Thursday, December 13, 2018

Just UCSB? - Admissions Decisions Creating ? And other things.


"Faculty fret about cheating and low English skills as UC Santa Barbara enrolls more students from China"

..."the blame on the university for failing to fully prepare for what has been a rapid influx of Chinese students. He and other faculty said they have pressed in recent years for international students to be better screened for English-language skills, offered more remedial help and instructed in American university norms, including the importance of academic integrity and respectful classroom behavior."...

"A few years ago, UC Santa Barbara faculty were told at a meeting that Chinese students made up 6% of the student body but accounted for one-third of plagiarism cases, according to Paul Spickard, a history professor on the faculty admissions committee."...


There's this on :

Remember earlier:


And on Title IX:

Monday, December 10, 2018

The political moves of UC Regents in relation to Title IX hypocrisy or pension reforms etc; UC Regents Special Meeting added tomorrow; Cal's new words on diversity and undergrad admissions; more UC PATH problems

"UCPath representatives respond to unresolved payroll complications at town hall"
..."Viorato added she thinks UCLA failed to support students who are most vulnerable to extreme financial instability.

“The university needs to determine how it will offer reparations to students who have faced eviction, had to take out high-interest loan offers and build their credit card debt,” she said.

The town hall included a Q&A session that allowed students to directly ask UCPath representatives questions. Claire Fieldman, USAC president, and Jamie Kennerk, USAC’s external vice president, were among the undergraduate and graduate students who voiced concerns.

The representatives at the town hall said there was no policy in place that would close unresolved cases in four days. However, Kennerk said this conflicted with information she had received from program directors and the UCLA UCPath team.

“So now that I’m hearing that that’s not how it works, I’m confused, and I think that we all need more light spread on what the actual case system looks like,” Kennerk said.

Kennerk added that solving the current payroll problems has been challenging because the new system is decentralized.

“UCPath doesn’t directly control everything,” she said in a separate interview. “It’s been hard to hold people directly accountable, which has complicated both student advocacy as well as UCPath’s ability to triage issues.”

Several of those in attendance asked what UCPath will do to help student workers who have explored all available resources but still cannot resolve their payroll and financial issues.

A UCPath representative said UCPath did not anticipate the issues student workers are experiencing and will adjust by providing better customer service.

The representatives’ presentation said students can receive loans from University Credit Union, Student Loan Services and Collections, and UCLA Graduate Division.

However, David Tuyo, a University Credit Union representative, said there is a cap on the amount students can receive if they opt for a short-term loan. UCU increased the maximum loan amount from $350 to $500 in light of student workers reporting payroll issues, but Tuyo said he thinks this is still not enough for many students.

“We don’t have a giant pot of money,” Tuyo said. “My heart goes out to those who need more than the $500 cap on short-term loans.”

Yunyi Li, the UCLA campus chair for UAW Local 2864 union, said UC Riverside and UC Merced, which implemented UCPath in January, experienced similar issues with the new system.

Li said the town hall provided useful but redundant information and added she thought UCLA acted in negligence by failing to resolve issues with UCPath before implementing the system at UCLA and treating the problems as an issue of customer service.

Anais Lopez, a third-year political science student, said she skipped a class to attend the town hall.

“Thursday of 10th week is very inconvenient for most students. It’s almost asking students not to go in a way,” Lopez said. “Although we want our money, we also need to get our grades, and we need to go to office hours and talk to our TAs and go to classes.”

Li and Lopez both said they were concerned about the number of students who work two jobs but have only received paychecks for one since the implementation of UCPath.

Lopez added students who work two jobs did not experience pay issues with the previous payroll system.

UCPath and CRU representatives said they were interested in hosting future information sessions, but stated they have yet to schedule another one. The UC Office of the President said in an email statement that additional staff and resources for troubleshooting UCPath issues will remain available at UCLA until the end of the academic year."

And :

"UC employees report paycheck errors with implementation of new payroll system"

-- but neither article tackles the $750 million dollar project costs thus far and its effect on future campus budgets, tuition and fees...
See also:


This new UC Regent making this move:

Los Angeles Times
"Labor leader Laphonza Butler jumps to political consulting — and just maybe a Kamala Harris presidential campaign"
..."Butler will be a partner in the newly rechristened firm SCRB Strategies, along with veteran strategists Ace Smith, Sean Clegg and Juan Rodriguez. Their clients include Newsom, Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf and Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), a frequent subject of speculation in her own right about 2020 presidential ambitions."..."“Can you imagine if we have a President Kamala Harris, what that would mean for Laphonza Butler?” Mitchell asked."...

