If approved, the restraining order would prohibit the two-day strike planned by the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees 3299. According to a statement released by the UC Office of the President on Friday, strikes that pose an imminent threat to public health and safety are illegal under state law, and the university believes the strike would improperly withhold health care from the public.

Dianne Klein, a UC spokesperson, said that if the union cared about patient safety, it would not endanger patients by striking.

“This (strike) is one of their tactics to get what they want, which is a special deal for their workers,” Klein said. “That is not only unfair but fiscally irresponsible.”

The strike comes amid ongoing contract negotiations that began in June 2012. The university proposed a pension reform that would increase contributions toward pension benefits from both the university and employees, but AFSCME 3299 rejected these reforms, arguing that the university is prioritizing pensions over patient care.

According to Todd Stenhouse, spokesperson for AFSCME 3299, the university is prioritizing executive pension benefits instead of adequate patient care and staffing.
“We are seeing the university cut corners in ways that are so dangerous for patients,” said Kathryn Lybarger, president of AFSCME 3299.

AFSCME 3299 has established a Patient Protection Task Force to care for patients during the strike, but that it is something in which the university refuses to participate, according to Stenhouse.

During pension reform negotiations, AFSCME 3299 asked for caps on executive pension benefits, which the university would not discuss, according to Lybarger.

“Right now, these executives are going to retire on upwards of $300,000,” Lybarger said. “That’s a lot of money to live on for doing nothing.”

The university filed a similar restraining order in July 2008 in response to a planned AFSCME 3299 strike. The court approved the restraining order, but the union went ahead with the strike.

“If the court says you are prohibited from striking and they go ahead and do it anyway, they are breaking the law,” Klein said. “We hope there is not a strike. We are prepared for one.”

University Professional and Technical Employees, another UC medical workers union, also held a demonstration Wednesday at the five UC medical centers.

AFSCME 3299 also held a sit-down protest at Wednesday’s UC Board of Regents meeting in Sacramento, resulting in the arrest of 13 demonstrators.

“We are in this fight to win real patient protection,” Lybarger said. “It’s not an option to emerge from this fight without having won real gains for our patients.”

Contact Tara Hurley at thurley@dailycal.org.

The post University of California files for restraining order against union planning strike appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The final resolution passed in a secret ballot by a vote of 20 in favor, 12 against and one abstention after more than five hours of debate and amendments.  The resolution does not divest funds but instead calls for divestment by the UC Board of Regents, which set investment policy for the system.

In a statement responding to the vote, UCSD Chancellor Pradeep Khosla reminded the campus community of the regents’ policy to divest only when the U.S. government acknowledges a state has committed an act of genocide but commended the campus on its civil debate of the divestment issue.

“I am confident that our students will continue to engage in open, balanced and civil dialogue when discussing highly complex world issues that evoke strong feelings and emotions,” Khosla said in the statement.

Wednesday’s resolution is the first to come out of the ASUCSD after more than four years of discussion. In previous years, similar resolutions have failed to pass the council or have been kept from a vote entirely.

“This year, we’ve been planning for it all year,” said ASUCSD president Meggie Le. “We spent about five hours striking any clause that could be political.”

Some senators, however, were upset by the content of the meeting. ASUCSD Senators Brad Segal and Shazzy Gustafson resigned in protest following the meeting.

“While I am inspired by students who proudly stand up for their convictions, in passing this resolution our student government unequivocally demonstrated that it does not speak for me, the Jewish community, nor the UC San Diego student body as a whole,” said Segal in his letter of resignation.

At one point during Wednesday’s meeting, the original resolution was split into two parts, one calling for divestment of UC funds and the other recognizing the effects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on student life.

“I think those two resolutions would have been a great compromise,” Le said. “(The second) validates the narrative of both Israeli and Palestinian students on campus. But right now, we have a lot of upset students.”

The split resolutions, however, were tabled until the following week, and the final vote passed the original resolution in its entirety.

