برچسب: University

  • University of California enrolled a record number of California residents in the fall

    University of California enrolled a record number of California residents in the fall


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

    Credit: Gregory Urquiaga / UC Davis

    The University of California increased enrollment of in-state students by more than 4,000 this past fall, keeping with demands from lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom to grow the number of California residents who get a coveted spot at the university system. 

    Not only did UC enroll a record number of Californians and its largest-ever class of California first-year students, but the rate of increase for those students was higher than in recent years, when UC has often seen only modest growth.

    That freshman class had 42,058 Californians — or 2,094 more than the previous fall. In addition to the uptick in first-years, UC enrolled more returning in-state sophomores, juniors and seniors than the previous year. Overall, UC enrolled 194,571 California resident undergraduates — or 4,145 more than fall 2022, a 2.2% jump. That accounted for 83.4% of UC’s total undergraduate enrollment. Enrollment of out-of-state students declined, thanks to a drop in the number of returning international students. 

    The historic jump in California residents is a turnaround from last year when lawmakers were critical of UC for failing to meet their demands.

    Campuses that welcomed an increase in California freshmen last fall are: Santa Cruz, Irvine, Davis, UCLA, San Diego and Santa Barbara. Berkeley and Merced saw only modest increases. When including returning students, the largest increases of California residents happened at the Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego campuses. UC officials cited higher retention rates as being among the main drivers of those increases. 

    “When we take a look at California resident students, this is the largest number that we’ve ever had,” Pamela Brown, UC’s vice president of institutional research and academic planning, said on a call with reporters this week.

    Over the last several years, UC has faced pressure from lawmakers and Newsom to prioritize enrollment of California resident undergraduates. In 2022, Newsom implemented a multiyear agreement — or a “compact” — with the system. Under the agreement, Newsom pledged annual budget increases of 5% in exchange for increased enrollment of in-state students, among other things.

    The system at times has struggled to keep up with those requests, with higher numbers of admitted California residents not always translating to enrollments in recent years.

    UC officials maintain they are committed to continue growing enrollment of California residents, even though Newsom earlier this month proposed deferring $258.8 million in state dollars for UC until 2025. That includes the funding for a 5% increase to UC’s base budget that the system is supposed to receive as part of the compact. 

    “We’re all in on the compact,” Brown said. 

    UC also enrolled a more racially diverse student body this past fall. Across the undergraduate student body, the share of students from underrepresented racial groups — including Black, Latino, Native American and Pacific Islander students — grew by 1.1% or 3,481 students. By far, the largest increase was among Latino students. UC enrolled 61,075 Latino students, 2,671 more than the previous fall, with California residents making up the vast majority of those students.

    UC achieved the increases despite a small decline in California residents transferring from a California community college, with the number of first-time transfer students down by 72. That decline, however, was much more modest than the previous year, when the number of in-state residents who transferred from a California community college declined by more than 1,000 students.

    Officials have attributed the drop in transfer students to declines in the number of students attending community colleges, which suffered massive enrollment losses during the pandemic. But with enrollment at the state’s community colleges now showing signs of recovery, those trends could be reversing.

    “We feel that this is something that is going to continue to improve in the next few years,” Brown said.

    UC’s optimistic estimates for in-state enrollment marks somewhat of a contrast from just a year ago, when UC told lawmakers it was behind schedule in increasing the enrollment of those students. UC estimated at the time that its enrollment of in-state students would decrease in the 2022-23 academic year, frustrating lawmakers who had asked UC to add thousands of California residents.

    In fact, though, UC ended up increasing enrollment of California residents on a full-time equivalent basis by more than 1,500 students in 2022-23, officials said this week. That was because students took more classes in the spring and winter than UC had anticipated. 

    The full-time equivalent calculation is different from headcount enrollment, which is a simple count of the total number of students. The number of full-time equivalent students, which is how the state calculates enrollment for funding purposes, is based on the total number of credits that students take. Under the multi-year agreement with Newsom, UC is expected to have added 8,000 full-time equivalent resident undergraduates by 2026-27, with 2022-23 serving as the baseline.

    UC won’t know its 2023-24 full-time equivalent enrollment numbers until the end of the academic year, but the increase in headcount enrollment in fall 2023 suggests that number is continuing to trend upward. 

    And even though UC is funded based on its full-time equivalent enrollment, lawmakers are just as concerned with ensuring the system continues to increase the total number of residents who attend. 

    The university’s plans for sustained enrollment growth does raise the question of whether its campuses have the capacity for that growth, particularly with some campuses already facing housing shortages.

    During this week’s call with reporters, officials cited new housing projects that are underway at several campuses and noted that future new students may not all be attending UC’s traditional brick-and-mortar campuses.

    “We are evaluating opportunities for students to pursue their degrees through things like our University of California in DC program, through our Sacramento program, which may not have direct footprints on campuses, but still allow them to have the in-person educational experience,” said Ryan King, a spokesperson for the system. 

    King added that UC will also look to increase online offerings.

    Brown also noted that the compact with Newsom has provided the “stability of knowing what we’re getting” and will help support enrollment growth.

    This year, under Newsom’s proposed budget deferrals, UC would be asked to borrow money to cover its compact funding — $227.8 million, plus another $31 million to increase resident enrollment and offset declines in the enrollment of nonresidents, who pay more tuition.

    In his budget proposal, Newsom said UC would get reimbursed in next year’s state budget. In its analysis of Newsom’s budget, the Legislative Analyst’s Office warned that plan could be risky. 

    “Not only would this proposal increase the pressure on the state to provide these payments next year—despite continued deficits — but it also would shift fiscal risk to these entities in the event the state does not ultimately make these payments,” the LAO wrote. 

    Brown, though, said UC remains confident in the compact and noted campuses are already moving forward with their 2024-25 enrollment planning, when UC expects to further increase California resident enrollment.

    “Campuses have set out targets that are helping us achieve the compact goals, and we’re continuing with those,” Brown said. “All our enrollment planning functions are looking to achieve the compact goals, and we are expressing great confidence that we’ll continue to get that support from the state.”





    Source link

  • University of California won’t allow hiring of undocumented students

    University of California won’t allow hiring of undocumented students


    Immigrant students at UC and their allies rallied last spring in support of a proposal to allow the university to hire immigrant students who lack permission to be in the U.S.

    Michael Burke/EdSource

    This story has been updated with additional quotes.

    The University of California will not allow the hiring of undocumented students for jobs on its campuses, disappointing students who pushed for the right to be employed without legal status. 

    Allowing those students to work campus jobs would have been “the right thing to do” but presented too many legal risks and thus was “not viable,” said Michael Drake, the system’s president, while addressing UC’s board of regents Thursday.

    Drake cited several possible legal ramifications. He said the university could be “subject to civil fines, criminal penalties, or debarment from federal contracting,” while human resources staff could face prosecution if they “knowingly participate in hiring practices deemed impermissible under federal law.” He also suggested that undocumented students and their families could face prosecution or even deportation. 

    “I know that many in our community will be disappointed that we are unable to take immediate action. As an individual, I would like nothing more than to do so right here, right now, because it is the right thing to do,” he added. “However, we have a fiduciary responsibility to consider all possible ramifications of our actions.”

    The regents voted to suspend consideration of the policy for one year. Some regents against the motion said it could be even more difficult to implement the policy a year from now, alluding to the possibility that former President Donald Trump could be back in office.

    In not moving forward with the proposal, the regents “let us down today,” said Jeffry Umaña Muñoz, a UCLA undergraduate student and one of the undocumented students who organized the movement advocating for the proposal. There are more than 4,000 undocumented students across UC’s 10 campuses.

