“Public Ivy.”
Richard Moll, an admissions officer at Yale University, originated the term in his 1985 book titled “Public Ivies: A Guide to America’s best public undergraduate colleges and universities.” He noted eight schools that offer an Ivy League experience at a public school price, naming University of Michigan as the leader — “the prototype Public Ivy.”
History Prof. Terrance McDonald, director of Bentley Historical Library, echoed this sentiment in an interview with the Daily. He said the term Public Ivy defines public universities with very high prestige that are on par with the Ivy League universities.
Though the term has been used in defining the University for the past thirty years, the University has experienced success since its origin in 1817 because of two unique factors.
Unlike many state universities, the University was founded at a request from the federal government: specifically, a land grant from Congress. Congress — not the state — initiating the creation of the University suggests to some that the University should equally strive to serve all Americans, not primarily Michigan state citizens.
Second, because the University was created before the state of Michigan was created, the original 1851 state constitution did something unheard of in the history of state universities: the constitution granted the University complete autonomy from the state legislature. That is, the governing Board of Regents had complete control over all University matters and in no way was controlled by state legislators.
“The constitutional autonomy is one of the most important features of the University,” said President Emeritus James Duderstadt, who served as President from 1988 to 1996, in an interview. “It allows the University, its Board of Regents, and faculty to really think very carefully of how to build the quality of the institution and not be subject to the whims of today.”
Regent Kathy White (D), chair of the Board of Regents, said the end result of the Michigan framers intentions has been the creation of fifteen excellent, autonomous public universities.
“It is very impressive that framers of the state Constitution thought carefully about higher education and how important autonomy is for good governance,” White wrote in an e-mail.
McDonald agrees that these characteristics are unique.
“This (autonomy) had a huge impact on the rest of the history of the University because it was a publicly run but a very self-organized institution in contrast with public universities elsewhere that were micromanaged by the state legislator,” McDonald said
McDonald likens this historical independence, as well as religious independence — the University has consistently been a secular institution — as contributing factors to why the University has been so successful.
Moreover, this autonomous system took the University out of the public realm while still provided political accountability, because the people of Michigan must vote to elect the regents.
The regents serve eight-year terms. They are not constantly running for re-election, which allows them to take a long-term view of how the University is growing.
“Having an autonomous governing board that is solely focused on the university allows the Regents to make decisions that are best for the institution over the long-term,” White said. “Those who seek election to the Board of Regents have a very deep commitment to the University and to the public that it serves.”
The citizens of Michigan elect regents so that citizens’ voices and concerns about the University are represented.
“At the time, the public had a much more cynical view toward standard politics and government,” Duderstadt said. “That is one of the reasons why they wanted to control how regents were elected rather than appointed by a governor or other mechanisms.”
The University of California system — the other flagship public research university comparable to the University of Michigan — also boasts a Board of Regents constitutionally autonomous from its state legislator.
After the Civil War and the passage of the Morrill Act — an act providing public lands to each state to build colleges with a focus on agriculture and mechanics education — the California Assembly passed the legislation creating the University of California. According to Duderstadt, pages from the Michigan constitution were inserted in this legislation, giving the University of California the same constitutional autonomy the University of Michigan has held for many years.
The UC system is different though, because California’s state governor appoints the regents, instead of the people of California electing them.
Additionally, the University of Michigan Board of Regents has sued the state, which has strengthened the true meaning of their autonomy, unlike the regents of the UC system.
The 2003 Supreme Court case Grutter v. Bollinger, concerning the use of affirmative action in college admissions policy, is an example of the University’s Board of Regents national leadership.
“The (UC system) regents’ autonomy hasn’t been defined through the courts in the same way the state of Michigan has had constitutional autonomy defined,” Duderstadt said.
The UC system has historically received generous funding from their state legislator, whereas in the Michigan state legislator higher education funding has not been a large priority.
Duderstadt likens this lack of state support, contradictorily, to this autonomy, as well as the success of national research funding the University has received from outside donors and the state of Michigan’s economic tragedy of 1980.
Prior to the Civil War, the University relied on the sale of its federal lands and student fees instead of the state’s resources to fund expansion. According to Duderstadt, this is a continued reason that has caused the University to regard itself as much as a national university as a state university.
These opposing facts — that the University must serve the nation but is run by leaders who capture the votes from citizens of Michigan only — contribute to issues of ownership and who exactly the University should be serving.
White said she believes that, in striving for excellence, the University not only serves the state of Michigan well but the nation and the world. She stressed though that the commitment made to state students is particularly extraordinary. An example of this is the University’s commitment to lower tuition for in-state students.
“(The election process) ensures that those who become stewards of the University have listened to the people of the state of Michigan, separately from other political entities in the state,” White said. “This gives great ownership of this institution to the people of the State of Michigan.”
Different University presidents have had a variety of ideas of what the University should be providing when it comes to if they are serving the state or the nation first.
While serving as President of the University in the late 1800s, President Emeritus James Angell said the University of Michigan’s purpose was to “provide a common education for the common man.”
According to Duderstadt, the fraction of students who come from low-income families has dropped in the last 10 years. In 2011, 63 percent of incoming freshmen reported family incomes over $100,000.
“Today, we are not providing a common education for the common man.” Duderstadt said. “This is in part because the state has abandoned its level of support for students based on need.”
Duderstadt says right now is a time where less than 10 percent of support comes from the state, and this fact may change, therefore changing citizens sense of ownership.
“I think right now if you look at the quality of the University, our form of selecting regents seems to work so well,” he said. “I’ve seen both sides of it though and I think it depends on the time. It is my hope we can be much more influential in the years ahead in persuading the people of the state just how important it is to invest in higher education.”
McDonald argues that the citizens of Michigan have a large sense of ownership because of how expansive the University campus is and how far it reaches, but may not always be attentive to the changes the regents are making.
“Michigan citizens on the whole are not paying close attention to what is going on at the University but at the same time they appear confident in the University and are pretty proud of it,” he said. “The average attitude towards the University I think is quite positive.”
Despite conflicting views, because of how the University is defined as a state university and how the Board of Regents is elected by the citizens of Michigan, the University should be serving the people of Michigan first. But because of its origins, the University has always done its best to go beyond the state level and serve the nation and the world.
Its creation from a congressional land grant and the Board of Regents being autonomous from the state of Michigan have shaped the University’s unique structure. This structure has allowed the University to think bigger, grow expansively and truly be distinctive in the higher educational world.