Tuesday, January 31, 2017

Failures of the political class, Failures of academia

This was one of many warning signs in Sept 2016: "I've always believed that university professors are willing and able to govern academics, but now I am not so sure."


Now, they-even STEM esp. STEM- write :


With instructions for ways to sign here:


It reads like this: "An Open Letter to President Donald Trump and His Administration
We the undersigned are calling on you, in the most urgent terms possible, to maintain our country’s commitment to meeting the greenhouse gas emission targets set forth in the Paris Climate Agreement. This agreement is the first of a series of steps required to avert substantial climate change. The Earth’s climate is entering a state that has not been experienced in human history. Continuing to produce greenhouse gases at current rates will have catastrophic, unstoppable consequences for our environment, our economy, and our country. Bold and decisive action may still avoid the worst scenarios, allow for adaptation to the changes, mitigate the damage, and bring new economic opportunities to our country. To this end, we ask that you ensure America’s place as the global leader on climate action.
With this letter, we aim to express the degree to which the scientists and intellectual leaders of our state, speaking for themselves and not on behalf of their respective employers, agree on the facts of climate change. Despite misleading portrayals, there is widespread consensus in the scientific and academic communities that human-caused climate change is real, with consequences that are already being felt. The science of how greenhouse gases trap heat is unimpeachable. Climate records are being broken as human-caused changes add onto natural oscillations (e.g., El Niño) in the climate system. Fossil records from pre-human times show much higher sea levels and a reorganization of vegetation patterns when greenhouse gases were higher and Earth’s climate was much warmer than today. Increasing levels of greenhouse gases in our atmosphere set in motion regional variations in weather, weather extremes, the loss of major ice sheets, and declining biodiversity that has been associated with mass extinctions in Earth's past.
Scientists have warned for decades of the dangers of overreliance on fossil fuels. The world has been slow to respond and, as a result, we run an increasing risk of major damage to America’s economy and security. We have had an unusually large number of serious natural disasters in the past decade that are in line with climate change predictions. The Southeast and West suffer from increasing droughts. Miami floods at high tide as sea levels rise. Major cities on the Eastern and Gulf coasts regularly suffer major damage from violent weather. Western forests die because winters are insufficiently cold to prevent insect infestation of drought-stressed trees. Left unchecked, the frequency and severity of these climate change events will increase with time, as will their economic impact. To secure and conserve our way of life, our economy, and our environment, we need immediate action.
The United States now has a unique opportunity to lead the world in developing innovative ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. By investing in and incentivizing clean energy and carbon sequestration technologies now, we position ourselves to be the economic and political leaders of the 21st century.  To do otherwise cedes these opportunities to others and undermines our national security, food security, water security, and the future of our children and grandchildren.  For these reasons, we ask you to maintain and increase our country’s commitment to taking action on climate change, beginning with the current Paris Climate Agreement.
Signed by,
2344 faculty members, ..."

IT started off ...

Like this at UCSF:

Outsourced IT workers ask Feinstein for help, get form letter in return | Computerworld

And now become this:

India freaks out over U.S. plans to change H-1B high-skilled visas

Trump's immigration reform: High-skilled visas may be next


Dismay or Drain?. Or...

See THE: 

-There are those who believe the U Much statement was stronger than UC's ,-but THE has:

"One of the strongest is that from Janet Napolitano, president of the University of California system and former secretary of homeland security under Barack Obama, along with the system’s individual chancellors. Their statement calls Trump’s order “contrary to the values we hold dear as leaders of the University of California”, adding that it is “critical that the United States continues to welcome the best students, scholars, scientists and engineers of all backgrounds and nationalities”."

Interesting, RT has this headline:
"Safe spaces on campus: University presidents lambast Trump travel ban"
There is:


With The Stroke Of A Pen, Trump May Have Sparked An American Brain Drain
Scientists, academics and advocates are looking at more hospitable environments overseas.
- they cite comment from , um, cough, Mary Sue Coleman...

Some other items to note:

San Francisco Magazine ,who previously did a widely read glossy profile of Mark Yudof is now sharing this content on a UC Berkeley alum at:
And excerpt:

Then see UCB and sanctuary cities policy comes up here as well:

It would be helpful to have some comment from Mark Yudof's on these items given he says his role is as a self described roving former UC president who visits campuses like UC Davis when they have campus climate issues -see at 45:00 timestamp here- and Yudof is currently UC Berkeley faculty...It might be helpful, illuminating, Lumina-ish?...
He also was highlighted by SF Mag a few years back, too btw
A UC student's plight in:

"The third-year bachelor’s student in gender and sexuality studies at the University of California, Riverside, didn’t think her citizenship status would be a problem. Though she’s undocumented, in 2012 she received work authorization under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. That program shields undocumented immigrants who arrived as youths from deportation and allows them to work legally."
Also there:
"Finally, many university officials are denouncing Trump’s ban as a direct threat to American values.
Nicholas Dirks, the chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, said “there is a far larger story at play” than the ban’s effect on campus. “Our country itself is at an historic crossroads, in debate not simply over a particular immigration policy, but over the very ideals that define our nation,” Dirks said."