--can we imagine what that means: potential worries, pitfalls for UC regents practices, policies, interactions?

Can we recall Harris' approach on Title IX in CA and specifically UC - the committee of two MOU moves, remember?

Or, its policy relationship to these recent widely covered troubling developments that extends over several years:

At minimum, Kamala "Harris should’ve known key staff member was accused of harassment
Fresno Bee"

Sac Bee broke it - then everyone else covered it:

- forcing non-disclosure agreement NDA and a "no rehire" clause included in the details of the settlement agreement

The case, as an internal HR case, extended over year+ before her departure mid-term to go to US Senate, yet:
"‘Nope.’ Kamala Harris denies knowing of allegations, settlement involving longtime aide"
..."she introduced a bill in June to ban forced nondisclosure agreements in harassment settlements."...

And no coverage of new UC regent Cohen's position on high stakes CA rule, CA supreme court case on pensions, anywhere... - even though his job makes him a major figure in all of it- and the president of the UC regents, who appointed him regent, also has a detailed view on the subject.

At Cal

Talk is cheap model again?:

..."On December 12 at noon in the Pauley Ballroom, I will be joined by Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor Paul Alivisatos for the last of this semester’s “Campus Conversations.” While we will, as always, be ready to field a broad range of questions, we hope to focus this particular conversation on our quest for a diverse campus community and culture that will help safeguard and sustain our excellence in teaching, research and public service for many years to come. This event is just the first in a series of opportunities to pose hard questions about our values, plans and commitments, to share innovative ideas and to challenge the status quo — to do, in short, what Berkeley does best.


Carol T. Christ

-- She is already having great difficulty in exhibiting good optics on the issue within her cabinet- a non existent diverse Chancellor's cabinet comprised of the most senior administration positions. So, how can she show results, fixes to long term admissions problems with diversity of undergrad student admissions? The students will not see similar faces in the most senior positions in administration at California that the experience Cal wants to give those students? Or, does the Chancellor and her ilk think the students will not notice?


There are now additional "special meeting " agenda items added to the UC Regents Health Committee meeting tomorrow, mostly centered around actions increasing the compensation for senior management:

December 11, 2018

You can watch it here:

See also:

And, yes Elsevier:

Tuesday, December 4, 2018

UC Regents Meeting December 11th , UC PATH coverage,, more

"Faulty payroll system leaves hundreds of University of California employees without checks"

--strangely, the piece claims UC could not provide accurate total numbers for those employees affected at UC Riverside nor UC Merced - which is very strange since northern UC is supposed to be supported on UC PATH by UC Merced and southern UC is supposed to be supported on UC PATH by UC Riverside- yet the support centers can't provide accurate numbers about their own home campuses where they are?! The assoc vp operations and project manager said he could not provide the info...

"He said he didn’t have numbers for Merced or Riverside."

"About 77,000 UC system employees — including both staff and student positions — are covered by UCPath, according to UC Associate Vice President of Operations Mark Cianca.

That’s about one third of the system’s 230,000 employees. The remainder are expected to be covered by UC Path by the end of 2019."

-and in the presentation to UC Regents in November it was made clear that some UC labs are now added in and UC is using UC Path as "a selling point" to them and others in contracts,grants etc. So there's that...


UC Regents Health Services December 11th meeting:

Public Comment Period
Action: Approval of the Minutes of the Meeting of October 9, 2018

H2: Discussion Remarks of the Executive Vice President – UC Health

H3: Action Approval of Appointment of and Compensation for Chief Operating Officer, UC Irvine Health System, Irvine Campus as Discussed in Closed Session

H4: Discussion Working Together: Conduct Expectations in Healthcare Settings and Initiatives to Prevent and Address Disruptive Behavior

H5: Discussion UC San Diego Health Affiliation with El Centro Regional Medical Center: Impact on Quality and Branding, San Diego Campus

H6: Discussion Perspectives on the Role of Network Expansion in Supporting the University’s Academic Mission and Affiliation Principles

H7: Action Amendment of Regents Policy 3401 – Policy on Student Health and Counseling Centers

H8: Action UC Health Capital Financial Plan

Could H4 item have anything to do with this that came out yesterday?:
"UC Irvine Employee Files Lawsuit Alleging University Disregarded Sexual Harassment Claims"

It is the latest to follow on the heels of , from Sept:

"Former UC Irvine vice chancellor committed sex discrimination by paying women less than men, review finds"

Another round of revolving door between UC and CSU:
"A former UC Irvine vice chancellor touted for promoting equity and diversity committed sex discrimination by paying three women less than men who did the same or similar work, a campus review has found.

Thomas A. Parham left his post as vice chancellor of student affairs in June to become president of Cal State Dominguez Hills. The review, which was obtained by The Times, found that Parham violated university nondiscrimination policies by refusing to pay an assistant vice chancellor and the directors of two campus centers as much as male counterparts."

And then there was this:

Add in here- this which appears as an opinion piece at WaPo rather than a statement from UCOP:
Washington Post
Janet Napolitano: Don’t let the Trump administration undermine Title IX"

The Washington Post
Janet Napolitano: Don’t let the Trump administration undermine Title IX

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos speaks at a student town hall in Philadelphia on Sept. 17. (Matt Rourke/AP)

By Janet Napolitano
December 4 at 4:54 PM
Janet Napolitano, secretary of homeland security from 2009 to 2013, is president of the University of California.

The Education Department, in issuing its proposed Title IX regulations, appears to believe our nation’s colleges and universities have gone too far in responding to allegations of sexual harassment and sexual violence.

The department is mistaken.

Twenty-seven years ago, I was part of the legal team that supported Anita Hill as she testified before members of a Senate panel, most of whom had never grappled with the concept of sexual harassment before. Today, we understand better how sexual harassment can devastate the educations, careers and lives of those subjected to it. In higher education, this awakening, in large part, is because of students who courageously and publicly shared their own experiences, drawing the attention of not only their college administrators but also the Education Department’s Office for Civil Rights — then under the Obama administration — and the nation at large. This, in turn, has led to critical improvements in how schools respond to complaints.

As a university president, I know all too well how crucial it is — and how complex it can be — to quickly and appropriately respond to sexual harassment and sexual violence. Since I came to lead the University of California in 2014, the UC system has dedicated significant time, tangible resources and its best thinking to develop processes that are fair to those accused and to those bringing complaints. Many other schools did the same, and as these processes continue to evolve on campuses and in the courts, we remain steadfast in our commitment to ensure fair and equitable outcomes for all parties. We have made important progress and, as a result, have seen a significant increase in reporting. This is important because it means people feel more confident about coming forward and are able to access the resources and recourse available to them.

The Education Department’s proposed rules threaten to reverse this hard-won progress by unraveling critical protections for individuals who are sexually harassed and undermining the very procedures designed to ensure fairness and justice. For example, these new rules would require that schools allow representatives of the accused — often lawyers — to cross-examine complainants at live hearings. This is an intimidating prospect, especially to students wrestling with the already difficult decision to come forward. This will discourage reporting, and it is unnecessary. While this requirement is supposedly intended to protect the accused, many universities, including UC, already permit the accused to question the complainant and witnesses through a neutral intermediary in a manner that does not cause further harm.

The Education Department would also narrow the definition of sexual harassment. The department currently recognizes that there is a spectrum of misconduct and requires schools to stop and remedy only behavior sufficiently serious to limit the target’s educational opportunities. This standard has worked well both for schools and for the Education Department through several administrations and does not need to be fixed. The new, narrower definition risks leaving serious conduct unaddressed — especially at schools that adopt a higher evidentiary standard, which the proposed rules also allow.

Additionally, the proposed rules would significantly diminish schools’ responsibilities to respond to complaints. Schools would be required to investigate only formal complaints that are made to someone with specific authority to institute corrective measures and that allege misconduct within a university program or activity. Worse, schools need only respond in a manner that is not “deliberately indifferent.” I believe our responsibilities as administrators and educators extend beyond these woefully minimal standards, and UC will not reduce protections for its own community members. I am concerned, however, about the safety and well-being of individuals at institutions that take a different approach.

These changes also would weaken the authority of the Office for Civil Rights, meaning the federal government would play little role in ensuring students received important Title IX protections. Schools look to the Education Department for leadership on critical issues affecting our nation’s students. Yet these proposed rules suggest that the Trump administration has deprioritized combating sexual harassment and sexual violence. Under the guise of providing due process, they represent yet another effort to erode important civil rights protections.

The problems of sexual harassment and sexual violence won’t go away until we work together to make them go away and change the culture of what is acceptable behavior. In the face of efforts to set this important work back, colleges and universities cannot waver in their commitment to do what is right. For too long, our culture has blamed and stigmatized survivors and allowed sexual misconduct without accountability. Together, we can build on progress we have already made to change that. We can, and we must."


Then this latest at Cal:

Then check out headline spin on it...


On students basic needs and separately the topic of IX there's:

Friday, November 30, 2018

Does UC Support Cal Grant Expansion or Not?

