The Stages of Admission at UC-Irvine

As word spreads of UC-Irvine's admissions boo-boo, the admissions officers seem to be going through stages. Yours truly has created a model:

The stages of admission at UC-Irvine (with apologies to Kübler-Ross):

• Denial – The first reaction is denial. In this stage individuals believe the diagnosis that they won't get away with denying admissions due to over-enrollment is somehow mistaken, and cling to a false, preferable reality.

• Anger – When the individual recognizes that denial cannot continue, they become frustrated, especially at proximate individuals. Certain psychological responses of a person undergoing this phase would be: But they didn't submit the right transcript

• Bargaining – The third stage involves the hope that the individual can avoid a cause of grief. Next year we'll do it better.

• Depression – "I'm so sad, why bother with anything?" We don't have space for them. In this state, the individual may become silent, refuse new interview, and spend much of the time mournful and sullen.

• Acceptance – "It's going to be okay." We'll find room. In this last stage, individuals embrace the inevitable future.

So can we just get on with it?

===
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2017/07/apparently-adults-in-room-at-uc-irvines.html

https://www.insidehighered.com/admissions/article/2017/07/31/uc-irvine-faces-criticism-after-revoking-hundreds-admissions-offers

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/07/27/uci-rescinds-500-admission-offers-student-leaders-demand-apology/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2017/07/31/u-c-irvine-faces-criticism-after-rescinding-499-admissions-offers-two-months-before-start-of-school/

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/29/us/uc-irvine-acceptance-rejected.html

http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uc-irvine-rescissions-20170728-story.html

http://www.sfgate.com/news/education/article/UC-Irvine-pulls-500-fall-admission-offers-11618842.php

Competition for ASUCLA

Closed

The venerable Sears store in Santa Monica - shown in the picture - is now shuttered, thanks to the changing nature of retail.

An interesting question is what may happen to ASUCLA's store, as it competes for business in textbooks and other products with the internet. The Bruin reports that Amazon is opening up a store in Westwood that will provide quick pickups for items ordered from Amazon, which is competing in the textbook market:

Students can now receive textbook orders from Amazon within a day at Westwood Village’s latest offering. Amazon opened a staffed pickup location Tuesday on Westwood Boulevard. Members of Amazon Prime and Prime Student receive free same-day pickup on items they ship to this location if they place their orders before noon, said Carly Golden, an Amazon spokesperson. Golden said the location also features a device station, where people can try out Amazon products like the Kindle, the Fire TV Stick and the Echo. Customers can also return items purchased online at the location.

“Amazon is a huge presence in all of our lives,” said Andrew Thomas, executive director of the Westwood Village Improvement Association. “A brick-and-mortar location will be a great presence in our community.”

Golden said this is the 21st staffed pickup location Amazon has opened near a college campus. Other campus locations include UC Berkeley, UC Davis, the University of Texas at Austin and the University of Pennsylvania...

Full story at http://dailybruin.com/2017/07/29/amazon-opens-location-in-westwood-with-added-benefits-for-prime-members/

Ban the Box at UC

UC is changing its hiring policy to remove barriers to opportunity

UC is making a change to avoid discouraging qualified previously incarcerated people from applying to work at UC.

Under UC’s new policy, which will begin as early as October, applicants will no longer be asked to check a box on the initial employment application indicating whether they have been convicted of a crime. Instead, information about prior convictions will be requested during the background and reference check stage, after applicants have advanced to the final stage in the hiring process based on their qualifications, talents and skills.

UC conducts background checks on all job finalists for staff positions. Employment offers are made after a qualified person successfully passes an overall background check for the position. If a job applicant has a prior conviction, human resources staff will carefully assess the type of conviction, when it occurred and its relevance to the position.

“This change to UC’s hiring process creates more opportunity for more qualified and capable people. Many have earned UC degrees after their legal difficulties and they should be able to continue to build a successful, stable future for themselves,” said Dwaine B. Duckett, UC’s vice president of systemwide human resources.

The Underground Scholars Initiative and “ban the box” movement

The policy change grew out of a discussion initiated by the systemwide Underground Scholars Initiative, which started as a UC Berkeley advocacy group supporting formerly incarcerated Berkeley students. The Underground Scholars played a key role in a similar policy change at UC Berkeley last year, as part of a nationwide movement known as “ban the box.”

Clarence Ford, now a graduate student at UC Berkeley’s Goldman School of Public Policy, and Rodrigo “Froggy” Vazquez, a recent UC Berkeley graduate, spearheaded the "Ban the Box" campaign as part of the Underground Scholars policy team. They worked with UC Human Resources (HR) to help them understand the discouraging message that the prior conviction checkbox on an initial application can send to a formerly incarcerated person — don’t even bother to apply.

“The thought of checking that box on every application — before I had a chance to show what I had to offer — used to make me very pessimistic about the future,” Ford said. “This decision by UC HR is a real victory in our work to increase opportunities for people impacted by the criminal justice system.”

Source: https://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/uc-changing-its-hiring-policy-remove-barriers-opportunity

The Return

Linda P.B. Katehi, who resigned last year as UC Davis chancellor after months of controversy, will return as a distinguished professor in September at the same pay rate she received as campus leader, university officials said Friday.

