UCLA's budget woes

A little aside from all the sports talk.

A few weeks ago a New York Times photographer took pictures during English 85 (American Novel). NYT said that the picture would be featured in an upcoming article about the state of public education. Article is now up.

For those who didn't know, Night Powell had to be shut down for the 1st 5 weeks. It reopened this Monday thanks to the donation of 2 anonymous donors.

16 days ago drebruin 15 comments 1 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

it's a scary situation

that doesn’t seem to have an upside. However, I did think it was cool that the NY Times refers to us as the flagship of the UC system!

by AZBruin on Nov 4, 2009 9:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

The problem with this is

there is no good answer. There’s a major negative to every move you make. The best you can do is find the solution with the least amount of damage.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 4, 2009 10:57 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

It seems to me that Michigan has done the best job addressing the issue

I don’t know what percentage of UCLA’s student body currently comes from out of state, but exploring a ‘private/public’ option, in which UCLA brings in a greater number of out of state students would seem to be in the best interest of the university at a whole, albeit at a disservice to California high school students.

by insomniacslounge on Nov 4, 2009 11:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I believe the issue has been explored

and there was talk of them doing that. It sounds like a decent option, but as with all of the options, it just doesn’t seem like the best way to go because in this situation, there is no best way.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 4, 2009 2:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't like the Michigan model

The UC system is intended to be for California residents that earn a spot first and foremost. Yes, bringing in higher out of state tuition would be good financially. But I think that gets us further away from the ideals of the UC system.

The fate of the UC is inevitably linked with the fate of the state as a whole. Until California realizes that the UC system—and the CSUs and community colleges—lead to more economic activity than they cost, and we value public education, the UC system will continue to be in trouble. UC President Yudof is certainly not doing much to press our political leaders and the citizens of California to value the UC’s mission—read his pathetic interview with the NYT Magazine from a few weeks back.

I’m a UCLA alumnus, went to grad school at UCI, and I’m now UCLA staff. I care deeply about the UC system, and things are looking bad.

by Westwood Wizard on Nov 4, 2009 3:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

At the same time

Shouldn’t that dedication to the model of educating the in-state students first reflect the investment that the state puts into it? Seems like the state wants something for nothing out of its public university system given the ever diminishing funding it gets from Sacramento. First of all, I will admit to being biased as I was an out-of-state admit, but I think UCLA needs to do what it can to not compromise on what makes it a premier destination in the first place: academic quality. If that means accepting more highly qualified out-of-state students who will subsequently pay more tuition to help close the budget gap, then I see that as killing two birds with one stone.

It’s sad that it has come to this but it’s time to get pragmatic. If in-state admissions are down for the flagship schools like UCLA, Cal, and UCSD, then maybe that will provide the motivation necessary for the voters to take a look at their priorities and bump higher education up their lists (at the expense of other things of course).

by Tydides on Nov 4, 2009 3:45 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs

Rec'd, Tydides

You did a much better job of expressing exactly how I feel about this issue, although I was an in-state admit myself.

by insomniacslounge on Nov 4, 2009 4:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

in-state vs out of state

It is not that in state admissions are down—we have higher numbers of more qualified applicants from in state than ever—it’s that in-state students pay a fraction (rightfully so) of the tuition that out of state students do.

by brand0n on Nov 5, 2009 4:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And I'm saying that should change

Since out-of-state students will pay more and accepting more of them and fewer in-state could help close the budget gap without sacrificing academic quality if all candidates are held to the same standard regardless of where they come from.

I never said in-state students shouldn’t pay less or that there aren’t as many qualified in-state candidates. I said that the school’s obligation to accept more in-state students should be proportional to the funding that it gets from Sacramento, which only makes sense, because that represents the “subsidy” that California residents pay to fund the UC system. Less funding means less incentive to favor in-state students. If Sacramento wants to maintain the preferred status for in-state candidates, then it needs to SHOW it means business and restore funding.

by Tydides on Nov 5, 2009 7:57 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the state should spin off UCLA and CAL

and allow them to be run as not for profit institutions. State ownership is not a plus anymore in any regard.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Nov 4, 2009 8:03 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

To expand further

why not give UCLA and Kal a charter with the same purpose they have as a state run entity, and allow them to run their own ships. I guarantee you would see a much better university. The politics and other stuff involved with being a state school weigh outweigh the ever decreasing investment the state makes in the Universities.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Nov 5, 2009 7:38 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Rumors are that UCLA is cutting

the foreign language requirement and firing all foreign language teachers. Budget woes, indeed.

by Centric on Nov 5, 2009 5:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

I never understood why foreign language was a requirement

but I think there is certainly a place for it at a university and it’s sad to hear about the department going away.

Formerly ryebreadraz

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Nov 5, 2009 8:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Now that I have my degree, I can disagree with impunity

I think foreign language requirements should be made stricter. A fraternity brother of mine got his foreign language requirement out of the way by taking Spanish, which was the language spoken in his home while he was growing up. I think you should have to take two “new” languages. Certainly Spanish and probably an Asian language – Korean or whatever the correct term is for Chinese. The school’s goal is to turn out well-educated, well-rounded leaders. California is no longer an English only state. A business or education or political leader in California will be miles ahead of his or her peers by speaking the language that a large minority (or is it now a majority?) of the people speak.

Heck, some of our brothers even took Romanian.

Again, I hasten to add that I already have my degree so it’s easy for me to add harder requirements for graduating.

by Fox 71 on Nov 5, 2009 6:22 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I agree wholeheartedly

When I was an undergraduate a couple years back, I did not like the foreign language requirement. I tried to pass out of Spanish, but just barely failed the exit exam. So I ended up taking Spanish 3 just to fulfill the requirement. 5 years later, I have a Spanish minor and am pursuing a bilingual teaching credential so that I can teach in Spanish. Especially in California, being able to speak a foreign language is HUGE (not just Spanish). It would be a complete shame if UCLA lowered their standards and expectations of excellence because of budget woes.

slow down, look up

by Point Guard 08 on Nov 5, 2009 10:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs