Sunday, January 31, 2010
Share Your Experiences/Observations: There's Richness in Many Voices and Power in Numbers
The Master White Paper intends to reflect the richness of the voices from our twenty three campuses' populations of faculty, students, and staff. Your comments here as well as suggestions for materials to post on this site (such as relevant articles) can become a deep pool from which we can draw for the MWP. Please contribute, even if you think it's just a small part. Together these contributions, whether small or not, add up to something potentially immense.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
"Doing More with Less"? Cold Fusion and Education
In today's LA Times, January 28, 2010, Carla Rivera reports on the Board of Trustees latest meeting in which they announced their plans to speed up graduation. According to the article, the consensus opinion among the BOT and high administration officials is that the university needs to remind students of why they're in school. The problem isn't that students can't get the classes that they need and that many have not been well-prepared for college level work. The problem is that we've been too "laissez-faire" with dawdling students. The problem isn't drastic budget cuts, fewer faculty members, larger classes, higher fees, and fewer classes. No, the problem is wayward students who don't know how to navigate college and are spending too much time taking classes they don't need. As if that were the main problem!
The notion of doing more with less, which is the code phrase for budget cuts, furloughs, layoffs, program elimination, and restructuring from administrators, reminds me of the notion of cold fusion: that you can get energy from nothing.
From the story:
Students attending California State University may be in for a dose of tough love as they are asked to choose majors more quickly, be more disciplined about attending class and be willing to sacrifice family time and outside activities to earn their degrees, several campus presidents said Wednesday.
They spoke during a meeting of Cal State's Board of Trustees at which university officials formally announced an ambitious initiative to raise graduation rates, particularly for students who are from minority groups and low-income households.
Cal State is setting a goal of increasing its six-year graduation rate 8% by 2016, raising it to 54%, as well as cutting in half the achievement gap in degree completion by under-represented minority students. Each of the giant university's 23 campuses is scheduled to have a plan in place by this fall.
Although each campus will implement a plan that fits the special needs of its student body, some common themes emerged Wednesday: Students will be given more individualized support such as counseling, more information about required course work and resources such as online tracking of their progress.
But the students will have to be more focused about their goals and understand that, given the university's fiscal constraints, the longer they stay in school, the less opportunity there will be for others to enroll, the presidents said.
To some extent, campus administrators have been "enablers" for many students, allowing them to dawdle in choosing majors and progressing toward their degrees, Cal State L.A. President James M. Rosser said in an interview.
"We're looking at how we've done our business and whether we've become too laissez faire," he said. "In high school they have workshops on how to get to college. We want to tell students how to get out of college. That might mean some intrusive advisement.
The notion of doing more with less, which is the code phrase for budget cuts, furloughs, layoffs, program elimination, and restructuring from administrators, reminds me of the notion of cold fusion: that you can get energy from nothing.
From the story:
Students attending California State University may be in for a dose of tough love as they are asked to choose majors more quickly, be more disciplined about attending class and be willing to sacrifice family time and outside activities to earn their degrees, several campus presidents said Wednesday.
They spoke during a meeting of Cal State's Board of Trustees at which university officials formally announced an ambitious initiative to raise graduation rates, particularly for students who are from minority groups and low-income households.
Cal State is setting a goal of increasing its six-year graduation rate 8% by 2016, raising it to 54%, as well as cutting in half the achievement gap in degree completion by under-represented minority students. Each of the giant university's 23 campuses is scheduled to have a plan in place by this fall.
Although each campus will implement a plan that fits the special needs of its student body, some common themes emerged Wednesday: Students will be given more individualized support such as counseling, more information about required course work and resources such as online tracking of their progress.
But the students will have to be more focused about their goals and understand that, given the university's fiscal constraints, the longer they stay in school, the less opportunity there will be for others to enroll, the presidents said.
To some extent, campus administrators have been "enablers" for many students, allowing them to dawdle in choosing majors and progressing toward their degrees, Cal State L.A. President James M. Rosser said in an interview.
"We're looking at how we've done our business and whether we've become too laissez faire," he said. "In high school they have workshops on how to get to college. We want to tell students how to get out of college. That might mean some intrusive advisement.
Wednesday, January 27, 2010
CSU Executives Benefits Summary
An Excerpt from the 2006 version of the recruitment brochure used by the CSU to attract new executives.
As you read this, it might be useful to keep in mind the following from our Call for a Master White Paper:
"In particular, this MWP would call for a dramatic cutback in the number, power, pay and purpose of administrative positions within the system based on the principle that a) in times of crisis the most important functions must be safeguarded - such as teaching, scholarship, and access for students - functions that are at the heart of the universities, and the least important functions - such as the burgeoning and overpaid high administrative posts - should be cut first, and b) even if we were not in the throes of a budget crisis, the growth of administrative posts in number, their share of resources, their agenda, and their power vis a vis faculty and students in recent decades and years has been detrimental to the CSU system and its official purpose of being a part (along with the UC system) of providing the best possible higher educational system for California.
"We would propose, in contrast to the prevailing ethic that high administrative posts, such as Chancellor and Presidents, must be paid very large salaries in order to attract (i.e., bribe) the best talent to serve in education, while faculty are expected to serve principally for the love of education, that these high administrative posts be filled with those whose first and foremost purpose is to serve education and not primarily for the power, prestige, pay and perks. We will push for the same ethic that faculty are expected to live by to be explicitly the criteria for administrators and that the pay for high administrators be cut substantially and be tied to a formula relative to faculty pay. We expect that such a change would attract a very different kind of person to these administrative posts and that the relationship between administration and faculty will become cooperative rather than adversarial, benefiting the system, the state and the nation as a whole."
The California State University
January 2006
The Benefits of Working at the CSU
This summary of executive perquisites, relocation benefits, and general benefits provides an overview of systemwide benefits generally available to executives of the California State University (CSU).
Executive Perquisites
Trustee policy recognizes the extensive business-related, public relations, and institutional development obligations of executives and provides special executive perquisites in recognition of these obligations. Campus foundations may supplement perquisites for presidents based on existing campus practice and local community preferences.
Executive perquisites may be taxable income to the recipient, and executives are encouraged to seek individual consultation with competent tax advisors regarding the potential impact of executive benefits and allowances.
Housing and Housing Allowances
The CSU campus presidents are provided with an official CSU residence where available. If an official residence is not available, a housing allowance is provided to assist the campus president in securing a residence. Housing allowances vary by campus.
Automobile and Automobile Allowances
The CSU campus presidents have a vehicle available for business use, and the campus provides automobile insurance, maintenance, and gasoline expenses for that vehicle. In lieu of a university vehicle, the CSU campus presidents have the option of electing an automobile
allowance of $1000 per month. Automobile allowances may be available to executives in the Chancellor’s Office.
Entertainment Allowance
Campus presidents receive an entertainment allowance of $300 per month from the state’s general fund to defray entertainment costs incurred in the course of conducting official business and institutional development activities. Additionally, funds are also available from the state general fund for community relations expenses. Executives in the Office of the Chancellor have access to funds for community related expenses. Campus foundations may supplement general fund
entertainment allowances and community relations activities.
As you read this, it might be useful to keep in mind the following from our Call for a Master White Paper:
"In particular, this MWP would call for a dramatic cutback in the number, power, pay and purpose of administrative positions within the system based on the principle that a) in times of crisis the most important functions must be safeguarded - such as teaching, scholarship, and access for students - functions that are at the heart of the universities, and the least important functions - such as the burgeoning and overpaid high administrative posts - should be cut first, and b) even if we were not in the throes of a budget crisis, the growth of administrative posts in number, their share of resources, their agenda, and their power vis a vis faculty and students in recent decades and years has been detrimental to the CSU system and its official purpose of being a part (along with the UC system) of providing the best possible higher educational system for California.
"We would propose, in contrast to the prevailing ethic that high administrative posts, such as Chancellor and Presidents, must be paid very large salaries in order to attract (i.e., bribe) the best talent to serve in education, while faculty are expected to serve principally for the love of education, that these high administrative posts be filled with those whose first and foremost purpose is to serve education and not primarily for the power, prestige, pay and perks. We will push for the same ethic that faculty are expected to live by to be explicitly the criteria for administrators and that the pay for high administrators be cut substantially and be tied to a formula relative to faculty pay. We expect that such a change would attract a very different kind of person to these administrative posts and that the relationship between administration and faculty will become cooperative rather than adversarial, benefiting the system, the state and the nation as a whole."
The California State University
January 2006
The Benefits of Working at the CSU
This summary of executive perquisites, relocation benefits, and general benefits provides an overview of systemwide benefits generally available to executives of the California State University (CSU).
Executive Perquisites
Trustee policy recognizes the extensive business-related, public relations, and institutional development obligations of executives and provides special executive perquisites in recognition of these obligations. Campus foundations may supplement perquisites for presidents based on existing campus practice and local community preferences.
Executive perquisites may be taxable income to the recipient, and executives are encouraged to seek individual consultation with competent tax advisors regarding the potential impact of executive benefits and allowances.
Housing and Housing Allowances
The CSU campus presidents are provided with an official CSU residence where available. If an official residence is not available, a housing allowance is provided to assist the campus president in securing a residence. Housing allowances vary by campus.
Automobile and Automobile Allowances
The CSU campus presidents have a vehicle available for business use, and the campus provides automobile insurance, maintenance, and gasoline expenses for that vehicle. In lieu of a university vehicle, the CSU campus presidents have the option of electing an automobile
allowance of $1000 per month. Automobile allowances may be available to executives in the Chancellor’s Office.
Entertainment Allowance
Campus presidents receive an entertainment allowance of $300 per month from the state’s general fund to defray entertainment costs incurred in the course of conducting official business and institutional development activities. Additionally, funds are also available from the state general fund for community relations expenses. Executives in the Office of the Chancellor have access to funds for community related expenses. Campus foundations may supplement general fund
entertainment allowances and community relations activities.
Monday, January 25, 2010
AB 656
The following is from CFA Headlines concerning AB 656 which would have imposed an oil and gas severance tax and direct these monies to fund higher education in California, thus providing higher ed with a stable source of funding. California is the only state that does not tax the oil and gas companies for their extracting these precious state resources. Given the record profits of oil companies, in the billions of dollars quarterly, and the desperate state that higher ed is in, the status quo is manifestly unjust. The same kind of pressure brought on the state and the board of regents that students and faculty brought in the demonstrations of last term and that led to Schwarzenegger's announcement that he would not cut the UC and CSU budgets further is what needs to be broadened and escalated.
“Those protests on the U.C. campuses were the tipping point,” the governor’s chief of staff, Susan Kennedy, said in an interview after the [Governor's 1/6/10] speech. “Our university system is going to get the support it deserves.”
AB 656 HALTED BY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
On Thursday, [1/21/10] the [California] Assembly Appropriations Committee took action on CFA-sponsored Assembly Bill 656 that essentially defeats the bill for this legislative cycle.
The committee deleted the oil and gas severance tax portion of the bill earmarked for public higher education and replaced it with a simple reporting requirement. The amendments require the state Board of Equalization to annually report to the legislature the amount of revenue that would be generated for public higher education if the oil and gas tax was implemented.
The inability to garner a two-thirds vote that would have been required for Assembly passage – only possible with the support of Assembly Republicans – coupled with the bill’s potential costs to the state general fund, directly led to this outcome.
When AB 656, authored by Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, was first introduced, CFA understood efforts to enact this bill would be a multi-year process.
CFA leaders expressed disappointment that the bill was not approved as originally proposed, but stressed how critical the months of lobbying and grassroots efforts by faculty, students and community members in supporting this measure were to influencing state policymakers about the need to fund public higher education.
The dialogue created by this collective action was instrumental in the Governor’s decision to increase the CSU budget by at least $305 million in his January budget proposal.
“Many in the legislature didn’t expect us to move AB 656 as far as we did,” stated CFA President Lillian Taiz. “We have not given up on our efforts to provide a stable source of funding for the CSU, and will continue to forcefully and effectively pursue avenues that will provide us these needed funds.”
Taiz added, “AB 656, coupled with our years of efforts to inform the public about the problems facing CSU, has placed higher education at the forefront of the state’s concerns. We will continue our efforts to ensure the long term health of the CSU is not sacrificed in the name of short-term economic expediency.”
CFA is continuing legislative efforts to provide oversight and accountability of the $1.34 billion in hidden funds held by CSU campus auxiliaries and foundations. The bi-partisan SB 330, authored by Senator Leland Yee - a reintroduction of last year’s SB 218 - was unanimously approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and is awaiting a vote by the full Senate next week.
“Those protests on the U.C. campuses were the tipping point,” the governor’s chief of staff, Susan Kennedy, said in an interview after the [Governor's 1/6/10] speech. “Our university system is going to get the support it deserves.”
AB 656 HALTED BY APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
On Thursday, [1/21/10] the [California] Assembly Appropriations Committee took action on CFA-sponsored Assembly Bill 656 that essentially defeats the bill for this legislative cycle.
The committee deleted the oil and gas severance tax portion of the bill earmarked for public higher education and replaced it with a simple reporting requirement. The amendments require the state Board of Equalization to annually report to the legislature the amount of revenue that would be generated for public higher education if the oil and gas tax was implemented.
The inability to garner a two-thirds vote that would have been required for Assembly passage – only possible with the support of Assembly Republicans – coupled with the bill’s potential costs to the state general fund, directly led to this outcome.
When AB 656, authored by Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, was first introduced, CFA understood efforts to enact this bill would be a multi-year process.
CFA leaders expressed disappointment that the bill was not approved as originally proposed, but stressed how critical the months of lobbying and grassroots efforts by faculty, students and community members in supporting this measure were to influencing state policymakers about the need to fund public higher education.
The dialogue created by this collective action was instrumental in the Governor’s decision to increase the CSU budget by at least $305 million in his January budget proposal.
“Many in the legislature didn’t expect us to move AB 656 as far as we did,” stated CFA President Lillian Taiz. “We have not given up on our efforts to provide a stable source of funding for the CSU, and will continue to forcefully and effectively pursue avenues that will provide us these needed funds.”
Taiz added, “AB 656, coupled with our years of efforts to inform the public about the problems facing CSU, has placed higher education at the forefront of the state’s concerns. We will continue our efforts to ensure the long term health of the CSU is not sacrificed in the name of short-term economic expediency.”
CFA is continuing legislative efforts to provide oversight and accountability of the $1.34 billion in hidden funds held by CSU campus auxiliaries and foundations. The bi-partisan SB 330, authored by Senator Leland Yee - a reintroduction of last year’s SB 218 - was unanimously approved by the Senate Judiciary Committee and is awaiting a vote by the full Senate next week.
Thursday, January 21, 2010
Deliver Us From Deliverology
Updated: 1/22/10 at 2:35 pm PST
In late November 2009, when the edict from Chancellor Reed came down that the CSU would be adopting Sir Michael Barber's Deliverology, a conversation on my campus' CFA email list ensued. The discussion prompted me to contact John Seddon whose critique of Barber from his book on Public Service Sector Policies in England can be viewed here. Some of the rest of that elist conversation I plan to post here on this site.
The two below are the first ones I've selected from that discussion. The first comes from John Edlund, the second from Nicholas Van Glahn. Please weigh in on this, as some of you already have begun to on this site, either by sharing an observation or raising a question.
Entering Phantom Logs About Phantom Logs
"It has been a while since I have read Solzhenitsyn but at some point in The Gulag Archipelago he is assigned to a labor camp that cuts timber and rolls the logs into the river to float down to the sawmill. The camp has production quotas that are physically impossible to meet, but politically impossible not to meet. Thus the camp commander meets the quotas by reporting phantom logs.
"Everyone in the supply chain understands this perfectly well, so the sawmill eliminates some of the phantom logs through various accounting fictions, but to meet its own quota reports phantom lumber made from the phantom logs. Downstream, construction units get some of the phantom lumber off the books by reporting damage and loss, but also build phantom houses out of phantom lumber. It's crazy, but it is the system.
"My reading of articles about Deliverology so far indicates that it results in a very similar system, where managers face losing their jobs if they cannot meet the targets imposed from above. It actually seems like administrators have more to fear from this than faculty, but it doesn't sound good." - John Edlund
"What makes this [Deliverology] obnoxious is that this presupposes that a degree is a product to be delivered more efficiently. It is not! A degree is something one earns. I understand wanting to make sure we retain students and find new ways to help students earn those degrees in the face of a paucity of resources, but you can not make a demand that a certain percentage of people must get degrees. I can't see how such a demand will not inevitably lead to administrators (and perhaps faculty with enough 'gentle pressure') making more and more concessions on curriculum and rigor." -- Nicholas Van Glahn
In late November 2009, when the edict from Chancellor Reed came down that the CSU would be adopting Sir Michael Barber's Deliverology, a conversation on my campus' CFA email list ensued. The discussion prompted me to contact John Seddon whose critique of Barber from his book on Public Service Sector Policies in England can be viewed here. Some of the rest of that elist conversation I plan to post here on this site.
The two below are the first ones I've selected from that discussion. The first comes from John Edlund, the second from Nicholas Van Glahn. Please weigh in on this, as some of you already have begun to on this site, either by sharing an observation or raising a question.
Entering Phantom Logs About Phantom Logs
"It has been a while since I have read Solzhenitsyn but at some point in The Gulag Archipelago he is assigned to a labor camp that cuts timber and rolls the logs into the river to float down to the sawmill. The camp has production quotas that are physically impossible to meet, but politically impossible not to meet. Thus the camp commander meets the quotas by reporting phantom logs.
"Everyone in the supply chain understands this perfectly well, so the sawmill eliminates some of the phantom logs through various accounting fictions, but to meet its own quota reports phantom lumber made from the phantom logs. Downstream, construction units get some of the phantom lumber off the books by reporting damage and loss, but also build phantom houses out of phantom lumber. It's crazy, but it is the system.
"My reading of articles about Deliverology so far indicates that it results in a very similar system, where managers face losing their jobs if they cannot meet the targets imposed from above. It actually seems like administrators have more to fear from this than faculty, but it doesn't sound good." - John Edlund
"What makes this [Deliverology] obnoxious is that this presupposes that a degree is a product to be delivered more efficiently. It is not! A degree is something one earns. I understand wanting to make sure we retain students and find new ways to help students earn those degrees in the face of a paucity of resources, but you can not make a demand that a certain percentage of people must get degrees. I can't see how such a demand will not inevitably lead to administrators (and perhaps faculty with enough 'gentle pressure') making more and more concessions on curriculum and rigor." -- Nicholas Van Glahn
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
First Time Visitors
On "Deliverology," in Highlander, UC Riverside's Paper
State universities to adopt 'Deliverology'
By: Shawn Bakshi
Posted: 1/19/10
CSU Chancellor Dr. Charles B. Reed announced earlier this month that the CSU system has adopted a plan to close achievement gaps and raise graduation rates through a system founded and coined by Sir Michael Barber of England: Deliverology. Deliverology was first introduced by Barber during Tony Blair's second term in England in order to improve performance and goal-meeting in the UK's public sector.
This new system focuses on an apparently simple approach to managing accountability and reaching goals set by education officials in the CSU system. In essence, Deliverology seeks to improve education by forcing educators to clarify their goals through identifying problem areas, developing a strategy to improve those areas, and setting up benchmarks in order to monitor their progress.
...
The system is termed Deliverology as the perceived end result of the system is to deliver results on a scale which can be constantly measured.
In England during what some Britons have called "the reign of Sir Barber," Deliverology seemed effective in increasing literacy rates of children 11 and younger. Proponents of this new system also claim that Deliverology will work in the CSU system in the same fashion it did in England's public sector as a main impetus for the program centers on the idea that people want better public services but are rarely willing to pay more for them.
Not everyone is on board with the Chancellor, however, as some CSU professors have voiced their concerns with what they feel may be an arbitrary change to a system which has been in place for so long.
"Deliverology would be a disaster for the CSU… We are coming up with a counter-plan to that of the Chancellor for the CSU system that goes beyond just a critique of Deliverology; a Master White Paper that will set forth, among other things, a very different vision for the CSU system," said California State Polytechnic University, Pomona sociology professor Dennis Loo, according to The Poly Post.
For the rest of the story, see here.
By: Shawn Bakshi
Posted: 1/19/10
CSU Chancellor Dr. Charles B. Reed announced earlier this month that the CSU system has adopted a plan to close achievement gaps and raise graduation rates through a system founded and coined by Sir Michael Barber of England: Deliverology. Deliverology was first introduced by Barber during Tony Blair's second term in England in order to improve performance and goal-meeting in the UK's public sector.
This new system focuses on an apparently simple approach to managing accountability and reaching goals set by education officials in the CSU system. In essence, Deliverology seeks to improve education by forcing educators to clarify their goals through identifying problem areas, developing a strategy to improve those areas, and setting up benchmarks in order to monitor their progress.
...
The system is termed Deliverology as the perceived end result of the system is to deliver results on a scale which can be constantly measured.
In England during what some Britons have called "the reign of Sir Barber," Deliverology seemed effective in increasing literacy rates of children 11 and younger. Proponents of this new system also claim that Deliverology will work in the CSU system in the same fashion it did in England's public sector as a main impetus for the program centers on the idea that people want better public services but are rarely willing to pay more for them.
Not everyone is on board with the Chancellor, however, as some CSU professors have voiced their concerns with what they feel may be an arbitrary change to a system which has been in place for so long.
"Deliverology would be a disaster for the CSU… We are coming up with a counter-plan to that of the Chancellor for the CSU system that goes beyond just a critique of Deliverology; a Master White Paper that will set forth, among other things, a very different vision for the CSU system," said California State Polytechnic University, Pomona sociology professor Dennis Loo, according to The Poly Post.
For the rest of the story, see here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