The ASUCSD’s vote follows earlier resolutions by other student governments nationwide in favor of divestment. Last week, students at UC Riverside passed a similar resolution, and in 2012, the Associated Students of UC Irvine also voted to support divestment.

A divestment bill was also passed at UC Berkeley in 2010 but was then vetoed. A subsequent vote to overrule the veto failed to pass.

Jacob Brown is the lead higher education reporter. Contact him at jbrown@dailycal.org and follow him on Twitter @jacobebrown.

The post UC San Diego student government calls on UC Regents to divest appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The extension of the $60 surcharge passed despite criticism that it was funding the costs of a settlement incurred when a court ruled the university had inappropriately raised tuition on students for the 2003-04 academic year. With the extension, the surcharge — which was first enacted in the 2007-08 school year — will now last through the 2017-18 academic year.

“The university lost a lawsuit against students and made them pay for it,” said Student Regent Jonathan Stein at the meeting.

The regents should have found an internal mechanism to pay for the costs of the lawsuits instead of putting the burden of payment on students, he said.

Students from the university’s professional schools filed class-action lawsuits against the university in 2003 and 2010, and in both cases, the court determined that the UC system raised tuition without adequately warning affected students. In total, the litigation process cost the university nearly $100 million, according to UC spokesperson Dianne Klein.

Since UC insurance did not cover the lawsuit, the university had to rely on students to fund the settlement, Klein said.

“I don’t think this is right,” said UC Regent Eddie Island. “Students are being asked to pick up the surcharge for a lawsuit with no benefit.”

When Stein and Island drew issue with extending the surcharge, UC President Mark Yudof said that students would end up paying for the lawsuits in an indirect form even without the surcharge.

“I don’t know what to say,” Yudof said. “Where would you have us take the money?”

Nathan Brostrom, executive vice president of UC business operations, lauded the regents’ decision to be candid with students about the fees.

“This is actually a hallmark of transparency, to show what it is and that it will be paid off,” Brostrom said.

While he acknowledged the funds could have come from cuts to UC programs, he said that that would have come at the expense of the quality of UC services.

According to UC Regent Richard Blum, university officials made a mistake by pursuing costly litigation and should have settled the case.

The extension will expire when the costs of the second lawsuit, Luquetta v. Regents of the University of California, are fully paid off. The first lawsuit, Kashmiri v. Regents of the University of California, is set to be paid off this school year. As per UC policy, 33 percent of the fees collected from the extension of the surcharge on professional students will go toward financial aid.

“Let’s face it, this is ugly,” Klein said. “Nobody likes this. (The university) felt strongly that we were in the right — that’s why we went through all the appeals. And guess what, we lost.”

Contact Jeremy Gordon and Libby Rainey at newdesk@dailycal.org.

The post Regents vote to extend tuition surcharge appeared first on The Daily Californian.

10:48 a.m.

And, that’s a wrap. The UC Regents have adjourned their meeting.

10:47 a.m.

The regents move to adopt the criteria for the selection of the next UC President.

10:45 a.m.

President Mark Yudof is delivering his address, noting the various awards UC faculty have recently won.

10:42 a.m.

Without any questions, the regents bring the Committee on Compliance and Audit to an end. The regents will close out the day with a general meeting of the board.

10:29 a.m.

“Social media can be very viral and negative for our organization…We have to be even more responsive and expedient” #UCRegents

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

10:26 a.m.

“Every given year that we add a freshman class, about 20% of those students are younger than 18, minors” discussing risk of minors for #UC

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

10:24 a.m.

Speaker says UC is trying to move from reactive responses to risks to proactive and preventative action, such as promoting ethical conduct

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

10:14 a.m.

The board moves on to the next item: Ethics and Compliance Annual Board Education.

10:07 a.m.

After the conclusion of presentations from various lab representatives, the regents move on to the Committee on Compliance and Audit.

