty per cent of the development costs for technicalschool projects is available under Section 103 of theHigher Education Facilities Act, administered by HEAC.In addition, funds are available from the Vocational Edu-cation Act.
In the 1963-65 biennium, the Coordinating Committeerecommended state assistance in the construction offacilities; however, it was not provided. In the currentbiennium, the Coordinating Committee has recommendedthat the state provide assistance for equipment in tech-nical schools in much the same manner as it nowequips two-year campuses of the University of Wisconsinand State Universities. It must be recognized that high-quality programs in vocational- technical education willrequire massive investments in equipment comparableto that used in business and industry. The acquisitionof equipment for new schoo's and new programs andthe replacement of obsolete machinery on a continuingbasis involve great expense. It is believed that this aidwould significantly stimulate development of quality pro-grams.
It is recommended that periodical:y the CoordinatingCommittee and the State Board review the progressbeing made in providing needed vocational-technicalschool space. If needed, appropriate legislation for stateassistance or changes in current financing patterns mustbe presented to the Legislature.
I. General Guidelines for Long-Range Facilities Planning
1. Comprehensive campus plans should be developedfor every campus to provide the physical facilitiesnecessary for accommodation of the approved aca-demic programs and the enrollments expected oneach of the several campuses. Comprehensiveplans now are being prepared for Wisconsin StateUniversities at Whitewater, Platteville, Stevens Point,and the University of Wisconsin campuses at Green
Bay and Parkside.2. Existing facilities guidelines must be continually re-
evaluated to confirm their adequacy. Research andpublic service guidelines should be developed ifpossible.
3. Funds should be requested for advance planningand procedures developed to harmonize with themethods approved in CCHE #37, 1966, so thatthe lead time in building construction can be re-duced to a minimum.
4. Continued study must be made of building obso-lescence and related maintenance costs. Wherenecessary, old structures should be replaced, par-ticularly if the academic program cannot be ade-quately carried out in such structures.
5. Advanced land needs as shown on approved cam-pus plans should be acquired sufficiently in ad-vance of current need to enhance an orderly buildingprogram. Obviously needed land should be acquiredwhen available in order to avoid future speculationand monetary loss to the state in the cost ofpurchasing the land.
6. Continued study should be made of the facility re-quirements for the area technical schools. Need
for future state funding to develop these facilitiesshould be reviewed periodically.
7. Some economies in facilities should result fromclose cooperation between universities and technicalschools located in geographical proximity to oneanother. The current study of cooperation shouldbe carried to early completion to ensure possibleeconomies before extensive building programs areundertaken.
8. Further study should be made of the statewide stu-dent housing program and its relation to the devel-opment of enrollments on all campuses.
9. The building programs should be designed to meetlong-range needs for research, public service, andinstruction and considerable expansion in thephysical plant will continue to be required. Itshould not be necessary to build maximum instruc-tional facilities for the peak enrollment in 1979 iffurther studies of populaton data continue to indi-nate that enrollments will decline after that date.However, if current birth trends are reversed, theneeds for instructional facilities will go beyondthose of 1979. Continued study must also be madeof the trends in adult education and how they mayaffect the need for facilities.
10. Differences currently prevail in the building con-
59
struction costs on the various campuses. It isrecommended that the CCHE review this matter inconjunction with competent engineering and archi-tectural personnel in the operating systems and theBureau of Engineering to determine the reasons andjustification for cost differentials,
J. Building Program Review Responsibilities andProcedures
One of the important responsibilities of the CCHE, aspreviously pointed out, is that of preparing a single,integrated priority list for higher education buildingprograms. Present practices do not provide adequatelyfor the CCHE to carry out this role as demanded inthe statute. A procedure must be developed to enablethe Coordinating Committee to evaluate thoroughly therequests and recommendations it makes, and then be ina position to establish priorities among the relativeneeds of the several systems, institutions, and buildings.It is the obligation of the Coordinating Committee tosupport strongly the program which it presents to theGovernor and the Building Commission. The proceduresbelow are recommended for the improvement of buildingprogram review:
1. Preliminary planning for a biennial program shouldbegin in the fall of the odd-numbered years, approxi-mately one year in advance of final program approval.a. A preliminary review of needs will be made at
this time; guidelines will be reviewed and neces-sary changes made.
b. High priority needs in the biennial program fol-lowing will be identified and requests made tothe Building Commission for advance planningfunds.
c. The Bureau of Engineering will be asked to evalu-ate cost data for final project submission.
d. The CCHE Facilities Subcommittee will determinethe detailed method by which it will review thefinal biennial program as submitted.
2. The biennial building request should be received byJune 1 of even-numbered years. The project requestsshould include:a. A description of functions, project scope, total
project and construction cost, project land re-
quirements, utility costs, and source of funds tofinance the projects.
b. Self-financing projects, gifts, and state grants.c. Long-range land requirements to be acquired in
the biennium.d. A current inventory of space by building and
function.e. A priority order for each system's request.
3. The CCHE Facilities Subcommittee will review andevaluate requests and make final recommendationsto the CCHE in the following sequence:a. Each system will be requested to review its project
requests in priority order with the Subcommittee.b. CCHE staff analysis and recommendations will be
received and reviewed by the Subcommittee.c. The Subcommittee will recommend a single higher
education building priority list.
4. The CCHE will approve and submit a building pro-gram to the Governor around October 15 of the even-numbered years.
5. After a building program has been approved by theCCHE, the operating systems should notify the CCHEof major proposed changes in projects or priorityorder. The Executive Director will report the proposedchanges to the CCHE Physical Facilities Subcommit-tee, which will recommend appropriate action to the
CCHE.
6. Actions of the Higher Educational Aids Commissionallocating Federal funds have a substantial effect onthe state's higher education building program. CCHEmembers of the Commission should be asked toreport regularly to the CCHE the actions of the Com-mission so that they may be reflected in buildingprogram recommendations.
7. Accomplishing these goals will require a high degreeof cooperation between the CCHE, the operating sys-tems, and the State Building Commission. An earlymeeting of the Facilities Subcommittee should reviewthe recommendations in detail and establish firmoperating procedures.
Section VIII 60
Financing Public Higher Education
The Coordinating Committee is required to "adopt acoordinated plan for the integration and most efficientuse of existing facilities and personnel and to submita single, consolidated, biennial budget request for publichigher education." These statutory requirements makeapparent the obligation of the Coordinating Committeeconstantly to review and evaluate the financial needsof public higher education in Wisconsin. It is necessary,however, to improve present procedures in order to fulfillthe statutory mandate.
The fundamental policy of the Coordinating Committeewhich guides its financial actions has been endorsedover a period of many years in acts by the Legislature.It is quite clear that a comprehensive, quality educationalprogram, open to all qualified Wisconsin students, is tobe established and maintained. The financial requestsfor public higher education have been based upon thiscardinal principle.
As higher education enrollments have grown rapidly,higher education has become an increasing part of thetotal state tax budget. Other funds supporting highereducation activities have increased substantially, how-ever, such as Federal grants, private grants, auxiliaryenterprises, and student fees.
Expenditures for education have risen tremendously allover the nation. While a study of comparative datarsveals that expenditures in Wisconsin have risen at aslightly higher rate than the U.S. average, it is a goodindication of the dedication to excellence and the open-door policy to which Wisconsin educators and legislatorsalike have subscribed.
A. Comparative Support fo:. Higher Education
We have attempted to secure some comparative data onstate support to assess whether the higher educationburden assumed by Wisconsin is greater or less than
that of other states. It must be recognized that compa-rable national data is usually two or three years oldbefore it is published and the rapid growtn of highereducation makes some of the data obsolete by the timeit is available.
Several years ago a study was initiated on state financialmanagement by the Legislative Committee on Organiza-tion and Procedure. A portion of the study is a com-parative study of educational financing in eight statesMinnesota, Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Wisconsin,New York, and California. This report, published inDecember 1965, attempted to assess:
1. Demand for higher ':.41.1cation2. The c .narity to public higher education3. Act -1, .nt -v ctfort
The report stated, "Wisconsin, with average per capitaincome and about average tax support for higher educa-tion, ranks:
1. Below the median of the selected states (6 of 8)and at the national median (24) in student expendi-tures pe, enrollee either for public institutions aloneor for all higher education institutions.
2. Above the selected state median (3 of 8) and wellabove the national median (18 of 48) in percentageof the college-age publicly enrolled, but at the bottomof the selected group and just below the nationalmedian in the percentage of total (public and private)enrollment.
3. Thus, Wisconsin is above average only in public enrollment; is at or below average in total enrollmentand in both public and total expenditure per studentenrolled."
This report was based upon 1962-63 data and one mustbear that limitation in mind. Another measure of com-parable support, however, is the expenditure for highereducation as a per cent of income. The U.S. Departmentof Commerce annually reports the general expenditurefor higher education per $1,000 of personal income. Thecomparative data are as follows:
1960-61 1964-65
U.S. Average $ 9.58 $13.43Median 11.64 16.16Wisconsin 10.26 20.37
61
These figures demonstrate the substantial increase insupport for higher education throughout the United Statesand that growth in Wisconsin has been at a slightlyhigher rate than the U.S. as a whole.
Comparison of the per cent of personal income spentfor higher education within the Midwest in 1964.65 reveals that Illinois and Ohio are substantially lower thanWisconsin; Minnesota and Michigan are slightly lower,while Indiana and Iowa are both higher.
Wisconsin has been successful in giving its youngstersborn after World War II, despite their unprecedentednumbers, better opportunities for higher education thanyoungsters had a decade ago, and at about the sameproportional cost to the students.
B. The Current Budget Request
Table IX
Actual1965.67
State Universities
OperatingSystemRequest1967.69
Recom-mended
by CCHE1967.69
State Tax Funds $ 55,226,886 $112,672,305 $107,296,800Student Fees 21,5V.000 27,380,000 27,380,000Auxiliary Operations 45,794,049 73,951,425 73,951,425
Sub Total $122,520,935 $214,003,730 $208,628,225
State Board of Vocational,Technical and Adult Education
State Tax FundsOperating Aids $ 8,334,300 $ 12,426,000 $ 12,426,000Equipment Aids 2,000,000 2,000,000
Sub Total $ 8,334,300 $ 14,426,01)0 $ 14,426,000
County Colle?,esState Tax Funds $ 1,415,300 $ 1,367,100 $ 1,242,500
University of Wisconsin*State Tax Funds $113,799,823 $205,544,090 $189,855,487Student Fees 37,449,905 44,382,709 44,382,709Auxiliary enterprises,
gifts, grants, etc. 139,364,117 144,355,679 144,355,679Sub Total $290,613,845 $394,282,478 $378,593,875
Higher Educe LionTotals $422,884,380 $624,079,308 602,887,650
State Tax Funds 178,776,309 334,009,495 312,017,837Student fees, auxiliary,
gifts, etc. 244,108,971 290,069,813 290,069,813
All figures shown are actual appropriation figuresestimated fringe benefit costs.
and exclude
Less University Hospitals
C. Quality Goals
It is important that periodic review be made of theallocation of the state's resource to higher educationand to relate accomplishments to goals. Quality stand-ards, while variable, must bear relation to the goal ofany given program, but the overall guideline will alwaysbe high quality.
It is recommended that an effort be made to establishguidelines for quality standards which will reflect fiscalrequirements. The standards basically should representthe goals of high quality in all programs, and yet providefor distribution of the state's resources on an equitablebasis reflecting comparable support where appropriateand assuring adequate differentials when required.
D. Cost Analysis
Much progress has been made in developing unit costsfor the teaching of students. The range of costs forinstructing students is extensive, from expensive mededucation to freshman and sophomore work at lessthan one-tenth the cost of medical instruction. Theseunit costs furnish a basic frame upon which to projectworkload requirements and provide some basis foridentifying the necessary different levels of support. Thisdata, combined with desirable standards for quality,can help in the process of developing an understandable,objective budget procedure in which budget decisions arerelated to clearly defined goals. It should facilitatecomprehension among educators, lay members of Boardsof Regents, the CCHE, and the Legislature.
The Kellett Committee on Improved Expenditure Manage-ment spent a substantial amount of time examining theunit cost development process in both the University ofWisconsin and State Universities. Cost information inthe current budget requests has been developed in themanner suggested by that Committee. The cost dataper student for the several systems is as follows for1966.67. These costs have been used in the develop-ment of 1967.69 budget requests:
62
Level I Level IIFresh.-Soph. Jr.-Sr.
U of Wisconsin
Level IllGrad.-Prof.
Madison $769 $1108 $2018Milwaukee 762 1355 1419Centers 894
State Universities . . 846 1125 1656
Progress in the development of acceptable standardshas been made through cooperative efforts of the CCHE,the operating systems, and the Department of Adminis-tration in such areas as the maintenance of facilities,library acquisitions, etc.
E. Student Fees
Traditionally, student fees for residents at the Universityof Wisconsin and State Universities have been approxi-mately 20 per cent of the over-all educational cost, ageneral ratio which has been maintained for many years.Current charges, however, have risen to a ratio of ap-proximately 22.0 per cent of the educational cost forresident students at the State Universities and the Uni-versity of Wisconsin.
Coordinating Committee policy states that it is in theiong-range interest of the state and the nation to keepfees low and, in fact, recommends eventual eliminationof fees in the public higher education system as is nowthe case in elementary and secondary education. There-fore, the current budgets for 1967.69, as recommendedby the Coordinating Committee, provide that fees supportbetween 17 and 19 per cent of the educational cost forthe biennium.
When the budget for higher education in the systems isbeing established, a certain level of fee receipts is
anticipated which the Boards must incorporate intotheir budgets if they are to realize sufficient funds tooperate at the authorized level. The legal responsibilityfor student fee charges lies with the two Boards ofRegents, but traditionally the fee levels actually have beenestablished by the Legislature's Joint Committee onFinance when the final state biennial budgets are deter-mined by that body.
It is recommended th,,c the policy of resident studentssupporting 20 per cent of the over-all instructional costsbe continued. However, as we move toward a universaleducation of two years beyond high school, the possibilitythat these first two years may be tuition-free, as now isthe case for elementary and secondary education, willhave to be considered.
Fees for other types of educational opportunities varyconsiderably. As a general budget procedure, the 1965Legislature established the premise that the UniversityExtension Division should be approximately two-thirdsself-supporting. The degree of support from fees forExtension programs varies considerably. Agriculturalextension has always been completely without chargeto the user. Extension programs within the State Uni-ve sity system are expected to be self-supporting andadult education in the vocational-technical school systemhas a wide range of support.
Some programs can be supported by those served.Others which serve clientele in depressed urban or ruralareas and/or which are designed to improve the economicstatus of individuals or groups simply will not exist ifhigh fees are charged. (See Recommendation No. 20.)
F. Technical Education
One of the major changes in the state's financial com-mitment was made in the 1965-67 biennium for techni-cal education. Prior to that time, technical educationwas supported approximately by 10 per cent from thestate, 9 per cent from Federal funds, 16 per cent fromfees, and 65 per cent from local funds. The 1965Legislature made /;ramatic funding changes by stipulat-ing that the state would pay 80 per cent of instructionalsalaries for technical programs, which means approxi-mately 56 per cent of the total program instead of theprevious 10 per cent.
Chapter 292, the Area Districting Act, provides for divid-ing the entire state into technical education districts,which extends the two-mill taxing authority to all partsof the state, thus improving substantially the fundingcapacity of the local schools. In addition, it specifies thatthe state will pay 100 per cent of the instructionalcosts for collegiate transfer programs in technical schools
(currently relates to Madison and Milwaukee only). Thesefunding changes are particularly appropriate since thetechnical schools in many cases are as statewide in theirdrawing power as some of our statesupported uni-versities.
The changing pattern for financing and the increasedparticipation of the state will contr ibute dramatically tothe improvement of equality of opportunity throughoutWisconsin. However, special attention must be givento the development of technical education to servestudents from the sparsely settled, relatively poor areasof the state. We may find that more state participationwill be necessary to assure equality of opportunity tostudents in these disadvantaged areas of Wisconsin. Thedevelopment of an educational aid formula similar to theequalization principle now employed in school aids forsecondary and elementary schools may be necessary.It is recommended that the CCHE, in cooperation withthe SBVTAE, review the problems of students living indisadvantaged areas, and if warranted, recommend addi-tional aid formulas which will assure the equality oftechnical education opportunities to students in all partsof the state, regardless of the population base andfinancial resources of these areas.
In 1965 the Coordinating Committee recommended stateassistance for the accelerated construction of technicalfacilities. However, this aid was not granted. The Co-ordinating Committee presently recommends that thestate provide equipment aid in the development of techni-cal schools. Technical equipment is an area of particularconcern and a basic requirement in most new schools.It is expensive and must be periodically updated to keepabreast of industrial advances in automation and mech-anization. The concept of state aid for equipment in thevocational - technical schools is similar to present statefunding for equipment at the University Centers andState University branch campuses, with facilities con-structed by local communities. It is therefore recom-mended that the CCHE renew its request that state aidbe provided for necessary equipment in state-orientedvocational-technical programs. The CCHE and SBVTAE,by cooperating together, should draw up detailed criteriawhich will establish eligibility for equipment aids.
G. Tha Role of Federal and Private Grants inFinancing Higher Education
There is a great evolving source of financing in the area
of Federal gifts, grants, and contracts. Private giftsand bequests to public universities also have increased.
Few public universities receive more funds from thesesources than the University of Wisconsin, but the StateUniversities have made remarkable progress in obtainingFederal funds in recent years. Vocational-technical edu-
cation has been receiving support from Federal fundssince 1917; indeed, Federal support is a large factor inthe budget.
Both the University of Wisconsin and the State Uni-versities have made substantial efforts in the use ofFederal funds to employ the resources of more thanone institution and thus provide, by such cooperativemethods, a maximum return both for the State of Wis-consin and for the nation as a whole. The University ofWisconsin is cooperating with major universities in other
states; the State Universities have developed several
significant cooperative projects within the system itself.
It is recommended that the CCHE and the operatingsystems vigorously pursue and utilize all available Fed-eral funds and private gifts and grants which will improve
the quality and quantity of Wisconsin's higher educationofferings and that cooperative programs should be en-
couraged.
Budgetary decisions are increasingly affected by policiesof Federal matching requirements and requirements forstatewide plans. State educational program decisions in
many areas can no longer be well made without fullcognizance of the impact of Federal programs. There
are indications that Federal funds may play an increasingrole in the support of general higher education programs
in the future.
In the past the CCHE has spent little time in reviewingFederal legislation since its effect on higher educationusually was limited to extremely specialized areas. Aneffort now will be made to review all Federal programsand analyze them, particularly in regard to the financialimpact they have upon the support of higher education.
64
An example of a significant Federal action affecting theCCHE itself is the provision by the 89th Congress offunds for statewide comprehensive facilities planning
which is already a statutory function of the CCHE in thepublic higher education sector. The grant, however, willbe made to the Higher Educational Aids Commission.Arrangements are being made to integrate this planningwith regular CCHE functions and to collaborate with theHigher Educational Aids Commission and non-public in-stitutions to develop comprehensive statewide facilities
planning.
1. Problems for the Future in Financing Public
Higher Education
Enrollments will continue to rise, nearly doubling againbetween 1966 and 1980 in the collegiate institutionsand will more than double in the technical schools.Salaries will continue to rise as dictated by the avail-ability of and demand for qualified faculty.
More and more students will take a minimum of fiveyears of education. In many cases a Master's degree
has become virtually mandatory for initial entry intoemployment. More Master's recipients progress to the
Doctorate. The requirements and need for faculty inhigher education alone demands such a trend.
Recent national figures indicate that the percentage ofstudents working on Master's degrees is increasing
faster than the percentage of students working on Bac-calaureate degrees; further, the percentage of students
working on Doctor's degrees is increasing faster thanthe percentage of those working on Master's degrees.
The state is increasingly concerned about the supply ofprofessional personnel in the fields of medicine, dentistry,
and veterinary medicine. Any program to increase theoutput and supply of pro:,.:-.sionals is extremely ex-pensive, both in capital outlay and in operating expenses.
In the 1965 budget report to the Legislature, the CCHE
reported that the state contribution to medical educationwas approximately $5,500 per year per student, or tentimes that of freshmen undergraduates. At present, thestate has no programs in dentistry or veterinary medicine
in public institutions.
Consequently, budgets will continue to increase, and inview of the substantial and necessary investment, itbecomes increasingly important that both the CCHE andthe operating systems frequently evaluate the uses andpriority for commitment of the resources provided.
I. Need for Efficiency and Economy
While it is inevitable that expenditures for higher educa-tion will continue to rise rapidly, it is also axiomatic thatas costs increase, expanded efforts must be devoted tomaking the best possible use of every state and Federaltax dollar. Higher educational institutions are the largestpublic employers in the State of Wisconsin. There arerelatively few businesses in the state larger than theUniversity of Wisconsin and State University systems.All higher education administrators must accept theobligation of achieving efficiencies wherever possiblewithin a single campus, within the several campuses ofa system, or among several systems. Such efforts shouldbe extended with three goals in mind: (1) programquality, (2) maximum service to student and state. and(3) maximum return on the tax dollar.
Considerable attention has been given to the need forimproved efiiciency in this state, and better managementpractices have been implemented in the higher educa-tional institutions. Favorable comparison of studentcosts at Wisconsin institutions with other institutionsattests to a continuing interest in efficient operation. Dataprocessing and other mechanical innovations are nowextensively employed in the processing of student recordsand other administrative activities resulting in increasedefficiency and reductions in costs. Improved maintenancemethods have been established on several campuses.The Kellett Committee on !mproved Expenditure Manage.ment has offered many challenging proposals.
Utilization of facilities has always been of prime concern,but personnel constitutes a far greater and continuingcost. Studies should continue to assure maximum useof clerical and other personnel in support of the faculty.The recently completed faculty time study provides avaluable tool in studying the deployment of teachingstaff.
65
In the Academic Programs Section of this report, severalareas of program coordination are suggested. It is inthe expansion of program coordination that forwardsteps can be made in producing efficiencies in operation.The report also has discusser.: the development of educa-tional quality standards. Educational quality standards,combined with sound management standards, are neces-sary goals.
It is recommended that the CCHE, in cooperation withthe operating systems, make a major effort to stimulatemaximum efficiency and economy. The operating sys-tems should be asked to furnish regular reports con-cerning their efforts to improve efficiency of operationand the results they have achieved. The CCHE shouldexamine areas of inter-system coordination.
Estimates for the Future
In 1966.67 the State of Wisconsin appropriated ap-proximately $112 million in state tax funds for highereducation operating expenses. Estimating future ex-penditures is always hazardous because basic assump-tions may readily change. In fact, the Legislature maymake changes in its current session which will indicatedifferent trends. However, in order to fulfill the role ofthe long-range master plan at a point in time, estimatesmust be projected of future costs and preparations madewhere necessary for funding.