Katehi will be paid $318,000 on a nine-month contract – when annualized, equivalent to the $424,000 salary she received as chancellor. She will teach electrical and computer engineering, as well as women and gender studies, according to a UC Davis bio.

Her salary appears to make her the highest paid faculty member in either department, based on the most recent UC salary data available to the public.

“If she gets a summer research contract, she will essentially make the same amount as a (chancellor), and that is not typical,” said James Finkelstein, a George Mason University professor and an expert on university executive pay...

Full story at http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/education/article164312277.html

Unfortunately, the galaxy where this occurred is not far away

Thanks to Sandy Jacoby for spotting this item:

Predatory Journals Hit By ‘Star Wars’ Sting

By Neuroskeptic | July 22, 2017

A number of so-called scientific journals have accepted a Star Wars-themed spoof paper. The manuscript is an absurd mess of factual errors, plagiarism and movie quotes. I know because I wrote it.

Inspired by previous publishing “stings”, I wanted to test whether ‘predatory‘ journals would publish an obviously absurd paper. So I created a spoof manuscript about “midi-chlorians” – the fictional entities which live inside cells and give Jedi their powers in Star Wars. I filled it with other references to the galaxy far, far away, and submitted it to nine journals under the names of Dr Lucas McGeorge and Dr Annette Kin.

Four journals fell for the sting. The American Journal of Medical and Biological Research (SciEP) accepted the paper, but asked for a $360 fee, which I didn’t pay. Amazingly, three other journals not only accepted but actually published the spoof. Here’s the paper from the International Journal of Molecular Biology: Open Access (MedCrave), Austin Journal of Pharmacology and Therapeutics (Austin) and American Research Journal of Biosciences (ARJ) I hadn’t expected this, as all those journals charge publication fees, but I never paid them a penny.

Edit 28th July: All of the above journals have now deleted the paper, so I’ve made it available on Scribd...

Full story at http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/neuroskeptic/2017/07/22/predatory-journals-star-wars-sting/#.WXxwnbmGOM_

The Scribd article is at:
https://www.scribd.com/document/354932509/Mitochondria-Structure-Function-and-Clinical-Relevance

Here, after an appropriate introduction is an excerpt from the paper:

...As more fatty acids are delivered to the heart, and into cardiomyocytes, the oxidation of atty acids in these cells increases. Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Plagueis the Wise? I thought not. It is not a story the Jedi would tell you. It was a Sith legend. Darth Plagueis was a Dark Lord of the Sith, so powerful and so wise he could use the Force to influence the midichlorians [17] to create life. Tis process increases the number of reducing equivalents available to the midichlorial electron transport chains, and thus generates Reactive Oxygen Species (ROS) [14,15]...

Apparently, the adults in the room at UC-Irvine's admissions office are on summer break

Wouldn't it be nice if the adults who are supposed to be in the room at the UC-Irvine admissions office actually stepped in and fixed this? Maybe before weepy stories in the LA Times and elsewhere forced them to do it, anyway?

Details: http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uc-irvine-rescissions-20170728-story.html

Problem with Numbers

From the Bruin: The University of California announced a settlement to a class action lawsuit Monday that would provide payments and vouchers to certain customers who purchased items from UCLA on-campus stores and medical center cafeterias.

A lawsuit filed in March alleged that customers who bought products at Associated Students UCLA stores or cafeterias in Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center or UCLA Medical Center in Santa Monica received receipts that displayed more than the last five digits of their credit or debit card numbers, which violates the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.

The UC Regents, who disputes the validity of the allegations, agreed to pay $400,000 in settlement funds, as well as settlement certificates worth up to $450,000 to certain customers with receipts that display more than the last five digits of their credit or debit card number.

UCLA officials said in a statement that both parties have agreed to the resolution to the matter, subject to the approval of the court.

Customers with receipts dating from Aug. 1, 2015 to Oct. 10, 2016 known as Subclass A, can receive a one-time payment of up to $50. Customers with receipts dating from Feb. 10, 2012 to July 25, 2016 known as Subclass B, can receive a settlement certificate worth up to $20 that can be used to purchase items in on-campus stores.

Individuals must submit a form online or through mail to the settlement administrator by Sept. 7 in order to receive the payment.

Source: http://dailybruin.com/2017/07/27/uc-settles-class-action-lawsuit-with-payments-vouchers/

Of course, you saved all your receipts, didn't you?

NOTE: APPARENTLY THE RECENTLY CIRCULATED EMAIL OFFERING REFUNDS FROM THE SETTLEMENT IS A PHISHING SCAM. DON'T SUBMIT ANYTHING TO IT. 

See below from the Anderson School:

Click on image to enlarge.

Limited

Data from the California Dept. of Education indicate that only 45% of California high school grads have taken the courses needed to enter UC or CSU. You'll find the data for 2015 by sex and race/ethnicity at:  (State, LA County, LAUSD, other areas and districts)
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/Distgrad.asp?cChoice=DstGrdEth&cYear=2015-16&cSelect=1964733--LOS%5EANGELES%5EUNIFIED%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E%5E&ProgramName=All&cTopic=Graduates&cLevel=District

Worth Reading If You Missed It

Only 36% of Republicans, according to the Pew Research Center, believe colleges and universities have a positive effect on the way things are going in the country, versus 58% who say they have a negative effect. Among Democrats, those figures are 72% and 19%, respectively. That finding represents a crisis.