9:34 a.m.

Committee on Finance ends, moving on to the Committee on Oversight of DOE labs.

9:33 a.m.

I think students will win this one. My best guess — UC will agree to drop the caps in the coming months.

— UC Student Regent (@UCStudentRegent) March 14, 2013

9:32 a.m.

Back at Regents meeting today @ UCSF. Students at public comment called for elimination of lifetime caps in UC student health insurance.

— UC Student Regent (@UCStudentRegent) March 14, 2013

9:19 a.m.

Regents approve temporary surcharge on students. Now moving on to discuss benchmarks for financial metrics.

9:12 a.m.

UC President Mark Yudof notes that wherever the cost of the lawsuit is pulled out of the University of California, students will pay either directly or indirectly.

9:08 a.m.

“I think we’ve handled the situation very poorly to be honest,” said UC Student Regent Jonathan Stein registering his opposition to the surcharge.

9:06 a.m.

And, moving through quickly the regents complete the Committee on Compensation to move to the COmmittee on Finance.

9:00 a.m.

Public comment comes to a close. The regents move on to the Committee on Compensation.

9:00 a.m.

UC Berkeley sophomore says UC is a leader in sustainability, asks to put fossil fuel divestment on UC Regents May meeting agenda.

ASUC Senator Nolan Pack speaks about ASUC’s recent decision to divest from fossil fuels.

8:53 a.m.

Johnson,who has worked for UC for over twenty years, says, “When I came here it was about patient care it wasn’t about dollars…”#UCRegents

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

8:49 a.m.

President of AFSCME 3299 Kathryn Lybarger speaking about report that alleges patient neglect at UC medical centers.

8:46 a.m.

CalSERVE senator @nolanpack is present at #UCRegents meeting, appears to be waiting to speak in public comment

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

8:43 a.m.

Students wear shirts that read, “We > Fossil Fuels,” will speak in public comment urging UC divestment in fossil fuel companies #UCRegents

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

8:40 a.m.

UCB student shares stories about how UC Ship has affected UC students — anonymous students struggling with minimal health coverage, he says

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 14, 2013

8:40 a.m.

Twenty seven individuals have signed up to participate in today’s public comment session.

8:38. a.m.

UC Regent Chairperson Sherry Lansing calls the meeting the order and begins the public comment session.

Curan Mehra is the executive news editor. Contact him at cmehra@dailycal.org.

The post Live Blog: UC Regents conclude March meeting appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The social media project, Promise Platform, aims to raise money by encouraging students, faculty members and alumni to start their own UC fundraising campaigns by utilizing their social networks to generate funds and promote the UC system. The program is expected to launch by Oct. 1, 2013.

“A student could promise to dye their hair purple if their friends help them raise $1,000 to support scholarships,” said  Daniel Dooley, UC vice president of external relations. “Steve Wozniak could agree to use a PC instead of a Mac for a month if his friends help him raise $50,000 for the university.”

The regents also heard updates on the Working Smarter initiative, an administrative-efficiency program that has saved more than $200 million and raised more than $89 million in additional funds as of July 2012. The program is ahead of schedule to meet its $500 million goal by 2015.

Additionally, the regents voted to support two housing projects at UC Santa Barbara and an academic building for the UCLA David Geffen School of Medicine as well as UC Merced’s design for a new long-term development plan.

Before returning to a closed session, the regents heard presentations from the UC fundraising campaign Onward California and UC Berkeley professor Catherine Cole, who spoke about the Fiat Lux Redux exhibit at UC Berkeley.

In the afternoon, the regents held closed sessions on collective bargaining matters, campus security and pending litigation.

They also discussed developments in appealed court decisions that either involved the UC system or had implications for UC policy. Cases included Felarca et al. v. Birgeneau, a case surrounding the arrest of students attending the Occupy Cal protests of Nov. 9 at UC Berkeley, and Baker et al. v. Katehi, a case relating to the use of high-concentration pepper spray on students by campus police at UC Davis.

The Special Committee to Consider the Selection of a President also met for the third time in a joint closed session with the rest of the regents. The committee discussed selection criteria for the next UC president and its “relationship to potential candidates.”

The Committee on Compliance and Audit met in the last session of the day. Committee members approved the external audit plan for the year ending June 30, 2013, and discussed restructuring of UC debt. On Tuesday, the UC finance office completed a bond repurchase that is expected to save $200 million in future costs.

Contact Alex Berryhill and Jacob Brown at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post UC Regents discuss fundraising, capital projects at meeting in San Francisco appeared first on The Daily Californian.

4:20 p.m.

March’s meeting of the #UCRegents has recessed for the day. Tune in tomorrow for the remainder of the meeting.

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

3:18 p.m.

Executive Vice President of Business Operations Nathan Brostrom and Chief Financial Officer Peter Taylor update the Committee of Audit and Compliance on the UCPATH Initiative.

11:38 a.m.

The regents will now meet in closed session until this afternoon’s open meeting of the Committee on Audit and Compliance.

11:35 a.m.

#OnwardCA campaign hopes to illustrate all the ways UC affects Californian’s everyday to garner increased private support. #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

11:28 a.m.

Onward California videos can be found on YouTube at tinyurl.com/c3bevgg. #UCRegents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

11:24 a.m.

UC to promote private donations with new promotional videos from #OnwardCA. #UCRegents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

11:22 a.m.

#OnwardCA‘s video on UC researchers being presented at #UCRegents meeting

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

11:21 a.m.

#UCRegents hear a presentation from UC Berkeley professor Catherine Cole on the Fiat Lux Project

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

11:02 a.m.

Regents now moving to hear presentations of faculty of research.

11:01 a.m.

Student Regents are supportive. We’ve asked UC to think creatively about bringing new $ to UC (instead ofstudent tuition) for long time.

— UC Student Regent (@UCStudentRegent) March 13, 2013

11:00 a.m.

Board of Regents chuckles at different ideas for gaining social media’s support, like wearing rainbow wigs at the next meeting. #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

10:57 a.m.

Gov. Brown jokes that he will do a duet for the social media initiative.#UCregents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

10:56 a.m.

UC can’t rely on the state, said Lansing. Social media initiative is part of UCs efforts to find financial stability. #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

10:53 a.m.

The program is expected to launch on Oct. 1 2013, according to Senior Vice President Daniel Dooley.

10:52 a.m.

The platform will be UC owned. Will be re-purposable for individual UC campuses. #UCregents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

10:51 a.m.

“Steve Wozniak could agree to use a PC instead of a Mac for a month if his friends help him raise 50,000 for the university” #UCregents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

10:51 a.m.

Students would make promises (dye hair, ride a bike long distance) to raise money from friends for the UC. #UCRegents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

10:46 a.m.

The program will seek to engage young alumni and students through social media in order to encourage them to help raise money for the scholarships at the UC. The UC will be working with the Entertainment Industry Foundation that will assist in seeking out celebrity support and corporate sponsors.

10:44 a.m.

The meeting recovenes. The faculty presenters have yet to arrive, so the committee will move to discuss systemwide social fundraising.

10:23 a.m.

The Committee on Finance concludes. Awaiting the arrival of the next presenters, the regents will take a short break.

10:16 a.m.

Working Smarter has focused particularly on lab safety, success is “something to pop champagne on,” said Brostrom #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

10:15 a.m.

Campuses enthusiastic for Working Smarter, “Give us the tools, and we will drive the value,” said Brostrom of campus’ attitudes. #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

10:07 a.m.

#UCRegents agenda: “Working Smarter is…collaborating today with its sister systemwide efficiency initiative at the CSU system, Synergy”

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 13, 2013

10:05 a.m.

