UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN-MADISON ARCHIVES
ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM

Interview #1063
KOOISTRA, FRANK

KOOISTRA, FRANK (1941-)
Associate Dean for Administration, CALS
At UW:  [as undergraduate] 1960-1965; [as administrator in CALS] 1969-2011

Interviewed: 	2009 (5 sessions)
Interviewer: 	Robert Lange
Index by: 	Stephen A. Pierce
Length: 	7 hours, 43 minutes

Abstract: In his five November/December 2009 interviews with Bob Lange, Frank Kooistra details his five-decade involvement with UW-Madison, first as a Short Course student and ending in a assistant deanship in the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences.  Kooistra chronicles his journey from rural Wisconsin life to college to US Army service and into academia. He offers memories of the Vietnam protests, major CALS figures, transitions in administrative and academic structure, academic staff organization, and his service in the Gambia, West Africa. This interview was conducted for inclusion into the UW-Madison Oral History Program.

Key Words: Harvard IL; Darien WI; Short Course; University of Wisconsin-Madison; Vietnam War; College of Agricultural and Life Sciences (CALS); Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF); student protests; Ag Hall; Internal Review Board (IRB) and Human Subjects Clearance; Glenn Pound; Ken Shapiro; Leo Walsh; Irving Shain; Madison Area Computing Cooperative (MACC); computers; Roger Wyse; Gambia; US Agency for International Development (USAID); Hays-Hill retitling; academic staff; Extension Merger (1965); Michael Pollan; food systems; Molly Jahn; Neil Jorgenson; Donna Shalala; John Wiley; David Ward; Carolyn “Biddy” Martin.

First Interview Session (November 5, 2009): Digital File

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

00:00:28	Question: Talk about your birthplace and parents. Answer: Kooistra was born Dec. 20, 1941 in Woodstock IL. He talked about his parents’ heritage, value for (or lack of) education, work in agriculture and nursing, and marriage in 1940. He described his father as a “rascal” and described his father and mother’s somewhat rocky early relationship.

00:05:49	Question: Was your father drafted? Answer: No; he got a deferment as the only son in the family.  He describe the Harvard IL farm, his two siblings’ births, and moving to Sharon WI and elsewhere.

00:08:06	[no question] He detailed the ownership and running of his father’s farms, which his grandparents owned. He recalled the character-building activities of the farm and the expectation that kids would work rather than doing a lot of extracurricular activities. Follow up: What kind of character? Answer: He thought it instilled hard work and honesty, though they envied the town kids.

00:13:25	[no question] He talked about going to Delavan-Darien HS, where he was tracked in the agricultural program but also took college-prep classes to be with his friends (not due to any interest in college). He then went to the pre-1961 Short Course at UW. 
	
00:16:12	[no question] He talked about influences on his future college career—most of the decision to take pre-college courses was social, but he didn’t have any interest in going into agriculture.  Thus, when all his friends went off to college, he was lonely and decided to take seriously his classes—he also got a small scholarship.

00:19:07	Question: What was Short Course like then? Answer: He recalled how most students came to have fun, not to seriously study—he thought it got better in later years. Follow up: So you hadn’t rejected agriculture? Answer: No; just not milking cows. 

00:20:57	[no question] He recalled meeting Jack King in Short Course, with whom he developed a good friendship and decided they would next year enroll in the regular program. His pas-sable HS grades prepared him for college, but he still reminisced about several moments in his life when he was intimidated—the night before his first class; his first chemistry exam; and depending on his entrance exams to get into officer training during Vietnam.

00:24:51	Question: What was UW like in 1961? Answer: He recalled academic standards being lower and social life being different—women’s hours, beer was ever-present but without much abuse. UW was smaller then, and he remembered the “Little International” livestock show being much bigger. He explained the location of his fraternity.

00:29:29	Question: Talk about your 4 years in Ag. Answer: He started in agronomy, moved to soils and then food science. Food science was a good match for him, and he talked about the conflict between the agriculture students and the business students in food science.

00:34:16	Follow up: What about Food Science lured you away from soils? Answer: He thought it was the fact that he wanted to get into management. He said later in college he worked summers at Babcock dairy plant and then at agricultural statistical reporting for the government in Madison. But he found government work boring.

00:37:35	Question: What were your parents thinking of your direction? Answer: He said they were very supportive, even when his brother and sister came to UW as well. He thought his father secretly hoped he’d come back to the farm. But then his father had a heart attack after which he had to quit farm work for health reasons.