Several obvious factors which could cause significantchanges in the estimates shown include such items as:
1. Rapidly rising enrollments in graduate programs be-yond current experience.
2. Additional and expensive state programs in pro-
fessional areas such as dentistry and veterinarymedicine.
3. Rising prices and general inflationary effects on theeconomy.
4. Substantial increases in the authorization of newprograms over and above that normally experiencedwith rising enrolments.
5. Considerable changes in state financing requirementsif Federal participation increases in the future.
Even with these restrictions, an attempt is being madeto estimate the cost ranges which might be expected in
the future. The estimates have been based on severalassumptions:
1. Over-all expenditures for all functions will rise as en-rollments rise in the same ratio as exists in 1966-67.
2. There will be, conservatively speaking, a 5-per centper year rise in cost level due to increasing salariesand increasing costs of goods and materials.
3. Graduate education will continue to grow rapidly re-quiring increased levels of support.
4. I qualified Wisconsin residents will be accommo-dated as shown in the enrollment projections.
S. Relative ratios of support from the state government,Federal government, and students remain unchangedfor estimating purposes.
6. State support for technical school and evening en-rollments will rise rapidly.
Based on these assumptions and recognizing the hazardsof projecting costs, the following minimum estimate ofannual state tax expenditures are made for the future:
1966/67 $112,000,000 (actual)1970/71 $215,000,000 to $270,000,0001975/76 $275,000,000 to $300,000,0001980/81 $340,000,000 to $375,000,000
The estimates illustrate the need for a continual reviewof higher education expenditures to produce maximumefficiency, the utilization of maximum Federal aid, anda continual study of the relative ratios of costs to beborne by students. While these costs appear substantial,they are necessary if the state's current higher educa-tion goals are to be met.
K. Financial Guidelines
1. Financial support always should be sought by theCCHE to continue an "open-door" admission policyfor all qualified Wisconsin residents and to maintainhigh quality programs in all operating systems.
2. Continued effort should be made to refine and de-velop cost techniques which are understandable and
66
provide the Governor and Legislature a ready meansfor establishing a level of support.
3. The level of support as c6tablished should be main-tained. If enrollments exceed budget estimates, fullfunding should be sought from the Legislature to pre-serve the program level.
4. As new programs are developed and proposed, theircost implications must be reviewed and consideredin the CCHE's final action.
5. Relatively high-cost graduate and professional pro-grams will be developing rapidly. Periodic reviewmust be given to possible duplication of programs.
6. Continual studies, such as the faculty time utilizationsurvey presently in the final stages, should be con-ducted from time to time to provide a means forfurther analysis of the commitment of the state'sresources.
7. Quality goals should be established wherever possibleto provide that state resources are allocated in anequitable manner consistent with program missionand to assure comparability of support where appro-priate and adequate differentials of support wherenecessary.
8. The increasing importance of the Federal govern-aient in financing higher education programs requiresa continual review of all Federal programs and pro-posals. The CCHE budget review should considerthe financial implications of current or proposedFederal programs. Whenever applicable, the CCHEshould establish policy positions regarding proposedFederal programs in regard to statewide public ad-ministrative questions and any matter in Federal
programming affecting its statewide public planningresponsibility.
L. Budget Review Responsibilities
State statutes require that the CCHE establish a single,consolidated budget request for higher education and
be responsible for its presentation. The budget repre-sents the financial commitment necessary 'to carry for-ward the state's plans and aspirations in higher educa-tion. In order to mesh this function properly with othereducational planning, it is necessary to give serious at-tention to improving the process by which the final bud-get requests are developed. There is difficulty in adequately carrying out the budgetary obligadons and muchof it can be traced to a time problem. The final deter-mination date for all budget activities in the even numberedyears is the statutory requirement the the governor-elect receive all budget requests on or before November20. Prior to this period, the Department of Administra-tion also needs time to make a preliminary analysis beforeturning the material over to the governor-elect. Tradi-tionally, system budget requests have been approved inthe latter part of September in even-numbered years andafter the fall enrollments are known. The need for pre-sentation of a biennial budget necessarily lengthens plan-ning lead time and contributes to less precision, es-pecially in enrollment forecasting. Higher education bud-gets also must be developed on the basis of departmentalneeds, institutional evaluations, and policies of the Boardsof Regents as 'ell as by CCHE policy. Therefore, amajor revision in the timetable and procedure for pre-paring the budget is necessary ire order that the opera-ting systems and the CCHE can arrive at the best pos-sible budgetary process.
Budgetary procedure should be developed which will al-low the Coordinating Committee time to review the general policies and general academic program decisionswhich govern the budget. Quality standards should bemaintained. The policy review shnuld include such majordecision areas as faculty salary goals, level of supportto be sought for various programs, general concepts ofnew and expanded programs to be included in the bud-get, the areas of possible duplication and overlappingof functions, and the extent to which statewide coopera-tion should be developed.
Attention also must be given to the relat;ve merits ofthe requests of the several systems, particularly in theexpansion and improvement of programs. Experience inthe past has proved that the Legislature does not always
67
provide all of the resources which educators believenecessary, even though the proposed programs are withinthe framework of recommended higher education plan-ning. The Coordinating Committee should be in a positionto recommend relative priority among the several pro-posals for expansion. This concept, to be operative, re-quires the development of ceetlin quality standards andgoals which assure equitable support for all continuingprograms and meet all workload requirements.
The budget as it is finally approved and presented by theCCHE can be supported with a clear set of academic andfinancial policy decisions and which, as part of the long-range plan, can be vigorously explained and defended inpresentation before the Governor and Legislature.
Specific recommendations to improve the budget processare:
1. The CCM: staff should cooperate with the operatingsystems and the Department of Administration to de-lop program budgeting techniques.
2. CCHE staff members, in cooperation with budgetofficers of the operating systems, will conduct a con-tinual s* :dy of factors affecting the financing ofhigher Jducation in the review of biennial requestsand refer to the CCHE Finance Subcommittee forearly consideration, a review of major budget policychanges, such as necessary levels of support, facultysalary goals, utilization of resources, etc.
3. Immediate attention should be given to the Jevelop-ment of quality standards where applicable andpossible.
4. The Board-approved budget requests for the systemsshould be provided to the CCHE Finance Subcom-mittee by September 1 of even-numbered years. Atthis time the systems should be asked to review theirbudget requests with the Subcommittee. (Work loadestimates necessarily will be preliminary at this timeand be subject to fu Iher review due to late-arrivingdata such as fall ern ollment estimates. See sectionon enrollment projection procedures for budgetplanning.)
5. The CCHE Finance Subcommittee will review thesystem requests and recommendations presented bythe CCHE staff and make its recommendations byOctober 1 of the even-numbered years. The CCHEwill approve final recommendations to be submittedto the Governor about October 15.
6. Where appropriate, the recommendations of the CCHEwould establish priorities among the requests 0 theseveral systems.
7. The CCHE should take a vigorous role in presentingthe budget to the Governor and Legislature and thepeople of Wisconsin. The Committee's major pre-sentation should relate the over-all budget objectivesto the needs of the state and the Committee's plansfor meeting the need. The 'a resentation must beworked out cooperatively with the operating systemswhich will continue to provide much of the detailedmaterial required in budget presentation.
M. Enrollment Projection Procedures for Budget Planning
Enrollment projections play a critical role in both short-range and long-range budgetary planning.
Traditionally, higher education enrollment projectionshave been separated into two phases. Long-range pro-jections have been made by the CCHE staff and have beenused for long-range program and facilities planning. Onthe other hand, short-range biennial projections havebeen made initially by the operating systems and reviewedby the CCHE as part of the budget review.
Projections, by their very nature, must be reworkedperiodically to reflect changing conditions and policies.Recent enrollment experiences have shown instances bothof under-estimation and over-estimation. The biennialbudget system particularly requires that short-range andlong-range estimates be reviewed around December 1 ofevery year so that fund requirements can be reviewedannually.
At times, long-range projections appear to deviate sig-nificantly from short-range projections. Long-range pro-
68
jections usually employ straight-line projections and givelittle attention to specific objectives in a single biennium.The deviations may cause confusion and should beavoided.
In order to make projections most useful for al necessarypurposes, the following proceduNs are recommended:
On or about December 1 of each year, short-range andlong-range enrollment projections will be reviewed underthe supervsion of the CCHE and with the cooperationof the operating systems.
In even-numbered years, final biennial estimates will bemade to be used in biennial budget requests. Prelim-inary estimates will have previously accompanied systembudget requests to the CCHE.
The annual short-range projections will be the basis forestablishing full funding requirements for operating bud-gets and all appropriate purposes.
Long-range projections will be made by the CCHE staffat this same time in cooperation with the operating sys-tems and reconciled with short-range projections. Theywill be used as applicable for the development of buildingprograms and long-range planning.
Section IX
The Institutions
Higher educational institutions in Wisconsin are com-mitted to these goals: academic excellence and diversity;
maximum opportunity for qualified Wisconsin youthspecifically, the freedom of the student to choose his
program of study, and utilization of available resources
to best advantage. Implementation of these objectives
requires that the respective academic roles of highereducational institutions and systems particularly their
areas of strength be clearly delineated. In the opinion
of the staff, the aim of the Coordinating Committee is
not to force public institutions into a common mold but
precisely the opposite to tap and guide those forces for
pluralism inherent in our systems of higher education.
Essentially, the staff believes that the various systems
and institutions of post-high school education in thestage can be compared or contrasted within this frame.
work:
(1) The relative emphasis placed upon the major edu-cational functions of: instruction, research, and pub-
lic service.
(2) The curricular pattern in each system or institutionspecifically, the nature and scope of the academic pro-
grams offered and the level of program emphasis. How
are programs and course offerings structured in terms
of lower division, upper division, and graduate work?
(3) The students enrolled: To what extent are programs
geared to the needs and aims of undergraduates, gradu-
ate students, professional or preprofessional students,
and vocational-technical students? What is the propor-
tion of students commuting to classes, as opposed to
those :lying in residence, and what are the predominantcharacteristics of each group? What is the per cent ofout-of-state students, and what are their geographical
origins?
(4) The principal service areas: What precisely is therelationship of the system or institution to its externalenvironment? What is the extent of its commitment toserving the immediate community, the state, the region,
the nation, other nations?
0
69
In this section, institutional missions and areas of spe-
cialization are briefly outlined. In future months, theCCHE staff will work closely with the public systems in
developing more complete statements of mission, identi-fying areas of excellence, and establishing suitable pro-
gram priorities.
A. The University of Wisconsin
The University of Wisconsin, with a total fall enrollmentof about 52,000 students on all campuses, is one of the
nation's greatest and largest multi-campus collegiatesystems, offering a broad spectrum of undergraduate and
graduate programs in the arts and sciences and profes-
sional fields. The University has long been recognized
as the principal research arm of the state, and as such,
is deeply committed to basic and applied research andproductive scholarship. In addition, the UW serves asthe center for such state services as the State of Wis-
consin General Hospital and the State Laboratory ofHygiene, and is authorized by law to "carry on educa-
tional extension and correspondence teaching and . . .
university extension classwork in such communities ashave 30 or more students . . ." Fred Harvey Harrington
is president of the University of Wisconsin.
On the following pages, the selected program proposals
of the University of Wisconsin for each campus are listed.
It should be emphasized that these are aspirations only,
as they have not been submitted as a program request
or authorized by the CCHE.
University of Wisconsin, Madison Campus
The University of Wisconsin at Madison, founded in 1849,
is the oldest of the state's public institutions of higher
education. It also is the state's largest higher educa-
tional institution, with a fall, 1966, enrollment of 31,
120 including 8,222 graduate students and 1,013 pro-fessional students in law and medicine. Located on the
shores of Lake Mendota, the main campus area includes
approximately 730 acres held by the University. (See
Map) Additional land is held at the University's Experi-
mental Farms, the University's Arboretum and at other
locations.
LA
KE
NE
N0
01"
PR
OJE
CT
S IN
PLA
NN
ING
0 AG
RIC
ULT
UR
AL -LIF
E S
CE
NC
ES
LIBR
AR
YE
NG
IPE
ER
t4G R
ES
EA
RC
H
ICE
FA
CILIT
YW
ISC
ON
SH
UN
ION
-SO
UT
H
(Z) Z
OO
LOG
Y C
LAS
SR
OO
M A
ND
LAB
OR
AT
OR
Y0 E
DU
CA
TIO
N S
CIE
NC
E
0 CO
O N
. PA
RR
0 CO
MM
UN
ICA
TIO
N A
RT
S
Jim0....,13
[---Th
Imo.
JUT
.7:i-,------------7--
-if-----r
-1----7,
i
ip C
P'
BU
ILDIN
GP
RO
GR
AM
UN
IVE
RS
ITY
OF
WIS
CO
NS
INM
AD
ISO
N C
AM
PU
S
L
BU
ILDIN
GS
AN
D P
RO
JEC
TS
NO
T S
HO
WN
ON
MA
P
CA
MP
US
BO
UN
DA
RY
EA
GLE
HE
IGH
TS
AP
AR
TM
EN
TS
(INC
LUD
ING
PR
OP
OS
ED
EX
PA
NS
ION
AR
E%
)F
CR
MA
RR
IED
ST
UD
EN
TS
PR
OJE
CT
S C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ED
BE
FO
RE
1960U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y H
OU
SE
S
PR
OJE
CT
S C
ON
ST
RU
CT
ED
1940 - 1966M
I AN
IMA
L ISO
LAT
ION
PR
OJE
CT
S U
ND
ER
CO
NS
TR
UC
TIO
NLIF
ES
AV
ING
ST
AT
ION
PR
OJE
CT
SIN
PLA
NN
ING
NE
ILSE
N T
EN
NIS
ST
AD
IUM
/-1-7/-7- /11
Projected Enrollment GrowUniversity of Wisconsin, Madison
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
39,000
38,000
37,000
36,000
55,000
34,000
33,000
32,000
31,000
30,000
2,000
The University offers courses ranging from Africanstudies to zoology in some 110 departments on the Medi-sen campus. Most departments offer advanced study,and doctorates are now available in 87 different fieldsof study. R. W. Fleming is chancel!or of the Madisoncampus.
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:
Total 31,120Men 19,089Women 12,031New Freshmen 4,719Graduate Students 8,222Faculty
(includes teaching and research assistants)8,227
1966-'67 Operating Budget $90,927,075
University of Wisconsin, Madison
Distim..ive Features and Areas of Speciafttinn Com-prehensive and diversified undergraduate and graduateprograms in the arts and sciences and in such profes-sional fields as agriculture, commerce, education, engi-neering, home economics, journalism, law, medicine,nursing, pharmacy, and social work. Major center .1.)rbasic and applied research in the state.
71
Rated as "distinguished" or "strong" recently by theAmerican Council on Education in 26 of the 29 gradu-ate fields surveyed; these 26 programs, leading to thePh.D., are, in alphabetical order:
Distinguished: Bacteriology/microbiology; biochemistry;botany; chemical engineering; geography; history;Spanish.
Strong: Anthropology; astronomy; chemistry; civil engi-neering; economics; electrical engineering; English; en-tomology; French; geology; German; mathematics; phil-osophy; physics; physiology; political science; psychology;sociology; zoology.
Selected Academic Aspirations2967-71
College of Letters and Science
UndergraduateJapanese (A.B.)
(in planning stage)
GraduatePublic Policy and Administration (M.A.)Scandinavian Literature (Ph.D.)Communicative Disorders (M.A. & Ph.D.)Chinese (Ph.D.)Hebrew Studies (M.A. & Ph.D.)
(in planning stage)Doctor of Musical Arts (D.M.A.)
School of Education
GraduateSynnoeticsHuman BiodynamicsSociology-Physical EducationPhysical Education Programs for Mentally
Retarded (M.A.)
College of AgricultureUndergraduate
Apparel DesignGraduate
Restructuring of M.S. and Ph.D. Programs in
Agricultural Eng.ForestryInterdisciplinary Ph.D. Program
(AgricultureMedicine) in Nutrition(under faculty review)
Medical SchoolGraduate
Jea Ith Laboratory Science (M.A. and Ph.D.)
School of NursingGraduate
Psychiatric NursingPediatric NursingObstetric NursingMedical-Surgical NursingNursing Service Administration
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee was established
in 1956 when the UW Extension Center and the StateCollege in Milwaukee were merged. The University hassince grown to a fall, 1966, enrollment of 14,176 and
now covers an "L"-shaped campus of 98.5 acres in Mil-
waukee's northern lakeshore area, including land re-
cently acquired from the old Downer College. J. Martin
Klotsche is chancellor of UWMilwaukee.
Downtown facilities of the University of Wisconsin-Mil-waukee consist of a square block at 600 W. KilbourneAvenue, known as the "UWM Civic Center Campus." Itstwo buildings serve as a focal point for continuing edu-cation programs.
The Coordinating Committee staff believes the present
98.5-acre "L"-shape campus bounded by Downer Ave.
nue, Cramer Street, Edgewood Avenue, and Kenwood
Boulevard (See Map) will be sufficient through 1983,if CCHE enrollment projections remain valid. Additional
land may be needed, however, for a new heating plantand for recreational purposes.
The Milwaukee campus is advancing toward major uni-
versity status through the selective development of pro-
fessional schools and programs leading to the Ph.D.By means of carefully controlled program growth, the
Milwaukee campus is attempting to achieve "peaks ofexcellence" based upon its metropolitan location, avail-
able resources, and the demonstrated need for specific
programs; obviously, it cannot excel in all fields. As an
urban university, UW-Milwaukee has a clearcut obliga-tion "to assist in improving the quality of urban life,"
and as the second largest UW campus in the state, it
must avoid unnecessary duplication of Madison curricula
and direct its efforts toward establishing high quality
complementary programs. In line with the inst'itution's
special responsibility to the greater Milwaukee area, dis-
tinctive programs have been initiated in lake studies,
urban studies, surface studies, and the performing arts.
Undergraduate majors are offered in most liberal artsareas at UW-Milwaukee, while Master's degree programshave either been approved or are now being offered in 3!
UW
M C
ivic
Cen
ter
Cam
pus
46 S
outh
Hal
l47
Nor
th H
all
48 A
nnex
"A
"
L_
I))
EIS
EM
NII
WE
13
14
12
11
C
111 I9
rit
It1,
111
11
29
UW
M C
AM
PU
S M
AP
1 Ph
ysic
s-E
ngin
eeri
ng B
ldg.
2 E
Bui
ldin
g3
Cam
pus
Ele
m. S
choo
l4
Pear
se F
ield
5 L
apha
m H
all
6 E
ngel
man
Hai
l7
3264
N. C
ram
er8
3283
N. M
aryl
and
Aye
.9
3273
N. M
aryl
and
Ave
.10
326
3 N
. Mar
ylan
d A
ve.
11 3
255
N. !
Way
land
Aye
.12
Hea
ting
Plan
t13
UW
M C
entr
al L
ibra
ry14
UW
M U
nion
15 B
aker
Fie
ld H
ouse
16 L
ibra
ry17
Bol
ton
Hal
l
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
Fine
Art
sFi
ne A
rts
Add
ition
Gar
land
Hal
lPe
arse
. Hal
lV
ogel
Hal
lM
itche
ll H
all
Stow
ell H
ouse
sPu
rin
Hal
l32
22 N
. Dow
ner
Ave
.32
50 N
. Dow
ner
Ave
.32
70 N
. Dow
ner
Ave
.Sh
epar
d H
ouse
Mar
ietta
Hou
seK
enw
ood
Con
f. C
ente
rC
hapm
an H
all
McL
aren
Hal
lA
lber
t Hal
l
35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 A B C D E
Hol
ton
Hal
lR
es. W
est
Hea
lth C
ente
rR
es. E
ast
Pow
er P
lant
Sabi
n H
all
Mer
rill
Hal
lJo
hnst
on H
all
Gre
ene
Hal
lK
imbe
rly
Hal
lG
reen
Mus
eum
Scie
nce
Com
plex
Prop
osed
Site
Che
mis
try
Bui
ldin
gU
nion
Exp
ansi
onPr
opos
ed S
iteE
duca
tion,
Soc.
Wel
fare
& N
ursi
ngR
esid
ence
Hal
l
Stud
ent P
arki
ng I
NFa
culty
Par
king
TH
E U
NIV
ER
SIT
Y O
F W
ISC
ON
SIN
MIL
WA
UK
EE
Projected Enrollment GrowthUniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
26,000
25,000
24,000
23,000
22,000
21,000
20,000
19,000
18,000
17,000
16,000
15,000
000
13,00
2,000
fields. The first Doctc' program, in mathematics, wasapproved for the Milwaukee campus in 1964. Sincethen, Doctoral programs in geography, psychology, andpolitical science have been approved and other Doctoralprograms are under study.
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:
Total 14,176(day and evening enrollments)
Men 8,273Women 5,903New Freshmen 2,439Graduate Students 2,247Faculty 1,472
(includes teaching and research assistants)1966.67 Operating Budget $17,109,658
University of Wisconsin-MilwaukeeGoal of major university status. Development of gradu-ate programs in accordance with UW-M's functions asan urban collegiate institution. Distinctive features: Ur-ban Studies, Lake Studies, Surface Studies, and Per-forming Arts.
Selected Program Aspiratiors
1967-71
College of Letters and ScienceGraduatePh.D.
PhysicsChemistryGeologyZoologyArt HistoryBotanyComparative LiteratureEnglishSpanish and PortugueseAnthropologyEconomics
School of Fine ArtsUndergraduate
Creative WritingFilm ArtsMuseum Curatorship
Graduate MajorsProfessional Theatre DesignDirectingActingPlaywriti ng
College of Applied Science and EngineeringM.S.
Electrical EngineerirgStructural EngineeringMechanical EngineeringMaterialsIndustrial Engineering
School of EducationMaster's
Exceptional EducationPhysical Education
Ph.D.Exceptional EducationCurriculum and InstructionEducational Administration and Supervision
74
Educational PsychologySocial and Philosophical Foundations of Education
School of Business AdministrationMaster of Science degree
School of ArchitectureArchitectural Studies
(B.A. or B.S.)
Master of Science in Architecture
1971.81College of Applied Science and EngineeringGraduate
Electrical Engineering (Ph.D.)
School of Business AdministrationGraduateAdministrative or Management Sciences (Ph.D.)