For it to be a crisis does not depend on you having any conservative sympathies. For this to be a crisis requires only that you recognize that the GOP is one of two major political parties in American life, and that Republicans’ lack of faith in higher education will have practical consequences...

Full op ed: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-deboer-higher-ed-republican-20170724-story.html

Poll results: http://www.people-press.org/2017/07/10/sharp-partisan-divisions-in-views-of-national-institutions/

Note that normally liberal-leaning news media have not been positive about recent academic trends, particularly those that seem to impinge on free speech or unwillingness to hear opinions that contradict one's beliefs. Example:

Such public opinion trends don't end happily, history suggests. You might Google UC's loyalty oath controversy from the 1950s, if you haven't heard of it.

CRISPR error

The University of California (UC) has fired another legal salvo in the prolonged patent battle over CRISPR, the revolutionary gene-editing technology that has spawned a billion dollar industry.

The UC leads a group of litigants who contend that the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) wrongly sided with the Broad Institute and two partners—Harvard University and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge, Massachusetts—in February when it ruled that the Broad group invented the use of CRISPR in eukaryotic cells. After that ruling, UC moved the battleground to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In a 25 July brief to the Federal Circuit, the UC group contends that PTAB “ignored key evidence” and “made multiple errors.”...

Full story: http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/07/ding-ding-ding-crispr-patent-fight-enters-next-round

STEM Variations

The Bruin carries an article showing the variations in undergrad enrollment in various STEM majors by sex:

An education organization named UCLA one of the best online colleges for women studying science, technology, engineering and mathematics in June for its online degrees and women-centered organizations.

The SR Education Group, an independent education organization, scored various universities on how well they supported women studying STEM subjects online. They ranked UCLA 22nd out of 64 top-scoring schools for the variety and quality of online STEM degrees it offers and organizations offering online support for women STEM students.

“(For each school) we were looking for specific websites for women in STEM,” Taitum Ridgway, a marketing manager for the SR Education Group, said. “We noticed that with organizations at UCLA, there was a dedicated person in charge to make sure the page was updated with services and support for female STEM students.”

While women now outnumber men in obtaining college degrees, men are still the majority of recipients of STEM degrees, according to the National Center for Education Statistics. Degrees for computer science and engineering in particular have the largest gender disparity...

Full story at http://dailybruin.com/2017/07/24/organizations-inspire-girls-tackle-gender-disparity-in-stem-fields/

SF Chronicle on Ben Shapiro at Berkeley

Editorial: UC makes right call on free speech

San Francisco Chronicle, July 23, 2017

Give UC Berkeley credit for learning from the past year’s intensive course in free speech and right-wing provocation. After a series of standoffs with conservative speakers left the university looking less than eager to accommodate all comers, its approach to the latest controversial invitation strikes the right tone by making unfettered expression the clear priority.
University officials initially expressed reservations about the time, date and type of venue requested for the Berkeley College Republicans’ next would-be guest, conservative commentator Ben Shapiro, prompting the group to revive its accusations of a consistent bias against right-wing speakers. But the university announced Thursday that it would take additional steps, including possibly paying or waiving venue fees, to make the speech happen on the September evening requested by the student organization.
UC Berkeley’s new chancellor, Carol Christ, said in a statement that the university welcomes a broad range of perspectives, including Shapiro’s: “We believe deeply in the value and importance of free speech and fully support student groups’ right to invite speakers of their choice to campus.” She added that the school had “hosted literally dozens of speakers from both conservative and libertarian movements without incident. The key is for the hosting organization to work collaboratively with the campus.”
Indeed, the recent crop of speakers and their supporters have at times seemed more eager to be refused than to be accommodated — and to therefore have the opportunity to accuse UC Berkeley of being a liberal echo chamber that has drifted a long way from the days when the Free Speech Movement began there. The Berkeley Republicans’ habit of demanding a particular date, time and venue without consulting the administration makes the university’s job more difficult. So do left-wing protesters threatening and carrying out violence, necessitating heightened security measures.
For those and other reasons, scheduled campus speeches by professional provocateurs Milo Yiannopoulos and Ann Coulter were ultimately called off this year. UC Berkeley appears to be striving to avoid a similar outcome in the case of Shapiro, whose books and commentary have targeted Palestinians, Hollywood and universities.
If all the student group and its guests are looking for is a cancellation and a headline, maintaining an open campus will only serve to call their bluff.
UC Berkeley’s efforts to welcome the next controversial speaker recognizes that the public university has a special obligation to facilitate the free exchange of ideas — even when the ideas are questionable and the interest in exchanging them is in doubt.

http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/editorials/article/Editorial-UC-makes-right-call-on-free-speech-11308172.php

Caution advised if you're coming to UCLA on 405 South

There's a report that this morning debris on the 405 through the Sepulveda Pass was causing flat tires. Probably, the problem is cleared by now. But maybe a bit of caution is advisable on that route.
https://patch.com/california/santamonica/s/g6rkf/a-dozen-drivers-suffer-flats-in-the-sepulveda-pass

The best laid plans... and those that aren't

Thanks to Michael Meranze for spotting this report on Berkeley's Regents-approved stadium folly. It's an illustration of what can happen when big capital projects - and their business plans and assumptions - go awry. 