00:40:17	Question: Any other subjects of interest? Answer: Kooistra said that all the business school courses were enjoyable, and also talked about ROTC.

00:41:02	[no question] He discussed graduating with a deferment because he was married, but when he found out his number was about to come up, he enlisted.

00:42:47	[no question] Returning to reflections about his collegiate career, he talked about how Alpha Gamma Rho (his fraternity) was a major influence on him.

00:43:56	Follow up: Was there a liberal arts requirement? Answer: Yes; he regretted there not being a foreign language requirement, but it was otherwise a standard 2-yr L&S curriculum. Follow up: Admissions and weeding out? Answer: They didn’t say it explicitly, but he remembered it vividly.

00:47:06	Follow up: Was the campus active protesting yet? Answer: Not yet; but everyone saw what was coming and was trying to enlist in the reserves. So he tried to enlist in Officer Candidate School (OCS), which he got into with flying colors.

00:49:42	[no question] He recounted his experience of going to Chicago on the troop train that took them to Fort Leonard Wood to begin his training. When his train-mates stole his suit-case and began abusing him because he was obviously not from Chicago and was just out of college, a black staff sergeant came to his help. He explained how a friend of his was also abused in a similar manner.

00:55:09	[no question] He continued to explain his training for OCS, from Ft. Leonard Wood (basic) to Ft. Sill (Officer Prep), and then he was deployed to work with field artillery OCS on Pershing missiles.

00:58:48	Follow up: After training? Answer: He finished in 1966, after which he and his wife were deployed with Pershing missile unit to Mainz, Germany, then to Neu Ulm, both of which he described as very nice. He talked about his rank before getting out. Follow up: Pershing missiles? Answer: He explained how they were long range nuclear capable surface-to-surface missiles with top clearance. He also explained the duty schedule for the unit and life in Germany at this tense time.

01:03:51	Follow up: Being a commander? Answer: He said he enjoyed it. He recounted doing a missile test-drill and retiring as a Lt. Col. from the reserves. Follow up: Did you think about staying in the military? Answer: No; he said he’d been offered the possibility in Germany of extending to make captain, but he didn’t want to go to Vietnam. He also related how he discovered first hand that, during disciplinary hearings, the military wasn’t interested in justice, but in punishing.

01:09:11	Question: After getting out in 1969? Answer: He didn’t know what he was going to do, but could continue with Statistical Reporting or take up another friend’s offer to take up his position as an administrative specialist in Ag Hall (without any posting or interviewing) running the federal Hatch funds coming into CALS.

01:12:45	[no question] He described coming back and starting his new job, having three babies in 3 years thereafter, and taking more graduate credits than was necessary to get his masters degree.

01:14:40	Question: What’s CALS like at this point? Answer: It has changed—partly because faculty changed from begin loyal to the school to being entrepreneurial and loyal to their research. Follow up: It was well regarded? Answer: Yes; Cornell and UW have been the top two agriculture schools for a long time.

01:17:53	[no question] Continuing to talk about CALS status nationally, he said it had been set apart by the existence of WARF (handling intellectual property) and Hatch funds, which faculty had to compete for. 

01:19:49	Question: 1969-71 is a tumultuous time on campus. Answer: Yes; Kooistra recalled being tear gassed during an accounting exam, walking through picket lines to get to class, and sharing his moderate opinions on the draft.

01:22:40	Question: Was Ag Hall affected by protests? Answer: Yes, because ROTC was close.

01:23:42	Follow up: So you remember Sterling Hall? Answer: He felt it all the way in Sun Prairie where they were living.

01:25:24	End of First Interview Session

Second Interview Session (November 10, 2009): Digital File

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

00:00:23	Question: Continue. Answer: He reviewed his decision to come back to UW rather than work for the federal government. He got his master’s degree not because he thought he’d go into higher ed, but to avail himself of the GI Bill.

00:02:29	[no question] When he got his MA, however, he thought he would test the market and was about to be offered a job with Kimberley-Clark when his advisors asked him to stay at UW. They offered a promotion and salary increase.

00:05:48	Follow up: What was this position? Answer: He again explained his role as the manager of the federal Hatch program funds, which were critical in mentoring new professors in how to write grants. 

00:10:04	Follow up: Did each college have an IRB? Answer: Each major college had a human subjects review committee, though that had changed over time.

