Here is a storification of the dueling microbial diversity talks that happened at UC Davis on Wednesday May 2.
Showing posts with label UCDavis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label UCDavis. Show all posts
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
PLOTS (publiclaboratory.org) is coming to #DavisCA
Saturday, March 24, 2012
12 hours of me: Slideshows w/ audio from "BIS2C: Biodiversity & the Tree of Life" at #UCDavis
Well, it has taken a few months of processing but I have finally gotten my lectures from the introductory biology course I teach uploaded in some way to share. The course is "BIS2C: Biodiversity and the Tree of Life" and it is the third quarter of a three quarter introductory biology series at UC Davis. Each year some 2300 or so students take this series which means that we at UC Davis have to offer each of the courses (BIS2A, BIS2B, and BIS2C) each quarter. Every fall I co-teach BIS2C. Alas we do not have a lecture hall big enough for 700 students, so we do the course in two sections. The way we teach it each of the faculty double up and teach their part of the course to each section. The course also has a weekly lab. It is a machine of sorts.
This fall I taught 13 lectures for the course. I covered basically phylogenetic methods, the big picture of the tree of life, and microbial diversity. I used the Apple presentation program Keynote for slides for my lectures and I used the "Record Slideshow" option to record audio in synch with the slides. After a bit of pain, I managed to convert these recordings into video and then posted them to Youtube. And today I am sharing them with you. There are imperfections of course. But I thought some might find them useful. Plus I have made a YouTube playlist for all the lectures if you want to just sit down and enjoy 12 hours or so of me. Now if only Youtube would allow me to change the thumbnail image for each lecture ... Plus I note - next year I will be doing much more interactive learning in class so this may be the last record of some of these lectures ...
Lecture 1: Introduction to Course and the Tree of Life
Lecture 2: Trees, Taxa and Groups
Lecture 3: Characters
Lecture 4: Phylogenetic Inference
Lecture 5: Phylogenetic Inference
Lecture 6: The Tree of Life
Lecture 7: The Three Domains
Lecture 8: Three Domains and Microbial Diversity
Lecture 9: Microbial Diversity
Lecture 10: Endosymbioses and Lateral Gene Transfer
Lecture 11: Endosymbioses and Lateral Gene Transfer
Lecture 12: Extremophiles
Lecture 13: Human Associated Microbes
This fall I taught 13 lectures for the course. I covered basically phylogenetic methods, the big picture of the tree of life, and microbial diversity. I used the Apple presentation program Keynote for slides for my lectures and I used the "Record Slideshow" option to record audio in synch with the slides. After a bit of pain, I managed to convert these recordings into video and then posted them to Youtube. And today I am sharing them with you. There are imperfections of course. But I thought some might find them useful. Plus I have made a YouTube playlist for all the lectures if you want to just sit down and enjoy 12 hours or so of me. Now if only Youtube would allow me to change the thumbnail image for each lecture ... Plus I note - next year I will be doing much more interactive learning in class so this may be the last record of some of these lectures ...
Lecture 1: Introduction to Course and the Tree of Life
Lecture 2: Trees, Taxa and Groups
Lecture 3: Characters
Lecture 4: Phylogenetic Inference
Lecture 5: Phylogenetic Inference
Lecture 6: The Tree of Life
Lecture 7: The Three Domains
Lecture 8: Three Domains and Microbial Diversity
Lecture 9: Microbial Diversity
Lecture 10: Endosymbioses and Lateral Gene Transfer
Lecture 11: Endosymbioses and Lateral Gene Transfer
Lecture 12: Extremophiles
Lecture 13: Human Associated Microbes
Friday, February 17, 2012
Results of #UCDavis Faculty Resolutions released re: Katehi, Pepper Spray, #OccupyUCDavis
Just received the three emails below regarding results of three UC Davis Faculty Senate Resolutions regarding the pepper spray incident from November and thought they might be of some interest. See this post for a little background.
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 20, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Motion Concerning Police Actions be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Motion:
Be it resolved that that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California hereby (1) condemns both the dispatch of police and use of excessive force in response to non-violent protests on November 18, 2011;
(2) opposes violent police response to non-violent protests on campus;
(3) demands that police deployment against protestors be considered only after all reasonable efforts have been exhausted and with direct consultation with Academic Senate leadership.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 635
No: 343
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared approved and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does support the Motion Concerning Police Actions.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 15, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Resolution:
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Academic Senate:
1) Condemns both the dispatch of police in response to non-violent protests and the use of excessive force that led to the deplorable pepper-spraying events of November 18, 2011.
2) Opposes all violent police responses to non-violent protests on campus.
3) Demands that police deployment against protesters be considered only after all reasonable administrative efforts to bridge differences have been exhausted, including direct consultation with the leadership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate.
4) Accepts Chancellor Linda Katehi’s good faith apology.
5) Expresses confidence in Chancellor Linda Katehi’s leadership and efforts to place UC Davis among the top 5 public universities in the nation.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 586
No: 408
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared approved and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does support the Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 6, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Motion Concerning the Chancellor’s Judgment be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Motion: In light of the events on the quadrangle of the UC Davis campus on the afternoon of Friday November 18, 2011, in light of Chancellor Linda Katehi’s email to faculty of November 18 in which she admitted that she had ordered the police to take action against the students who were demonstrating on the quadrangle and said that she had had “no option” but to proceed in this way, and in light of the failure of Chancellor Katehi to act effectively to resolve the resulting crisis in the intervening days,
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California lacks confidence in the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, and
Be it also resolved that the result of the vote on this motion be communicated to the Board of Regents and the President of the University of California.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 312
No: 697
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared defeated and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does not support the Motion Concerning the Chancellor’s Judgment.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 20, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Motion Concerning Police Actions be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Motion:
Be it resolved that that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California hereby (1) condemns both the dispatch of police and use of excessive force in response to non-violent protests on November 18, 2011;
(2) opposes violent police response to non-violent protests on campus;
(3) demands that police deployment against protestors be considered only after all reasonable efforts have been exhausted and with direct consultation with Academic Senate leadership.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 635
No: 343
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared approved and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does support the Motion Concerning Police Actions.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 15, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Resolution:
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Academic Senate:
1) Condemns both the dispatch of police in response to non-violent protests and the use of excessive force that led to the deplorable pepper-spraying events of November 18, 2011.
2) Opposes all violent police responses to non-violent protests on campus.
3) Demands that police deployment against protesters be considered only after all reasonable administrative efforts to bridge differences have been exhausted, including direct consultation with the leadership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate.
4) Accepts Chancellor Linda Katehi’s good faith apology.
5) Expresses confidence in Chancellor Linda Katehi’s leadership and efforts to place UC Davis among the top 5 public universities in the nation.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 586
No: 408
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared approved and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does support the Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
REPORT OF THE DAVIS DIVISION OF THE ACADEMIC SENATE
COMMITTEE ON ELECTIONS, RULES AND JURISDICTION
On December 6, 2011, a petition bearing the signatures of at least 50 members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate of the University of California was submitted asking that the following Motion Concerning the Chancellor’s Judgment be voted on by the membership of the Davis Division (tenure/tenure-track faculty of the UC Davis Campus):
Motion: In light of the events on the quadrangle of the UC Davis campus on the afternoon of Friday November 18, 2011, in light of Chancellor Linda Katehi’s email to faculty of November 18 in which she admitted that she had ordered the police to take action against the students who were demonstrating on the quadrangle and said that she had had “no option” but to proceed in this way, and in light of the failure of Chancellor Katehi to act effectively to resolve the resulting crisis in the intervening days,
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California lacks confidence in the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, and
Be it also resolved that the result of the vote on this motion be communicated to the Board of Regents and the President of the University of California.
The Davis Division membership was notified on February 3, 2012 that on-line balloting was open and would be closed on February 17, 2012, at 5:00 PM. The on-line ballot results were reviewed by the Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction on February 17, 2012 after 5:00 PM and are reported as follows:
Total eligible voters: 2,693
Required to pass: Majority
Vote received:
Yes: 312
No: 697
Invalid Ballots: 0
The Motion was therefore declared defeated and the University of California, Davis Division of the Academic Senate does not support the Motion Concerning the Chancellor’s Judgment.
Respectfully submitted,
Committee on Elections, Rules and Jurisdiction
G.J. Mattey, Chair
James Fadel
Mark Grismer
Thursday, February 9, 2012
Wanted - input on voting for resolutions for the #UCDavis Academic Senate #OccupyUCDavis
Well today I am finally getting around to voting on some UC Davis Academic Senate resolutions relating to the Occupy UC Davis pepper spray incident. For those not familiar with this - first - I offer you my undying love - second - here are some of my previous posts on the theme:
I wrote a lot about the pepper spray incident here and on twitter - I felt in many ways like I had to report on what was going on for the outside world. Here are some of my key posts:
View signatories
#3: Motion Concerning Police Actions
TO: Professor Linda Bisson, Chair, Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Dear Chair Bisson
The undersigned members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate hereby petition you to put the following motion to a vote of the entire membership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate at the earliest date that is feasible under Senate rules.
Motion:
Be it resolved that that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California hereby (1) condemns both the dispatch of police and use of excessive force in response to non-violent protests on November 18, 2011;
(2) opposes violent police response to non-violent protests on campus;
(3) demands that police deployment against protestors be considered only after all reasonable efforts have been exhausted and with direct consultation with Academic Senate leadership.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
View signatories
I wrote a lot about the pepper spray incident here and on twitter - I felt in many ways like I had to report on what was going on for the outside world. Here are some of my key posts:
- 11/19 A day of almost pure joy in #DavisCA and at #UCDavis, until ... #OccupyUCDavis
- 11/20 My accidental encounter with the #OccupyUCDavis crowd at #UCDavis #impressed
- 11/22 An exhausting and exhilarating day at the #OccupyUCDavis rally
- 11/23 Reporting from #UCDavis Town Hall meeting re: #OccupyUCDavis
- 11/23 Should #UCDavis faculty "walkout" from teaching to "support" students? I do not think so
- 11/25 Email from #OccupyUCDavis to #UCDavis faculty - Call for a General Strike
- 11/28 Just another Monday at #UCDavis: contentious UC regents meeting, a strike (sort of) & some occupying #OccupyUCDavis #OUCD
- 11/29 Town Hall #2 - Chancellor Katehi meets w/ Faculty/Staff; Katehi receives much support
- 12/1: Top 10 reasons to still consider attending #UCDavis #OccupyUCDavis
And then Winter break happened and things calmed down a bit at UC Davis. Plus, I got busy and needed to go back to running my lab and doing some work. Not that nothing happened during this time. Lots did in fact. The best place to find out about what happened is the Davis Enterprise which continued coverage of everything going on (see list on the right side of this page).
Catching up to today - now the issue (for me and other faculty/members of the Academic Senate) is that we have to vote on some resolutions regarding the pepper spray incident.
Below are the three for which I am supposed to vote. I am asking anyone out there for input on these. All of them seem pretty, well, lame to me and I am inclined to vote no on all of them. But I am reserving judgement and looking for feedback from others out there. Any comments / suggestions welcome.
#1 Motion Concerning the Chancellor's Judgment
TO: Professor Linda Bisson, Chair, Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Dear Chair Bisson
The undersigned members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate hereby petition you to put the following motion of non-confidence in the leadership of the Chancellor to a vote of the entire membership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate at the earliest date that is feasible under Senate rules.
Motion: In light of the events on the quadrangle of the UC Davis campus on the afternoon of Friday November 18, 2011, in light of Chancellor Linda Katehi’s email to faculty of November 18 in which she admitted that she had ordered the police to take action against the students who were demonstrating on the quadrangle and said that she had had “no option” but to proceed in this way, and in light of the failure of Chancellor Katehi to act effectively to resolve the resulting crisis in the intervening days,
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California lacks confidence in the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, and
Be it also resolved that the result of the vote on this motion be communicated to the Board of Regents and the President of the University of California.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
View signatories
#2: Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence
To: The Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Re: Petition for Ballot on Issues
We, the undersigned members of the UC Davis faculty, petition the Davis Division of the Academic Senate to hold a vote on the issues below.
