Editorial
Campus policy changes need student input
December 3, 2025
This past semester, there have been many changes behind the scenes in how the UW–River Falls campus is structured. For most students, these changes, regardless of their impact, have seemed to come out of nowhere, yet they carry major repercussions for curriculum and academic life. Many of the changes are intended to help lower costs, but nearly all have sparked debate over whether they are helpful and, more importantly, whether they limit the academic freedom of professors and students.
Throughout the semester, discussions about academic freedom have continued, but students have had minimal involvement in shaping decisions or responding to them. This lack of student participation risks widening the divide not only between students and faculty but also among faculty and staff themselves. This is not to place blame on either group, but to emphasize that decisions about education policy must include all voices.
Students have often been left behind in communication. When Okta was announced in October to replace Duo as the campus verification program, many students were confused about when, how and why the change was being implemented. Aside from freshmen, most students did not see problems with Duo. While emails were sent, a clear explanation was never fully established. Even a month after Duo’s expiration, its login message remained on UW System websites, underscoring the lack of clarity.
For students, authentication systems are not just technical details. They are the gateways to grades, financial aid, registration and campus resources. When communication is unclear, students lose trust in the administration’s ability to manage systems that directly affect their daily lives. The rollout of Okta illustrates how even small changes can create frustration when students are not adequately informed.
More recently, discourse surrounding Act 15 and the UW System’s plan to reshape general education has raised concerns. As discussed in the last issue, the main controversy involves changes to UWRF’s Core General Education Requirements, particularly American Cultural Diversity (ACD) and Global Perspectives (GP). Under a new policy proposed by the UW Board of Regents, these requirements will be restructured.
As of this editorial, the Board of Regents has approved Resolution 4, which states:
“That, upon the recommendation of the President of the University of Wisconsin System, the Board of Regents approves the attached revisions to Regent Policy Document 20-25, ‘Teaching Workload Policy,’ and submission of the policy for review by the Joint Committee for Employment Relations consistent with s. 36.115(10), Wis. Stats., and directs implementation of the policy no later than September 1, 2026.”
This vote guarantees that starting in September 2026, UWRF’s general education requirements will be capped at 36 credits. While many understand the rationale, there is also a sense of betrayal and distrust, with some viewing the university’s actions as compliance rather than collaboration with the Regents.
Faculty Senate Chair Ozcan Kilic summarized the concern: “Excellence in teaching depends on faculty freedom, trust and scholarly engagement, not on compliance metrics.”
The stakes are high. ACD courses typically expose students to histories and perspectives of marginalized groups in the United States, while GP courses encourage students to think globally about culture, politics and economics. Cutting or reshaping these requirements risks narrowing the educational experience, especially for students who may not encounter these perspectives in their major coursework.
Because most courses at risk of being cut are in the College of Arts and Sciences (CAS), tensions have grown between CAS faculty and those in the College of Agriculture, Food and Environmental Sciences (CAFES), who are more supportive of the changes. Students often hear only the perspectives of professors in their own colleges, which risks widening the divide further. This divide reflects a broader tension in higher education between liberal arts and applied sciences, a tension that becomes sharper when resources are limited.
A survey was sent to students and faculty across the UW System to gather opinions. Of the 300 responses, most came from students, a step in the right direction. However, the survey results were not verified at the time of writing, and the survey was distributed only to CAFES.
This limited scope raises concerns of bias and undermines confidence in the process. Surveys are meant to capture broad perspectives, but when distribution is uneven, they risk reinforcing existing divisions rather than bridging them.
Amid the debate over ACD and GP, another course has received less attention: HEAL 108. The Faculty Senate did not discuss its removal at the Nov. 12 meeting, though it is being cut under the same mandates. Student conversations about HEAL 108 have been more positive, citing frustrations with its design, such as fees for repairing damaged smartwatches loaned to students.
HEAL 108 was designed to promote health literacy and wellness skills, but its flaws, from unclear assignments to equipment issues, left many students dissatisfied. While criticisms are valid, the apathy surrounding its removal sets a dangerous precedent.
If students dismiss general education requirements too easily, future cuts could harm the breadth of education. General education is meant to provide a foundation beyond one’s major, and losing courses without serious discussion risks weakening that foundation.
It is the responsibility of faculty to communicate clearly about campus changes, but students also have a responsibility to engage, ask questions and work with faculty to find solutions. Shared governance is a tradition in higher education, and it only works when students participate alongside faculty and administrators.
Regardless of your views on campus politics, the courses offered at UW–River Falls are for you, the students. While the Student Government Association has made attempts to include students in these discussions, much of the focus has remained on faculty perspectives. That is understandable, but the bond between students and faculty must be maintained to resolve issues in ways that serve the broader campus community.
It may be tempting to split into groups based on positions, college affiliation or personal investment, but division will only lead to infighting. At a time of significant change, students and faculty across all colleges must come together to discuss the best path forward.
Students should continue to engage with faculty, participate in surveys and attend forums when available. Clear communication and collaboration will be essential as UW–River Falls prepares for the implementation of new general education policies in 2026.