Luckily, nothing like that could ever happen at UCLA. (Or could it?)

[We'll spare you the obscene title which you can figure out by looking at the link below.]

Patrick Redford, 6/07/17, Deadspin 

The University of California-Berkeley first built Memorial Stadium atop their campus in 1923 as a tribute to those who died fighting World War I. It’s one of the most beautiful college football stadiums in the country, a gem perched in the Berkeley Hills that overlooks the East Bay, San Francisco, and the Golden Gate Bridge. Problem is, stadiums get old, especially stadiums that straddle the Hayward Fault, a more destructive cousin of the famous San Andreas Fault. Memorial Stadium is quite literally bisected by the fault, which not only means that there is risk of a catastrophic earthquake, but that the stadium is slowly being pulled apart by fault creep.

A 1997 study rated the seismic safety of the stadium “poor,” and school officials embarked on a quest to fix it shortly after. Regents told the school to either fix the stadium or find a new place to play. That’s an impossible decision, given that Berkeley is a high-density urban area crisscrossed with fault lines and bound by mountains to the east and the San Francisco Bay to the west. By 2006, Berkeley officials had decided not to try and build a stadium somewhere else or play home games in the Raiders stadium, but rather to completely renovate and retrofit Memorial Stadium and build a new locker room and workout facility underneath it. The school was going to take on a bonded debt of $445 million for the $474 million project, hoping to pay it back by selling 50-year rights to season tickets for hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Almost immediately, the project got mired in a series of delays. An infamous tree-sitting protest began on the morning of Cal’s annual rivalry game with Stanford in 2006 and delayed construction all the way until September 2008. A neighborhood association sued the university over potential plans to build a parking garage (there is a comical dearth of parking in Berkeley), and that case wasn’t settled until 2010. The delays, the adjacent American economic crisis, Cal football’s declining on-field relevance, and the UC system’s budget crisis (which prompted $650 million in cuts and 17 percent tuition spikes) turned the incredibly ambitious project into an unholy albatross. Stanford stadium guru Roger Noll warned Berkeley officials that the project was too risky, and he was proven correct in his assessment.

By June 2011, only 49 of the 3,000 long-term seats had been sold. By December, the school said that they were $113 million short of their goal. Kansas tried a similar long-term seat plan and they abandoned it after it failed spectacularly. Cal tried to pivot away from the seat selling plan by 2013, but by that point, a gaping budget shortfall was staring them in the face, and that was just from paying off the debt. The Bears now owe at least $18 million per year in interest-only payments on the stadium debt, and that number will balloon to at least $26 million per year in 2032 when Berkeley starts paying off the principal stadium cost. Payments will increase until they peak at $37 million per year in 2039, then subside again in 2051 before Berkeley will owe $81 million in 2053. After that, the school is on the hook for $75 million more and will have six decades to pay it off. The stadium might not get paid off until 2113, by which time, who knows, an earthquake could send the stadium back into the earth or football as we know it might be dead.

Cal has a historically strong athletics program across the board, with several teams competing for national championships every year, multiple Bears winning Olympic medals every few years, and many high-profile pros in the NBA and the NFL. The school’s 30 teams are the second-most in the Pac-12, and even though Berkeley is more famous for its strong record of academic success, no other public school can stand up to Berkeley’s combination of elite academics and big-time sporting success. However, the current budgetary crisis brought on by the stadium debt is an existential threat to athletics at Cal.

The debt financing plan relies on athletics revenues going up, which is not encouraging given that ticket sales declined next year, the TV rights bubble might be popping, and the football team does not look like it will be worth a damn in the foreseeable future. Austerity measures have been broached before, and in 2010 Cal Athletics almost lost five teams, including its iconic rugby team. Last-ditch donor efforts saved those teams, but the budget is still mired in horrifying amounts of debt. The program ran a $22 million deficit last year, and a new apparel deal and a new naming rights deal for Memorial Stadium’s field will only take small chunks out of that gap. A new task force was formed by the school in August 2016 to find solutions to the budget crisis, and as co-chair Robert O’Donnell told Bloomberg, “Everything is on the table.”

Tensions between Cal’s athletics and academics are nothing new, and this situation isn’t helping. The stadium debt is so large that funding may have to come out of the school’s non-athletics budget soon. The school’s largest donors donate to both the school and the athletics programs, and any disruption of sports could decrease the overall amount of donations. The task force issued a report on its findings this week—you can read it below—and while they did not mention any specific remedies, things look incredibly dire.

• Given its magnitude, it is virtually certain that interest expense will exceed IA’s operating income for the foreseeable future no matter what actions are taken regarding program scope in IA.

As the task force made clear, cutting sports might save money, but could also dry up the donor well that the school relies on to pay teachers.

• If the scope of the program were reduced, what would be the potential savings? To bound the problem, we received estimates that reducing the number of intercollegiate sports from 30 to the NCAA minimum of 14 might produce an initial annual savings on the order of $9- 12 million. In addition, total IA annual capital spending of $7-8 million might decline to $3-4 million. Substantial uncertainty surrounds both of these estimates.

