Tag Archives: Budgets & Funding

Really #UBC? Taking $7,230 in grocery bag donations? #ubcnews #bced #bcpoli

It has become increasingly difficult to entertain appeals that the University of British Columbia is underfunded by the Ministry. Surely, other postsecondary institutions in BC are chronically underfunded, as the CBC reported on a FPSE report in the fall:

British Columbia’s post-secondary system is in crisis and is failing students by forcing them into careers they may not be suited for, says a group of university and college teachers.

But not UBC and nor are its Faculties, Schools, and bloated Offices underfunded.

One problem is how the Central Managers and Middle Managers (Deans, ADs, Directors) allocate or distribute the money. UBC has a $2b budget and its Properties Trust generated another $2b over the past decade.

Yet managers see it opportunistic to go to grocery stores and take bag donations, effectively from desperate non-profits. *See UBC shameless in taking shopping bag donations.

In February-April, UBC was attached to the cash registers at Whole Foods Market at the Cambie, Kitsilano, Robson, and West Vancouver locations. UBC took $7,230.38 in grocery bag donations from the tills.

UBC took half of the $14,460.76 total while the Environmental Youth Alliance, Harvest Project, Stanley Park Ecology Society, and Westside Food Collaborative took fractions of the balance. For instance, the West Side Food Collaborative received just $1,539.76 and the Stanley Park Ecology Society a mere $889.54.

What exactly is going on at UBC with its finances? Where is the accountability?

#UBC #shameless in taking shopping bag donations #ubcnews #bced #bcpoli

Why is the University of British Columbia now taking bag donations from Whole Foods supermarket, effectively robbing from the poor to give to the rich? Yes, UBC, which boasts a $2b annual budget has been taking bag donations from Whole Foods for the past two months.

During this time, UBC has been shamelessly battling it out with the Westside Food Collaborative for donations (i.e., bring your shopping bags and Whole Foods donates 10 cents per bag saved). It adds up to thousands of dollars for the needy non-profits and now, UBC.

Yes, you heard it right. In addition to battling it out with the University of Toronto and McGill University for the large Development funds, UBC is competing with the likes of co-ops, Kitsilano Neighbourhood House for kids, and the Downtown Eastside Women’s Centre.

Apparently, UBC has no shame in insisting that it meets the Whole Foods Community Chest program criteria for bag donations. Whole Foods gives to

non-profit organizations in our local community … those organizations that most closely align with Whole Foods market’s core … hunger relief and organic farming/sustainable food resources.

In this case, and it’s not the first time for UBC, it’s the noted Botanical Garden taking the donations. The Botanical Garden is sitting flush on unceded Musqueam Territory and on the border of the ultra-rich Point Grey area of Vancouver and University Endowment Lands, and in the heart of UBC Properties Trust, which oversaw another $2b in real estate development over the past 10 years.

The Botanical Garden has been lobbying hard for its $20m redevelopment plan. One of the first things the Garden’s Director, Patrick Lewis, succeeded in was

winning the ear of the senior administration, noteably the support of comptroller Ian Burgess and vice-president of finance Pierre Ouillet and through him members of the executive committee.

So there you go, a seat at the table of a $2b operating budget and still ‘want your bag donations’ from Whole Foods. Is this greed or just finesse?

Give back the money UBC! Redirect the donations back to the needy non-profits, many of which have little to no budget to speak of.

Peter Wylie: Case study of #UBC, Okanagan campus #ubconews #ubcnews #ubceduc #bced #bcpoli

Peter Wylie
Associate Professor, Economics
University of British Columbia

A New University in an Underrepresented Region: A Case Study of University of British Columbia, Okanagan Campus, Canada

Paper Presented at The 8th International Seminar for Local Public Economics,
University Of Guanajuato, Mexico, Nov 10-11, 2016

This paper analyzes the establishment in 2005 and subsequent evolution of a new university campus in the interior region of British Columbia, Canada, until then under-serviced with regard to university provision and with one of the lowest rates of participation of its population in post-secondary education in the province of British Columbia (BC). The paper considers the founding vision of the campus, situated in the city of Kelowna, represented by the original Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the University of British Columbia (UBC) and the Government of BC in relation to its subsequent evolution to today.