There is also:


Monday, January 30, 2017

"University of California administrators stopped pursuing high-dollar moonlighting positions after scrutiny of former UC Davis Chancellor"

UC top brass stopped pursuing lucrative board seats after Katehi ...

Also there, see:
Cutting middle-class scholarships will create burden on families
Sacramento Bee

Antithetical to the stated values...

"Like Napolitano, UC regents oblivious to criticism"

"Campus criticizes UC’s reluctance to disinvest from DAPL after Trump’s reinstatement of construction"

From a year ago see

UC Davis Aggie with: "Calls for UC to divest from Wells Fargo"
https://theaggie.org/2016/01/29/afrikan-black-coalition-calls-for-uc-to-divest-from-wells-fargo/ -whatever happened with it?

"Another Lawmaker Asks UC President to Halt UCSF Layoffs"
At the board session for UC regents on the 26th Newsom made a point to note that DeLeon joined the Gov in calling for phasing out the UC middle class plan...
That's in the "archive" too

Sunday, January 29, 2017

But the UC Regents didn't sign it, so...

What meaning does this have if the UC Regents did not sign it? (And/or if one is at a campus where the Chancellor is currently under a 'review' process that is unclear/cloudy?)

"UC statement on President Trump's executive order
UC Office of the President
Sunday, January 29, 2017

President Janet Napolitano and the Chancellors of the University of California today (Jan. 29) issued the following statement:

We are deeply concerned by the recent executive order that restricts the ability of our students, faculty, staff, and other members of the UC community from certain countries from being able to enter or return to the United States.

While maintaining the security of the nation's visa system is critical, this executive order is contrary to the values we hold dear as leaders of the University of California. The UC community, like universities across the country, has long been deeply enriched by students, faculty, and scholars from around the world, including the affected countries, coming to study, teach, and research. It is critical that the United States continues to welcome the best students, scholars, scientists, and engineers of all backgrounds and nationalities.

We are committed to supporting all members of the UC community who are impacted by this executive action.

President Janet Napolitano
University of California

Chancellor Nicholas B. Dirks
University of California, Berkeley

Interim Chancellor Ralph Hexter
University of California, Davis

Chancellor Howard Gillman
University of California, Irvine

Chancellor Gene Block
University of California, Los Angeles

Chancellor Dorothy Leland
University of California, Merced

Chancellor Kim A. Wilcox
University of California, Riverside

Chancellor Pradeep Khosla
University of California, San Diego

Chancellor Sam Hawgood
University of California, San Francisco

Chancellor Henry T. Yang
University of California, Santa Barbara

Chancellor George R. Blumenthal
University of California, Santa Cruz"

Thursday, January 26, 2017

UPDATES: UC Berkeley dire cap projects funding situation- Dirk's should address...

What Regent M said about UC Berkeley during today's board meeting see


See at the 77:00 time mark..now for some reason Regent M's remarks about Cal capital strategies shows up at the 1:00:00 mark ( and toggling between 59:43- and the 1:00:00 mark is now more clunky )

(And, btw regent Blum also threw in his two cents that Berkeley is a very, very unhappy place right now etc in this section of the meeting as well- which is a bit different from Cal PR folks who say they do not sense any bad mood as they walk the halls etc)
Also at

Some final updates on the UC Regents board meeting topics from their final day added in below:

So take a look at that cap strategies conversation about UC Berkeley mentioned above and then read these:



And then maybe ask howthehellisthatgonnahappen?

But the problems remain:


Instead he is discussing, tweeting about   this: and sending out this

The fait accompli of this year's tuition increase was accomplished with little push back, is that in itself a sign of ...Disconnect, or...?

Regents Torlakson and Newsom both commented on that as well.
Regent Perez is new incoming chair of ACAD committee because Island and Gould will be ending their term March 1 - when Brown will have four UC regents positions available for him to fill, which should prove a helpful resource to employ if the UC regents continue to discuss him/Sacto negatively as they did at this week's meeting...

Regent Perez also discussed at length this history and subject at Cal

 during the 2:31:00 time mark and he questions why the students delegated away their advocacy to the student regents and Perez correctly mentions that the student regent role is not set up for that by UC policy... BTW UC is trying to recruit for that role again: http://regents.universityofcalifornia.edu/about/members-and-advisors/student-regent.html

Regent Elliott noted that UCOP does not provide detail breakdown on resident and non resident grad student population and Elliott wanted to know why, but no answer back...

Oh yeah and don't  miss Ortiz Oakley statements about how he, as a higher education expert, -even he- is having difficulties understanding some of the rationales in play
Cost per student breakdowns and  tuition, fees etc see his comments at the 02:11:00thru to 02:20:00 time mark at video link at the top of this post, he says" I'm not sure even I understand the relationship between aid and tuition anymore and this is my business"
He then discusses how it might be even more difficult for other Californians and parents to understand ..He is saying this about UC where he earned his MBA and he is also Chancellor of the CA community college system in addition to serving as UC Regent.

Regent M 'everybody is getting to capacity'

Blum talks about 2018 CA gov race and the new admin in DC...

Regent M on 'Berkeley  as  an example needs alot of stuff but they only have nine million left'

Then comments on other UC campuses

And much more...You can find those exchanges in the video of this week's UC regents meeting.

On a separate note read this important Berkeley side story about events that occurred at UCB

Then see this one from abclocal affiliate:

UC Bloat's version of transparency and governance...

Cal football aide under fire since player death is let go
"But rather than terminate Harrington’s contract, the school extended it. He continued to coach until Sonny Dykes — the head coach who recruited Harrington — was fired this month. All other assistants were also let go.

Cal will continue to pay Harrington through June 30, the end of his contract, although his salary of $12,500 per month would be reduced by however much a new job were to pay.

The multimillion-dollar settlement and uproar from faculty came after The Chronicle reported that attorneys for UC admitted liability and negligence in Agu’s death.

The admission by the school capped months of confidential depositions, obtained by The Chronicle, during which former Cal football players disputed the narrative that university officials told the public and the media about the events surrounding Agu’s death."
"Chancellor Nicholas Dirks in July ordered a new review of the strength and conditioning program after The Chronicle reported on the possible conflicts of interest and methodology in the first one.

The new probe will continue despite Dykes and his staff leaving, said Dan Mogulof, a spokesman for the campus.

Harrington has been replaced by Torre Becton, who previously coached at USC and Washington.
Editorial: UC must outline specific guidelines for Title IX coordinator
On one hand, Napolitano claimed in a statement that Salvaty would help to more consistently enforce newly drafted Title IX policies across the various campuses. Yet, on the other hand, the UC claims there is no inconsistency across respective campuses’ Title IX offices. These mixed messages show not only a lack of coherence in the UC’s reasoning behind the new position, but also a lack of direction in what it hopes to achieve.

Even looking past the matter of uniformity, it’s clear the UC doesn’t even know what effect the Title IX coordinator will have on its campuses. Napolitano referenced the new policies regarding sexual violence and harassment as the reason for the new position, and a university spokesperson added Salvaty would help the UC to assess and strengthen its Title IX policies. But without a set of guidelines for what exactly strengthening policies would entail, it’s unclear what tangible effect Salvaty will have on students and faculty besides being a glorified policy analyst.

Thus, it is imperative the UC comes up with clear-cut parameters for the Title IX coordinator position. Without outlining explicit objectives for the position, it is difficult to see the benefits it could bring.

Sexual discrimination and harassment are certainly important issues on UC campuses, and it’s good that the administration is looking to address the issue proactively. But without actually figuring out which problems a systemwide office should – or even can – fix, it runs the risk of becoming administrative bloat. And to the chagrin of the UC, that’s just another example of splurging student fees."

Also there, this on IX:

Then see The Bee:
..."thousands of pages of documents UC has yet to produce in response to Public Records Act requests from The Bee dating back to May 5 that were filed as the scandal involving Katehi and UC Davis was unfolding.

Katehi, who faced criticism and student protests over her acceptance of lucrative corporate board seats, extensive travel and public relations efforts to improve her image, was suspended in April and resigned under fire in August as the UC probe of her actions was made public.

The Bee filed 27 public record requests during the uproar involving Katehi, which began with The Bee’s revelation that she had accepted a seat on the board of DeVry Education Group while it was under investigation by the federal government for allegedly misleading students.

UC Davis and UC officials eventually released a number of records in response. Those included contracts that revealed Katehi and UC Davis hired companies to scrub the internet of negative postings about the chancellor and the school following the November 2011 pepper-spraying by police of students at a campus protest.

