• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Wednesday, 4/30/97 Administration considers per-course fees 'Materials' charge could be $100 for each course, officials say

By Brooke Olson Daily Bruin Senior Staff If the governor "buys out" proposed UC fee increases, then students will pay the same amount next year as they did this year, right? Wrong. The UC Board of Regents won't raise fees next year, but UCLA administrators might. UCLA officials are currently in the midst of considering several different fee proposals which could potentially raise costs by several hundred dollars a year per student. If these fees are approved, it will make UCLA the most expensive university within the nine-campus system. The university may soon charge $30-$100 per class, under the guise of a recently approved Course Material Fee Policy, but the only acknowledged fee hike is for "instructional enhancement." In its current stage of development, the initiative would provide a World Wide Web site for every course as well as offer virtual office hours for classes and provide enhanced drop-in computer and science labs. The fee for these enhancements would be based on the number of credit hours taken. Non-science courses would cost less than science courses because they tend to use less technology, said David Wilson, assistant dean of humanities and member of a "user committee" that is currently drafting the proposal. "The idea is that for the humanities and social sciences, the fee we will be proposing is probably in the area of $2.50 per credit hour, while the South Campus (classes) would probably be $3.50 per credit hour," Wilson said. Costs per course could range from $9 to $13 for each undergraduate, nontutorial class - a "small price" to pay for entering the 21st century, supporters of the fee said. Opponents of the fee argue that the university's proposal lacks both foresight and an accurate survey of student and faculty needs. The user committee, which consists of eight students, several assistant deans and a representative from the chancellor's office, has relied on "anecdotal" evidence as well as their own ideas in establishing a proposal for the fee, Wilson said. "I'm all for technology, but ... the plan is rather ill-conceived," said Justine Hernandez, a graduate student in English. "I just think they really need to think about exactly what they're doing," Hernandez said. "This fee is really going to change the way professors teach and increase the number of hours teaching assistants must work for their classes," she added. Members of the committee note that although their proposal is not finalized, they believe that it is a fair and modest fee. "The fee is pretty small compared to how much it is going to accomplish," Wilson said. "We would prefer not to have the students pay for anything. "At the same time we think students understand that there are things they have to pay for in order to enhance their education," Wilson said. Whether or not technology is essential to education, though, is a debate that rages from the steps of Kerckhoff Hall to the state Legislature's meeting room. "To compete, our students must have easy access to all forms of information and technologies, including equipment, systems and networks," said Assemblyman Ted Lempert, D-Palo Alto. "(But) fees for using campus computers certainly offer a barrier for many students" who will be unable to pay for the additional fee. User committee members said current proposals would have the "enhancement" fee folded into a student's financial aid package. Since there's no way to determine which and how many classes the student will take, the financial aid offered would be an estimate, Wilson said. The proposal will be presented to the Student Fee Advisory Committee for approval by May 19, after which it will be forwarded to the chancellor for possible implementation. But the enhancement fee is just one cost students will bear over the next few years - additional mandatory course fees will also be implemented, sources said. To a certain extent, course fees already exist in the form of lab fees that provide the students with additional materials. However, because mandatory course fees within the UCs were then illegal, the lab fees were optional. Students could purchase the materials from a different source. But when UCLA discovered four UC campuses charging mandatory course fees, the administrators succeeded in lobbying the UC Office of the President (UCOP) to change the policy last May. "At this point, these fees are a definite certainty," said Undergraduate Cultural Affairs Commissioner Max Espinoza. Now that the president's office has changed the policy, the only barrier to charging for each course is UCOP's and campus administrators' approval - a goal some say is easily achieved. There's no student vote nor legislative approval necessary - an advisory committee composed of students and administrators is responsible for drafting and submitting the proposal. "Pretty much the university can do what they want," said John Lee, an undergraduate student who serves on the Student Fee Advisory Committee. "If the administration sees these course fees justified, then there really is no problem in getting these implemented." Although several administrators denied that UCLA would implement course fees next year, members of SFAC noted that university officials have been discussing the possibility of such a fee since last May. The fee, under the guidelines established by UCOP, would not exceed the cost of an average textbook - anywhere from $30 to $100 per course. Departments will use the money to purchase materials or products germane to the class, such as overhead projectors and handouts. Some fear that the fees will not directly benefit the students but will instead be used to enhance various faculty salaries. University officials, though, deny the claim, noting that if mandatory course fees were implemented, students would directly benefit from the costs. Students, staff and faculty can post questions and comments on UCLA fees at http://www.humnet.ucla.edu /voh/iei.html. Previous Daily Bruin Story: UC Regents propose new fee increases, January 20, 1995