In October, Michael V. Drake, President of the University of California (UC) system, told the Academic Council of the Academic Senate that members of the Board of Regents opposed a policy the Senate adopted earlier this year. According to the minutes of that meeting and those in attendance, Drake reminded Senators that, “while the Regents have delegated various decision-making authorities to the president, Senate, and other parties, the Regents still possess ultimate decision-making authority.” He then told the faculty leaders that, “unless the Senate finds a way to address Regents’ concerns in this regard, they may revoke the Senate’s authority.”
Whether that was a threat or a warning may depend on which side of the table you’re on. Even if it was only a warning, Drake’s message and the stance of some Regents was a serious, consequential, and confrontational escalation – casting a shadow on the accepted and settled arrangement that those who do the teaching are the academic experts. Even more seriously, it threatens the spirit of shared governance that guides one of the country’s largest and most respected public university systems.
The policy that angered some of the Regents and triggered the “revoke the Senate’s authority” statement is known as the “campus experience requirement.” Approved by the Senate in February, it mandates that undergraduate degree-seeking students in the California system complete at least some of their coursework on a campus – just 10% of coursework for 4-year students and 20% for students who transfer. Though majors and graduate programs could still be entirely online, and professors or programs could request a waiver from the systemwide Senate, the policy essentially closed off the potential for fully online degrees in the University of California system.
...The Senate has many good reasons to go slow on fully online degrees. One is that, despite what anyone tells you, the science and research on online college programs is not settled. In fact, there’s plenty of evidence to support the idea that delivering education material online is detrimental to some students, perhaps even most students. In debate over the proposal, faculty acknowledged that online degrees could expand access to the system. But they also raised concerns about creating a two-tier degree scheme in which one group of students could access valuable on-campus resources, networks, social activities, and support programs and another group couldn’t. According to the minutes of the debate, faculty were also worried that “online degrees could affect the quality of the educational experience and could marginalize students.”
And though it was not referenced directly, reputational quality was probably a consideration too...
Still, at least a few California Regents are heavily on the access and profit side of the ledger enough to threaten to override their own teachers and upend the principle of shared governance. The President’s Office declined to make any Regents available for comment on this issue. And although she did not respond to several direct requests to be interviewed, or accept opportunities to comment, system insiders say Regent Maria Aguilano is one of the leading advocates for online degrees and one of the Regents who was very likely “concerned” about the February policy.
Aguilano is the Executive Vice President of ASU Learning Enterprise. The ASU is Arizona State University, which has been a vocal advocate for digital and online programs for years. ASU has one of the largest online enrollments in the country and at one point had projected to make as much as $500 million a year from its online programs by 2025...
Lark Park, another Regent, is also supportive of opening California’s public universities to fully online learning. Like Aguilano, Park did not respond to interview requests or offers to provide a statement. Park is the Director of the state-funded Cal Ed Learning Lab, which she has described as being born from a conversation about online learning and has written in support of expanding digital and Internet-based programs. Also in October, Park contributed to an advocacy paper titled “Reimagining Online Education in California.” The paper called out the University’s ban on online degrees directly, saying, “despite the rising demand and use of online education … stakeholders continue to raise concerns about this mode of learning in California. Examples include the University of California’s (UC) ban of fully online degrees.” The paper then asked, “Why is there such reluctance to engage in and friction about a high-demand avenue” of online education?
...President Drake’s office confirmed that his message about revocation was not universal, that it applied only to the decision regarding online degrees. That may be reassuring, but it also may not matter. Once Regents start picking and choosing the academic policies they want to set themselves, governance isn’t exactly shared. It’s conditional. At best...
Note that the Regents, simply by letting it be known that they want something, can bend the Academic Senate in their direction. The dropping of the SAT as an element of UC admissions is an example. The original Senate review pointed to the actual use of the SAT at UC, noting that - as used - it enhanced the diversity the Regents said they wanted. When it became clear that the Regents didn't want to hear that message, a compromise was offered by the Academic Council chair that deviated from the Senate's official review. You can hear her compromise proposal at:
https://archive.org/details/
The compromise she offered was also rejected by the Regents.
With regard to the online issue, it might be noted that, as stated by then-Academic Council Chair Horwitz, UC faculty had a great deal of experience with online instruction thanks to the pandemic. See his remarks to the Regents below:
Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzBbeahfUbo.
The issue, of course, pre-dates the pandemic. Here is then-Academic Council Chair Powell in 2013:
Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1fkp7Wuvvk.
In 2020, despite a protest from then-Academic Council Chair Bhavnani, the Regents adopted a policy regarding chancellor selection without consulation with the Senate. So, the tension between the Senate and at least some Regents has been growing, apart from the online issue:
Or direct to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bbsF9WaPx8.
No comments:
Post a Comment