UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROJECT

Interview #345
ROUSE, MARY K.

ROUSE, Mary K. (1944- )
Staff; Dean of Students
At UW: 1967-

Interviewed: 1988	
Interviewer: Laura Smail
Index: Unknown & Jill Slaight
Length: 2 hours 50 minutes

Background; First position at UW; Appointment as dean of students; Plans; Policy regarding student orientation and counseling; Issues of academic misconduct; Support for family: spousal hires and child care; SOAR program; Fall plans for freshmen; WSA; Multicultural Center; Relationship with faculty.

First Interview Session (February 11, 1988): Tape 1

Tape 1

00:00:01	Background.  Husband's fellowship to UW graduate school.  To Madison 12/1/67.  Job admissions office.  Admissions to five-year program her first assignment. 

00:15:00	1969 had largest class to date of minority students.  Ruth Doyle.  Began MR's commitment to minorities, special students, foreign students. 

00:18:35	Spring 1973.  Job opening in dean of students' office.  Talked to Ginsberg.  He suggested she apply new job, assistant dean of students.  Long interview process.  MR surprised at offer of job.  July 1973 began.

00:21:00	Application for Dean of Students.  Subsequent appointment Shalala.  Belief could work well with her.

00:22:34	Surprise at appointment.  

00:24:10	Loves job.  Really didn't expect get job.  Very outspoken in interview.  May be token female, but doesn't think so. 

00:27:12	Interviewed the thirty people on staff in first month.  Began realizing things wanted to do.  Concern find way for women with children to work outside without neglecting children.

00:29:54	(from voice).   Discussed with employees.  Offered possibility of part time.

00:31:30	More detail on appointment as dean. 

00:41:55	In interviews, MR talked about changes thought ought to be made.  Faculty should know role dean's office plays.  Want do more for freshmen.  Donna Shalala and MR have agreed on everything.

00:45:22	Need more programming, more support to student organizations.  Ernest Boyer's The Undergraduate Experience.

00:48:02	Long standing commitment to eliminate -isms.  Mother disabled from polio.  

00:49:58	Helping troubled students and parents.  Her children.

00:52:30	Q. re changes in dean's office predicted by Ginsberg.  Different era now.  For first time a chancellor attentive to student life and interests.  DS asked MR if she'd like be included in cabinet.

00:55:34	Tradition of excellence in UW.  Can call on deans to help.

00:56:44	Q. re difficulty of colleagues' communicating.  Campus decentralized.  No Division of Student Affairs.  MR has committee of student service directors; to meet once a month.  One of goals is to improve networking.

00:59:11	End of First Interview

Second Interview Session (March 10, 1988): Tape 2

Tape 2

00:00:02	Changes in dean's office include more programming, e.g. orientation program, helping freshmen in first year, particularly minority students.

00:04:21	Joseph Kauffman's help.

00:06:09	General enthusiasm for program.  Students' concern re mandatory ethnic studies course.  

00:07:25	When Rouse assistant dean, tried organize meeting new freshmen living off campus.  Little response.  Students better connected with UW now. Idea expand SOAR around for 3 years.  Berkeley example.  Money for orientation cut back drastically last few years.  Reallocating money for this year, asking for money next year.  Need cooperation colleges.

00:14:12	Q. re counseling policy.  Shifting to Counseling Service. Lowest ratio counselors to students in Big Ten.  Goal to be accredited for training by American Psychological Association. Less counseling in dean's office.

00:19:03	Advocacy role of dean's office.  Example.

00:20:58	Why Counseling Service not accredited.

00:25:45	Q. re policy on academic misconduct (cheating).  Number of cases doubled this year.  Policy created by faculty, regents.  Student dean's office only administers.

00:29:10	End of side.

00:29:12	Cumbersome system.  System Administration reviewing. Comments on due process.

00:35:55	Orientation will include university's expectations, including no cheating.

00:37:30	MR's current concern: support for family.  Example: couple hiring; splitting positions.  Dean of Family Resources asked deans contribute to underfunded child care programs. 

00:42:19	Q. re departments' reactions hiring spouse.  Dilemmas posed. MR's comments.

00:48:28	Management Development Seminar.  Joe Kauffman teaching. Response to Rouse's talk on child care.  An ad in New York Times.

00:55:02	End of Second Interview

Third Interview Session (August 9, 1988): Tape 3

 Tape 3

00:00:01	New hires.  Hundreds of applicants.

00:01:51	Staff retreat to introduce new staff and review program.  Sense of teamwork.

00:06:10	Alliance for Undergraduate Education conference at Wingspread.  Influence of Ernest Boyer's book.  Plans for small classes taught by faculty for freshmen.

00:12:01	Pilot project for 1-credit course in history and functioning of UW-Madison.

00:17:19	Impact of retirements of Cohen, Cronon, and Bock in 1989.

00:19:26	Three reports being presented: Children, Families, and Child Care has gone to Shalala.  Parental Leave Committee nearly finished with report.  Alcohol and Drug abuse on campus. 

00:26:15	A wonderful year.  Difficulty is finding time.  Has more confidence now.  Her schedule.

00:29:12	(from voice)   Schedule continued.  

00:31:40	The SOAR program.  Problems created by addition of talk on racism.  Orientation continues to end freshman year.

00:34:14	Q. re WSA.  Importance of good relations.  New heads excellent.

00:38:50	Multi-cultural center in MR's budget.  Very important.  Need to involve faculty and staff.  Red Gym plan.

00:44:20	Q. re faculty interest in student dean's activities.  MR to speak to math department, hopes to other departments.  Wants contacts with TAs too.