    “Our classmates can apply for any job on campus, helping them not only get by financially on a daily basis but also advancing their careers, while we remain forced to rely on incredibly limited resources,” he added in a statement. “I’m deeply disappointed that the UC Regents and President Drake shirked their duties to the students they are supposed to protect and support. We as UC students deserve so much more from our university leadership.”

    Several regents voted against the measure to suspend considering the policy: Keith Ellis, Jose Hernandez, John Pérez, Gregory Sarris, student regent Merhawi Tesfai and Tony Thurmond. Thurmond is an ex-officio member of the regents in his role as the state’s superintendent of public instruction. Ellis, an alumni regent, is also an ex-officio member.

    A coalition of undocumented students and legal scholars started urging UC more than a year ago to allow the hiring of undocumented students. They argued that UC is permitted to do so, saying the university as a state entity is exempt from a 1986 federal statute banning the hiring of immigrants without legal status.

    UC officials formally started studying the issue last spring. At that time, Pérez said it was the board’s intention to ultimately allow the hiring of undocumented students.

    Pérez said Thursday that he couldn’t “think of a moment where I’ve been more disappointed sitting around this board.” Pérez was appointed as a regent in 2014 and served a one-year term as chair of the board beginning in 2019.

    “We have gotten so focused on the question of what the law clearly says today, that we’re losing sight of the moral imperative of what the law should be interpreted as being,” he said. “Some of us may discount the analysis by some of our greatest legal scholars and suggest that it is just an academic exercise on what is legally permissible. But if we don’t challenge, if we don’t push, we won’t know.”

    The regents’ decision Thursday comes after Politico reported Wednesday that officials in President Joe Biden’s administration privately opposed the proposal and warned UC of possible legal ramifications, even threatening that the administration could sue. 

    In response to a question from EdSource seeking confirmation of the Politico report, a UC spokesperson said the university “regularly engages with local, state, and federal partners on numerous issues concerning public education and for maintaining compliance with existing federal law.” The spokesperson added, though, that UC “will not characterize the nature of those discussions.”





    Source link

  • Chico State biology professor parts ways with university

    Chico State biology professor parts ways with university


    Embattled Chico State biology professor David Stachura is no longer employed by the university, a spokesperson said in a two-sentence statement issued Thursday.

    The spokesperson, Andrew Staples, would not say if Stachura, who had been on paid suspension for more than a year, was fired or resigned. He was the subject of two investigations that were nearing conclusions. One was on appeal to the chancellor’s office and the other was scheduled for mediation in April.

    Reached later by phone, Staples cited personnel privacy laws in declining further comment.

    Stachura’s lawyer, Kasra Parsad, did not return messages Thursday.

    The end of Stachura’s tenure at Chico State comes after a contentious court case to ban him from the campus and a failed libel suit he brought against a colleague.

    EdSource reported in December 2022 that an investigation found that Stachura had an inappropriate relationship with a student that included sex in his office in 2020 that could be heard through the walls, causing colleagues to report him. Stachura has repeatedly denied the affair.

    He received only light punishment for the affair and within months was named the university’s  “Outstanding Professor” of the 2020-21 academic year. The award was rescinded after EdSource reported on it.

    Stachura’s estranged wife later filed court papers in their ongoing divorce case alleging that he had threatened to shoot the professors who reported him and cooperated in the university’s investigation.

    Stachura was a tenured biology professor and was considered an expert in the use of zebra fish for medical research.

    A member of the biology department expressed relief  Thursday that Stachura is no longer on the faculty.

    “It’s about time,” Gordon Wolfe, a semi-retired biology professor, said. The biology department, he said, “is no longer dysfunctional. People are happy again.”

    Wolfe had reported to the university the allegations that Stachura’s wife made in court filings. A university investigation of the threats found that Stachura was not a danger, and he was allowed to keep working. The university’s police chief, who was a member of a panel that probed the matter, later testified that he disagreed with that finding.

    In November, a report by a San Diego lawyer hired to investigate how Chico State handled the Stachura matter revealed that former campus President Gayle Hutchinson knew about the affair with the student and the alleged threat to shoot colleagues when she approved his promotion to full professor. She retired last year.

    The report found that the university violated no existing procedures in how it handled the Stachura matters, including not informing faculty and students that Stachura allegedly threatened gun violence on campus.

    The saga did get the attention of state lawmakers. An Assembly committee cited EdSource’s reporting on Stachura multiple times in a report issued earlier this month that concluded that students and faculty members across the state don’t trust how schools deal with matters of sexual misconduct as governed by Title IX of federal education law.

    The report’s recommendations included forming a task force to examine whether “a statewide office to provide guidance and to monitor the compliance of post secondary education institutions with sex discrimination laws” can be formed and also having the leaders of the three systems issue annual compliance reports on sexual misconduct cases to lawmakers.





    Source link

  • Can Virginia colleges offer a model to California on getting community college students to earn university degrees?

    Can Virginia colleges offer a model to California on getting community college students to earn university degrees?


    Steve Perez chats with a representative at the Northern Virginia Community College Office of Wellness and Mental Health resource table during the ADVANCE program welcome event at George Mason University on Jan. 31.

    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    Steve Perez faced a daunting challenge as he considered where to attend college. 

    The first in his family to pursue a higher education, Perez was “basically all on my own.” Rejected from his top choice, Virginia Tech, he was considering community college near his hometown of Falls Church, Virginia. But he worried whether he would be able to successfully transfer to a four-year university, knowing it would be up to him to take the right courses and successfully apply for admission. 

    “No one in my family really knows anything about college,” he said. “That was really tough.”

    All of that changed when his high school counselor told him about ADVANCE, a partnership between Northern Virginia Community College and George Mason University that is anchored by dual admission to both schools.

    Students start at the community college but are immediately accepted to George Mason before even taking their first community college class. The colleges also provide students up front with the full list of courses they need to earn their bachelor’s degree, a task that in other states is often left to students. 

    Northern Virginia Community College serves about 70,000 students across its six campuses in the suburbs of Washington, D.C., more than any other community college in the state. Likewise, George Mason is the largest public research university in Virginia with about 40,000 students, most of them commuters. Their main campuses separated by just 5 miles, Northern Virginia historically has sent more students to George Mason than any other community college.

    A statue of George Mason on the George Mason University campus in Fairfax.
    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    Officials say the ADVANCE program perfected that transfer partnership. Since launching in 2018, just over 1,500 students in the program have successfully transferred to Mason, including 415 this past fall. More than 90% of students in the program graduate within two years of transferring to Mason.

    The program stands out nationally, even earning kudos from the federal Department of Education for solving a widespread problem of a cumbersome transfer process that stymies students in community college.

    In California, most community college students who want to get a bachelor’s degree never transfer. Without adequate support, they often struggle to keep track of courses, ending up with too many credits but lacking required classes. One study found that as few as 2.5% of students intending to transfer do so within two years, and only 23% do so within four years.

    The Virginia program could serve as a model for California colleges. The state is in the early stages of adopting its own dual admission programs at both of its public university systems, the University of California and California State University. CSU’s program, open to far more students than UC’s, is especially exciting to college access advocates.

    Both programs launched this past fall, and officials are hopeful it will make transferring easier for students.

    Taking away the guesswork

    In Virginia, the idea of ADVANCE is to “take away the guesswork for students,” said Jen Nelson, the community college’s director of university transfer and initiatives. 

    Upon enrolling, students receive a link to a portal where they select one of 85 academic pathways, such as business, computer science or psychology. Based on their pathway, the portal then shows them all the classes they need to take to transfer and eventually earn a bachelor’s degree.

    “It provides that guarantee that if students take these classes, they’re going to transfer,” Nelson said. “It takes away that concern of, am I taking the right thing? Am I spending my time and money in the right way?”

    As long as they maintain at least a minimum grade point average — usually a 2.5 — students are automatically admitted to Mason. They don’t even need to fill out an application. 

    Along the way, students can meet with counselors who are hired specifically for the ADVANCE program. They also have full access to all the resources offered at Mason, including clubs, libraries and even health care.

    In Perez’s case, he chose a computer science pathway and this semester started his lower-division classes, which include general education, math and introductory computer science classes. He’s on track to transfer to George Mason within two years.

    At a recent resource fair for new students hosted on the Mason campus, Perez walked from table to table, learning about the resources offered by Mason, including club sports, mental health services and tutoring. He can participate in all of it now that he’s in the program.

    Steve Perez grabs a informational card at the Northern Virginia Community College Office of Wellness and Mental Health resource table during the ADVANCE program welcome event at George Mason University on Jan. 31.
    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    “I’m really happy I chose this pathway because it gives me a great opportunity,” he said. “And it takes away the stress.”

    Not long before ADVANCE launched in 2018, Janette Muir remembers sitting in on an advising session at Northern Virginia for her son, who had recently graduated from high school.

    Muir, a professor and George Mason’s associate provost for academic initiatives at the time, was shocked to learn how confusing the transfer process was.

    Students received little guidance, and many were taking unnecessary courses. 

    “I thought, ‘Oh my gosh, it’s so confusing for even a student who has professors as his parents,’” she said.

    Her son and other students, Muir said, needed more help. Muir started working with the presidents of both institutions to develop ADVANCE. 

    Janette Muir addresses ADVANCE students and their friends and family during the welcome event at George Mason University in January.
    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    That year, the two colleges launched the program with 21 pathways. It has since grown to 85 pathways, and more than 4,500 students have enrolled since the program’s inception. 

    Any student can enroll so long as they have not completed more than 30 college credits, and students who do enroll tend to stick around. Among the students in the cohort that entered in fall 2021, 87% returned the following year, far better than the national average retention rate of 61%. 

    When they transfer to Mason, ADVANCE students on average graduate two semesters faster than non-ADVANCE transfer students. In fact, 92% of them graduate within two years of transferring. Students also finish an associate degree upon transferring, which officials say is important to ensure they have the necessary preparation in their major. 

    Muir, who now oversees ADVANCE in her role as Mason’s vice provost for academic affairs, said officials have started to expect students to finish the entire program in four years rather than six. 

    “When you come into this program and you follow the pathways, you do better and you finish sooner,” Muir told new students gathered at a welcome event in January. 

    For Jaden Todd, a second-year community college student in the program, having access to the pathways portal has been especially helpful. 

    When Todd first started college, learning certain classes would transfer to some universities but not others was a “big shocker.” He took a Western history class only to learn that it wouldn’t be accepted at another college he was considering, Virginia Commonwealth University, which required a world history course. 

    “There’s stuff like that where I spent several hundred dollars on a class just to be informed that I would have to retake a class in a similar area,” he said.

    When it comes to the courses he needs to transfer to and ultimately graduate from Mason, however, there are no surprises. 

    If students do have questions, they have access to counselors who have been hired specifically for the ADVANCE program. 

    Emma Howard, a sophomore who will transfer to Mason this fall, consulted her adviser after learning that one of her courses, which she thought qualified as an elective, wasn’t going to be transferable.

    The adviser called the transfer center at Mason and successfully convinced them to count the course, an acting for the camera class.

    “They really try to make your time here easier,” Howard said. “They bring a lot of ease and just faith in the matriculation process.”

    Eliminating the ‘transfer shock’

    When Maria Fruchterman transferred this past fall to Mason, she already had a close circle of friends. That’s because, while she was taking her lower-division community college classes, she was also playing club field hockey at Mason. It was a perk afforded to her because she was in the ADVANCE program.

    “It’s been really good for my transition,” Fruchterman said. “I just felt at ease and very comfortable.”

    Maria Fruchterman answers questions about the ADVANCE program during a welcome event at George Mason University in Virginia.
    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    The motivation to give Northern Virginia students access to the Mason campus was two-fold, Nelson said. For one, as a community college, Northern Virginia doesn’t offer all the same benefits and resources available at Mason and other four-year institutions, like health insurance and mental health counseling.

    Officials also wanted to eliminate the “transfer shock” that transfer students often deal with upon arriving at the four-year university, Nelson said. “They’re going to a new environment. Everything is different,” she added.

    By giving students access to those resources up front, it allows them to “hit the ground running,” Nelson said.

    That’s what Perez is planning for himself. While visiting Mason’s main Fairfax campus for the welcome event, he felt a different buzz than what he was accustomed to at Northern Virginia’s main campus in nearby Annandale. 

    “I noticed that there’s so many more people around,” he said. “Especially in Annandale, it seems like everyone leaves campus by 3 p.m.”

    As he learned about the different clubs offered at Mason, Perez said he planned to join several: a computer science club, a chess club, maybe even an intramural badminton team. 

    Can California replicate?

    Whether California’s dual admission programs will significantly improve transfer won’t be known for some time. Both programs are in their infancy, just launched last fall.

    Between the two, CSU may have a better chance at success, with a far more robust program than what UC offers. About 2,000 students enrolled in CSU’s first cohort, compared to just 182 for UC. 

    CSU’s program is open to essentially any first-time college freshman entering a California community college. Students can enroll by creating an account on the CSU Transfer Planner portal and selecting from one of the degree programs across CSU’s 23 campuses. Eligible students are guaranteed admission. 

    UC’s program is limited only to students who applied to UC but weren’t eligible because they didn’t complete their A-G course requirements in high school. That was the minimum required by a state law passed in 2021 creating the dual admission programs. 

    The law, designed to give students a second chance at attending UC or CSU, asks UC and requires CSU to offer dual admission to students who didn’t “meet freshman admissions eligibility criteria due to limitations in the high school curriculum offered or personal or financial hardship.” CSU’s program goes beyond what’s required by law by offering dual admission to just about any student who was rejected or simply chose not to attend CSU.

    UC may be less incentivized to admit students because several campuses have capacity issues and turn away many qualified applicants each year. UC’s program is limited to only six of its nine undergraduate campuses, with its three most exclusive campuses — Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego — not included. 

    CSU’s dual admission program is available at every campus, though select programs with capacity issues are excluded, such as some engineering programs at Cal Poly San Luis Obispo. 

    CSU officials hope the dual admission program will eliminate a problem with the current system: local campuses and their staff aren’t familiar with prospective transfer students until they apply. 

    “We want this to be an opportunity for us to connect with them way earlier in the process and support them,” said April Grommo, CSU’s assistant vice chancellor of enrollment management. 

    Similar to the Virginia program, students on CSU’s dual admission pathway get access to an online transfer planner showing them all the classes they need upfront.

    Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California’s higher education center, is hopeful it will make a meaningful difference. In an August 2023 PPIC report, Johnson and other researchers identified dual admission as a “promising approach” to help solve California’s transfer dilemma. 

    “A lot of the challenge for community college students when they start is knowing what is required to get into UC and CSU,” he said. “By front loading all of that information, we think students would face fewer obstacles and be more efficient.”

    In addition, CSU’s dual admission program gives community college students access to programs and services available at the campus closest to their residence, like the ADVANCE program does. One CSU campus, Long Beach, for years has already been offering something similar. As part of the “Long Beach Promise 2.0,” launched in 2018, students at nearby Long Beach City College have the option to receive a “future student” ID card for CSU Long Beach and can access the campus library, athletic events, clubs and more.

    “A lot of research in higher education focused on why students complete or why they don’t complete has included this notion of belonging, feeling a part of the campus,” Johnson said. “And I think the more that you can do for community college students can only help that sense of belonging so that when you eventually do transfer, you feel like it’s your school.”