00:11:28	Question: Your new role broadened your understanding of the college. Answer: He explained the “pipeline” of grants and his liaison with the Grad School, describing his job as “beautiful” in an era when there wasn’t so much oversight on compliance. Remarking on the overwhelming bureaucracy that had developed for compliance, he opined that something had to change.

00:16:52	Follow up: Was it CALS by then? Answer: Yes, just prior to his arrival, the name was changed to CALS by Glenn Pound. Follow up: Why the change? Answer: It was an attempt to highlight the importance of life science components to the Ag school, which set UW apart and was the cornerstone of the biology departments on campus. Follow up: Opposition? Answer: It’s always been a reluctance internally.

00:22:39	Question: Describe CALS at this point. Answer: Kooistra observed that when he first came, Glenn Pound was dean and “ran a very tight ship” with an inner core of associate deans. Pound, he said, had a strong connection to the “Ag coalition” and was politically powerful. 

00:25:32	[no question] Continuing to describe CALS, he said that Pound retired and Leo Walsh was hired in 1975—a good researcher but without the pedigree and political connec-tions that Pound had. He saw this as a period of decline, with greater exertion of control from Bascom and more budget cuts. He noted that CALS historically took a bigger budget cut than other campus units, he thought because of 101-4 funds and Hatch funds that CALS were given.

00:30:49	Question: Was Walsh’s coming from Extension met with dismay? Answer: Yes; he didn’t think the hard sciences or Bascom Hall ever respected Walsh, but credited him with having an international vision, hiring Ken Shapiro to overtake this work. He felt that Walsh started behind the 8-ball and never recovered. He also explained how Walsh had shot himself in the foot by showing up Shain after a trip to China, which Shain never forgot.

00:35:37	Question: You were promoted to Assoc. Dean for Administration in 1981. Answer: He noted that while it wasn’t his early career goal, he stayed for almost 25 years total. He explained the complexities of the transition to Walsh’s administration, during which his two mentors had gradually become old guard rather than the in crowd and resented it. Thus he always felt caught between his mentors and Walsh during that transitional period, and later had to compete for the assoc. dean’s job.

00:42:55	Follow up: What was the range of responsibilities of assoc. dean? Answer: Kooistra explained that a human resources officer and 5 business services reported to him; when he became dean, however, computers were just beginning to be used, and it was his job to bring information technology into the office. 

00:44:23	[no question] Kooistra recalled having a lot of fun in those days because he discovered that, in an effort to be frugal, his predecessor turned back over a million dollars of state funds to the college unspent. So after increasing departments’ base budget with the money, he bought $1/2 million of computer equipment from Wang. 

00:48:16	[no question] Explaining his choice to buy from Wang despite opposition from Apple users, he said he felt they needed to be moving toward minicomputing. When Wang went bankrupt, then, they were able to transition easily to IBM.

00:49:42	[no question] He continued talking about the financial and departmental issues related to buying computer equipment. When he confronted dept administrators on leaving resources unspent, he was taken to task on the issue because they were penalized at times for allowing their accounts to go into overdraft. Also, when chairs found out they had extra money, he found he had less extra money to spend.

00:52:27	Question: Relationship with Walsh? Answer: Good—while he felt Walsh never got credit for good things he did, he admitted that during Walsh’s tenure CALS “went into the tank,” partly because Walsh tended to “kite positions.” Walsh always thought there were pots of money available, which led to a financial deficit.

00:55:28	Question: CALS relationship to family v. corporate farming? Answer: He related “jumping back and forth” on this issue, citing a survey about the decline of the family farm and the stress created by rising production but falling number of farms. He also noted the difference between farming today (which was a “computer world”) and the way it put distance between CALS (and Extension) and farmers.

01:00:10	Follow up: What’s the implication for CALS? Answer: He thought that Extension was still valuable, but every CALS department was becoming more scientific.

01:02:28	Question: During your first stint as assoc. dean, was there more corporate money flowing into CALS? Answer: No; that support has been steady; growth had come in competitive granting from federal agencies by talented young scientists. He addressed the claim that CALS was overly dependent on corporate financing.

01:05:08	Question: How does a person like Jim Crow get into CALS? Answer: He observed that both Genetics and Urban Planning historically answer to 2 deans, partly in CALS. He addressed concerns that some CALS departments seemed to duplicate other departments in other schools, and observed that campus governance would disallow any dean from trying to move all economics, planning, etc. into one campus unit. 