00:47:50	Q. re dean's meetings.  Their brevity, humor.

00:51:05	University Committee's failure to take immediate stand on class disruptions in spring.  MR very angry at disruptions.  Need for strong University Committee.

00:54:21	End of Third Interview.

Fourth Interview Session (February 23, 2001): Tape 4

Time	Keywords
00:00:00	Start of Interview/Interviewer’s Introduction

00:00:18	Question: Vision for student services as Dean of Students? Answer: Mary Rouse (MR) described her path to deanship at UW-Madison. Her commitment to students motivated her to apply for the position in 1987.  After Rouse accepted the position, Donna Shalala became Chancellor. MR saw Shalala as a kindred spirit in her respect for students. Beyond supporting students, her initial goal as dean was to bolster student services and raise their visibility. 

00:05:43	Question: What specific changes did MR intend to make? Answer: Rouse set her sights on freshman orientation. She also wanted to recruit and retain minority and LGBT students more effectively.  Follow-up: What University policies were working well at the time? Answer: The UW was operating smoothly on the whole. 

00:08:15	Question: How had decentralization of student services affect student life? Answer: Rouse spoke about the lack of awareness of student services, as well as their remote locations on campus and inadequate staffing. 

00:11:05	Question: Concerns about Red Gym? Answer: The building was deteriorating. Student affairs needed a better, more central location. MR considered adapting Red Gym for this purpose, even if it could not house all student services. 

00:13:27	Question: Red Gym committee? Answer: Rouse spoke about Shalala, who started as chancellor after MR’s appointment (January 1988).  She told a story about buying Shalala a pin that read “short people are more down to earth.” Shalala established a committee to consider Red Gym’s future use and asked Rouse to chair it. 

00:16:15	Question: Connection between Red Gym project and her interest in student services? Answer: Rouse discussed her long-held interests in the Classics and history. With Red Gym, she saw an opportunity to combine historic preservation with adaptive use. 

00:18:40	Question: Operation of the Red Gym committee? Answer: Rouse praised the committee members – faculty, staff, and students. The committee conducted hearings and surveys to gauge the need for student service space.  

00:21:38	Question: Next step after committee work? Answer: Next, Rouse pursued funds from the Campus Planning Committee, and later from the UW System budget and the Board of Regents. She went through this process three or four times. Few thought the project would succeed, but students overwhelmingly supported it. Rouse spoke about obtaining a Historic Structures Report for the project. 

00:27:22	Question: How did she gain support at each level within the University? Answer: The committee crafted an effective presentation for the Campus Planning Committee. MR took advantage of her political, professional and personal contacts. She returned to the subject of historic preservation and stressed the project’s success in this arena. Follow-up: How did she use the Historic Structures Report (HSR) to garner support? Answer: MR continuously used information from the HSR about the building’s past and proposed uses. 

00:34:54	Question: Work with the State Historical Society? Answer: MR worked with Jeff Dean of the State Historical Society, which was initially reluctant about the project.

00:36:12	Question: Attitude of the State’s Facilities Management? Answer: They were never on board and did not see the importance of student services.  Follow-up: How did they change the direction of the project? Answer: They pressured Rouse to raise more funds and imposed matching funds in an effort to kill the project. She solicited $7.25 million in private funds, whereas only $5.5 million came from state taxpayer funds. 

00:39:04	Question: State Building Commission? Answer: They were opposed to the project, especially the Governor. Senator Fred Risser was a key advocate. 

00:40:50	Question: Changes in historic preservation during construction phase? Answer: A gift from the Morgridges introduced some changes. MR mentioned disputes between the architects involved, e.g. over materials used to clean bricks on the exterior façade.  Nevertheless, the project did not differ widely from its initial conception. 

00:43:10	Question: How did funding shape the project? Answer: The Morgridge gift brought the project much closer to completion. Follow-up: Financial support from the University? Answer:  The University advocated for the project within the UW System. Achieving National Historic Landmark status was crucial and resulted in funding from the Getty Foundation. 

00:46:04	Question: Morgridge donation? Answer: MR visited the Morgridges at their home in May 1994 and presented the project to them. In mid-August, John Morgridge e-mailed Rouse and indicated his and Tashia’s support. The stock they granted the project soon tripled in value. Subsequent support followed from other donors, as well as graduating classes. 

00:52:21	Question: How did she stay motivated? Answer: Rouse was confident in the project and its benefits for students. The building provides a better first impression to prospective students – and becomes a crucial point of reference for them later on. 

00:55:17	Question: Most difficult arguments against the project? Answer: Arguments that denied the building’s historical value or its renewal as a positive use of University funds. MR described an unexpected proposal to drastically cut back the project.

00:59:10	Question: How has the project affected the University’s attitude toward historic buildings? Answer: Positively. MR was chiefly concerned with demonstrating the continuities between past use and adaptive use. Follow-up: Feedback from alumni? Answer: Very positive. Rouse told a story about presenting photographs of Red Gym during a talk for the Attic Angels nursing home series. The pictures “transported” one resident who had attended UW-Madison back to her 1920s prom. 

01:03:45	Question: Would she do anything differently? Answer: In retrospect, the process was burdensome. Student support was fundamental. 

01:05:07	Question: Takeaways on historic preservation and adaptive use? Answer: The armory’s uniqueness as a campus hub resonated with many people. Preservation cannot occur without adaptive use. 

01:06:46	Question: Anything to add? Answer: No.

01:07:31	End of session. 

END OF INTERVIEW #345