To anticipate the results, we find that almost none of the original vision for the campus has been realized, and it has evolved in a way fundamentally opposed to the Government’s expressed intention. This is largely due to the fact that universities are autonomous institutions in Canada largely free of political influence and hence need only follow their own goals rather than those of the Government and/or electorate. It might also be that the Government’s stated vision was political posturing and it fully intended to leave the evolution of the campus entirely to the University and not hold it to account to the MoU. That the campus was left to UBC, one of the world’s top 40 universities in international ranking, and top 20 public universities, to develop as a second, smaller campus in Kelowna than its much larger main campus in Vancouver, a 4-hour drive away, has had important implications for its subsequent development away from the original expressed goals. The paper discusses issues of academic planning, accountability and oversight in the provision of this local public good by the Government funders/taxpayers.

Read Paper: Peter Wylie, Case study of UBCO

Dignity at work and #mismanagement at #UBC #ubcnews #bced #ubysseynews

There have been questions about what we mean by “mismanagement” at the University of British Columbia? What is meant by claims that at key moments in the past two years, there was evident mismanagement by the Board of Governors? Some faculty members juxtaposed the BoG’s failures against the University Act and best practices or Nolan Principles.

What do we mean by suggesting that UBC’s Committee of Deans establishes a bad model for the campus (i.e., mismanagement, e.g., no agendas, minutes, etc.)? What is meant by mismanagement by omission of a policy to regulate the appointment of Associate Deans?

Or, what is meant by charges that specific programs, such as UBC’s Master of Educational Technology program, a proverbial digital diploma mill, are mismanaged? What is meant by the mismanagement of a Career Advancement Plan?

So here’s a clarification and why good management matters:

Workers tend to have a keen sense of mismanagement when they experience it and academic workers are no different. Academics have a keen sense of academic mismanagement when they see it.

The sense used here is not the common legal definition of gross mismanagement, e.g., “a continuous pattern of managerial abuses, wrongful or arbitrary and capricious actions…” Nor is it used in the sense of financial mismanagement (e.g., p. 274).

Rather, mismanagement in most UBC cases refers to simply a failure to adhere to best practices (of accountability, equity, governance, hiring, etc.). The concern is with omissions. Of course, omissions may be intentional and this does not preclude arbitrariness, deception, or a destitution of integrity, etc.

In Dignity at Work, the key text on the topic, Hodson (2004) articulates in detail the short and long-term effects of mismanagement. The basic thesis is this: “Working with dignity is a fundamental part of achieving a life well-lived, yet the workplace often poses challenging obstacles because of mismanagement or managerial abuse” (frontispiece).

In the first paragraph then, Hodson prefaces: “Even where abuse is commonplace and chaos and mismanagement make pride in accomplishment difficult, workers still find ways to create meaning in work and to work with dignity” (p. 3). We see this in the most exploited workers at UBC: Sessional Lecturers.

“The first hurdle in the quest for dignity at work, Hodson says, “is thus the possibility of mismanagement and abuse” (p. 83). Indeed, “mismanagement and abuse have a central role in generating resistance and undermining citizenship in the workplace.” And he emphasizes, the buck stops at the top:

Chaotic and mismanaged workplaces undercut workers’ pride and erect barriers to quality work. The consequences of poorly organized workplaces can also spill over to coworker relations, further undermining organizational effectiveness. (p. 109)

Hodson concludes: “significant denials of dignity remain in the workplace. Chief among these are mismanagement and abuse” (p. 273).

Helps explain the state of working conditions in various programs and units at UBC, doesn’t it?

Vancouver’s K-12-university crisis #ubc #ubcnews #bced #ubced

20089915295_711d75bd15_m

Stephen Petrina & E. Wayne Ross, Vancouver Observer, October 7, 2016– Vancouver, the city of disparities, is faced with polar opposites in its educational system.

The contrast between K-12 schools and the university in Vancouver could not be more stark: The schools sinking in debt with rapidly declining enrolments and empty seats versus the university swimming in cash and bloating quotas to force excessive enrolments beyond capacity.

With central offices just 7km or 12 minutes apart, the two operate as if in different hemispheres or eras: the schools laying off teachers and planning to close buildings versus the university given a quota for preparing about 650 teachers for a glutted market with few to no jobs on the remote horizon in the largest city of the province.

There is a gateway from grade 12 in high school to grade 13 in the university but from a finance perspective there appears an unbreachable wall between village and castle.

Pundits and researchers are nonetheless mistaken in believing that the Vancouver schools’ current $22m shortfall is disconnected from the university’s $36m real estate windfall this past year.

The schools are begging for funds from the Liberals, who, after saying no to K-12, turn around to say yes to grades 13-24 and pour money into the University of British Columbia, no questions asked.

There may be two ministries in government, Education and Advanced Education; there is but one tax-funded bank account.