    In Virginia, staff at George Mason and the community college are often asked how other colleges can replicate their success.

    Jennifer Nelson addresses ADVANCE students and their friends and family during the welcome event at George Mason University.
    Credit: Taneen Momeni / EdSource

    Officials at those colleges point out that the two institutions have several factors working in their favor. The partnership is natural given the geographic proximity and historical relationship between the colleges. There are a number of faculty who have taught at both colleges. The colleges’ presidents work closely and actually spend time with each other, like meeting up for an occasional breakfast. 

    “How do you do this work? I can tell you it’s not easy. If it was easy, lots of people would be doing it,” Muir said. “It takes a lot of relationship-building, a lot of connection and recognizing the value of a community college education.”





    Source link

  • Amid faculty objections, UC considers limiting what faculty can say on university websites

    Amid faculty objections, UC considers limiting what faculty can say on university websites


    UCLA campus in Westwood on Nov. 18, 2023.

    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    This story was updated on Friday to include that the UC Academic Senate urged the regents to reject the policy.

    In a move faculty say infringes on their academic freedom, the University of California will soon consider a policy restricting them from using university websites to make opinionated statements. Such statements have come under scrutiny since last fall, when some faculty publicly criticized Israel over its war in Gaza.

    The proposed policy, which goes to the system’s board of regents for a vote next week, would prevent faculty and staff from sharing their “personal or collective opinions” via the “main landing page” or homepages of department websites, according to a new draft of the policy. Faculty would be free to share opinions elsewhere on the university’s websites, so long as there is a disclaimer that their viewpoint doesn’t represent the university or their department.

    The final version of the policy may not be complete until next week. Regents accepted feedback from the university’s Academic Senate through Friday. Following a systemwide review, the Senate’s Academic Council is asking the regents to reject the proposed policy.

    Whatever the final version says, the fact that regents are considering the issue at all is alarming to some UC faculty. They argue that issues of academic freedom are outside the purview of the regents and question how the university would enforce the policy. And although the policy doesn’t explicitly mention a specific issue, faculty see it as an attempt to prevent them from discussing Israel’s war in Gaza.

    “At a moment when across the country, academic freedom is being challenged, we’re worried that the regents have lost their way on this issue,” said James Vernon, a professor of history at UC Berkeley and chair of the Berkeley Faculty Association. “I think it’s out of their purview, and I think they’re doing it for very obvious reasons. It’s about Palestine and the political positions of some regents.” 

    UC officials have said action is needed to ensure that faculty opinions are not interpreted as representing the views of the university as a whole. The regents previously discussed a similar policy in January but delayed a vote until March. At the time, one regent said the board was considering the policy because “some people were making political statements related to Hamas and Palestinians,” seemingly referring to the statements made by some faculty last fall in support of Palestine. 

    By only disallowing statements on “main landing pages,” the latest version is less restrictive than the policy initially proposed in January, which would have banned statements made on any “official channel of communication.”

    To some faculty, the issue was already settled in 2022, when the Academic Senate determined that UC faculty departments have the right to “make statements on University-owned websites,” so long as the statements don’t take positions on elections.

    “The Academic Senate came out with very clear recommendations,” said Christine Hong, a professor of ethnic studies at UC Santa Cruz. “We have a group of regents who are running roughshod over what you would think would be the core commitments of the university to academic freedom and to the principle of shared governance.”

    Some faculty find the revised version of the policy to be an improvement, including Brian Soucek, professor of law at UC Davis and previous chair of the UC Academic Senate’s university committee on academic freedom. While he remains concerned with the regents “micromanaging” what faculty departments can say, Soucek said the revised policy “is not a major threat to academic freedom,” given that it only limits what can be said on the main landing pages of websites.

    UC officials declined to comment on this story, saying only that regents would consider the policy at next week’s meeting. 

    Traced to Oct. 7 attack

    The new push to limit faculty statements can be traced to the Oct. 7 attack by Hamas on Israel and Israel’s subsequent bombardment of Gaza. The Hamas attack killed about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, with about another 240 taken hostage. Since Israel launched its military response, more than 30,000 people have been killed in Gaza, most of them women and children.

    On Oct. 9, UC system leaders issued a statement condemning the Hamas attack as an act of terrorism resulting in violence that was “sickening and incomprehensible.” Several of UC’s campus chancellors also issued their own statements condemning the attack.

    In a letter the following week, the UC Ethnic Studies Council criticized UC’s statements, saying they lacked context by not acknowledging Israeli violence against Palestinians, including “75 years of settler colonialism and globally acknowledged apartheid.” The ethnic studies faculty also said UC’s statements “irresponsibly wield charges of terrorism” and called on UC to revoke those charges. UC later said it stood by those assertions.

    UC ethnic studies faculty then engaged in a back-and-forth with regent Jay Sures. Sures wrote a letter responding to the Ethnic Studies Council letter, saying it was “rife with falsehoods about Israel and seeks to legitimize and defend the horrific savagery of the Hamas massacre.” The ethnic studies faculty subsequently criticized Sures for not condemning Israeli violence and called on him to resign.

    Sures also wrote in his letter that he would do “everything in my power” to protect “everyone in our extended community from your inflammatory and out of touch rhetoric.” Now, Sures is the regent most fervently pushing the proposal to limit what faculty can say on UC websites.

    Since last fall, some faculty departments have displayed statements on their websites condemning Israel. The website for UC Santa Cruz’s critical race and ethnic studies department, for example, includes a statement calling on “scholars, researchers, organizers, and administrators worldwide” to take action “to end Israel’s genocidal attack on Gaza.” 

    Involving faculty

    UC isn’t the only university to move to restrict faculty from making political statements on department websites. 

    At Barnard College, a private women’s liberal arts college in New York, the department of women’s, gender and sexuality studies published a statement last fall expressing solidarity with the people of Palestine. The college removed the statement and then rewrote its policy on political activity to prohibit faculty departments from posting political statements on college-owned websites. The quick response prompted an outcry from some free speech advocates who criticized the college for making the policy change without consulting faculty.

    The American Association of University Professors, an organization that advocates for academic freedom, doesn’t have guidance regarding whether departments should take political positions, a spokesperson said. However, if universities are to create such policies, they should “be formulated through shared governance channels, with substantial faculty input,” said the spokesperson, Kelly Benjamin.

    In that regard, UC officials have made progress since January, Soucek said. 

    Prior to the January meeting, Soucek co-authored a letter to the regents urging them to reject the policy being considered at that time. Among other criticisms, Soucek wrote that the development of the policy was “sudden, opaque, and seemingly devoid of any collaboration at all” with the staff and faculty it would impact.

    Following the January meeting, regents shared a revised version of the policy with Academic Senate leaders, requesting their thoughts and giving them until this Friday to share that feedback.

    In an interview, Soucek commended the regents for “taking a breath” and accepting feedback on the revised policy. “That’s a great thing, and that’s what they should have done from the beginning,” he said.

    Even with the changes to the policy, some faculty still see it as a major threat. Hong, the UC Santa Cruz professor, is concerned with the intention behind the policy, even if the latest version is less restrictive than the original.

    Hong pointed out that UC’s general counsel, Charles Robinson, said during the January meeting that the intent of the policy was to “make sure that landing pages wouldn’t be associated with types of speech that the university would feel uncomfortable with.”

    Hong called that a “really striking disclosure,” saying that it violates the principle of academic freedom. 

    “Whatever revisions they make, we have to address what the intention behind this policy is,” Hong said. “This is a joke of an exercise. Why are we being forced to go through this?”

    Faculty also say it’s unclear how UC would enforce the policy. The revised version doesn’t define what constitutes an opinionated statement and states that the “administrator responsible for maintaining the website” will be responsible for “assuring compliance with this policy.”

