"To compete successfully in an increasingly innovative world economy, the U.S. will have to choose to lead in key technology sectors, and to do a better job of training an American workforce that will tackle the technical challenges ahead of us and be capable of operating in a more technology-driven workplace. This will require an increased federal commitment to investment in research and innovation."
-and- Here is the full text of her statement.
Daily Cal has this piece on patents today
Another Op Ed on UC Admissions -- this one in Daily Breeze- it reads like this: Whose University of California will it be?
..."fair for many of those rejected despite meeting all qualifications to wonder just whose UC this great public university will eventually become.
Will it continue to be the fundamental goal and reward for the state’s high schoolers, motivating them to achieve and attempt ever more difficult academic challenges? Or will it become another playground for wealthy out-of-state and foreign students who can afford the almost $23,000 extra per year in tuition paid by non-California residents?
So far, that extra money — the difference between $13,200 in-state tuition this year and $36,078 for all others — has proved no hindrance to foreigners in particular. One reason: Governments of China and some Arab countries pay all tuition and expenses for many of their citizens who study at American universities.
Altogether, 13 percent of all UC undergraduates next fall will be from out of state, split just about evenly between foreign students and those from the other 49 states. That’s up from 12 percent this year and just 5 percent as recently as 2010.
There is no doubt a connection between that fast-growing out-of-state student-body element"... - you can read the rest of that here.
Aren't California resident applicants to UC also sometimes those w/ international backgrounds, recent legal immigrants etc.? And isn't it also about 'out of state' admission to UC? What are the numbers state by state on UC admissions?
and see: comments section here where some are calling for a divorce b/ween UC and CA in the comments here - but: What if...well, what if say, there is a pre-nup, and in the pre-nup all the inherited wealth UC enjoys/enjoyed - that is inherited wealth CA received prior to the marriage and it is protected by the prenup -and the UC constitutional autonomy is also part of the CA inheritance, too. So "Divorced-UC' would become University of Blank and would be the one to pack bags, move out- not vice versa? CA would hold onto the buildings, land etc.. CA could do some CA legislative house keeping, bring in a 2.0 U of CA crew. The newly single now "Divorced-U /University of Blank" could call itself the 'University of We Don't Care Where The Money Comes From' - or "University of International Students Suit My Pedagogy" - or "University of
Whatever it is, whatever it calls itself--it still doesn't know what it is, what it is supposed to be, or how it is supposed to operate...
but- no worries- that isn't stopping the panel talks:
17th Annual Travers Conference on Ethics and Accountability in Higher Education
May 1, 2014 - 9:00am to 4:00pm Garden Room, Clark Kerr Campus UC Berkeley
Panelists from UC Berkeley include:
John Wilton, Vice Chancellor for Administration and Finance
Catherine Koshland, Vice Provost, Professor
Henry Brady, Dean, Goldman School of Public Policy, Professor, Travers Dept. of Political Science
Christopher Edley, Professor, School of Law
Jesse Rothstein, Associate Professor, Goldman School of Public Policy
Heinrich Mintrop, Associate Professor, School of Education
Other Distinguished Panelists:
Mohammad Qayoumi, President, San Jose State University
Pamela Brown, Vice President for Institutional Research and Academic Planning, UCOP
Nancy Shulock, Professor and Exec. Director of Institute for Higher Ed. Research & Policy, CSU-Sacramento
Sara Goldrick-Rab, Associate Professor, Dept. of Sociology, University of Wisconsin
Hans Johnson, Senior Fellow, Public Policy Institute of California
and $20,000 to the UC Regents too - in addition to the $3 mil to UCLA earlier this month. And, MotherJones and others posting all the UCLA and Donald Sterling ads, too- complete with "the UCLA is also planning on naming a research lab in their honor" stuff.
Online backlash-- is over? Chicago Tribune piece:
Online programs navigate learning curves
As universities exploit e-learning's benefits, they're discovering ways to maintain academic standards
California Gov. Jerry Brown, at a January meeting of the University of California Board of Regents, said he wanted the university to try online education for the masses that could leave out the human element altogether — "a pure online course that, once it's in the can, it's almost perpetual motion." According to online educators consulted, such an approach would generate a backlash. UC President Janet Napolitano responded accordingly.
In a public appearance, she called online courses "a tool for the toolbox," a reference to an inevitable change in which online education will become part and parcel of higher education, and will involve faculty. She added that online learning is not "a silver bullet, the way it was originally portrayed to be. It's a lot harder than it looks."
Backlash, judging by increased enrollment and participation by Ivy League royalty, is over.
Read the detail in full at the Daily Bruin- a student op ed asking about 'it', too- UCLA relations with POM Wonderful, donors overstep bounds: To begin with, state disclosure forms show that between 2010 and 2013, Feinberg was on the Resnicks’ payroll as a consultant, earning upwards of $100,000 from the power couple in 2011.
During this time, companies owned by the Resnicks bankrolled research at UCLA on the health benefits of pomegranate juice, including studies coauthored by Harley Liker, a doctor who had served as the Resnicks’ personal physician and medical director of POM Wonderful.
In turn, the Resnicks used studies at UCLA and elsewhere to tout in advertisements that..
it does not mention the Kern Reservoir aspect though.
While at the Daily Bruin also read about their sit down interview with Napolitano
Napolitano said she would still work not to increase tuition even if the state doesn’t grant the extra $120.9 million the UC is asking for. In Brown’s proposed budget released in January, he only gave a 5 percent or $142 million increase to the UC, less than what the UC Board of Regents requested.
and she talks about the murky campus climate results and there's this correction:
Correction: Napolitano said she believes Gov. Brown will be careful in allocating state funds this year because he wants to avoid ending his term with a deficit.