Read More: Vancouver Observer

#UBC budget retreat records FoI (12 Faculties) #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #caut_acppu

The Faculty Association of UBC raised some key concerns this week over the University’s budget. Key concerns include UBC’s:

  • overuse of discretionary revenue on capital expenditures: “diversion of operating surpluses to capital”
  • “massive administrative bloat in its complement of management and professional staff”
  • 2:1 staff-to-faculty ratio
  • deprioritizing of academic funding
  • polemic “from senior management that salary increases from the recent arbitration were ‘unanticipated'”
  • refusal to provide a general wage increase above 0-2%

We need to be measured with any sympathy for Faculties or units running up deficits for admin bloat, non-union labour, etc. and turning around to ask for more.

UBC’s unit budgets are notoriously opaque at the Faculty, School, Department, Office, and Centre levels. Faculty, staff, and students are perennially left begging for details or forced to resort to Freedom of Information requests. For instance, on 11-12 January, UBC’s VP Finance hosted a Budget Retreat for the Deans to present their status and plans. The rest of us were not given access.

So here are the UBC Vancouver Budget Retreat January 11/12 2016 records, accessed through a FoI request.

Table of Contents

  1. Retreat Agenda 1
  2. University Budget 5
  3. Law 12
  4. Applied Science 42
  5. Arts 105
  6. Dentistry 135
  7. Education 167
  8. Forestry 180
  9. Land & Food 193
  10. Medicine 208
  11. Pharmaceutical Sciences 228
  12. Sauder 257
  13. Science 274
  14. Graduate & Postdoc Studies 289

Download full UBC Budget Retreat records

Patronage at #UBC and the dangers of gated management #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #highered

If there is anything learned at the University of British Columbia since the announcement of President Gupta’s resignation on 7 August 2015, it is that patronage is the institution’s greatest threat to reversing its spiraling downfall.

Of course we hear a lot these days about the gated communities in Vancouver and Kelowna where the 1% enjoy their luxuries without annoying distractions and questions from the 99%. Chip Wilson’s gated and walled $64m waterfront home makes the old Casa Mia on Marine Drive look like a quaint tiny house. And if trends have their way at UBC, Chip, valued at $2.2b, will soon run the Board of Governors (i.e., Lululemon U), following Stuart Belkin, valued at a comparatively mere $900m with a modest hobby farm in Southlands.

In the midst of its administrative and legitimacy crises, on 25 November Belkin was appointed Chair of UBC’s BoG. In 1938, Stuart’s father, Morris, led students on a protest against the BoG’s proposal to increase fees by $25. At his first meeting as Chair on 15 February 2016, Stuart presided over the approval of huge tuition increases across the University, no questions asked. Morris, the consummate contributor to student media, saved The Ubyssey by buying the printing house, which eventually became College Printers and core to Belkin’s packaging corporation. Stuart has an aversion to the media.

Following Morris’s death in 1987, the family donated to UBC $1m+ and by 1992 established itself as an art patron with a $1.5m endowment as ground was broken for the Morris and Helen Belkin Art Gallery on campus (opened 17 June 1995). Stuart commands UBC’s BoG in the midst of sieges on privilege and patronage.

Philanthropic patronage is common at UBC but it’s the managerial form that is perhaps much more entrenched and dangerous at this point.

In Moral Mazes: The World of Corporate Managers, Jackall explains that patronage reduces to “alliances that give one ‘clout’”

by the systematic collection of information damaging to others and particularly about deals struck and favors won in order to argue more effectively the propriety and legitimacy of one’s own claims; and, on the part of those in power, by pervasive secrecy, called confidentiality, that attempts to cordon off the knowledge of deals already made lest the demands on the system escalate unduly. (pp. 197-198)

Drawn from frontier tactics of circling the wagons, the practice of protecting managers at all cost for favours and perks, or patronage, has generated a crisis at UBC. Indicative of this crisis of patronage was the deans’ endorsement of the BoG and Central senior managers on 9 February 2016.

Rarely at UBC is administrative patronage, characterized by this process of encircling and turning inward, exposed in such a raw, visible form, as if under siege by faculty, staff, and students.

The deans, along with vice, assistant, and associate appointees, owe their capital, in large, to a system of patronage that keeps gates and walls to protect privilege. Gated management, suppressing and distrusting shared governance, relies extensively on patronage.

Acting as if through Gupta’s resignation ‘to the victors go the spoils’, the deans are gambling that circling the wagons around the BoG and Central, however much it exposes patronage, delivers payoffs come reappointment time and invariable sieges on gates and gatekeepers within their own Faculties.

Patronage delivers payoffs at UBC, as Central looks the other way when accountability is due. For example, Central has been unwilling to find either fact or fault with administrators perennially running up deficits, suppressing academic freedom, mismanaging academic portfolios, playing favouritism, breaching privacy, biasing student votes, bloating admin ranks and offices, etc.

The fact that no one—not a single administrator– has been held accountable, canned, denied reappointment, or moved back to faculty ranks, etc. in the midst of the University’s most serious administrative crisis in fifty years is increasingly suspicious.

Yet this nagging suspicion of the BoG and Central, “perceptions of pervasive mediocrity” (Jackall, p. 197), and faculty members’ current No Confidence vote call the entire system of gated management and patronage at UBC into question.

#UBC admin again dodges accountability in report on privacy breach @ubcnews #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #highered

Yet another “investigation” into administrative mismanagement at the University of British Columbia has failed to find any facts related to leadership. Today’s report on the investigation into the “privacy breach” or leak of records related to President Gupta’s resignation fails to find accountability at the top of the Office of the University Counsel. From within this Office was an inadvertent leak of records supplementing UBC’s official disclosure.

Made aware of the “privacy breach,” on 27 January VP External Relations Philip Steencamp and University Counsel Hubert Lai announced that they would “immediately launch an independent investigation into how the material became public.”

Well, here is how, kind of, not really, not at all, nothing

Already on 28 January, Steencamp and Lai were back-pedalling: “UBC deeply regrets the error that led to this privacy breach…. To that end, UBC has retained an external expert to review its disclosure practices and provide recommendations.”

So, was there an investigation or just a review?

The Smith Report on breaches of academic freedom UBC following the announcement of Gupta’s resignation cost the University about $78k.

Now, UBC likely paid about $25k for a legal consultant to give instructions to University Counsel on embedding files in a PDF and on how to protect and redact a record.

So taking the Review of UBC’s Processing of Freedom of Information Requests as an investigation report, UBC is now 0/3 in finding facts of accountability in its recent reports.

The first was the Fact Finding Report: Commerce Undergraduate Society (CUS) FROSH CHANTS. The second was the Summary of the fact-finding process and conclusions regarding alleged breaches of academic freedom and other university policies at the University of British Columbia.

The only fact is that UBC has been increasingly reluctant to find any form of accountability with its senior and middle managers.

Since August and the announcement of President Gupta’s resignation, avoidance of accountability has grown progressively worse.

Avoidance of accountability is now UBC’s greatest liability.

At the same time, faculty members’ access to information regarding the budget and governance on campus is increasingly blocked and ridden with obstacles. Denied access to basic files and information, including budgets, faculty members are now forced to submit Freedom of Information requests.

And with that said, Information and Privacy within the Office of the University Counsel is swamped and overburdened, understaffed and unable to provide timely access to records.

Wary of corruption and cronyism, on 22 October, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for BC released a scathing report of the practice of withdrawing decision-making to shadow systems. In Access Denied, Denham begins:

Democracy depends on accountable government. Citizens have the right to know how their government works and how decisions are made.

This holds for UBC, by the University Act a corporation bound to accountability to its members: faculty, staff, students.

#UBC faculty moving to ‘no confidence’ in Board of Governors #ubcnews #ubcbog #ubc100 #bced

Building from the power of petition, faculty members at the University of British Columbia are moving toward a vote of no confidence in the Board of Governors.

A “no confidence” vote will set a new precedent at UBC wherein accountability in shared governance takes on meaning.

Since University executives scrambled on 7 August 2015 to announce the sudden resignation of President Gupta and seal records related to the resignation, confidence in the Board of Governors has progressively eroded.

The Faculty Association of UBC has scheduled a Special General Meeting to discuss the motion on Tuesday, March 22 from 2 pm to 3:30 pm.

Members should have received a notice regarding the presentation of a petition to the UBC Faculty Association signed by over 450 faculty seeking to have a membership vote on a no confidence motion. The motion, sponsored by Jonathan Ichikawa (Philosophy), Juliet O’Brien (FHIS), and Alan Richardson (Philosophy) is as follows:

“Be it resolved that the Faculty Association of the University of British Columbia has no confidence in the University of British Columbia Board of Governors.”

#UBC operating under ‘constrained funding’ means what? #ubcnews #ubc100 #highered #bced #bcpoli

In the opaque cloud of process, the University of British Columbia announced yesterday that it is operating “in a constrained funding environment.” So what in the world does “constrained funding” mean?

Of course, UBC’s faculty and students have grown accustomed to “constrained funding” if this means few to no internal funds for research and teaching despite millions in revenue for more administrators and capital projects. Yes, we know what “constrained funding” means in that sense.

But what exactly does “a constrained funding environment” mean at the University level? Does it mean a $120m deficit? $30m deficit?

Does it simply mean that the economy and Loonie and are nosediving, so expect the worst in 2016-17?

Quite an elusive report on UBC finances

#UBC vague on budget, opaque on process #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced #bcpoli

Lo and behold, the University of British Columbia finally made an announcement about the budget leading into a new fiscal year (1 April 2016). Trouble is, the budget news is vague and the process opaque.

Compared to other Canadian universities, UBC faculty, staff, and students are in the dark on the budget, whether it be at the University or local unit levels.

Today’s news that “UBC continues to operate in a constrained funding environment” is clear as mud. How “constrained”?

The Provost continues to hold a freeze on faculty hiring and a balance of Faculties are running up deficits. Come September, the University will most certainly face another $100m deficit with expenses increasing.

UBC announced that “many central administrative units absorbed significant budget reductions in the last year, and most of these flow into 2016/17” but admin bloat continues unchecked.

For various reasons, the Deans have been pampered by a central administration looking the other way when it comes to the bloat and deficits.

Since the 7 August announcement of the sudden resignation of President Gupta, UBC has been silent about the budget. Actually, save for a very partial disclosure of records given a volume of FoI requests, UBC has been silent about most issues of accountability.

In the meantime. the Council of Senates’ Budget Committee has been left to tinker with Student Information Systems instead of holding UBC’s executives to account.

#UBC deans in hot-seat for mere assertion of excellence #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced

In an era not too long ago, deans were able to assert their authority on most matters of governance, finance, management, and planning. Now, with credibility and legitimacy eroding, with shadow systems opening to scrutiny, can mere assertion of authority and excellence continue to pass for reality or truth at UBC?

So what part of the “Deans support UBC leadership” Op-Ed is believable or persuasive? Can the Deans support their “strongest” assertion?

We want to make clear in the strongest possible terms that we are absolutely committed to the pursuit of academic excellence and have consistently supported initiatives to promote such excellence.

Let’s test this assertion of commitment “to the pursuit of academic excellence” with a graduate program on campus:

  1. A graduate diploma mill, which in 13.5 years graduated 680 masters students but did not hire a single FT faculty member. Yes, 680 masters students and 0 FT faculty hired in 13.5 years.
  2. Instead is an exploitation Sessional labour—85% of all the courses—to teach at a piecemeal per student wage while their benefits start and stop at the term’s beginning and end. Staff members are hired to teach, who then double-up on their M&P jobs and displace the Sessionals from additional course assignments. The Sessionals are denied office space or worse:
    1. Per the policy and requirements of space usage in [the academic building] for Sessional instructors, the [123] temporary office space, must be cleared of all personal belongings, borrowed library items and additional furniture installed.
    2. If, by Dec 1, 2015, the space is not restored to its original condition, items will be disposed of, and you shall be invoiced for the cost of clearing and removal.
    3. As requested, I attach the photos of the room in its original condition, taken prior to it being temporarily assigned to you in February 2015.”
  3. It took 8 years of agitation across two Faculties to complete a single Self-Study and Program Review. There are 7 administrators overseeing this Program but not a one could initiate a Review. Effectively, when it finally did happen, well, let’s just say that an expectation of arm’s length Reviewers was mocked.
  4. Did I mention that this was a revenue generating program and maybe there is something to shield from scrutiny? When in April 2015 the Associate-Provost reviewed the Office (yes, Office) that runs and manages the Program, he reported:
    1. “Shadow systems are used more than University systems which is concerning because the data in the shadow systems are not verifiable, and because of the opportunity for misuse of funds.”
  5. In the last four years, this program generated about $5.4m in total revenue but we cannot account for expenses or overhead “because the data in the shadow systems are not verifiable.”
  6. Where does the money go then?
  7. Is it just thrown at the deficit that’s run up elsewhere year after year?
  8. But still, where does the money go? Is it just paying for administrative bloat?
  9. Did I mention 680 masters student graduates and 0 FT faculty in 13.5 years?

If this is “academic excellence” we’d hate to see academic mediocrity or compromise…

We want to make clear in the strongest possible terms that we are absolutely committed to the pursuit of academic excellence and have consistently supported initiatives to promote such excellence.

Lowering the bar of excellence? No, just inflating the envelope of greatness.

Academic freedom download Smith report on Berdahl case #UBC #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced

SmithReportCover

Download full Smith Report

On 7 August, the University of British Columbia announced the sudden resignation of President Arvind Gupta. The next day, Professor Jennifer Berdahl queried whether he lost a masulinity contest. The UBC Board of Governors Chair, John Montalbano, took exception to this query and expressed to Berdahl his dismay. Sauder School of Business administrators also objected and requested she downplay the post and tread carefully so as not to insult financial donors, such as Montalbano, when speaking and writing.

On 17 August, Provost pro tem Angela Redish and Interim President Martha Piper issued an important Statement from UBC on Academic Freedom.

On 25 August, UBC and the Faculty Association agreed to find the facts of the “alleged breaches” of academic freedom. On 15 October, UBC released a 10 page summary of the 84 page Report written by the Honourable Lynn Smith. The Summary is peculiar in its exclusion of any facts of administration or management.

Following a Freedom of Information request, the University disclosed the full Report, albeit heavily redacted.

In the full Report, Smith offers a very helpful analysis of academic freedom, reaffirming “the ‘right to criticize’ either UBC or other societal or governmental Institutions” (p. 21).

Part and parcel of academic freedom, criticism or critique of University management, managers, decisions, and direction was reaffirmed in June 2015 in BC in a case involving faculty member George Rammel’s academic freedom in criticizing the Capilano University President’s directions and decisions.

The Berdahl and Rammell cases, combined, are extremely important for academic freedom.

Academic freedom includes criticism or critique of the management of the University or Faculty, etc. without fear of reprisal or sanction.

#UBC Dean time to come #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #ubcgss

UBC Deans, what do you know and when did you know it? After six months and a crisis that’s growing, it is time to come clean.

The Freedom of Information disclosure indicates that you were unhappy with President Gupta. On 1 May, Gupta couldn’t tell: “Things seem to be going well with the Deans now (or at least I think so).

On 22 April, a week after the FAUBC claimed a mini-victory over scaling back and amending Policy #81 (“Use of Teaching Materials in UBC Credit Courses”), Gupta did the accountable thing by announcing that he was moving Dave Farrar from the post of Provost.

That Policy #81 process was painful; it nearly led to CAUT censure of UBC. Such a needless policy and cost but no one really shed tears over the exit of the Provost.

Except the Deans. The Deans took a tantrum. Why is that?

Montalbano said as much to Gupta: “The issue with the Dean’s in response to the Provost announcement was a catastrophic example that you are not either being informed in a timely manner or worse.”

Ok Deans, time to speak up and come clean. What happened?

At the U of S, when dean Robert Buckingham spoke out against the University, he lost his job but won integrity.

With integrity, he was rehired.

Time to come clean UBC Dean.

Why are #UBC managers resisting change? Follow the $$ #ubcclean #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #ubysseynews

Since University of B. C. President Arvind Gupta resigned unexpectedly last August, the institution’s managers and governors agreed to remain silent and move records and answers to non-disclosure agreements and privacy protection.

After five months of Freedom of Information requests, UBC released a partial disclosure of records related to Gupta’s resignation. One answer is implicit and explicit in the disclosure: if you want to know why UBC managers resist change, follow the money.

On the record, a rift formed between Gupta, the Dragon’s Den leader, and emotionally vulnerable middle managers. “You are deemed too quick to engage in debate in a confrontational or dismissive manner,” Gupta was scolded, “which is demoralising to a group of executives in fear of their employment security.” Gupta was not Presidential.

Off the record, there’s another storyline, perhaps more realistic.

One of the largest employers in British Columbia – $2.1 billion operating budget – the university and its Properties Trust have for years been given free passes in the court of accountability. This conceit percolates down through the ranks of middle management.

Gupta was hired in the fallout of serious financial fraud cases within the Faculties of Medicine and Dentistry. Controversies, such as the Sauder School of Business students’ rape chant in September 2013 had chipped away confidence in the ranks of management.

Senior campus administrators had seemingly looked the other way as internal investigations into management pointed to no one and nothing for accountability. The free pass for managers was status quo when Gupta was hired at UBC.

Three months in, Gupta targeted university finance and management for overhauls. The Vice President Finance was let go and the Provost was moved to an adviser’s post.

At this point, it began to look like a policy of administrator accountability had suddenly arrived on Point Grey. Administrative bloat and perks were finally called into question. The pushback was fierce as middle managers, deans, and their numerous assistants and associates, grew anxious and more insecure.

Stamping out fires, Gupta wrote on May 1 to the Chair of the Board of Governors: “Things seem to be going well with the Deans now (or at least I think so).” The doubt signalled that behind-the-scenes middle managers were conspiring under turf war conditions.

Accountability was pushed back up to the President: “we are still not certain that you fully appreciate the scope of your accountability,” Gupta was told in mid-May. “You must refrain from thinking controversial thoughts out loud.

Gupta redirected priority to allocating finances to classrooms and hiring of faculty members, and away from bloated administrative ranks. For instance, the ranks of assistant and associate deans swelled from 47 in 2000 to 72 in 2015. Senior administrators and deans had long protected their prerogative of appointing at these managerial ranks and resisted even the slightest consideration of regulation through a proper hiring policy.

It didn’t matter to a balance of managers that Gupta was successful in attracting $66.5m in Federal research funding in late July. At the same time, he was called into meetings to answer to pushback. The Board formed an ad hoc committee to erode confidence. On August 7, he resigned.

Not one to rock a boat at a birthday party, Interim President Martha Piper stepped in to celebrate UBC’s 100th and restore business as usual and the free pass for management. Champagne corks were popping in September.

In December, Piper rushed the Board to once again approve student tuition increases across the campus. At the year’s major budget meeting in mid-January, with all the deans providing their faculty’s financial status and plans, the sole message to members of UBC was that the president said the ‘presentations were excellent.’ With deficits run up in the faculties, budgets are in a mess, but the PowerPoint slides are beautiful.

Of course arrogance, cronyism, and hubris have their limits, even at UBC. Since Gupta’s resignation, the university has bounced from one crisis to the next. The university is slipping again into a crisis of financial management. Why are managers resisting? Follow the money.

Stephen Petrina, Sandra Mathison, and E. Wayne Ross are Professors in the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia and co-directors of the Institute for Critical Education Studies.

#UBC BoG: time for Nolan Principles #ubcnews #ubc100 #ubcclean #bced

Give us break UBC: Board of Governors, Senate, and other admin committee work is not rocket science. However, given the release of records and findings of shadow systems and backroom deals, it’s time for the basics: adopt the Nolan Principles of Standards in Public Life.

In brief, for universities, the Nolan Principles are:

  1. Selflessness: University and public interest opposed to self-interest.
  2. Integrity: Decision-making integrity opposed to coercive power.
  3. Objectivity: Merit, affirmative action, and diversity complemented.
  4. Accountability: Decisions and actions accountable to peers, public, and open to scrutiny.
  5. Openness: Decisions and actions open and transparent opposed to restriction and secrecy.
  6. Honesty: Self-interest openly declared when in conflict with best interests of the University or public interest.
  7. Leadership: Principles supported by example of leadership (i.e., leaders model the principles).

Special issue: Educate. Agitate. Organize: New and Not-So-New Teacher Movements #activism #k12 #education #edreform

We are thrilled to launch this Special Issue of Workplace: A Journal for Academic Labour:

EDUCATE. AGITATE. ORGANIZE: NEW AND NOT-SO-NEW TEACHER MOVEMENTS

Special Issue of Workplace
Edited by
Mark Stern, Amy E. Brown & Khuram Hussain

Table of Contents

  • Forward: The Systemic Cycle of Brokenness
    • Tamara Anderson
  • Introduction to the Special Issue: Educate. Agitate. Organize: New and Not-So-New Teacher Movements
    • Mark Stern, Amy E. Brown, Khuram Hussain
  • Articles
  • Principles to Practice: Philadelphia Educators Putting Social Movement Unionism into Action
    • Rhiannon M Maton
  • Teaching amidst Precarity: Philadelphia’s Teachers, Neighborhood Schools and the Public Education Crisis
    • Julia Ann McWilliams
  • Inquiry, Policy, and Teacher Communities: Counter Mandates and Teacher Resistance in an Urban School District
    • Katherine Crawford-Garrett, Kathleen Riley
  • More than a Score: Neoliberalism, Testing & Teacher Evaluations
    • Megan E Behrent
  • Resistance to Indiana’s Neoliberal Education Policies: How Glenda Ritz Won
    • Jose Ivan Martinez, Jeffery L. Cantrell, Jayne Beilke
  • “We Need to Grab Power Where We Can”: Teacher Activists’ Responses to Policies of Privatization and the Assault on Teachers in Chicago
    • Sophia Rodriguez
  • The Paradoxes, Perils, and Possibilities of Teacher Resistance in a Right-to-Work State
    • Christina Convertino
  • Place-Based Education in Detroit: A Critical History of The James & Grace Lee Boggs School
    • Christina Van Houten
  • Voices from the Ground
  • Feeling Like a Movement: Visual Cultures of Educational Resistance
    • Erica R. Meiners, Therese Quinn
  • Construir Y No Destruir (Build and Do Not Destroy): Tucson Resisting
    • Anita Fernández
  • Existential Philosophy as Attitude and Pedagogy for Self and Student Liberation
    • Sheryl Joy Lieb
  • Epilogue
  • No Sermons in Stone (Bernstein) + Left Behind (Austinxc04)
    • Richard Bernstein, Austinxc04

Thanks for the continued interest in and support of our journals, Critical Education and Workplace, and our ICES and Workplace blogs. And please keep the manuscripts and ideas rolling in!

Sandra Mathison, Stephen Petrina & E. Wayne Ross, co-Directors, Institute for Critical Education Studies

#UBC will not be commenting, say what? #ubcnews #ubc100 #ubysseynews #bced

UBC, famous for its pots calling kettles black, is now scrambling to explain why its unaccountable Board of Governors is lecturing its President on accountability. “We are still not certain that you fully appreciate the scope of your accountability,” Gupta was told last May.

UBC, famous for cutting off its nose to spite its face and body, is now in reaction mode trying to explain why its President, having just secured $66.5m of federal research funds is the same day hauled into meetings and told “You are deemed too quick to engage in debate in a confrontational or dismissive manner.”

UBC, famous for redecorating its deck chairs as its leadership sinks, is now back-pedalling to explain why its Chairman is dressing down its President for not addressing the Board “in a manner that is ‘Presidential’.”

VP External Relations Steencamp, welcome to UBC. Suddenly there is a lot of communicating to do. “UBC will not be commenting.” Say what?

No confidence #UBC time to recall Board, rescind tuition hikes #ubysseynews #ubcnews #ubc100 #bced

Given the implications that an unelected body has been running the show at the University of British Columbia, through a series of behind the scenes ad hoc committees, confidence in governance has waned. It is time to recall the Board of Governors. And time to rescind the tuition hike the Board approved in December. Accountability?

#UBC redaction rampant in release of Gupta resignation records #ubc100 #ubcnews #bced #ubysseynews

The University of British Columbia’s Office of the University Counsel released records this morning related to  “Dr. Arvind Gupta’s resignation of his appointment as President and Vice-Chancellor.” Click here for Freedom of Information Disclosure Package.

Initial assessment: Redaction is rampant (e.g.,  281-287, 467-83, 492-501, Strategic Plan 516-546, 566-577, 581-584, 846-861). This is sad but predictable. But now we have something to work with. Finally. Thank you FoI?

The process of redaction is simply discretionary: a body can decide what to redact and what to disclose. And for too many records in this Disclosure the redaction is wholesale. Exemptions from disclosure are discretionary and in this case legalism prevails over UBC. Sections 13 (Policy advice or recommendations) and 22 (Disclosure harmful to personal privacy) of the Act are used wholesale in this Disclosure.

Second assessment: Records are undisclosed. There is a large volume of records related to this controversy that remain undisclosed–withheld from Freedom of Information disclosure.

Third assessment: It’s quite a shame and sham, depending on how this disclosure is read. There are way too many red herrings and entirely irrelevant records in this Disclosure (e.g., the Ministry of Advanced Education records, 630-681). I read through the Disclosure package and learned little to nothing about President Gupta’s resignation, his Performance Evaluation, and the role of actors on campus, such as the VPs, Deans, and Board of Governors.

The most relevant records (566-584) are unreasonably redacted: BoG problems late July leading to the resignation. The sole record between Gupta and BoG concerning the resignation (589) is fully redacted. There is an interesting record concerning the Deans (439) as heads were rolling RE President Gupta’s reform of the the now infamous “Provost Model.”

Tentative Final assessment: Request comprehensive disclosure. Follow the money. Deans are running up deficits year after year in many cases as they bloat the admin ranks. Meantime, FT hires stagnate, graduate funding declines, and tuition rises. Follow the money to find out what happened between President Gupta and the BoG.

Index to the Disclosure Package:

  1. Records related to Dr. Arvind Gupta’s Departure, 1-7
  2. Records related to Dr. Arvind Gupta’s Performance Targets, 8-33
  3. Dr. Arvind Gupta’s Expenses, 34-124
  4. Dr. Arvind Gupta’s Calendar, 125-132
  5. Records related to Dr. Arvind Gupta’s Emails, 133-248
  6. Emails between Dr. Arvind Gupta and John Montalbano, 249-587
  7. Emails between Dr. Arvind Gupta and Board of Governors in relation to resignation, 588-589
  8. John Montalbano Emails containing “Arvind or Gupta” and “resignation or Piper”, 590-611
  9. Susan Danard Emails containing “Arvind or Gupta” and “resignation or Piper”, 612-629
  10. Emails between President’s Office, Board of Governors & Ministry of Education, 630-681