Take "writing across the curriculum" seriously and reduce messy GE subsidies

Imagine an institution in which the English department offers each year 13 or so sections of a "rhetoric and composition" course enrolling about 200 students for a 1.25 semester credits. These credits are covered exclusively by adjuncts. Suppose this represents about 18% of the department's total credit production and it is produced by about 12% of its FTE. Having guaranteed enrollment and deploying only adjunct labor to teach it might amount to a "GE subsidy" that is messy in that it might allow departments to appear artificially more efficient.

The institution currently believes it is experiencing an "under deployment" of its tenured and tenure track faculty. This is perceived to be especially true in a few departments.

The institution has for many years flirted with variations on "writing across the curriculum," but has never seriously implemented a program based on that idea for beginning students.

Proposal: all introductory rhetoric and composition classes will be taught by tenured and tenure track faculty in departments across the college. The college will make the fact that "freshman comp" is taught exclusively by full time faculty one pillar of its brand.

Benefits:

• Since instructors will inevitably draw on their own discipline and the majors they teach in, the first year comp course will effect broad liberal arts exposure for all first year students, can serve as a second gateway to possible majors in addition to intro courses. 
• Having instructors of these courses spend a little time together will yield the elusive cross-program collaboration that will almost certainly have healthy knock-on effects. 
• The program undercuts the tendency of students to think of writing as something associated with English courses but not others. 
• Majors could permit inclusion of the writing class as an elective reducing the need to staff electives. 

The FTE deployment will be managed and incentivized by a fair algorithm that favorably adjusts departmental credit hour production expectations to account for the size limits on composition classes.

NOTE: technically, this move INCREASES the cost of staffing first year composition since TTT faculty are more expensive. But if the perception that these faculty are currently under-utilized, then this can be a cost effective solution.

1. Essentials of liberal arts

1. What are the essential components of a quality liberal arts education, and how can we ensure that we remain, first and foremost, a first-rate liberal arts college in the midst of change?

2. Can we restructure and still be liberal arts?

2. Are there ways we can restructure ourselves that will still allow us to deliver what we deem to be an essential liberal arts curriculum? 
1.  Could we, for example, think about majors and/or graduate programs with fewer requirements? Majors vary from 10 credits to 16 or 17 — can this discrepancy be reduced?
2. In smaller departments, are there still ways that we can combine smaller classes, have them offered less often, combine senior seminars, or the like?

3. Can interdisciplinary work be the key?

3. Are there ways that interdisciplinary work can help us achieve both goals? That is, to ensure students access to a high quality liberal arts education with coverage of a sufficiently broad and deep curriculum, while also ensuring that the college is on sound financial footing?

4. Can the white paper help? New programs? Revenue growth possibilities?

4. Can the White Paper help us to think about this: Are there other ideas for programs, collaborations with other colleges, etc. that can help us ensure that we remain true to our mission and values while we do this restructuring work?
1. Are there new programs, majors, collaborations, etc. — noted in the White Paper or not — that folks would like to work on developing? Short term? Medium and long term?
2. Where do we reasonably see revenue growth possibilities in the next year? The next 2-3 years?

5. Other conversations we need to have?

5. What other conversations do we feel the faculty and board need to be having about how to address these budget concerns?
   
   For example: How can we carry out our goals of shared governance during a time with looming budget cuts?
   
   What else?