The following statement was presented to the UC Regents by graduate students at the May 19th UC Regents meeting at UCSF. Nine graduate students from UC Berkeley attended the meeting dressed as “GSI Joes” in army attire adorned with military patches that read “Dean Edley = Class(room) Enemy.” The action was a response to Dean Christopher Edley’s recent proposal for transforming UC Berkeley into a “Cyber Campus” where “squadrons of GSIs” will serve on the “frontline of online contact” with undergraduates. Dean Edley's Cyber Campus proposal is here, and coverage of the action is here.
We are here today as members of UAW 2865, the union for Academic Student Employees at the UC. The University of California perceives its graduate students as a cheap labor force that will follow orders without question. Recently, in a proposal for transforming UC Berkeley into a “Cyber Campus,” Christopher Edley, the Dean of Boalt Law School and Chair of the Gould Commission’s Education and Curriculum Working Group, called for “squadrons of GSI’s” to serve on the “frontlines” of a new UC Berkeley. This myopic vision of higher education conceives of the UC as more of a brand than the public institution called for in the 1960 Master Plan. We find Dean Edley’s “Cyber Campus” to be just the beginning of a frightening trajectory that will undoubtedly end in the complete implosion of public higher education in the embattled state of California. Dean Edley’s proposal and many of the recommendations currently under consideration by the University Commission on the Future are just select examples of how the UC is sacrificing undergraduate education in order to maximize profits.
As graduate students who are on the front lines of educating undergraduates, we see everyday what is happening to the quality of instruction at the UC. We are horrified by the UC Regents’ vision of the future, one that is based on business models that do not consider quality of education or student and worker experience. This is a future in which we refuse to live, work, and teach. If the future of the UC is one where graduate students are continued to be treated as a casual labor pool we guarantee it will be one that is missing the top notch graduate students on which administrators have come to rely.
One of the unfulfilled promises of the UC system is that it should be at the forefront of progressive change that California desperately needs. Instead, it is at the forefront of privatization, a high fee-high loan model that will drive low income students into debt or shut them out completely. Instead of negotiating fairly with the labor unions, the UC has repeatedly thwarted good faith bargaining. Instead of striving to be competitive in attracting graduate students to the UC, our universities expect us to work for less and receive lesser benefits because we chose to study at a public institution. Meanwhile just the opposite argument is used to attract people to high level management positions: we have to pay them exorbitant salaries and perks or they will go elsewhere. Instead of insuring childcare for the lowest income students at UC Berkeley, our registration fees subsidize football tickets for students. A crisis of priorities, indeed.
The Regents increased our fees without increasing the quality of our experience here at UC; in fact, Dean Edley's plan will destroy the quality of undergraduate education in the process of redefining what teaching means for graduate students. We did not come to graduate school to be in squadrons, nor did we come here to be virtual instructors on the frontline of dismantling quality public education in California.
But the military rhetoric Dean Edley uses is perhaps apt in this case. A moment of crisis is a time when profound change can happen, a new path taken; there are parallels here and lessons that we should have learned but have not. In the moment of crisis generated by 9-11, the president of the United States was able to sell the country on an illegal, unilateral and murderous war, a war that our country is still waging after nearly a decade. And to what end? To generate profits for a select few while hundreds of thousands suffer and die. The budget crisis has been used in the same way here at UC. You, the UC Regents, have accelerated your plans to dramatically restructure the UC in a way that represents the outright rejection of the logic of public education. Your vision of the UC could not be clearer: it is a corporation that sells education, one that lives and dies by its ability to reduce costs of production. You are well on your way to destroying the UC's public function as a collective investment in the future of all Californians, replacing it instead with the market function of providing a luxury good to those who can afford it. This will be your legacy. We did not come to the UC to fight, but we will fight you every step of the way, and that legacy will be ours.
Sunday, June 13, 2010
"This Will Be Your Legacy"--Graduate Students Respond to Dean Edley and the UC Regents.
The following statement was presented to the UC Regents by graduate students at the May 19th UC Regents meeting at UCSF. Nine graduate students from UC Berkeley attended the meeting dressed as “GSI Joes” in army attire adorned with military patches that read “Dean Edley = Class(room) Enemy.” The action was a response to Dean Christopher Edley’s recent proposal for transforming UC Berkeley into a “Cyber Campus” where “squadrons of GSIs” will serve on the “frontline of online contact” with undergraduates. For more information on Dean Edley's Cyber Campus proposal, see the documents found at: http://ucbfa.org/projects/gould-commission. For coverage of the action, visit http://www.cityonahillpress.com/2010/05/20/uc-targets-'sustainable'-spending
We are here today as members of UAW 2865, the union for Academic Student Employees at the UC. The University of California perceives its graduate students as a cheap labor force that will follow orders without question. Recently, in a proposal for transforming UC Berkeley into a “Cyber Campus,” Christopher Edley, the Dean of Boalt Law School and Chair of the Gould Commission’s Education and Curriculum Working Group, called for “squadrons of GSI’s” to serve on the “frontlines” of a new UC Berkeley. This myopic vision of higher education conceives of the UC as more of a brand than the public institution called for in the 1960 Master Plan. We find Dean Edley’s “Cyber Campus” to be just the beginning of a frightening trajectory that will undoubtedly end in the complete implosion of public higher education in the embattled state of California. Dean Edley’s proposal and many of the recommendations currently under consideration by the University Commission on the Future are just select examples of how the UC is sacrificing undergraduate education in order to maximize profits.