    To Soucek, that suggests that the policy will be managed by UC’s IT staff. 

    “That’s how it sounds,” he said. “Our IT staff has enormous expertise. For most of them, it doesn’t extend to issues of academic freedom.”

    Whoever is ultimately in charge of scanning the many departmental websites across UC’s 10 campuses will have a “gigantic task,” said Vernon, the UC Berkeley professor. 

    “And then the next question is, who’s going to enforce it once they’ve actually found someone who’s violated this policy? That is really important to have clarified,” he said.





    Source link

  • Why one California university leader thinks year-round operations will aid enrollment

    Why one California university leader thinks year-round operations will aid enrollment


    Students in a science class at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo.

    Credit: Arabel Meyer / EdSource

    Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo recently announced that it will become the first public university in the state to shift to year-round operations starting summer 2025. The change would give students the option of starting in the summer and taking their academic break during a different term, and it would allow the university to admit more students per year.

    Cal Poly President Jeffrey Armstrong said other universities have had success with this model. 

    “Secondary to growth (in enrollment), I think we’re going to see student success,” Armstrong said. 

    Taking inspiration from schools that have had year-round operations for years, like Dartmouth College in New Hampshire and the University of Waterloo in Canada, Armstrong said he hopes to put a “Cal Poly twist” on the idea to benefit all students. 

    Beginning next year, students will be able to choose to start either in summer or fall during the application process. Faculty and staff will also be able to choose which terms they will work.

    Armstrong said students and faculty will have enough information to make an informed decision about what their schedule will look like and “they will know what they’re getting into.”

    If a student opts to start in summer, they might have a greater chance of being admitted to Cal Poly, which currently has an admit rate of 28% and is highly impacted with more applications than available spaces, Armstrong said.

    “We’re not changing our standards,” Armstrong said. “What we’re doing is using year-round to open up more spaces so more students can get in.”

    Starting the year in the summer would be different from simply taking summer classes or taking a couple of classes in the last few weeks of summer through summer start programs to help students adjust to college.

    Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo President Jeffrey D. Armstrong
    Credit: Cal Poly SLO

    Students who start their year in the summer would have full course offerings equivalent to what is offered during the other terms, and classes would be for a full term, according to Armstrong.

    When asked about the expected cost of the change to year-round operations, Armstrong said, “Overall, we believe the investments required will not be significantly out of line as what would be required for enrollment growth through traditional non-year-round operations means.”

    Following the year-round model, students, including freshmen, would have more opportunities to participate in “high-impact practices” such as internships, study abroad and undergraduate research, according to Armstrong. 

    “We know when students participate in high-impact practices, it enhances their retention, it enhances their chance to graduate,” he said. 

    A student who chooses to start in summer could then study abroad or do an internship during the fall term and come back for spring term, for example. 

    Armstrong said students could also decide to take classes every term and graduate earlier, though this would not be required.

    It’s about “flexibility for all students, really,” he said. “I think it’ll be very positive, and it’ll expand access to high-impact activities. We want it to be more equitable.”

    Financial aid would still cover a full academic year (three quarters or two semesters) no matter when a student starts, Armstrong added. 

    In an ideal world, Armstrong said about a third of students would start in summer, though starting out, the numbers might be more like 15-20%. 

    “It’s allowing us to grow, [and] it’s taking the number of students in the regular academic year down, so it’s relieving some of the pressure,” Armstrong said.

    Cal Poly began discussing this shift in 2019, but it was delayed because of the to the pandemic. The change was then set to begin summer 2024 but delayed again after Cal Poly met its enrollment goals for the year by increasing course availability, allowing more students to enroll full time. 

    As college enrollment rates increase, universities have been trying to find ways to do so without increasing costs too much. In 1999, the California Legislative Analyst’s Office issued a report recommending universities switch to year-round operations. 

    Cal Poly is the only public university in California to make this switch, though other schools are making different efforts to increase their enrollment and expand summer instruction.

    According to Hazel Kelly, CSU spokesperson, other CSU campuses are also considering ways to offer more flexible academic calendars.

    “The Chancellor’s Office is working with those universities as they consider a range of implications of alternative calendars including student enrollment, campus budgets, financial aid, accreditation, labor agreements and facilities, among others,” Kelly said.

    California State University, Long Beach is working on expanding enrollment during the fall and spring semesters, focusing on “underserved majors with available space,” according to CSULB spokesperson Gregory Woods. 

    “To bolster enrollment, our strategy is to enhance retention rates and average-units load for current students, and to expand the class size of the incoming first-time, first-year student level,” Woods said. 

    San Diego State University, which has the second-lowest acceptance rate of all the CSUs and is also highly impacted, does not have a plan to move to year-round operations like Cal Poly but is exploring other ways of increasing enrollment, SDSU spokesperson La Monica Everett-Haynes said.

    “We have, however, implemented efforts toward summer enrollment and, overall, continue to see high levels of enrollment growth during both the academic and summer session periods,” Everett-Haynes said.

    The University of California has similarly been working to expand summer enrollment without moving to the year-round model. 

    “Every UC campus is committed to expanding capacity and enhancing educational equity for California students through overall enrollment growth as well as more nontraditional approaches, including efforts to improve timely graduation and to expand online, summer and off-campus opportunities,” said Ryan King, UC spokesperson. 

    According to the “Building 2030 Capacity Report” issued in 2022, UC has turned to increasing online course offerings and financial aid for summer to help meet their enrollment goals. King noted that the report shows a spike in summer enrollment in 2020, and “UC campuses recognized this surge as an opportunity to increase summer enrollment and capacity over the long term by growing the number and mix of online and impacted fall-winter-spring course offerings.”

    Cal Poly decided that switching to the year-round model, and not just expanding their regular summer offerings, would be the most beneficial. 

    Armstrong said this shift to year-round operations will benefit all students, not just the ones who choose to start in the summer, because classes will be offered more often throughout the year, there will be more opportunities to participate in high-impact activities and the campus community will grow.

    As part of the effort to increase enrollment, Cal Poly is working on building more on-campus housing so that all first- and second-year students can live on campus, a project that “will result in several thousand beds added between now and 2030,” Armstrong said. 

    Armstrong also expects the switch to year-round operations, along with increased financial aid, to help Cal Poly’s efforts to increase diversity. 

    As Cal Poly begins this shift, students will only be able to choose between summer or fall starts, and only incoming students will get this option. Armstrong said he hopes everyone will have this option in the future, and that a spring start will also be available.

    “We think it’s going to be very significant,” Armstrong said. “Our evidence from polling and asking questions of prospective parents and students shows that the interest is very high in the year-round concept.”

    Ashley Bolter is a fourth-year journalism major and French and ethnic studies minor at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, and a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Julio Frenk, University of Miami president, named next UCLA chancellor

    Julio Frenk, University of Miami president, named next UCLA chancellor


    Julio Frenk, president of the University of Miami, has been selected as the next chancellor of UCLA.

    Credit: UCLA

    Julio Frenk, the current president of the University of Miami and a public health researcher, will become the next chancellor of UCLA.

    The University of California’s board of regents on Wednesday unanimously approved Frenk, who was born in Mexico and will become the first Latino chancellor to lead UCLA.

    Frenk will earn an annual base salary of $978,904 and will start in the role Jan. 1.

    “I am eager to take this role for several reasons,” Frenk said Wednesday, addressing the regents. “This is a crucial moment for higher education. We need bold innovation, and UCLA has a track record of embracing that kind of innovation.” 

    Frenk, 70, will succeed current Chancellor Gene Block, who plans to step down from the role July 31. Darnell Hunt, UCLA’s executive vice chancellor and provost, will serve as the interim chancellor until Frenk takes over.

    Frenk’s appointment comes as UCLA reels from months of pro-Palestinian protests. Earlier this spring, Block was criticized for being unprepared after a mob of counter-demonstrators attacked a pro-Palestinian encampment on the campus. About two dozen pro-Palestinian protesters this week were arrested on the campus.

    “At this moment, campus communities across the country are facing complex questions related to protecting student well-being, stopping all forms of discrimination and upholding free expression rights,” Frenk said Wednesday. “University leaders must take up these issues thoughtfully while continuing to advocate for the immense value that higher education generates.” 

    Frenk has led the University of Miami since 2015. During his time there, he was credited with orchestrating a $2.5 billion fundraising campaign and leading the university through the Covid-19 pandemic, among other accomplishments.

    Frenk is the second high-profile education leader to leave the Miami area in recent years for Los Angeles. Alberto Carvalho, the superintendent of the Los Angeles Unified School District since February 2022, had previously served as the superintendent of Miami-Dade County Public Schools.

    Prior to leading Miami, Frenk was dean of faculty at the public health school of Harvard University, the T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He was also previously the federal secretary of health in Mexico, where he was credited with reforming the nation’s health system. 

    “I am thrilled to welcome Dr. Frenk as the next chancellor of UCLA,” Richard Leib, chair of UC’s board of regents, said in a statement. “Dr. Frenk’s strategic and inspirational leadership, along with his extensive background in education and health, including his time as the Federal Secretary of Health of Mexico, uniquely positions him to guide UCLA into a future of impact and innovation.”

    Frenk was born in Mexico City in 1953. His father, who was 6 years old at the time, fled Nazi Germany in the 1930s along with his parents and sister. Frenk’s father, grandfather and great-grandfather were all physicians.

    Frenk earned his medical degree in 1979 from the National University of Mexico. He also received degrees from the University of Michigan, including a master’s in public health, a master’s in sociology and a joint doctorate in medical care organization and sociology.

    The pool of candidates for UCLA’s next chancellor “was remarkable,” but Frenk stood out “for his unique combination of scholarly, medical, administrative and political expertise,” James Steintrager, the chair of UC’s academic senate, said in a statement. “How he straddles the worlds of university research and health care delivery makes him an excellent fit for UCLA.”





    Source link

  • Should California’s college systems be merged into one university?

    Should California’s college systems be merged into one university?


    California State University, Dominguez Hills in Carson.

    Credit: Stephinie Phan / EdSource

    To better help students access and complete college, California should consider a major — and highly controversial — overhaul of its Master Plan for Higher Education that merges the state’s three public higher education systems into one mega-university, researchers argued Monday. 

    The bold proposal, detailed in a report from California Competes, a nonprofit research organization, suggests that the 10-campus University of California, the 23-campus California State University, and the state’s system of 116 community colleges be combined into a single California University that could accommodate a wide array of degree- and certificate-seeking students.

    Su Jin Jez, author of the report and CEO of California Competes, said merging the systems would eliminate transfer problems and make it easier for students to enter, succeed, and finish college, among other benefits. 

    “This proposal is intentionally provocative,” Jez said during a webinar Monday. “It’s designed to challenge existing paradigms and spark transformative discourse.” The original version of the report was released in December, but an updated version was published Monday when California Competes also hosted a webinar promoting the report. 

    Jez acknowledged that it might never come to be. The proposal would likely face challenges from the systems themselves, along with many stakeholders such as unions, faculties, legislators and alumni.  

    Other experts, reached by EdSource, questioned the proposal’s political feasibility, and one criticized the idea, saying it would not be possible to combine such large and complex institutions. 

    Jez argued that the original master plan, adopted in 1960, is outdated in part because of the rising costs of college and the changing racial and gender demographics of the state’s college students. Whereas the majority of students were white in 1960, Latinos now make up a majority of college-age individuals in California and a plurality of college students. Women also account for a majority of students in California colleges, a major change since 1960, when male students were the significant majority. 

    The original master plan said UC was to focus on research and enroll the top academically achieving eighth of high school graduates, while California State University was to consist mostly of undergraduate programs and serve the top third of high school graduates. The state’s community colleges were to offer open-access undergraduate classes, associate degrees for transfer, and vocational training. Those lines have since been blurred to some degree: CSU now offers some doctoral programs, and dozens of community colleges offer at least one bachelor’s degree. But over much of its time, that master plan arrangement was often hailed as a great strength for the state, helping during explosive population growth and supporting key scientific research.

    Under the proposed California University, the three segments would be merged into a network of regional campuses — such as California University, San Joaquin Valley, and California University, Los Angeles. 

    Each regional campus, which would be made up of one or several existing campuses, would offer a full range of programs and degrees, from certificates to doctorates. The LA campus, for example, would likely include the existing UCLA campus as well as the five CSU and many community college campuses in the county. It’s unclear how many regions would be included.

    There would be no admission requirements, and transfers would be completely eliminated, as students would be able to move seamlessly through their chosen regional campus.

    It would be highly challenging politically to merge the systems, which the report acknowledges. The co-directors of the Civil Rights Project at UCLA, which commissioned the report, urged Jez to “think boldly” in looking for a revised master plan, rather than come up with an immediately pragmatic solution, according to the report’s foreword.

    Jez said during Monday’s webinar that she believes there is a “hunger for a new vision for higher ed in our state” and noted that higher education leaders have previously urged changes to the master plan.

    Eloy Ortiz Oakley, the former chancellor of the state’s community college system, said in an interview that he agrees with the premise that the master plan is outdated and that he supports some of the report’s ideas, such as creating better coordination between the systems. But he rejected the idea of a single university.

    “I could not and would not support it,” said Oakley, who is now CEO of the College Futures Foundation. “There is just no way in my mind that you could form one comprehensive governance entity, given the size and the scope of the three public university systems.”

    Hans Johnson, a senior fellow at the PPIC Higher Education Center, previously called for modifications to the master plan in a 2010 report he wrote. He suggested at the time that, by 2025, the master plan be updated by setting explicit goals for improving eligibility, completion and transfer rates. 

    In a recent interview, Johnson said the state has made progress in increasing eligibility for UC and CSU and improving completion rates. He pointed to California residents’ enrollment being up significantly at both systems and noted graduation rates have improved greatly at CSU, particularly four-year rates. 

    Progress is still needed, though, in transferring more students to UC and CSU, he said. A state audit published last year found that, among students who began college between 2017 and 2019 and intended to transfer, only about 1 in 5 did so within four years. One thing that will be required, he said, is better coordination between the community college system, CSU and UC.

    “You could argue that the way to do that is to have one big system, and I think that’s a valid argument,” he said, referring to the California Competes proposal. “Politically, I don’t know how realistic it is.”

    The first step to better coordination could be some kind of coordinating council or board — similar to the California Postsecondary Education Commission, which was eliminated in 2011. Proponents say it would benefit the systems to be able to share data and information about their students and use that to strengthen transfers. 

    Gov. Gavin Newsom’s January budget proposal included $5 million in annual funding to “establish a state planning and coordinating body for TK-12 education, higher education, and state economic and labor agencies,” though his revised budget released last week did not include that proposal.

    “Despite the very large state expenditure on colleges, universities and programs, the state is operating without any institutional body that coordinates these systems or even provides basic data that would be essential for the rational management, maximum efficiency and coordination of the system,” the California Competes report states, adding that creating such a board is “particularly urgent and doable.”

    Other proposals in the report may be less doable, Jez said Monday, adding that her proposal should be seen as a “vision,” even if making it happen would be “really tough.”

    “Our higher ed system is the best in the world, and I want us to stay there,” she said. “And I think that this is a moment that we can accelerate and ask, how do we stay on the vanguard? How do we continue to be the ones that are creating new models that the rest of the world will follow?”





