Thursday, September 21, 2017

Odd details pop up in some of the coverage

A good long read and informative- This in depth article:

And other coverage

'Fair Wage Fair Work' at UC, and new Title IX audit and discussion at UC Regents Meeting

Reposting the archive of the UC Regents compliance and audit committee session because the regents put out an archive of it that deleted a very important section,then they took down the archive for a few days and now it is reposted apparently now with the deleted content now included and now matching the captioning- you can now view that section starting at the 17 minute mark, see again with this new link:

This is the original now disabled link to the incomplete content:

None of this is explained at the regents web pages, site- and yes it is all a bit galling in light of CHE puff pieces on such matters,
On this topic also see:
"The reference on archiving caught the eye of yours truly, who continues to note that the Regents do not really archive the recordings of their meetings. They post them for only one year. Yours truly, in contrast, does archive them - at considerable time cost. So we ask for the umpteeth time, why - if the Regents are now putting their meetings on YouTube for just one year - they can't just leave them their indefinitely? How about the UC Regents stepping into the 21st century in that regard? The only answer we have ever gotten regarding the one-year rule is that CSU does it that way. Is that a reason? Let CSU be CSU. Bad practice there is no excuse for bad practice at UC."

-and we add in here that position comes with a $250,000 salary and perks... And the missing content now posted also includes comment from Regent Perez that he did not receive from UC Regents staff the 'meeting materials' on a certain campus involved in the audit of the FWFW policy...

Cal Chancellor Speech In The Campus Budget, Expenditures, and other items

UC leadership decision to fund -in the millions- what they deem worthy...
While at the same time ratcheting up their own politically provocative comments against their political opponents

And if one is going to announce a planned Year of Free Speech shouldn't one also make contingency plans based on past campus experience (s) in advance?
Is causing UC community to question UC leadership moves on funding and how it might negatively impact campus interests:

See the ways it comes up in:
..."The mounting costs to the campus — which is struggling to reduce a crippling budget deficit from $150 million last year to $56 million by June — are sparking growing concern.

Berkeley has shelled out at least $1.4 million in security costs since February,"...

And Daily Cal:

"the campus will foot the estimated $600,000 security bill for Ben Shapiro to spout unoriginal and unnuanced opinions in one of the biggest venues on campus, it should at least continue to fund, if not expand, Berkeley Connect."

And create very bad optics in light of:

Promises of reforms may come too late: "Christ said she wanted to acknowledge the “uncertainty and peril” that students who are Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals recipients face and how the imminent “Free Speech Week” will affect many individuals in vulnerable communities.

In an unexpected move, Christ announced that the administration will be working to change the policies that “currently allow” events such as Free Speech Week to happen — a declaration that was met with booming applause.

“Once Free Speech Week ends, we have to come together as a community and think hard about our policies,” Christ said to the audience.

- such optics hamstrung, pigeonholed Birgeneau, Dirks, and UCOP leadership before.
That interview Napolitano gave DC yesterday ,see immediate last post for yesterday's coverage, now gets covered by IHE and CHE:

SF Gate is back at listing again unconfirmed speakers as headline:

While Cal admin is back at updating on the unconfirmed as of Sept 20 Wed.:

Daily Cal tried to keep up:

-as part of that Cal event next week there is something called "Zuck2020" - is that a sign of Silicon Valley participation?

Silicon Valley and its colleges, universities 'mismatched' and out of sync

While others are asking is Silicon Valley mismatched to Democracy:

[Several interviews ( e.g this week's interview of HRC on MSNBC- Maddow) with HRC on her new book 'What Happened'- those interviewing her are confused by HRC stance on Sandberg in book while HRC also entertaining the ideas around the above. UC hypocrisy/position also something to think about in light of it's own biz relations with such platforms etc.]

- and then there are those conversations around SV and privatization of higher ed, online instruction moves to be had..
There was some public comment at UC Regents meeting where scientific concern about non traditional therapies may be displacing traditional med at UC, a chemist even handed a batch of papers w/ list examples of it at UC, the UC Gen counsel walked up to him and took his handouts he wanted the regents to see, you can find that in public comment from the first day of the UC Regents meeting.see at the 44:00 mark here:

Now this new funding at UCI comes up:

Wednesday, September 20, 2017

UCOP paying Cal's 'four times $600,000?'-And the president of the UC Regents on other things at ...Yale

See this latest:
"Napolitano said that her office, which oversees the University of California system, will take the unprecedented step of helping Berkeley cover the the "substantial" security costs. That protection is necessary to ensure free speech on campus, she said.
This will be a test for Berkeley," she said. “It’s a cost that the university is bearing to protect the speakers but also to protect the value of free speech ... But the rock and the hard place that the campus is in, is the value of free speech versus the need to protect the safety and the security of the students and the faculty.”

Napolitano said security for a recent speech by conservative author Ben Shapiro cost the school $600,000. The event this month including Bannon and planned by far right provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos is expected to be four days of similar security needs, she said. She would not provide an exact figure.
"I think some of these speakers are coming deliberately to provoke, and I think to provoke a response," she said. "But nonetheless they’re coming to speak, they’re coming to put forward controversial and noxious ideas, and, you know, colleges and universities are places where noxious ideas are expressed.

"So how you carry that out, protect that value — that’s the challenge that we face," Napolitano said. "That’s why I think it’s important that if these events are going to occur, that they be done safely and securely and, I think unfortunately that means universities bear the cost.""...
See full article.

But then read this at a local paper, SFist: "Also, the university continues to push back, saying the event is welcome to go on outdoors on the steps of Sproull Hall and other spots as now planned, but student group The Berkeley Patriot failed to meet several deadlines and has lost the indoor venues they had wanted — and the university will not be subsidizing security costs as they did for last week's Ben Shapiro event, which was a one-time deal." : Here.

WaPo says they are going halfsies on costs:

And then talks DACA costs at UC a little bit on Title IX,and then mentions that Napolitano said DeVos has quite a vertical learning curve on higher education , read the article for the full quote, context.
This survey poll by a UCLA professor with Brookings ties:

Prompts this op Ed in msm:

Opinion | A chilling study shows how hostile college students are toward free speech
Washington Post

Also at WaPo:
End their piece with:
"Despite his concerns about safety if events have to be held outdoors, he said they will not give up on the event, or trying to get the most controversial speakers. That is the type of speech most in need of protection, he said.

“No one will riot if Shapiro comes,” he said. “They’ll riot if Bannon comes.”

Daily Cal: has this latest.

And the NBC Bay area details out so many areas of backtracking by event organizers:

And the administration points students to this:

Brown at Yale, his other alma mater, on :
"“State, City, and International Efforts”
Kerry Convening” conference "Session 3: State, City and International Efforts"
Moderator: Secretary John Kerry
Mr. Jerry Brown, Governor of the State of California
Mr. Jay Inslee, Governor of the State of Washington
Dr. Jim Kim, President of the World Bank
Ms. Anne Hidalgo, Mayor of Paris

More here:

Sunday, September 17, 2017

Flexibility or Special Treatment?

More new updates: With less than 6 days notice -apparently UC admin has now sent out a final itinerary with a new updated list of speakers *some of whom are still unconfirmed or deny their participation* and *new locations*-listed here:

"UC Berkeley says Free Speech Week is on"

See also: " Berkeley's attention turns to 'Free Speech Week'"

All that press coverage given to a non event? See:

“it would be completely wrong to call this a cancellation,” Mogulof said. As of late Friday, he said, “nothing has been scheduled. There is nothing to cancel.”

Original- earlier post:

Update on logistics for “Free Speech Week”

..."They were told on 8/11 they needed to sign and execute these contracts by 8/18. They did not. They were told on 8/22 they needed to sign and execute these contracts by 8/25. They did not. They were told, in writing, for the last time, on 9/13 that the contracts must be signed and executed by 9/15 at 5pm. They did not."...
"The campus has shown flexibility where it is allowed to do so in working with a small group that appears to be struggling to fulfill responsibilities it accepted as a result of the decisions it made. The campus cannot allow this student organization to disregard policy and thus provide it with special treatment that would not be provided to any other student organization on the Berkeley campus.

Should the student organization fail to complete the necessary steps to hold its remaining 10 reservations, there is absolutely nothing to prevent them from seeking to reschedule the events they hoped to host for a later date so that they can fully comply with the policies that apply to them and their peers."

Remember in Politico UC Berkeley characterized like this: "UC Berkeley assistant vice chancellor for communications Dan Mogulof told POLITICO Tuesday that the student organization ... — whose membership is estimated by Mogulof at between 5-10 members "

UCB says "no regrets" on the $600,000"?:


This LAT op ed quibbles on part of the provost's statement: "UC Berkeley is sending mixed messages about freedom of speech"

-One might be of the opinion that paper didn't give significant/comprehensive coverage of what happened at this September UC Regents meeting (which was held closer to their neck of the woods at UCSD, which their Times Trib folks could have also covered...??) - but who did?
DB tapped out a bit of coverage of the UC Regents meeting:
UC Regents recap – Sept. 13

UC regents recap – Sept. 14

Friday, September 15, 2017

Bitter peels?

She doesn't get into the details of what is happening on campus real time,but has this at a conference:

"Napolitano spoke at a conference promoting "civil discourse" attended by Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy in a section of the federal courthouse called the Kennedy Learning Center. Kennedy, a Sacramento native, said in opening remarks that he fears “the idea of free speech is slipping away from our young people” in an increasingly polarized nation.
“The answer to a wrong or insulting or immoral idea is more speech, not less,” he said. Universities, in particular, Kennedy said, “must step up to the plate and insist that there's a place for thoughtful ... robust disagreement.”"

But Justice Kennedy doesn't say what young people should do when these costs hit campus budgets??:

"Price Tag to Protect Speech at Berkeley: $600000"
New York Times

"The cost of free speech isn't cheap at UC Berkeley"

Even for events with unconfirmed speakers, details like contract for facilities etc. almost to the moment the event is to take place all unconfirmed, not finalized...and UC allows it...

Should their tuition dollars go to the drip drip drip inconclusive administrative process that allows it? Or is it too snowflakey to expect advance planning from campus administration so the students, staff,faculty, other visitors, community etc can access services and parts of campus necessary - including for matriculation? What would Kennedy recommend to resolve that part of the problem that UC admin has the ability to control? Did that come up at that Sacto conference?

On the UCD berries saga:

"UC won. In May, after five days of trial testimony in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, a jury found that California Berry had improperly used the UC plants. But the case wasn’t over. Damages hadn’t been sorted out, and after the jury rendered its verdict the judge said he believed UC Davis was as guilty of “bad conduct” as the two scientists. Settlement negotiations ensued, leading to the agreement filed in court Friday.

University officials declined to comment on the settlement
. "


And this at UCLA
"UCLA pharmacy closed after state finds it sent out drugs with expired, potentially dangerous ingredients"

Thursday, September 14, 2017

On other things...with updates

After athletics probe, UC Berkeley under indefinite federal Title IX monitoring

UC regents give pay raises to eight chancellors

"UCSF Chancellor Samuel Hawgood was the highest paid campus leader to receive a raise. His salary will increase from $795,675 to $819,545 a year.
The others chancellors were:
•UC Irvine’s Howard Gillman, $499,550 to $514,537
•UCLA’s Gene Block, $454,574 to $468,211
•UC San Diego’s Pradeep Khosla, $449,208 to $462,684
•UC Santa Barbara’s Henry Yang, $401,020 to $413,051
•UC Merced’s Dorothy Leland, UC Riverside’s Kim Wilcox and UC Santa Cruz’s George Blumenthal, $394,655 to $406,495"
- they also get money from outside boards they serve on, usually they are asked to serve on those boards precisely because they are UC Chancellors not just subject matter expertise.. but good luck on getting a news paper to list out the true total remuneration...

University of California committee OKs $1 million bonus for CIO Jagdeep Singh Bachher
There is this on LANL:


Lawmakers OK free year of community college for all; bill goes to governor

Court leans toward allowing protesters' to sue UC administrators


UC Irvine chancellor apologizes after school rescinds admission offers
Los Angeles Times


UC to make process of verifying student admissions information more effective
University of California

University of California investment assets under management show strong gains
University of California

"University of California hints at tuition increase, starts review of overturned admissions | EdSource"


Dirks is tweeting some items he is reading or attending lately, this is one of the items:
Revolutionizing the university for the digital era - The Washington Post