• Set against these savings is the effect that reducing the number of sports would likely have on philanthropy, not only to IA but also to the entire campus. Development staff estimates that the initial annual impact could be on the order of $25 million. While this estimate is consistent with that made in the 2010 report, this number, like the estimated cost savings from reducing sports, is subject to great uncertainty. Notwithstanding this uncertainty, any recommendation must consider the net cost of scope savings after taking into account the potential reduction in philanthropy.

The task force noted that cuts and changes must be made but stopped just short of any prescriptions. Tighter budgetary control is a given, but the school simply owes too much money to avoid taking any drastic measures. The other shoe will drop soon for Cal, and it’s not going to be pretty when it does.

Source: https://deadspin.com/cal-is-fucked-because-of-its-stupid-stadium-deal-1795896858

Report of task force at: https://www.scribd.com/document/350654877/tktk

70% Issue Postponed to November Regents

Sources say that the issue of the 70% floor on retiree health care that was taken off the July Regents' agenda has been postponed to November - as opposed to September. This later date means that the floor can't be removed for calendar year 2018. 

Money for UC Law Schools

UC Law Schools Win Bid to Intervene in Case Awarding $45M for Botched Mortgage

Karen Sloan, The Recorder, July 20, 2017

University of California law schools and two consumer rights legal organizations have won a bid to intervene in a lawsuit where they stand to receive a collective $40 million in punitive damages from Bank of America. U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Klein of the Eastern District of California found that the law schools and consumer protection groups acquired standing in the suit when they were unexpectedly made third-party beneficiaries of the total $45 million in punitive damages awarded in a case where Bank of America severely botched its handling of a Sacramento-area couple's mortgage.

Klein ruled in March that a large damage award was necessary to garner the attention of the bank's board of directors and spotlight its poor treatment of mortgage holders. He also ruled that the bulk of the $45 million in damages should go to groups—such as the five law schools affiliated with the University of California—that can help prevent banks from taking advantage of consumers. It's an unorthodox provision and unlike the more common cy pres award, whereby entities such as law schools receive funds from class action lawsuits.

"If the punitive damages award is later reduced or disapproved, then [the intervening entities] will be adversely and pecuniarily affected within the meaning of conventional understandings of standing," Klein wrote in his July 13 opinion allowing the schools and the National Consumer Law Center and National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center to intervene in the suit...

Full article at http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202793503568/UC-Law-Schools-Win-Bid-to-Intervene-in-Case-Awarding-45M-for-Botched-Mortgage

Hoping to Waive Him Goodbye?

Berkeley's new chancellor can't be looking forward to this event, whenever it occurs.

UC Berkeley Offers to Waive Venue Fee for Right-Wing Speaker

US News, 7-20-17

University of California, Berkeley is now offering to waive a venue fee for former Breitbart editor Ben Shapiro to speak on campus on the date Berkeley College Republicans requested, school officials said Thursday afternoon. New UC Berkeley chancellor Carol Christ made the decision out of a commitment to free speech, university spokesman Dan Mogulof said.

Campus Republicans requested a room that could accommodate 500 people for guest speaker Shapiro on Sept. 14, Mogulof said. He said earlier Thursday that all venues large enough and free of charge to student organizations were already booked for Sept. 14, the only proposed date the group offered.

"The event will either take place in a smaller venue or the university will foot the bill for a larger venue that's available," Mogulof said. "All the details will have to be worked out with them, but I'm optimistic."

Berkeley College Republicans vice president Naweed Tahmas did not immediately respond to a telephone message seeking comment Thursday evening. The waived fee depends on which venue the two agree to.

Despite the waived fee, the student group will still need to pay for basic security costs per university policy, school officials said...

Full story at https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/california/articles/2017-07-20/uc-berkeley-says-another-right-wing-commentator-cannot-speak

Details, Details

Along with the budget, the legislature passes various requirements, i.e., things it wants recipients of funding to do. The $50 million for UC conditioned on meeting the terms of the recent state audit is an example. But there seems to be a (bad) case of micromanagement in the request below:

Item 6440-001-0001—University of California

1. University of California—Contracts With Medical Laboratories. On or before January 1, 2018, the University of California (UC) shall report to the Legislature on the following issues: (a) the number of outside medical laboratories for which UC currently contracts; (b) the value of each contract; (c) a summary of any efforts UC has made to date to consolidate its contracts with outside laboratories; and (d) a summary of Vizient’s recommendations to UC on consolidating contracts with outside laboratories.

From: http://www.lao.ca.gov/reports/2017/3696/2017-18-supplemental-report.pdf

page 22.

Vizient - the organization named above - seems to be a consulting firm in Texas dealing with the medical area. Yours truly first thought the provision was an attempt to discourage outsourcing. But on its face, it seems instead to favor more efficient outsourcing.

Despite removal of 70% retiree health care floor from July regents' agenda, issue isn't dead

Letter below reproduced by permission:

July 17, 2017

Dear President Napolitano,

The UC Berkeley Emeriti Association (UCBEA) is very troubled about the proposal to rescind the 70 percent floor for the University’s aggregate annual contribution to the retiree health benefit program.  Our concerns have been well articulated by our colleagues from other campuses.  Essentially, they are centered on two general themes: 

• Governance: The agenda item was added without prior notification or consultation with the Academic Senates or the Councils of Emeriti and Retiree Associations.