    Source link

  • University of California President Drake to step down

    University of California President Drake to step down


    UC President Michael Drake listens to public speakers at the March 20, 2024 UC Regents meeting at the UCLA campus.

    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    This story was changed to correct that new students were recently admitted for fall 2024, not 2025.

    University of California President Michael V. Drake will step down at the end of the upcoming academic year, closing out a five-year tenure in which he navigated the 10-campus system through the Covid-19 pandemic, enrollment growth, labor strife and campus protests.

    Drake, 74, announced his plan in a letter Wednesday to the UC community. 

    “I am immensely proud of what our students, faculty, and staff have accomplished these past several years. You have weathered a global pandemic and historic natural disasters, dealt with international conflict and domestic political uncertainty, navigated the stresses and opportunities of daily life, all while making our University stronger, more resilient, more impactful, and more inclusive than ever before,” he said. 

    Drake, who was UC’s first Black president, took over as president in August 2020 after previously serving as the president of Ohio State University. He also previously was the chancellor of UC Irvine and UC’s systemwide vice president of health affairs.

    Drake became UC’s president as campuses were preparing to enter their first full academic year during the Covid-19 pandemic. He helped guide the system through remote instruction and welcoming students back to campuses.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom on Wednesday praised Drake’s handling of the pandemic, saying in a statement that he “took the reins of the University of California during the height of the pandemic and has led with grace and vision in the years since.”

    Newsom worked directly with Drake to develop a five-year compact that Newsom’s office and UC agreed to in 2022. As part of the compact, Newsom pledged annual funding increases of 5% for UC in exchange for the system working toward a number of goals, including improving graduation rates and increasing enrollment of California residents.

    Getting more Californians enrolled has also been a priority of state lawmakers, who have frequently called on UC to do so. And recently, UC has started to make progress in that area. In fall 2023, the system’s freshman class had 42,058 Californians — 2,094 more than the previous fall, the largest year-over-year increase during Drake’s tenure.

    Further enrollment growth of California residents could be coming this fall. UC announced Wednesday that it admitted 93,290 California first-year students for fall 2024, a record number and a 4.3% increase from last year.

    Drake’s tenure leading UC, however, hasn’t been without challenges. 

    In 2022, 48,000 UC academic workers walked off the job in what was the largest-ever strike of higher education employees. UC eventually reached an agreement with the workers that increased their pay and gave them improved benefits.

    The union, however, authorized another strike this past spring amid pro-Palestinian protests, arguing that UC had violated workers’ rights by retaliating against them for participating in those protests. Workers ultimately went on strike at six campuses, though a judge later ordered them to halt their strike.

    The pro-Palestinian protests and encampments consumed several of UC’s campuses this past spring, with several UC chancellors calling in police to arrest students and disband encampments. Protesters demanded that UC divest from companies linked to Israel, but Drake’s office said in April that it “has consistently opposed calls for boycott against and divestment from Israel.” It’s not clear to what degree protests will resume when the fall term begins. 

    As he enters his final year on the job, Drake plans to “continue the work that we have focused on during my tenure,” he said in his letter to the UC community.

    “That includes expanding student support and creating paths to a debt-free UC education, ensuring that more California students can reap the benefits of a UC degree, building on the University’s academic and research excellence, and working to promote a safe and respectful community that fosters a free exchange of ideas,” he added.

    Janet Reilly, the chair of UC’s board of regents, plans to soon appoint a committee to begin a national search for the system’s next president.





    Source link

  • Cal State, University of California ban encampments, impose protest rules

    Cal State, University of California ban encampments, impose protest rules


    Hundreds of San Diego State students protest in support of Palestinians on April 30, 2024.

    Credit: Jazlyn Dieguez / EdSource

    California State University and the University of California are welcoming student activists back to campus this fall with revamped protest rules that signal a harder line on encampments, barriers and, under certain circumstances, the wearing of face masks.

    Cal State, the nation’s largest public university system, was first to issue its policy Thursday, a bundle of restrictions that govern public assemblies on university campuses. UC President Michael Drake followed Monday with a letter outlining his expectations for campus chancellors to impose restrictions on how students could engage in protests this fall.

    The two systems join a wave of colleges that have revisited rules about how and where people can demonstrate on their campuses in the wake of pro-Palestinian protests last spring. Critics say some strengthened restrictions could limit free speech rights.

    The Cal State policy bars tent encampments and overnight demonstrations, a signature of the spring’s protest movements both within CSU and across higher education institutions. Erecting unauthorized barricades, fencing and furniture is also prohibited.

    “Encampments are prohibited by the policy, and those who attempt to start an encampment may be disciplined or sanctioned,” CSU spokesperson Hazel Kelly said in a written statement to EdSource. “Campus presidents and their designated officials will enforce this prohibition and take appropriate steps to stop encampments, including giving clear notice to those in violation that they must discontinue their encampment activities immediately.”

    Kelly said the encampments “are disruptive and can cause a hostile environment for some community members. We have an obligation to ensure that all community members can access University Property and University programs.”

    UC campuses similarly will ban encampments or other “unauthorized structures,” Drake said in a letter to campus chancellors Monday morning directing them to enforce those rules. He also said they must prohibit anything that restricts movement on campus, which could include protests that block walkways and roadways or deny access by anyone on campus to UC facilities.

    “I hope that the direction provided in this letter will help you achieve an inclusive and welcoming environment at our campuses that protects and enables free expression while ensuring the safety of all community members by providing greater clarity and consistency in our policies and policy application,” Drake added. 

    UC faces Oct. 1 deadline

    As part of this year’s state budget agreement, lawmakers directed Drake’s office to create a “systemwide framework” for consistently enforcing protest rules across UC’s campuses. Lawmakers are withholding $25 million from UC until Drake submits a report to the Legislature by Oct. 1 detailing those plans.  

    A variety of higher education institutions have bolstered policies that constrain demonstrations and similar gatherings in reaction to protests over the Israel-Hamas war last school year.

    The University of Pennsylvania’s “temporary guidelines” include a ban on bullhorns and speakers after 5 p.m. on school days as well as a two-week limit on the display of posters and banners, according to The Associated Press. Indiana University’s policy allows “expressive activities” like protests from 6 a.m. to 11 p.m. only and requires prior approval to hang or place signs on university property. The University of South Florida rules stipulate that no protests are allowed in the final two weeks of a semester, AP reported, among other restrictions. 

    Tyler Valeska, an assistant professor of law at Loyola University Chicago, said that even if a university has not seemed keen to enforce protest rules strictly in the past, many are now telegraphing a more forceful approach in the future.  

    “For years, maybe even decades, it did seem to be the case that university officials had a policy on paper and then another policy in their actual approach to enforcement,” he said. “And we saw a major change from that status quo in the spring, where universities around the country started suddenly enforcing policies that had been on the books for years or decades, but had never really been enforced against relatively nondisruptive student speech.” 

    “It may be the case that the universities are hyping up their policies with no actual intent to enforce them stringently, but based on what we saw in the spring, that would surprise me,” he added.

    Applies to all Cal State campuses

    The interim policy at Cal State applies to all 23 of the system’s campuses, replacing rules at each school. University leaders still have discretion on specifics, such as determining which buildings and spaces on campus are considered to be public areas and which hours of the day those spaces can be accessed, which they will spell out in addition to the systemwide policy.

    Drake’s letter to the campus chancellors is not a systemwide policy. Instead, his letter directs each campus to come up with its own policies. Those policies must meet certain requirements, including the banning of encampments. 

    Some campuses likely already have the necessary policies, Drake said in his letter. If they don’t, they should develop or amend existing policies as soon as possible, he added. In either case, each campus must provide a document or webpage that describes those policies. 

