Search News


Browse Archives

News

Unnatural Enemies

November 25, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Amid a season of protests across the University of California, the system’s president and the leader of its premiere campus have increasingly found themselves portrayed as the villains. While they are both working to change that, a few recent public relations missteps may complicate their efforts.

Allegations of police brutality during a protest at Berkeley last week and faculty concerns about athletics spending are the latest PR headaches for Robert J. Birgeneau, the campus's chancellor. As for the system’s president, Mark Yudof has been busy defending a 32 percent tuition hike, while suffering additional criticism for joking about his compensation in a New York Times interview.

Despite these challenges, Birgeneau and system officials believe they can galvanize support from a student protest movement that often maligns them, and instead channel the students' energy into a productive lobbying campaign for more state resources.

“When negative things happen, they don’t help,” Birgeneau said Tuesday, a day after announcing an investigation into the protest response. “It’s not all about me, and it’s not all about Yudof. It’s about the university, and people have to decide whether they support the university in a very difficult time.”

Yudof could not be reached for comment, but a system official shared Birgeneau’s hope that students who have targeted university leaders can be transformed into allies of the UC system. Nathan Brostrom, the system’s interim vice president for business operations, met with student protesters Monday for what he called an “often tense but constructive” dialogue.

“I think that if we can harness a lot of what is true anger and passion and get it directed toward our ongoing struggle with Sacramento, I think it’s going to be extremely valuable for us in this budget process,” said Brostrom, who also serves as Berkeley’s vice chancellor for administration. “I think that was missing in previous years. [Lawmakers] need to hear from the students.”

In the war for students’ hearts and minds, the fundamental struggle for UC officials is to convince students that the Legislature and governor -- not regents, Yudof and the chancellors -- are the problem. As one of the state's few discretionary budget items, higher education has been a target for legislative cuts in recent years, and some have even questioned whether political motives have contributed to an unsustainable expansion of campuses in the university system. Thus far, however, shifting blame to Sacramento has been a hard sell. While students say they’re angered about legislative cuts, there is a sense that the regents saddled them with excessive fees rather than seeking other solutions.

“The UC regents say their finger is pointed at Sacramento, but our finger is pointed directly at the UC regents and President Yudof,” said Aaminah Norris, a graduate student in Berkeley’s School of Education who has taken part in protests.

Donald Kingsbury, a graduate student on the Santa Cruz campus who helped organize protests there, said students simply don’t share Yudof’s goals -- so it wouldn’t be reasonable to work with him. Echoing concerns some faculty have expressed, Kingsbury said he worries Yudof and the regents are moving toward a more private model of education that relies on higher tuition, corporate partnerships and grant-funded-research that “enriches the sciences to the detriment of the humanities.”

“This is not all about an individual; the problems in the UC System and in the state of California predate Mark Yudof,” Kingsbury wrote in an e-mail Tuesday. “He is simply an appropriate figurehead for a 30-year-old legacy of misplaced priorities and bad decisions. The Board of Regents itself is populated by investment bankers, businesspeople, and other types who view truly public education as a dinosaur, including [Board Chair] Russell Gould, a former board member of Wachovia Bank.”

While it may be an uphill climb with some students, Birgeneau says that most of his exchanges with students during forums on budget issues have been respectful. The television cameras, however, frequently focus on students he describes as a small and vocal minority.

“There is a radical core of students who are not interested in listening, and I don’t think you’ll ever reach them,” he said.

Given that, Birgeneau has opted to attend forums rather than protests. When faculty members and students participated in a systemwide walkout in September, Birgeneau did not engage with them.

“Going out in the middle of that would not have been useful in my opinion,” he said.

That is exactly, however, what the chancellor at the Riverside campus did do. Tim White addressed protesters with a megaphone, and students said at the time that he won some good will with the move.

"I'm proud of us," White said. "I understand the anger and frustration. I share the frustration."

Birgeneau and Yudof have both missed a window to align themselves with the movement, instead of becoming targets of it, according to Robert Dudley, a professor of integrative biology at Berkeley.

“I think they missed that opportunity months ago [during a systemwide walkout]," he said. “There is zero chance [now] that Yudof and Birgeneau would have any credibility to legitimately represent faculty or student interests. With Birgeneau, the silence has been deafening.”

Had Birgeneau engaged with protesters during the September walkout, he might be in a different political position now, Dudley said.

“That was his moment,” Dudley said. “He could have addressed the crowd from the balcony of the main building. He didn’t. Instead, it was individual faculty [addressing students], particularly in the humanities, because their budgets are being cut.”

If Dudley sounds upset, it’s in part because he has the dubious distinction of being the lone faculty member arrested during Friday’s protest. The arrest has drawn the ire of a number of Dudley’s colleagues, including something of a celebrity scientist who happened to witness it. Tim White (no relation to Riverside’s chancellor), who made worldwide news helping to uncover the oldest fossil skeleton of a human ancestor, says he was outraged to watch police wrestle Dudley to the ground.

“I saw a colleague of mine tackled from behind and thrown face down on the grass, put in handcuffs and walked away for simply coming close to police yellow tape, [and] students who had their hands raised being beaten with batons while they were chanting peaceful protest,” White said.

The chancellor’s call for a panel of students, faculty and staff to investigate the incident is a “step in the right direction,” but it’s too early to tell if it will effectively address what went wrong and prevent it from happening again, White said.

It's of note that White, who is presumably the kind of faculty member Berkeley would fight to keep as budgets decline, says he doesn't have a history of criticizing the administration -- but thinks the response here was so poor that it's warranted.

“Am I known as a campus radical? No," he said. "I’m an anthropologist and biologist who doesn't like seeing his colleague being blindsided by police officers and thrown to the ground, and I’m going to speak out against it.”

A Test for a Popular Chancellor

While the Berkeley protest began as the occupation of a building by a group of 40 people -- most of them students -- it has spawned a much larger debate that will be a real test for a chancellor who has enjoyed a fair amount of popularity in his first five years. Much of the criticism for the budget cuts has thus far been aimed at the Legislature and Yudof, but Friday’s events reinforced growing concerns that Birgeneau is not in touch with the concerns of his campus, according to Alice Agogino, a former chair of the Faculty Senate.

“I don’t think the general faculty was blaming Birgeneau so much, and this Friday kind of turned the tide on that,” she said. “The police violence and the message he was sending out about what a good job the police did, the fact that it was so hard to get in touch with him when faculty were trying to help, that was a turning point. It really depends on what he does in the near future. What he does next week is going to be critical. I think up until Friday people were upset and it wasn’t clear who to blame.”

Many faculty and students still give Birgeneau a lot of credit for past deeds, so it’s probably most accurate to say he’s “on probation” with both groups now, Agogino said. Faculty still remember, for instance, when Birgeneau supported their opposition to the Patriot Act a few years ago, incurring some political risk, she said.

Concerns about the protest incident come at an inopportune time, however, and not just because Birgeneau needs faculty and students to back him in such a difficult budget climate. The protest occurred just weeks after the Academic Senate passed a nonbinding resolution, calling for the university to discontinue its practice of subsidizing athletics with millions of dollars a year while staff are being laid off and programs are being cut.

The Senate voted 91-68 in favor of the resolution, and its passage drew national attention. Jack Citrin, a professor of political science at Berkeley, said it probably would have been in the chancellor’s long-term political interest to have tried to secure a different outcome for the vote. While he risked appearing too hands-on in a faculty matter, Birgeneau might have been spared the public blow of a vote that questioned the administration’s priorities, Citrin said.

“I don’t know how this [protest] is affecting our chancellor’s image or reputation among people who count, [but] the thing on athletics may not play well,” he said. “There, I think, was a mistake -- a lack of sort of political savvy on part of the people [in the chancellor’s office]. That resolution could very easily have been defeated; I don’t think it represents the views of the majority of faculty at all. So, yeah I think the politics of leadership is something that they need to attend to.”

