JANUARY, 2010

Welcome to the inaugural newsletter from the Santa Barbara Division of the
Academic Senate. This newsletter highlights some of the issues that are
being discussed by Systemwide Senate Committees. Each committee has
a campus representative listed as well. You can learn more about specific
Issues Under Review by following this link:

Joel Michaelsen (Geography)

   •    Met with UC Commission on the Future working group co-chairs to discuss ways
        for systemwide Senate to interact with working groups and assigned systemwide
        committees to serve as main contacts with working groups – Size & Shape:
        UCPB; Funding Strategies: UCPB; Education & Curriculum: UCEP; Access &
        Affordability: BOARS; Research Strategies: UCORP

   •    Chair Powell and Vice Chair Simmons reported on their efforts with counterparts
        from other higher ed segments to develop joint advocacy strategies for the
        upcoming budget negotiation season in Sacramento

   •    Powell and other segment senate chairs sent a joint letter on behalf of
        Intersegmental Committee of Academic Senates (ICAS) to Assemblyman Ira
        Ruskin with recommendations for his Joint Committee for Review of the Master
        Plan for Higher Education

   •    Discussed and endorsed a letter opposing the differential fee by major proposal

   •    Endorsed the Universitywide Committee on International Education’s (UCIE)
        recommendation to elevate requirements in the job description for the new EAP
        Director so that candidates would have to be qualified to achieve tenure at UC

   •    Endorsed a letter from CCGA opposing graduate student fee increases and
        suggesting several options for mitigating their impacts

David Stuart (Physics)

   •    A review of the return of collected indirect costs (IDC) to campuses is underway,
        primarily to look at how IDC is allocated, and to consider the extent to which the
        basis for the costs covers the actual overhead costs. UCORP is also reviewing
        the situations in which agency contracts do not allow indirect costs to be charged
        to consider the impacts of these contracts.
  •   UCORP members have had discussions related to the UC Commission on the
      Future to provide clarity on how it may best be established, what the objectives
      are, and how we could most effectively use the process to increase support for

  •   There have been ongoing discussions of the budget impacts to research across
      UC and at individual campuses, e.g., potential inequities in the implementation of
      the Furlough Exchange Program among researchers without external funding.

  •   The proposed changes in the patent assignment agreement signed by UC
      employees have been discussed.

Gerardo Aldana (Chicana-Chicano Studies)

  •   Fee increases: will we ever return to prior levels of state support? 1995: $15k per
      student; this spring: $7.8k per student

  •   Raising the Blue & Gold Plan to $70k from $60k

  •   Berkeley is proposing (eventually) 23.5% out-of-state students. Plan does not
      appear to have any systemwide discussion.

  •   Days of Instruction - UC requires 146 days; AAU average is 130. Can this
      amount to an opportunity for reducing expenses?

  •   CalTeach (STEM outreach, originally funded by OP and the Governor's office) is
      being moved to individual campuses and is being defunded centrally.

  •   Undergraduate Educational Effectiveness Task Force Report – Currently under
      review. The Task Force was charged with determining measures of teaching
      effectiveness similar to those produced by other institutions. This constitutes an
      effort to demonstrate quantitatively to the public/legislature some measure of UC
      contributions. The report covers various methods for measuring educational
      effectiveness (from standardized campus-wide measures to discipline specific
      measures) and makes recommendations on each.

  •   Education Abroad Program – what funding model is most appropriate? How do
      we handle differential costs associated with each campus? (Some are simply
      drawing from established campuses and programs; others are entirely
      constituted by UC efforts in the foreign city).

  •   Online Instruction- What is the scope of online instruction consistent with UC's
      mission? Should we be considering the possibility of an 11th (cyber) campus?
      Can it be cost-effective to implement certain forms of online instruction? What is
      the relationship between "UC quality" and online instruction? Concurrent
      discussions/efforts: RFP for online course proposals being developed at OP
      contingent on efforts to raise outside funds; UC Commission on the Future.
Jane Mulfinger (Art)

At the systemwide level, the University Committee on Planning and Budget met 3 times
this autumn, once telephonically. In general this year, UCPB is monitoring progress of
budget negotiations in Sacramento, insisting on shared governance and transparency,
making sure that adequate Senate input is solicited and that the input is taken seriously.
UCPB receives regular reports from the Office of the President's Budget and Finance

Among the issues discussed this term:

   •   OP's request to consider differential fees for upper division business and
       engineering students - in general UCPB replied negatively to this proposal.

   •   The role of the Gould Commission in relation to UCPB - UCPB will be receiving
       reports to review. Council is concerned that the Commission will not be able to
       come to thoughtful recommendations by the March deadline. UCPB members
       report regularly about faculty perceptions and any campus-based progress in
       regards to the Commission.

   •   If UC's funds are not restored by the State, what strategy should UCPB take in
       advising? - Discussions about whether or not there is merit to a "Plan B." Given
       the fact that some divisions and departments are now stripped down to the bone,
       how is the current quality maintained or improved? What needs to be done to
       ameliorate over-stretched territories in instruction? What could/should be done if
       state funding worsens?