School of Social WelfareUndergraduate
Non-teaching Recreation MajorHome Economics Specialty in Family and Home
ManagementGraduate
Master's Program for Clinical Diagnosticians
75
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay and ParksideCampuses
Academic Planning for UW-Parkside andUW-Green Bay
The CCHE staff gives full recognition and .3upport to theview that considered and responsible curricular planningfor the new campuses should precede final facilities de-cisions. The applicable Wisconsin statute indicates that"the educational programs offered by the new institutionsshall be approved by the coordinating committee andshall be consistent with the courses of study offered byother institutions operated by the board of regents ofthe university of Wisconsin." Such cooperative educa-tional planning is proceeding with the appropriate ad-ministrative personnel of the University of Wisconsin andmembers of the CCHE staff. Several factors have beeninvolved in considerations leading to the establishmentof final and complete academic and facilities plans forthe two new four-year campuses.
Some of these factors include:
1. The very recent availability of major administrativeappointees on the two new campuses. ChancellorWeidner assumed full responsibilities on February 15.As the new campuses should complement one an-other in their special fields, academic plans for thetwo campuses cannot proceed independently.
2. Continued diverse and special interests recommendactions concerning possible major missions of thetwo campuses.
a. Should either or both of the new campuses con-centrate a major effort toward the developmentof a technological emphasis?
b. In view of the continuing expansion of the Stoutand Platteville programs, is there a need for ad-ditional concentration upon major efforts in thepreparation of faculty for vocational, techcical,and adult schools?
c. Are additional schools of education necessary?With eleven public universities offering bothgraduate and undergraduate degrees in educa-tion plus the several excellent teacher prepara-tion programs in state private colleges, the CCHE
staff questions the need for additional majoremphasis in this field on either of the newcampuses.
d. Are more traditional business administration pro-grams needed in Wisconsin?
3. Continuing discussion of the funds to be made avail-able for facilities. The CCHE staff recognizes thatpart of the delay in facilities planning may have re-sulted from the lack of more detailed academicplans but each factor has a reciprocal effect uponthe other.
4. Continued discussion concerning the time schedulefor beginning freshman-sophomore work and otherspecial features. The CCHE has consistently sup-ported the early development of the third- and fourth-year campuses to full four-year status.a. What existing branch campuses will be closed?
Certain programs can be justified on efficiencygrounds if substantial enrollments are assured.
b. At what point would graduate work, extensivepublic service, adult education, and researchfunctions be implemented?
Despite these difficulties and those involved in enroll-ment projections for new campuses, considerable prog-ress is being made in cooperative academic planning andthe tempo of such efforts is expected to increase in theimmediate future.
The CCHE continues to endorse the provision of qualityand diverse educational opportunities on each majorcampus consistent with sound educational and financialconsiderations. "The CCHE believes that liberal artswork is central to collegiate education. Existing liberalarts programs shall be maintained and strengthened atinstitutions where these programs are now offered andeducational opportunities in the liberal arts should beextended throughout the state as equally as possible."The major focus of these campuses in their initial stageswill be to provide excellent and unique academic pro-grams at the undergraduate level and the public serviceand research concentration as appropriate to such de-veloping institutions. A continuing re-evaluation of thestate needs for additional graduate programs and thereadiness of University of Wisconsin-Parkside and Uni-versity of Wisconsin-Green Bay to provide such a level
76
of work should be undertaken by the CCHE staff in co-operation with the University of Wisconsin. In the begin-ning stages, both UW-Parkside and UW-Green Bay wouldestablish, as a minimum, an undergraduate core cur-riculum in the sciences, the social sciences, and thehumanities. The CCHE staff recommends a continuedclose liaison with University of Wisconsin staff in thedevelopment of an effective academic program adaptedto area and state needs.
The following discussion will attempt to identify institu-tional curricular developments in the several areasdeemed most appropriate to a new four-year campusoperation. Adjustments in academic planning will con-tinue as further fiscal and policy decisions are forthcom-ing. Needed flexibility is provided in the modest facilitiesthat will be provided initially and the more discriminateand final decisions will be made over the next severalbiennia.
Liberal ArtsEach institution should provide the strong, comprehen-sive liberal arts base prerequisite to the development ofexcellence in any collegiate academic program. The CCHEstaff continues to support the central rationale for estab-lishing the two new four-year campuses: to provide excel-lent liberal arts educational opportunities on a regionalbasis for students within a radius of 50-75 miles andon a commuting basis to as great a number as possiblein order to decelerate the growth at area institutions.To achieve such purposes, some program duplication isboth necessary and desirable. Except in the creation ofprofessional schools and a few courses which may evolveas a result of unusual faculty strengths or resources, alluniversities, particularly in their initial development, .ol-low similar curricular patterns. There continues to bea great need for graduates from strong liberal arts pro-grams and the CCHE endorses the position that achiev-ing such excellence in the liberal arts should not beneglected. While specific details and decisions concern-ing the scope of each major program must await furtherstaffing, faculty involvement, Board of Regents andCCHE action, academic concentrations should be de-veloped in the following traditional liberal arts fields:
1. Biological Sciences (Biology)
2. English3. Fine Arts (Art, Music, Speech)4. Modern foreign languages (French, German,
Spanish)5. Geography6. Mathematics and statistics7. Philosophy8. Physical Sciences (Chemistry, Physics)9. Psychology
10. Social Sciences (History, Political Science, Sociology,
and Anthropology)
In addition, a physical education program serving theneeds of the total student body should be developed ateach institution.
Teacher EducationPast CCHE policy has encouraged the continued expan-
sion of teacher education programs. In response to rec-ognized needs, the public universities as well as the pri-vate colleges have expanded and strengthened theirteacher preparation curricula at both the undergraduate
and graduate level. In light of these recent develop-ments and projected long-range plans of the several in-stitutions, the CCHE staff does not believe that a concen-
tration in teacher education at the school level is war-ranted on either of the two new campuses. However,
these campuses should provide, through their strongliberal arts curriculum and a Department of Education,
the opportunity for students to prepare for careers ineducation, particularly at the secondary level.
Specialized Curricular FeaturesThe University of Wisconsin, in cooperation with theCCHE, is seeking to identify unique roles each of thenew campuses may fulfill in the evolution of a stateplan for higher education. Excellence and appropriatediversity at an institution, as well as at a state level, isdesirable, and distinctive peaks of excellence shoulddevelop on each new campus. The University of Wiscon-sin -id the CCHE are in the process of identifying dis-tinctive missions for each institution. Academic features
of each campus would include:
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay1. Focus upon the needs, problems, and phenomena of
the Northern Great Lakes region
77
2. Four major theme colleges, based heavily uponliberal arts disciplinesa. Physical environmentb. Regional and community developmentc. Human biology and welfared. Artiotic creativity and communications
3. Applied anthropology related to area problems4. School of business and public administration with
particular attention to northeastern Wisconsin (paperindustry, food processing, transportation, communi-cations, small business, state and local government,regional planning).
University of Wisconsin-Green Bay will be a single Uni-versity with four campuses, with headquarters at GreenBay and centers in Marinette, Fox Valley, and Manitowoc.
University of Wisconsin-Parkside1. Higher education as related to the problems of an
industrial society2. School of Modern Industry (engineering mechanics,
industrial engineering, mechanical engineering, com-puter science, industrial organization and manage-ment, accounting, finance, marketing, transportation,labor history, economics)
3. College of Science and Socie' (the largest of theadministrative units, it will embrace the sciences,humanities, and social sciences, as well as pre-pro-fessional programs)
4. Applied industrial research
Students and FacultyIn order to serve the primary function of these institu-tions, careful attention must be given to attracting astrong teaching faculty and an effective administrativestaff. Key administrators and faculty should be recruitedas soon as possible to provide the lead time in totaleducational planning required in such an undertaking.Budgetary support should be provided to enable the in-stitutions to attract an unusually strong and balancedfaculty, consisting of tenured professors and associateprofessors, as well as junior staff members.
Students will undoubtedly become more involved in edu-cational planning as related to their particular needs. Astrong and aggressive testing, guidance, and counseling
staff must become an integral part of early campusplanning.
A studentfaculty ratio of 16-1, which is the same asfound in the U.W. Center System, is recommended bythe University of Wisconsin for determining staffing re-quirements. Faculty needs for the two new campusesare directly related to the cumber of students and thepolicy concerning student-faculty ratio. Present enroll-ment and faculty projections are sufficient for planningpurposes if certain basic assumptions are accepted:
1. Present legislative and policy decisions are followedconcerning date and scope of opening.
2. Quality concepts will require, at least at the initialstages, a 16-1 student-faculty ratio.
Physical FacilitiesNeither new institution can be expected to meet spaceutilization guidelines within a short time after opening,as any "university" must have available to its studentscertain basic resources, irrespective of enrollment, if itis expected to assume higher educational responsibili-ties. In addi'ion to unspecialized conventional classroomsof various sizes, certain more specialized facilities shouldbe available upon opening:
A basic library with minimum holdings of 50,000 vol-umes and the facilities and space required for studentsto utilize such a resource. Provision must be made toexpand the holdings rapidly to meet projected enroll-ments, as well as qualitative factors.Learning center (possibly combined with library) withbasic films, recordings, slides, audiotapes, and possiblykinescopes and programmed instruction courses.Modern, well-equipped science laboratories in the bio-logical and physical sciences (Biology, Chemistry,Physics, Geography, Geology).Well - equipped language laboratories.Student health clinic.Testing, guidance, and counseling center.Administrative and faculty offices.Computer center.Educational television and instructional television po-tential.
78
Special Innovative FeaturesIt 's recommended that the unique educational oppor-tunities provided by the opening of new university cam-puses will not be lost through undue concentrationupon limited opening enrollments. It is expected thatboth institutions will respond to the challenge by in-corporating the best from existing successful universitiesand at the same time remain in the vanguard of academicinnovation. Some educational innovations planned forone or both of the new campuses include:
Self-pacing, elimination of "normal load" concept andclass distinctions (freshman, sophomore, junior, senior).Independent study and credit by examination.Written analysis of students, rather than normal"grades."Physical education aimed at fitness and health fortotal student body and the development of individualskills and interests to keep students physically activethroughout life.Off-campus work experiences.Interdisciplinary approaches (theme colleges) in direc-tion of emphasis and combination.Close proximity of faculty offices.
To summarize, the following specific curricular patternsand related features are recommended for both newcampuses:
1. A strong liberal arts core of unciergraduate majorsto be implemented as soon as possible.
2. A professional emphasis in education. Educationcourses should be available to enable a student tomeet the certification requirements for a degree insecondary education.
3. A traditional and a distinctive emphasis in businessadministration. In addition to strong programs ineconomics and business, each campus should de-velop a distinctive excellence in discrete areas ofbusiness administration: Parkside an industrial em-phasis and Green Bay a specialization in small busi-ness and natural resources.
4. An initial student faculty ratio of 16.1, to be re-evaluated as campus enrollments become sufficientfor the efficient utilization of staff.
5. Well-equipped libraries and laboratories for the sci-
ences, for the foreign languages, and for the studyof statistics, instructional media centers, closed cir-cuit television potential, physical education facilities,student service center, computer center, specializedart and music spaces, and faculty offices.
The CCHE staff continues to support the purposes as-signed to the new institutions at the time of authoriza-tion and would encourage academic planning to fulfillthese goals. In addition, areas of specialization proposedby the respective institutions are encouraged as theyappear responsive to regional and state needs and in-stitutional responsibilities.
Schedule for Opening and Related Facilities DecisionsChapter 259, Laws of 1965, provided for the establish-ment of two new University of Wisconsin campuses in
northeastern Wisconsin and the Racine-Kenosha areas.They were to be developed gradually beginning withthird or third- and fourth-year academic work. Subse-
quently, sites were selected at Green Bay and Parkside.The statute also directed the Coordinating Committeeto formulate a plan and schedule for the developmentand implementation of the two institutions. The CCHEhas previously approved two statements in partial ful-fillment of this charge. They are Paper #53, 1965,prepared at the request of the Statutory Site Selection
Committee to clarify policies which might affect siteselection, and Paper #45, 1966, which established gen-eral guidelines for campus development.
Paper #45, 1966, recommended that every effort be
made to open the campuses in the fall of 1969, pro-viding initially a third or third- and fourth-year institutionin accord with statutory requirements. It was contem-plated that freshman and sophomore courses would
continue to be offered in the existing Green Bay, Racine,and Kenosha Centers until the two new campuses aredeveloped into four-year institutions.
The CCHE continually has expressed concern that cam-puses restricted to third- and fourth-year programs canfulfill their stated purposes effectively, but recognizesthat the institutions may not begin as full universitieswithout modification of the statutes. In both of its policystatements referred to above, the Coordinating Commit-
79
tee emphasized the importance of integrating first- andsecond-year operations with upper division work inorder that the primary objectives of the newly authorizedinstitutions be fulfilled. These objectives call for four-year collegiate opportunities on a regional and commutir.c,basis and the deceleration of the growth rate at Madison,Whitewater, Oshkosh, and Milwaukee. Because of thisconcern, the CCHE recommended early development ofa full four-year opportunity at each of the new campussites.
To advance the integration of programs as soon as pos-sible, the University of Wisconsin plans to place theRacine and Kenosha centers under the administrativedirection of the Chancellor at Parkside and the Green
Bay, Marinette, Menasha and Manitowoc centers under
the direction of the Chancellor at Green Bay.
In June, 1966 the Coordinating Committee recommendedthat UW-Parkside and UW-Green Bay be expanded tofour-year campuses by admitting freshmen beginning in1971 and that the transition to full four-year .:ampusesshould be completed by 1975. At that time, the GreenBy and Kenosha centers would discontinue freshman
and sophomore operations.
In order to facilitate the development of these campuses,a request was made by the CCHE for an initial bienniumbuilding program of $28,500,000. This amount wasrequested to provide facilities for certain basic educa-tional functions when the new campuses would open in1969 and to provide facilities to meet enrollment needs
through 1971. Campus master planning funds of$400,000 have been allocated by the Building Com-mission. The Building Commission later recommendedthat $12,820,000 be appropriated in the 1967-69 bi-ennium, basing its recommendations on the small pro-jected opening enrollment as third- and fourth-year cam-
puses. The Commission also recommended that detailedplanning funds be provided to speed development of theproposed 1969 supplementary biennial building programwhich would need to be ready in the fall of 1971.
Considerable discussion has ensued in the past several
months concerning the proposed level of facilities fund-ing and the possibility of alternatives to the schedule foropening. The alternatives include:
1. That plans continue to open with third- and fourth-year students in 1969, admit freshmen in 1971, anddiscontinue first- and second-year work in theKenosha and Green Bay centers in 1974 or 1975.This has been approved by the CCHE.
2. That the new campuses start with third- and fourth-year students in 1969, but admit freshmen andsophomores in 1970. Under this plan the GreenBay, Kenosha, and Racine centers would discontinuefirst- and second-year work in 1970.
3. That because some doubt has been expressed aboutfacilities being ready in 1969, the statutes should
be changed to permit opening the campuses as fullfour-year institutions in 1970 and to close the Green
Bay, Kenosha, and Racine centers in 1970.
With appropriate concern for educational opportunities,excellence of program, diversity of opportunity for stu-dents, and efficiency in the new campuses, the CCHE
staff has continued to study all of these possible al-ternatives. The staff also has continued to review theimplications of the current statute as it might affectfuture development in order to seek modification if neces-
sary to assure maximum effectiveness of the educationalprogram on the new campuses.
Concurrently, Brown and Kenosha counties have pro-ceeded to acquire the approved sites for the campuses.One site has been largely transferred to the state. While
some difficulties have been encountered, it has beenanticipated that the other soon will be secured so thatconstruction can be started as funds are made available
on July 1, 1967. Both sites must be acquired immedi-ately in order to avoid any postponement of constructionon this account.
The CCHE staff believes that the state and its youngpeople will be best served if the campuses develop intofour-year institutions at the earliest possible date. Thisconcept would permit the initial development of a much
more comprehensive physical facility and a broader
academic base. It is recommended that current plansbe modified and that alternative #2 be adopted. Plan-
ning would thus proceed on the basis of a 1969 opening,but with an initial authorized building program to provide
80
for four-year institutions it 1970, the earliest possibledate under existing The recommended planningdate thus is in line with 1970 goals used in planningfacilities for all other campuses. It is desirable to con-tinue to strive for at least a third-year opportunity in1969, providing transfer opportunities for center stu-dents, since both of these areas are in urgent need ofadditional educational opportunities at the earliest pos-sible date.
Instead of planning for 1970 enrollments with third- andfourth-year campuses with only 477 students at Parksideand 826 at Green Bay, we would, on the basis of pre-liminary estimates, project the Green Bay enrollment toapproximately 2,100 and Parkside to 3,000. Furtherdetailed review will have to be made of the estimates aswell as the effect of the change in plans on enrollmentsat existing campuses.
The enrollment figures herewith submitted assume avery limited housing program, at least in 1970. One ofthe major purposes of the institutions is to providecommuting opportunities, but some housing will be neces-sary to accommodate students in the area who arebeyond commuting range. In addition, it is anticipatedthat these institutions will offer some unique educationalprograms available to Wisconsin students only in theselocations.
The Facilities Subcommittee of the CCHE has asked thestaff, in conjunction with the operating systems, to con-duct a comprehensive study of student housing needsand the impact on institutional planning. The study isnow under way and long-range housing needs and plansfor the two campuses will be developed as part of thatstudy.
Enrollments of this magnitude will, of course, require asubstantial increase in authorizations over and abovethe Building Commission recommendation, but will alsoreduce concern about overbuilding.
Most important, however, is the development of theinstitutions to four-year status at an earlier date andthe resulting service to the people of the area and state.
The staff believes that it is in the best interests of the
area to discontinue first- and second-year offerings atGreen Bay, Racine, and Kenosha as soon as possible,preferably in 1970, and to concentrate efforts in a topquality, four-year educational institution in 1970. TheCenter facilities are reasonably new and can be well usedto meet other educational needs of the areas, particu-larly adult and continuing education since these arerapidly growing, urban population centers. Recent popu-lation estimates made by the University of Wisconsin'sDepartment of Rural Sociology attest to the future needsof the areas.
Previously, the CCHE recommended that the completetransition to four years be completed by 1975 and thatthe Green Bay and Kenosha centers close by that dateand that the Racine Center continue to operate. It isobvious from the enthusiasm in both Racine and Kenosha,and the proximity of both cities to the new campusesthat a single four-year educational institution wouldbest meet the needs of the area. Center enrollment atRacine probably would be very low and the RacineCenter is ideally located to be used for continuing edu-cation.
Recognizing that the centers are the property of localgovernments, the staff recommends that the local units,the CCHE, and University of Wisconsin jointly study howthese valuable facilities would best meet educationalneeds of the areas.
Space Need under the ProposalEnrollments of the size projected allow the use of appli-cable building guidelines in some relatively standardareas including classrooms, teaching laboratories, andoffice space and at the same time the use of theminimum module concept. The initial academic pro-gram, as outlined elsewhere in this paper, emphasizesthe development of a basic foundation curriculum. Therewould not appear to be many unique and unusual spaceneeds in the initial building program except as requiredby new learning techniques and innovations in the cam-pus master plan.
Planning has assumed that flexibility will be employedin developing methods for meeting space needs. Allplans point to the high priority of the construction oflibraries for the new campuses. All over the state new
libraries are being built considerably beyond immediateneed in anticipation of long-range growth; however, inthe interim the surplus space is easily adaptable to usefor offices and general classrooms. Likewise surpluslaboratory space is used as general classroom spacetemporarily. As enrollment and curriculum develop, con-struction programs for following bienniums provide neces-sary specialized space.
The initial building requests included some auxiliaryenterprise space (primarily food service) which couldnot be initially funded by student fees due to the ex-tremely low enrollments. The newly-projected enroll-ments would provide enough enrollment hate to fundthe auxiliary service area from student fees as is thecase in all other institutions.
The over-all higher education building program recommended by the Building Commission and being con-sidered by the Legislature is intended to provide spacenecessary for 1970 enrollments and would provide spaceranging from 65 assignable sq. ft. per student to 113sq. ft. per student for instructional, non-instructional,and auxiliary enterprise (student center) space for 10existing four-year institutions. These figures are ex-clusive of the University of Wisconsin, Madison whichhas a great deal of public service and research spaceand is not comparable to any other institutions in thestate.
Planning guidelines for initial building programs at thenew campuses should bear some comparability to otherspace allocations within the state, but allow for flexibilityto accommodate a growing curriculum and recognize thatefficiency in space use will improv as enrollments grow.
It is recommended that a general guideline of 120 as-signable sq. ft. per student (including auxiliary space forfood services, etc.) be used in developing the over-allspace needs using the new enrollment proposal. This isthe guideline applied by the Building Commission in itscurrent recommendation for the new campuses. Spacerequirements for 1970 would be 252,000 sq. ft. inGreen Bay and 360,000 sq. ft. at Parkside. It is recog-nized that the space per student required in futureyears will decrease. If current experience is used as abench mark, the following general allocations of space
Parkside Campus of the University of Wisconsin 82
The site for the new UW-Parkside campus, shown above,is located between Racine and Kenosha on Highway 31.
N
A
$
A.
0
per student might be applicable:
Direct Instruction 60 sq. ft.Classrooms, laboratories, library,
other instructional spaceFaculty and staff offices 11 sq. ft.Physical education 15 sq. ft.Other non-instructional space 16 sq. ft.Auxiliary services 18 sq. ft.
120 sq. ft.
This paper makes no attempt to place a dollar cost onthese space estimates since this requires engineeringand architectural expertise which is properly a functionof the Bureau of Engineering in cooperation with theoperating system. Currently the Bureau, the Universityof Wisconsin, and the Building Commission are review-ing the proper level of unit cost applicable to the newcampuses. The staff can only recommend that the unitcosts finally developed be consistent with good construc-tion and program need.
6n summary, the staff of the CCHE submits the followingrecommendation:
1. That the CCHE approve the opening of third- andfourth-year campuses in 1969 as originally recom-mended, but that freshmen and sophomores be ad-mitted in 1970, and that the University of Wisconsinstudy and recommend to the CCHE the future use ofthe Green Bay, Kenosha, and Racine Centers.
2. That the Building Commission be requested to reviewits recommendations on the basis of the new pro-posal and approve a request for an initial buildingprogram of 252,000 assignable sq. ft. for Green Bayand 360,000 assignable sq. ft. for Parkside. Neces-sary auxiliary space and housing should be fundedfrom applicable receipts.
University of Wisconsin-ParksideA 690-acre site, adjacent to Petrifying Springs Park inKenosha County, was recommended by the Governor'sStatutory Site Solec;on Committee and approved by theCoordinating Co ilnittee and the State Building Com-mission for the UW-Parkside Campus. The site is threemiles from the Kenosha Center and seven miles from the
83
Racine Center, thus offering four-year educational oppor-tunities to students living in both cities.
