College Guide
Blog
California’s facing a big fight in the legislature over the fees community colleges are planning to charge for online courses. The problem first came about in June after a student at Foothill Community College demanded a refund for the extra $78 he had to pay for an online math class, in addition to the $85 he had to pay just to register for the class.
That’s because under state law any fees for instruction must result in “tangible personal property.” The $75 fee was illegal because it merely allowed students to access material for a semester; they couldn’t download the material for future reference.
And so California tried to change the law. It’s not working out so well. According to an article by Nanette Asimov in the San Francisco Chronicle:
Efforts to quickly legalize student access fees for community college cyber-classes - fees that are banned by state law but which may be rampant across California campuses - have hit a snag in the state Capitol.
Darrell Steinberg, president pro tem of the state Senate, has strongly criticized a recent recommendation by a community college task force to change state law to permit such fees, which are charged by publishers capitalizing on the explosive popularity of online courses. The problem, he told community college leaders, is that the group met behind closed doors, was heavily weighted with publishers, and failed to disclose conflicts of interest.
That’s because the fees essentially cover the cost of accessing proprietary software. While this software is arguably better, since it’s often capable of providing instant feedback on learning, it’s not necessarily better than open source, free online curricula. Many legislators argue that’s precisely the sort of resources California community colleges should use. They should not be charging students extra to use material produced and sold by publishers.
Facebook
Twitter
Milan Moravec on August 12, 2011 12:08 AM:
Chancellors, Faculty University of California Berkeley (UC Berkeley) have cleaned up at the expense of students, California taxpayers. Californians face mortgage defaults, 12% unemployment, pay reductions, loss of unemployment benefits. UC Berkeley shares sacrifices? No Chancellor, Faculty layoffs or wage concessions. UC Berkeley tuition, fee increases are arrogance. If wages better elsewhere, chancellors, vice chancellors, tenured, non tenured faculty, UCOP apply for positions. If wages are what commit you to Cal, leave for better paying job.
UC Berkeley wages must reflect California's ability to pay, not what others are paid. There is no good reason to raise tuition, fees during the longest, deepest recession in USA history when wage concessions available from Chancellors, Faculty. The sky will not fall on UC Berkeley.
Share the sacrifices UC Berkeley Faculty, Vice Chancellors, Provost, Chancellor:
No furloughs.
18 percent reduction in UCOP salaries & $50 million cut.
18 percent prune of campus chancellors', vice chancellors' salaries.
15 percent trim of tenured faculty salaries, increase teaching load.
10 percent decrease non-tenured faculty salaries, increase research, teaching load.
100% elimination of all Academic Senate, Academic Council costs, wages.
(17,000 UC paid employees earn more than $100,000)
UC Board of Regents Chair Sherry Lansing can bridge public trust gap with reassurances salaries of Chancellors, Faculty reflect depressed California wages.
With UC�s shared sacrifices, sky will not fall on the 10 campuses.
pQuincy on August 12, 2011 7:45 AM:
Mr. Moravec, while it's quite possible that more efficiency is possible at Berkeley and other UC campuses, how is it that those who celebrate "the market" and "free markets", and who demand that taxes be cut or kept at very low level, don't see that there is also a market for academic researchers and leaders? The problem is that tenured and untenured faculty, and skilled administrators and staff at the UC campuses, ARE applying for and taking other positions -- and unlike your fantasy world, losing top researchers and skilled staff DOES harm the quality of the University. Morever, your demands for more cuts cuts cuts ignores that the university has been cutting already for over 10 years. Starting with the 2000-2001 recession, the state began cutting support to the UC system, and now provides LESS THAN HALF the dollars per student that it did 15 years ago. Cuts are everywhere, already, yet you want to cut another 20%?
Why would Chainsaw Al Dunlop's plan -- cut all the expensive employees -- work any better at a University than it worked at Sunbeam. Why would the Circuit City ploy -- lay off the salespeople with experience and keep the ones willing to work for minimum wage -- work any better for Berkeley?
The idea that steep cuts in administrators' and faculty salaries, while also increasing the teaching load, would not have any effects is simply silly. The best teachers and the most successful researchers would be those most likely and most able to leave, after all, leaving the less productive. Your plan is a prescription for destroying something that California built up over 50 years.
Adenakevin on August 10, 2012 3:20 AM:
I am impressed by the quality of information on this website. There are a lot of good resources here. I am sure I will visit this place again soon.
• Very useful info. Hope to see more posts soon!