01:10:47	[no question] Continuing to talk about how campus shared governance prevented deans from trying to interfere in departmental affairs, he gave the example of AHABS (Animal Health and Biomedical Sciences—old Vet Science). Former dean Wyse, in an effort to get FTEs, told Vet Science that their core mission wasn’t in line with CALS, which prompted AHABS to secede to the Vet School. This somewhat rash decision eventually resulted in their four departments being dissolved into the Vet School.

01:17:52	Question: Construction Administration? Answer: He explained the history of this program, which was abolished by dean Weiss. This taught students how to bid contracts, etc., but Weiss was under the crunch of budget cuts and tried cut out departments that weren’t core to CALS mission.

01:20:47	[no question] He explained how Roger Wyse only stayed as dean of CALS for about 5 years, because he alienated all his department chairs, who asked him to be removed. Ultimately, he was only removed because of an illicit affair he had with a subordinate.

01:22:37	Follow up: Were the AHABS and Constr. Admin. decisions good? Answer: It was reasonable of Wyse to get more resources out of AHABS but it wasn’t in their best interest to leave. The Construction Administration, however, he thought short-sighted.

01:25:31	Question: What’s it like to balance this powerful position? Answer: He remarked that the only one he could really confide in was his wife, because the faculty were instru-mental in hiring him, but he had to be loyal to the dean. He said the most uncomfor-table he got was when Walsh thought there was still money when there wasn’t. So when he came back from Africa and Wyse was coming into the deanship

01:27:41	[no question] He explained the complicated administrative scenario that involved him going to Africa, then returning there during a period when Wyse, Donna Shalala, and Len Van Ess all transitioned into positions at UW. When he came back after  a military coup, then, Van Ess was in his job and he fortunately was able to work in International Development Services until he was offered his old job back.

01:33:42	[no question] Continuing to describe the transitional period in which he got his old job back, he discussed Len Van Ess, who he described as “a class guy” and the perfect partner for Irv Shain. A great devil’s advocate, Van Ess didn’t work well with Wyse. He also detailed practical office relationships in Wyse’s office.

01:37:14	Question: Was selection of deans one of Shalala’s weaknesses? Answer: He thought so; like Shalala, Wyse was a mover, but didn’t understand the administrative structure on campus (partly because Shalala wanted to change the culture).

01:39:50	End of Second Interview Session

Third Interview Session (November 12, 2009): Digital File

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

00:00:24	Question: Talk about Africa. Answer: Kooistra explained that in 1985, CALS won a USAID project called GUARD (Gambia Agricultural Research and Diversification). He explained the location and climate of Gambia, and the school’s mission to work with the Ministry of Agriculture to implement an R&D component to it.

00:03:31	[no question] He describes the excitement surrounding the project (led by Shapiro and expected to last 10-15 years), which they thought would develop human capital. 2-yr terms were normal for the project, and in 1988 he was asked to review the manage-ment of the project. He described accounting and budgetary problems, though the scientific end was going well.

00:06:34	Follow up: How long? Answer: He was there for 3 weeks; while apprehensive before-hand, afterward he wished he could have stayed longer. He got the opportunity when asked to implement an accounting/budget system, and then again when one of his colleague’s 2-year term was up. He asked to replace him.

00:09:22	[no question] About this time, the project was up for its 5-yr review. He explained USAID’s constant interest in new projects and CALS refusal to turn over the project to Extension agents when that was outside their jurisdiction. So when they only got a 2-yr extension, Kooistra requested to go wrap the project up.

00:13:16	[no question] He recounted beginning their time in Africa—they dropped their youngest daughter off at UW-Oshkosh, left for Gambia, and knew he’d love it. By the time he arrived, USAID had decided to abandon agriculture and move to the “hot topic” of the environment and natural resources. But because the Gambian ministry had seen CALS’ work, they asked Kooistra to stay on with a project financed by the World Bank.

00:16:12	[no question] He talked about the colonial and ethnic heritage of Gambia.

00:17:09	[no question] Continuing his narrative about Africa, he described how “things went south” with his relationship with USAID’s Ag and Natural Resources project and the IMF agent in Gambia. When his counterpart at USAID ran into personal problems, he was asked to step in and he jumped at the chance to salvage the program.