   •   Regular discussion regarding the correlation between public relations and state
       and private funding - concern about public image in the press - concern about a
       lack of understanding of the role of UC in the general public. ($46K invested per
       inmate, but California can't find $11K per new student.) UCPB has emphasized
       the need for effective state and federal lobbying by the Office of the President.

   •   Capital projects - need to continue bond requests for seismic and other safety
       issues for long-delayed maintenance of buildings - under consideration are
       alterations to the ways that debt is handled in order to give UC more financial
       flexibility for these projects.

   •   UCPB is looking at comparative data for non-academic and academic FTE
       growth in numbers and in salaries over the last 12 years in order to assess any
       problem or growth areas that need to be cut back.

   •   Two UCPB members were appointed to the Education Abroad Program's
       (UCEAP) new Governance Committee. Concern over timely Senate review has
       been expressed, and discussions have begun to clarify the need to address
       quality issues while budgetary solutions are devised. The new Director position
       will be filled by a UC academic or equivalent, and the Governance Committee will
       play a key role in the search.
  •   Continued and ongoing discussion regarding the effects of furloughs, student fee
      increases, cuts in instruction, tentative projections for 2010-2011,etc.

  •   A study of revenue streams for UC has been presented to UCPB - discussion
      continues regarding whether or not OP should take lesser percentages from
      some funds as well as whether or not this budget crisis offers an opportunity to
      streamline the complex matrix of revenue flow to campuses. Also on the table -
      the topic of historic inequalities in per-campus distributions due to circumstances
      of campus establishment - UCSB has a vested interest in reworking these
      established formulas.

  •   Indirect Cost Recovery (ICR) - pursuing a charge from Academic Council to
      update the Senate's investigation into ICR, concern that UC's ICR rates do not
      cover expenses for research, too many waivers or 'gifts' granted to avoid ICR,
      transparency an issue at some campuses.

  •   Non-Resident (NR) Enrollment - discussion has begun regarding the temptation
      to recover needed funds through expanding NR enrollment. Should the incentive
      for expansion in this way be taken away by centralizing the fund source? Should
      a limit be enforced on NR enrollment? Discussions focused on the political risk
      of alienating the public through denying access to CA residents, the benefits of
      international students on campuses, and the suggestion that NR enrollment be
      encouraged up to a certain percentage, with anything above that pooled.

  •   Online Education - UCPB has commented on the On-Line RFP that OP is
      working on. UCPB has said that a system like this needs to grow from the
      ground up through faculty initiative. Online education could work for introductory
      courses that are already heavily impacted. Concerns about the lack of insight
      regarding higher student-faculty ratios, workload issues, and potential damage to
      UC quality were expressed. Vice Chair Simmons reported that the project is a
      grassroots effort, that UCOP will raise funding centrally, and that competitive
      course proposals will come from faculty and must be approved by Senate

  •   UCPB and UCFW have drafted a memo to Academic Council asking to make
      restoration of competitive salaries and benefits its top budgetary priority.

  •   UCPB is working on a follow-up report to the 2006 Futures Report and the 2008
      Cuts Report. This report, tentatively titled "Choices Report," may address issues
      of privatization, access, compensation, accountability, educational delivery, and
      size. It was noted that the appropriate size of UC should be based on the state's
      needs for education and research to ensure a vital economy in the coming

John Sutton (Sociology)

  •   Graduate student fee increases and impact on graduate education
  •   Monitoring and consulting with the UC commission on the future, specifically
      Education & Curriculum, Research, and Size and Shape Working Groups

  •   Degree program changes on different campuses

Konstadinos Goulias (Geography)

  •   Faculty salaries, the Comparison 8, and restoring the multi-year plan for raising
      faculty salaries across the board.

  •   Maintaining UC Faculty Retirement as a defined benefits program.

  •   The disestablishment of furloughs.

  •   A furlough exception for faculty on reduced pay sabbaticals.

  •   Budget advocacy with the legislature of the State of California in support of the
      University of California system.

Vickie Scott, (Theatre & Dance)

      •   Academic Freedom in Shared Governance

      •   Implementation of RE-89: the Regental resolution requiring adoption of
          special review, approval, and reporting procedures for proposals to obtain
          research funding from the tobacco industry:
          Members discussed RE-89 and the campus procedures for the additional
          review mandated by the Regents’ resolution.

      •   Legal Fees for Faculty Accused of Misconduct in Research:
          Members discussed a recommendation to require reimbursement of any legal
          fees incurred by faculty found innocent of alleged misconduct in research.

      •   Research Using Animal Subjects;
          Members discussed the issues related to research using animal subjects and
          potential impacts on academic freedom in research.

      •   Report of the Undergraduate Educational Effectiveness Task Force;
          Members discussed UCEP’s preliminary review of the UEETF report, which
          recommends that each UC campus establish discipline-specific learning
          assessment programs that are derived from the curriculum, and are faculty-
          driven, with Senate oversight.

      •   Proposal for Differential Fees by Major:
          Members discussed the proposal for differential fees by undergraduate major
          and the possible impacts on teaching.

To top