There are 34 Working Smarter projects underway. Most of the savings have come from Enterprise Risk Management – $150 million in two years.

10:00 a.m.

Here’s the agenda item with details on the Working Smarter initiative.

9:58 a.m.

Regents discuss Working Smarter Initiative, five year committment to steamline operation and build sustainable financial model#UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

9:56 a.m.

Morales completes her speech and without questions, the regents move on to the Committee on Finance.

9:55 a.m.

On online education, Morales says students support a hybrid model in which online learning supplements an in-class education.

9:54 a.m.

Students are concerned about #UCShip deficit, says Morales. Requests that #UCOP pays for deficit with emergency or discretionary funds

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 13, 2013

9:53 a.m.

Morales begins discussing UC SHIP and asks the regents to lift the lifetime caps on coverage.

“These caps do not reflect the values of our university and should be lifted immediately,” she said.

9:52 a.m.

Morales says @_ucsa is against Governor Brown’s proposed unit cap #UCRegents meeting

— Libby Rainey (@rainey_l) March 13, 2013

9:51 a.m.

Morales calls for increased state funding to UC and a tuition freeze for both undergraduate and graduate students.

9:50 a.m.

UC Student Association President Raquel Morales begins addressing the regents. She will discuss student concerns including issues regarding UC SHIP.

9:49 a.m.

UCLA project funded by gifts raised by campus and will advance funds from the medical center #UCRegents

— Alex (@berryhill93) March 13, 2013

9:48 a.m.

The regents approve the construction of the center.

9:41 a.m.

Currently, the regents are looking over design plans for the Teaching and Learning Center. Below is a rendering of what the building will look like.

9:36 a.m.

The motion to approve the budget is carried. The regents will now discuss the construction of the Teaching and Learning Center for Health Sciences at UCLA.

9:34 a.m.

The regents move to approve the preliminary funding for the San Joaquin apartments. Now moving onto the approval of the budget for the Sierra Madre apartments also at the Santa Barbara campus.

9:31 a.m.

Like UC Merced, UC Santa Barbara will use the facilities to support it’s growing student body. The campus has been working toward developing community support from a number of parties including environmental groups

9:27 a.m.

The UC Regents moves on to the request for funding for the preliminary plans for the San Joaquin apartments on the UC Santa Barbara campus.

9:27 a.m.

Hello from the Regents meeting @ UCSF. I will provide occasional updates at facebook.com/UCStudentRegent. Nothing majorly controversial on agenda.

— UC Student Regent (@UCStudentRegent) March 13, 2013

9:24 a.m.

Regents ask UC Merced Chancellor Dorothy Leland to check in regularly on the future of the plan.

9:16 a.m.

The current #UCMerced development plan can be found at tinyurl.com/avog92b. #UCRegents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

9:13 a.m.

Chancellor Leland notes the intense collaborate effort that went on between the campus and the university in developing this plan.

9:13 a.m.

#UCMerced growing at more than 500 students per year and unless facilities are built, enrollment could flatline. #UCRegents

— Jacob Brown (@jacobebrown) March 13, 2013

9:12 a.m.

UC Merced Chancellor Dorothy Leland speaking about growing the campus’ capacity by improving and expanding facilities.

9:07 a.m.

The meeting of the Committee on Grounds and Buildings has started.

9:01 a.m.

Public comment comes to a close and Sherry Lansing recognizes Bob Powell, Chair of the Academic Senate.

8:48 a.m.

Yudof concludes his remarks and the public comment session begins.

8:42 a.m.

UC President Mark Yudof makes a few comments on the a number of issues including ongoing plans at UC Merced as well as his concerns regarding the UC SHIP deficit.

8:40 a.m.

The search committee to select the next UC president has met twice already according to Lansing. Lansing said interested parties to universityofcalifornia.edu where they can take part in the process.

8:29 a.m.

Chairperson Sherry Lansing calls the UC Regents meeting to order.

Curan Mehra is the executive news editor. Contact him at cmehra@dailycal.org.

The post Live Blog: UC Regents begin two-day meeting appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Of the 320 students enrolled in “The Beauty and Joy of Computing,” the 60 students taking the course online consistently underperformed compared to the in-class students.

Garcia spent months transferring his course to an online platform, filming his course in high definition so his lecture videos would be of optimal quality, offering online versions of labs and working with instructional designers to adapt his course to the online format. But he came to the eventual conclusion that students would be better served taking his class where it was originally offered: in the classroom.

“This is an experiment,” Garcia said. “After courses run their first lot and maybe make some changes to the course, I would hope that each course goes back to the drawing board and fixes itself.”

Garcia finds himself in a similar place as other faculty members participating in the UC Online pilot program — a systemwide effort aimed at expanding the university’s online education offerings — as professors face the pains that come with developing and experimenting with online education.

Over the past few months, online education has garnered significant support. Both Gov. Jerry Brown and the UC Regents have publicly pushed for greater investment in online course development, citing great financial potential. Brown allocated $10 million to online education in his proposed budget.

But despite plans for heavy investment in online development, courses offered since UC Online’s launch have seen mixed results.

Garcia attributed his online students’ underperformance to a lack of accountability. Online students were “cramming” online course material right before exams instead of showing up to online lectures and discussions with the same frequency as the other students, he said.

Like Garcia, UC Berkeley assistant professor Brian Carver — who taught “An Introduction to Information” online this fall — struggled to engage online students. He spent two years developing a new course only to see enrollment drop nearly 25 percent over the course of the semester.

While Carver thinks it is possible for an online course to be as engaging as an in-person course, he has yet to see the online platform that delivers it.

“The time it took to develop this course took so much more time for me (than) to develop an in-person course that I’m not currently looking to develop anymore,” Carver said.

According to UC Online Interim Director Keith Williams, professors for UC Online work with instructional designers to create their courses. Online classes can have synchronous discussion sections and video-chat sequences or video-based lectures that allow students to go more at their own pace, and much of this structure is at the professor’s discretion.

“All of the courses we have developed, we have developed with the intent of running again and again,” Williams said. “Our goal is for these to be regular offerings and to be offered more than once. For a lot of the faculty, it is an experiment because they haven’t done it before. That’s where the instructional designer (comes in).”

After his first effort with online education, Garcia is now working to develop his course by creating more landmarks that require students to keep up with lectures and assignments, such as regular quizzing. He said that the available online platforms lacked analytics, tools with which he could observe students’ online activity, but quizzes may be a way around these limitations.

UCLA professor Susanne Lohmann eliminated the lecture from her UC online course, “Diversity, Disagreement and Democracy,” altogether, instead opting for game-based learning in which students participate in quizzes and answer questions and then analyze the data that the games elicit. Lohmann said the course structure allowed her students opportunities to interact with the class material that would not have been possible in a lecture hall.

“Her online class was completely different than what I expected,” said Andrew Litt, a senior at UCLA who took Lohmann’s course. “I personally don’t really think (recorded lectures) work well because (they’re) boring … but in professor Lohmann’s class, you play games and learn about how people think and reason, and in an online setting, that worked really, really well.”

Following positive student feedback, Lohmann plans on offering the course again in UCLA’s spring quarter.

Williams said he expects a systemwide meeting involving campuses and UC Online to take place in April. The regents have already discussed the possibility of having undergraduates take four online courses in their first two years in the UC system — a feat that the UC Office of the President estimates would require at least 137 high-enrollment online courses from both UC Online and campus-specific efforts.

Currently, UC Online is piloting two new UC Berkeley courses — “American Cybercultures: Principles of Internet Citizenship” and “Intro to Probability and Statistics for Business” — for the spring semester. UC Online plans to add approximately 20 new courses at the beginning of the 2013-14 school year, according to the UC Office of the President.