For his part, Birgeneau says he’s focused on the big picture problem of preserving Berkeley’s strengths at a time of economic turmoil. A plan is in place to bring the budget into equilibrium in two to three years, and the chancellor says he’ll continue to push for additional revenues from the state. Birgeneau has previously proposed a gas tax for higher education, and says he’ll continue pushing for a new model to help the system.

“We’re going to work to try to get all of this energy directed in a more constructive direction,” he said. “I don’t know what else to do. We’re going to do our job no matter what we get from protests, from what I believe is a relatively small percentage of our community.”

Janet Broughton, dean of the College of Letters & Science, said in an e-mail Tuesday that she agrees the students could become part of the larger effort to influence lawmakers.

“Our students are right to be angry about the new fee increases, and most of them understand that to preserve excellence and access at UC, we must change hearts and minds in Sacramento,” she wrote. “I think great things could happen if our students mobilized around that mission.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Unnatural Enemies

  • Baton Beatings Won't Help
  • Posted by CC Prof on November 25, 2009 at 8:30am EST
  • Hitting students with batons, as described in the article, is probably not a good way to win them over to the administration's side. Of course, the administrators don't really care about the students. They are too busy pocketing their ridiculous salaries and expanding the administrative side of things. Then they have the gall to call for more taxes.

    The first thing that California and the University of California need to do is cut the fat. There are prison guards in California who make over $100,000 per year. There are retired firefighters and policemen who receive annual pensions greater than their highest salary. There are UC administrators who are being paid an administrative salary while they "prepare to teach." These sorts of practices are common throughout all levels of government in California.

    I'm all for government services, and I think that UC tuition has been raised far too much. I loved the UC campus that I attended, but I paid less than $2000 per year in the late 80's. Government services are meant for the public. They are not there so that the governing elites in the organization providing the services can siphon off undeserved public funds for themselves and their friends.

    I truly hope that this student anger remains aimed at the administrators and their abusive and wasteful practices. This society sorely needs some well-deserved anger aimed at these elites in both the private and the public sector. Too many of these people are being over-compensated for under-performing, and this is especially true in California.

  • Posted by CSU Adjunct on November 25, 2009 at 11:45am EST
  • Why blame the administrators? They are just doing what they were trained to do - get more money for the union dominated tenured faculty. Build new buildings so they can point with pride at how good their campus looks. The faculty continues to support the Democrats in Sacramento - the major cause of the state's budget shortfalls. Why blame the union guards and the police and firemen who have cushy pensions. The pensions of the faculty are nothing to sneeze at in terms of when they can retire and what their retirement compensation is. As for athletics, have you seen the disproportionate number of females in the classes? How the majority of students can be labeled a minority and catered to is very interesting. Athletics caters to the male students. Folks, we have a world view problem in the schools. Until they are no longer socialist fiefdoms beholding to the Democratic Party, there will not be a change. Look to helping the students first. Then look to increasing the efficiency of the overall system. We do not need Starbucks in the Library building. Get back to supporting the students and perhaps the tuitions will not rise. Everyone in the system needs to go on an "efficiency hunt" and do what they individually can to lower costs. The administrators are part of the faculty. It is the student and faculty responsibility to work to lower costs. Get to work and stop whining.

  • don't blame the administrators too much
  • Posted by mathprof on November 25, 2009 at 11:45am EST
  • Perhaps the administrators, caught between declining state support and the need to keep the university open to students from all economic levels, haven't done an ideal job. But the wealthy business interests who prefer their wealth to paying their share of services for all Californians are the real villains in this dispute. The university administration and the students are fighting over the scraps from their masters' tables.

    We need to go back to the idea that a public university is an asset not just to the students who attend it but to the entire state of California and its future. The outstanding teachers who are UC graduates, the engineers and scientists whose UC-gained expertise fuels economic growth, the talented artists and writers these campuses have produced, are the rewards reaped by the taxpayers who funded UC generously in the past. Many of these graduates were people whose families could never have afforded private education. The University of California has an international reputation for excellence, but its major positive impact has been right here in California. Let's not throw it away!