• Financial: There were no details as to the fiscal necessity of this proposed change, no analysis of the financial burden on retirees, and no mention of the impact this would have on recruiting and retaining faculty and staff.

While we appreciate the removal of the proposal from the July agenda, it apparently will be on the agenda for the September Regent’s Finance and Capital Strategies Committee.  In the interim, UCOP must be more sensitive to the long tradition of shared governance and consult with the various stakeholders such as the Academic Senates and the various emeriti associations.  Further, UCOP must be more transparent about the underlying data and analyses that led to this agenda item in the first place.

The emeriti of our wonderful university make an enormous contribution to scholarship and pedagogy.  I draw your attention to John Vohs’ “Eleventh Campus” (see link: 

http://cucea.ucsd.edu/documents/AVirtualEleventhCampus.pdf) and the contribution of UC Berkeley’s emeriti to our campus (see link:

http://retirement.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/ucb_emeriti_survey_results_2012-15_final.pdf). 

By placing such an important item on the Regent’s agenda without prior consultation and discussion is, at best, disrespectful to our emeriti.  The following recent communication (with his permission) by Professor Emeritus Richard Mathies captures the frustration we have been hearing from many of our colleagues: “Hmmm--- So I have been writing grants, doing research, and advising students and postdocs for free since July of 2013, just brought in a $3M grant from NASA that will support a lot of people at Berkeley (and hopefully lead to putting an instrument on Enceladus and or Europa) brought in many millions of dollars of royalty payments into the campus over the years, and the Regents want to secretly reduce their support for my retiree health care!  Its insulting to see how they respect and reward 40 years working for this institution. I am changing my will terms.  Not your fault but perhaps you can use this message to influence someone.”

We look forward to your acting on our concerns before this issue is brought to the Regents.

On behalf of UCBEA, sincerely yours,

John Swartzberg

President, UCBEA

Update: Explainer on Blue Shield/Blue Cross Mix-Up

Yesterday, we noted that retirees were having health care bills sent to former carrier Blue Shield when the current carrier (since Jan. 1) is Blue Cross.* Apparently, the work-around is for retirees to ignore communications coming from Blue Shield.

Here is a further explanation from a reliable source:

Some of our Medicare members continue to receive Explanation of Benefits (EOBs) from Blue Shield of CA (denials) for claims incurred in 2017.  The reason for this is due to CMS/Medicare’s “crossover” process, by which the claimants’ secondary plan (such as the UC Medicare PPO and High Option plan) receives claims directly from CMS once Medicare has adjudicated the claim.  CMS is informed of the retiree’s supplemental plan via an electronic feed from the carrier.  Unfortunately, CMS still has Blue Shield’s crossover in place and Blue Shield has not been able to correct the information electronically. 

Therefore, Blue Shield is manually updating UC retirees’ records to correct the crossover and anticipates these updates will be completed by next week. After that, CMS will still have to update their system which usually takes about 2 more weeks, after which the issue will be resolved.

The good news is that Medicare also has Anthem’s crossover in place (along with Blue Shield’s) so the 2017 claims are being processed twice – once under Anthem where the claims adjudicate correctly and also under Blue Shield where the same claims are (correctly) denied.  The result is that two EOBs are sent to the member, causing confusion and concern. To date, there are 947 members affected.

If you receive a call from a member about this, please share with them that claims are being sent to both Blue Shield and Anthem now and that Anthem is processing these claims correctly.  For 2017 claims, members should disregard the Blue Shield denial EOBs. 

Anyway, if you are getting stuff from Blue Shield, now you know how to deal with it:

---
*http://uclafacultyassociation.blogspot.com/2017/07/change-is-hard.html

Sign of the Times

Click to enlarge

California law now requires that one-person restrooms with locking doors be all-gender. See: https://www.mrllp.com/blog-transgender-bathroom-laws-in-california-what-employers-lara-shortz. However, there is also an official boycott - that explicitly includes UC - regarding use of funds for travel to states which are listed by the state attorney general as having laws fostering "discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people." See:
https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887.

The sign above, recently noticed by yours truly, seems to be part of this issue, although it is posted on a restroom that is for more than one person and isn't locked. Oddly, not all single-gender restrooms in the building have this sign. Notably, the large men's restroom on the first floor of the same building where there are classrooms - and thus heavy usage - did not have such a sign (as of yesterday afternoon).

Change is Hard

UC changed insurance carriers from Blue Shield to Blue Cross last January 1. But for retired employees, bills kept being sent to Blue Shield which, of course, rejected them. Currently, the situation is that bills are being sent to both carriers and thus retirees get rejections from Blue Shield but bills are being paid by Blue Cross. See the announcement below from the UCLA Emeriti/Retirees Relations Center (ERRC):

------

Update on Blue Shield/Anthem Transition Issues 

The Emeriti/Retirees Relations Center recently received this information from the UC Office of the President:

Some retirees who are enrolled in Anthem/Blue Cross Medicare health care plans continue to receive Explanation of Benefits (EOBs) from Blue Shield of CA, denying coverage for claims incurred in 2017.   

This issue has occurred with the recent change from Blue Shield to Anthem/Blue Cross. Blue Shield has not been able to correct the crossover information with Medicare electronically so each retiree record must be changed manually.  

 

The good news is Anthem's crossover is in place with Medicare so claims are being paid correctly by them. However, you may receive two different EOBs for 2017 claims - one from Anthem stating that the claim has been paid and one from Blue Shield stating that the same claim has been denied. 

 

For 2017 claims, please disregard the Blue Shield denial EOBs. Claims are being correctly paid by Anthem/Blue Cross. The issue should be completely resolved within the next three weeks.

We realize that this has caused confusion for retirees. Questions or concerns should be directed to the Retirement Administration Service Center (RASC) at 1(800) 888-8267.

New Dean of Social Sciences

[Yours truly may have missed this announcement. Better late than never.]

Dear Colleagues:

I am pleased to announce the appointment of Darnell M. Hunt as Dean of the Division of Social Sciences, effective July 1, 2017.

A member of the UCLA faculty since 2001, Dr. Hunt is professor of sociology and African American Studies, and has served as director of the Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies since 2001 and as chair of the Department of Sociology since 2015. Prior to his appointment at UCLA, he was chair of the sociology faculty at the University of Southern California.

Professor Hunt’s research interests include race, media and cultural studies, and he currently manages a number of research projects on the experiences of African Americans. He has written and edited several publications, including Screening the Los Angeles 'Riots': Race, Seeing, and Resistance and Black Los Angeles: American Dreams and Racial Realities. In February 2017, Professor Hunt, along with Ana-Christina Ramon, Michael Tran, Amberia Sargent and Vanessa Diaz, released the fourth annual Hollywood Diversity Report, a major project focusing on diversity in the entertainment industry...

Sincerely,

Scott L. Waugh
Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost

Full announcement at http://evc.ucla.edu/announcements/appointment-of-darnell-m.-hunt-as-dean-of-the-division-of-social-sciences

The law partners of Hastings & Boalt

Hastings

Racist Pasts of Boalt Hall and Hastings' Namesakes Haunt Law Schools

Karen Sloan, The Recorder, July 14, 2017    

Lawyer Serranus Clinton Hastings made his fortune during the California Gold Rush and served as the first chief justice of the state's Supreme Court before giving $100,000—supposedly in gold coins—to establish the University of California's first law school in 1878.

Hastings apparently also enjoyed hunting Native Americans. You read that right.

The namesake of the University of California Hastings College of the Law, according to historians, financed and promoted "Indian-hunting expeditions," in which wealthy men hunted Native Americans for sport in the mid-19th century. Now, an adjunct professor is calling for the San Francisco law school to take a comprehensive look at Hastings' legacy and reconsider whether his name belongs on the school.

Similarly, an attorney and lecturer at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law has raised questions about a racist legacy of John Henry Boalt, after whom the school's main building is named. Boalt was a Bay Area attorney best known, according to Charles Reichmann, for his efforts to remove the Chinese from the Golden State and his advocacy for what became the Chinese Exclusion Act, the first federal law to bar immigrants based on their race.

Both Reichmann and John Briscoe, the Hastings adjunct, penned recent op-eds in the San Francisco Chronicle criticizing the long-dead benefactors for racism and genocide and calling for a thoughtful examination of their legacies.

It seems those calls have not gone unheard. Berkeley law spokeswoman Susan Gluss said last week that the school has formed a "diverse committee of stakeholders" to review Boalt's history and the "appropriateness" of his name appearing on campus.

"It's important to note that John Boalt himself had no relationship with the law school, and Boalt Hall is not the official name of the UC Berkeley School of Law," according to a statement from the law school. "Nonetheless, the name is used widely colloquially within and outside the school, and the concerns raised are meaningful."

Hastings has already commissioned a researcher to gather more information about the school's namesake and plans to form a committee to parse those findings and determine whether they warrant action.

"I have an open mind as to where we go from here," said Hastings Dean David Faigman...

Full article at http://www.therecorder.com/id=1202793084859/Racist-Pasts-of-Boalt-Hall-and-Hastings-Namesakes-Haunt-Law-Schools

Listen to Regents Meeting of July 13, 2017 Including Constitutional Issue

In their final session this past Thursday, the Regents discussed a variety of issues that had come up in the two days before. Summaries are available at:

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/07/13/uc-board-regents-passes-budget-debates-new-hr-program/
and
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-uc-regents-budget-20170713-story.html

You can hear the session at the link below:


One issue that came up was an outgrowth of the state audit report that complained about budgetary and other practices at UCOP. The legislature, following the suggestion of the auditor, created a separate appropriation for UCOP and conditioned $50 million on satisfying the auditor's requirements. The question of the constitutional autonomy of the Regents was thus raised. Two regents discussed the implications. There was hint of possible legal action - all very vague at this point.

You can see the constitutional discussion below:

UCLA to "conquer the online learning market"

UCLA Global Online is expected to enroll its first intake of students in 2018 and will offer degrees and certificates at the master’s level with entry requirements that mirror the existing requirements for the university.

Despite the university’s global brand, Wayne Smutz, founding dean of UCLA Global Online, said the university has yet to conquer the online learning market.

“One of our challenges will be how do we make that work internationally”
“We have a lot of research activities around the globe that we do that make us international,” he told The PIE News. “Our brand is very strong internationally but we don’t really deliver education internationally.”

