Each of us makes decisions about how to direct our programs within the context of our respective institutions, which has given Los Angeles programs a diverse identity that is very healthy. We live in a time when publicly funded universities are struggling to survive in the face of dwindling public support and rapidly increasing spending. This white paper has undertones of “woe is me, we are not understood” without a hint at how landscape architecture might relate to this transition from public universities. There are those of us who have been around long enough to have an idea, or at least at least an opinion, about why we have difficulty “maintaining a diverse and qualified design faculty.” Decades ago, early professional study programs proliferated like rabbits. There were a number of good explanations for this trend, but few people were willing to discuss the impact it might have on the profession, particularly in academia. We are now harvesting the product of these sowings. Our pool of candidates for faculty positions is primarily comprised of individuals with a first professional degree in landscape architecture at the master's level. It is difficult to explain to an administrator with a scientific background how an individual can acquire professional competence in this discipline in three years, that the resulting diploma is also the terminal diploma and that this individual is prepared to carry out research which will add to the body of knowledge of the discipline. I doubt this white paper can compare or balance these qualifications against faculty in other fields who have bachelor's, master's, and doctorate degrees followed by postdoctoral experience before joining a faculty to teach and do research. Architecture and fine arts distinguish b...... middle of paper ......could think about what he wants to be when he grows up. Do we want to be service-based and nurture the profession at the office level or do we want to be science-based and nurture the body of knowledge? It is unlikely that we can continue to do both for very long under the current system, regardless of accreditation standards. Forces far beyond our control, universities and state legislatures, will do it for us if we don't start making decisions for ourselves. Regardless of whether we let them do it or we do it, the issue of promotion and tenure will be moot and the issue of fairness of promotion and tenure between science faculty and studio faculty is so far from the radar screen that it is not at all a consideration in the scheme of things. Treat the problem, not the symptoms. In the words of Daniel Burnham: “Don’t make small plans.”