  • The importance of faculty support is underestimated here
  • Posted by BerkeleyProf at UC Berkeley on November 25, 2009 at 12:15pm EST
  • The role that faculty support plays in establishing trust between students and administration is underestimated here - because, frankly, the administration seems to have concluded that faculty are no longer a valued part of the campus community.

    Here is a short list of how the administration is losing faculty allegiance at lightning speed:
    1. The furloughs were handled badly; faculty input, with far better ideas about how to maintain goodwill and work smoothly, were ignored. I am not even going to address the administration's clumsy rhetorical responses in the New York Times and elsewhere.
    2. There was no obvious effort to respond to or reach out to signatories supporting the September walk-out.
    3. The vote on athletics was more important than suggested here - in two ways. First, I was in that room; emeritus professors and administrators with voting privileges overwhelming supported continuing subsidies of athletics, while younger faculty (under 55, let's say) who are more engaged with the implications of costs to teaching support voted in the majority. The nature of who voted and how is often not reported, but sitting in the back of the room, I found it to be a strong statement about the direction this movement may go. Secondly, there was (again) no effort on the part of administration to reach out and address the issues raised in that room and by faculty who had made a careful study of the costs of intercollegiate athletics, God bless them for their effort. Instead, before the vote, the Chancellor indicated it was important - after, he downplayed it.

    I think that until the administrators on our campuses are again required to regularly teach - and grade - the implications of what we are losing will be too obscure to them to make a difference. Our administrators think we are whining over spilt milk, while the reality is that we are bleeding to death in front of their eyes. They do not know the students or the faculty any more; their isolation and unwillingness to engage in discourse is at the root of our loss.

  • "Crying all the way to the bank..."
  • Posted by vfichera on November 25, 2009 at 12:15pm EST
  • While I appreciate this article as one of the most nuanced so far on the situation in California, the administrators' contention that they are the unhappy victims of student protests reminds me of an old Liberace anecdote.

    Liberace, the flamboyant pianist with the glittery and glittering showman outfits, was once asked about his reaction to the criticisms leveled against his regalia as not fitting for a serious performer.

    His reply was "I cry -- all the way to the bank."

    So, too, the administration beneficiaries of the current system of funding -- who will not themselves be seriously affected by anything in their compensation structure -- are simply crying on the shoulders of the press: all the way to the bank.

  • true leadership
  • Posted by jess on November 25, 2009 at 1:00pm EST
  • I'm disappointed that the leadership of the UC system sees these protests as a bad thing. True leadership would welcome the students to a sit in inside a building, and maybe even provide blankets or water for them. A true leader would be proud that students are exercising their rights, being socially active, and banding together to attempt to impact change. I've known college presidents that have kept their offices open and tasked security to protect the open building just so students could continue their sit in. That is how a system should work.

    The fundamental problem, aside from the misappropriation of funds, is that the administrators continue to see the students as unnecessary burdens, or thorns in the side. Things will never change while that attitude continues.

  • Administrators are faculty?
  • Posted by CSU Professor , Professor/Sociology at Cal Poly on November 25, 2009 at 1:30pm EST
  • To the CSU Adjunct who says that administrators are faculty: if they were faculty, then they would be teaching. To conflate administrators and faculty is a major error.

    The CSU Chancellor's Office and the various presidents of the system claim that in order to attract the necessary talent that they have to offer extraordinary pay and benefits packages to themselves and fellow administrators.

    It's interesting and revealing that they should make that argument.

    Whereas faculty go into teaching and scholarship primarily - or exclusively - for the love of knowledge and education and because they want to teach students, administrators apparently don't share these values and must be bribed into serving. This alone shows the gap between the value systems of faculty and that of administrators. We need to sharply reduce administrative bloat and exorbitant pay and benefit packages and have administrators who serve for the love of education, not for the love of money. How can we have people who are supervisors of faculty be motivated by money and power? Isn't there something fundamentally wrong with that picture?

  • Administrators and ... administrators
  • Posted by UC Supporter , Academic Senate member at UC Berkeley on November 25, 2009 at 3:45pm EST
  • The term "administrator" covers a lot of territory. Some administrators are faculty members who have agreed to serve as academic deans, vice provosts, or vice chancellors. Many of them plan to return to teaching and research after they finish their stints, and although some are able to continue doing a bit of teaching and research while they do their administrative work, many are just too swamped. Other administrators are in areas like IT, facilities, purchasing, and HR, where there's no reason to expect them to function as faculty members.

  • Not the start, not the end
  • Posted by Cut to It on November 25, 2009 at 4:15pm EST
  • The demise of public education started happening decades ago and will continue as long as a college degree continues to be advertised in terms of POTENTIAL salary. How many times do you see reports about the amount of money over the course of a lifetime a college graduate will make over a person with a college degree? This has nothing to do with a public good. As soon as you equate it to POTENTIAL salary then it becomes a private good. As much as I view education as a public good I can't blame legislators when they decide to make cuts to higher ed because of how it has become a private good in the eyes of students, families, marketers and the colleges themselves. It's the people, specifically taxpayers, who get to define what is "public education". Legislators need to be reminded of the public good, but instead they continue to expand Corrections (prisons) and a plethora of other programs. Of course all of these are "good". The days of unsustainable growth and expectations is over and we all need to be part of the discussion. Students love and have "demanded' new Unions, residence halls, recreation centers, libraries, etc. This all costs money. Public institutions love to talk about the different pots of funding (general fund, tuition, fees, auxiliaries, etc.) and just say there's nothing that can be done because of the money silos. This needs to change. Institutions need to have flexibility to support themselves. Public education as a model doesn't exist. Even the best institutions are "publically supported" with a minority of their funding coming from the state (taxpayers). The issue in California is front and center because of the extraordinary amount of the tuition increase, however all schools are experiencing unsustainable increases. Maybe an 8 or 9% increase doesn't seem bad compared to 32% but it is still way ahead of inflation and increase in material costs.

  • Shocked by What's Happening at UC
  • Posted by Riverside84 on November 26, 2009 at 4:00pm EST
  • I am another 1980s-era UC graduate who has lived in the Southeast since 1986. My parents moved to California from Illinois during the 1960s precisely because at that time, California was building a superb higher education system. For many years, Californians have lived happily with higher education as the state's crown jewel. Even as the quality of elementary and secondary schools started to decline in the 1980s, the universities remained excellent.

    My mother became quite concerned when I made the decision to attend grad school in Alabama back in 1986. Her view of Alabama was that it was a state that had only recently broken away from the era of segregation and chain gangs and was not a progressive supporter of higher education.

    I am shocked by the news I am seeing lately coming from California of the 32% fee increase, on top of last year's 9% or so. I am also shocked at how California's prison system has grown at a faster rate than prisons outside of hard-line Texas.

    The students have every right to protest this assault on their financial future in a nonviolent manner. Not every student is a future Wall Street banker or Golden State real estate magnate with the ability to easily pay back hundreds of thousands of dollars in student loans. Middle-of-the-road professionals like teachers, small-town administrators, nurses, and office administrators still require college degrees. Those who have benefited from California's R & D heritage have every right to expect the leadership of California to believe in the state's financial future through continued funding for education and research.

    The administration has failed to effectively lobby the California legislature to preserve university funding. I do believe there was overbuilding during the 1990s as the newer UCs like my once-small alma mater Riverside added management programs and med schools. However, it appears that during the last 5 or 6 years, the administration has completely failed to lobby the Calif. legislature to maintain an adequate amount of public funding.

    Faculty were already under quite a bit of grant-writing pressure when I went to school in the 1980s. There is a point at which the quality of research (as well as teaching) will decline if faculty are forced to spend too much time writing grant proposals versus guiding postdocs and grad students.

    I believe that a large portion of athletics should be self-supporting i.e. football and baseball. Nevertheless, the university should still support minor sports and intramurals. I'm not a big sports person, but I believe the minor sports contribute to a lifetime of good health habits for their participants.

    There is a strong nexus between the explosive growth of California's prison system and the decline in public support for its universities. While violent offenders need to absolutely stay locked up, a large part of the growth in prison population has been related to Three Strikes and mandatory sentencing laws directed at non-violent and drug-related offenders.

    I used to be against legalization of drugs. However, I now believe that California must choose between its hard-nosed prison policies and the concept of decriminalization of milder drugs like marijuana and steroids (which were legal until 1994) with the funds saved from the penal system to be directed straight to the university system.

    California also must address the legacy issues that were created by Proposition 13.

  • %: students, faculty, uc workers and supporters worldwide
  • Posted by newstoyou , English at UC Berkeley on November 26, 2009 at 8:45pm EST
  • Any UC student who has attended any of the fairly large number of at-capacity meetings, conferences, forums, rallies, protests, library and other types of sit-ins, improvised marches that have stopped traffic on major downtown thoroughfares, building occupations, etc.—and any community member or other who has read front-page national headlines whose coverage is largely sympathetic of such actions, or has seen the tremendous number of faculty members' names who have publicly and in print endorsed the September walkout, or has seen the footage of blatant police violence on students on youtube, facebook and other social networks—knows without a doubt that the mobilization surrounding an ongoing protest, against administrative decisionmaking and lack of accountability (and/or accounting) regarding budgets and funding, represents far more than "a relatively small percentage of our community." As is the case with the rest of the UC administration, as well as the administrations of other irresponsibly run institutions of public education in California and elsewhere (whether in times of budget crisis or boom!), Birgenau has his back against the wall. It is because of the amount of support for the protesting and dissent, and not the lack of it, that Birgenau doesn't "know what else to do." If the concern of the administrators was actually public education, a salary in the hundreds of thousands should be a pretty motivating factor in finding innovative and inspiring ways to take on some real leadership and be accountable to the needs and concerns and questions of the most participatory and inspired population of students to come through the UC system in quite some time.

  • $3 million UC/UCB Carefree Spending
  • Posted by Milan Moravec , CEO at University of California on December 1, 2009 at 5:30am EST
  • Work Can Be Done Internally
    UC President Yudof has a UCB Chancellor that should do the high paid work he is paid for instead of hiring an East Coast consulting firm to fulfill his responsibilities. ‘World class’ smart executives like Chancellor Birgeneau need to do the analysis, hard work and make the difficult decisions of their executive job!

    Where do consulting firms like Bain ($3,000,000 consultants) get their recommendations?
    From interviewing the senior management that hired them and will be approving their monthly consultant fees and expense reports. Remember the nationally known auditing firm who said the right things and submitted recommendations that senior management wanted to hear and fooled government oversight agencies and the public? Consultants never bite the hand that feeds them

    Mr. Birgeneau's executive officer performance management responsibilities include "inspiring innovation and leading change." This involves "defining outcomes, energizing others at all levels and ensuring continuing commitment." Instead of demonstrating his leadership capacity by fulfill his executive accountabilities, Mr. Birgeneau outsourced them. Doesn't he engage University of California and University of California Berkeley (UCB) people at all levels to help examine the budget and recommend the necessary $150 million trims? Hasn't he talked to Cornell and the University of North Carolina - which also hired Bain -- about best practices and recommendations that might apply to UCB cuts?
    No wonder the faculty and staff are angry and suspicious. Three million dollars is a high price for students and Californians to pay when a knowledgeable ‘world-class’ Chancellor is not doing the work of his job.
    Save $3,000,000 for teaching students and request that the President Yudof motivate Birgeneau to fulfill his executive work accountabilities!