He pointed out that while other prestigious universities in the US deliver MOOCs and online short courses, universities of that calibre are not fully-fledged in the online learning market for full degrees.

“In the last year, we’ve seen a real opening up of the international space to online around the world,” he said.

“And while it’s not completely open there are hints that that door is starting to crack and I think that makes the timing right to become more internationally-oriented.”...

Full story at https://thepienews.com/news/ucla-global-online-masters-degrees/

Weird Image from UCLA Transportation

UCLA Transportation posted this odd image of a Big Blue Bus stranded in the ocean in Santa Monica as part of a campaign to induce bus ridership. Source: http://beagreencommuter.com/your-green-commute-guide-to-las-best-summer-events/. Not exactly clear why one should be attracted to a flooded bus. But worse things could happen to Santa Monica: [Click twice] 

Listen to the Regents Meeting of July 12, 2017

Yesterday's Regents meeting in the morning included a full board session (with public comments) and then sessions of the committees on Public Engagement, Compliance and Audit, and Governance.

The afternoon featured Academic and Student Affairs (with a national labs add-on) and Finance and Capital Strategies.

We have archived the audio of these various sessions at the links below.

The news media have focused primarily on the discussion/recommendation of the Academic and Student Affairs committee regarding allowing letters of recommendation as part of the undergraduate admissions process:

More recommendation letters likely to be sought for UC admissions

JULY 12, 2017, LARRY GORDON, EdSource

Letters of recommendation have been rarely asked for in freshman application reviews at the University of California’s nine undergraduate campuses. But now that may be changing for a small slice of the 170,000-plus application pool despite some concerns that low-income and minority students could be hurt.

A UC regents committee on Wednesday approved a policy change that would allow campuses to ask up to 15 percent of applicants for extra information if an admissions decision is not otherwise clear-cut. The supplemental items for such wobblers can be two letters of recommendation from teachers or counselors, the grades from the first semester of high school senior year or a questionnaire for students to better explain their talents and circumstances.

Several regents said they were worried that teachers and counselors in over-crowded high schools that serve low-income and mainly minority students might be too busy to provide fully fleshed-out letters and that affluent families might be better able to ask for such recommendations.  But the regents all wound up voting for the new procedure after faculty assurances that such letters are likely to bolster low-income students’ chances by highlighting their special abilities and that the process would be carefully monitored to make sure no groups are disproportionately rejected.

The vote by the regents Academic and Student Affairs Committee came less than a week after UC released statistics showing how highly competitive freshman admissions was this year at its most popular campus. Only 14.6 percent of the 63,516 California applicants to UCLA were offered admission and just 19.7 percent of 49,280 at Berkeley. With such a flood of applications, admissions officials said extra information in future questionnaires and letters will provide more tools in making very difficult decisions.

Unlike most private universities and some public schools, UC generally has not asked for recommendations in its main undergraduate applications. It relies instead on high school grades through junior year, standardized test scores, a review of students’ accomplishments and personal challenges and readings of the students’ “personal insight” statements about such topics as leadership abilities, talents and favorite classes.

A few special programs ask for recommendation letters and sometimes campuses seek so-called “augmented review” if something puzzling or incomplete appears in the application, such as a one-semester dip in grades. In 2015 UC Berkeley began a controversial pilot program that asked for, but did not require, recommendation letters for applicants whose suitability for admission was not clear-cut. A previous proposal for all Berkeley applicants to submit such letters was rejected because it was seen as “a barrier disadvantaging vulnerable student populations,” according to a regents’ document outlining the history of Wednesday’s agenda item.

The new systemwide policy would allow campuses to ask for extra information from just 15 percent of applicants and only those who fall “in the margins for admission but whose initial application presents a specific gap in the picture of their qualification or presents extraordinary circumstances that call for further comment,” the document said.

Regent John Perez, who chairs the Academic and Student Affairs committee, said it was difficult deciding how to vote on the matter and that the debate symbolized UC’s frequent struggle between being “elite or elitist.” Perez, who is the former state Assembly speaker, said he wanted students to have an extra chance to make their case for admission but not have to face “additional hurdles.” Given assurances the results would be closely monitored, Perez and other regents on the panel who expressed some skepticism voted for the change.

The full board of regents are expected to do likewise Thursday and the plan is expected to go into effect for the admissions cycle starting this November.

James Chalfant, faculty representative on the UC regents board, said the policy was drawn up to allow campuses flexibility on whether to seek the letters and information. He emphasized that it is “not meant to give unfair advantages” to any applicants but was meant to ensure that no one is rejected because of a lack of positive data and support.

Source: https://edsource.org/2017/more-recommendation-letters-likely-to-be-sought-for-uc-admissions-some-worry-about-equity-in-college-access/584717

You can find links to the audio of these sessions below:

Morning:

Full Board:


The other morning sessions can be found at:
https://archive.org/details/RegentsPublicEngage71217am/Regents-ComplianceAudit7-12-17am.wma

Afternoon:

Academic & Student Affairs:


The other afternoon session (Finance & Capital Strategies) is at:
https://archive.org/details/regents-AcademicStudent7-12-17pm/regents-AcademicStudent7-12-17pm.wma