In the Academic Senate letter transmitting this decision to the Chancellor, it is reported that “the MBA proposal in particular revealed significant and deep divisions of opinion within the Senate faculty regarding the advisability of converting programs, and in particular a ‘cornerstone’ program, to self-supporting status. The AGSM faculty voted overwhelmingly in favor of the proposal, the school’s FEC voted narrowly in favor, the Council on Planning and Budget provided an overall positive opinion, and a majority of Graduate Council members were opposed. The bylaws of the Senate specify that the Graduate Council’s opinion is final on new degree programs.” [Leuchter to Block 4-10-12].
Below are links at which you can read the Anderson proposal for the self supporting MBA and the Graduate Council’s negative decision. As the quote above suggests, there is a tendency for outside reviewers and observers to view the Anderson proposal in symbolic terms, i.e., as part of the gradual withdrawal of public support for the academic core of UC and its replacement by tuition. The Graduate Council’s decision was reported as “3 members voted in favor, 7 were opposed, 2 abstained, and 1 registered a ‘no vote’ (7 members were absent); GSA Representatives: 3 were opposed (1 was absent).”
The Anderson faculty seems to be about 2/3 in favor of the proposal and 1/3 against – but less on symbolic grounds and more on the evaluation of the plan’s internal pros and cons and its assumptions.
The Anderson MBA Proposal is at:
The Graduate Council Report on the Proposal is at:
Note: The document above was extracted by cutting and pasting from a larger pdf file and so may not have the same formatting as the original. Its wording is the same as the original.