As graduate students who are on the front lines of educating undergraduates, we see everyday what is happening to the quality of instruction at the UC. We are horrified by the UC Regents’ vision of the future, one that is based on business models that do not consider quality of education or student and worker experience. This is a future in which we refuse to live, work, and teach. If the future of the UC is one where graduate students are continued to be treated as a casual labor pool we guarantee it will be one that is missing the top notch graduate students on which administrators have come to rely.
One of the unfulfilled promises of the UC system is that it should be at the forefront of progressive change that California desperately needs. Instead, it is at the forefront of privatization, a high fee-high loan model that will drive low income students into debt or shut them out completely. Instead of negotiating fairly with the labor unions, the UC has repeatedly thwarted good faith bargaining. Instead of striving to be competitive in attracting graduate students to the UC, our universities expect us to work for less and receive lesser benefits because we chose to study at a public institution. Meanwhile just the opposite argument is used to attract people to high level management positions: we have to pay them exorbitant salaries and perks or they will go elsewhere. Instead of insuring childcare for the lowest income students at UC Berkeley, our registration fees subsidize football tickets for students. A crisis of priorities, indeed.
The Regents increased our fees without increasing the quality of our experience here at UC; in fact, Dean Edley's plan will destroy the quality of undergraduate education in the process of redefining what teaching means for graduate students. We did not come to graduate school to be in squadrons, nor did we come here to be virtual instructors on the frontline of dismantling quality public education in California.
But the military rhetoric Dean Edley uses is perhaps apt in this case. A moment of crisis is a time when profound change can happen, a new path taken; there are parallels here and lessons that we should have learned but have not. In the moment of crisis generated by 9-11, the president of the United States was able to sell the country on an illegal, unilateral and murderous war, a war that our country is still waging after nearly a decade. And to what end? To generate profits for a select few while hundreds of thousands suffer and die. The budget crisis has been used in the same way here at UC. You, the UC Regents, have accelerated your plans to dramatically restructure the UC in a way that represents the outright rejection of the logic of public education. Your vision of the UC could not be clearer: it is a corporation that sells education, one that lives and dies by its ability to reduce costs of production. You are well on your way to destroying the UC's public function as a collective investment in the future of all Californians, replacing it instead with the market function of providing a luxury good to those who can afford it. This will be your legacy. We did not come to the UC to fight, but we will fight you every step of the way, and that legacy will be ours.
We are here today as members of UAW 2865, the union for Academic Student Employees at the UC. The University of California perceives its graduate students as a cheap labor force that will follow orders without question. Recently, in a proposal for transforming UC Berkeley into a “Cyber Campus,” Christopher Edley, the Dean of Boalt Law School and Chair of the Gould Commission’s Education and Curriculum Working Group, called for “squadrons of GSI’s” to serve on the “frontlines” of a new UC Berkeley. This myopic vision of higher education conceives of the UC as more of a brand than the public institution called for in the 1960 Master Plan. We find Dean Edley’s “Cyber Campus” to be just the beginning of a frightening trajectory that will undoubtedly end in the complete implosion of public higher education in the embattled state of California. Dean Edley’s proposal and many of the recommendations currently under consideration by the University Commission on the Future are just select examples of how the UC is sacrificing undergraduate education in order to maximize profits.
As graduate students who are on the front lines of educating undergraduates, we see everyday what is happening to the quality of instruction at the UC. We are horrified by the UC Regents’ vision of the future, one that is based on business models that do not consider quality of education or student and worker experience. This is a future in which we refuse to live, work, and teach. If the future of the UC is one where graduate students are continued to be treated as a casual labor pool we guarantee it will be one that is missing the top notch graduate students on which administrators have come to rely.
One of the unfulfilled promises of the UC system is that it should be at the forefront of progressive change that California desperately needs. Instead, it is at the forefront of privatization, a high fee-high loan model that will drive low income students into debt or shut them out completely. Instead of negotiating fairly with the labor unions, the UC has repeatedly thwarted good faith bargaining. Instead of striving to be competitive in attracting graduate students to the UC, our universities expect us to work for less and receive lesser benefits because we chose to study at a public institution. Meanwhile just the opposite argument is used to attract people to high level management positions: we have to pay them exorbitant salaries and perks or they will go elsewhere. Instead of insuring childcare for the lowest income students at UC Berkeley, our registration fees subsidize football tickets for students. A crisis of priorities, indeed.
The Regents increased our fees without increasing the quality of our experience here at UC; in fact, Dean Edley's plan will destroy the quality of undergraduate education in the process of redefining what teaching means for graduate students. We did not come to graduate school to be in squadrons, nor did we come here to be virtual instructors on the frontline of dismantling quality public education in California.
But the military rhetoric Dean Edley uses is perhaps apt in this case. A moment of crisis is a time when profound change can happen, a new path taken; there are parallels here and lessons that we should have learned but have not. In the moment of crisis generated by 9-11, the president of the United States was able to sell the country on an illegal, unilateral and murderous war, a war that our country is still waging after nearly a decade. And to what end? To generate profits for a select few while hundreds of thousands suffer and die. The budget crisis has been used in the same way here at UC. You, the UC Regents, have accelerated your plans to dramatically restructure the UC in a way that represents the outright rejection of the logic of public education. Your vision of the UC could not be clearer: it is a corporation that sells education, one that lives and dies by its ability to reduce costs of production. You are well on your way to destroying the UC's public function as a collective investment in the future of all Californians, replacing it instead with the market function of providing a luxury good to those who can afford it. This will be your legacy. We did not come to the UC to fight, but we will fight you every step of the way, and that legacy will be ours.
