On behalf of the University of New Hampshire, I am pleased to welcome you to our campus. It is a privilege to participate in your discussions addressing critical issues in public higher education.

I speak on behalf of the University of New Hampshire, the state's only public university, a university with the three missions of teaching, research, and service in the land-grant tradition. As such, the University is obligated to create new knowledge, to communicate what is known to the next generation and to provide students with the tools for continued learning, and to apply its research and teaching to the needs of the state of New Hampshire. In addition, UNH is the institution with primary responsibility for the state's graduate programs. Thus, the University of New Hampshire is a different kind of educational institution than the other public institutions of the state.

New Hampshire's University programs are quite focused. There is no medical school, or veterinary school, or law school, or programs in architecture or pharmacy. On the Durham campus the academic programs are organized into just five colleges with the basic studies combined with applications of those basic studies. In our colleges, engineering and the physical sciences are combined, biological sciences and agriculture are combined, education and journalism live within the liberal arts, nursing is part of UNH's School of Health and Human Services, and economics is a program in the business school. As a consequence, interdisciplinary work is facilitated and many of the strongest programs at UNH are cross-disciplinary programs. These programs, together with the disciplinary programs, provide students with high quality educational experiences supported by faculty research and applications to real world settings. A distinctive feature of UNH is the integration of research and undergraduate education.

In addition to being a land-grant institution, UNH is also a sea-grant and a space-grant institution. Those additional designations indicate special federal funding for UNH's exceptionally strong programs in marine science and space science.

Much of the strength of UNH comes from its state-wide involvement. Our programs at Manchester increasingly address the difficult issues of urban areas and provide access to higher education for place-bound students in the state's population center; Cooperative Extension extends across the state working in areas of agricultural and natural resources, and also in programs directed toward communities, families, youth, and children. Our education programs are supportive of K-12 education and school reform efforts across the state. The research and graduate programs of the University increasingly match the needs of emerging and leading industry in the state; they provide the basis for the new development that these industries need; and they strengthen undergraduate education. Programs of these kinds--critical to New Hampshire's future--are in jeopardy as a consequence of severe underfunding by the state.

The University has serious financial problems and is reducing its programs at a time when external demands suggest we should be expanding in selected areas. UNH spends approximately 16% less than its peers to educate its students and spends only half what its peers spend on administration. Over the last eight years, external research funding at UNH has increased by 109%, degree candidate enrollments have increased by 11%, degree production has increased by 28%, but the number of UNH employees has increased by less than 1%. The state of New Hampshire receives excellent returns on its University investments. In addition to an educated citizenry, a recent study by Dr. Robert Puth in our Economics Department demonstrates that for each dollar of state expenditure on the University, at least $3 of increased revenue comes to the state.

I appreciate that your Study Committee is looking at the question of organizational structure for public higher education in the state. This is an important issue, but I must confess that it is not one I have devoted much attention to. As University President for the last 16 months, I have needed to be primarily concerned with how, in this environment of greatly constrained resources, we will maintain the quality of our educational programs, adapt current programs to the needs of a new day, provide access to a university education for all qualified students in the state, provide the number of baccalaureate and graduate degrees that will be required to support a knowledge intensive economy, provide modern tools of learning for students and faculty and distance learning opportunities in the workplaces of the state, prepare students for careers in an international economy, effectively match the University's program resources to the economic opportunities of New Hampshire, and maintain the aging physical facilities of our campus.

The three components of public higher education--community/technical colleges, state colleges, and the University--each address distinctive student goals and state needs. Each is important and it is critical that their missions not be blurred or homogenized. Indeed, the public is best served if the differences in mission among these institutions are recognized and supported.

A second very important issue before the committee is the area of student financial aid. The New Hampshire Incentive Grants and the Governor's Success Scholarships are extremely useful to University students, but they do not come close to meeting the needs of New Hampshire students. The University must use almost 24% of its total tuition dollars for student financial aid support. The number of University students qualifying for financial aid continues to increase. We are concerned that students spend too many hours a week earning tuition money and that they graduate with too much debt. Because the University meets the full need of in-state students, increases in tuition drive increases in financial aid. There is a clear need for additional funds for student scholarship support in New Hampshire. However, the current proposal for portable scholarships, as I understand the proposal, would not significantly increase the money that is available for New Hampshire students. Rather it would put the support of individual students in competition with the support for programs within the University System of New Hampshire. The other presidents and the Chancellor have spoken in detail about our position on this. We would be concerned that one outcome could be weakened state support for the public institutions that must provide high quality teaching, research, and service in support of the state's future and that a second outcome could be an expensive bureaucracy at the state level for the distribution of student financial aid.

I hope these comments are helpful to you. I will be happy to respond to your questions.