    Both of California’s four-year university systems have come under fire for how they responded to protests in solidarity with Palestine this spring. Some campus leaders approached student activists with a light touch, allowing students to camp overnight in quads peacefully and negotiating with representatives until they voluntarily disassembled encampments. But as conflicts between protesters, counterprotesters and administrators flared on some campuses, university leaders called in law enforcement agencies to break up encampments and arrest students who did not comply with orders to disperse.

    Highlights for both systems

    The new protest guidance suggests that Cal State and UC are now headed in roughly the same direction, taking a stronger stance against practices that featured frequently in spring protests. 

    Highlights of the policies include:

    • Camping: Cal State’s policy bans “encampments of any kind, overnight demonstrations … and overnight loitering.” It outlaws the use of camping paraphernalia, including recreational vehicles and tents. Bringing “copious amounts of personal belongings” to campus without permission is also a no-go, except as allowed in student housing and university work spaces. Drake’s letter instructs UC chancellors to clarify their policies to make clear that setting up a camp, tent or temporary housing structure is not allowed without prior approval.
    • Barricades and other structures: Drake requests campuses make sure their policies prohibit building unauthorized structures on campus. Cal State’s interim policy additionally lists a range of temporary and permanent structures — “tent, platform, booth, bench, building, building materials (such as bricks, pallets, etc.), wall, barrier, barricade, fencing, structure, sculpture, bicycle rack or furniture” — that aren’t allowed without permission.
    • Masking and refusing to self-identify: Cal State and Drake’s letter invoke the same policy on face coverings almost to the word. Both warn that masks and other attempts to conceal one’s identity are not allowed “with the intent of intimidating and harassing any person or group, or for the purpose of evading or escaping discovery, recognition, or identification in the commission of violations” of relevant laws or policies. Cal State’s language, additionally, notes that face masks are “permissible for all persons who are complying with University policies and applicable laws.” Similarly, both systems bar people from refusing to identify themselves to a university official acting in their official capacity on campus.
    • Restricting free movement: Drake’s letter emphasizes that campus policies should prohibit restricting another person’s movement by, for example, blocking walkways, windows or doors in a way that denies people access to the university’s facilities. The guidance comes days after a federal judge issued a preliminary injunction that barred UCLA from “knowingly allowing or facilitating the exclusion of Jewish students” on its campus. Cal State’s interim policy includes blanket advisories against actions that “impede or restrict the free movement of any person” and block streets, walkways, parking lots or other pedestrian and vehicle paths. 

    Kelly, the CSU spokesperson, said sections of the policy about encampments, the use of barricades and face coverings “are not new and are already in place for the most part at each university and at the Chancellor’s Office.” 

    In the spring, students built encampments at UC campuses including UCLA and UC San Diego as well as Cal State campuses including Sacramento State and San Francisco State. Bobby King, a spokesperson for San Francisco State, said the school granted students last spring an exception to the campus time, place and manner policy. 

    Pro-Palestinian student encampment in front of Royce Hall at UCLA on April 30, 2024.
    Credit: Delilah Brumer / EdSource

    “The new CSU policy will create greater urgency in resolving a situation like the one we had last spring,” he said. “Obviously, with the new policy in place, campus leaders who engage with the students would need to convey that urgency.”

    The interim policy at Cal State takes a comprehensive approach to defining what is and is not allowed during demonstrations, outlawing items like firearms, explosives and body armor as well as actions like shooting arrows, climbing light poles and public urination. The policy outlaws demonstrations in university housing, including the homes of employees living on university property when “no public events are taking place.”

    Drake’s directive describes a tiered system for how campuses should police individuals if they violate any rules. They would first be informed of the violation and asked to stop. If they don’t, the next step would be to warn them of potential consequences. 

    After that, UC police or the local campus fire marshal could issue orders that could include an unlawful assembly announcement, an order to disperse or an order to identify oneself. If the conduct doesn’t change at that point, the individuals involved could be cited for violation of university policy and, if they are breaking a law, they could also be detained and arrested. Police could order them to stay away from campuses for repeat offenses or what they deem more severe violations.

    That response system, however, “is not a rigid prescription that will capture all situations,” the guidance states. 

    Cal State’s interim policy is effective immediately for students and nonunion employees, Kelly said. Unionized employees will work under the previously-negotiated campus policies until a meet-and-confer process for the new policy is complete.

    Each Cal State campus asked to elaborate

    Cal State Dominguez Hills and Stanislaus State were the first two campuses to publish addenda for their schools as of press time.

    The Dominguez Hills addendum, for example, lists areas where protests are permitted without pre-scheduling, including the north lawn in front of the Loker Student Union and a sculpture garden adjacent to the University Theater. But the document limits events in those places to the hoursbetween 7 a.m. and 11 p.m. and allows only “non-amplified speech and expression.”

    The campus-specific policy will also describe any restrictions on signs, banners and chalking. The Dominguez Hills addendum prohibits the use of sticks or poles to support handheld signs, does not allow signs “to be taped to any campus buildings, directory signs, fences, railings, or exterior light poles” and by default limits signs to a two-week posting period. It also includes a list of “designated posting places” on the campus.

    Margaret Russell, an associate professor at Santa Clara University School of Law, said Cal State’s policy is clearly motivated by a desire to minimize disruptions from protests. Russell said that though many of the restrictions target students’ conduct rather than their speech, she is troubled by broad language seeming to require written permission for posters, signs, banners and chalking.

    Russell said such language could create “a chilling effect” because it “is so potentially broad and far-reaching that people don’t know ahead of time what’s allowed and what’s not allowed.”

    “The overall message is, ‘Be careful. Be careful where you express your opinion aloud.’” And so to me, it seems suppressive of freedom of speech, which is probably what they want,” she said.

    Kelly, the Cal State spokesperson, said that the policy overall is meant to describe how the universities’ property can be used without inhibiting free expression.

    “Generally, separate individual written permission is not required for signage unless the person is trying to post on a facility where it is not permitted,” she said. “This rule does not apply to signs and posters people carry or use personally.”

    An Aug. 14 statement from the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) did not name any universities but broadly criticized school administrations for policies it said “severely undermine the academic freedom and freedom of speech and expression that are fundamental to higher education.”

    “Many of the latest expressive activity policies strictly limit the locations where demonstrations may take place, whether amplified sound can be used, and types of postings permitted,” the statement said. “With harsh sanctions for violations, the policies broadly chill students and faculty from engaging in protests and demonstrations.”

    The AAUP statement said some institutions have gone so far as to require protest groups to register in advance. AAUP argued that such provisions effectively block spontaneous protests and may discourage protesters wishing to avoid surveillance. 

    The AAUP statement came a day after the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA) released a “guide to preventing encampments and occupations on campus.” The guide encourages universities to ban encampments and to act decisively to punish students who violate those policies.

    “Once an encampment has occupied the campus, the institution has very few options to avoid an ugly spectacle that at best will make the administration look ineffectual and even make the board appear derelict,” the guide says. “Negotiating and making concessions are invitations to more and increasing demands. They embolden others to employ similar coercive tactics in the future and further undermine the university’s mission.”

    Cal State’s interim policy says the university embraces its obligation to support the free exchange of information and ideas, but that such freedom of expression “is allowed and supported as long as it does not violate other laws or University policies and procedures.” 

    Cal State spokesperson Kelly said the university system “places the highest value on fostering healthy discourse and exchange of ideas in a safe and peaceful manner, by sustaining a learning and working environment that supports the free and orderly exchange of ideas, values, and opinions, recognizing that individuals grow and learn when confronted with differing views, alternative ways of thinking, and conflicting values.” 





    Source link