Friday, June 4, 2010
UC Workshop on Recruitment and Enrollment of Non-Resident Undergraduates (6/14-15/2010)
DRAFT – 5/27/10
Monday, June 14 Saratoga Ballroom
9:00 to 10:00 Registration – coffee/tea
10:00 to 10:20 Introductory Session: Goals for the workshop
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
10:25 to 11:00 (Chancellor Birgeneau)
11:05 to 12:15 Where is UC now regarding enrollment of non-residents?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
12:15 to 1:30 Asian Buffet Lunch - Saratoga Ballroom
How can UC best go about effectively communicating the educational imperative for non-resident enrollment and impacts on diversity?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
1:30 to 2:30 Round Hole: Square Peg – Fitting the Non-Resident Applicant into UC Admissions Processes and Practices
Presentation and Facilitated Discussion
Co-Facilitators will present some of the UC admissions practices that are called into question as we embark as a system on increasing enrollment of non-resident students. This session will stimulate a discussion of current policies/practices that serve currently as an impediment to the non-resident applicant.
The presentation will provide a review of current UC admission processes and practices impacting non-resident recruitment and enrollment. This will be followed by a facilitated brainstorming session with participation by all. Next steps will be identified with a goal to develop recommendations for UC leadership that would reduce/eliminate policy/procedure challenges.
Presenters: Brent Yunek, Associate Vice Chancellor, Enrollment Services, UCI;
Susan Wilbur, Director of Undergraduate Admissions, UCOP
2:30 to 2:40 Stretch Break – beverages and cookies
2:40 to 3:50 Building a robust prospect pool of students your campus seeks to enroll and graduate is a key component to having an effective recruitment plan. UC Berkeley and UC Riverside will describe how they work with two key partners- CollegeWeekLive and Zinch, to attract prospective students and maintain relationships through the yield cycle.
Presenters: Bob Patterson, Deputy Director of Undergraduate Admissions, UCB
Emily Engelschall, Director of Undergraduate Recruitment, UCR
Mike Garvin – CollegeWeekLive
Robert Rosenbloom – CollegeWeekLive
Brad Hagen - Zinch)
3:50 to 4:00 Stretch Break – beverages and cookies
4:00 to 5:00 Panel Session: Armchair vs travel: Communication strategies and considerations. Panelists will discuss their experiences and perspectives and offer suggestions for connecting with domestic and international non-resident students. Q&A to follow brief presentations.
Moderator: Christine Van Gieson, Director of Admissions and Associate Dean for Enrollment Services, UCSB
Panelists: Martin Bennett, EducationUSA Marketing Coordinator, Institute of International Education
Lee Melvin, Vice President for Enrollment Management and Planning, University of Connecticut
5:00 to 5:40 Diversity considerations and the tools necessary to ensure diversity. Financial Aid and “discounting.” What investment in student financial support will be needed for success and for achieving diversity? Review of current non-resident diversity data.
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
For dinner, you are on your own!
Tuesday, June 15 Hops Bar and Grill /Napa Valley Room
7:30 to 8:30 Registration/Networking – beverages and muffins
8:30 to 9:00 Review of international trends meeting international priorities for US colleges and universities- OpenDoors
Martin Bennett, EducationUSA Marketing Coordinator, Institute of International Education
9:00 to 10:30 International and domestic recruitment collaborations between UC campuses and other universities; collaborations among UC campuses. Use of commercial consortia for international recruitment.
Presenters: Walter Robinson, Assistant Vice Chancellor and Director Office of Undergraduate Admissions
Martha Pitts, The College Board
Mike Garvin – CollegeWeekLive
Robert Rosenbloom – CollegeWeekLive
Brad Hagen - Zinch
10:30 to 10:45 Stretch Break – beverages and muffins
10:45 to Noon Panel Session: Collaborative relationships with individual secondary schools and college counselors in recruiting and enrolling domestic non-residents.
Moderator: Walter Robinson, Assistant Vice Chancellor and Director Office of Undergraduate Admissions
Panel: Vicki Englehart, Dean of College Counseling and Guidance, Lake Highland Prep, Orlando, Florida
Diane Freytag, Director of Counseling and Advising, The Overlake School, Redmond, Washington
Myron Arakawa, Director of College Counseling, Punahou School, Honolulu, Hawaii
Noon to 12:45 Taste of Italy Buffet Lunch – Hops Bar and Grill
12:45 to 1:30 College Board Enrollment Planning Services- College Board can provide a number of tools (Recruitment Plus, Enrollment Planning Service, Descriptor Plus and Student Search Service) that will allow us to strengthen our recruitment efforts, gain a deeper understanding of our prospective students and improve communication.
Martha Pitts, The College Board
1:30 to 2:30 Panel Session: Building relationships with California Community Colleges in UC recruitment/enrollment of international students. (Santa Monica Contact)
Brent Yunek, Associate Vice Chancellor, Enrollment Services, UCI
2:30 to 2:45 Stretch Break – beverages and brownies
2:45 to 3:45 Panel Discussion - A conversation on some of the ways that a campus might coordinate domestic and international non-resident recruitment across a broad spectrum of offices/units.
The panelists will share their experiences using a variety of campus organization resources to seek enrollment from non-residents in both campus degree and non-degree programs.
Some topics that will be raised are: the use of agents, leveraging current efforts of summer and extension outreach, and building a recruitment culture throughout the campus community.
Moderator: Kevin Browne, Assistant Vice Chancellor – Enrollment Management and Extension, UC Merced
Panel: James Maraviglia, Assistant Vice President, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Gary Matkin, Dean, UC Irvine
Darin Menlove, Assistant Director of Programs, Summer Sessions, UC Berkeley
George Beers, Dean, Foothill College
3:45 to 4:15 Closing session: next steps and desired deliverables. What should be included in a UC Non-Resident Recruitment/Enrollment Resource Guide?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
Monday, June 14 Saratoga Ballroom
9:00 to 10:00 Registration – coffee/tea
10:00 to 10:20 Introductory Session: Goals for the workshop
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
10:25 to 11:00 (Chancellor Birgeneau)
11:05 to 12:15 Where is UC now regarding enrollment of non-residents?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
12:15 to 1:30 Asian Buffet Lunch - Saratoga Ballroom
How can UC best go about effectively communicating the educational imperative for non-resident enrollment and impacts on diversity?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
1:30 to 2:30 Round Hole: Square Peg – Fitting the Non-Resident Applicant into UC Admissions Processes and Practices
Presentation and Facilitated Discussion
Co-Facilitators will present some of the UC admissions practices that are called into question as we embark as a system on increasing enrollment of non-resident students. This session will stimulate a discussion of current policies/practices that serve currently as an impediment to the non-resident applicant.
The presentation will provide a review of current UC admission processes and practices impacting non-resident recruitment and enrollment. This will be followed by a facilitated brainstorming session with participation by all. Next steps will be identified with a goal to develop recommendations for UC leadership that would reduce/eliminate policy/procedure challenges.
Presenters: Brent Yunek, Associate Vice Chancellor, Enrollment Services, UCI;
Susan Wilbur, Director of Undergraduate Admissions, UCOP
2:30 to 2:40 Stretch Break – beverages and cookies
2:40 to 3:50 Building a robust prospect pool of students your campus seeks to enroll and graduate is a key component to having an effective recruitment plan. UC Berkeley and UC Riverside will describe how they work with two key partners- CollegeWeekLive and Zinch, to attract prospective students and maintain relationships through the yield cycle.
Presenters: Bob Patterson, Deputy Director of Undergraduate Admissions, UCB
Emily Engelschall, Director of Undergraduate Recruitment, UCR
Mike Garvin – CollegeWeekLive
Robert Rosenbloom – CollegeWeekLive
Brad Hagen - Zinch)
3:50 to 4:00 Stretch Break – beverages and cookies
4:00 to 5:00 Panel Session: Armchair vs travel: Communication strategies and considerations. Panelists will discuss their experiences and perspectives and offer suggestions for connecting with domestic and international non-resident students. Q&A to follow brief presentations.
Moderator: Christine Van Gieson, Director of Admissions and Associate Dean for Enrollment Services, UCSB
Panelists: Martin Bennett, EducationUSA Marketing Coordinator, Institute of International Education
Lee Melvin, Vice President for Enrollment Management and Planning, University of Connecticut
5:00 to 5:40 Diversity considerations and the tools necessary to ensure diversity. Financial Aid and “discounting.” What investment in student financial support will be needed for success and for achieving diversity? Review of current non-resident diversity data.
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
For dinner, you are on your own!
Tuesday, June 15 Hops Bar and Grill /Napa Valley Room
7:30 to 8:30 Registration/Networking – beverages and muffins
8:30 to 9:00 Review of international trends meeting international priorities for US colleges and universities- OpenDoors
Martin Bennett, EducationUSA Marketing Coordinator, Institute of International Education
9:00 to 10:30 International and domestic recruitment collaborations between UC campuses and other universities; collaborations among UC campuses. Use of commercial consortia for international recruitment.
Presenters: Walter Robinson, Assistant Vice Chancellor and Director Office of Undergraduate Admissions
Martha Pitts, The College Board
Mike Garvin – CollegeWeekLive
Robert Rosenbloom – CollegeWeekLive
Brad Hagen - Zinch
10:30 to 10:45 Stretch Break – beverages and muffins
10:45 to Noon Panel Session: Collaborative relationships with individual secondary schools and college counselors in recruiting and enrolling domestic non-residents.
Moderator: Walter Robinson, Assistant Vice Chancellor and Director Office of Undergraduate Admissions
Panel: Vicki Englehart, Dean of College Counseling and Guidance, Lake Highland Prep, Orlando, Florida
Diane Freytag, Director of Counseling and Advising, The Overlake School, Redmond, Washington
Myron Arakawa, Director of College Counseling, Punahou School, Honolulu, Hawaii
Noon to 12:45 Taste of Italy Buffet Lunch – Hops Bar and Grill
12:45 to 1:30 College Board Enrollment Planning Services- College Board can provide a number of tools (Recruitment Plus, Enrollment Planning Service, Descriptor Plus and Student Search Service) that will allow us to strengthen our recruitment efforts, gain a deeper understanding of our prospective students and improve communication.
Martha Pitts, The College Board
1:30 to 2:30 Panel Session: Building relationships with California Community Colleges in UC recruitment/enrollment of international students. (Santa Monica Contact)
Brent Yunek, Associate Vice Chancellor, Enrollment Services, UCI
2:30 to 2:45 Stretch Break – beverages and brownies
2:45 to 3:45 Panel Discussion - A conversation on some of the ways that a campus might coordinate domestic and international non-resident recruitment across a broad spectrum of offices/units.
The panelists will share their experiences using a variety of campus organization resources to seek enrollment from non-residents in both campus degree and non-degree programs.
Some topics that will be raised are: the use of agents, leveraging current efforts of summer and extension outreach, and building a recruitment culture throughout the campus community.
Moderator: Kevin Browne, Assistant Vice Chancellor – Enrollment Management and Extension, UC Merced
Panel: James Maraviglia, Assistant Vice President, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Gary Matkin, Dean, UC Irvine
Darin Menlove, Assistant Director of Programs, Summer Sessions, UC Berkeley
George Beers, Dean, Foothill College
3:45 to 4:15 Closing session: next steps and desired deliverables. What should be included in a UC Non-Resident Recruitment/Enrollment Resource Guide?
Tom Lifka, Associate Vice Chancellor, Student Academic Services, UCLA
Friends, Romans, and Countrymen: The New UC Online Initiative
Friends and colleagues -
We would like to announce our new website for UC's Online Education Initiative:
http://onlineeducation.universityofcalifornia.edu
The Initiative is an ongoing effort to integrate information technology into undergraduate instruction in an innovative response to the growing demand for selective, high quality, undergraduate education.
Our new website is meant to serve three important functions:
1) To gather and share information about online instruction efforts and lessons learned across the UC campuses and at other select universities and colleges.
2) To document the initiative's efforts to explore the efficacy of online instruction in UC's undergraduate curriculum, and to allow you to comment and provide feedback on much of that documentation.
3) To build a repository of current research, project briefings, news articles and other information that may inform the community about current practice, developing trends, opportunities and challenges in the use of online instruction in undergraduate education.
We invite you to visit the new website and peruse the project documents and other information to get a better understanding of the Initiative's goals and objectives. You can also browse the various resources and featured contributions to get a snapshot of current literature, news and research regarding online education. The website will be updated as the Initiative progresses, so visit us online periodically for the latest information about the project.
While you're at the website, we invite you to contribute to the Initiative by commenting on various project documents or submitting resources. We also welcome feedback on the Initiative or on the website itself - simply use the Contact Us form to do so.
http://onlineeducation.universityofcalifornia.edu
Thank you!
We would like to announce our new website for UC's Online Education Initiative:
http://onlineeducation.universityofcalifornia.edu
The Initiative is an ongoing effort to integrate information technology into undergraduate instruction in an innovative response to the growing demand for selective, high quality, undergraduate education.
Our new website is meant to serve three important functions:
1) To gather and share information about online instruction efforts and lessons learned across the UC campuses and at other select universities and colleges.
2) To document the initiative's efforts to explore the efficacy of online instruction in UC's undergraduate curriculum, and to allow you to comment and provide feedback on much of that documentation.
3) To build a repository of current research, project briefings, news articles and other information that may inform the community about current practice, developing trends, opportunities and challenges in the use of online instruction in undergraduate education.
We invite you to visit the new website and peruse the project documents and other information to get a better understanding of the Initiative's goals and objectives. You can also browse the various resources and featured contributions to get a snapshot of current literature, news and research regarding online education. The website will be updated as the Initiative progresses, so visit us online periodically for the latest information about the project.
While you're at the website, we invite you to contribute to the Initiative by commenting on various project documents or submitting resources. We also welcome feedback on the Initiative or on the website itself - simply use the Contact Us form to do so.
http://onlineeducation.universityofcalifornia.edu
Thank you!
Friday, May 28, 2010
Alternative Commission on the Future: Opportunity to Submit Responses to UCOF
The Alternative Commission on the Future, a group of students and workers at UCLA, is collecting student responses to the UC Commission on the Future's proposals--online classes, multi-year fee increases, eliminating majors/departments, cutting teaching staff, and differential fees, among others. We would appreciate it if you could please take and pass around this survey we are using to collect data:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3WMM96B
We are working with UC-AFT to make a proposal analyzing the results, which we will present at the July 13-15 Regents meeting at UCSF. The plan is to show the Regents and the public how students, faculty, and staff overwhelmingly disapprove of the recommendations. We are trying to get 1000 responses, so please pass on the survey.
UCLA Fights Back!
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/3WMM96B
We are working with UC-AFT to make a proposal analyzing the results, which we will present at the July 13-15 Regents meeting at UCSF. The plan is to show the Regents and the public how students, faculty, and staff overwhelmingly disapprove of the recommendations. We are trying to get 1000 responses, so please pass on the survey.
UCLA Fights Back!
Monday, May 24, 2010
UCB Academic Senate Establishes Special Committee on UC "Governance and Leadership" (May 24, 2010)
Resolution on Senate Committee on University Governance and Leadership
In the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California
Approved by a vote of 263 to 113 in a formal mail ballot, May 7-21, 2010
• Official Results of the Ballot
• Text of the Resolution
• Ballot Arguments For and Against
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 24, 2010
CHAIR CHRISTOPHER KUTZ
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
Re: Resolution on Senate Committee on University
Governance and Leadership
Dear Chair Kutz,
The results of the balloting on the resolution to form a special committee to develop reform proposals concerning the governance and leadership of the University are as follows: 263 for, 113 against. The resolution thus passes.
