اینترنت

برچسب: regents

  • UC regents appear to support future tuition increases, but are skeptical of bigger ones

    UC regents appear to support future tuition increases, but are skeptical of bigger ones


    Student walk up and down the Promenade to Shields Library at UC Davis.

    Credit: Gregory Urquiaga / UC Davis

    Top Takeaways
    • UC is likely to continue raising tuition for each incoming class and then freezing the cost for that cohort of students for up to six years. 
    • The rate of increase each year is based on inflation but has been capped at 5%. Regents appear opposed to increasing that cap.
    • UC is worried about federal cuts and uncertain state finances. Students are concerned about affordability.

    The University of California’s Board of Regents on Thursday indicated support for continuing to raise tuition for each incoming freshman class for at least several more years, though many regents appeared skeptical of hiking the maximum increase allowed each year. 

    Since the 2022-23 academic year, tuition has gone up for each incoming class of undergraduates, ranging from 3.5% to 5%. But the price was also then frozen for the duration of their enrollment, so long as they graduate within six years. The rate of increase each year is based largely on inflation, but is capped at 5%. 

    California residents who entered this past fall pay $14,436 in tuition and systemwide fees, not including some additional campus fees, living expenses and books, and will continue to pay that rate each year. For in-state freshmen starting this fall, their rate will be $14,934, about 3.4% higher. Out-of-state and international students pay significantly higher rates.

    When the regents approved the so-called tuition stability plan in July 2021, they agreed to reconsider it prior to the 2027-28 academic year. Most regents said they want to renew the cohort policy, describing it as a resounding success that has improved campus budgets and brought predictability to students and their families. In the past, tuition increases affected all students from all cohorts, whether freshmen or seniors, at the same time and the same rates, often raising costs in the middle of their education. 

    The regents did not take action Thursday to formally extend the plan and only discussed the policy. A vote on it may be scheduled as soon as November, officials said.

    A number of regents, however, appeared unlikely to support proposals from UC administrators to allow for even greater tuition increases, including one to increase the maximum tuition hike in a given year from 5% to 7%.

    “I think it’s remarkable the success we’ve had, and that’s why I want to continue it,” said Richard Leib, a regent and a past chair of the board. “But I also have the feeling that if it’s not broken, why are we trying to fix it?”

    UC staff said upping the maximum increases could help the system navigate budget problems, including federal cuts to research funding and state funding uncertainties. 

    The president of the UC Student Association, meanwhile, encouraged the regents to get rid of the policy altogether and keep tuition flat after the 2026-27 academic year.

    “In order to ensure that the university can be a space that is accessible to students financially, I strongly urge you all to not renew the cohort tuition model,” Aditi Hariharan, a fourth-year student at UC Davis, said during remarks to the board. She added that keeping the policy would threaten UC’s ability to enroll “a diverse range of students from all economic backgrounds.”

    In defending the plan, UC officials said Thursday that the policy has actually made attending UC less expensive for the system’s low-income students. 

    Shawn Brick, the system’s associate vice provost for student financial support, noted that the state’s Cal Grant program fully covers tuition and fees for qualifying students. Additionally, UC sets aside 45% of revenue generated from the tuition policy for financial aid. That, Brick said, has provided the system’s neediest students with additional aid for other expenses, such as textbooks, that was not previously available.

    Nathan Brostrom, the system’s chief financial officer, said the policy has also generated $375 million in new revenue for campus operations, which has been used to support faculty-to-student ratios and improve student services.

    At the same time, officials said the policy has not been a cure-all and that higher tuition revenue and state budget support have not kept pace with rising costs. 

    The UC staff on Thursday suggested three potential scenarios that would generate even more revenue from the tuition policy. One would be the proposal to increase the maximum annual increase to 7%. Another would be to add another increase, possibly 1%, on top of the inflation-based increase. The third option would be to reduce the amount of revenue that is set aside for financial aid, from 45% to 35%. 

    Most regents who spoke said they disapproved of the proposal to allow for annual increases as high as 7%. Maria Anguiano, the board’s vice chair, said she remains supportive of renewing the original policy, but added that tuition hikes of 7% “no longer feels modest.”

    State Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, an ex-officio voting member of the board, said increasing the cap to 7% would be a “very significant change” and suggested tabling the idea altogether. 

