A publication of the Academic Senate, University of California Notice Vol. 22, No. 3, December 1997 NEWS FOR THE UC FACULTY Who is Eligible to In Close Vote, Regents Approve Domestic- Attend UC? Wealth Partner Benefits for UC Faculty and Staff Of Data Come from The University of California is not the governor lost, he told the press usually a center of high drama, but it following the meeting that he doesn’t New State Study briefly became one last month as the UC believe “we’ve seen the last of this,” Regents approved, by the narrowest of though he was not specific about what What proportion of California’s margins, domestic partner benefits for may come next. various high school populations are University faculty and staff. The close-margin by which the eligible to come to the University of The Regents decision came in the measure was approved did nothing to California? In November, the University form of a 13-12 vote in which those in diminish the sense of elation felt by those got a cart-load of information on this favor of the benefits prevailed only University faculty and staff who subject in the form of a long-awaited because of a last-second abstention by a supported domestic-partner benefits at report from California’s Postsecondary Regent who earlier had seemed to oppose UC. The Regents’ vote was welcomed Education Commission (CPEC). Some the proposal before the board. More nearly universally by the UC faculty of the major messages from the report fundamentally, the benefits measure which, through the Academic Senate, were that not as many California high prevailed despite the determined has formally supported such benefits school students are fully eligible for UC opposition of California Gov. Pete since 1994. Last year’s Academic Council as state educational policy requires; that Wilson who, just hours before the final Chair, Duncan Mellichamp, whose the proportion of black students eligible discussion of the issue was to begin, request to the Regents last spring was for UC is not only low but dropping; and appointed two new Regents who then instrumental in bringing about the that there is a very large pool of students went on to side with him on the measure. board’s deliberations, said the Regents’ — including minority students — who The governor’s actions prompted Lt. vote was “a vote for fairness and would be eligible for UC if they simply Gov. Gray Davis — like Wilson, an ex- competitiveness,” as UC will now join took all the SAT tests the University officio Regent — to say he was “offended the ranks of first-tier academic requires. by this effort to make midnight institutions offering such benefits. He The question of eligibility for the appointments” in an attempt to “pack noted that the faculty did not get all it University is different from the question this board at the last moment.” Though of admission. To be eligible for the (Please See: Domestic, Page 3) University means to be minimally eligible, a status that brings with it a California’s ‘Virtual University’ Aims to guarantee of admission to a campus of the University, though not necessarily Be A Digital Center for Higher Education to a student’s campus of choice (or to a This coming May, the State of such a system will bring about an major of choice within any campus). The California will inaugurate a digital-age educational synergy in California, central question before CPEC was: What adjunct to its higher education efforts as prompting institutions to increase the proportion of the state’s public high it opens the California Virtual University transferability of their courses and school graduates meet the minimum (CVU). bringing about the development of on- standards of eligibility for UC and for The name of the new entity may be line educational tools and courses useful California State University? something of a misnomer, since there throughout higher education. The commission’s means of are no plans for CVU ever to be a stand- The CVU had its beginnings in a answering this question was to collect alone, degree-granting university. At 1996 decision by the Western Governors the transcripts of about 15,000 randomly root, it will be a website with some Association to form a degree-granting, selected 1996 high school graduates and content of its own and with links to the on-line institution called the Western then turn the transcripts over to UC and websites of most of the higher education Governors University. After receiving CSU with a request that they make a institutions in California. Beyond this, advice on this project from state determination as to whether each of the in line with the goals of the CVU, the educators, California Gov. Pete Wilson graduates selected was eligible for three public California higher education decided that California would not be a admission. A determination of who institutions will seek funding from the part of it, but instead would form its actually was eligible among this group state for the development of on-line own, limited “virtual university.” of students presumably then yields the courses and for some upgrading of on- Through an executive order issued last proportion of all graduates who are line infrastructure. April, Wilson established a “design eligible for admission to the institutions. The hope is that the existence of team” for the CVU. Initially made up For UC, the proportion who are eligible strictly of higher education turned out to be 11.1 percent, while for administrators, the team came to include CSU it was 29.6 percent. Inside Notice: faculty from all the segments of These numbers stand in contrast to California higher education after two clear standards imposed by Davis Says No To Semester System concerns about the original makeup of (Please See: CPEC, Page 4) (Please See: Virtual, Page 3) Notice Following Senate Vote, UC Davis Abandons Semester Proposal A negative vote by the UC Davis with the shortfall having implications was the process of conversion that would Senate has prompted the UCD for everything from facilities to number help, as it would provide the faculty administration to shelve a proposal for of faculty hired. with an opportunity to undertake a converting the campus from a quarter- Grey did not make the case that the comprehensive consideration of whether system to a semester-system. Saying that semester system per se would solve UCD students are receiving enough unit- “the faculty must be our principal guide UCD’s problem. Rather, he believed it credit for the course work they do. Such on the question of changing the academic a consideration is difficult to do calendar,” Davis Chancellor Larry piecemeal, he said, since a change in Vanderhoef announced on December 9 course credit instituted by a given that he would not pursue the conversion, Letters to Notice academic unit stands to affect other units which he first proposed at a campus as well. convocation in September. Effects of Prop. 209 In mail balloting that concluded on December 3, 810 UCD faculty said they To the Editor: preferred to remain on the quarter In response to the letter of NEWS IN BRIEF system, while 251 said they’d prefer to Michael J. Glennon [Notice, November convert to the proposed “early” semester 1997, p. 2], Proposition 209 says that FEBRUARY ASSEMBLY MEETING system, which would have begun in the University “shall not discriminate August and ended before Christmas. against” African-Americans and The Senate’s Universitywide Eighty-six of the division’s 2,066 eligible other racial, ethnic or national origin Assembly will hold its second meeting voting members expressed no groups. Prop. 209 also says that UC of the academic year on Tuesday, preference. Of the eligible voters, more shall not “grant preferential treatment February 24, at UC Irvine. Agenda than 500 are emeriti; fewer than 20 to” Anglo-Americans as well as other materials will be sent out to Assembly percent of emeriti voted, however, ethnicities. These prohibitions require representatives prior to the meeting. meaning that about 1,150 of some 1,500 remedies and one cannot remedy At the Assembly’s first meeting of active faculty cast votes in the balloting. discrimination against African- the year, on October 29 in Berkeley, The Senate vote was one of several Americans (or against a white male) Assembly members heard from, and advisory votes held on the issue; if African-Americaness (or whiteness) asked questions of President Atkinson; Academic Federation (non-Senate) is disregarded. received a report from UC Provost faculty voted narrowly against the Prop. 209 says absolutely nothing Judson King on UC’s recently signed change, while Davis students were about prohibiting the use of racial, sexual, Department of Energy laboratory overwhelmingly against it. The campus’ ethnic and national origin categories in management contracts; heard from Staff Assembly favored the change by a the elimination of preferences. In fact, Board of Admissions and Relations with slight margin. the Bakke case would have been Schools Chair Keith Widaman on Despite the negative vote, the Davis insoluble without addressing the fact admissions issues; and considered at Senate seems to be in good agreement that he was white and male. some length the question of course add/ with the administration that there are a Prop. 209 nullifies the Regents’ rules drop policies on the campuses and number of campus problems that the in so far as the latter totally prohibit the systemwide. proposed conversion might have helped, use of ethnicity (or sex) as a criterion for The Assembly concluded that it did but that now need to be addressed by applying a legal remedy. The not want the statewide Senate’s other means. Davis Provost Robert Grey suppression of information about Committee on Educational Policy to draft and Senate Chair Bryan Miller have ethnicity, etc., would block a systemwide add/drop policy, though agreed to a process by which Senate and desegregation as well as the it did vote, almost unanimously, that administration will divide these issues application of Prop. 209. “the Academic Senate should reclaim and then get to work solving them. Prop. 209 requires that preferential jurisdiction over the add/drop policy” Among the issues that the treatment not be given to Europeans on all UC campuses. On some campuses, administration hoped to deal with (caucasians) or Anglo-Americans or any the administration has assumed through a conversion is that of a financial other group in any aspect of public responsibility for this policy. loss the campus suffers because of the education. This means, among other unusually low academic load taken on things, that the curricula in many EAP DIRECTORSHIPS by UCD students. UC receives funding fields such as law, economics, history, UC faculty have been invited to from the state for so-called full-time political science, philosophy, and apply for directorship positions in the equivalent (FTE) students, defined as a literature be reviewed to eliminate University’s Education Abroad Program student taking 15 units of course-work any discrimination or preferential for 1999 through 2000. Two-year per quarter. For each FTE, the state treatment. appointments for the term January 1, provides $7,000 in funding. At UCD, Prop. 209 will have a very radical 1999 through December 31, 2000 are however, the average undergraduate impact on all aspects of the University. planned for Chile (Santiago) and Costa takes fewer than 13.5 units per quarter. It requires a level playing field for all Rica (San Jose). The disparity between this figure and ethnicities and nationalities and that will An EAP Study Center Director must the 15-unit FTE funding threshold means require remedial action. be a tenured faculty member of the that the campus “must now teach —Jack D. Forbes Academic Senate, a Lecturer with approximately 11 students to earn Native American Studies, Davis Security of Employment, or a Professor funding for 10,” as Provost Grey put it, (Please See: EAP, Page 6) 2 Domestic Partner Benefits: Approved in a Close Vote by Regents (Continued from Page 1) partners of UC employees, and new The modification of the health requested, as it has recommended guidelines that would have given insurance proposal came about because benefits for both opposite- and same- chancellors discretion to include of a legal challenge to the concept of sex domestic partners. Nevertheless, he students with domestic partners in UC’s providing employer-paid benefits to praised President Atkinson “for having student-family housing. In November, same-sex couples while denying them the courage to propose this and to see it however, the Regents were asked to to unmarried couples of the opposite through.” consider a significantly modified sex. In October, California’s Labor When the president first brought a domestic-partner health-benefits Commissioner ruled, following a proposal for domestic-partner benefits proposal and they concluded that they complaint filed against the City of to the board in September, his should send the student housing Oakland, that such a benefits structure recommendations included two items: measure back to the administration for violates a section of California’s Labor Health benefits for same-sex domestic further consideration. Code that prohibits employment discrimination based on sexual orientation. The ruling was not binding Virtual University: Limited Role for UC on UC, but, fearing that the University (Continued from Page 1) would be vulnerable to a similar example, and who have thus missed the judgment, the UC administration the group were expressed by the state’s initial course in a three-course sequence. decided to broaden its definition of Intersegmental Committee of Academic If it could be ascertained that many domestic partners. Under the language Senates (ICAS). students across the campuses are being approved by the Regents, domestic- For the coming year at least, the hampered by the lack of availability of a partner health benefits will be provided University of California’s participation given course, that course would become to UC employees “who are precluded in the CVU will be limited to a CVU a good candidate to be offered on-line. from marriage because they are of the website listing of some 350 courses With all segments of higher same-sex or incapable under California currently offered by University of education working over the next several law of a valid marriage because of family California Extension that have some years on the development of on-line relationship.” Thus the University will “distance learning” component to them. courses, the hope for the CVU is that it not be providing benefits on the basis of In addition, UC may mount “learning will bring about an increase in the sexual orientation, but on the basis of an modules” on the CVU website that have number of courses that are transferable “inability to marry,” with the additional nothing to do with course-work. Carol among institutions in the state. Indeed, benefits recipients being an as-yet Tomlinson-Keasey, UC’s vice-provost UC administrators are hopeful it will unspecified group of persons who are for academic initiatives, says that UC have this effect between the campuses of close enough blood relatives of UC may offer “citizen resources,” such as the University of California where, as employees that they are legally forbidden information on patient management of Tomlinson-Keasey notes, “the highest to marry them. various illnesses, and K-12 teacher barbed-wire” to transferability often Early in December, this aspect of resources, such as modules on DNA or exists. With on-line courses, students the issue took another turn as State geophysical processes. will find it much easier to take courses Labor Commissioner Jose Millan Next year, should the state provide from an institution other than the one at announced that his office would sue the the funds, UC campuses will join in the which they are enrolled. And, at least in City of Oakland unless it agrees to extend effort to develop better on-line courses. theory, an increased impetus for medical benefits to unmarried opposite- The three segments of higher education transferability should follow from this. sex couples. Millan told the San Francisco in California have asked the state for $3 This very push is a matter of concern Chronicle, however, that in his judgment million per year over each of the next for UC faculty, however. In recent the domestic-partner policy passed by three years for course development, discussions regarding CVU among the Regents does not violate the state meaning a $1 million appropriation per statewide and campus Senate labor code’s anti-discrimination segment per year. According to committees, UC faculty expressed provisions, given the “inability to marry” Tomlinson-Keasey, if the state worries that an intensive use of on-line standard that underpins the UC policy. appropriates this funding, UC will education throughout the state will result It is unclear as yet what definition sponsor a competition among its faculty in pressure on UC to award degrees on the University will use for the “family for virtual course development; an RFP the basis of on-line course work or to relationship” the policy mentions. for on-line course ideas will be sent out accept large numbers of on-line courses Wayne Kennedy, UC’s senior vice- to faculty and the most promising ideas for transfer credit. president for administration, said late in that are received will be funded. At the least, faculty felt, burgeoning November that “we need to go through What use will be made within UC of use of virtual courses might overload a dialogue about this, and that’s going to the courses developed? Since the UC faculty with requests to review the take some time.” For this group, as well University places a high value on the quality of courses proposed for transfer as for same-sex domestic partners, “residential” aspect of undergraduate credit. Academic Council Chair Sandra Kennedy said, the plan is to hold a special education, it envisions virtual courses Weiss notes that ICAS will be holding a “open enrollment” period for health being employed only as an adjunct to its conference this coming March on the insurance benefits, with July 1, 1998 being existing courses, providing more subject of intersegmental transferability the earliest date on which such benefits “flexibility and convenience” to certain issues, with part of its focus being on- might be instituted. kinds of students — those who have line courses. enrolled in the winter quarter, for (Please See: Domestic, Page 6) 3 Notice CPEC Eligibility Study: Large Group of the ‘Potentially Eligible’

(Continued from Page 1) for the 1996 class the figure had dropped does count for a student’s admission to California’s Master Plan for Higher to 2.8 percent, a 45 percent decline. For a campus and program of choice.) Education: UC is supposed to admit the Latinos, eligibility went from 3.9 to 3.8 Further, there are students who would top 12.5 of California’s high school percent; for whites, it held steady at 12.7 be eligible for admission on the basis of graduates, while CSU is supposed to percent; and for Asians, it dropped from their GPA and SAT I combination, but admit the top 33.3 percent of graduates. 32.2 percent to 30 percent. who did not go on to take all the required One clear effect of the study, therefore, The question of being potentially SAT II tests. The pool of students who was to present a mandate to each eligible for UC has to do with students did not take one or more of the SAT tests institution to increase its eligibility rate. who are ineligible only because they makes up the group called potentially The responsibility for this at UC have not taken one or more of the four eligible. rests with the Academic Senate, which SAT exams the University requires of all The CPEC study revealed that some has delegated authority from the Regents entering students (the SAT I and three 9.4 percent of the state’s 1996 high school to set UC’s basic eligibility requirements SAT II achievement tests). The CPEC graduates fall into the potentially eligible — what courses a student needs to have study revealed that this potentially category, a figure not much smaller than taken, what grade-point levels need to eligible pool is large and growing, a fact the 11.1 percent of students who were be achieved in these courses, and so that is puzzling, potentially worrisome, fully eligible. Furthermore, the cohort of forth. By relaxing or tightening these and perhaps promising all at once. these students has grown over time: They standards, the University can increase Students can become eligible for only constituted 5 percent of the state’s or decrease the proportion of the state’s admission to UC on the basis of grades 1986 graduating class, and 6.5 percent of high school graduates who are eligible alone if they achieve a GPA of 3.3 or the 1990 class. for admission to UC. better in a set of required (“a to f”) The size of the 1996 potentially The Senate has, in turn, delegated courses; or they may become eligible eligible pool left UC admissions officers authority over eligibility standards to through a combination of grades and and BOARS members scratching their its Board of Admissions and Relations standardized test scores if they reach heads. Dennis Galligani, UC’s assistant with Schools (BOARS). The group’s certain SAT threshold scores while vice-president for student academic chair, Keith Widaman of UC Riverside, having a GPA in the a-f courses between services, told the UC Regents in said in November that his committee 2.82 and 3.29. November that UC, CPEC and CSU have has begun to consider a number of means UC requires, however, that every agreed to conduct a joint study to try to by which UC’s eligibility rate might be student — even those eligible on the understand this and other puzzling raised; this work is being folded into basis of grades alone — at least take the results from the CPEC study (such as the BOARS’ consideration of several SAT tests, though the question of how drop in black eligibility). Some 89 percent proposals that have been put forth such students score on the tests does not of those who were potentially eligible recently to fundamentally alter matter for basic eligibility (though it for UC had GPA’s of 3.3 or better in the admissions practices at UC. (See story at a-f courses. What everyone wants to right.) know is why such well-prepared BOARS consideration of these issues Senate Committee students would not take the proper SAT will be aided by the data CPEC put exams. together, which are detailed enough that Plays Pivotal Role Some faculty and administrators are they yield not only an overall eligibility worried that the potentially eligible pool rate, but information on eligibility by In Admissions may constitute an admissions “time- ethnic group, gender, area of residence Senate committees often have bomb” ticking away. If all students who in California, and on students who are lots on their agendas, but one are potentially eligible took the SAT nearly or “potentially” eligible for committee that has a particularly exams, UC’s eligibility rate would go admission to UC. In nearly every one of full plate is this year’s Board of from 11.1 to 20.5 percent, some 8 these areas, the CPEC study had some Admissions and Relations with percentage points (and 40 percent) above surprises for UC, particularly when Schools (BOARS), the panel charged its mandated maximum. What results from this study were compared with setting UC’s undergraduate tightening of admissions requirements to earlier studies. eligibility standards. Last month, would be necessary to get the rate back With respect to gender, it turns out BOARS was handed a mandate to down to 12.5 percent? that 12.6 percent of female California increase the proportion of California On the other hand, a racial high school graduates are eligible for high school graduates who are breakdown of the CPEC data revealed admission to UC, as opposed to only 9.7 eligible to admission to UC, given that 4 percent of the state’s black high percent of the state’s male high school the figures from a long-awaited school graduates fall into the potentially graduates. This gap, of 2.9 percent, has CPEC study on UC eligibility. eligible pool, as do about 4 percent of been growing over time. Among 1986 Beyond this, BOARS is now Latino students — more than the 2.8 high school graduates, it was 0.6 percent, considering three proposals that percent of black students and 3.8 of while among 1990 graduates it was 1.7 seek to fundamentally change Latino students who are fully eligible. percent. admission at UC. One calls for doing Could such students be targeted, and a On the issue of race, the news from away with the SAT as an admissions sizable portion of them convinced to the study was that black eligibility rates requirement; another calls for take the tests and then apply to UC? To are not only low but dropping. For the some observers, the pool of potentially 1990 class, 5.1 percent of black graduates Please See: Senate’s, Page 5) eligible minority students had the look were eligible for admission to UC while of a rich source of future UC students. 4 Senate’s BOARS