00:20:44	[no question] Continuing to talk about the USAID project in the Gambia, he observed that it went well until 1994 when some US officers led a coup in the country. He describes details of the coup and his experience of it. Because the US government doesn’t support military governments, their project got shut down and he was the last technician to leave the country.

00:25:17	[no question] He described his ongoing relationship with Gambia, doing consulting because IMF, World Bank, etc. knew him. In fact, he’d continued to do consulting in a number of foreign countries, including Malawi and Bangladesh.

00:27:17	Follow up: Did you imagine this trajectory? Answer: Not at all, coming from small-town Delavan to working internationally. He talked about how his first wife never made the transition, which led to a divorce. Follow up: Has this been through CALS? Answer: No; all independent.

00:30:47	Follow up: UW’s connections to Africa? Answer: He agreed and talked about how CALS was still engaged, though to a lesser extent, internationally. Since Walsh, CALS leadership had focused on WI.

00:33:40	[no question] He said that he’d never felt threatened in his international experiences, but shared an anecdote about how after the coup there was a countercoup during which there was automatic weapons fire right outside his house wall.

00:35:52	Question: Gambia today? Answer: He said it was “bad news,” talking about his second marriage to a Gambian woman and the corruption of the coup’s leader in the 1990s. He also discussed the pre-colonial slaving history of Gambia and the ethnic groups there.

00:42:50	Follow up: Is there an informal group of professors who’ve served in Africa? Answer: He talked about the African Association of Madison, of which he was treasurer. He related how one funeral for a member attracted over 500 Africans and Madison has a large Gambian population.

00:48:18	Follow up: You would go back to Africa? Answer: Yes;  he discussed taking possible projects coming up, CALS’ lack of engagement with what he did due to the way funds are allocated, and how few people he still knew in Gambia. 

00:54:23	[no question] He concluded this section by noting that he was committed to Africa but was discouraged by the corruption and the US government’s ability to do much leading to long-term stability. He was frustrated that his work was limited by the half-life of the computer hardware that they were using and the obsolescence of Paradox software.

00:57:14	Follow up: Is Africa ungovernable or are governments colonial creations? Answer: He saw some cause for optimism from some countries that are democratic, the eclipse of apartheid, etc. Follow up: An educated class? Answer: He emphasized the importance of education, citing a monitoring trip he’d made with the ministry that showed up gender disparities, etc., though this was more typical of rural communities.

01:03:30	Follow up: Are there still many Africans coming to university in the US? Answer: Yes; many came to UW and never left the US. Many want to go home.

01:05:34	Question: Talk about academic staff governance. Answer: He began reviewing his long history with shared governance, and thought he got involved because his role was a bridge from academic to campus programs and he got to know key people in campus administration—Mareda Weiss, Dorothy Klinefelter, Bob Dye, Don Miner. He called this cohort “junior administrators.”

01:07:36	[no question] He explained how the cohort just mentioned decided to gather after hours to share stories and network (the Concerned Administrators Group—CAG), and how it matured to meetings at homes, professional development group, and becoming a very important campus group.

01:09:40	[no question] He detailed the effect of Hays-Hill retitling, which pigeonholed adminis-trators and set up a salary structure. Thereafter, campus administration realized they needed policies and procedures for academic staff, and he was asked to serve on Tom Hoover’s committee that crafted a P&P document. He was elected to the first academic staff committee, and while he was in Africa the Academic Staff Assembly was formed, which he served in.

01:14:34	Question: What issues were you dealing with? Answer: Collective bargaining continued to come up, though he objected to how the process worked (enabling legislation, etc.). 

01:17:07	[no question] He observed that the whole culture at UW had shifted, noting that the terminology at UW was no longer “faculty governance” but “shared governance. He talked about academic staff committees and the large number of academic staff who are represented on other committees. He discussed more on his thoughts on the academic staff committee and other involvement at the college level.

01:20:41	[no question] In a larger context, he noted that academic staff have taken over some of the administrative functions of the university as faculty try to concentrate on research—PIs, training, etc.

01:23:26	Question: Are you frustrated at the increasing power of Bascom Hall? Answer: Yes and no; the academic staff, having not had a voice until the 1970s, don’t remember what “faculty governance” was like and think it’s a good change.

01:27:18	Question: Joanne Elder? Answer: She was a key person.

01:28:34	Question: The future for academic staff? Answer: He thought that the state’s obligation to other budgetary issues was progressively pushing education lower, citing large budget cuts in CALS staff in the last years. He thought as this pushed on the academic staff, it might unionize in the near future. He and Lange talked about PROFS and ASPRO.

