Board of Regents Policy Proposal Leaves Room for Debate

On Oct. 15, 2025, the UW-River Falls Faculty Senate passed a resolution responding to a proposed policy by the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents that would reduce the number of required general education credits. While the policy aims to streamline credit transfers across UW campuses, many faculty members say it undermines academic autonomy and raises concerns about transparency.

The proposal follows the enactment of Act 15 on July 3, 2025. Section 134 of the act amended Chapter 36.11(3)(b) of the Wisconsin State Statutes, requiring the Board of Regents to establish policies for transferring credits between UW institutions. By Sept. 1, 2026, all credits for core general education courses must be transferable and satisfy general education requirements at the receiving institution. The board must also submit a proposal to the Joint Committee on Employment Relations by Dec. 31, 2025.

Under the plan, core general education requirements would be organized into six categories, with a maximum of 12 courses totaling approximately 36 credit hours. The goal is to ensure that students who complete general education credits at one UW campus will have those credits recognized at another.

“In an ideal world we would have a lot of time to work on this,” said Dr. Wes Chapin, interim provost and vice chancellor for academic affairs. “And there may be some implications or effects on other programs.”

Faculty Senate members expressed concern over how the policy is being implemented. While many agree that credit transfer is beneficial, the process has been described as “shady.” Although Act 15 authorizes the Board of Regents to establish transfer policies, it does not grant authority to dictate curriculum at individual campuses.

Reports have surfaced that someone—either from the Board of Regents or the Wisconsin Legislature—has pressured UWRF to remove its general education requirements for Global Perspectives and American Culture and Diversity. It was implied that failure to comply could result in a loss of funding.

Additionally, the website hosting the proposed policy initially included a comment section for feedback, which was later removed. A response was issued, but it failed to clarify whose input had been considered.

“We create our own curriculum,” said Professor Erik Kline, a member of the Faculty Senate. “Our curriculum is not dictated by the state legislature, and certainly if there were to be demands about the classes we teach, that it’s not coming from some unclear voice.”

Faculty opinions on the resolution vary across colleges. Many professors in the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) supported the resolution, while faculty in the College of Agriculture, Food and Environmental Sciences (CAFES) viewed it as flawed. Some criticized the wording as “counterproductive,” and noted that faculty in CAS—who are more likely to be affected by potential cuts—were not adequately represented.

“I don’t think [the proposed policy] is done right from a top-down view,” said Dr. Patrick Woolcock, professor of engineering and engineering technology. “But the fact remains that we’re a state organization.”

Students have also weighed in. While some worry about the long-term consequences of reducing general education requirements, others see potential benefits. Currently, general education courses make up 33% of required coursework, and some students feel that reducing this number would allow them to focus more on major-specific classes. Others say scheduling conflicts prevent them from choosing general education courses that truly interest them.

Because student opinion is divided, Woolcock and Student Government Association President Madeline Nelson are developing a survey for students, faculty and external stakeholders to share their views. They believe students should have a voice in both campus-wide and statewide discussions.

“It’s our education that is being affected,” Nelson said. “We want to make sure that students that come to institutions and all UW institutions gain a well-rounded education, and Gen-Ed requirements are essential to that.”

Discussions surrounding the policy are expected to continue through the fall. Both the Faculty Senate and SGA plan to work toward a solution that supports academic integrity, student needs and institutional autonomy.