“Right now, we are at baby steps,” Garcia said. “But through experimentation and the UC online program, I think we can really (create) an amazing experience.”

Libby Rainey covers higher education. Contact her at lrainey@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @rainey_l.

The post Professors see varying success in online courses appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Our conversation at the regents meeting failed to address the substantial differences between online education efforts currently under way at the university. Examining those differences provides a convenient way to articulate what students do and do not support and to illustrate where this university should spend the $10 million the governor has put in his proposed budget for the development of online education at the UC system.

Online education at the campus level — as it has been developed at UC Berkeley, UCLA and other UC campuses — has been geared first and foremost toward teaching students better. Instead of having 400 students sit in a lecture hall listening to a professor speak, for example, some classes at Berkeley now allow those 400 students to view the lecture online before coming to class and then use class time working in small groups with GSIs. Homework done online presents other interesting opportunities — educational software can immediately detect where a student is struggling and provide him with additional instruction, tips and customized follow-up assignments. Data on student performance can be sent to a professor so she can track in real time where content is being learned and where it is not.

This “blended learning” model of online education has been proven at the UC system and elsewhere to result in higher student test scores and higher completion rates. Developing the technologies that make blended learning possible won’t make teaching cheaper, but dramatically lower drop rates might save money in the future as fewer students have to repeat classes.

The intent of faculty members developing online education projects at Berkeley and other UC campuses is to supplement, not replace, the in-classroom experience. And their goal is better educational outcomes, not saving money (by lowering educational costs or firing GSIs) or making money (by selling Berkeley content to non-Berkeley students). The statewide student government of the university, the UC Student Association, recently issued a statement in support of online education of this kind. I support it as well.

Unfortunately, this is not the version of online education that was discussed at the regents meeting. What was discussed at the regents meeting was a hodgepodge of goals and ambitions. The university’s online efforts would: expose people across the world with no access to higher education institutions to the wonders of higher learning; enable high school students and community college students to take online classes for credit and thus arrive at the university with credits in their pockets; put 10 percent of every UC student’s education entirely online; put two years of a UC education entirely online; and enable the university to save money or make money in such enormous amounts that it would bridge that gap between what the governor can provide in state appropriations and what the university needs to be fully funded.

The discussion was not grounded in the good work of campus-based efforts. We are left not knowing the goals the UC Office of the President, the central administration of the university, has for online education. Will the university seek to save money by providing partially or fully online classes to students or make money by providing partially or fully online classes to non-UC students? Is there any reason to expect these goals are achievable, given that elite universities nationwide are putting classes online for free? Does the university have a business model, and should we have one before we begin to invest millions of dollars?

There are benefits to using online education to make the UC system more accessible, of course. It may enable differentlyabled students, students with dependents and students working full-time jobs to take classes at locations and at times that are convenient for them. If students can come to the university with a number of credits already earned, they can spend less time paying tuition. And it may democratize the world’s knowledge and expand the economic opportunities of millions for whom a college degree is out of reach.

But in order to realize these benefits, the university must first identify what its intentions are, what values will drive it, and what its business model is. Rushing ahead without these decisions in place would not be responsible. As the UC system tries to make these decisions, we should look to our campus-based online education efforts, where we may already have all the role models we need.

Jonathan Stein is the UC student regent.

Contact the opinion desk at opinion@dailycal.org.

The post Online education: proceed with caution appeared first on The Daily Californian.

At the meeting, Brown, an ex-officio regent, suggested further fiscal discipline to make up for shortfalls in state funding. His proposals included reducing students average graduation time, lowering administrators’ compensation and decreasing faculty benefits.

Brown assumed an unusually active role in the financial committee’s discussion, at one point quoting Cicero’s “On the Republic” to describe the university’s current fiscal situation as part of a larger class conflict between the “elites and the plebeians.”