(Continued from previous page) Notes from the Chair: Political Pressures making eligible the top six percent of the And the Governance of Universities graduates of each high school’s senior class; and a third — a proposed A consensus seems to be emerging that American universities are in amendment to the state’s constitution — the midst of a crisis in governance, though there is no consensus on what would make eligible the top 12.5 percent factors have brought about this situation. Observers have blamed the of each graduating class. crisis on inefficiencies that accompany consultation with faculty, the BOARS’ views would mean nothing dearth of capable academic administrators, or governing boards that are in the face of an approved constitutional ill-prepared or disengaged. Recently, another explanation has gained amendment (an outcome that most prominence — that University governing boards are more politicized observers think is highly unlikely), but now than ever before. its judgment is critical on any admissions changes the University might institute. This concern topped the list of discussion topics at a recent higher Under a delegation from the Regents education roundtable sponsored by the Association of Governing Boards stemming from 1884, the Senate has the of Universities and Colleges (AGB). At that meeting, California’s university responsibility of setting admissions and college presidents, faculty leaders, governing board members, policy at UC. Beginning in 1920, the politicians, and business CEOs were in agreement that the appointment Senate delegated this task to a group it of California’s board members, and expectations for how they should formed called the Board of Admissions, perform after appointment, have become heavily politicized. with the “Relations with Schools” being This is not to say that the problem is confined to our state. In 1996, the added in 1939. BOARS is responsible for AGB produced a report, resulting from the work of its Commission on the proposing to the Regents any changes in Academic Presidency, whose recommendations included a specific plea UC’s undergraduate eligibility to governing boards across the country: “Individual board members must requirements, and, so far as the historical remember that their primary allegiance and responsibility is to the record indicates, the Regents always institution and the public interest . . . not to the constituency or party that seem to have followed BOARS’ advice. put them on the Board.” The committee consists of a chair — this Substantial concern has been expressed that the UC Regents may year Keith Widaman of UC Riverside — have fallen prey to the pitfalls of partisanship last month during their a vice-chair and one representative from debate over extending benefits to domestic partners ( see story on page 1). the Senate admissions committee on each People on both sides of the issue seem convinced that politics took control campus. of the governance process during these discussions. It was the first time In November, BOARS met in in recent history in which every Regent was in attendance ( including the Berkeley in an all-day session that included presentations from the governor and all the other state officials who serve ex-officio). Also, two principals in some of the proposals to new Regents were appointed by the governor a few hours before the board change UC admissions. A staff member was to vote on the issue and legislators came to address domestic partners from State Sen. Teresa Hughes office benefits during the public comment period. One might conclude that made the case for the amendment these factors simply reflect the strong sentiment about this issue in society Hughes is proposing on making eligible as a whole. But what is troubling to many observers is the possibility that the top 12.5 percent of each graduating a few Regents voted as they did because of political pressures to do so. class; UC Berkeley Education Dean The critical question is how to keep the University isolated from Eugene Garcia talked to the group about political struggles. Many believe that we would decrease politicization if the idea of eliminating the SAT as an the Regents were elected by popular vote, but I believe that such a change admissions requirement (on grounds could actually exacerbate the problem, since Regents who are elected that such a move might increase Latino might constantly be courting favor with powerful people or constituencies. eligibility); and UC professors Rodolfo Nevertheless, the Regents do need to be selected with out undue reliance Alvarez and Richard Flacks made a on favoritism or party affiliation. presentation on their proposal for Our board has been given the constitutional independence it needs to making eligible the top 6 percent of each exercise judgments without political interference. So what really matters graduating class. is the time each Regent takes to carefully weigh the implications of various The issue CPEC brought to BOARS, policy decisions. At root, the governance of the University rests on the of