Preamble
Whereas non-violent political protest, free assembly, and free speech are constitutional rights valued at the UC Davis,
And whereas the response of the UC Davis Police Department to peaceful protestors on November 18, 2011 was appalling,
And whereas in the UC Davis culture it is customary for representative(s) from the highest levels of the administration to engage in direct dialogue with demonstrators,
And whereas prior to November 18, 2011 Chancellor Linda Katehi worked diligently to elevate the national and international stature of the Davis campus,
And whereas the presence of an accomplished scholar at the top post has helped UC Davis attract and retain outstanding scholars, including faculty members serving at the highest levels of administration,
And whereas in the last two years, Chancellor Linda Katehi developed a bold plan for campus growth that includes an aggressive fund-raising campaign that will alleviate the burden imposed by ever decreasing state financial support,
And whereas Chancellor Linda Katehi apologized to University community for the events of November 18, 2011,
And whereas Chancellor Linda Katehi publically stated that she will ensure that such events do not recur,
And whereas the events of November 18 transformed Linda Katehi into a Chancellor who engages in a full and open dialogue with students, staff, and faculty,
And whereas Chancellor Katehi moved expeditiously to replace the flawed communications in the two days following the events with a campus-wide dialogue through a series of town hall meetings with students, staff, and faculty,
And whereas a Chancellor with first-hand experience of the horrific events of November 18, 2011 is better qualified to deal with its aftermath,
And whereas dispatching police before engaging in a direct dialogue with protesters, while running counter to the UC Davis culture, does not outweigh the Chancellor Katehi’s impeccable performance of all her other duties,
And whereas Chancellor Katehi’s resignation would have devastating effects on the moral and academic standing of the campus, thereby making it highly unlikely that UC Davis could attract a Chancellor of her stature,
And whereas it is time to promote a constructive healing process rather than risk more harm by pressuring the Chancellor to resign:
Resolution:
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Academic Senate:
Condemns both the dispatch of police in response to non-violent protests and the use of excessive force that led to the deplorable pepper-spraying events of November 18, 2011.
Opposes all violent police responses to non-violent protests on campus.
Demands that police deployment against protesters be considered only after all reasonable administrative efforts to bridge differences have been exhausted, including direct consultation with the leadership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate.
Accepts Chancellor Linda Katehi’s good faith apology.
Expresses confidence in Chancellor Linda Katehi’s leadership and efforts to place UC Davis among the top 5 public universities in the nation.
Catching up to today - now the issue (for me and other faculty/members of the Academic Senate) is that we have to vote on some resolutions regarding the pepper spray incident.
Below are the three for which I am supposed to vote. I am asking anyone out there for input on these. All of them seem pretty, well, lame to me and I am inclined to vote no on all of them. But I am reserving judgement and looking for feedback from others out there. Any comments / suggestions welcome.
#1 Motion Concerning the Chancellor's Judgment
TO: Professor Linda Bisson, Chair, Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Dear Chair Bisson
The undersigned members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate hereby petition you to put the following motion of non-confidence in the leadership of the Chancellor to a vote of the entire membership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate at the earliest date that is feasible under Senate rules.
Motion: In light of the events on the quadrangle of the UC Davis campus on the afternoon of Friday November 18, 2011, in light of Chancellor Linda Katehi’s email to faculty of November 18 in which she admitted that she had ordered the police to take action against the students who were demonstrating on the quadrangle and said that she had had “no option” but to proceed in this way, and in light of the failure of Chancellor Katehi to act effectively to resolve the resulting crisis in the intervening days,
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California lacks confidence in the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, and
Be it also resolved that the result of the vote on this motion be communicated to the Board of Regents and the President of the University of California.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
View signatories
#2: Five-Resolution Vote of Confidence
To: The Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Re: Petition for Ballot on Issues
We, the undersigned members of the UC Davis faculty, petition the Davis Division of the Academic Senate to hold a vote on the issues below.
Preamble
Whereas non-violent political protest, free assembly, and free speech are constitutional rights valued at the UC Davis,
And whereas the response of the UC Davis Police Department to peaceful protestors on November 18, 2011 was appalling,
And whereas in the UC Davis culture it is customary for representative(s) from the highest levels of the administration to engage in direct dialogue with demonstrators,
And whereas prior to November 18, 2011 Chancellor Linda Katehi worked diligently to elevate the national and international stature of the Davis campus,
And whereas the presence of an accomplished scholar at the top post has helped UC Davis attract and retain outstanding scholars, including faculty members serving at the highest levels of administration,
And whereas in the last two years, Chancellor Linda Katehi developed a bold plan for campus growth that includes an aggressive fund-raising campaign that will alleviate the burden imposed by ever decreasing state financial support,
And whereas Chancellor Linda Katehi apologized to University community for the events of November 18, 2011,
And whereas Chancellor Linda Katehi publically stated that she will ensure that such events do not recur,
And whereas the events of November 18 transformed Linda Katehi into a Chancellor who engages in a full and open dialogue with students, staff, and faculty,
And whereas Chancellor Katehi moved expeditiously to replace the flawed communications in the two days following the events with a campus-wide dialogue through a series of town hall meetings with students, staff, and faculty,
And whereas a Chancellor with first-hand experience of the horrific events of November 18, 2011 is better qualified to deal with its aftermath,
And whereas dispatching police before engaging in a direct dialogue with protesters, while running counter to the UC Davis culture, does not outweigh the Chancellor Katehi’s impeccable performance of all her other duties,
And whereas Chancellor Katehi’s resignation would have devastating effects on the moral and academic standing of the campus, thereby making it highly unlikely that UC Davis could attract a Chancellor of her stature,
And whereas it is time to promote a constructive healing process rather than risk more harm by pressuring the Chancellor to resign:
Resolution:
Be it therefore resolved that the Davis Division of the Academic Senate:
Condemns both the dispatch of police in response to non-violent protests and the use of excessive force that led to the deplorable pepper-spraying events of November 18, 2011.
