08 April 2010

The Academic Council's "Choices" report

Not much to disagree with, here. I was impressed by AC's clarity of vision and force of argument. AC recommends that UC:
  • Maintain or increase state support
  • Avoid suffocating core academic programs 
  • Delay the start of any new programs until the core is stable 
  • Adopt a multi-year fee strategy 
  • Increase budget transparency 
  • Balance system-wide needs and campus needs 
  • Disentangle sources of funds but recognize essential cross-subsidization 
  • Avoid stratification and tiering 
  • Increase diversity by recruiting non-resident students 
  • Prioritize retirement funding and total remuneration 
  • Honor its commitment to current employees by rewarding future service under current UCRP plan terms 
  • Consider Pension Obligation Bonds to maintain the health of UCRP 
  • Recognize that online education will not substantially cut cost 
  • Recognize that shifting salaries to grants will have adverse consequences 
  • Overhaul Indirect Cost Recovery Tax auxiliaries and medical centers 
  • Increase fundraising efforts  
  • Review growth of campus administration 
  • Curb construction projects
  • Recognize UC Merced’s unique situation and fund that campus accordingly
The real question is what the Council will do when this report goes unheeded, just like its two predecessors, the "Futures"  and the "Cuts" reports.


  1. as the doc says, it's a report by UCPB, not by the academic council

  2. It's a report by UCPB, endorsed by the Academic Council.

  3. The Academic Council did not endorse the report, just the idea of circulating it for review.

  4. Are you guys picky. OK, report by UCPB, circulated by AC, not a chance in hell of being acted upon by anybody.