However, numerous records still have not been produced, including"...


Why Regent Pattiz needs to resign from the UC Board of Regents
"Yet, this January, Pattiz will resume his seat at the bi-monthly board meeting, making promises to advocate for students on a spectrum of issues including impending tuition increases, diversity and campus climate and — ironically — sexual violence prevention.

I’m not an educational policy expert by any means, but I can tell you this: You wouldn’t need to spend thousands and thousands on press and public relations to cover up controversies if you eliminated the roots by which these controversies contentedly grow. Keeping Pattiz on the board further affirms the widely felt sentiment by students, staff and faculty that the board is neither representative nor aware of their interests.

Prospective students should not d see controversy after controversy when they Google the University of California. Professors are working too hard to provide quality instruction for their work to be de-legitimized by bureaucrats who don’t know how to act justly. Staff members are working themselves to death to provide the best support services for their students, only to see headlines questioning the impact of their efforts. Student activists are often sleep-deprived, full-time students working several jobs and paving the way for a better university only to have their parents question at the dinner table why their regent was sexually harassing their employees.

It does not matter if Pattiz was acting in his official role as a regent or not. When someone accepts the prestigious role of a governor-appointed regent, "...

UC Regent committee approves Anderson School of Management expansion

"Where the rich go to college in California
See which universities have the highest percentage of students from 1-percent families"
Part of coverage of another new report on CA higher ed

Wednesday, January 25, 2017


"One report, from the Reclaim California Higher Education Coalition, argues for restoring per-student state funding to 2000 levels after adjusting for inflation, for offering all students seats and for eliminating tuition in order to return California to the original spirit of its vaunted Master Plan for Higher Education. Such moves would only cost the median California household $48 per year in additional state income tax, it says -- although it uses a funding formula that would cost high-income families much more, as much as $50,240 for those with adjusted gross income over $1 million. It would also cost lower-income families less" see the report here:
"The other report, from College Futures Foundation, says California should change the way it funds its public university systems and makes financial decisions about them. The report notably calls for reform in revenue stability and predictability, arguing California should find a way to keep revenue from spiking during good years and plummeting during lean years. It also calls for improving budgeting practices for employee benefits, having state universities do more to reallocate the money they have toward student success and for California to improve its processes for accountability and transparency."
See their report here:


More coverage:





And then a recommendation to read or read again this post closely:

And then this two part post:

Wondered earlier in the week  about some Cal moves,...and now this info:


Sunday, January 22, 2017

No idea..

Napolitano’s cancer treatment took UC regents by surprise

"“It was even more surprising to hear that she had been undergoing treatment for months,” said one regent, who asked not to be named because of the sensitivity of the matter.

The call came from Monica Lozano, chairwoman of the board, who had been kept informed about Napolitano’s cancer treatment since she was diagnosed in August. Regents got the call Tuesday, shortly before UC went public with the news.

Lozano went out of her way to say Napolitano was doing well and would be quickly back to work, our source said.

Napolitano was treated for breast cancer in 2000 and underwent a mastectomy, but UC has not disclosed the nature of her current cancer. In its public statement, the university said Napolitano was expected to be released from the hospital in the next day or two.

Sure enough, on Friday, the 59-year-old former Arizona governor and Homeland Security chief was back in the office.

Still, if everything was going so well — and there was no cause for alarm — why the call?

“That’s what some of us were wondering as well,” the regent said."

One might recall this old AP article where Napolitano's health was covered:

-That was press coverage of elected officials archive- seems perhaps to be in stark contrast to how the msm have covered pols during 2016 election etc

There are new personnel being hired, but it remains unclear if they are replacing folks or what the status of the review launched over 2016 summer is, but SJ Merc has:

"It’s official: Cal athletics bleeding cash at astounding rate"


"Cal released official financial documents Friday that confirm a massive budget deficit and dire outlook for the Bears’ 30-sport athletic model.
The athletic department lost $21.7 million in the 2016 fiscal year, according to a statement of revenues and expenses submitted to the NCAA.

The deficit matches projections outlined months ago by this newspaper and was covered by central campus, which itself is running a $110 million budget shortfall.

The athletic department’s fiscal woes are rooted in the debt service payment on the Memorial Stadium and Simpson Training Center projects, which cost approximately $460 million (combined).

The Bears generated $86.3 million in revenue from continuing operations against $88.1 million in expenses. But the interest payment on the debt service was $18.5 million. (There were minor additional costs for capital projects.)

That interest payment will remain steady until 2032, when the principal kicks in and annual payments soar — first to $30 million and eventually to almost $40 million.

Cal chancellor Nicholas Dirks has formed a task force to recommend a sustainable athletic model. The group is likely months away from issuing its conclusions, but the elimination of sports teams is a potential, if not likely, outcome.

The projections for the 2017 fiscal year are nearly as dire: An $18.8 million loss."

-But the story does not include a link to the report mentioned in the first sentence...
Daily Cal has this editorial board piece:
"UC tuition hike only option amid state divestment
UNIVERSITY ISSUES: Freeze in tuition for the past six years was never viable solution for University"


While the faculty at CSU write:
"Not only did the editorial fail to justify raising tuition in the California State University system, it failed to detail differences between the two systems in relation to state funding and students."


It gets into Napolitano's moves at UC and differences between the two systems...

"UC and CSU tuition increases make sense” (Jan. 13), echoed UC President Janet Napolitano’s excuses to raise tuition. Red pen time.

Not only did the editorial fail to justify raising tuition in the California State University system, it failed to detail differences between the two systems in relation to state funding and students.

The CSU educates some 478,638 students on its 23 campuses. That’s over 208,000 more students than the UC. Yet if you break down state funding per student, the CSU receives nearly $5,000 less per student than the UC."

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/california-forum/article127816614.html

There is: a UC Regents meeting this week

Thursday, January 19, 2017

Space, that final frontier- and other forces

In California, Tensions Over Growth Divide a Campus
"Faculty and administrators at the University of California at Riverside are wrestling with how to heal a rift caused in part by fallout from an ambitious expansion plan

An Op Ed "UC needs to prioritize online education"

"In 2013 the Little Hoover Commission issued a report, “A New Plan for a New Economy: Reimagining Higher Education.” It notes that in the wake of the Great Recession in which state government spending was slashed for higher education, “California is recovering, but it must change its model for higher education if it hopes to meet the needs of a growing population and provide workers with the skills to compete in the world of the 21st century.

“The commission found that online education has enormous potential to expand the reach of public higher education, if used in a manner that benefits students. California’s colleges and universities already are using online courses, though they have yet to aggressively engage online education in ways that could help more students complete their programs on time and transfer course credits between systems.”

One of the reasons for not being more aggressive in rolling out online education is opposition by faculty, which must approve each course. “This policy, while understandable, causes substantial delay and, if continued, will ensure that California will become a follower rather than a leader in development of online higher education,” the report said.

Fortunately, the online effort is being pushed by Gov. Jerry Brown with the aid of increased funding, and gains are being made, particularly in the community college and CSU systems. The UC system, however, has lagged behind.

Only 49 online classes are now available for UC students. Just 20 classes are offered for non-UC students, 13 of which are closed to new enrollees. If you are lucky enough to

And closes with:

"Good leadership demands looking beyond the next 18 months. The future for the University of California appears likely to include empty buildings worth hundreds of millions of dollars on our University of California campuses. They can do much better."

The LAO looks at projections of student growth and opines that UC and CSU don't need additional campuses to accommodate what is coming. See:

UC Med no doubt is watching these:


Something  at Daily Cal:


The force is with woman who gets life-saving lung transplant

Tuesday, January 17, 2017

DeVos, Davos- snowflake treatment?

Climate change, Disability Rights, Title IX, public schools, purported 'govt sucks' quotes - all that and more come up in speed rounds here in video and transcript:
At a cold, snowy Davos there was:
Coverage of UCSD and more expert opinion on US leadership position on climate change

Monday, January 16, 2017

Sonny day, everything ain't ok

See this Matier and Ross update: Cal football fans: Put your TV contract where the sun don't shine - San Francisco Chronicle

And  Daily Cal now has,

Those are big 'if's, little interims, and questionable values

See: "UC needs a tuition hike, but also a clearer vision of its identity"

Includes some harsh statements about the Gov relationship with UC, and does not explain the funny math SF Chronicle pointed out and frames the opinion piece in a way that takes Napolitano's word that it will only be used for the undergraduates-- where is the proof of :

..." if Napolitano is true to her word and this money is used solely to improve the education of those who pay it, the price hike is justified. There are valid concerns about the long-term funding of the university, but for the short-term, preserving UC’s quality in exchange for a small increase in tuition and fees is the right move. The Board of Regents should approve the price hike when it meets next week.

Besides, the increase won’t affect most of the students who attend, at least not for a few years. The university’s financial aid system assures that families of four earning less than $80,000 a year pay no tuition at all. And the state’s new middle-class scholarship program, launched three years ago but still being phased in, will more than cover the increased cost for many more families. Only those making more than $150,000 a year will pay the higher tuition, and spending a little more than $300 extra is something that most of them will be able to afford.

That’s all well and good for the next few years, but there is a nagging and far more important issue that state leaders have yet to address satisfactorily. It’s nothing less than defining the very identity of the University of California going forward.

Gov. Jerry Brown and Napolitano clashed over this a few years ago. The governor, who has never been a major supporter of UC, basically resisted anything that would help the university bring in more money — higher tuition, better funding from the state or admitting more out-of-state students, who bring geographic diversity to campus in addition to paying a higher tuition that helps fund financial aid for low-income Californians. Instead, Brown expressed his preference for a more austere UC, one that saves money by pushing more online courses and prodding professors into teaching more classes while engaging less in research and other academic pursuits."

And no discussion by LAT of the yet to be completed JLAC audits, they just mention:

"Brown didn’t create the funding problem that has bedeviled UC and its students in recent years,"..."no sooner had Brown announced that the state might face a budget deficit this year than he targeted UC again by proposing to phase out the middle-class scholarships. Phase in, phase out, just like that. So much for greater access to higher education for middle-class families. "

But they close out with:
 "Realistically, UC will never return to the glory days when higher education was nearly free. But California can do better than make a public university education a strain on"...

They also have:
"UC Davis protest spurs concerns about free speech — and more political clashes ahead"

As you read that article perhaps also consider:
Should it really fall to an interim Chancellor at UC Davis, a 'Dirks-on- his-way-out-under-a-cloud/s'-appointed 'associate chancellor' (is he gonna stick around after Dirk's is out at Cal Hall?, And when are those clouds around Dirk's gonna get cleared up with actual reported findings from OP?)), a VC from UCLA, and some Prof in some Dept -all male btw-to be the  voices on how UC should deal with these issues?

(Shouldn't the UCSB painful recent years history also inform the subject as well? But no one wants to mention that thing that happened, --you know that thing that happened with a whole lot of  speech and videos beforehand, remember? But UC response spun those events as solely the result of only one very specific type of failed policy, not as a failure of other policies or of championing 'good speech' etc.)

And where are the comments from the non interim UC Chancellors?

OP and the Regents did take the 'more speech' stance but they, themselves, are crickets right now/again...

But in critically important ways the UC values, identity, mission are in question -so why should they wanna speak?
"The University of California does itself a disservice by outsourcing jobs"
By The Editorial Board

"The goal of the UC system, per its own mission statement, is to educate Californians in order to benefit the California economy by creating an educated workforce. It comes as a shock, then, that the UC system has become the first American public university to outsource some of its information technology (IT) jobs to another country. Since last year, the UC system has been firing its IT staff and replacing them with workers from other countries (primarily India), who are brought to the U.S. on work visas.

This action, while motivated by a need to cut costs — with the UC system’s budget being as strained as it is — sends a devastating message to many of the UC’s students. When there are students studying right now to become software engineers, it is tantamount to betrayal for the UC system"...See the full article.

Daily Cal has:
"new electrical engineering and computer sciences department policy revision for the upcoming semester aims to discourage intended computer science majors from intentionally failing lower division prerequisite classes."



As grades, financial aid and other campus information pour in after the end of the fall 2016 semester, issues have come up with the new CalCentral system."...Renee Chow, a professor of architecture and design and associate dean of undergraduate studies at the College of Environmental Design, said in an email that she had not had any issues with SIS nor heard about any problems from academic advisors.

Campus students have taken initiatives to responding to issues with CalCentral by posting complaints and providing feedback in the student Facebook group CalCentral Bugfinders, which now has over 500 members.

The group was created in response to initial issues with the system at the beginning of fall 2016 enrollment.

UC Berkeley senior Leo Steinmetz issued a letter of criticism of CalCentral in April 2016, mainly focused on issues surrounding enrollment processes in the new system. Eighty students also signed a petition in agreement with the letter. Steinmetz said the SIS office responded quickly to the letter and seemed willing to work on the issues, since they scheduled meetings with him and the other authors. But Steinmetz said most issues are still present.

“It is my impression that most of the issues continue to exist and to cause problems for students,” Steinmetz said in an email. “I more or less gave up on trying to get them to make it better about a month after I wrote that letter, because it seemed pretty clear that they had created the system with basically no flexibility, so even when they were willing to make the changes we proposed, they literally weren’t able to.”"

