Tag Archives: Tuition

Special Saturday night soup

  • This may or may not contain Red Tags.

    A renowned genetics professor is leaving the University of Arizona (The Campus Correspondent)

  • “Federal loans should go to those who are most likely to benefit from higher education, not to everyone who can enroll…” So, not these guys? Oops (Inside Higher Ed)
  • Of course waiting until the students had gone for Winter Break, the UA announced the selections of deans for the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, and the College of Fine Arts. (Note: Fishiness was the smell of the day when each of their predecessors suddenly “resigned” earlier this year. More on this later.) (UA News)
  • And you thought UA faculty had it bad… (The Philadelphia Inquirer)
  • WatchCat update notice: A new front page tab complete with in-depth information and speculation from research, interviews and reliable anonymous sources concerning the inner-workings and personnel moves associated with the UA Transformation should be up between Jan. 5 and 10.
  • Anyone for an H1N1 flu vaccine from UA Campus Health Services? (UA Campus Health Services website)

UA faculty leaders: We have no idea what is going on, either

UA Provost Meredith Hay shrugs her shoulders in resignation...just kidding---this is just some random chick.

And in other breaking news, the sky is blue.

University of Arizona Faculty Senate meeting. Snoozefest, right? Well, not today, because when you approve the minutes of the previous meeting 52 minutes into the current meeting, that’s when you know you’ve stumbled into something good.

  • Puzzling dialogue does the impossible, makes UA Transformation even murkier

Breaking off from the traditional UA Faculty Senate meeting format, UA Faculty Chair Wanda Howell asked Strategic Planning and Budget Advisory Committee Chair Lynn Nadel (who is a man) to clear up for the faculty exactly what SPBAC is. (In short, they are the committee who makes advisements to the UA upper administration on what to cut and how to save money throughout the UA Transformation Process, although it’s still unclear how active or effective the group really is.)

Nadel described SPBAC as the “nexis of communication” between the UA central administration and the UA community, including the faculty and colleges, after which he said that SPBAC “is beginning to play its role.”

Finally, Phew. I was starting to get worried. It’s only been a year-and-a-half since the inception of the UA Transformation Process and the creation of SPBAC. Good to know that over a dozen months after its creation, the group is finally “beginning to play its role.”

But what takes the cake is this gem of a dialogue between Howell, Nadel and Secretary of the Faculty J.C. Mutchler:

Howell: “Are we going to tell them what to cut? I think that’s what everyone’s wanting to know.”

Nadel: “No.”

Dammit, we almost had something.

Nadel: “The decision rests with the administrators. Anything else is chaos, as far as I’m concerned.”

What. Just. Happened.?

Howell: “So, if they wouldn’t take our suggestions, they would have to tell us why, right?”

Mutchler: “Well, we’d ask them why, but they wouldn’t have to tell us anything.”

Howell: “Oh, they most definitely would have to tell us why.”

Oops, good to see that these people aren’t the only ones who “have no idea what the hell is going on.”

UA President Robert Shelton: “The wisdom of this group is absolutely at the core” of the UA Transformation.

Jesus, you said it, Mr. President.

Whether or not Shelton was tossing out a hilariously-timed, subtle dig at the faculty leadership, the dialogue speaks volumes about the mass confusion and general lack of insight by anyone into the inner-workings of the UA Transformation Process. Right now, the only thing anyone knows is that no one else knows a damn thing either.

  • Faculty friendships getting in the way of effective leadership?

UA Provost Meredith Hay’s speech to the Faculty Senate started out simple enough, with the provost taking a page out of Shelton’s Day 2-of-the-Regents-meeting book by first commending the presentation given at the Arizona Board of Regents meeting concerning the status of arts and humanities at the UA. (Is anyone buying this “We care about social sciences too” charade anymore?)

She then immediately segwayed into the sadness she surely feels from Nadel leaving soon as the SPBAC chair. Hay made sure to note with importance the immense friendship she and Nadel had discovered with each other.

Now, whether this is typical nice-speak that accompanies the departure of a colleague or Hay actually meant it, this has been a major flaw with the faculty’s involvement in the UA Transformation.

A main concern among the faculty has been the existence of too much of a buddy-buddy relationship going on between faculty leadership and the UA administration. Off-the-record interviews I have had with faculty since the beginning stages of the UA Transformation have shown time and time-again that faculty are concerned that faculty leadership don’t really have their concerns in mind. Wanda Howell has commented on this in past faculty forums, saying that faculty leadership is in a tough position, so the leaders must toe the line between the administrators and the faculty in order to meet both sides, compromisingly.

The faculty seem to want someone in there who will fight tooth-and-nail to scratch their way into the minds and attention of Shelton and Hay. If that’ true, sorry, profs—Howell and Nadel aren’t your guys, although I think you know that already.

  • Shelton downplays any UA wrongdoing in “Climategate” scandal

In one of most under-reported stories that is least talked about in university circles, Shelton defended the UA amidst an email scandal involving whether or not UA and world climatology personnel tried to cover up data pointing against widely-held thoughts on global warming.

If you aren’t familiar with the bizarre story, read this, this and this to catch up. Do it. It’s international. It’s interesting. It’s sexy.

Shelton maintained during a speech to the Faculty Senate that there is “no substance” to the emails, saying that the UA faculty submit themselves to the highest integrity of data. He went on to say that independent research groups have backed up the UA professors’ research data.

The president, naturally, blamed the media for the firestorm, and said that the facts are being distorted by those who do not understand how science research works.

“There may be those who do not fully understand,” Shelton said.

Maybe Shelton has a leg to stand on here, as he is a science man. That being said, it sounds too much like the convincing Shelton has continually tried on the UA community concerning the UA Transformation Process—“You don’t need to understand, because we understand.” (Not an actual quote, but you get the idea.)

Of course, whether it’s a global warming scandal or the dismantling of his university, instead of having open discussions about it, Shelton just wants to sweep it under the rug, just like some of the inner-workings of the Transformation Process.

And, as the faculty have said, don’t be fooled by the “conversations” the provost and president have had with faculty and student leaders. As has been mentioned in comments from faculty in the faculty poll, these conversations are not so much of a two-way communication as they are the provost telling faculty what’s going to be done and how.

Indeed here, Shelton is telling the faculty what to think about the “Climategate” scandal, rather than offer satisfactory explanation, even though the president was the vice provost for research at the University of California system (a decade before his tenure at the UA started), nowhere near the UA professors, when the emails were supposedly circulating among the climatologists in question.

  • Tuition to rise once again

As if you could expect anything else in a year when the state budget is in turmoil, the UA’s budget is cut by about $100 million and the upper administration is working on reshuffling the entire university structure, Shelton announced that tuition will once again rise up to absurd proportions.

“There is no doubt in my mind that tuition will have to go up and go up significantly for next fall and the following year,” he said.

Even after the great tuition increase of 2010 becomes official at March 11 and 12’s ABOR meeting on the UA campus, the university will still be in big trouble financially, Shelton told the Faculty Senate.

However, the president said he has no plans to recoup the $100 million lost via tuition dollars only, as current plans for tuition will only cover “about half of that.”

Shelton added that he doesn’t see the possibility of the UA’s in-state tuition to skyrocket, like the UC school system, in the near future, but does think it would be a good idea to adjust to the median of the UA’s 15 peer institutions, which would put tuition high but manageable, he said.

Surprisingly, Shelton said he meets on a regular basis with students leaders and Student Body President Chris Nagata in particular. What are these meetings, though? When are they going on? We always hear about these meetings, but we never see them, and we never see what I guess are supposed to be the results of them.

  • Other tidbits from the Faculty Senate meeting

-Graduate Student Government Leader David Talenfeld did not bring the UA graduate students’ “Statement of Rights,” downgraded from “Bill of Rights,” to the Faculty Senate for approval, and mentioned that the statement will probably not be ready for the January Faculty Senate meeting, either.

-The spring 2010 Faculty Elections petition process will begin in January, with the elections taking place in March. Those not wanting to run for re-election were encouraged to find a suitable replacement to run instead.

-UA Law Professor Andrew Silverman commended the UA for officially severing ties with Russell Athletics amid a scandal involving international sweatshop labor and union controversies. Apparently, after the UA terminated its contract with Russell, the athletic apparel giant started entering in negotiations for union labor, rehired some workers and provided compensation for others. If all goes well, Silverman said the UA may enter back into a contract with Russell Athletics, information he said he obtained because of his position as the UA chair for the Committee Monitoring Human Rights Issues.

ABOR Preview, Part Deux: Numbers games

The second day of the Arizona Board of Regents meeting on the University of Arizona campus will be just as full as Day 1, with some interesting statistics to boot, if you’re into that kind of thing.

  • Financial aid reports – In accordance with the Board’s “2020 Vision” (visited in part one of the WatchCat ABOR Preview), the Regents will be looking at financial aid plans for Fiscal Years 2010 and 2011, as well as reflecting on the FY 2009 financial aid situation concerning the Arizona university system.

Since part of the “2020 Vision” is to increase both the number of degrees produced and the total number of students within the university system, naturally, financial aid must be examined to be able to make Arizona’s university more affordable, according to the Regents’ agenda. Basically, the idea is that if college is made more affordable, more people will go to college. Don’t ask me how this fits into ABOR’s plan to “maintain educational excellence,” but it sure should make some money.

Instead of regurgitating info, here are some numbers straight from the horse’s mouth:

-Total financial aid within the state university system for 2008-2009: $1.3 billion, a 19 percent increase from the previous year

-Amount of above figure that accounted for the UA financial aid for 2008-2009: About $430 million

-Amount of debt students typically find themselves in upon graduation: $19,110, a 12 percent increase over the last six years

-The largest source of financial aid awards: Student loans, at 48 percent

-The smallest source of financial aid awards: State funding (no kidding; we knew that even a year ago), at about 1 percent

-Average net tuition paid by full-time undergraduate residents: $2,253

  • Enrollment and graduation trends: The Regents will be discussing plans concerning undergraduate enrollment. Although undergraduate enrollment is 1,400 short of projections, the number of bachelor’s degrees awarded is more than 1,500 ahead of projections. Interesting.

Again, the numbers tell the story:


-Fall 2008 freshmen admitted without academic deficiencies: 72 percent

-Fall 2007 freshmen admitted without academic definciencies: 79 percent

-Average fall 2008 freshmen GPA: 2.9

-Average fall 2007 freshmen GPA: 2.8

-Enrollment increases by university: UA – 1.9 percent; Arizona State University – 1.5 percent; Northern Arizona University – 4.5 percent

-Percentage of Arizona university system students who are out-of-state undergraduates: 24.3 percent

-Percentage of UA students who fall into the above category: 30.3 percent


-The number of bachelor’s degrees awarded by the Arizona university system in 2008-2009: 20,106 degrees; ASU awarded 11,229, while the UA awarded 5,915. NAU brought up the rear with 2,963 bachelor’s degrees awarded

-The number of graduate degrees awarded by the Arizona university system during that same timeframe: 8,562; ASU – 4,381, UA – 2,327; NAU – 1,854

-Curiously, undergraduate enrollment is up 3 percent while graduate enrollment is down 1.2 percent.

  • Revising the Student Code of Conduct: The Board of Regents will be revising the universities’ Student Code of Conduct policies to reflect the recent change in Arizona law allowing firearms to be stored in locked compartments within vehicles. It is worth noting that the revised code will allow universities to require that cars carrying firearms be parked in alternate parking lots, if the universities so choose to exercise that requirement.

Sunday Soup…