Monday, March 31, 1997
CHANCELLOR:
Leadership must focus on upholding UCLA’s accessibility and
quality of education
A privatized university, fueled by aggressive fund-raising and
void of affirmative action policies. It’s quite a different picture
of UCLA from thirty years ago, when state subsidies were less
laughable and affirmative action was shiny and new. But this is the
direction in which we are headed.
We know that Albert Carnesale was an effective administrator at
Harvard. However, UCLA is not the Ivy League. Building a privatized
campus from a massive public university will not only require
truckloads of elbow grease  it will require careful,
present-minded steps. And the accomplishments that have made UCLA a
strong, kinetic institution must not be sacrificed in the
process.
Campus diversity is one such accomplishment. In past years, UCLA
has been effective in offering an affordable college education to
students with variegated backgrounds. Because reasonable fees and
diversity go hand-in-hand, Chancellor Carnesale’s goal of
privatization must not result in tuition increases. Privatized or
not, UCLA must remain accessible.
Further, Carnesale must find a way around the Regents’ hasty
repeal of affirmative action. Applications from underrepresented
communities have already fallen off since the Regents’ announcement
last quarter. To preserve the school’s rich, multi-cultural
environment, UCLA must reach out to these communities.
Cal administrators have instituted the Berkeley Pledge in order
to maintain diversity at their school. Meanwhile, UCLA has yet to
take a firm stance, and our inaction makes us seem indolent.
Privatization must be looked at more closely. Privatization is
inevitable. Subsidies have been cut by about 38 percent since 1960,
and fund-raising from private sources is the only way UCLA can
continue functioning. So we are not against Carnesale’s goal to
privatize the university; but we are wary of it. Fund-raising can
mean lobbying and special interests which could hurt current UCLA
programs. The money raised should be free from agendas.
Chancellor Carnesale will inherit labor issues when he arrives
this summer. Chancellor Young has defied logic by denying the
existence of the Student Association of Graduate Employees (SAGE).
SAGE members "exist" enough to have valid concerns about wages,
workloads and benefits. There is a smug, elitist attitude coming
from the Chancellor’s Office regarding student labor. Whether or
not TAs and RAs should be considered primarily students, UCLA
should see that they make up a significant, well-organized body
which deserves the courtesy of recognition. Deal with it, don’t
ignore it.
And he must be sensitive to the needs of undergraduate students.
Professors in undergraduate classrooms are held down by the threat
of faculty and program cuts. Changing the G.E. requirements by
clustering topics is not going to bring about any significant
reform. (In fact, the switch is likely to be one big headache.)
In order to exact a higher, more uniform standard of education,
there must be a more massive investment at the undergraduate level.
We support other campus improvements, such as those taking place at
the Med Center, but improvements in education must not be
overlooked.
Carnesale would like to see UCLA become a top 10 university. He
is not alone. However, as we ascend through the ranks, let’s not
get so caught up in the pomp and splendor that we forget about the
key issues.
Diversity, affordability, sound labor practices and quality of
undergraduate education are at the heart of an effective UC campus.
At least they should be.