On Monday, the University of California Commission on the Future met to discuss various ways to cut university costs. Oh, so you’re one of the 76 percent of students who doesn’t know what that is, either?
While created to optimize accessibility and resource allocation and UC quality, the UC commission’s latest proposals for saving the UC money are still quite costly on a figurative level. If implemented, which is likely, the rich meaning of an undergraduate degree will be devalued.
Students’ lack of familiarity with the Commission on the Future and the commission’s lack of regard for student welfare is no coincidental matter ““ with such detachment from students, it’s no wonder that education is so easily compromised.
The new proposals involve downsizing degree requirements and promoting online and summer instruction in order to boot students out of the system in less than four years. The lack of funds within the UC system and within any American education system is nothing new. Neither is the fact that attempts to be more fiscally conservative often happen at our expense.
But the commission’s newest development slightly differs from a tuition hike, fewer professors or any of the other unfortunate circumstances that have arisen in the past two years.
The difference lies in that students may be more willing to accept these new changes because of stress from parents or their own personal desire to quicken the process, move on to graduate school, and stop “wasting time.” A three-year degree may, in fact, seem efficient to some.
But it’s important to generate the most return out of your investment.
The current job market has more than enough competition and will be unable to accommodate the wave of students that will roll in if degrees are shortened and the classic classroom setting is outsourced. It’s kind of like driving in Los Angeles ““ everyone you see is in such a rush, but no one has anywhere to go.
It is upsetting to think that the institution’s decision to commodify our time here can be mirrored by our own passive acceptance of a money-oriented education and a faster pace of life. And even if getting through college in three years is an important aim for some, it isn’t something the UC commission needs to endorse or implement.
This type of approach is an abysmal degradation of what education means. College should never come to be some systematic contraption that spews out market-ready adults. It is, rather, an extremely unique time in one’s life, where the access to profound and interconnected knowledge is immediate through professionals and peers. We will miss out on the potential of our experience together if this is not realized.
Despite possible acceptance of such a proposal, the Alternative Commission on the Future, composed of students and faculty, has surveyed students enough to know that an overwhelming disapproval of the UC commission’s actions, and, in fact, the commission as a whole, exists.
Students do not support relegating face-to-face class time to online courses or summer sessions, where student learning is inhibited by the fast-paced intensity of the course.
Students will not be happy with these changes, education will not be improved and the UC system will suffer in performance and reputation.
The university is understandably under extreme pressure to be more frugal, and state funding undoubtedly lags behind the university’s growth and state inflation. The restructuring of a struggling university system should not, however, consider fiscal solutions without also considering the impact on students and what seems to be a hot topic this school year ““ the quality of education at UCLA.
The UC commission’s report acknowledges that the face of California is evolving, and the university is one of the central domains from which that change can be accommodated and positively maximized.
This is exactly why reconfiguring our budget with these supposed goals in mind is so vital ““ we are not simply a part of a public education structure, but of an institution that propels and enables some of the most intelligent young minds across the world, an institution that can greatly benefit from the growing diversity of California.
A whopping 94 percent of students surveyed by the Alternative Commission believe the governing structure of the UC is inadequately addressing the system’s needs. In a perfect world, this will serve as a rude awakening to administrators and the UC commission that other avenues of money management need to be pursued to salvage this system.
Think three years of college is better than four? E-mail Moradi at imoradi@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to opinion@media.ucla.edu.