The Regents have some items on their agenda that will reshape the University of California. Wednesday the 17th at 9:30 the Committee on Educational Policy will discuss the effort now spreading throughout the system to recruit more nonresident students who can be charged more than double in-state fees. The L.A. Times report repeats without investigating claims that nonresidents will not replace resident students but will be added to them, in a zero-growth budget environment when the state has no reason to pay additional money to educate the children of Texans and Nevadans. Tune in to see if this claim is repeated and explained.
At 10:15 on Wednesday the Committee on Finance will hear fairly dismal budget news. Student tuition will start going up sometime after 8:50 am on Thursday morning. And the discussion of the pension changes will begin Thursday morning at 10:15. Listen in.
Commentary to follow -
UC's New Approach to Labor Relations - Part 4
13 hours ago
2 comments:
Here is my one-minute speech for the regents meeting: I speak against the fee increase. Last year we learned that external grants lose hundreds of millions of dollars, endowment gifts are restricted and often do not cover the full cost of what they support, and self-sustaining units will not share their profits. In other words, the only source of new income for the university is student fees and state funds. Since state funds are never enough, this means that undergraduate students end up subsidizing everyone else. The end result is an endless need to increase tuition and at the same time reduce the cost of instruction by increasing the size of classes, reducing the number of course offerings, and eliminating the sections and services supporting classes. We need a different funding model - one based on transparency, rationality, and fairness.
Pitts was the pitts today-
no real research has been done on non resident placement after graduation- here is the student regent account of the Pitts presentation:
"Provost Pitts talk to the Ed Policy Committee on the issues of nonresident enrollments. The UC Commission on the Future was suggesting that the nonresident enrollment be increased and then capped at 10%. It is currently at 6.5%. Regents had mixed reactions – a couple of the Regents remarked on the capacity issue of our campuses, and asked how nonresident enrollment increases were not going to knock out California residents. Other regents questioned why there is a specific cap of 10%, when the current enrollment percentage is not a capped percentage. Other Regents asked what are the results of these nonresident enrollments – do these nonresidents stay in the state after they leave? While data shows that 2 out of 3 nonresidents decide to stay in California for graduate school, we do not know how much of these nonresidents stay and work in California."
it was embarrassing how many times Pitts had to say 'i don't know those numbers ill have to get back to you- or maybe i'll get back to you'
just a friggin embarrassment- does the man not have a well paid staff?!
other funny stuff
Blum's comment about talking to someone close to him about "our tea party friends" and how likely they are to help with discussions with OMB and NIH
and Eddie Island asking Taylor - why did you makes us just listen to your 20 minute presentation on UC finances.
comedy central should let their cameras
Join the Conversation
Note: Firefox is occasionally incompatible with our comments section. We apologize for the inconvenience.