increasing the proportion of eligible inner strength and integrity of each Regent. Fortunately, UC’s Board of state high school students, almost Regents has many strong, autonomous, values-driven members who are certainly will result in a slight loosening not afraid to act according to principles and in the University’s best of some UC eligibility requirements, with interests, regardless of the personal consequences engendered by their the elements in play being high school GPA in the required “a-f” courses, SAT actions. These invaluable Regents could be found on either side of last scores, and the combination of SAT month’s debate on domestic partners. But if our Regents yield their scores and GPA for some students. integrity to political pressures, then the future of the University will be on Widaman’s group has already begun shaky ground. considering a number of alternatives —Sandra J. Weiss intended to get UC to the 12.5 percent Chair, Academic Council eligibility level. 5 Domestic Partners: Benefits are Taxable EAP Directorships (Continued from Page 3) extension of the benefits was Regent (Continued from Page 2) In the two days of discussions that Ward Connerly, who asserted that “there the Regents held on domestic partners are certain values that transcend even Emeritus. At each site, the director in November, it was never clear, until the institution of marriage.” Are we administers the Study Center, assures the final vote was counted, how the board willing to say [to our gay employees] harmonious relations with UC’s partner would come out on the issue. Gov. that you don’t really matter; that your universities and facilitates exchange Wilson’s opposition to the measure was rights are not as sacred to us as others?” provisions of agreements, provides based on three premises: That domestic- he asked. Academic Council Chair academic and general counseling for UC partner benefits provided by a state Sandra Weiss asked the Board to “please students enrolled there, implements UC agency have the effect of “devaluing join your Academic Senate in supporting academic policy, and serves as Instructor marriage”; that despite its constitutional this proposal and voting down the of Record for all academic work autonomy, UC should not be providing governor’s.” So important was the undertaken by EAP students. benefits that are not offered by other Regents’ decision perceived to be that, Applications for the Chile and Costa state agencies; and that in approving for the first time in anyone’s memory, Rica directorships will be due Friday, benefits for same-sex couples, UC would the entire contingent of 26 Regents was February 20, 1998. Further information be opening itself up to lawsuits and a present for a final vote on an issue, may be obtained by contacting Kathleen probability that it would have to provide including all the ex-officio Regents from Ranney, Universitywide Office, benefits to all unmarried partners, thus state government. Education Abroad Program, UCSB, (805) “doing serious damage to the institutions Even if the benefits the Regents 893-3677, or at the e-mail address: of marriage and the family.” approved withstand legal challenge, [email protected]. Most of the 11 Regents who voted there is a limitation on them that is Resident directorships of varying with the governor voiced support for beyond the University’s control, which durations will be recruited in the Fall of some or all of his ideas. Regent Frank is that the federal government treats 1998 including those for China (Beijing), Clark, for example, said the University domestic partner benefits as taxable Egypt (Cairo), France (Bordeaux/ had no right to provide benefits that are income. In the most simple cases — Toulouse), Hungary (Budapest), Japan not accorded to the other branches of involving, for example, a same-sex (Meiji Gakuin), Russia (Moscow), state government, while Regent Tom couple with no children — what has Scandinavia (Lund), South East Asia Sayles said the University was trying to been taxed at other institutions is the (Singapore), and UK/I (Northern office “correct discrimination with further amount an employer contributes for a in Edinburgh). discrimination” (against unmarried domestic partner over and above what it heterosexual couples). Arguing for contributes for the individual employee.

Notice Voluntary Contribution Plan Update is published eight times during the academic year for the University of California faculty by UC Voluntary Contribution Fund Performance the Academic Senate’s Academic Council. As of November 30, 1997 Sandra J. Weiss, Chair UCOP, 22nd Floor, 300 Lakeside Drive Rate of Return, Rate of Return, Oakland, CA 94612 Fund Last 12 Months Last 1 Month Unit Price David Krogh, Editor Room 422, 2223 Fulton Street Equity 20.84% 3.09% $201.8 UC, Berkeley, CA 94720-1020 Bond 13.75% 1.59% $101.9 (510) 642-6068 Savings 6.22% 0.49% N/A [email protected] ICC 7.60% 0.61% N/A Money Market 5.62% 0.46% N/A Notice is available on the World Wide Web Multi-Asset 12.73% 1.64% $22.6 at: http://www.ucop.edu/senate

6