Opposes all violent police responses to non-violent protests on campus.
Demands that police deployment against protesters be considered only after all reasonable administrative efforts to bridge differences have been exhausted, including direct consultation with the leadership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate.
Accepts Chancellor Linda Katehi’s good faith apology.
Expresses confidence in Chancellor Linda Katehi’s leadership and efforts to place UC Davis among the top 5 public universities in the nation.
View signatories
#3: Motion Concerning Police Actions
TO: Professor Linda Bisson, Chair, Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Dear Chair Bisson
The undersigned members of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate hereby petition you to put the following motion to a vote of the entire membership of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate at the earliest date that is feasible under Senate rules.
Motion:
Be it resolved that that the Davis Division of the Senate of the University of California hereby (1) condemns both the dispatch of police and use of excessive force in response to non-violent protests on November 18, 2011;
(2) opposes violent police response to non-violent protests on campus;
(3) demands that police deployment against protestors be considered only after all reasonable efforts have been exhausted and with direct consultation with Academic Senate leadership.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Yours sincerely,
View signatories
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Fun visit to the #UCDavis Bohart Entomology Museum w/ my daughter's Daisy Troop (led by my wife)
Kudos to the UC Davis Bohart Museum of Entomology for the tour they gave to the Daisy Troop my daughter is in (which is run by my wife and a friend of hers). I got there a little late and embarrassed myself by thinking one of the dads was one of the museum workers and introducing myself (even though I know the dad pretty well). Oh well, live and let learn. The visit went great - the kids got to play with bugs, got to open the stacks and even pull out drawers of various bugs (note - the general term, not the Homoptera). The museum staff were wonderful and the museum itself is very nice. A great kids activity in Davis and good for adults too. Always great to see passionate science education and outreach.
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Letter from Justice Cruz Reynoso to President Yudof regarding pepper spray investigation at #UCDavis
Just got this in email and thought it would be good to share
The text reads:
In an effort to keep you apprised of any developments stemming from the UCD November 18 Task Force, I am writing to inform you of changes to the original timeline that was established. These changes stem primarily from our negotiations with the Federated University Police Officer’s Association (FUPOA) for access to non subject officers. As such, I am targeting February 21, 2012 for the release of the report of the Task Force. It is my expectation that this meeting be held publicly on the Davis campus.
As you have charged, the timing of the release of the Task Force report is dependent on the fact- finding report from Kroll. The Task Force feels it is imperative to have the most complete view possible of the events that took place last November. This includes interviews from subject and non subject officers as well as students and faculty. While Kroll has conducted several interviews with students and faculty, as of the beginning of last week, Kroll had not had access to subject and non subject officers. Through several rounds of negotiation the General Counsel’s office has made an agreement with FUPOA for access to non subject officers. Interviews with non subject officers are taking place this week.
While the timeline for the release of the report has been delayed for a few weeks, I am very pleased that an agreement was reached for access to non subject officers as this is a critical component in understanding not only the frame of mind, but a complete understanding of the events that took place, including the view of police officers.
Sincerely, Cruz Reynoso
Thursday, January 19, 2012
Draft post cleanup #21: Tracking progress on the vertebrate tree of life
Yet another post in my "draft blog post cleanup" series. Here is #21; from March 2010:
A very interesting paper came out recently from colleagues of mine at UC Davis: Rapid progress on the vertebrate tree of life. I did not know they were working on this but perhaps should have. It has some fun/interesting analysis of the accumulation of phylogenetic knowledge over time. For example see Figure 1
The rest of the paper is worth a look.
And alas I stopped there ... I think I wanted to get Brad Shaffer and Bob Thomson's comments on the paper but never got around to it. Two years later the paper still is worth a look ...