01:34:39	Question: UW is in tough shape. Answer: Yes; he discussed how the campus would have to deal with budget cuts. Follow up: Do you think UW will fall to the 2nd tier? Answer: He didn’t think so—UW had WARF, a very creative faculty, growing intellectual property rights.  He questioned why UW was here in the first place, and didn’t suppose UW would just freefall.

01:41:35	End of Third Interview Session

Fourth Interview Session (December 3, 2009): Digital File
Time	Keywords

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

00:00:24	Question: Talk about the evolution of CALS. Answer: Having reviewed joining CALS in 1969, Kooistra remarked that the cost of compliance with federal guidelines had led to a huge expansion of the administration—what he did before now requires a staff of 6, and the faculty-staff ratio had drastically changed while the number of undergrads had stayed relatively constant.

00:05:00	[no question] Continuing to talk about CALS’ evolution, he again observed the shift in faculty allegiance from the program/outreach in early days to now individual research.

00:06:13	[no question] Another thing that had changed drastically was the quality of students, who now only included the upper 10% of HS classes. Follow up: Is that a good change? Answer: He said it was an unavoidable change, since resource reductions meant capped enrollment. There were positives and negatives to it.

00:10:27	Follow up: Compare graduates now than years ago? Answer: Kooistra didn’t feel qualified to answer, but felt that earlier graduates were very successful, with more CEOs than just about any other university. 

00:12:24	[no question] He thought perhaps UW’s education might even be slightly less than before because the same size student body are taught by fewer professors. He thought CALS’ professor-student ratio and undergrad advising set it apart from other colleges.

00:14:41	Follow up: Diminishing accessibility of education? Answer: He agreed with this perspective, but felt the harsh reality was that with a diminishing number of seats, one had to be selective.  He also felt that it improved UW’s standing and helped to avoid some of the abuses of athletically-driven schools.

00:17:12	Question: Are the bulk of CALS students still farm kids? Answer: No; the demogra-phic used to be predominantly male with the exception of Home Economics, which left CALS during Pound’s deanship. But today 55% of students were female and many were pre-med or pre-vet (very different from before).

00:20:34	Follow up: Was the focus farming before? Answer: Yes, or farm-related. These are still big but less; landscape architecture, horticulture and biology/biochemistry have been growth fields, reflecting the scientific bent of CALS. He said the new dean was pushing for the school to be more visionary in its curriculum.

00:23:00	Question: Where have faculty reductions come? Answer: Biochemistry and some life sciences have held, having availed themselves of cluster hiring; but production depts like food science, agronomy, and Ag Econ have taken hits, as well as Extension.

00:24:46	[no question] He continued to talk about changes in CALS, complaining that the “merger” of Cooperative Extension was actually a pulling apart of the successful WI model of integrating Extension and research. But outreach delivery was also changing with the enormous amount of information available on the Internet.

00:27:52	Question: The net effect of the merger of extension? Answer: He thought it was hard for people to see beyond their local perspective and change was hard to accept, though it was inevitable with program and funding shifts.  He thought it was easier to admini-ster when it was in the colleges, having been in on the ground floor of the creation of the inter-institutional agreement which tried to untangle the budgeting process. He explained how these complicated budgetary practices never quite worked out.

00:33:20	Question: Do you get students interested in running large farms? Answer: He thought so, though he emphasized that the scientific reputation of UW attracted people for a specific reasons and the “real farm kids” go to Plattville and River Falls. Follow up:  Not a policy? Answer: No; this was just an adaptation to resources and rising admissions standards; he cited how his own farm experience limited his time.

00:37:25	Follow up: Is this limitation detrimental to CALS? Answer: Perhaps. He observed that one of the most vibrant alumni programs was the Farm and Industry Short Course, which built allegiance to UW over a short period of time and was a basic mission of CALS. On the other hand, the dairy and other courses had begun to suffer during bad budgetary years. He also talked about the ambiguity even of the name of CALS, which led people to think it as a farming college.

00:43:26	Question: Organic farming and food systems v. corporate farming? Answer: He said CALS had adapted, having to “serve all of our masters” by increasing organic farming research in the last 5 years but still accepting corporate gifts within a policy environ-ment that protected UW. He cited how Rural Sociology held CALS to a high standard

00:46:34	Follow up: The feeling at CALS about bringing Michael Pollan? Answer: He said they weren’t happy, since they knew it would create a firestorm and generate a lot of administrative work. 