Cordially,
Daniel F. Melia, Secretary and Chair
Committee on Rules and Elections
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TEXT of the Resolution
Whereas, There is widespread concern about the financial future of the University;
Whereas, The Regents and the President of the University have established a Commission to study alternative future arrangements;
Whereas, It appears that consideration of Major Reforms in the Top Level Governance and Leadership of the University is unlikely to occur within that Commission;
Whereas, Numerous members of the Faculty of the University have thoughtful contributions to offer in that regard; and
Whereas, Such Reforms might be a significant factor in efforts to restore public confidence in and public support for the University; therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate asks its Divisional Council to convene a special Committee charged to collect, study and formulate a set of Reform Proposals concerning the Governance and Leadership of the University, which will then be distributed to the membership of the Division for a ballot assessment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Statement FOR Resolution:
What is the motivation for this Resolution concerning Reform of the Governance and Leadership of the University of California? It is in the last Whereas:
“Whereas, Such reforms might be a significant factor in efforts to restore public confidence in and public support for the University.”
We have heard from some Working Groups of the UC Commission on the Future that maintaining a strong share of financial support from the State will be essential to a healthy future for UC; and the two officials from the Office of the President who attended the April 22 meeting of the Berkeley Division made that same point.
How does one achieve that? The standard reply is to advocate for all the wonderful benefits that UC provides to all of California. We all support that effort.
But that is not enough. We are well aware that there are problems and there are criticisms from outside, about how University officials handle the public money and the public trust placed in the hands of The Regents and their top executives.
Many of us inside UC share some of those criticisms; and this endeavor, being led by faculty, can be relied upon to protect the integrity of academic functions within the University.
So here is a chance to act in a way that can serve both objectives: to advocate for reform in University management as we see it is needed and, at the same time, to respond positively to a public disapproval of mismanagement.
This Resolution does not ask you to endorse a preformed list of complaints; rather it seeks the creation of a constructive process, within the Academic Senate and initiated by the membership. This path should achieve the most uninhibited approach to this problem – and that independent character is also essential for gaining credibility in the public domain.
The Committee created by this Resolution will invite, collect and evaluate proposals for reform in the governance and leadership of the University. It will then select the most significant proposals, solicit arguments for and against each one, and then submit all that to the full membership of the Berkeley Division to be voted on, item by item.
This process will not guarantee the achievement of those reforms supported by the majority of the faculty; nor can it guarantee that this exercise will produce the influx of new public money that we all desire for the University. Yet, it is a chance to pursue those goals, something that we the faculty can initiate; and it seems better to try than to forego the opportunity.
While the scope of this endeavor covers all of UC and might best have been undertaken by the systemwide Academic Senate, that has not happened. Therefore, we at Berkeley now have an opportunity to take this initiative, inviting colleagues at other campuses to join as they see fit.
For additional background materials, see what was provided for the April 22 meeting:
http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/meetings/meeting_background_Spring2010_2.html
Submitted by: Charles Schwartz, Professor Emeritus of Physics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Statement AGAINST Resolution:
We recommend a no vote on this resolution. We understand the proposed resolution to have the goal of improving management of the entire University of California System by targeting the organizational structure of the University of California Office of the President for review. While we fully support that goal, we believe that the mechanism proposed has the potential to make matters worse because of the vagueness of the charge and because the action is not being taken in concert with the other campuses and their divisions of the Senate. The charge in the resolution does not make clear the extent to which its focus is UCOP or the campuses or how overlap between the two should be addressed. The resolution calls for creation of a Berkeley committee and then a subsequent Berkeley faculty vote on the recommendations of that committee. We believe that a Berkeley go-it-alone approach to systemwide issues will do more harm than good. Currently faculty across the system are aligned with the goal of the resolution--reducing inefficiencies at UCOP. However, our experience with the systemwide Academic Senate leads us to believe that this go-it-alone approach from Berkeley is likely to be perceived as an attempt by our campus shape the outcome to Berkeley’s singular advantage, and thus create hostility to what would be widely supported proposals, were they developed by a systemwide committee. Should the current resolution pass, we hope the vague charge leaves room to insist that the committee formed actively involve our sister campuses and to put the recommendations to a vote on all 10 campuses.
Submitted by:
Ronald C. Cohen, Professor of Chemistry and of Earth and Planetary Science
Ignacio Navarette, Professor of Spanish and Portuguese
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California
Approved by a vote of 263 to 113 in a formal mail ballot, May 7-21, 2010
• Official Results of the Ballot
• Text of the Resolution
• Ballot Arguments For and Against
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
May 24, 2010
CHAIR CHRISTOPHER KUTZ
Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate
Re: Resolution on Senate Committee on University
Governance and Leadership
Dear Chair Kutz,
The results of the balloting on the resolution to form a special committee to develop reform proposals concerning the governance and leadership of the University are as follows: 263 for, 113 against. The resolution thus passes.
Cordially,
Daniel F. Melia, Secretary and Chair
Committee on Rules and Elections
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------TEXT of the Resolution
Whereas, There is widespread concern about the financial future of the University;
Whereas, The Regents and the President of the University have established a Commission to study alternative future arrangements;
Whereas, It appears that consideration of Major Reforms in the Top Level Governance and Leadership of the University is unlikely to occur within that Commission;
Whereas, Numerous members of the Faculty of the University have thoughtful contributions to offer in that regard; and
Whereas, Such Reforms might be a significant factor in efforts to restore public confidence in and public support for the University; therefore, be it
Resolved, That the Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate asks its Divisional Council to convene a special Committee charged to collect, study and formulate a set of Reform Proposals concerning the Governance and Leadership of the University, which will then be distributed to the membership of the Division for a ballot assessment.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Statement FOR Resolution:
What is the motivation for this Resolution concerning Reform of the Governance and Leadership of the University of California? It is in the last Whereas:
“Whereas, Such reforms might be a significant factor in efforts to restore public confidence in and public support for the University.”