Irvin G. Wyllie, formerly Chairman of the History Depart-ment at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, has beennamed chancellor of the new campus.
University of Wisconsin-Green BsyA 535-acre site on the eastern edge of the city of GreenBay was recommended by the Statutory Site SelectionCommittee for the new UW-Green Bay campus. The sitehas been approved by the Coordinating Committee andthe State Building Commission. The new campus, whichfronts on Highways 54 and 47 and has substantial bayfrontage, is only three miles from the existing Green BayCenter. In addition to the 535 acres in the site, thestate will be able to purchase up V:- an additional 220acres of adjacent land if needed.
Edward Weidner, formerly Director of the Center for De-velopmental Change at the University of Kentucky, hasbeen named chancellor of the new campus.
UW Center SystemThe first formal University of Wisconsin Center was es-tablished at Milwaukee in 1923. The UW Center Systemnow includes 11 two-year campuses, including twoopened last fall at Janesville (the Rock County Center)and Waukesha (the Waukesha County Center). Addi-tional two-year Centers are planned for 1968 at Barabooand West Bend. Lorentz H. Adolfson is chancellor of theCenter System.
All the Centers offer a freshman-sophomore program ofcourses eventually leading to a general B.A. or B.S. de-gree. In addition, numerous pre-professional coursesare offered in such fields as engineering, commerce,journalism, and nursing, to name a few of the areas, ateach of the Centers. In the fall of 1966, the number ofcourses offered at nine of the Centers ranged from ahigh of 90 at the Green Bay Center to a low of 40 atthe Marinette Center. (The Waukesha and Rock CountyCenters have not yet developed full course offerings, sincethe 1966 fall semester was their first semester of opera-tion.) The number of subject areas offered at the nineCenters ranged from 21 to 31 in the fall semester.
Green Bay Campus of the University of Wisconsin
The site for the new UW-Green Bay campus, shownabove, is located on the east side of the city of GreenBay, three miles from the existing Green Bay Center.
84
I
BROWN COUNTYHOSPITAL
+6:
Coordinating Committee staff recommendations concerning the UW Centers and State University branch campuses are included in Section V, Part B, of this plan.
Fall, 1966 EnrollmentTotal 5,911Men 3,427Women 2,484New Freshmen 3,561Faculty 4981966-67 Operating Budget $5,602,443
Projected Enrollment GrowthUniversity of Wisconsin Center System
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
tip,en_
A
Waukesha County Center (Waukesha) 0,I (1
1c,I!
Nip
44, 1- r SA-sn
Aoo-oe. 01OZwoo,
"q 4:
,1 ' to
stsur1=311
9 k
Kenosha Center
otr I 51119 F
Marshfield Center
it- 4 NM I eau Ottor12wommomi
Fox Valley Center (Menasha)
Irk 2' c4Og _
liDA' lit---iiiill
r -
VFRS:TYF 4'S.C:INP+
r"s
Sheboygan County Center (Sheboyganl
Manitowoc County Center (Manitowoc)
B. The State Universities
The nine Wisconsin State Universities currently enrollover 44,000 students and have emerged, within therecent past, into the seventh largest university systemin the United States. Eugene R. McPhee is director ofthe State UniveCties. Projections indicating total stu-dent enrollment of approximately 80,000 within the nextdecade impose further quantitative and qualitative de-mands upon the State Universities. The evolution ofeach of the nine institutions into university status re-quires the careful and controlled development of dis-tinctive peaks of excellence on the several campuses.Such diversified and discriminate academic planning isboth educationally sound and fiscally responsible. TheBoard of Regents of State Colleges and the CCHE staffagree that no developing institution can be all things toall students, but each must provide an academic pro-gram in the basic disciplines sufficiently broad to meeta range of undergraduate and graduate needs and pro-fessional aspirations.
The State Universities already participate in all threefunctions of a university: instruction, research, andpublic service. The major emphasis, however, remainsin the classroom in "instruction-student services." Ahigh degree of institutional and systems' support of theteaching function has attracted a strong teaching faculty.Research activities, while not extensive, are expandingunder the encouragement of modest state, Federal, andprivate support. Most research is applied in nature andcontributes significantly to the professional capabilitiesof the staff. Some research support is critical to thecontinued recruitment of additional strong faculty at thegraduate level. The CCHE staff recommends that thestate financial support of the research function at theState Universities be substantially increased. In the fieldof public service, the past decade has witnessed a grow-ing emphasis on the part of the State Universities. Theirstrong faculties and excellent facilities have earned agrowing respect from individuals and agencies seekingthe public services an area university can provide.
Each of the State Universities has essentially completedthe development of what may be called an "umbrellacurriculum" at the undergraduate level. For example,each of the State Universities offers similar majors or
87
minors in eleven basic academic fields. An additional13 courses of study are available on any one of eightdifferent campuses. Such a cluster of majors and minorsis necessary to provide the basic liberal arts andsciences appropriate to any major coJ'ege or university.Additional undergraduate majors on the several campuseswill gain approval either as they fit into the concept of abasic umbrella curriculum or as they relate to particularstrengths or academic missions of the individual institu-tion.
The most significant State University development auringthe next 15 years will be the growth of graduate educa-tion, particularly at the Master's degree level. Theseinstitutions, with an important focus in the field of pro-fessional education, have developed highly successfulMaster's degree programs in teaching. Here again, someduplication of graduate programs in high demand fieldshas developed and is justified. Assuming legislative ap-proval, M.A. and M.S. programs should evolve in mostfields where M.S.T. authorization has already beengranted. Further Master's degree evolution must be care-fully studied to avoid unwarranted duplication and tocapitalize upon institutional potential at the graduatelevel.
In response to a CCHE request, each State Universityhas submitted a definition of its academic mission andhas attempted to project its curricular plans for the next15 years. These studied and comprehensive institutionallong-range plant, are on file with the CCHE and will beextremely valuable as background data for future aca-demic long-range planning. As each State Universityproceeded independently in identifying program aspira-tions for a 15-year period, a considerable amount ofduplication was to be expected. Neither the Board ofRegents nor the CCHE staff has attempted individualevaluations of the new undergraduate and graduate pro-grams included in the institutional plans. The programslisted for each campus on the following pages arecurricular aspirations only and no CCHE endorsementis implied by the identification of possible fields ofacademic specialization. Each new program will be ap-proved by the CCHE in accordance with campus prioritiesas it is demonstrated that it meets established criteria
Table X 88
Undergraduate Majors and Minors Offered at Wisconsin State Universities 1966.67
All nine State Universities offer four-year degree programs in teacher education, all offer up to three years of credit work toward other pro-fessional degrees, and all except Stout award four-year liberal arts degrees. A number of specialized degree programs are offered. All theuniversities are authorized to award Master's degrees in education, and Superior offers a sixth year Specialist in Education degree.
EAU LA OSH. PLATTE. RIVER STEVENS SUPE. WHITE.SUBJECT AREA CLAIRE CROSSE KOSH VILLE FALLS POINT STOUT RIOR WATER
ACCOUNTING BOTH MAJOR BOTH MAJORAFRICAN STUDIES MINORAGRICULTURE BOTH BOTHAMERICAN CIVILIZATION BOTHAMERICAN STUDIES BOTH BOTH
ART BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHART EDUCATION BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHASTRONOMY MINORAUDIO-VISUAL EDUCATION MINORBIOLOGY BOTH BOTH BOTI1 BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTH
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR BOTH BOTH MAJOR MAJOR BOTH MAJORBUSINESS ADMIN/ECONOMICS MAJOR MAJORBUSINESS EDUCATION BOTH MAJOR BOTH MAJORBUSINESS MANAGEMENT MAJOR BOTH MAJORCHEMISTRY BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR MINOR BOTH
CONSERVATION BOTHDISTRIBUTIVE EDUCATION MAJOREARTH SCIENCE MAJOR BOTHECONOMICS BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHELEMENTARY EDUCATION MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR
ENGLISH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTHENGINEERING, CIVIL MAJORENGINEERING, MINERALS MAJORFINANCE MAJOR MAJOR MAJORFRENCH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH
GENERAL SCIENCE MAJOR BOTH MAJOR BOTH BOTH MAJORGEOGRAPHY BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHGEOLOGY MINOR BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTHGERMAN BOTH MINOR MINOR MINOR BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHGUIDANCE AND COUNSELING MINOR MAJOR
HEALTH EDUCATION MINOR MINOR MINORHISTORY BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTHHOME ECONOMICS MINOR BOTH MAJORHOME ECONOMICS EDUCATION MAJORHUMANITIES BOTH
INDUSTRIAL EDUCATION BOTH MINOR MAJORINDUSTRIAL TECHNOLOGY MAJOR MAJORINTERNATIONAL STUDIES MAJORJOURNALISM BOTH MINOR MINOR MINOR BOTH MINOR MINOR MINORJUNIOR HIGH EDUCATION MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR
LATIN MINOR BOTHLATIN AMERICAN STUDIES MAJOR MINOR BOTHLIBRARY SCIENCE MINOR MINOR BOTH MINOR MINOR MINOR MINOR MINORMANUAL ARTS THERAPY MAJOR MAJORMARKETING MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR
MATHEMATICS BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTHMATHEMATICS PHYSICS MAJOR BOTHMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJOR MAJORMENTAL RETARDATION BOTH MAJOR MAJORMUSIC BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH
MUSIC EDUCATION BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MAJORNATURAL SCIENCE MAJOR BOTHNURSING MAJOR MAJORPHILOSOPHY MINOR BOTH MINOR MINOR MINORPHYSICAL EDUCATION, MEN MINOR BOTH MINOR MINOR MINOR MINOR MINOR MINOR
PHYSICAL EDUCATION, WOMEN MINOR BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINORPHYSICAL SCIENCE MAJOR MAJCRPHYSICS BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTHPOLITICAL SCIENCE BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTHPRE-SCHOOL EDUCATION MAJOR
PSYCHOLOGY BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MAJOR BOTH BOTHRECREATION BOTHRUSSIAN MINOR MINORRUSSIA - E. CENTRAL EUROPE MINORSAFETY MINOR MINOR MINOR
SECRETARIAL ADM:NISTRATION MAJOR MAJORSOCIAL SCIENCE MAJOR BOTH MAJOR MAJOR BOTH BOTH MAJOR MAJORSOCIOLOGY BOTH BOTH. BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTHSPANISH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR MINOR BOTH BOTH BOTHSPEECH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH BOTH MINOR BOTH BOTH
SPEECH AND HEARING THERAPY MAJORSPEECH CORRECTION MAJOR MAJORVOCATIONAL EDUCATION MAJOR
and fits identifiable campus missions. These plans re-main provisional, directional and viable as they mustadapt to the dynamic and changing nature of higher
education in Wisconsin.
The desire for additional professional schools in suchfields as law, engineering, forestry, and veterinary medi-cine was cited in several plans. Such major policy de-cisions have not been sufficiently studied by the CCHEstaff, the Board of Regents, or the University involved toallow even a tentative decision. While several State Uni-versities and the Board of Regents indicate their readi-ness to undertake the establishment of professionalschools as necessary, such proposals are not included
in the following summary of institutional curricular
aspirations.
Table XI
1966.67 WSU Graduate Programs
Eau La Osh-Claire Crosse kosh
GENERAL AREASLanguage, Literature, Speech X X X
History-Social Science X X X
Mathematics-Science X X X
Elementary Education X X X
SPECIAL AREASAgricultureArtAudio-Visual CommunicationsBusiness Education X
Communication Disorders X
Counseling aria Guidance X X X
Home EconomicsIndustrial Education
X
Junior High Education X
Mental Retardation X X
Music X X X
Physical Education X
ReadingX
School AdministrationSchool Business ManagementSchool Psychological Services X X
School SupervisionSpecialist in Education (6 year)Teaching of Emotionally Disturbed X
Vocational Education
89
Platte-ville
RiverFalls
StevensPoint
Supe-Stout rlor
White-water
X X X X X
X X X X X
X X X X
X X X X X
X X
0cn
C N 0
P N
V
KEYLAND ERESINILT OWNED
LAND ID OE ACQUUNIP
rilotOICIUMBANARY)
1=;=1 OUILDINE UNIEll csAtTiocnol
*011111* IN veslit stow_
Nose IT AL
AT IOM ALMIACAIL
ATIUMC AT ION
1004154 ARIAArm:. EWA' 655111 II CLAINIIIINIT ANL
1 . .
Eau Claire
Wisconsin State University-Eau Claire, situated on a400-acre campus on the banks of the Chippewa River,is the youngest of the State Universities. The schoolopened its doors in 1916 to a student body of 159 anda faculty of 20. WSU-Eau Claire has since grown to anenrollment of 5,326 (fall, 1966), with 335 faculty mem-bers. Leonard C. Haas has been Eau Claire's presidentsince 1959.
Included in the total number of acres at WSU-Eau Claireis the 200-acre Putnam Park, a gift from the city ofEau Claire in 1958.
Majors are offered in 34 undergraduate areas and gradu-ate programs in ten areas. A journalism major wasintroduced in September, 1966, and Eau Claire's Schoolof Nursing, which opened in 1965, offers the first bac-calaureate degree nursing program in northwestern Wis-consin. The School of Nursing is now one of two suchprograms in the State University system. WSU-Eau Claireis the only State University offering a graduate programin the field of communication disorders.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Eau Claire
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
91
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 5,326Men 2,671Women 2,655New Freshmen 1,743Graduate Students 163Faculty 335
(109 with doctorates)1966.67 Operating Budget $8,037,302
Eau ClaireDistinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
A comprehensive liberal arts curriculum with emergingprograms in paramedical and business fields.
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967.1971Undergraduate
Fine Arts (BFA)Social WorkPublic AdministrationScandinavian StudiesEnvironmental ScienceFinanceMarketingData ProcessingFive-Year Programs in
Teacher EducationSelected Paramedical
Fields
1971.1981UndergraduateSecretarial AdministrationMiddle East StudiesInsuranceRisk ManagementWater ScienceAir ScienceBio-Ecology
Graduate
Social Work (MSW)Library ScienceArt (MFA)
Graduate
Business Administration(MBA)
Foreign LanguagesMedical TechnologyMusicJunior College TeachersLearning TheoryComparative Education
Campus of Wisconsin State University-La CrosseA science addition (22), the conversion of old libraryspace (29), a new maintenance building (36a), and anew central stores building (39) have been approved by
the Coordinating Committee and the Building Commission
for the 1967'69 biennium.
6r 1MM,,1.
.
IQtCO
0Pq 4
t .-.. . \
; W. AL)0 n
r. ..... . .
g
nt i
92
La Crosse
Wisconsin State University-La Crosse was establishedin 1909 as the La Crosse State Normal School with anenrollment of 176 students. Today 4,514 students areenrolled at the 37-acre campus on the east side of LaCrosse. Dr. Samuel G. Gates became president of theschool in 1966, succeeding Dr. Rexford S. Mitchell,president since 1939.
While physical education has been a specialty at WSU-La Crosse for the past 50 years, the University hasbecome a multi-purpose institution. The School of.Letters and Sciences is now the largest and fastestgrowing of the three undergraduate schools. The othertwo are the School of Teacher Education and the Schoolof Health-Recreation-Physical Education. The Health-Recreation-Physical Education School has more than1,000 majors, one of the largest enrollments in a special-ized area within the entire State University system.WSU-La Crosse is the only State University offering amajor in recreation and the only one offering a minorin audio-visual education. La Crosse offers majors in 30undergraduate areas and graduate programs in 6 areas.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-La Crosse
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13 000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,00011966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
93
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 4,514Men 2,452Women 2,062New Freshmen 1,432Graduate Students 154Faculty 292
(77 with doctorates)1966.67 Operating Budget $7,511,156
La CrosseDistinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Nationally recognized undergraduate and Master's degreeprograms in health and physical education.
Selected Academic Aspirations1967.1971UndergraduateSocial Work (BSW)Fine Arts (BFA)Pre-School ChildComputer ScienceJunior High School
TeachingAccountingInsuranceMarketingRussianAnthropologyMedical PhysicsJournalismStatisticsGerman
1971-1981UndergraduatePhysical TherapyBusiness AdministrationDramaHealth EducationInterdisciplinary ProgramsIneustrial and Hospital
RecreationHealth Science
GraduateBusiness Administration
(MBA)Audio VisualMusicArt and Art EducationStudent Personnel
ServicesLearning SpecialistSchool PsychologyApplied MathematicsClinical Psychology
GraduateSocial Work (MSW)6-Year Program in
Physical Education andEd. Psychology
Computer ScienceMusicGeographyHealth PhysicsRecreationPhysical Therapy
Campus of Wisconsin State University-OshkoshA new classroom building (6), nursing building (21), andphysical education and health building (2) have beenapproved by the Coordinating Committee and the Building Commission for the 1967'69 biennium.
L..1............\.\--........--...-1
\ ..\ \ .. :\ V I LIi...l IN". .II.. AliqUi
/u.1.14 I AllF.PIL 3700' 1100 ROW YORK Ali:
II::.... \ ,,L......................1
1 1
r--...
011.4 mOs. OK:.
1]
fi
-,..;:,:....7,...,-- .`-...\\,:,,, 1
./ N 71.".','...,....',,`,,,,J i
..,: , ) r.N., , i
INNrf
TA
KEY
1.10 Ill /10,15 IWNIP
LAMP 1I II ACIIIKOP
.(11KirCarentoRRRIA
R=I 11.114/INA 45011 ....... 101.1
ouKrilia 164 MIRK, stall
94
Oshkosh
Wisconsin State UniversityOshkosh, which opened in1871, enrolled 8,267 students in the fall of 1966, thelargest enrollment of the nine State Universities. Lo-
cated on the Fox River in the northwestern section ofOshkosh, the campus now occupies 85 acres. Roger E.Guiles has been the school's president since 1959.
Majors are offered in 34 undergraduate areas and gradu-ate programs are offered in 8 areas. WSU-Oshkosh isthe only State University offering majors in internationalstudies and speech and hearing therapy, and the onlyone offering minors in African Studies and astronomy.The University established a School of Nursing thisyear, the second of the State Universities to do so, and
established a School of Business Administration lastyear. The Business School offers majors in accounting,marketing, finance, and general business administrationand already enrolls more than 1,000 students.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Oshkosh
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,U00
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
b1000
4,000
3,000
2,000
95
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 8,267Men 4,345Women 3,922New Freshmen 2,610Graduate Students 375Faculty 508
(193 with doctorates)1966.67 Operating Budget $11,454,649
Oshkosh
Distinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Comprehensive liberal arts and business administraticprograms with emerging program in nursing.
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967-1971UndergraduateComputer Science and
Data ProcessingAnthropologyReligionPublic HealthMicrobiologyRadio-TV FilmInsuranceReal EstateAudio VisualEarly ChildhoodUrban AffairsRussianJournalism
1971-1981UndergraduateCross-Cultural and Inter-
disciplinary Programs
GraduateSocial Work (MSW)Business Administration
(MBA)School PsychologistEducational PsychologyArtForeign LanguageEarth Science
GraduateElementary Education
(6-yr.)NursingJunior College TeachingInternational StudiesLibrary Science
it
../1
Campus of Wisconsin State University-PlattevilleEquipment to complete the industrial education-agri-culture building (lb), the conversion of the old industrialeducation building (25), a new maintenance building(36c), and a new central stores building (39d) have beenapproved by the Coordinating Committee and the Build-ing Commission for the 1967-'69 biennium.
96
r-
/
/
I
1
I/
... :2. ...... ........!...X 4
: /....''.... \\\\\
..... >1
1
rn
Platteville
The year of 1966 was the centennial year for WSU-Platte-ville, the oldest of the nine State Universities. The Uni-versity had a fall, 1966, enrollment of 4,190 studentsand is spread over 720 acres, the largest acreage of thenine State Universities. This total includes, however,490 acres in two University farms. Bjarne R. Ullsvik hasbeen president of the University since 1958.
WSU-Platteville's School of Engineering is the only suchfacility among the nine State Universities, offering ma-jors in civil engineering and minerals engineering. Ma-
jors in industrial technology and industrial educationare also offered here as well as at Stout State University.A total of 30 undergraduate majors are offered. Gradu-ate programs are offered in eight areas.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Platteville
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977
97
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 4,190Men 2,983Women 1,207New Freshmen 1,222Graduate Students 166
Faculty 280(76 with doctorates)
1966.67 Operating Budget $6,585,421
PlattevilleDistinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Civil engineering, minerals engineering, vocational agri-culture, and industrial education.
Selected Academic Aspirations
17,000
1967.1971
UndergraduateExpanded
HumanitiesCore
BusinessAdministration
Home EconomicsAgricultural
EconomicsIndustrial
TechnologyArchitecture
1971-1981
UndergraduateData ProcessingSocial Work(Law Enforcement
Administration)
GraduateAudio VisualAgricultural
ScienceIndustrial
TechnologySafety EducationBusiness
Administration(MBA)
5-Year Programsfor Teachers inVoc. Tech.Schools
Civil EngineeringSafety
GraduateSchool PsychologistsIndustrial StudiesMech. EngineeringElec. Engineering
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
a 7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1980 1983
Campus of Wisconsin State University-River FallsA new laboratory building (10) has been approved bythe Coordinating Committee and the Building Commissionfor the 1967-'69 biennium.
98
. r---,...,I I gLie Allill/MUM *
:. -. L ..I 1 Lam...maiPis m sORIANIu IA11101
11111101Ipb
^ "1!
,
s,
-
CITYMAIIITRNANCI
Abl*OMR WORKSt
A
. 4
SII HOUSMA
1IRK 7,41
1.1/111*111TA /II PI
1--
IAA It 110l141114 ARIA AIRPORT
MI. a.a.r Al AM ma 1E1 .M AND MMMMM La MI MO MI NM a JIII=1111 .IRIIIY LAOMI1
1
V
River Falls
Wisconsin State University-River Falls, founded in 1874,occupies 630 acres, including two University farms. Itsfall enrollment was 3,544, which includes 113 gradu-ate students. Eugene H. Kleinpell has been presidentof the University since 1946.
WSURiver Falls offers majors in 34 undergraduate areasand 6 )duate programs in 7 areas. It is the only StateUniversity to offer a major in the Humanities. It is alsothe only State University to have a special College ofAgriculture, although WSUPlatteville also offers a majoror minor in agriculture. The College of Agriculture in-cludes programs in agricultural education, a 2-year pro-gram in agricultural science, and Bachelor's degree pro-grams in agriculture with either a broad area emphasisor with an emphasis on business, science, and tech-nology.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-River Falls
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2.000
99
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 3,544Men 2,337Women 1,207New Freshmen 991Graduate Students 113
Faculty 255(88 with doctorates)
1966.67 Operating Budget $5,861,957
River FallsDistinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Leadership and established reputation in agricu4ure andagriculture education
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967.1971Undergraduate
ExpandedHumanities &Fine Arts
Food ScienceResource
ManagementBioStatisticsSafetyAudio VisualAgricultural
EngineeringCommunications
ArtsBroadcast
JournalismSocial Work
1971-1981
Graduate
AgriculturalEconomics
Animal SciencePlant & Soil
ScienceEarth ScienceSpeech
CorrectionJournalismVocational
EducationArt EducationJunior High
Education
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983 Further development in specialized areas of strength
r
36e 39f
- - mM MM. Of/m AMP-Mm- maw of/m wmom mo emm mvi
0
1.L__
';
L. / Imm moi tamo mamma:40,4m.. mm. mms emm mom _.......J
!AMP-
:I
I
mom-
FEDERAL WATERRE5OURcEsLABORAToRy
Nom
mmimm
I103PITAL
REUGIOUGAnn
FRATERNALORGAN IzATIONS
UMM111.
KEY
LANG. FRE4ENTLY owNgp
LAN 10 15E ACQUIRED
ER. tr4tTIVC,4411t°1414,Rmty)
isu14DIN4 1.1141111 C ONSTRUCTI
111141414 STA51
100
Campus of Wisconsin State University-Stevens PointA new classroom building (5), a physical education ad-dition (18), the conversion of old library space (27), anew maintenance building (36e), and a new central storesbuilding (39f) have been approved by the CoordinatingCommittee and the Building Commission for the 1967-'69 biennium.
Stevens Point
The campus of Wisconsin State University-Stevens Point,founded in 1894, now covers 140 acres east of thebusiness district of Stevens Point. Its student bodynumbered 5,123 in the fall of 1966, including 101graduate students. James H. Albertson has been theUniversity's president since 1962.
WSU-Stevens Point offers majors in 26 undergraduateareas and graduate programs in four areas. It is theonly State University to offer a major in American Civili-zation and in Conservation, and its Conservation Depart-ment is the oldest and one of the largest of any institu-tion of higher learning in the United States. It also isone of two State Universities offering a major in homeeconomics, with special courses offered in dietetics,food service management and experimental foods.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Stevens Point
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2.000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
101
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:Total 5,123Men 3,138Women 1,985New Freshmen 1,836Graduate Students 101Faculty 361
(109 with doctorates)
1966-'67 Operating Budget $8,511,542
Distinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Strong liberal arts orientationUnique programs in conservation and home economics
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967-2971UndergraduatePhilosophyArea StudiesArchitectureNursingAccountingData ProcessingSocial WorkForest ManagementWildlife ManagementRecreationWater ScienceEarly ChildhoodLaw EnforcementSafety
1971-1981UndergraduateInternational
RelationsJournalismPublic
AdministrationComputer TrainingClothing & TextilesCell BiologyLandscape
Architecture
GraduateReadingEduc. AdministrationElementary EducationStudent Personnel
Services
GraduateJunior College
TeachersVoc.-Tech.
TeachersResearch in
Education
, L..........
I 1.6
MARRIIIIP 'MUST 04W111114 ARIA
MP I./ eV VI
LAND PRESENTLY OWNED
LAND TL RE ACQUIRED
tqlTglielC AVI11:1114MIOR A 1,,Y)
;1=1 SUNDINA UNPIR COM FAIVIIIII4
eUILIIINA IN YISIAN STA4I
CO M m artalAt.
r"......'.."'"."......"'1I
I,
I1
1t.1
I 1
I 1
I ! i
-
. e
Ir. A.. 41..=
111
ca L,A
0
rtt °
ti 411
e.
LIT YPARK
.. .
Ilin amp An. elm 11101110,111101..... ....
i
: / :i
CITY.
FLITURILSTADIUM
rt
I
Is I
II IMO
I. 11Yll
102
Campus of Stout State UniversityA new office building (11) and equipment to complete
the science-technology building (lb) have been approvedby the Coordinating Committee and the Building Com-mission for the next biennium.
Stout
Stout State University, founded in 1893, now includes a
campus of 80 acres in Menomo-ie, Wisconsin, and astudent body numbering 3,251. Its president since 1961
has been William J. Micheels.
Stout has developed a more specialized emphasis thanother State Universities in two broad areas of traininghome economics and applied science and technology.
Stout was originally established to prepare teachers forvocational, industrial, and home economics education,
but in recent years it has expanded its curriculum toprepare students for jobs in business and industry inthese and other program areas. Stout only offers majorsin 11 undergraduate areas and graduate programs in
five areas, but it offers courses in most liberal arts areas.
It is the only State University to offer majors in voca-tional education, home economics education, manualarts therapy, and pre-school education. Within the
School of Home Economics and within the School ofApplied Science and Technology numerous specialized
curriculums are offered.
Projected Enrollment GrowthStout State University
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,00p
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,100
2,000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
103
Fall, 1966, Enrollment:
Total 3,251
Men 1,878
Women 1,373
New Freshmen 1,066
Graduate Students 111
Faculty 250
(63 with doctorates)
1966-'67 Operating Budget $6,400,787
StoutDistinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Unique and specialized institution with strong programs
in vocational-technical education, home economics, in-dustrial arts education, and industrial technology.
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967.1971UndergraduateExpanded Liberal ArtsCooperative Work-Study
ProgramsArts and DesignDistributive EducationIndustrial DesignApplied MathematicsRecreationIndustrial ChemistrySociologyEconomicsPhysicsElectronics (Radio-TV)
1971.1981Undergraduate
InterdisciplinaryMajors
NutritionHome Economics
GraduateCooperative Intern
Programs withIndustry
Technical TeachingDoctoral Program in
Industrial Vocational-Technical Education
Safety EducationVocational EvaluationAmerican IndustryFamily LifeStudent Personnel
ServicesArt & Art EducationIndustrial Management
GraduateEducational Media
(doctoral program)Applied Math
104
coLlUrf 7-4A-rmcvnu. ' CeNTIVM-. JimisofkCQUAT SCHDIEL... NIGH HIENMOUP fi. 5 C
et 2. 2012
-RELIGIOUS
' ORGANIZATION]
Vor..KTIONAL :
recioncAs 1
APOLT E 0 CATI 4 14
11 It
I '
A
2
11 TN
to
.CO
L.550125
-
11111112
1
111014,,,"I
is
GO MAIRFIC
RAD. FICADROUND HOUSE
141-3-at39n %
L
l 2
Ile
SI
51.1.11ORHIGA OCROot.
MARRIED iTUDENT1INOOSING Artsiymi or I 103 STREET
f
A
KEY
LAND PRESENTLY OWNED
LANP TO SE ACQUIRED
ElmFEISTIN 4 SUN. PIN 4Cr INDICATES TOMIORAIDO
'MEDINA UNPER CONSTRUCTION
OUILP1144 IN MIAS STA41
Campus of Wisconsin State University-SuperiorA new heating plant (13), the conversion of old libraryspace (26), a new maintenance building (360, and anew central stores building (39n) have been approvedby the Coordinating Committee and the Building Com-mission for the 1967-'69 biennium.
Superior
Wisconsin State University-Superior, founded in 1896,occupies a campus of 150 acres near downtown Superiorand had a fall, 1966, enrollment of 2,709 students.Karl W. Meyer has been Superior's president since 1964.
WSU-Superior offers majors in 30 undergraduate areasand graduate programs in 12 areas. One particular areaof emphasis at Superior is educational administration andguidance. The University is the only State Universityoffering an undergraduate major in guidance counselingand graduate programs in art, school administration, andschool supervision. The University also recently inaugur-ated a sixth-year graduate program leading to the Special-ist in Education degree for educational administrators.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Superior
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
11,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
105
Fall, 1966, EnrollmentTotal 2,709Men 1,757Women 952New Freshmen 824Graduate Students 205Faculty 197
(63 with Doctorates)
1966-'67 Operating Budget $4,651,538
Distinctive Features and Areas of Specialization
Broad based liberal arts and established graduate pro-gram in education.
Selected Academic Aspirations
1967.1971UndergraduatePhilosophyInterdisciplinary
ProgramsArea StudiesPreschool ChildDriver EducationEarth ScienceDisadvantaged Child(lifted ChildJournalismSocial WorkNursingMedical RecordsRecreationRussianSpeech Correction
1971-1981Undergraduate
Data Processing
Graduate
Culturallydisadvantaged
PsychometryGuidanceGeneral SciencePhysics EducationBiologyArtSociologyDrama
Graduate
Bus. Admin. (MBA)Cooperative
Doctoral programin Educ. Admin.
Fine Arts (MFA)
Campus of Wisconsin State UniversityWhitewaterAn addition to the library (7), a new health center (20),a physical education addition (28), a new maintenancebuilding (36g), and a new central stores building (39i)have been approved by the Coordinating Committee andthe Building Commission for the 1967.'69 biennium.
r - _
rArstONET UM
106
Om. droa riM eml amlor my.
ti
.NM MEM MEW MD MIMI 0=1
FUTLIFIC TITA PI U ALIAMILBOARth--g.
IVAMN 0.9.10 51116LESTLIPINT iloufINO
28CCM, wr
CALVARY
CRY( YIY
Jul
cu9 36
mow
39i
Gr.
CITYFERN
Fs milmem
KEY
LAND PRESENTLY OWNED
L`-
Eft ElISTING [3UILDIUGLAND TO BE ACCIlifFIED
1:1,NILDIINIIC.Di°131ATLIDERTECt4011PST"RYU)O104L-DUILDING IN DESIGN :MBE
Whitewater
Wisconsin State University-Whitewater, founded in 1868,had the second largest enrollment of the State Universi-ties in the fall 7,004. The school occupies 130 acresin the northwestern section of Whitewater. Its presidentsince 1962 has been Walker D. Wyman.
Majors are offered in 34 undergraduate areas and gradu-ate programs in nine areas at Whitewater. The businessadministration major, within the School of Business andEconomics, is the major with the largest enrollment atthe University. Whitewater is the only State Universityto offer an undergraduate major in distributive education(in the School of Business and Economics) and a gradu-ate program in school business management. In addi-tion, Whitewater offers new interdepartmental majors inAmerican and Latin American Studies.
Projected Enrollment GrowthWisconsin State University-Whitewater
17,000
16,000
15,000
14,000
13,000
12,000
12,000
10,000
9,000
8,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1966 1968 1971 1974 1977 1980 1983
107
Fall, 1966, EnrollmentTotal 7,004Men 4,048Women 2,956New Freshmen 2,331Graduate Students 274Faculty 471
(124 with doctorates)
1966-'67 Operating Budget $11,198,855
Distinctive Features and Areas of SpecializationComprehensive liberal arts offering with distinctive pro-gram in business administration and business education.
Selected Academic Aspirations1967.1971UndergraduatePhilosophy ReligionRussianGeologyInternational Bus
AdministrationOffice AdministrationBusiness EconomicsEducation SecretaryLibrary ScienceSafety EducationOutdoor EducationPre-kindergartenJunior High SchoolSocial WorkFine Arts (BFA)Music TherapySchool Psychologists
1971.1981UndergraduateComparative
LiteratureAnthropologyComparative
Religions
GraduateAccountingForeign LanguageGuidanceElementary EducationMental RetardationEmotionally DisturbedHandicappedInstructional MediaFinanceMarketingManagementComputer Center Mgmt.Business EducationSpecialist Programs
GraduateFine Arts (MFA)Expanded Bus,
Administration(MBA)
Office Admin.Quantitative Bus.
AdministrationInternational Bus.
Administration
State University Branch CampusesThe 1963 Legislature authorized the State Universitysystem to establish branch campuses similar to previ-ously authorized University of Wisconsin Centers, offer-ing two years of college work in communities approvedby the Coordinating Committee for Higher Education.The first branch campus, operated by Stout State Uni-versity, opened in the fall of 1966 at Rice Lake, in Bar-ron County, with an enrollment of 116 students. Fresh-man classes are being offered this year to students whoare sharing the Barron County Teachers College withsecond-year teachers college students. (The CountyTeachers College will close in June.) In the fall of 1967,the full two-year program will be offered. Some classeswill be taught in the County Teachers College b.iilding,while some will be taught in buildings expected to beready on the new 150acre campus in Rice Lake.
A second branch campus will open in the fall of 1967on a 125-acre site in Richland Center, to be operated byPlatteville State University. An additional branch isplanned for Fond du Lac in 1968 and Medford at a laterdate.
Coordinating Committee staff recommendations concern-ing UW centers and State University branch campusesare included in Section V, Part B, of this plan.
C. Reorganization of Vocational-Technical Education
Despite an impressive record, the development of voca-tional-technical training opportunities throughout thestate has been uneven. In recognition of this fact, theLegislature passed Chapter 292, Laws of 1965, designedto expand and strengthen such opportunities throughplacement of the entire state in area districts by 1970.Under the law, the Coordinating Committee and the StateBoard were directed to "prepare a proposed master planof vocational, technical and adult education districts."To assist these agencies in the preparation of the plan,a staff committee on area development was created, con-sisting of planning specialists from the State Board, theCCHE, and the Departments of Administration and Re-source Development.
In February, 1966, the Area Development Committee
108
submitted its first report an analysis of present andfuture occupational trends and alternative educationalgoals for the VTA system to the State Board and theCoordinating Committee, both of which then adoptedpolicies regarding the quality and breadth of vocational,technical, and adult education programs. In its report,the staff group projected a shortage by 1970 of more than4000 clerical technicians, medical assistants, electricaland engineering technicians, and practical nurses, unlessarea districts were rapidly developed and needed class-room space constructed to accommodate enrollmentgrowth in the VIA system.
Subsequently, the Area Development Committee formu-lated proposed criteria for the establishment of VTAdistricts. After full discussion of the criteria report, theState Board and the Coordinating Committee took theseactions:
(1) Accepted the fundamental premise guiding the de-libera:'ons of the Area Development Committee: thatstudents in the VTA system should be assured ofeducational opportunity of highest possible qualityat reasonable cost to the individual, the locality,and the state.
(2) Agreed on the necessity for a wide distribution ofeducational opportunities throughout each district,i.e., one or more major centers or technical insti-tutes, plus as many supporting vocational-technicalfacilities as are required to serve all segments ofthe district's population.Approved these criteria on a tentative basis:
Each district should generate 760 to 780 full-time students during the 1970's and 1980's.
To produce the requisite number of full-timestudents, each district should have a high schoolgraduate pool of 2,900 to 3,000 throughout the1970's and 1980's.
Each district should contain a minimum equalizedvaluation of $450 million in the 1970's and 1980's.
Districts for areas with sparse population shouldbe considered on their individual merits.
(4) Sanctioned a provisional area plan involving fifteendistricts and the use of county lines in drawingdistrict boundaries, except where such lines splitmunicipalities.
(3)
From August 16 to October 20, the CCHE and the State
Board conducted a series of 14 public hearings through-
out Wisconsin aimed at: (1) familiarizing local groups
with the tentative criteria, the proposed districting plan,
and salient provisions of Chapter 292, and (2) enter-
taining individual and group reactions to the criteria and
plan. More than 1,700 persons appeared.
In the course of the hearings, certain basic issues
emerged:
(1) Were the tentative criteria proper and realistic?
(2) How were the needs of students living in outlying
or sparsely populated areas of a district to be met?
(3) Should area district lines follow county boundaries
or high school district boundaries? Or should acombination of school district and county lines be
employed where appropriate?
(4) Should the power to appoint area district boards
lie exclusively, as Chapter 292 now provides, with
county board chairmen or school board presidents?
In November the State Board approved a 15-district
plan, which was adopted the next month by the CCHE,
with the exception of District #1, the 17-county area
in northwestern Wisconsin. (See map.) The officers and
director of the State Board were asked to restudy this
district and report back to the SBVTAE and the Coor-
dinating Committee. In addition, the CCHE staff was re-
quested to re-examine the "area and administration"
of District #15. Finally, both the State Board and the
Coordinating Committee determined that:
(1) VTA district boundaries should follow county lines,
except that where school districts are divided by,
or lie contiguous to, VTA district boundaries, these
school districts may choose to move themselves as
an entire unit from one district to an adjoining dis-
trict if such action does not impair the originaldistrict's ability to meet the criteria.
(2) In the formation of districts, county board chair-
man and high school district board presidents
should be provided with equal representation onarea board appointment panels.
Vocational-Technical Education Districts 109
A 15-district reorganization plan for vocational-technicaleducation in the state was approved by the CoordinatingCommittee in December, with the exception of AreaNo. 1, which was recommended for further study.
(3) To expedite area development, the deadline for theinclusion of the entire state in VTA districts should
be advanced to July 1, 1968.
The Coordinating Committee has already recommendedlegislation to implement such changes in Chapter 292.In addition, the staff recommends:
(1) that area district boards, once constituted, pro-ceed as rapidly as possible to evalu3te occupationaltraining and student needs in their district, and toprepare for State Board and CCHE approval aproposed master plan covering: VTA program ex-pansion, recruitment of faculty, facilities construc-tion, library improvements, cooperative relationshipswith other educational systems, and the extension
of services to areas of the district outside effectivecommuting distance of a major center. It is essen-tial that each district board closely involve repre-sentatives of all sections of the district in the de-
velopment of appropriate training and skill up-
grading opportunities. In certain districts, needsand enrollment potential will dictate the offeringof Associate Degree technical programs at morethan one location, and in all districts there will beat least one major technical institute, plus as manysupporting schools and day and evening programsas are required.
(2)
(3)
that area boards and individual VTA schools co-operate fully with high school administrators indesigning programs within the high school to pre-pare students for either direct entry into occupa-tions upon graduation, or admission to post-highschool vocational-technical programs, and with col-legiate institutions in programming and joint useof facilities and equipment (where feasible). In
terms of coordination among the high schooIrd, theVTA schools, and the collegiate institutions, a
particularly significant area is student guidance
and counseling.
that area boards enter into reciprocal agreements,under which (a) students could attend a VTA school
outside their home district if programs of their
choice were unavailable in the district of residence,and (b) all reasonable and necessary tuition chargeswould be paid by the home district to the districtproviding the histruction.
that the State Board and the Coordinating Commit-tee periodically review the method of selectingarea boards.
that the Coordinating Committee fully support theefforts of the State Board to strengthen its plan-ning and research functions. The newly establishedplanning and development unit in the central StateVocational Board Office should, as part of its majorresponsibilities, assist area boards in long-rangecurriculum and facilities planning, and insure thateach board develops its own planing and researchcapacity; attempt, in cooperation with the CCHEstaff, to define and/or clarify the respective rolesof the State Board and the area boards; conductcontinuous studies of labor force trends, and initi-ate other studies bearing upon the special problemsof the VTA system.
D. Dual-Track Institutions
In broad terms, a dual-track institution can be definedas follows:(1) Is comparable to comprehensive junior colleges in
other states(2) Is instruction-oriented(3) Is responsive to local and area needs(4) Is in close proximity to the homes of its students(5) Charges minimal student fees(6) Adheres to an "open door" admissions policy (re-
quires a high school diploma or the equivalent forentrance)
(7) Offers a diversified curriculum encompassing:Associate Degree technical programs, one- andtwo-year preparatory technical programs, andspecial vocational programs including apprentice-ship trainingCollege-parallel letters and science courses atthe freshman-sophomore levelAdult education (vocational and avocational) andcommunity service programs
(8) Provides counseling, guidance, and testing services
110
(9) Affords the student enrolled in either track lettersand science, or vocational-technical the oppor-tunity to transfer from one program to the other,with appropriate academic credit given for previouswork.
In 1965 the Coordinating Committee designated RiceLake, Rhinelander, and Wisconsin Rapids as sites fordual-track institutions. It was the decision of the CCHEthat while the state's rather unique system of Universitycenters, State University branch campuses, and localvocational, technical, and adult schools was effectivelymeeting the needs of most students, a somewhat dif-ferent approach was required in sparsely-populated amaslacking public higher educational opportunities. In theCommittee's view, a dual-track operation in the threecommunities named above would be more efficient andeconomical than separate collegiate transfer and voca-tional-technical tracks, each with a potentially low en-rollment. Last .191y this policy was reaffirmed by theCCHE.
Since that time, however, a new order of priorities hasemerged:
(1) In recent months the residents of Wisconsin Rapidshave expressed much stronger interest in expanded vo-cational, technical, and adult offerings than in two-yearcollegiate education. Under the statewide VIA districtplan adopted by the State Board of Vocational, Technical,and Adult Education and the Coordinating Committee forHigher Education (see Section IX), it is highly probablethat Wood County will be approved as the base countyfor District No. 14. Moreover, it should be borne inmind that Wisconsin Rapids is already within convenientcommuting distance of liberal arts institutions at StevensPoint and Marshfield.
(2) In September, 1966, the Barron County branch cam-pus opened under the administration of Stout State Uni-versity, which means that students in Rice Lake can nowavail themselves of liberal arts transfer opportunity.
(3) Of the original three cities designated by the Co-ordinating Committee, Rhinelander appears to be theonly one still actively seeking the establishment of adual-track institution.
Therefore, in light of these factors, the staff recom-mends:
(1) that a pilot dual-track operation, suited to the needs,resources, and enrollment potential of the surroundingarea, be initiated at Rhinelander. The proposed institu-tion would be a "pilot project" in two major respects:
(a) It would serve as a model for cooperative relation-ships between existing VTA schools and public collegiateinstitutions in the same community;
(b) Depending upon future enrollment patterns, it mightserve as the prototype for dual-track operation in otherthinly-populated areas.
(2) that the Rice Lake VTA school and the BarronCounty branch campus remain for the time being underseparate administrations, but cooperate closely on pro-gramming and facilities utilization, and that contingentupon the results of at least five years of experience withthe pilot project at Rhinelander, the Rice Lake situationbe reassessed in terms of the feasibility and desirabilityof conversion to a similar dual-track arrangement.
(3) that vocational, technical, and adult education oppor-tunities be significantly broadened at Wisconsin Rapids,arl that should the need arise for any arts trans-fer instruction, such courses be offered on an extension
or contractual basis with WSU-Stevens Point and/or theMarshfield UW Center.
E. County Teachers Colleges
The County Teachers Colleges in Wisconsin, as well asthroughout the United States, have enjoyed a long andproductive history while providing the tuo-year elementaryeducation opportunities needed to staff the many smallone-room rural schools. Historically, they representeda step forward in the preparation of teachers from theearlier practice when the rural school teacher was r::-c.;uited from the ranks of the area high school and givena short course in pedagogy prior to assuming classroomresponsibilities. The more recent past has witnessed thetermination of the County Teachers Colleges in all thestates except Wisconsin.