Sunday, January 15, 2017

Regents of the University of California meet January 25 & 26, 2017,

Wednesday, January 25
9:00 am
Location: Robertson Auditorium
Concurrent Meetings
10:00 am
Location: Fisher Banquet Room 

Location: Fisher Banquet Room 
10:00 am
Location: Robertson Auditorium
12:30 pm
Concurrent Meetings
1:00 pmCompliance and Audit Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Compliance and Audit Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
1:00 pmPublic Engagement & Development Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
Public Engagement & Development Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Fisher Banquet Room
3:30 pmGovernance and Compensation Committee (open session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Governance and Compensation Committee (closed session) (pdf) Location: Robertson Auditorium
Thursday, January 26
9:00 am
Location: Robertson Auditorium
9:30 am - 3:00 pm
Location: Robertson Auditorium

Saturday, January 14, 2017

Genius and luck? ..More.

It's an Op Ed at Sac Bee but details , facts on UC and OP approach included in it:
"Why ‘Dreamers’ at UC should feel very lucky"



This is included among other fresh news links posted at Remaking the U.:

Press Enterprise:" Tuition increases possible for CSU students "

Also this Audio and article on a report by CSU faculty:
"CSU faculty: Underfunding the schools betrays current students"


Apparently UC Constitutional autonomy does not exclude UC on this new policy, see:


And also don't miss:

CNN previously assigned their business reporter to this subject ...

Now they are covering UC Davis  on it like this: "Students Shut Down Free Speech- UC Davis Protestors Prevent Talk..."

-They are giving it front page breaking news treatment there...

Fox  highlight a particular view on Title IX in their coverage:

And feminism comes up in the ABC local video footage:

Thursday, January 12, 2017

What is OP paying for it? Why one person for that role? Why someone who has only held the job at UCLA for a li'l over a year?

UC hires first systemwide Title IX coordinator

Why is UCLA the epitome of Title IX for all UC? Is it? Should it be? The candidate has Ed ties to Notre Dame and U Chicago - are they the model of what Title IX should be at University of California?
-More overpaid OP bloat? Or is this position announced in advance of other findings?

See also:



And, now in this new story this section:
"Salvaty is not the first UCLA Title IX officer to go on to lead a systemwide Title IX office. Pamela Thomason, Salvaty’s predecessor, left in 2014 to become Title IX officer for the California State University system"
--A reminder of precisely that UCLA history is part of the concern.
See: http://dailybruin.com/2017/01/12/uclas-kathleen-salvaty-named-ucs-systemwide-title-ix-officer/

$500 million- while outsourcing, offshoring? And tuition hikes?


And, the privatized boosting for disparate treatment at one UC campus spin



"UCSF’s decision to exploit the H1-B visa loophole has received a great deal of criticism from state legislators and congressmen, but UC President Janet Napolitano has remained complacent about the matter. Yet, it was only 2014 when Napolitano remained firm in increasing employee minimum wages to $15 per hour, despite the costs. Now, the move to fire IT workers because it costs too much to pay them is not only terribly ironic, but also proves the UC is terribly flimsy when it comes to committing to its values.
This underhanded move demonstrates a frightening hypocrisy in the UC’s actions that is not limited to its treatment of IT workers. Over the past week, Teamsters 2010, the union for skilled workers, has protested stalled contract negotiations with the University, which it says stems from the UC’s refusal to increase their wages over the last four years.
Treating skilled workers in this manner throws dirt into the mouths of not only employees, but also state lawmakers and taxpayers, who provide funding to the university system for its educational merit and also for its role as one of California’s largest employers.
Certainly, cutting budget deficits is no laughing matter, and UCSF – and therefore the UC – are right in looking for ways to balance the books. However, backhandedly "

http://dailynexus.com/2017-01-12/brown-more-funding-less-aid-in-the-ucs/UCOP is continuing this narrative:
"Also during the conference call, UC Office of the President (UCOP) spokesperson Dianne Klein said financial aid covers more than just tuition; it covers other “educational expenses” such as housing, transportation and food. She echoed Napolitano in saying the proposed tuition hikes could “provide more resources” to low-income students.
“It may sound counterintuitive, but the lowest-income students are really going to end up better off because they will receive more financial aid,” Klein said."

THE has:
"The Great Mistake: How We Wrecked Public Universities and How We Can Fix Them, by Christopher Newfield
Sir David Bell fails to recognise the portrait of v-cs in a critique of neoliberalism in the US academy"


See Sac Bee with their op Ed.:

"Why tuition increases make sense at UC and CSU"

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Opposition, real reasons, 'mrakleaks'?, More

Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon says he'll oppose rolling back higher-education aid for middle-class students
Khosla Commits Funding for Undocumented Student Services

Here's the real reason Cal fired Sonny Dykes
San Francisco Chronicle - Matier and Ross

Included in OP Ed on UC Davis Chancellor search:
"Wrote this high official in an email to all committee members: “The most troubling aspect of the (Davis Enterprise) article is that it included information that should only be known to members of this committee and suggests that a member or members of this committee broke confidence and shared information intended only for committee use.”