    “If we have an extraordinary circumstance where you all feel the need to increase tuition more than 5% in any given year, you should have to come back to this body and explain why,” she said. 

    Jay Sures was one of the only regents who appeared to support the proposal. He said federal changes and threats have created “true headwinds for this university system” and that there are “issues with what potential state funding could be going forward that could potentially pose a true existential threat” to the system.

    “What would happen if we did have a cap and our shortfall was such that we were in that sort of disaster situation? What are we going to be able to do if we put a cap on it today and we fall into that situation tomorrow?” Sures said.

    Before the UC staff brings an official proposal to the board, they plan to consult with incoming President James Milliken, who takes over on Aug. 1, said Brostrom, the chief financial officer.

    Janet Reilly, the board chair, said the current plan is to bring an action item to the board’s meeting in November, but added that could change.

    “I think that what you are hearing from this group is a lot of gratitude and much satisfaction with the program that we rolled out,” Reilly said. “But still there are questions to be answered.”





    Source link

  • UC regents again postpone vote on policy to restrict some faculty speech

    UC regents again postpone vote on policy to restrict some faculty speech


    Public speakers address UC leaders during a March UC regents meeting at UCLA.

    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    The University of California’s board of regents on Thursday again postponed a vote on a controversial policy to restrict faculty departments from making opinionated statements on the homepages of university websites. The regents could next consider the policy at their July meeting in San Francisco.

    The proposal was initially introduced after some faculty departments, such as the ethnic studies department at UC Santa Cruz, posted statements on their websites criticizing Israel’s invasion of Gaza in response to the Hamas assault in Israel. The potential adoption of the policy comes as pro-Palestinian protests and encampments have popped up across the system’s 10 campuses, with arrests of hundreds and, at UCLA, a violent counter-protest.

    How a university should respond, if at all, to various forms of protest has suddenly become an overwhelming question across California and the rest of the nation, affecting graduation ceremonies and faculty support of campus leaders.

    The agenda for Thursday’s regents meeting at UC Merced included the policy as an action item to be voted on by the regents, but for the third consecutive meeting, the vote was delayed. Unlike previous meetings, the item was not discussed in open session before regents decided to postpone the vote. They did not say whether it was debated in closed session. 

    Faculty across UC have criticized the policy, arguing that it would infringe on academic freedom and questioning how it would be enforced. But supporters of the policy, led by regent Jay Sures, say it is needed to ensure that the views of faculty departments aren’t misinterpreted as representing UC as a whole. Sures could not be reached for comment Thursday about why the item was delayed again.

    Under the latest version, political and other opinionated statements would not be allowed to appear on the homepages of departmental websites. They would be permitted elsewhere on those websites, but only with a disclaimer stating that the opinions don’t represent the entire campus or university system.

    Entering the regents meeting, academic senate leaders had asked the regents not to adopt the policy and instead issue a statement endorsing recommendations made by the senate in 2022. The latest policy in many ways mirrors the senate recommendations but does have some differences. The senate recommendations say faculty departments should be able to make political statements on UC homepages, as long as the statements include a disclaimer and don’t take stances on elections. 

    “We would welcome a straightforward Regents’ statement endorsing the 2022 Senate recommendations rather than the creation of new and not entirely clear bureaucratic regulations that raise issues of compliance and enforcement,” wrote James Steintrager, chair of the senate, in a letter to regents ahead of this week’s meeting.

    Steintrager did, however, say the policy was an improvement over previous versions because it “enunciates clearer goals, defines key terms more explicitly, and better specifies the types of statements it covers.” 

    Steintrager also wrote that he appreciated that the regents took feedback from the senate ahead of this weekend’s meeting. That sentiment was echoed by James Vernon, a professor of history at UC Berkeley and chair of the Berkeley Faculty Association. Vernon said in an interview this week that the regents ahead of this meeting took “a more consultative approach to the academic senate.”

    But Vernon, like senate leaders, still has reservations about the policy and questioned whether it’s an issue the regents should be dealing with at all. 

    “For me, this policy represents an overreach by the regents. The academic senate has already issued a report about statements on websites. It set out a set of discretionary guidelines for campuses and departments to follow,” Vernon said.





    Source link