As a result of increasing educational requirements for
111
teachers as well as geographic and transportation fac-tors, Wisconsin County Teachers Colleges have not sharedin the dynamic state and national growth highereducation. For the past 25 years, enrollments at theCounty Teachers Colleges have remained substantiallystable while other state public higher education systemshave experienced dramatic growth.
Several factors have contributed to the impending demiseof the County Teachers Colleges. Consolidation of themany one-room rural schools has removed the primaryoccupational opportunity of the CTC graduate. Theaccessibility of other area collegiate institutions also hasdiminished the appeal of the County Teachers Colleges.The escalating cost of higher education, particularlywhen quality programs are offered to small numbers,has had its effect. The well-documented explosion ofknowledge has had a dual impact not only upon the cur-riculum of the Colleges, but also in the demands ofpublic school administrators for teachers with a minimumof a Bachelor's degree. Even in the field of elementaryeducation, the requirement of a specialized curricularconcentration in an academic major or minor is evolving.The development of such academically-oriented teachereducation programs has made it progress4,r1iy moredifficult for other institutions to accept transfer creditsfrom the County Teachers Colleges. The intense compe-tition for qualified staff and the low level of state andcounty financial support for County Teachers Collegefaculty also has had an adverse effect.
In response to these and other educational and fiscalconsiderations, legislation passed in the 1963 sessionrequires, beginning in 1972, a minimum of a baccalau-reate degree for all Wisconsin public school teachers.State aids to County Teachers Colleges thus would beterminated at the conclusion of the 1970-71 academicyear at which time it is assumed that CTC operations inWisconsin would be discontinued. An inspection of theCounty Teachers Colleges' facilities, which either areowned or leased by the counties involved, will be madeby the Industrial Commission, Bureau of Engineering,and the Department of Resource Development in termsof their possible use for other educational or communityservice functions. A report of their recommendations willbe made when the survey is completed.
Several meetings have been held with representativesof the County Teachers Colleges boards, CTC presidents,and the State Department of Public Instruction. A con-sensus has developed concerning educational policy andCCHE recommendations for legislative action related tothe orderly phase-out of the smaller County TeachersColleges prior to the June, 1971 termination date.Quality higher education requires a faculty of consider-able academic specialization and a range of library hold-ings and laboratory facilities difficult to attract or justifyfor a small student body. The biennial budget approvedby the CCHE on October 26, 1966 would withdraw stateaids beginning in 1967-68 from County Teachers Col-leges with fewer than 50 students at the beginning ofthe 1966.67 academic year. Legislation to implementthis decision will be introduced, and if adopted, wouldterminate the operation of the CTC in Buffalo, Green,Lincoln, Polk, and Vernon Counties. The County TeachersColleges of Barron, Richland, and Taylor Counties alsoare being discontinued as State University branches areestablished in these three areas.
The academic records of the many students who haveattended the County Teachers Colleges must be gatheredand retained in a central and available depository. Im-mediate efforts to retrieve the appropriate records ofthe institutions no longer operating should be made bythe State Department of Public Instruction through theappropriate Cooperative Educational Service Agency.Each president of the existing institution would transferstudent records to the State Department as part of histermination responlibilities.
The County Teachers Colleges have rendered a vital con-tribution to Wisconsin public schools and to highereducation. A continuance of state support, however, ateither the sub-50 student level or beyond the 1971closing date is not justifiable in light of expanding statehigher educational opportunities and the sophisticatedfuture demands upon higher education in Wisconsin.
F. Private Colleges and Universities
The private colleges and universities, with a total fallenrollment of 29,167 students, constitute a vital seg-ment of Wisconsin's system of higher education. Al-
112
though they are not under Coordinating Committee juris-diction, their importance and role in the state's systemof higher education must be recognized in educationalplanning.
Two universities, Lawrence and Marquette, supplementtheir offerings in liberal arts and teacher education withundergraduate and graduate work in other fields. Thecurriculum at Lawrence University includes basic andadvanced work in the humanities, the natural sciences,the behavioral and social sciences, and the fine arts.Lawrence also encompasses three coordinate unitsDowner College, which merged with Lawrence in 1963,the Conservatory of Music, and the Institute of PaperChemistry. Through Downer College, two fields of specialinterest to women in professional life are offered in homeeconomics and occupational therapy. The Conservatoryof Music is an undergraduate professional school whichprepares students at the collegiate level for careers asteachers, performers, and composers, and offers a
Bachelor of Music degree. Through Lawrence's affilia-tion with the Institute of Paper Chemistry, a graduateschool, a broad education in science and engineering isprovided leading to the Master's and Doctoral degrees.The Institute also functions as a research center for thepaper and pulp industry.
Marquette University now includes 10 schools and col-leges which grant degrees: the Colleges of Liberal Arts,Business Administration, Engineering, Journalism, andNursing; Schools of Dentistry, Law, Medicine, Speech,and Graduate Studies. The School of Dentistry also hascurricula for women leading to a diploma in DentalHygiene and a Bachelor's degree in Dental Hygiene. TheSchool of Medicine includes curricula leading to theBachelor's degree in physical therapy and medical tech-nology. The School of Graduate Studies offers Master'sdegrees in 31 separate ;ields and doctorates in 11 fields.Marquette also operates summer sessions, a Division ofContinuing Education, and an Evening Division.
There are nineteen accredited undergraduate private col-leges in the state which concentrate their programs inliberal arts and teacher education. Three technical andprofessional schools, other than the Institute of PaperChemistry, offer work in engineering, art, and music:
Table XII 113
Wisconsin's Private Institutions of Higher Educationand Fall, 1966, Enrollments
UniversitiesMarquetteLawrence (including
Inst. of Paper Chemistry)
Liberal Arts CollegesAlvernoBeloitCardinal StritchCarrollCarthageDominicanEdgewoodHof? FamilyLakelandMarianMiltonMount MaryMount SenarioNorthlandNorthwesternRiponSt. Francis CollegeSt. NorbertViterbo
Technical and ProfessionalLayton School of ArtMilwaukee School of
EngineeringWisconsin Conservatory
Theological SeminariesDe Sales PreparatoryHoly CrossHoly Name SeminaryMount St. PaulNashotahSacred HeartSt. AnthonySt. FrancisSt. Joseph'sSt. LawrenceWisconsin Lutheran
Junior CollegesConcordiaMater DolorosaMilwaukee Lutheran Teachers
GRAND TOTAL
LocationMilwaukeeAppleton
MilwaukeeBeloitMilwaukeeWaukeshaKenoshaRacineMadisonManitowocSheboyganFond du LacMiltonMilwaukeeLadysmithAshlandWatertownRiponBurlingtonWest De PereLa Crosse
MilwaukeeMilwaukee
Milwaukee
MilwaukeeLa CrosseMiddletonWaukeshaNashotahOneidaMarathonMilwaukeeEdgertonMount CalvaryMequon
MilwaukeeMilwaukeeMilwaukee
the Milwaukee School of Engineering, Layton School ofArt, and Wisconsin Conservatory of Music. There areeleven theological seminaries, three of which offer pro-
grams at the graduate level, and three private juniorcolleges with religious affiliations.
A number of private colleges and universities are now in
the process of preparing long-range institutional plans;
in the opinion of the staff, it is essential that the CCHE
take these plans into acount as it develops policies for
public higher education. Knowledge of such plans willgreatly facilitate the CCHE's efforts to promote coopera-tion between public and private institutions so as tomeet the total higher educational needs of the state with
maximum effectiveness and economy. Marquette Uni-
TotalEnrollment
9,4081,349
PresidentVery Reverend John RaynorDr. Curtis Tarr
1,425 Sister M, Augustine1,426 Dr. Miller Upton
608 Sister Mary Aquin Miller1,046 Dr. Robert D. Steele1,335 Dr. Harold H. Lentz
640 Sister M. Rosita637 Sister Mary Nona564 Sister M. Brideen589 Dr. John B. Morland362 Sister M. Shelia597 Dr. Charles W. Banta
1,219 Sister Mary John Francis137 Sister Mary Hyacinth745 Dr, Richard P. Bailey258 Carleton Toppe978 Dr. Fred 0. Pinkham
42 Very Reverend Dacian Bluma1,600 Very Reverend D. M. Burke
594 Sister M. Justille McDonald
2911,507
33
Edmund D. LewandowskiKarl 0. Werwath
Michael Hammond
116 Most Rev. William E. Cousins80 Most Rev. F. W. Freking38 Mons. George 0. Wirz
189 Very Rev. Gabriel Stapleton86 Very Rev. D. J. Parsons54 Rev. Robert L. Colle65 Very Rev. T. A. Heidenreich
276 Most Rev. William E. Cousins43 Very Rev. Francis O'Neil52 Very Rev. Gratian Zach, O.S.M.
146 Carl J. Lawrenz, C.A.P.
389 Walter W. Stuenkel42 Sister M. Bona
201 Robert J. Boss
29,167
versity, for instance, is contemplating a substantial ex-pansion of its graduate curricula; obviously, given itssize, its location in the largest metropolitan area in thestate, and its significant contribution in graduate andprofessional fields, the University's projected programsare an important factor to be considered by the CCHEin the long-range planning of public higher education.
At the same time, thedesirability of sharingtinuing basis, plannihigher education.
Enrollments in eachversities in the firstabove:
staff recognizes the necessity andwith the private sector, on a con-
ng information relating to public
of the private colleges and uni-semester of 1966-67 are shown
The Coordinating Committee's staff office is located onthe fourth floor of the National Guardian Life InsuranceBuilding at 2 E. Gilman St., Madison.
114
Section X115
The Coordinating Committee for Higher Education
The Coordinating Committee for Higher Education
(CCHE), founded in 1955, provides for the direction andcoordination of activities of the University of Wisconsin
system, the Wisconsin State University system, the State
Vocational, Technical, and Adult Schools, and the County
Teachers Colleges.
The 17-member Committee, assisted by a central staffin Madison and working through five standing subcom-mittees, continuously studies the state's public institu-tions of higher education and the needs of state resi-dents for public higher education. It authorizes neweducational program offerings, recommends an order of
priority for the construction of new facilities, recom-
mends a single, consolidated biennial budget requestfor state institutions of higher education, and makesgeneral recommendations to the Legislature resulting
from its studies.
Wisconsin ic; not the only state to recognize the need for
coordination of higher education. In fact, 39 states nowhave statewide higher education coordinating bodies.Types of coordination in other states include a single,statewide governing board for institutions of higher
education (15 states); a coordinating board similar toWisconsin's Coordinating Committee (21 states), andvoluntary boards with no legal status (3 states). Most
coordinating boards were formed during the 1950's andin recent years when mushrooming enrollments in insti-
tutions of higher education increased the complexity ofbudget and facility requests and of program plans.
The CCHE currently has five subcommittees which make
studies and present recommendations to the entire group
for action or informational purposes. These subcom-
mittees are (1) Executive, (2) Plans and Policies, (3)Finance, (4) Facilities, and (5) Student Affairs.
Working papers are prepared by the staff and submitted
to the subcommittees. An attempt is made to keep allCommittee members fully informed about the work ofthe subcommittees and staff through a communicationmailed to members between meetings. The CCHE News-letter, published 4-6 times a year, also presents to the
Governor, the Legislature, the operating systems, and
other citizens a summary of Committee and staff ac-tivities.
The staff also is in communication with coordinatingagencies in other states, the U.S. Office of Education,the American Council on Education, and other groupsconcerned with higher education to benefit from nationalstudies and studies made by other state coordinatingbodies.
A. History of CCI-1E
The 1955 Legislature created a 15-member CoordinatingCommittee for Higher Education to coordinate activitiesof the University of Wisconsin and the State College sys-tem (now the Wisconsin State University system). In
addition to the Committee's responsibility for educationalplanning, physical plant, budget requests, and legislativerecommendations, the Committee also was charged withmerging the UW Extension Center and the State Collegein Milwaukee.
In 1956, upon the recommendation of the Committee,Milwaukee's two facilities were merged into a singleinstitution, now the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee.The Committee also created a joint staff, consisting ofrepresentatives from the University of Wisconsin andState College system, to act as its research arm in mak-ing continuous studies of higher education in Wisconsin.
Two important additions to the jurisdiction of the CCHE
were made since then. Laws of 1961 included theCounty Teachers Colleges under the CCHE and Laws of1963 included the post-high school aspects of vocationalschools under the CCHE.
In 1965, the Coordinating Committee was revamped andstrengthened in what Governor Warren P. Knowles called"one of the most significant bills passed by the 1965Legislature." The reorganization created a 17-memberCommittee with the majority of members (9) appointedby the Governor for 8-year terms, and gave the Com-
mittee its own budget and an independent staff. For-
merly, the University and the Board of Regents of StateColleges staffed and supported the Coordinating Com-
mittee.
Besides the nine members appointed by the Governor,
members of the CCHE now include one member eachfrom the Board of Regents of State Colleges, the Boardof Regents of the University of Wisconsin, and the StateBoard of Vocational, Technical, and Adult Education; thepresidents of these three boards; the State Superin-tendent of Public Instruction; and one member of aCounty Teachers College board appointed annually bythe Governor from recommendations made by the Asso-ciation of County Teachers College Boards. Formerly,
there were 10 system representatives arid four appointeesof the Governor on the Committee.
The bill also provided for the appointment of a full-timeexecutive director with "a recognized and demonstratedinterest in and knowledge of public higher education."Carlisle P. Runge, Chief of the CCHE Joint Staff, wasappointed the first Executive Director to serve 4 itil July1, 1966. In January, 1966, the Committee appointed
Angus B. Rothwell as the new Executive Director, effec-
tive July 1. Mr. Rothwell was State Superintendent ofPublic Instruction since 1961 and was Chairman of the
CCHE during 1964-'65.
In December, 1965, the staff headquarters of the CCHEwas moved from the Wisconsin Center to the NationalGuardian Life Building at 2 East Gilman Street.
B. Functions of CCHE
Excerpts from the Wisconsin Laws of 1965 define thefunctions of the Coordinating Committee for Higher
Education as follows:
Overall Purpose: "The purpose of this section is to pro-vide for the direction and co-ordination of the activitiesof the University of Wisconsin and the State Colleges,Schools of Vocational, Technical and Adult Educationand County Teachers Colleges by providing a permanentjoint committee to make a continuing study of the state-supported institutions of higher education under theirjurisdiction, and the relation thereto of the needs of thepeople of Wisconsin, to recommend necessary changes
in programs and facilities, to provide for a single, con-solidated, biennial budget request for the University ofWisconsin and the State Colleges, and that portion of
116
the budget request of the State Board of Vocational,Technical and Adult Education described in sub. (3) (c),and to report the results of its studies and recommenda-
tions to the governor anti the legislature."
Educational Planning: "The committee shall determinewhat overall educational programs shall be offered" in
these institutions. "No new educational program shall
be developed or instituted at any institution of highereducation except with the committee's approval."
Physical Plant: "The committee shall adopt a coordinatedplan for the integration and most efficient use of existingfacilities and personnel, and an order of priority for theconstruction of new facilities at the University of Wis-
consin and the State Colleges."
Budget Requests: "The committee shall review the sepa-rate budget requests of the University and State Colleges,the budget requests of the State Board of Vocationaland Adult Education for state aid . . . and shall recom-mend a single, consolidated biennial budget request tothe governor."
Legislative Recommendations: "The committee shall con-tinuously study the needs of the people of Wisconsinfor state-supported higher education and recommend
any legislative proposals to carry out its decisions result-ing from such study."
Executive Director: "The committee shall appoint andfix the salary of a full-time executive director who shallhave a recognized and demonstrated interest in andknowledge of public higher education. The executivedirector shall employ, with the approval of the com-mittee, such professional and clerical staff as is neces-sary, outside t"--e classified service."
The statutes specifically note that, except for particularareas mentioned above, the laws creating the Coordinat-ing Committee are not intended to deprive the boardof regents, the state vocational board, or the boards ofcounty teachers colleges of any of the powers and dutiesconferred upon them by law in the governing of theinstitutions under their control.
C. Some Major Actions of the CCHE since Reorganization
Meeting of September 22, 1965:(First meeting after reorganization)
1. Approved a request from State College Regents toproceed with a $22 million student housing program tobe occuplied in the fall of 1967. (Papers #34 and#35, 1965)2. Approved a request of the State Board of Vocational,Technical and Adult Education for cooperation from theCCHE in developing a comprehensive state plan for areadistricting in Wisconsin of the vocational-technicalschools.
Meeting of November 10, 1965:
1. Approved answers to basic educational planningquestions requested by the Statutory Site Selection Com-mittee in planning for new third- and fourth-year cam-puses. (Paper #53, 1965)2. Adopted a resolution of intent from Medford and ap-proved establishment of a branch campus at that loca-tion to be operated by the Board of Regents of StateColleges. (Papers #47 and #53, 1965)3. Approved procedures to be folloved to implementJoint Resolution #60 in compiling a faculty salary andtime utilization study. (Paper #55, 1965)
Meeting of January 12, 1966:
1. Approved appointment of Angus B. Rothwell as Ex-ecutive Director to succeed Carlisle P. Runge, effectiveJuly 1, 1966. (Paper #6, 1966)2. Approved the establishment of a School of Nursingat UW-Milwaukee.3. Approved granting Associate degrees for 2-year tech-nical programs at Appleton, Eau Claire, and Green Bay.(Papers #2 and #8, 1966)4. Approved Liberal Arts majors at Platteville, RiverFalls, Oshkosh, La Crosse, Superior, Eau Claire and Stout.Approved majors in Teacher Education at Platteville, Osh-kosh, and Stevens Point. (Papers #2 and #8, 1966)5. Approved criteria for identifying transfer curriculumin schools under the jurisdiction of the State VocationalBoard. (Papers #4 and #8, 1966)
117
Meeting of March 10, 1966:
1. Adopted the recommendation of the Statutory SiteSelection Committee that the campus of the Universityof Wisconsin-Northeast be located on the Shorewood sitein Green Bay and that a review be made of the educe-bona! needs of northern Wisconsin. (Papers #23, #24and #26, 1966)2. Approved recommendations contained in a staff studyof the academic calendar policy in state institutions ofhigher education that the present semester-summer ses-sion calendar be confined and that efforts be directedtoward strengthening summer sessions. (Paper #18,1966)3. Approved six Associate degree programs and initialdevelopment of 41 new technical education programssubmitted by the State Vocational Board. (Papers #19and #28, 1966)4. Approved staff recommendations on educational poli-cies for Wisconsin's Vocational, Technical and Adult Edu-cation system. (Papers #21 and #28, 1966)5. Approved resolutions from Fond du Lac County thatthe establishment of a 2-year liberal arts center be ad-vanced from 1969 to 1968, but designated it a branchof the State University system instead of a UW Centeras requested. (Papers #11 and #28, 1966)6. Adopted a statewide guideline that nonresident under-graduates (excluding foreign students) be limited to 25per cent at any one campus in the state. (Papers #3and #28, 1966)
Meeting of June 2, 1966:
1. Approved the Petrifying Springs site selected by theStatutory Site Selection Committee for the third- andfourth-year campus to be operated by the University ofWisconsin in southeastern Wisconsin. (Paper #43, 1966)2. Recommended that no undergraduate work in forestrybe incorporated in any curriculum of a public universityat this time. (Paper #58, 1966)3. Adopted staff recommendations on the schedule anddevelopment of the new UW campuses in northeastern andsoutheastern Wisconsin with amendments. (Paper #45,1966)4. Approved two-year Associate degree programs in lawenfcrcement and interior decorating at Kenosha Technical
Institute, and approved undergraduate majors in eco-norr^cs at Platteville and in Russian and East CentralEuropean studies at Stevens Point. (Paper #52, 1966)5. Approved offering Master's degrees in fields otherthan Teacher Education in the State University system.(Paper #48, 1966)6. Adopted staff recommendations on area vocational-technical school redistricting with the following amend-ments:(a) Criteria for formulating area dierint plans and the
15-district plan concept are to be reviewed withinterested citizens and local units of governmentbefore approval.
(b) Approval of applications from Marathon and Keno-sha counties to assume responsibility for operatingthe Wausau and Kenosha Vocational, Technical andAdult Schools.
(c) Organization of a review panel to meet over thestate to explain the criteria and plan to hear reac-tions and to report back to the CCHE and Vocational
Board.(d) Any plan should include the establishment of dual-
track institutions in Rice Lake, Rhinelander, andWisconsin Rapids, consistent with existing CCHE
plans.
Meeting of July 15, 1P66:
1. Endorsed tKe Liberal Arts curricula of the MadisonSchool of Vocational, Technical and Adult Education.
(Paper #63, 1966)2. Approved several Master's degree programs at theState Universities and the Master's degree in rehabilita-tion counseling at UW-Milwaukee. Deferred all other re-quests presently on file with the staff, including the re-quest for a School of Architecture at UW-Milwaukee,pending a review of academic program criteria and pro-
cedures by the staff. (Papers #64 and #69, 1966)3. Reaffirmed the CCHE position to support the estab-lishment of dualtrack institutions of higher educationat Rice Lake, Rhinelander and Wisconsin Rapids as pro-
vided for in Chapter 292, Laws of 1965, and recom-mended maximum coordination between both existingand proposed higher educational institutions in the state.(Papers #57 and #69, 1966)
118
4. Requested the Facilities Subcommittee to review allfacets of the dormitory programs at public institutionsof higher education. (Paper #62 and #67, 1966)
Meeting of October 26, 1966:
1. Approved procedures and criteria for acting on newacademic programs. (Papers #78 and #93, 1966)2. Approved 25 new programs at the Bachelor's, Mas-ter's, and Ph.D. level considered by the total committeeon July 15 and endorsed by the Plans and Policies Sub-committee at a special August 17 meeting. (Papers #79and #93, 1966)3. Approved a $602.8 million consolidated budget re-quest for higher education institutions in 1967-'69 asrecommended by the Finance Subcommittee. (Paper #88,1966)4. Approved the 1967-'69 building program for highereducational institutions as recommended by the FacilitiesSubcommittee. (Paper #89, 1966)5. Approved the sum of $1,500,000 for advance plan-
ning for the University of Wisconsin and State Universitysystems. (Papers #91 and #99, 1966)6. Approved projected enrollments for the new 3rd- and4th-year campuses of the University of Wisconsin. (Papers
#85, #91, and #96, 1966)
Meeting of December 14, 1966:
1. Approved the State Vocational Board's recommenda-tion of a 15-district statewide vocational plan, with theexception of Area #1, the 17-county district in thenorthwestern part of the state, which the CCHE asked
the Vocational Board to re-evaluate and to report backto the CCHE in March. The staff also was asked to re-study the area and administration of District #15.2. Approved a Ph.D. program in political science at the
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. (Paper #108, 1966)3. Received CCHE staff enrollment projections to 1983.
(Paper #101, 1966)4. Delayed action on architecture program requests by
three state institutions until the CCHE staff can furtherstudy the requests and inspect facilities at the schools.
5. Recommended legislation to move the deadline forinclusion of the entire state in vocational education dis-
tricts forward to 1968, and to terminate state aids toCounty Teachers Colleges where the 1966-'67 enrollmentfell below 50 students. (Paper #104, 1966)
D. CCHE Operational Recommendations
1. To fulfill its statutory obligations the CCHE shouldinitia.e significant studies of needs in higher edu-cation as well as to act upon requests submittedby the various systems.
It is to be assumed that recommendations will alsoemanate from the governing boards and their ad-ministrative staffs. In considering all new proposalsthe systems affected will be invited to participatefully so that when specific recommendations arepresented to the CCHE for action there may be ascomplete an analysis available as is possible. Ex-amples of studie,- worthy of immediate attention arethe follcwirig:
(a) The CCHE, with the assistance of special con-sultants to work with the staff, should giveimmediate attention to the entire range ofhealth service needs involving higher educa-tion. This would include requirements for thepreparation of both professional and para-professional personnel and the contributions inthese areas being made by other agencies.
(b) A study in depth should be made of the ap-propriate roles of the systems of higher edu-cation in traffic and safety education with aview toward making certain that all avenuesof research, teaching, and public service areutilized to their maximum capability.
(c) The CCHE should conduct a study that wouldassess the effects of new developments in edu-cational technology on both faculty and spaceutilization as well as their effects on studentopportunities.
(d) A critical examination of costs per student atvarious levels in various institutions as relatedto tuition charges is needed.
This study should include the effect that tui-
119
tion fees have upon the ability of students toattend institutions of higher education andexamine the possibility of charging differentfees at different. levels.
(e) An over-all and continuing study of all studentswho graduate from state high schools is im-perative to determine whether or not we aresucceeding in helping students reach theirhighest potential, reducing the number ofdrop-outs to a minimum, and giving all necessary information to high school students ariatheir parents in regard to financial assistanceand opportunities available in Wisconsin.
2. The procedures for examining and acting upon bi-ennial operational budgets and building requestsshould be changed so that the subcommittees, theCCHE as a whole, and the staff may have adequatetime to obtain full information before recommenda-tions are prepared. Suggested procedures are pre-sented in Sections VII and VIII of this document.
3. To accomplish the tasks assigned to the CCHE, ad-ditional staff and space requirements should bemet. The current CCHE budget request for its ownoperation calls for authorization to employ two full-time professional staff members, special temporaryconsultants, secretarial assistance, and additionalspace to acOOmmodate the work of the Committee.The budgetary request merits the support of theGovernor and the Legislature.
4. For information required to make all necessarystudies the CCHE will necessarily continue to callupon the various systems for maximum assistance.Duplication of staff work in the offices of the CCHEand the systems will be avoided.
5. Long-range planning should be a continuous proc-ess. This provisional plan will serve as a basis forfocusing attention on specific areas which call forimmediate CCHE policy determination in formulat-ing both short-range and long-range plans of thefuture. New long-range plans should be developedonce in every two years to reflect progress and any
changes that need to be made in the plans for thedevelopment of our institutions of higher education
as a result of new information.
6. While the systems of higher education have manydifferent objectives and serve different clientele,there arri several areas where the coordination ofactivities would increase the opportunities of ouryouth and world, at the same time, effect economies.
The CCHE should seek out every possible means
of intersystem coordination in these areas. Libraryfacilities and computer installations are examples
of studies that merit consideration. Joint use ofstaff and facilities by both the technical schoolsand the two university systems also appear to offer
many of the advantages of the junior college systemwhile permitting both major kinds of institutions todevelop programs of excellence in their own areas.
7. Efforts should be advanced for the members of theCommittee and members of the staff to have anopportunity to become better acquainted with work
being done by comparable coordinating boards and
staffs in other states.
8. The representatives of the CCHE who ire membersof the Higher Educational Aids Comr.fission shouldsubmit reports at meetings of the whole Coordinat-
ing Committee upon the activities of the HigherEducational Aids Commission which affect the opera-
tion of the CCHE. Since HEAC is concerned withboth facilities and student financial aids, no pres-ently constituted subcommittee has a parallel as-
signment.
9. A new subcommittee to consider problems of stu-dent affairs is recommended to replace the scholar-
ship subcommittee. Proposed legislation would
transfer the present responsibilities of the scholar-ship subcommittee to HEAC, and it appears that avariety of student affairs problems will be pressingfor solution in the months ahead.
10. It is recommended that the CCHE critically examine
its own structure and functions to determine howthe legislative charge to the Committee may be best
fulfilled.
120
11. While the CCHE's responsibilities are limited bystatute to the public institutions of higher educa-tion, it is recommended that cooperation with pri-vate and out-of-state institutions be encouraged inthe gathering of statistics and discussion of pro-grams of mutual interest.
12. The Governor, members of the Legislature, theboard members of the systems, and all others con-cerned with higher education should be kept fullyinformed of the progress and problems of theOCHE.
Summary of Recommendations
Section III The Students
1. In light of the critical nature of the dropout prob-lem, particularly at the freshman level, the CCHE staffrecommends a cooperative study of admissions andretention policies and the articulation between high
schools and higher education.
2. The CCHE staff recommends a continuing study oftuition and other fees and of the adequacy of studentfinancial aids programs as related to the costs of higher
education to students.
3. A coordination of the efforts of the several agencies
involved in student financial aid programs is recom-mended to maximize the impact of financial aids in at-tracting and holding larger numbers of qualified students
in higher education. Institutions should share in statefinancial aid programs in accordance with the needs oftheir students, and such aids should be available on an
equitable basis to students attending centers and branch
campuses and vocational-technical schools.
4. The CCHE staff recommends an early study of thepatterns, policies, and problems involved in the transfer
of students from one institution to another, particularlywhen such transfer involves different systems of higher
education in Wisconsin.
5. The CCHE staff recommends that uniform definitions
and techniques be developed for reporting higher edu-
cational enrollments.
6. It is recommended that the enrollment projectionsas stated in this provisional plan be considered enroll-ment goals for planning. They should not be imposedas absolute figures, however, since requirements andconditions can change rapidly.
7. It is recommended that the Coordinating Committee'sstatewide guideline for nonresident undergraduates becontinued and that strong efforts be made to diversifythe geographical base for nonresident students, thusrealizing the full value from student cosmopolitanism.
8. It is recommended that the CCHE recognize thenational character of graduate education and encourageincreased outside support for this phase of higher edu-cation.
9. The staff recommends that the CCHE, the Universityof Wisconsin, the State Universities, and the Vocational-Technical Schools, along with all private institutions,cooperate with the Higher Educational Aids Commissionin studying and reporting the whole area of financial aidrequirements.
Section IV The Outreach Plan
10. The staff recommends a moratorium on the ap-proval of any new centers or branch campuses.
11. The staff believes that the firm commitment of theCoordinating Committee to a dual-track operation, inRhinelander and the projected establishment of a four-year University Campus in Green Bay eliminates theneed at this time for a four-year public university in thenortheastern tier of Wisconsin.
12. The staff recommends that the proposed Rhine-lander facility, along with the extension activities of thevarious systems, become the focal point for a large-scale, coordinated program of adult education and com-munity services in the area.
13. The staff recommends that all needy students, par-ticularly those living outside effective commuting dis-tance of an existing or planned higher educational facility,be guaranteed, through present scholarship and loanprograms, the financial resources to choose a collegiate
121
or vocational-technical institution in the state.
Section V Academic Programs
14. Insofar as it is consistent with mission and effective.ness, students should not be subject to geographic orinstitutional discrimination. Comparable academic pro-grams upon different campuses should receive equitable state support.
15. The CCHE staff recommends that the several branchcampuses and centers, in cooperation with the CCHE andthe systems involved, should study ways to extendhigher educational opportunities by the revision of ad-missions standards to attract more students, particu-larly those third and fourth-quartile high school gradu-ates who might profit from a collegiate experience.
16. Associate degree programs attractive to studentsshould be stressed as an integral part of the curriculum of all centers and branch campuses as well as intechnical institutes and deal -track institutions.
17. Educational factors including library holdings, re-search experience and resources, as well as financialconsiderations, require that Doctoral level graduate workin Wisconsin be concentrated in a few large universitieswhere department size and faculty strengths wouldassure quality programs. While final decisions concern-ing the approval of post-Master's degree programs onother campuses must await the successful mounting ofcomprehensive programs at the M.A. and M.S. levels,growing needs would indicate that large, strong, rapidly-growing institutions such as Wisconsin State University-Oshkosh be evaluated in terms of their Doctoral potentialin areas of outstanding strengths. WSU-Eau Claire, be-cause of its academic strength, its geographical locationand wide service area, might also develop Doctoral pro-grams in selected fields. Other State Universities withestablished reputations in specialized fields should concentrate their advanced graduate curricular developmentin these areas of recognized excellence. The critical andexpanding need for qualified instructional staff for technical institutes requires the early development of a Doctoral program in technical education in an institutionsuch as Stout State University.
To capitalize upon curricular specializations on the sev-
eral campuses and to extend the availability of neededgraduate programs particularly in education the Uni-
versity of Wisconsin, in cooperation with the State Uni-
versities, is urged to consider the development of co-
operative Doctoral programs in appropriate areas of
specialization. For example, some Ph.D. level work inmathematics might be considered for an institution such
as La Crosse to help meet the industrial needs of the
area.
18. Each state institution should develop nonduplkating
extension services most appropriate to its strengths.Action programs, designed to meet the critical needsof the educationally, culturally, and economically under-privileged and the occupationally displaced, must re-ceive highest priority.
19. To promote expanded and nonduplicating extension
services throughout Wisconsin, it is recommended thata State Advisory Committee on Extension be reactivated
and expanded to include representation from the CCHE
staff and all state higher education agencies partici-
pating in extension work.
20. A diversity of patterns of financial support is re-quired for the funding of extension and correspondence
work. Some programs can be supported by those served.
Some, such as action programs aimed at helping to solve
social, financial, and educationa: problems of depressed
urban neighborhoods and rural areas, must be whollysupported by local, state or Federal funds, or privatebenefactions. Fees for college credit work in correspond-
ence or special classes should not exceed those for
similar on-campus work. Development of extension pro-
grams must be governed by the needs of the people of
the state, not by the ability of the programs to support
themselves financially.
21 An intrastate student exchange plan should bedeveloped in cooperation with the institutions and sys-
tems to enrich the educational experiences of qualified
students enrolled in Wisconsin universities.
22. The CCHE staff requests an early review of theapplication of recent innovations in retrieval and com-
122
munications systems to future library development.
23. The staff recomrne ds that review be made to see
if the computer capability now being planned for Madi-
son can be extended throughout the state, thus pro-viding a major improvement factor to all of Wisconsin'spublic higher education while achieving long-range econo-
mies. While the availability of this research and teach-ing facility is still some time in the future, a coordinated
state effort in the development of this vital functionis suggested.
24. The CCHE staff recommends that a statewide com-
mittee representing the University of Wisconsin and theState Universities be formed to clarify and set appropri-
ate admission and transfer policies and practices for alltwo-year campuses as well as for the major universitycampuses. Such a committee should also be asked to
make recommendations concerning possible duplicationand dispersal of resources in high school career days,
pre-college testing, residence hall applications, financial
aid procedures, probation and drop policies. Serious
consideration should be given to standard admission
forms and some central state clearance of all freshmanapplications to minimize the impact of double enroll-ments upon state educational planning.
25. The staff recommends that in light of the antici-pated volume of new program requests from the Uni-
versity of Wisconsin and the State Universities particu-
larly in graduate, professional, and specialized fields
academic program priorities be established for eachsystem over the next biennium.
26. & 27. The CCHE staff recommends the endorse-
ment of the educational television plan of the State Edu-
cational Telev'sion Planning Committee containing the
following specific proposals: (1) establishment of a Wis-
consin Educational Television Commission, and (2) theappropriation of $1,265,000 to implement the plan dur-
ing the 1967-'69 biennium, assuming Federal support
of $1,200,000.
28. In light of changing conditions and the heavy in-
vestment of limited resources and space on alreadycrowded campuses, the CCHE staff questions the justi-
fication for the continuance of laboratory schools. Animmediate re-evaluation by the systems involved andthe CCHE of the total contribution of the campus schoolto higher education in Wisconsin is recommended. Asthese schools may have a significant impact upon publicschool planning in the several communities, local schoolofficials should be kept fully informed of any projectedchange in operation.
Section VI Faculty
29. The CCHE staff recommends the expansion of exist-ing efforts and the early development of new programsto increase the supply of faculty and to spread the influ-ence of outstanding faculty members to larger numbersof students.
30. I he staff recommends that the CCHE endorse thesemeasures for increasing the supply of vocational-technicalinstructors: greater salary inducements, particularly aspecial incentive formula applicable to full-time teachersin Associate Degree and one- and two-year preparatorytechnical programs; a scholarship fund to enable gradu-ates of Associate Degree programs to continue theireducation at a collegiate institution and earn the bacca-laureate degree; ex^,ansion of existing teacher trainingprograms, and closer cooperation between the VTA sys-tem and the collegiate institutions in developing new pro-grams (Stout and Platteville State Universities have in-dicated a strong desire to move ahead in this area); in-ternships in industry, and more vigorous, better coor-dinated recruitment efforts both in the state and outsideWisconsin.
Section VII Physical Facilities
31. It is recommended that the CCHE, in cooperationwith the operating systems, develop a detailed housingplan for all institutions including technical schools andtwo-year campuses.
32. It is recommended that periodically the CoordinatingCommittee and the State Vocational Board review theprogress being made in providing needed vocational-technical school space. If needed, appropriate legisla-tion for state assistance or changes in current financingpatterns must be presented to the Legislature.
123
33. The building program should be designed to meetlong-range needs for research, public service, and in-struction, and considerable expansion in the physicalplant will continue to be required. It should not be neces-sary to build maximum instructional facilities for thepeak enrollment in 1979 if further studies of populationdata continue to indicate that enrollments will declineafter that date. However, if current birth trends are re-versed, the needs for instructional facilities will gobeyond those of 1979. Continued study must also bemade of the trends in adult education and how they mayaffect the need for new facilities.
34. Differences currently prevail in the building con-struction costs on the various campuses. It is recom-mended that the CCHE review this matter in conjunctionwith competent engineering and architectural personnelin the operating systems and the Bureau of Engineeringto determine the reasons and justification for cost dif-ferentials.
35. The procedures below are recommended for theimprovement of building program review:
a. Preliminary planning for a biennial program shouldbegin in the fall of the odd-numbered years, ap-proximately one year in advance of final programapproval.
A preliminary review of needs will be made at thistime; guidelines will be reviewed, and necessarychanges made.
High priority needs in the biennial program follow-ing will be identified and requests made to theBuilding Commission for advance planning funds.
The Bureau of Engineering will be asked to evalu-ate cost data for final project submission.
The CCHE Facilities Subcommittee will determinethe detailed method by which it will review thefinal biennial program as submitted.
b. The biennial building request shoula be received by
June 1 of even-numbered years. The project re-quests should include:
A description of functions, project scope, totalproject and construction cost, project land require-
ments, utility costs, and source of funds to finance
the projects.
Self-financing projects, gifts and grants by thestate.
Long-range land requirements to be acquired in
the biennium.
A current inventory of space by building andfunction.
A priority order for each system's request.
c. The CCHE Facilities Subcommittee will review andevaluate requests and make final recommendations
to the CCHE in the following sequence:
Each system will be requested to review its projectrequests in priority order with the Subcommittee.
CCHE staff analysis and recommendations will be
received and reviewed by the Subcommittee.
The Subcommittee will recommend a single higher
education building priority list.
d. The CCHE will approve and submit a building pro-gram to the Governor around October 15 of theeven-numbered years.
e. After a building program has been approved by the
CCHE, the operating systems should notify the CCHE
of major, proposed changes in projects or priorityorder. The Executive Director will report the pro-posed changes to the CCHE Physical Facilities Sub-committee, which will recommend appropriate action
to the CCHE.
f. Actions of the Higher Educational Aids Commission
g.
124
allocating Federal funds have a substantial effect on
the state's higher education building program. CCHEmembers of the Commission should be asked toreport regularly to the CCHE actions of the Commis-
sion so that they may be reflected in buiiding pro-gram recommendations.
Accomplishing these goals will require a high degree
of 'ooperation between the CCHE, the operating sys-
tems, arm the State Building Commission. An earlymeeting of the Facilities Subcommittee should review
the recommendations in detail and establish firrnoperating procedures.
Section VII! Financing Higher Education
36. It is recommended that an effort be made to estab-lish guidelines for quality standards which will reflectfiscal requirements. The standards basically should
represent the goals of high quality in all programs, andyet provide for distribution of the state's resources onan equitahle basis reflecting comparable support where
appropriate and assuring adequate differentials when
required.
37. The staff recommends that the policy of residentstudents supporting 20 per cent of the over-all instruc-tional costs be continued. However, as we move toward
a universal education of two years beyond high school
the possibility that these first two years may be tuition-free, as now is the case for elementary and secondary
education, will be considered.
38. It is recommended that the CCHE renew its request
that state aid be provided for necessary equipment instate-oriented vocational-technical programs. The CCHE
and SBVTAE should cooperate to draw up detailed cri-teria which will establish eligibility for equipment aid.
39. The staff recommends that the CCHE and the op-erating systems vigorously pursue and utilize all avail-
able Federal funds and private gifts and grants which
will improve the quality and quantity of Wisconsin'shigher education offerings and that cooperative programs
should be encouraged.
40. It is recommended that the CCHE, in cooperationwith the operating systems, make a major effort to stimu-late maximum efficiency and economy. The operatingsystems should be asked to furnish regular sports con-cerning their efforts to improve efficiency of operationand the results they have achieved. The CCHE shouldexamine areas of intersystem coordination.
41. Specific recommendations to improve the budgetprocess are:
a. The CCHE staff should cooperate with the opera-ting systems and the Department of Administra-tion to develop program budgeting techniques.
b. CCHE staff members, in cooperation with budgetofficers of the operating systems, will conduct acontinual study of factors affecting the financingof higher education in the review of biennial re-quests and refer to the CCHE Finance Subcom-mittee for early consideration a review of majorbudget policy changes, such as necessary levelsof support, faculty salary goals, utilization of re-sources, etc.
c. Immediate attention should be given to the devel-opment of quality standards where applicable andpossible.
d. The Board-approved budget requests for the sys-tems should be provided to the CCHE FinanceSubcommittee by September 1 of even-numberedyears. At that time the systems should be askedto review their budget requests with the sub-committee.
e. The CCHE Finance Subcommittee will review thesystem requests and recommendations presentedby the CCHE staff and make its recommendationsby October 1 of the even-numbered years. TheCCHE will approve final recommendations to besubmitted to the Governor about October 15.
f. Where appropriate, the recommendations of the
g.
125
CCHE would establish priorities among the re-quests of the several systems.
The CCHE should take a vigorous role in present-ing the budget to the Governor, the Legislature, andthe people of Wisconsin. The Committee's majorpresentation should relate the overall budget ob-jectives to the needs of the state and the Com-mittee's plans for meeting the need. This pre-sentation must be worked out cooperatively withthe operating systems which continue to pro-vide much of the detailed material required inbudget presentations.
42. In order to make enrollment projections most use-ful for all necessary purposes, the following proceduresare recommended:
a. On or about December 1 of each year, short-rangeand long-range enrollment projections will be re-viewed under the supervision of the CCHE andwith the cooperation of the operating systems.
b. In even-numbered years, final biennial estimateswill be made to be used in biennial budget re-quests. Preliminary estimates will have previouslyaccompanied system budget requests to CCHE.
c. The annual short-range projections will be thebasis for establishing full funding requirementsfor operating budgets and all appropriate purposes.
d. Long-range projections will be made by the CCHEstaff at this same time in cooperation with theoperating systems and reconciled with short-rangeprojections. They will be used as applicable forthe development of building programs and long-range planning.
Section IX The Institutiaas
43. The CCHE staff recommends that the CCHE approvethe opening of third- and fourth-year campuses in 1969as originally recommended, but that freshmen and sopho-
mores be admitted in 1970 and that the University of
Wisconsin study and make recommendations to the CCHE
as to future uses of the Green Bay, Kenosha and Racine
Centers.
44. The staff recommends that the Building Commission
be requested to review its recommendations on the basis
of the new proposal and approve a request for an initial
building program of 252,000 assignable sq. ft. for Green
Bay and 360,000 assignable sq. ft. for Parkside. Neces-
sary auxiliary space and housing should be funded from
applicable receipts.
45. The CCHE staff recommends that the state financial
support of the research function at the State Universities
be substantially increased.
46. The staff recommends that area vocational-technical
district hoards, once constituted, proceed as rapidly as
possible to evaluate occupational training and student
needs in their district, and to prepare for State Vocational
Board and CCHE approval a proposed master plan cov-
ering: VTA program expansion, recruitment of faculty,
facilities construction, library improvements, coopera-
tive relationships with other educational systems, and the
extension of service to areas of the district outside effec-
tive commuting distance of major centers.
47. The staff recommends that area boards and indi-
vidual VTA schools cooperate fully with high school ad-
ministrators in designing programs within the high
school to prepare students for either direct entry into
occupations after graduation, or admission to post-high
school vocational-technical programs; and with collegiate
institutions in programming and joint use of facilities
and equipment where feasible.
48. The staff recommends that area boards enter into
reciprocal agreements, under which (a) students could
attend a VTA ,...hoot outside their home district if pro-
grams of their choice were unavailable in the district of
residence, and (b) all reasonable and necessary tuition
charges would be paid by the home district to the district
providing the instruction.
49. The staff recommends that the State Vocational
Board Zind the CCHE periodically review the method of
selecting area boards.
50. The staff recommends that the CCHE fully supportthe efforts of the State Vocational Board to strengthen
its planning and research functions.
51. The staff recommends that a pilot dual-track opera-tion, suited to the needs, resources, and enrollment po-
tential of the surrounding area, be initiated at Rhine-
lander.
52. The staff recommends that the Rice Lake VTA
school and the Barron County ._,anch campus remain
for the time being under separate administrations, butcooperate closely on programmint and facilities utiliza-
tion; and that contingent upon the results of at leastfive years of experience with the Rhinelander project,
the Rice Lake situation be reassessed in terms of the
feasibility and desirability of conversion to a simile
dual-track arrangement.
53. The staff recommends that vocational, technical,
and adult education opportunities be significantly broad-
ened at Wisconsin Rapids, and that should the need
arise for any liberal arts transfer instruction, such courses
be offered on an extension or contractual basis with
WSU-Stevens Point and/or the Marshfield UW Center.
Section X The Coordinating Committee for Higher
Education
54. To fulfill its statutory obligations the CCHE should
initiate significant studies of needs in higher education
as well as to act upon requests submitted by the various
systems.
It is to be assumed that recommendations will also
emanate from the governing boards and their adminis-
trative staffs. In considering all new proposals the sys-
tems affected will be invited to participate fully so that
when specific recommendations are presented to the
CCHE for action there may be as complete an analysis
available as is possible. Examples of studies worthy of
immediate attention are the following:
(a) The CCHE, with the assistance of special consult-
ants to work with the staff, should give immediate
attention to the entire range of health serviceneeds involving higher education. This would in-
clude requirements for the preparation of both
professional and para-professional personnel and
the contributions in these areas being made by
other agencies.
(b) A study in depth should be made of the appro-
priate roles of the systems of higher education in
traffic and safety education with a view towardmaking certain that all avenues of research, teach-
ing, and public service are utilized to their maxi-
mum capacity.
(c) The CCHE should conduct a study that would
assess the effects of new developments in educa-
tional technology on both faculty and space utili-
zation as well as their effects on student op-
portunities.
(d) A critical examinatior of costs per student at
various levels in variouz institutions as related
to tuition charges is needed. This study should
include the effect that tuition fees have upon the
ability of students to attend institutions of higher
education and examine the possibility of charging
different fees at different levels.
(e) An over-ell and continuing study of all students
who graduate from state high schools is impera-
tive to determine whether or not we are succeed-
ing in helping students reach their highest poten-tial, reducing the number of drop-outs to a mini-
mum, and giving all necessary information to high
school students and their parents in regard to
financial assistance and opportunities available in
Wisconsin.
55. The procedures for examining and acting upon bien-
nial operational budgets and building requests should
be changed so that the subcommittees, the CCHE as a
whole, and the staff may have adequate time to obtain
MI: information before recommendations are prepared.
127
Suggested procedures are presented in Sections VII and
VIII of this document.
56. To accomplish the tasks assigned to the CCHE,
additional staff and space requirements should be met.
The current CCHE budget request for its own operation
calls for authorization to employ two full-time profes-
sional staff members, special temporary consultants,secretarial assistance, and additional space to accommodate the work of the Committee. The budgetary request
merits the support of the Governor and the Legislature.
57. For information required to make all necessary
studies the CCHE will necessarily continue to call upon
the various systems for maximum assistance. Duplicationof staff work in the offices of the CCHE and the systems
will be avoided.
58. Long-range planning should be a continuous process.
This provisional plan will serve as a basis for focusingattention on specific areas which call for immediateCCHE policy determination in formulating both short-range and long-range plans of the future. New long-
range plans should be developed once in every two years
to reflect progress and any changes that need to bemade in the plans for the development of our institutions
of higher education as a result of new information.
5. While the systems of higher education have manydifferent objectives and serve different clientele, there
are several areas where the coordination of activities
would increase the opportunities of our youth and would,
at the same time, effect economies. The CCHE should
seek out every possible means of intersystem coordination
in these areas. Library facilities and computer installa-
tions are examples of studies that merit consideration.
Joint use of staff and facilities by both the technical
schools and the two university systems also appearto offer many of the advantages of the junior college
system while permitting both major kinds of institutions
to develop programs of excellence in their own areas.
60. Efforts should be advanced for the members of the
Committee and members of the staff to have an oppor-
tunity ID become better acquainted with work being done
128
by comparable coordinating boards and staffs in otherstates.
61. The representatives of the CCHE who are membersof the Higher Educational r;!ds Commission should sub-mit reports at meetings of the whole Coordinating Committee upon the activities of the Higher Educational AidsCommission which affect the operation of the CCHE.Since HEAC is concerned with both facilities and studentfinancial aids, no presently constituted subcommitteehas a parallel assignment.
62. A new subcommittee to consider problems of stu-dent affairs is recommended to replace the scholarshipsubcommittee. Proposed legislation would transfer thepresent responsibilities of the scholarship subcommitteeto HEAC, and it appears that a variety of student affairsproblems will be pressing for solution in the monthsahead.
63. It is recommended that the CCHE critically examineits own structure and functions to determine how thelegislative charge to the Committee may be best fulfilled.
64. While the CCHE's responsibilities are limited bystatute to the public institutions of higher education, itis recommended that cooperation with private and out-of-state institutions be encouraged in the gathering ofstatistics and discussion of programs of mutual interest.
65. The Governor, members of the Legislature, theboard members of the systems, and all others concernedwith higher education should be kept fully informed ofthe progress and problems of the CCHE.
n:,77."..I.WPW.
Public Institutions of Higher Education
129
University of Wisconsin-MadisonDr. Fred H. HarringtonUniversity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Dr. J. Martin KlotscheUniversity of Wisconsin-Green BayDr. Edward Weidner
University of Wisconsin-ParksideDr. Irvin G. ".7yilie
UW Center, Green BayOr. Theodore N. SavidesUW Center, Janesville
Dr. Charles MillerUW Center, Kenosha
Mr. Arthur N. OgdenUW Center, ManitowocMr. Raymond O. GrosnickUW Center, Marinette
Mr. Lon W. WeberUW Center, Marshfield
Dr. Norbert E. KoopmanUW Center, MenashaDr. Harry Hutson
UW Center, RacineDr. Albert E. MayUW Center, Sheboygan
Dr. Earl BeardUW Center, Waukesha
Mr. Murray DeutschUW Center, Wausau
Dr. Paul A. Zehner
130
Wisconsin State Universities
Eugene R. McPhee Director
Wisconsin State University, Eau ClaireDr. Leonard A. Haas
Wisconsin State University, La CrosseDr. Samuel G. Gates
Wisconsin State University, OshkoshDr. Roger E. Guiles
Wisconsin State University, PlattevilleDr. Bjarne Ullsvik
Wisconsin State University, River FallsDr. Eugene H. Kleinpell
Wisconsin State University, Stevens PointDr. James Albertson
Wisconsin State University, StoutDr. William J. Micheels
Wisconsip State University, SuperiorDr. Karl Meyer
Wisconsin State University, WhitewaterDr. Walker Wyman
Rice Lake BranchDr. John F. Meggers
County Teachers Colleges
Ashland County Teachers College
Barron County Teachers College
Buffalo County Teachers College
A J McDermott
Frederick H. Hake
Mrs. Wilma Austin
Columbia County Teachers CollegeMr. W. E. Engbretson
Dodge County Teachs CollegeMr. Arthur K. Mehren
Dor K . Teachers CollegeMr. Orville A. Miller
Greed ,aunty Teachers CollegeMr. A. R. Schilling
Juneau County Teachers CollegeMr. S. M. Calhoun
Langlade County Teachers CollegeMr. Gustav Bystrom
Lincoln County Teache, s CollegeMr. Melvin F. Asher
Manitowoc County Teachers College
Outagamie County Teachers College
Polk County Teachers College
Mr. Bert L. Greenfield
Mr. E. H. Gordon
Mr. Leo H. Burdette
Racine-Kenosha Counties Teachers CollegeMr. William D. Thompson
Richland County Teachers CollegeMrs. Warren Wallace
Sauk County Teachers CollegeMr. H. H. Thies
Sheboygan County Teachers CollegeMr. Vernon E. Maurer
Taylor County Teachers CollegeMr. Eugene W. Laurent
Vernon County Teachers CollegeMr. Neil D. Green
Waushara County Teachers CollegeMr. Clifford S. Larson
State Vocational Board Staff
C. L. GreiberState Director
A. E. TowneAssistant Director for Vocational Rehabilitation
E. I. LehrmannAssistant Director for Vocational-Technical Education
132
The Coordinating Committee staff wishes to thank mem-bers of the long-range plan steering committee RobertClodius, Robert DeZonia, Clarence Greiber, WallaceLemon, and Bjarne Ullcvik for the assistance in pre-paring this plan. The staff also wishes to thank theState Educational Television Planning Committee andmembers of the staffs of the University of Wisconsin;the Wisconsin State Universities; the County TeachersColleges; the State Board of Vocational, Technical andAdult Education; the Department of Public Instruction;the Department of Administration; the Department of Re-source Development; and the Vital Statistics Division ofthe State Board of Health and all other persons whohelped in the preparation of this provisional long-rangeplan.
Coordinating Committee Staff Members
Angus B. Rothwell Executive Director
Harry Spindler Assistant Director
William White Assistant Director
Gale Kelly Associate for Educational Programs
Phyllis Hawthorne Research Analyst
Richard Kamradt Public Information Assistant
Mary Baerwolf Administrative Assistant
40. It is recommended ,at the CCHE, in cooperationwith the operating systems, make a major effort to stimu-late maximum efficiency and economy. The operatingsystems should be asked to furnish regular reports con-cerning their efforts to improve efficiency of operation
the results they have achieved. The CCHE shouldexamine areas of intersystem coordination.
41. Specific recommendations to improve the budgetprocess are:
a. The CCHE staff should cooperate w'th the opera-ting systems and the Department of Administra-tion to develop program budgeting techniques.
b. OCHE staff members, in cooperation with budgetofficers of the operating systems, will conduct acontinual study of factors affecting the financingof higher education in the review of biennial re-quests and refer to the CCHE Finance Subcom-mittee for early consideration a review of majorbudget policy changes, such as necessary levelsof support, faculty salary goals, utilization of re-soi2:ces, etc.
c. Immediate attention should be given to the development of quality standards where applicable andpossible.
d. The Board-approved budget requests for the sys-tems should be provided to the CCHE FinanceSubcommittee by September 1 of even-numberedyears. At that '.rime the systems should be askedto review their budget requests with the sub-committee.
e. The CCHE Finance Subcommittee will review thesystem requests and recommendations presentedby the CCHE staff and make its recommendationsby October 1 of the evennumbered years. TheCCHE will approve final recommendations to besubmitted to the Governor about October 15.
f. Where appropriate, the recommendations of the
g.
CCHE would establish priorities among the re-quests of the several systems.
The CCHE should take a vigorous role in present-ing the budget to the Governor, the Legislature, andthe people of Wisconsin. The Committee's majorpresentation should relate the overall budget ob-jectives to the needs of the state and the Com-mittee's plans for meeting the need. This pre-sentation must be worked out cooperatively withthe operating systems which will continue to pro-vide much of the detailed material required inbudget presentations.
42. In order to make enrollment projections most useful for all necessary purposes, the following proceduresare recommended:
a. On or about December 1 of each year, short-rangeand long-range enrollment projections will be re-viewed under the supervision of the CCHE andwith the cooperation of the operating systems.
b. In even-numbered years, final biennial estimateswill be made to be used in biennial budget re-quests. Preliminary estimates will have previouslyaccompanied system budget requests to CCHE.
c. The annual short-range projections will be thebasis for establishing full funding requirementsfor operating budgets and all appropriate purposes.
d. Long-range projections will be made by the CCHEstaff at this same time in cooperation with theoperating systems and reconciled with short-rangeprojections. They will be used as applicable forthe development of building programs and long-range planning.
Section IX The Institutions
43. The CCHE staff recommends that the CCHE approvethe opening of third- and fourth year campuses in 1969as originally recommended, but that freshmen and sopho-
mores be admitted in 1970 and that the Uni/ersity of
Wisconsin study and make recommendations to the CCHE
as to future uses of the Green Bay, Kenosha and Racine
Centers.
44. The staff recommends that the Building Commissionbe requested to review its recommendations on the basis
of the new proposal and approve a request for an initialbuilding program of 252,000 assignable sq. ft. for Green
Bay and 360,000 assignable sq. ft. for Parkside. Neces-
sary auxiliary space and housing should be funded from
applicable receipts.
45. The CCHE staff recommends that the state financialsupport of the research function at the State Universities
be substantially increased.
46. The staff recommends that area vocational-technicaldistrict boards, once constituted, proceed as rapidly as
possible to evaluate occupational training and studentneeds in their district, and to prepare for State Vocational
Board and CCHE approval a proposed master plan cov-
ering: VTA program expansion, recruitment of faculty,
facilities construction, library improvements, coopera-tive relationships with other educational systems, and the
extension of service to areas of the district outside effec-
tive commuting distance of major centers.
47. The staff recommends that area boards and indi-vidual VIA schools cooperate fully with high school ad-
ministrators in designing programs within the high
school to prepare students for either direct entry intooccupations after graduation, or admission to post-high
school vocational-technical programs; and with collegiateinstitutions sl progfamming and joint use of facilitiesand equipment where feasible.
48. The staff recommends that area boards enter intoreciprocal agreements, under which (a) students couldattend a VTA school outside their home district if pro-grams of their choice were unavailable in the district ofresidence, and (b) all reasonable and necessary tuitioncharges would be paid by the home district to the districtproviding the instruction.
49. The staff recommends that the State Vocational
126
Board and the CCHE periodically review the method ofselecting area boards.
50. The staff recommend: that the CCHE fully supportthe efforts of the State Vocational Board to strengthenits planning and research functions.
51. The staff recommends that a pilot dual-track opera-tion, suited to the needs, resources, and enrollment po-tential of the surrounding area, be initiated at Rhine-
lander.
52. The staff recommends that the Rice Lake VTAschool and the Barron County branch campus remain
for the time being under separate administrations, butcooperate closely on programming and facilities utiliza-tion; and that contingent upon the results of at leastfive years of experience with the Rhinelander project,the Rice Lake situation be reassessed in terms of thefeasibility and desirability of conversion to a similardual-track arrangement.
53. The staff recommends that vocational, technical,and adult education opportunities be significantly broad-ened at Wisconsin Rapids, and that should the needarise for any liberal arts transfer instruction, such coursesbe offered on an extension or contractual basis withWSU-Stevens Point and/or the Marshfield UW Center.
Section X The Coordinating Committee for Higher
Education
54. To fulfill its statutory obligations the CCHE shouldinitiate significant studies of needs in higher educationas well as to act upon requests submitted by the various
systems.
It is to be assumed that recommendations will alsoemanate from the governing boards and their adminis-trative staffs. In considering all new proposals the sys-
tems affected will be invited to participate fully so thatwhen specific recommendations are presented to theCCHE for action there may be as complete an analysis
available as is possible. Examples of studies worthy ofimmediate attention are the following:
(a) The CCHE, with the assistance of special consult-
ants to work with the staff, should give immediate
attention to the entire range of health service
needs involving higher education. This would in-
clude requirements for the preparation of both
professional and para-professional personnel and
the contributions in these areas being made by
other agencies.
(b) A study in depth should be made of the appro-
priate roles of the systems of higher education in
traffic and safety education with a view toward
making certain that all avenues of research, teach-
ing, and public service are utilized to their maxi-
mum capacity.
(c) The CCHE should conduct a study that would
assess the effects of new developments in educa-
tional technology on both faculty and space utili-
zation as well as their effects on student op-
portunities.
(d) A critical examination of costs per stuL it at
various levels in various institutions as related
to tuition charges is needed. This study should
include the effect that tuition fees have upon the
ability of students to attend institutions of higher
education and examine the possibility of charging
different fees at different levels.
(e) An over-all and continuing study of all students
who graduate from state high schools is impera-
tive to determine whether or not we are succeed.
ing in helping students reach their highest poten-
tial, reducing the number of drop-outs to a mini-
mum, and giving all necessary information to high
school students and their parents in regard to
financial assistance and opportunities available in
Wisconsin.
55. The procedures for examining and acting upon bien-
nial operational budgets and building requests should
be changed so that the subcommittees,the CCHE as a
whole, and the staff may have adequate time to obtain
full information before recommendations are prepared.
Suggested procedures are presented in Sections VII and
VIII of this document.
56. To accomplish the tasks assigned to the CCHE,
additional staff and space requirements should be met.
The current CCHE budget request for its own operation
calls for authorization to employ two full-time profes-
sional staff members, special temporary consultants,
secretarial assistance, and additional space to accom-
modate the work of the Committee. The budgetary request
merits the support of the Governor and the Legislature.
57. For information required to make all necessary
studies the CCHE will necessarily continue to call upon
the various systems for maximum assistance. Duplication
of staff work in the offices of the CCHE and the systems
will be avoided.
58. Long-range planning should be a continuous process.
This provisional plan will serve as a basis for focusing
attention on specific areas which call for immediate
CCHE policy determination in formulating both short-
range and long-range plans of the future. New long-
range plans should be developed once in every two years
to reflect progress and any changes that need to be
made in the plans for the development of our institutions
of higher education as a result of new information.
59. While the systems of higher education have many
different objectives and serve different clientele, there
are several areas where the coordination of activities
would increase the opportunities of our youth and would,
at the same time, effect economies. The CCHE should
seek out every possible means of intersystem coordination
in these areas. Library facilities and computer installa-
tions are examples of studies that merit consideration.
Joint use of staff and facilities by both the technical
schools and the two university systems also appear
to offer many of the advantages of the junior college
system while permitting both major kinds of institutions
to develop programs of excellence in their own areas.
60. Efforts should be advanced for the members of the
Committee and members of the staff to have an oppor-
tunity to become better acquainted with work being done
126
by comparable coordinating boards and staffs in otherstates.
61. The representatives of the CCHE who are membersof the Higher Educational Aids Commission should sub-mit reports at meetings of the whole Coordinating Com-mittee upon the activities of the Higher Educational AidsCommission which affect the operation of the CCHE.Since HEAC is concerned with both facilities and studentfinancial aids, no presently constituted subcommitteehas a parallel assignment.
62. A new subcommittee to consider problems of stu-dent affairs is recommended to replace the scholarshipsubcommittee. Proposed legislation would transfer thepresent responsibilities of the scholarship subcommitteeto HEAC, and it appears that a variety of student affairsproblems will be pressing for solution in the monthsahead.
63. It is recommended that the CCHE critically examineits own structure and functions to determine how thelegislative charge to the Committee may be best fulfilled.
64. While the CCHE's responsibilities are limited bystatute to the public institutions of higher education, itis recommended that cooperation with private and out-of-state institutions be encouraged in the gathering ofstatistics and discussion of programs of mutual interest.
65. The Governor, members of the Legislature, theboard members of the systems, and all others concernedwith higher education should be kept fully informed ofthe progress and problems of the CCHE.
Public Institutions of Higher Education
University of Wisconsin
Fred Harvey HarringtonRobert L. ClodiusNeil G. CaffertyCharles A. Engman
University of Wisconsin Madison
University of WisconsinMilwaukee
University of WisconsinGreen Bay
University of WisconsinParkside
University Extension
University of Wisconsin Center System
UW Center, Green Bay
UW Center, Janesville
UW Center, Kenosha
UW Center, Manitowoc
UW Center, Marinette
UW Center; Marshfield
UW Center, Menasha
UW Center, Racine
UW Center, Sheboygan
UW Center, Waukesha
UW Center, Wausau
129
PresidentVice PresidentVice President, Bus. & Fin.Vice President for Admin.
Robben W. Fleming, Chanc.
J. Martin Kiotsche, Chanc.
Edward W. Weidner, Chanc.
Irvin G. Wyllie, Chanc.
Donald R. McNeil, Chanc,
Lorentz H. Adolfson, Chanc.
Theodore N. Savides, Dean
Charles Miller, Dean
Arthur N. Ogden, Dean
Raymond 0. Grosnick, Dean
Lon W. Weber, Dean
Norbert E. Koopman, Dean
Harry Hutson, Dean
Albert E. May, Dean
Earl Beard, Dean
Murray Deutsch, Dean
Paul A. Zehner, Dean
130
Wisconsin State Universities
Eugene R. McPhee DirectorRobert H. DeZonia Asst. DirectorRobert W. Winter Asst. Director
Wisconsin State University, Eau Claire
Wisconsin State University, La Crosse
Wisconsin State University, Oshkosh
Wisconsin State University, Platteville
Wisconsin State University, River Falls
Wisconsin State University, Stevens Point
Wisconsin State University, Stout
Rice Lake Branch
Wisconsin State University, Superior
Wisconsin State University, Whitewater
Leonard A. Haas, Pres.
Samuel G. Gates, Pres.
Roger E. Guiles, Pres.
Bjarne Ullsvik, Pres.
Eugene H. Kleinpell, Pres.
James Albertson, Pres.
William J. Micheels, Pres.
John F. Meggers, Dean
Karl Meyer, Pres.
Walker Wyman, Pres.
131
County Teachers Colleges
Ashland County Teachers College A J McDermott
Barron County Teachers College Frederick H. Hake
Buffalo County Teachers College Mrs. Wilma Austin
Columbia County Teachers College Mr. W. E. Engbretson
Dodge County Teachers College Mr. Arthur K. Mehren
Door-Kewaunee County Teachers College Mr. Orville A. Millar
Green County Teachers College Mr. A. R. Schilling
Juneau County Teachers College Mr. S. M. Calhoun
Lang lade County Teachers College Mr. Gustav Bystrom
Lincoln County Teachers College Mr. Melvin F. Asher
Manitowoc County Teachers College Mr. Bert L. Greenfield
Outagamie County Teachers College Mr. E. H. Gordon
Polk County Teachers College Mr. Leo H. Burdett
Racine-Kenosha Counties Teachers College Mr. William D. Thompson
Richland County Teachers College Mrs. Warren Wallace
Sauk County Teachers College Mr. H. H. Thies
Sheboygan County Teachers College Mr. Vernon E. Maurer
Taylor County Teachers College Mr. Eugene W. Laurent
Vernon County Teachers College Mr. Neil D. Green
Waushara County Teachers College Mr. Clifford S. Larson
State Vocational Board Staff
C. L. Greiber State Director
A. E. Towne Assistant Director for Vocational Rehabilitation
E. I. Lehrmann Assistant Director for Vocational-Technical Education
132
The Coordinating Committee staff wishes to thank mem-bers of the long-range plan steering committee Robert
Clodius, Robert DeZonia Clarence Greiber, Wallace
Lemon, and Bjarne Ullcvik for their assistance in pre-paring this plan. The staff also wishes to thank theState Educational Television Planning Committee andmembers of the staffs of the University of Wisconsin;the Wisconsin State Universities; the County TeachersColleges; the State Board of Vocational, Technical andAdult Education; the Department of Public Instruction;the Department of Administration; the Department of Re-source Development; and the Vital Statistics Division ofthe State Board of Health and all other persons who
helped in the preparation of this provisional long-range
plan.
Coordinating Committee Staff Members
Angus B. Rothwell Executive Director
Harry Spindler Assistant Director
William White Assistant Director
Gale Kelly Associate for Educational Programs
Phyllis Hawthorne Research Analyst
Richard Kam radt Public Informatio Assistant
Mary Baerwolf Administrative Assistant