..."At this point, the committee would be well advised to narrow the field to three, then make the names public — before I do — and invite them all to campus for question-and-answer sessions with various UC Davis stakeholders and community members. "
And there is this at Daily Cal

Tuesday, January 10, 2017

FOBH Swamp Thang?

Where B n H stands for Bill, Hil...

"Gorelick also lobbied from 2009 to 2010 on behalf of student loan giant Sallie Mae as part of an intense effort by that company and big banks to block the Obama administration’s effort to reform the student loan system by eliminating nonsensical, wasteful loan subsidies to private lenders. The Obama administration ultimately prevailed over Gorelick and the other special interest lobbyists, and the reform has saved billions for students and taxpayers."
See in full:
And, Chron Higher Ed has an interactive list:
"Here Are the Programs That Failed the Gainful-Employment Rule"


Is there going to be something similar for the IX compliance reviews?

Boom or Bust?, Plans or Revise?

The UC Board of Regents are also trying to move these same workers from a secure defined benefit pension to a risky 401(k)-style plan that will decimate income replacement and make workers subject to the whims and fees of Wall Street. Pensions are essential to ensuring retirement security, yet this state system is endangering the futures of its own residents.

UC has refused to address these matters in a fair and just way, and now these employees are without a contract. Despite the fact that 58 percent of them have bachelors’ degrees, their future is uncertain.


California’s Brown Focuses on Trump, Dark Clouds as State Booms
Governor Edmund G. Brown Jr. to Introduce the 2017-18 State Budget in Sacramento

For consideration?

First -see:
This post by a faculty member at UC Davis on an upcoming set of sponsored talks at UC campuses- for a long while it was the sole item at HuffPo's 'college' section

Yet they also have e.g. this other   view on it : also at HuffPo - but not included in that strange skeletal "College" section there (thought they merged it all into 'education' section and removed the 'college' section link, but there it is, maybe they plan to revive it?).

Take your pick of viewpoint, complex, or nuanced, write your own opinion etc..

In fact, now some UC Berkeley faculty have signed on to some letters expressing their position, see DailyCal.

At the same time some news outlets are  doing ongoing sometimes breaking news coverage of this news story where some of those topics raised in the posts above-- can be seen as hitting beyond theory into response to reality, headlines.

... becomes this kind of coverage of the subject matter, and this kind of talk about Berkeley

Another view...
If UC is now for the purpose of providing free forum for launching book junkets for those who are outside the immediate UC  community, US...then...

Is this about lucrative and strategic props and staging using identity politics as springboard, or?


Well, anyway check out: this upcoming book- Can Berkeley get a panel talk on it, too?

And tie it in to discuss: this research as well

 You could add in: this too

...Let's at least also make it about UK folks' ruminations research on the 'the how and why of funding for US higher education' directly, right?

Monday, January 9, 2017

Read It and...

That was : fast -Runs about 154 pages
On the Ed SEC nom: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/opposition-research-trump-nominees_us_58740f26e4b099cdb0ff0e2d?6mp7rwr8uu594quxr

Here is a direct link:. http://riggedcabinet.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Betsy-DeVos-Research-Report.pdf

See Buzzfeed on:

"The rule applies to 29,000 career college programs across the country; 66% are for-profits and the rest private and community colleges. But 98% of the failing programs are at for-profit colleges, and almost 25% of all four-year programs at for-profits nationwide are at risk of being shut down.
A scattering of programs at prestigious nonprofit colleges, including a drama program at Harvard, also failed."


"The firing of Sonny Dykes was not a great moment for Cal, and was made more embarrassing by officials of this great university issuing simplistic, mattress-tag statements about the deal. I challenge you to read the generic quotes of Chancellor Nicholas Dirks and athletic director Mike Williams and stay awake. Pure prattle.

•At least they didn’t mention “culture.”
Academics came up for about twenty seconds in the eighth minute of a ten minute presser:
Or at

Does it apply to UC? And IX

See: a CA state employees travel ban in

Are there any research collaborations in those spots? Exemptions for UC?
Hunch: UC Constitutional autonomy means it doesn't apply to UC, but an interesting headline...

It is not clear how the Trump admin view it- this prominent family supported him in his campaign against HRC and
  they have a connection to Title IX cases, relied on it in their higher education experiences  
So...The incoming admin stance...Unclear where it lands...