I note some pictures of sit-ins where students are raising a clenched fist -- echoes of college protests of the 60's and 70's, except that I imagine the new mantra is 'Power to the Privledged'

Just want your readers to know that CSU campuses and student there are also part of this protest. And they are hardly, for the most part, priveleged. I know it's a juicier story to lament the attack on the premier research institutions in CA (plus I realize that many Boomers can't resist the whole Berkeley in the 1960s angle), but the CSU provides access to education for more students than any other instituiton in the nation. I wish more attention were being given to the loss of educational access and its impacts on our nation and not just to the effects that budget cuts have on research universities.

This is the cost of the educational benefits California has offered as compared to most other states that have always required some contribution from students to educational costs to public Universities/Colleges. California is just now adjusting back to the model the rest of the states have been using all along. Unfortunately, this was hastened by non-California students finding residence loopholes to take advantage of benefits intended for (and paid for by) families of Californians.

Bully tactics would not seem to appropriately represent what we consider learned and intelligent people. It seems "we" are proned to fall back on our "base" weaknesses to get our point across. Too bad.

Well if the students and professors can generate some income for their bankrupt state, that would go a long way towards solving the problem. At least it would be better than burning who knows how much on the salaries of professors while they didn't do their jobs.

"GIMMEGIMMEGIMMEGIMME!!"

This crisis has been coming ever since California passed prop 13. The financial meltdown was just the catalyst for the chickens coming home to roost. Now the next generation has to pay the price of the prior generations' selfishness, in the form of a crappy state school system.

You don't think the best faculty, particularly younger faculty, will leave the UC system for greener pastures? Think again: academia is a national labor market, and there are plenty of universities that are more than willing to snap up the best UC faculty. Plus, more star faculty are deciding to enter industry, where the hours are shorter, the pay is better, and they don't have to put up with people, like some of the Chronicle commenters, who can't string two words together into a coherent sentence.

"Privledged"?, "Priveleged"?, "Proned"?

Preposterous!

It was a pain in the tuckus. Took 45 minutes just to leave campus yesterday and go all of about 1/4 mile after the students tried to occupy the freeway.

At least they're engaged and not apathetic. And faculty are on the same side. Gave the campus cops something to do here. As an MSO (what we call department administrator/controllers) commented looking at the 50-60 squad cars full of cops, "Dear god. Will you LOOK at all that overtime! More than for Bill Clinton's speech!"

Around here it was the chancellor and faculty who were leading figures in the protests, which is why in this area the students made more sense than previously I think. Our chancellor isn't too shabby in the coopting department.

There were not protests when the budgets were increased irresponsibly? Precious, precocious intellects of our western border: It goes first horse, then cart, and thus, first undisciplined spending, then debt and cuts.....would it help if it was sung it in a happy voice and a rhyme ?

I fail to see the point of blocking entrances or exits to freeways and campus buildings. Commuters, students, staff, and faculty were not the target of this protest. Such actions would seem to be counterproductive.

The Chronicle's coverage is incredibly biased. I suppose that makes sense, given this is a magazine for administrative wanks. No quote from a student? Focusing attention on the 5% of students who got carried away? Despicable, Chronicle.

The UC's and CSU's are engines of the California economy. The return on investment is inestimable. They are the R & D arm of the state, providing billions of dollars annually in stimulus to local economies. Of course, thinking long-term is the problem with people in Sacramento. In not meeting funding goals now, they're just ruining the competitive advantage of the state and further decimating its tax base.

If the tuition hikes meant no decline in course availability and no furloughs, students and faculty would be upset but would at least see the necessity. As it stands, student tuition is going up 32% and they are seeing drastic cuts in course availability, which often causes prolonged stay in the university. For a student who has to stay an extra year to get the courses he/she needs, this could mean an extra 10K in tuition. This is where the anger comes from. If you had been paying 1,000 for rent each month, then the landlord came and raised your rent to 1,320 a month, then proceeded to shut off the water and cut the gas, you'd be pissed. That's the sort of experience students at CSU's and UC's are having right now.

And saying that now public education in CA is just like other states relies on the false assumption that public education in other states is acceptable. That's often not the case. It's a race to the bottom.

Students and faculty should stop letting budget cuts obscure the real issue: the seemingly inexorable rise in the cost of education with no apparent increase in education's benefits. They should protest the lack of innovation and accountability at their schools; the outdated teaching modes that drive up costs and decrease learning outcomes; and the complete lack of representation for their economic interests at the management level.

Soc_sci_anon (6) may have a point. He notes that "Plus, more star faculty are deciding to enter industry, ..." Industry will probably snap those Latin and Literature professors up in the wink of an eye.

Don't they teach Econ 101 anymore in California?

If not, a lot of folks might benefit greatly from the wonderful, yet mysterious magic of TANSTAAFL. For the young or otherwise uninitiated; undertanding that "There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch" might just be the beginning of a lifelong journey through adulthood.

If individuals (or their families) are not willing to pay for their own college education, they will need to slowly and very carefully explain to the rest of us exactly who they think should be responsible for doing so. The lunch they are wanting to eat ain't free. So who pays and why?

Why yes, they do teach us Econ 101 here in California, 11232247, which is why we are capable of reading the newspaper and noticing that Chevron (headquartered in CA) declared a single year profit of $28 billion last year--ironically the same amount as the state's deficit--and that Anthem Blue Cross declared a profit of $4.7 billion, and that many other large corporations seem to be rolling in free (or are they "expensed"?) lunches while the middle and working class students at public universities are asked to absorb fee increases over 30%. This represents an economic decision--or a failure to lead. The California's Master Plan for Education is an excellent model for our public servants to emulate, and their first task is to generate the revenue. Man up, Schwarzenegger.

johntoradze

That was a funny post with some interesting stories about the day. But when you say "at least they're engaged and not apathetic" I have to disagree.

Being engaged means getting off your ass and going to work to get what you need and want. If you are already taking big loans to go to UC, then you better be in class getting your money's worth, not playing out in the street. Being engaged means setting priorities; go half-time if you must, get a job and go to school later, move to another state. Being engaged in the game of life means making tough choices.

I wish I was rich too, but what can one do?

As far as the proteters are concerned, what is up with protesting for only one day? What did they do that evening, go home to their cozy dorms and drink beer and have a nice dinner? I bet they even watched TV too!! They sound like a bunch of filthy, lazy capitalists to me!!

They need to get out there and spend the night sleeping on campus and they should stay there until the job is done, no matter how many years it takes. By the way, they need to be outside in the rain and snow too. Do you suppose great revolutions are won only when the weather is nice and sunny?

They complain about the government but you can not even find reliable revolutionaries anymore!!

Most comments are inane.

Amen. End of discussion.

Take from the rich institutions and give to the poor institutions.

Higher ed is in such a fix because corporations have made deals with legislatures and are not taxed equitably. Higher ed.leaders just looke dthe other way while public institutions were slowly choked over the past 2 decades. The anger with the adminsitrators comes from the fact than in many cases presidents and provosts have been bought off by these corporate interests and stopped advocating for studnts and faculty a long time ago. The should have been the ones protesting 10 years ago but they were too busy living in free mansions with cooks and maids, flying the corporate jet around and arranging their consulting fees for sitting on corporate boards. The presidents and the provosts are in bed with the politicians and the corporate fat cats who appoint their own to higher ed governing boards. These same allow for corporations to colonize university research programs. Then deans do the bidding of the boys uptown. The whole governance/administrative system needs a purging. I only wish Obama was a real socialist. We could nationalize the public universities and send all the packing to reeducation camps.

Of course there are exceptions like the Nevada administrators who protested with students. we need more leaders in higher educaion like that.

ciceronow

Yes, higher ed is in a fix because of the deals that happen between legislatures and corporations.

That is exactly what happens when "public" universities become nationalized. The government, who is always under the influence of the rich, take control. The problem is that "public" universities are already nationalized (or "state-alized," if you will), not that they need to be. What the government giveth, it can also taketh away. This is the problem with the nationalization of anything.

As far as re-education camps are concerned, there are places you can go and live if that is what you are really looking for.

Blackhawks and Canucks tonight; I say 'Hawks by at least two goals!! Go 'Hawks!!

I find it remarkable that even with the prevailing PC culture in academe, no one has mentioned how California's identity as a welfare state has played a role in this. Seriously, turn a blind eye if you must, but the staggering sums paid out to people who live off the system significantly contributed to this dilemma.Of course illegals are entitled to freebies and in-state tuition now aren't they? Even at the cost of California's future. What a waste of nice weather.

asymptotic

Yes!!...A socialized state...This is what is going to end up screwing everyone, not just university students. Why is this not being talked about here?

First of all I have to say that I support aid to students who genuinely need it. However as a university faculty member i am pretty sick of the take from the rich, give to "anyone" socialist mentality. Let's not fool ourselves....It is the symbolism of this notion which motivates student protests, not the idea that costly tuition increases will actually deter students from their education. the corporate and university fat cats you refer to who are supposedly "stealing from students" are a drop in the elitism bucket compared to those we elect to do our bidding in congress and in our State legislatures. Talk about living high on the hog at the public expense!! At least I can choose not to patronize corporations who act irresponsibly and unethically, but government programs are foisted on me and I have little say in how irresponsible, self-serving bureaucrats spend my tax dollars. I have been around universities a long time both as an administrator and a faculty member, and I can tell you 2 things - -1)that with very few exceptions, university executives and faculty are among the hardest working individuals in this country, and 2)the demands and stress on university presidents more than justify their salaries and benefits.

I completely agree with soc-sci-anon that the chickens are finally coming home to roost --a value of hard work (which built this country) has been replaced by a sense of entitlement. Wake up politicians and students.....the budget woes of our great educational institutions represent but one symptom of the out of control greed which has gripped this nation. There are ALWAYS limits to what individuals, organizations, and institutions can afford. Amassed in debt and entitlement programs, our country has been well beyond that limit for some time. Student protests are but one more indication of a rampant sense of entitlement which has driven us dangerously beyond that limit.

Well, Perpetual Student, they apparently don't teach you Econ 102, which says that if you seize more and more profits from corporations headquartered in your state (which you seem to advocate), they simply leave it and go elsewhere, increasing a state's unemployment and decreasing its tax revenue.

I'm sure you'd be thrilled if the state of California could unilaterally commandeer profits from all of the evil corporations there who are, in the words of *South Park*, being all corporation-y. But Chevron et al. aren't legally required to remain in the state. (By the way, aren't both Anthem BC and Chevron publicly traded? So some of those wicked profits are going back to shareholders...) Support a radical tax increase on California businesses all you want, but don't bitch when the secretary, janitor, middle manager etc. who work at Chevron are out of a job -- and can't send their kids to *any* college -- because the corporation has decamped to Arizona.

I love it when hacks try to sound smart about economics, like there's one monolithic consensus on sound economic policy. There are plenty of ways to intelligently fund a robust public higher education system, keeping costs manageable for students, providing adequate course availability to complete degrees on time, all while improving the state's economy.

Fees have risen in the UC system 90% since 2007, faculty salaries have declined relative to peer institutions (19% below market on average), class size has risen, offerings have been cut, availability has declined. To say that students are being selfish, or that the increases are necessary, or that there's no remedy, is intellectually dishonest. Perhaps fees needed to be raised, as they were in the U of Texas system...by 4%, not 32%. California voters are failing themselves.

The protesters aren't making this crisis up, they're not being greedy, and they're not looking at the world through rose-colored glasses. What do you think will happen if the UC and CSU systems continue their decline? California's competitive advantage rests in agriculture and higher education, period. The San Joaquin Valley and the Silicon Valley are emblematic of the way the California economy works. By screwing the UC and CSU systems, you're screwing both Valleys (agricultural productivity gains are driven by R & D also).

The state's only future competitive advantage rests in biotech and green energy, both of which are highly R & D dependent. Where will these industries get workers, where will they innovate, where will they thrive? Wherever states have vibrant, productive university systems serving the private sector AND the social good. In California--unlike New England--R & D is carried out by the public U's. Screwing undergraduate education in the state is an easy way to destroy the state economy.

Or, we could all act like children and think this is just them darned kiddies acting up again. Idiotic.

I am amazed to see some of the ignorant comments coming from people who are supposedly educated and people who are affiliated with colleges and universities. Don't those of you who think it is just fine to cut the universities' budgets understand that education is a public good that benefits everyone? Destroy the higher education system, and you will undermine the economic base of your state - employers will go where they can get educated workers. And it won't be states like California that the will be going to if trends like the current one continue?

And do those of you in favor of the budget cuts think it is just fine that how much money you have determines your access to state universities. To me that is patently unfair - every Californian (or resident of any other state) pays taxes that support higher education, and hence every resident ought to have access to what they are paying for.

And as to commenters like #1 - cutting the budget, raising tuition, and limiting access as is being done in California and many other states is exactly what serves the interests of the privileged. If daddy and mommy are rich, you get to go to college. Otherwise, find a minimum wage service job. What is being done to higher education is disgraceful. I say, GO PROTESTORS, KEEP IT UP!

I received my BA, MA, and PhD degrees from UCLA and, in those days, I actually paid around $900 for an entire year of undergraduate education. I am now a professor in a public university in CT and while CT certainly has its share of budgetary and higher educational funding woes, I would like to make some comments that address various sides of these issues. (1) Like many ohter (although quieter and more modest) people across this country, I was deeply concerned about the vast amounts of money that was poured into the recent Prop 8 campaign. I believe that it is at some point incumbent on the courts to avoid such monumental expenditures. The reason to provide gays and lesbians with the right to marriage is to prevent crimes of opportunity against vulnerable minorities and to give children the protections of legally recognized family life. (2) Here in CT, our Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage with minimal fuss, and the sun has yet to fall out of the sky. (3) Public support of higher education encouraged an ethos on university campuses that saw higher education as being in the service of the public good. When public support began to erode--which might have occurred because of an intergenerational difference in perception--this caused a culture shift in higher education that many Americans find offensive. The argument that we need higher education so that we can all get high paid jobs with corporate America strikes deep unease in Americans, and for good reason--especially when it's been combined with globalization, outsourcing, and the decay of a national economy. (4) We had a lot fewer "support services" but the campus atmosphere was quite peaceful--possibly because the anxious rivalries caused by pitching everything as a quest for competitiveness--had not yet emerged. (5) I think the assessment movement and the relations between universitie and corporations have been largely ill-conceived, and I am afraid that in coming years these misgivings will be enlarged as we see further--and more disturbing--evidence of the steady erosions of privacy that have accompanied the internet, and the consequences of the same. The acquisition of advanced knowledge, and the internalization of habits of critical thinking--are not achievements that can be purchased or produced on the marketplace with "cut rate efficiency." We are swamped in controversy and suspicion, and I regret to say that the internet has not so much produced thoughtful consideration and moderate views but partisanship and politicized knowledge. I wish us luck, but it may come that we shall need an economic slowdown in order to reconsider what we regard as truly important.

Seems to me a lot of theory heads are forgetting these days about access to education for the impoverished, socially and economically vulnerable in our great state of CA.

Community Colleges are seeing fewer and fewer full time professor hires, they're getting hit with a fee hike (and we're talking people who can't afford bus passes who go to schools without the clout to pull "free" student-fee local transportation deals), and they are getting the greates enrollment spikes as folks seek retraining in the face of high unemployment. Some CA community colleges are in the postion of having to cancel full classes, give pink slips to full timers, and turn students away.

I said turn students away.
What, exactly, is "publc" education for again? Public for whom?

Quoth No 27: "I was deeply concerned about the vast amounts of money that was poured into the recent Prop 8 campaign. I believe that it is at some point incumbent on the courts to avoid such monumental expenditures."

So don't allow the people to vote because it costs too much? Indeed, courts are cheaper, and dictators are cheaper still. At least for a while.

Mr Farley in 26 asks -- at least pertinent to the topic of the post, the following: "I am amazed to see some of the ignorant comments coming from people who are supposedly educated and people who are affiliated with colleges and universities. Don't those of you who think it is just fine to cut the universities' budgets understand that education is a public good that benefits everyone?"

Maybe some of us are more educated than you suppose. Some of us may be educated enough to have read and thought about Richard Vedder -- thatt's Professor Richard Vedder--'s "Going Broke by Degrees--Why College Costs so Much?

I agree with this article. Protesters should definitely keep up what they're doing. Students and faculty have every right to be upset. When students pay more, education no longer remains a public service but it becomes more of a private one. How are people that are less privileged going to get employed without a higher education? Students choose to go to a public school for a reason. And for most, that reason has to deal with money. And if money becomes a problem, there is no where for people without money to turn for an education. Private schools aren't going to provide one. Education is a public service. Even parents are upset because now they wonder, where do all the taxes go? If it use to go to education, where is it now? Students have every right to be upset.

As for faculty and staff, quality teachers are getting laid off due to budget cuts and fee hikes. Instead of staff members getting paid what they deserve, they need to based their salaries off private deals and what not. How is that fair? How is the idea of everyone learning together promoted through these unfair salary pays? What makes someone who gets paid less for the exact same job more likely to do the best at what he/she does? As staff and students, protest is afoot in a fight for public education.

Universities may not be completely at fault but a protests has got to start somewhere and what better place than where the problem lies.

Love the neo-con and neo-lib tendency above to blame the victims and the love it or leave it mentaility of some on the blog. Those "entitled poor people" are the problem according to some on this list not to mention the "undocumented aliens". Shame on you blaming the victims. Let's look at higher ed. policy in Europe and I think we know where we should be heading. If we do that we have to look at corporate tax policy, labor policy and health care policy all feeding into the higher ed. crisis here. Yes its a slipery slope for our neo-con flag wavers. I would say the conservative venal types should go live somewhere else but the US is the last bastion of unbrideled capitalism, greed, and Spencerian policies. If I were the feds I would penalize corporations for decamping to international destnations and then have a uniform federal corporate tax policy so corporations can't play states off one another. No place to run should be the federal corporate tax slogan.

Public education is just that-public. There is a public good to it and yes it is redsitributive. My aspiration of nationalizing higher ed is one of federal rescue from the state governing boards which have been corporatized by the corrupt politicians appointing them. Kind of like when the feds sent the national gaurd in to force the schools in the south to stop their racist policies and open their doors. Remember when Nixon used price freezes, maybe Obama should put a price freeze on tuition. Alas, the hope of the Obama using the state to equitably redistribute wealth in this country through progressive policies is not reflective in his ideas about regulating the fiancial institutions or the health insurance companies. He should have appointed Stiglitz, Reich, and Angel to be top advisors rather than the same old same old such as Summers, Bernake, Geithner, and in education Duncan. I am a middle class Anglo guy who got a free ride to college becuase I kept my grades up and my parents couldn't afford to pay for it. I wouldn't be in higher ed except for progressive policies at the State (Cal Grant B) and Federal Level (Pell grants) and low fees. I think many of those protesting recently are in the same boat as I was not priveleged whiners as many of you assert. Back then, the state was not afraid to take its fair share of corporate profits to pay for higher education. GO PROTESTORS-KEEP IT UP!!! University and College presidents are not going to do the hard work of pressuring legislators for them, Hats off.

It feels damn good to be a bleeding heart, I know. You care about people, and want everyone to share in the largesse of those whose hard work undergirds our albeit, frail, economy. Noble. But the bottom line is simply this....there is not enough money to satisfy the enormous wants of "the public," however you define "public." That means not everyone is entitled to go to UC. Our community college system is excellent. The state has provided for the public good via its well-conceived Master Plan with a 3-tiered higher education system. California is broke. At the federal level too, the largest budget line item is interest on the federal debt. But none of this should matter, you say?? Let's just continue feeling good about ourselves as we advocate for the wants (vs. needs) of all citizens no matter what the cost. After all, feeling good is what is important. Let's just continue spending what we don't have so we will all feel better!!