We have heard from some Working Groups of the UC Commission on the Future that maintaining a strong share of financial support from the State will be essential to a healthy future for UC; and the two officials from the Office of the President who attended the April 22 meeting of the Berkeley Division made that same point.
How does one achieve that? The standard reply is to advocate for all the wonderful benefits that UC provides to all of California. We all support that effort.
But that is not enough. We are well aware that there are problems and there are criticisms from outside, about how University officials handle the public money and the public trust placed in the hands of The Regents and their top executives.
Many of us inside UC share some of those criticisms; and this endeavor, being led by faculty, can be relied upon to protect the integrity of academic functions within the University.
So here is a chance to act in a way that can serve both objectives: to advocate for reform in University management as we see it is needed and, at the same time, to respond positively to a public disapproval of mismanagement.
This Resolution does not ask you to endorse a preformed list of complaints; rather it seeks the creation of a constructive process, within the Academic Senate and initiated by the membership. This path should achieve the most uninhibited approach to this problem – and that independent character is also essential for gaining credibility in the public domain.
The Committee created by this Resolution will invite, collect and evaluate proposals for reform in the governance and leadership of the University. It will then select the most significant proposals, solicit arguments for and against each one, and then submit all that to the full membership of the Berkeley Division to be voted on, item by item.
This process will not guarantee the achievement of those reforms supported by the majority of the faculty; nor can it guarantee that this exercise will produce the influx of new public money that we all desire for the University. Yet, it is a chance to pursue those goals, something that we the faculty can initiate; and it seems better to try than to forego the opportunity.
While the scope of this endeavor covers all of UC and might best have been undertaken by the systemwide Academic Senate, that has not happened. Therefore, we at Berkeley now have an opportunity to take this initiative, inviting colleagues at other campuses to join as they see fit.
For additional background materials, see what was provided for the April 22 meeting:
http://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/meetings/meeting_background_Spring2010_2.html
Submitted by: Charles Schwartz, Professor Emeritus of Physics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Statement AGAINST Resolution:
We recommend a no vote on this resolution. We understand the proposed resolution to have the goal of improving management of the entire University of California System by targeting the organizational structure of the University of California Office of the President for review. While we fully support that goal, we believe that the mechanism proposed has the potential to make matters worse because of the vagueness of the charge and because the action is not being taken in concert with the other campuses and their divisions of the Senate. The charge in the resolution does not make clear the extent to which its focus is UCOP or the campuses or how overlap between the two should be addressed. The resolution calls for creation of a Berkeley committee and then a subsequent Berkeley faculty vote on the recommendations of that committee. We believe that a Berkeley go-it-alone approach to systemwide issues will do more harm than good. Currently faculty across the system are aligned with the goal of the resolution--reducing inefficiencies at UCOP. However, our experience with the systemwide Academic Senate leads us to believe that this go-it-alone approach from Berkeley is likely to be perceived as an attempt by our campus shape the outcome to Berkeley’s singular advantage, and thus create hostility to what would be widely supported proposals, were they developed by a systemwide committee. Should the current resolution pass, we hope the vague charge leaves room to insist that the committee formed actively involve our sister campuses and to put the recommendations to a vote on all 10 campuses.
Submitted by:
Ronald C. Cohen, Professor of Chemistry and of Earth and Planetary Science
Ignacio Navarette, Professor of Spanish and Portuguese
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
UC Ponders New On-Line Revenue Stream
Timothy Hampton
Professor of French and
Bernie H. Williams Professor of Comparative Literature
U.C. Berkeley
This just in. . .
Dateline, Oakland, CA. Officials of the University of California are reacting cautiously to a new proposal floated by advisors to the campaign of Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Meg Whitman. The proposal aims to help close the Budget Deficit of the struggling ten-campus system. Whitman,
whose development of the eBay on-line auction site has made her a billionaire, has long been a critic of the size of the California Government, and has vowed, if elected, to cut thousands of jobs from the public sector, including UC and CSU. However, advisors close to the Whitman camp have recently advanced a new approach for funding public education that would harness the power of the Internet to reduce the size of UC.
The program, provisionally dubbed uBay, would enable citizens to place on-line bids to purchase pieces of the vast ten-campus system, from parcels of land, to buildings, to campus furniture. “Let’s face it, UC is as bloated as the rest of the public sector,” announced Helmut Sitzbad, an official close to the Whitman Campaign. “This innovative program would enable the average taxpayer, people like you and me, to help slim down some of the fat. Just log on, select your item, and click. Presto, UC will be smaller and you will own a piece of California history.” Sitzbad noted that buildings all across the System could easily attract wealthy developers looking for investment opportunities in a slack real estate market. “But the beauty of this idea is that everyone can own a piece of UC,“ he added. “We’ve got classrooms on all ten campuses with too many chairs, tables, and desks—not to mention chalkboards that don't get written on and windows that don't get closed. With the coming of recycling even the waste baskets are under-utilized. Through our plan Californians could purchase these appealing items with a simple click of their mouse. The University would shrink, its budget would grow, and the citizenry would feel itself linked to UC in an entirely new way. Some might complain that this is a form of privatization. However, at the end of the day, we see this as a way of putting the University literally back in the hands of the taxpayers.”