In response to the governor’s request for further fiscal discipline, Regent Richard Blum pointed out that UC faculty and executives continue to have significantly lower salaries than their counterparts at private universities — a trend that Blum said will “only result in the UC becoming a junior college.”

“You have to ask yourself, do you want the UC’s campuses to be as good as they have always been?” Blum said.

California Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, warned the regents that Brown’s budget proposal is unlikely to pass if Sacramento’s demand for stable tuition levels is not met.

“If the discussion with the members of Legislature has the same tones as present here, I do not think you will be successful with the outcomes you want” Perez said. “Over the last several years there have been 900 million in cuts. Fee increases have been 1.4 billion. The fee increases are disproportionate to the disinvestment of the state.

According to Regent Sherry Lansing, current chair of the board, increasing tuition for certain graduate programs remained a possibility for dealing with fiscal difficulties — a statement that drew sharp criticism from  Student Regent Jonathan Stein and Perez. Still, she said, undergraduate tuition increases in the 2013-14 school year are highly unlikely.

Lansing praised the president and speaker for facilitating “healthy discourse,” which she said is productive in helping find alternative sources of revenue to state appropriations.

Contact Alex Berryhill and Shirin Ghaffary at newsdesk@dailycal.org.

The post UC Regents voice concern over budget demands appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The funding ratio — a measure of the program’s financial health — fell from 81 percent to 77 percent between July 2011 and June 2012.

Anemic investment returns have only exacerbated the problem. Across all UC retirement plans, the return on investments was only 0.8 percent last year, compared to 20.5 percent the year before.

Troubles with the UC Retirement Plan follow the decision to suspend employee pension contributions from 1990 to 2010 because the fund appeared to have a surplus.

The plan now faces a roughly $11 billion unfunded liability as employee contributions have yet to catch up to the cost of benefits, creating an ever-widening funding gap.

Due to the plan’s massive size, its woes have begun to weigh heavily on the university’s financial health at large.

“Changes in the pensions and retirement are really the tail that wags the bulldog of the university,” said Nathan Brostrom, UC executive vice president for business operations.

But proposals to increase employee or employer contributions in order to improve the plan’s health have seen huge pushback from unions and campuses alike.

In October, UC Berkeley Chief Financial Officer Erin Gore said increasing employer contribution rates would place an even greater fiscal burden on the campus in an already difficult time.

At Thursday’s meeting, the regents also discussed potential changes to the methodology for analyzing the financial health of their plan.

To determine how much of a pension plan is funded, actuaries estimate how much the plan will pay out in benefits in the future and then discount that number based on various factors.

The choice of discount rate can have a huge impact on the apparent size of the unfunded liability — the amount the university will owe that the plan has not accounted for.

The art of selecting a discount rate mirrors Goldilocks’ dilemma: If actuaries choose too high of a discount rate, they may mask the unfunded liability; and if they choose too low of a discount rate, their analysis may produce a deceptively large unfunded liability.

The trick is choosing just the right rate.

The university’s choice of a discount rate has come under fire from all sides with some parties, like a group of UC San Francisco nurses calling for a higher discount rate, and others, like former secretary of treasury George Shultz and former chairma of the Federal Reserve Paul Volcker, calling for a much lower one.

During the public comment session of the meeting at UC San Francisco, Erin Carrera, a nurse at UC San Francisco, made reference to an independently prepared actuarial report that used a higher discount rate, reducing the apparent unfunded liability by $1 billion. Under this plan, there would be far less need to increase contribution rates.

But Brostrom said he remained comfortable with the university’s choice of discount rate because it remained in line with a long-term rate of return on investments.

Still, UC President Mark Yudof appeared open to having the administration consider all proposals.

“I want you to read this material, think about it (and) respond,” he told UC Chief Financial Officer Peter Taylor. “Treat that extremely seriously.”

Curan Mehra is the lead higher education reporter. Contact him at cmehra@dailycal.org.

The post UC employees debate finances of retirement plan appeared first on The Daily Californian.