00:48:10	He and Lange talked about how the organic movement, etc, affected not only CALS but the individual household. He was suspicious of whether organic products were naturally better than one’s that availed technologies of enhanced productivity, he didn’t have a problem with people paying more money for desired products. He also noted that CALS had the difficult task of operating “on both sides of the ledger.”

00:52:23	Question: Fundraising? Answer: He observed that when the new dean, Molly Jahn, arrived, she pointed out how far the college was behind on fundraising  and the opportunities this presented; but he didn’t feel that CALS had the kind of alumni base that could contribute like School of Business or Med School grads could.

00:54:50	[no question] Continuing to talk about fundraising, he supposed that the state funding of CALS was only 17% (including tuition)—the remainder was from federal granting and development. He explained the importance of gift money for operating budgets and building campaigns.

00:58:48	Question: Does CALS have an independent relationship with the legislature? Answer: No; Glenn Pound had particular sway with the ag coalition, but a) agriculture had diminished in its legislative power and b) legislators had less and less allegiance to Madison and more to local UW schools. While he didn’t like this change, he thought it had to happen. He reflected on alumni support for CALS, which remained steady.

01:02:43	[no question] He talked about positive change at CALS. He credited Jahn with having major vision, merging faculties into new departments and changing dept names. But he noted that change didn’t happen as fast as Jahn envisioned.

01:05:33	Follow up: Does taking a hard look at who you’re serving mean agriculture? Answer: No; it’s in the biological sciences, which include agriculture, but he talked about how Madison needed Plattville and River Falls to sustain ag students in the future. Related to this, he couldn’t recall a single new department in CALS, but several folded into other departments to shrink the college and make it more research oriented. 

01:09:15	Follow up: What does that do to teaching and family farms? Answer: He thought teaching would have to adapt to stakeholders and students, with Platteville and River Falls providing human capital to local farms while Madison provided for the nation and corporate farms. He said the issue of family farms was more trenchant when farms were smaller; most farms had by now incorporated in some way.

01:12:52	Follow up: Is part of the fascination with organic farming that they’re supposedly family farms? Answer: Maybe early on, but organic farms was big business—but he was amazed and pleased with Madison’s fascination with the farmers’ market.

01:14:16	Question: Deans? Answer: Kooistra began by talking about Glenn Pound, an out-standing, decisive administrator—not a micromanager or big meeting person—in an era without much bureaucracy who moved to Bascom Hall later on. But he didn’t think Pound would survive in the current administrative environment. 

01:18:13	[no question] He moved to talk about Leo Walsh, who started as an Extension soils scientist and brought him in as his financial person. He credited Walsh with an inter-national vision, but thought he was never accepted by Bascom Hall or the community as the strong scientist that was expected. 

01:20:50	[no question] He then talked about Wyse, who was an East-Coast urbanite who didn’t come over well in CALS or “understand us.” But he noted that Wyse inherited Walsh’s budget problems and got things going again on the right track. 

01:23:50	[no question] He could think of “no finer person” than Neil Jorgenson, who held CALS together in some of its darkest hours. 

01:25:05	[no question] He continued to talk about Dick Eberle, who brought stability and re-established the connection with Bascom Hall that had lapsed during Wyse’s tenure. He thought Eberle relied on a good staff.

01:27:03	[no question] Molly Jahn followed Eberle, and he thought she showed unparalleled vision and articulateness. He wondered if she’d be able to develop other qualities that would make her an excellent dean—understanding staff functioning and how to make changes at a pace that didn’t put off people. He thought it would be hard for her to come back from Washington DC.

01:30:54	[no question] He made some general comments about deans, each of whom had faults, but also were talented people hired for a reason. He wondered who the next leader would be who could lead CALS through the change that needed to happen.

01:32:51	Question: Is CALS still preeminent in the US? Answer: Absolutely. For its size, it ranked higher in many categories—cites, external grants, etc.—than its peers. He again pointed to WARF and Hatch funds, recruitment of the best candidates, and the Madison environment as reasons for CALS’ success.

01:36:30	End of Fourth Interview Session

Fifth Interview Session (December 8, 2009): Digital File
Time	Keywords

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

00:00:23	Question: Talk about campus service. Answer: Kooistra thought the academic staff committee and Assembly were highlights, but talked about other sporadic service.

00:01:43	Follow up: What was that like? Answer: He said it was very interesting, describing the search and finalists, one of whom he favored but was eliminated. He wondered that some of this candidate’s fiercest critics were also women, wondering why diversity didn’t include gender. He recounted the screening process, which changed entirely when Bazzell interviewed superbly.

00:09:42	[no question] He observed that the only thing similar to the Bazzell he had experienced was applying for the position that John Torphy eventually got.  

00:12:09	[no question] After citing several other committees, he talked about the sexual harassment committee chaired by Ted Finman that put the first harassment document together for the campus. He’d been on equity and diversity committees for a long time and so was a natural choice for this service.

00:14:45	Follow up: Were you aware of the scope of the problem? Answer: Yes; having served on equity committees, they’d dealt with gender  equity issues.

00:16:30	[no question] He talked about Hays-Hill retitling, which made people aware of key action words, the CAG group, etc.

00:20:15	Follow up: Does UW have more committees than other Big 10 universities? Answer: He had always heard that UW was a unique place in terms of shared governance. He talked about serving on committees of administration officers.

00:25:04	Question: Are search committees biased toward someone from WI? Answer: Yes, but insider knowledge could cut both ways and “kill” many capable candidates for all kinds of reasons. All you could hope for was a good short-list.

00:28:33	Follow up: Did Wiley pre-determine that Sandefur would follow Certain? Answer: While he hadn’t heard that, he talked about another female candidate who was “shut out” and with hard feelings. Follow up: Complexity of the running of UW? Answer: He agreed with Lange that it was very complex, even between colleges.

00:31:46	Question: Are you pleased with how UW has operated? Answer: Yes; he cited how university leadership selected chancellors. He admired how Shalala operated as an administrator, though he didn’t find her to be personable one-on-one.

00:36:27	[no question] He talked about other chancellors, David Ward—who was very engaging as a speaker—and John Wiley—who he didn’t think appreciated CALS.

00:37:15	Follow up: Yes, how did chancellors view CALS? Answer: He thought Ward was the closest to appreciating CALS—Shain didn’t like Walsh; Shalala had a political agenda; and Wiley had an antipathy influenced by being from Engineering.

00:40:54	Question: Was John Wiley the best choice? Answer: He thought it fair to call him parochial. He went on to observe that the jury was still out on Martin. He thought that the “jewel that was lost” was Paul Ludden.

00:46:07	Question: Expand about your impressions of Biddy Martin? Answer: He thought Martin interviewed well, though he didn’t know what the applicant pool was like. He admired Paul DeLuca, but wondered whether his administrative position prepared him for the Provost’s job.

00:51:41	Question: Would Dick Barrows have made a good Provost? Answer: Not a great one, not a bad one. He liked Bernie Cohen as provost. Follow up: What does that mean? Answer: He thought Cohen functioned and communicated well. He and Lange talked about the variable relationship between the Provost and the deans of the colleges.

00:57:48	[no question] He also talked about interaction with Len Van Ess, who he described as an “icon in Bascom Hall.” But he lost favor in Shalala’s administration, and he reviewed Van Ess’ character and bouncing to Roger Wyse’s administration, only to be asked to leave.

01:03:05	Question: Impact of budget cuts? Answer: To an outsider looking in, he thought, it looked easy—UW seems to have a lot of money—but it had really changed the university. Faculty had to be entrepreneurial and the administration was “built on a house of cards” (overhead on research grants).

01:07:23	Follow up: Is it conceivable that state funding will increase? Answer: No; with other budget issues looming, education wasn’t going to become a priority. He saw tuition as making up this gap.

01:10:04	Question: CALS over the next 50 years? Answer: He thought it had all the potential to become something special. He said they weren’t going to return to the applied science, but turn toward basic science. He saw CALS being central to the human endeavor of feeding people.

01:13:20	Question: Closing remarks? Answer: Kooistra saw it as his privilege to be associated with UW-Madison; he felt now being emeritus he had more to contribute than ever and hoped to move into an international role.

01:15:26	Follow up: It’s an extraordinary journey. Answer: Yes; he quipped about sitting with the president of Bangladesh, a PhD of UW’s soils science program, for an hour. He sensed that due to declining resources, UW wasn’t going to have that global impact in years to come.

01:19:38	End of Fifth Interview Session

End of Oral History #1063