"California Student Aid Commission backs expansion of Cal Grant program
Legislature could overhaul Cal Grants next year"

"University of California System President Janet Napolitano and California State University System Chancellor Timothy White were cool on the proposed overhaul, however. In a letter to the 15-member commission, Napolitano and White supported increasing the size of the Cal Grant that helps students pay for living expenses, but said further changes need more analysis."

And UC in a quick read 2 page letter-says this on Cal grant program for students:

- it is interesting that only two segments joined on that letter: UC's Napolitano joined by former UC Riverside Chancellor and now CSU Chancellor White... But UC Regent Ortiz Oakley did not join the letter and he is Chancellor of the CA community college system...

(BTW chancellor White comes up in some bad memories in :this latest Remaking the University guest post:

"There is a punchline to this story that takes place in a former UCR Chancellor’s living room…

During this period, Chancellor Tim White periodically invited groups of department chairs to his residence for friendly dinners, during which he engaged us in conversation about things we felt were important to the campus. During the dinner i attended, a fellow departmental chair and i raised concerns ove"...)


Gov elect Newsom's views on Cal grant also come up in the EdSource article.

And Daily Bruin had this -which was mostly statements of hope and expectations and light on in depth analysis:
"Daily Bruin
UCLA experts speculate on fiscal feasibility of Newsom's campaign pledges"

Other coverage offers this:
..."give Newsom his only real chance to pursue and deliver on the promises he repeatedly pushed during the campaign.

Consider that wish list: universal health care, universal preschool, universal prenatal care, free community college tuition for two years, more funding for higher education, cradle-to-career education, building hundreds of thousands of housing units by 2025 to ease the homeless and housing crisis. And that’s just for starters."...see:

And they also had this
"The Mercury News
Get ready, California: Gavin Newsom is not Jerry Brown, from governing styles to Trump taunts to hairdos"

No answer to them this week...

In news articles all last week--Many comments from campus community wondering about why Cal administration relied upon an AQI meter located on the bay at Aquatic Park near bay breezes and away from hillside ridge area that is center of, close to campus -- but no answers from admin on it this week when folks returned...last week just excuses that it was difficult to assess.

But there is this Op Ed still asking important questions:
..."Anybody who was on campus could feel how bad the air quality was. It hurt to breathe, and the website Purple Air listed the air quality index as well above 200 on campus. Almost all universities in the Bay Area had canceled classes that day. But according to UC Berkeley’s metrics — a morning read of a meter 2 miles from campus — the smoky air did not warrant a shutdown that day."...
"Of course we need the courage to carry on. But we also need the courage to take bold action. And that courage won’t just bubble up from nowhere. It will grow out of our connection to each other in community and our sense of collective struggle. And that is an ethic that we won’t learn in the classroom.

If, at the behest of revenue-minded campus administrators, I found myself standing in front of a smoky room of dedicated students with face masks, my message might be something like this: Carpe diem. No more business as usual. Let’s help each other by organizing and creating the future that we want and need — together."

And, thankfully for this reporting, coverage of experts at Davis looking into effects based on readings from Berkeley- Oakland hills (where smoke nestled) during that time:

And here is one more related article:

See NYT:

..."It’s a godawful mess; there is just such a long list of hazardous materials that are partially burned and scattered about in the debris after a fire,” said Dr. Gina Solomon, a professor at University of California, San Francisco, who studies the effect of chemicals on health."...

"Professor Webster stood on the blackened banks of Butte Creek, scooping up sample jugs of water. He is part of a project with a consortium of universities studying the contaminants that wildfires release into the watershed. Of particular concern, he said, was the site of this fire: Paradise sits in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada, where cities as far away as Los Angeles get their water.

“That landscape is the landscape that provides high-quality drinking water for the rest of the state,” Professor Webster said.

Crews are currently installing wattles — bundles of straw — along water bodies in an attempt to block the seepage of contaminants. But with recent rains, many chemicals are still flowing and the cleanup work has become even more challenging.

“The firefighters are doing heroes’ work,” Dr. Solomon said, “but these hazardous materials workers are doing heroes’ work for sure too — it’s just less visible.”

Cal on Harvard's admissions, and then Cal autograder issues update


At Harvard:
UC Berkeley Sociologist Talks History of Harvard Admissions | Harvard Crimson

There is a running series of those updates as well, the latest here:


Now IHE covering "Autograding System Goes Awry, Students Fume
Computer science students at the University of California, Berkeley, are frustrated with a malfunctioning autograding system."

More background here- in the last section of this post: