- Author: Wendy Powers
This week was the Regent's meeting where UC ANR had a chance to educate the Regents about who we are and the value we bring to California. I missed the first public day of the meeting because the Program Council was also this week. But I was to be there yesterday which was the scheduled day for Glenda's UC ANR presentation. The group was behind schedule by 9 AM. They ended up so far behind schedule that the UC ANR presentation was rescheduled to the May meeting.
The topic that put the agenda so far behind schedule? Student tuition. The proposal centered on a 2.6% increase to non-resident fees that would equate to just under $800 per year. Regents raised concerns that, while $800 may not seem like much, in some countries it is a month's wages. Additional concerns regarded DACA students who failed to meet the requirements for in-state tuition and the fact that they would be impacted by the $800. Those against the increase argued that the cost of running UC is not the financial responsibility of non-resident students. Those in favor countered that while they, too didn't like the idea of increasing costs to students, there is a $30M gap in the budget, state funding does not keep up with rising costs, and 2.6% is less than a cost-of-living adjustment. In the end, the decision was to undertake further analysis and make a decision at the next meeting (hopefully after the UC ANR presentation). I happened to be sitting near a large group of students who declared ‘victory.' By the way, did you know that snapping fingers have replaced clapping (less disruptive)?
I'm not sure who won what. Acceptance letters need to go out, and they will state that the non-resident fees may increase by 2.6%. That then turned into a discussion about the need for students to be able to know, in advance, what their education will cost without changing those costs mid-stream. If the increase goes forward, should it only then apply to incoming students? Then next year's acceptance letters would include the 4-year cost for the class entering in fall 2020, and so on. The commitment would only be made for four years, thus, promoting an increase in 4-yr graduation rates.
While tuition doesn't relate to UC ANR directly, I found the principles relevant. One could replace the word ‘tuition' with ‘REC research costs' and have the same conversations. In fact, I've had these same conversations. It all comes back to ‘who pays when the taxpayers don't?' Unfortunately, the Lt. Governor did not offer to help make a push for UC ANR like she did with state support for UC, in general, but perhaps that will come.
I'm still digesting the Program Council conversations, but in the meantime, I need to start working on my weekly quota for reviewing merit and promotion packages. So far, I am 0% complete for the week.
- Author: Wendy Powers
Last week it rained in southern California. And no one warned me. Despite that, it was a productive trip to the South Coast REC to talk about a different model for calculating recharge rates. No surprise that Chris, Darren, Kat, Deb and Lisa were way ahead of the topic and had an approach ready to propose. It made for easy work that will meet the goals of providing a better experience for the researcher by being able to provide multi-year rates at time of proposal submission. The researcher costs would be guaranteed for specified services and space, thus eliminating the uncertainty of budgeting costs. Mid-October we will have the conversation at Kearney and then work with the remaining RECs to meet the same goals.
October is a busy month. My entire career, it seems that October, March and July have been heavy travel months. This position promises to maintain the trend. If I had more time, I'd like to hear the conversation next week at the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine Science Breakthroughs 2030: A Strategy for Food and Agricultural Research meeting to be held in Irvine, October 2 – 4. NAS conducted a study “to identify ambitious scientific opportunities in food and agriculture” and identified five focal areas for the Breakthroughs 2030 Study including Greener Plants, Greener Animals, Reducing Food Waste, Safer Food Supply, and Pathways for Resilience. These areas will be explored in greater depth by experts at the approaching "Jamboree Meeting" on October 2-4 in Irvine, CA. Anyone planning to attend?
Had the study identified ‘developing new foods' as a focal area, the study group might be interested in a news piece Ruth Dahlquist-Willard sent along about the moringa (http://abc30.com/2433622/). I had never heard of the moringa before. I suspect it might still be a while before I actually come across the ingredient on a menu, but it is good to know how it ties to CA and UC ANR.
This week I am in Philadelphia attending the annual Ag Experiment Station Directors meeting. NIFA presented a session on Big Data and talked about their upcoming listening sessions to seek stakeholder input on science opportunities. There is one in Sacramento on Nov 2 that I hope will be well attended by UC, including UC ANR. The Big Data session was interesting, particularly comments that Amazon and social media are the biggest contributors to big data – I typically think of remote sensing and automated data acquisition as sources of big data and don't give much thought to these other sources. I learned a lot in this session, including what the term georectification means and how it ties to deep learning used by Siri and Watson. I also learned about DRYAD – an open platform for sharing data. This might be of use to a MultiState Research Project that I have been involved with and now work with as the administrative advisor.
Next week, instead of heading south to Irvine, I head back east (Vermont) to the annual Extension Directors meeting. I preferred the arrangement last year when the Ag Experiment Station Directors and the Extension Directors met jointly, and in the west. I haven't looked at the agenda yet but hope to learn a few things there. I need to stay focused on the fact that I am the secretary and have to take minutes – not my strong suit and perhaps explains my calculus grade (the first time through).
In the meantime, more learning tomorrow, another manuscript to read, some position descriptions to wrap up before next week and what looks to be a full day in Davis on Friday. I will keep you posted how these progress.