UC officials have been cautiously optimistic about the new uBay proposal. University spokesperson Bob Furlong noted that the plan could help alleviate some of the logistical problems on campus. “Cuts to teaching budgets mean that we’ve already got overcrowded classrooms all across the System,” he
said in an e-mail. “By eliminating desks and tables we should be able to create more space in some of our bigger lecture halls, thereby increasing standing-room capacity. The sale of windows and doors would bring knowledge to students unable to squeeze into the rooms where lectures and seminars are held.” He added that, while selling off entire buildings might seem like a big step, small departments could conduct some of their business outside during nice weather and faculty could “bunk” with each other by sharing offices during the rainy season. “We’re always promoting collaborative research, and this might well further our efforts in that direction,” he noted.
UC officials plan to solicit faculty input on the uBay initiative, but the University is confident that the pushback will be minimal. “These days UC is all about moving on-line,” noted C. Johnson Hacker, Assistant Director of Administrative Obfuscation for UC’s President’s Office. “We are moving at warp speed toward on-line courses, and next month we’ll be unveiling two exciting new initiatives to market the UC name over the Web. Our innovative digital advisement program, ‘Download-a-Dean,’ and our live-chat teaching program, ‘The Tweeting Tutor,’ both hold enormous promise for filling UC’s
coffers while engaging with the public in exciting new ways. In our view, it’s part of the University’s public mission to make UC available to everyone with a Paypal account.”
Officials close to the Whitman campaign caution that the fledgling uBay project is still on the drawing board, and they are undecided as to the extent of its reach into the often arcane world of Academe. “We’re excited about the idea of reducing bloat by selling off buildings, land, and perhaps a few professors,” noted spokesperson Sitzbad. “We’re less clear on things like bacteria, which have enormous revenue potential because they reproduce like crazy, but could, in the wrong hands, be dangerous. We’re very concerned to keep the great treasure that is the University of California
away from people who might behave irresponsibly."
Professor of French and
Bernie H. Williams Professor of Comparative Literature
U.C. Berkeley
This just in. . .
Dateline, Oakland, CA. Officials of the University of California are reacting cautiously to a new proposal floated by advisors to the campaign of Republican Gubernatorial Candidate Meg Whitman. The proposal aims to help close the Budget Deficit of the struggling ten-campus system. Whitman,
whose development of the eBay on-line auction site has made her a billionaire, has long been a critic of the size of the California Government, and has vowed, if elected, to cut thousands of jobs from the public sector, including UC and CSU. However, advisors close to the Whitman camp have recently advanced a new approach for funding public education that would harness the power of the Internet to reduce the size of UC.
The program, provisionally dubbed uBay, would enable citizens to place on-line bids to purchase pieces of the vast ten-campus system, from parcels of land, to buildings, to campus furniture. “Let’s face it, UC is as bloated as the rest of the public sector,” announced Helmut Sitzbad, an official close to the Whitman Campaign. “This innovative program would enable the average taxpayer, people like you and me, to help slim down some of the fat. Just log on, select your item, and click. Presto, UC will be smaller and you will own a piece of California history.” Sitzbad noted that buildings all across the System could easily attract wealthy developers looking for investment opportunities in a slack real estate market. “But the beauty of this idea is that everyone can own a piece of UC,“ he added. “We’ve got classrooms on all ten campuses with too many chairs, tables, and desks—not to mention chalkboards that don't get written on and windows that don't get closed. With the coming of recycling even the waste baskets are under-utilized. Through our plan Californians could purchase these appealing items with a simple click of their mouse. The University would shrink, its budget would grow, and the citizenry would feel itself linked to UC in an entirely new way. Some might complain that this is a form of privatization. However, at the end of the day, we see this as a way of putting the University literally back in the hands of the taxpayers.”
UC officials have been cautiously optimistic about the new uBay proposal. University spokesperson Bob Furlong noted that the plan could help alleviate some of the logistical problems on campus. “Cuts to teaching budgets mean that we’ve already got overcrowded classrooms all across the System,” he
said in an e-mail. “By eliminating desks and tables we should be able to create more space in some of our bigger lecture halls, thereby increasing standing-room capacity. The sale of windows and doors would bring knowledge to students unable to squeeze into the rooms where lectures and seminars are held.” He added that, while selling off entire buildings might seem like a big step, small departments could conduct some of their business outside during nice weather and faculty could “bunk” with each other by sharing offices during the rainy season. “We’re always promoting collaborative research, and this might well further our efforts in that direction,” he noted.
UC officials plan to solicit faculty input on the uBay initiative, but the University is confident that the pushback will be minimal. “These days UC is all about moving on-line,” noted C. Johnson Hacker, Assistant Director of Administrative Obfuscation for UC’s President’s Office. “We are moving at warp speed toward on-line courses, and next month we’ll be unveiling two exciting new initiatives to market the UC name over the Web. Our innovative digital advisement program, ‘Download-a-Dean,’ and our live-chat teaching program, ‘The Tweeting Tutor,’ both hold enormous promise for filling UC’s
coffers while engaging with the public in exciting new ways. In our view, it’s part of the University’s public mission to make UC available to everyone with a Paypal account.”
Officials close to the Whitman campaign caution that the fledgling uBay project is still on the drawing board, and they are undecided as to the extent of its reach into the often arcane world of Academe. “We’re excited about the idea of reducing bloat by selling off buildings, land, and perhaps a few professors,” noted spokesperson Sitzbad. “We’re less clear on things like bacteria, which have enormous revenue potential because they reproduce like crazy, but could, in the wrong hands, be dangerous. We’re very concerned to keep the great treasure that is the University of California
away from people who might behave irresponsibly."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)