A very interesting paper came out recently from colleagues of mine at UC Davis: Rapid progress on the vertebrate tree of life. I did not know they were working on this but perhaps should have. It has some fun/interesting analysis of the accumulation of phylogenetic knowledge over time. For example see Figure 1
 |
| Cumulative phylogenetic information amassed for the last 16 years. The accumulation of sequences for vertebrates in GenBank (a), papers using the term 'phylogeny' or 'phylogenetics' in the Web of Science database (b) and phylogenetic resolution (measured as the proportion of nodes with at least 50% bootstrap support) in the vertebrate tree of life resulting from these research efforts (c). In all cases, the data are cumulative from the start of each analysis. Phylogenetic resolution is calculated as in Table 1. Trend lines are exponential in (a), and second order polynomial in (b) and (c). |
The rest of the paper is worth a look.
And alas I stopped there ... I think I wanted to get Brad Shaffer and Bob Thomson's comments on the paper but never got around to it. Two years later the paper still is worth a look ...
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Storification of Tweets from talk by Jane Lubchenco at #UCDavis
Jane Lubchenco, head of NOAA, gave a talk at UC Dav is yesterday and I made a "Storify" version of some tweets from it. I am putting it below the "fold" here since it takes up a lot of space and I cannot figure out how to put the "click here for more" feature in the middle of a storify embed.
Letter from Chancellor Katehi to #UCDavis Community
Posting this email I received for those interested. Not sure what will happen this quarter in terms of Occupy UC Davis actions and related issues ... but will post as things develop.
Dear UC Davis Community,
Happy New Year! I am writing to welcome everyone back to campus and to share my thoughts about the coming year at UC Davis.
The many conversations we've had about the events of last November affirm that our pursuit of academic excellence can succeed only if our campus remains a safe and welcoming place for all voices and forms of expression.
As we work to ensure this, we must not forget the understandable frustration that has fueled protests. After repeated cuts in state support for California's public universities and a near doubling of tuition the past four years, many of our students and their families have reached a breaking point. Rising student debt and a still-struggling economy have only made things worse. Students have every right to expect that we will stand with them in fighting to reverse these very troubling trends.
In the coming year, I will personally and persistently advocate for additional state and federal investment in our university to help ease this financial burden and make UC Davis more available and accessible to deserving students. We also will steward our resources wisely, seek to protect academic programs to the extent possible, and do everything possible to fund more student scholarships and fellowships.
Ours is a preeminent public university. As we all strive to enhance its many qualities and distinctions, let us be proud of what is taking place every day in our classrooms, laboratories, health centers and other centers of excellence. All of you, in some way, are benefiting our region, state, nation and world. All great universities place students at the center of their work. We cannot and will not rest until we provide our students the best learning environment and services possible.
I also am committed to focusing on the positive role of UC Davis in economic development and its positive impacts on communities, our state and beyond. A stronger regional, state and global economy will provide our graduates with the career and service opportunities they deserve.
In support of this goal, I have initiated an extensive effort involving faculty, students and staff to assess and evaluate our 2020 Initiative. Central to that task is our ability to convert this concept into a plan that is implementable, aligns well with and supports our values and principles as a land-grant university.
The 2020 Initiative can be a bold blueprint for UC Davis to meet its financial challenges while broadening access to California students and allowing our university to become an even more vital engine of economic development.
Much work lies ahead. We expect to receive in coming weeks the results of various inquiries regarding the events of last November. We will receive critical reports regarding the future of UC Davis athletics. And we will hear the concerns and ideas generated by the fifty faculty, staff and students helping to study and shape the proposed 2020 Initiative.
I look forward to sharing and discussing these important subjects with you.
Sincerely,
Linda P.B. Katehi
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Draft post cleanup #10: trip to LA artificially sweetened by Carolyn de la Peña
Yet another post in my "draft blog post cleanup" series. Here is #10:
Went on a mini trip to UCLA for a mini meeting in November. It seemed appropriate that I brought with me to Los Angeles, land of empty pleasures - the new book from UC Davis Professor Carolyn de la Peña - "Empty Pleasures" on the history of artificial sweeteners. So I took a picture of the book overlooking part of LA from my hotel room:
The book is great read by the way ...
Went on a mini trip to UCLA for a mini meeting in November. It seemed appropriate that I brought with me to Los Angeles, land of empty pleasures - the new book from UC Davis Professor Carolyn de la Peña - "Empty Pleasures" on the history of artificial sweeteners. So I took a picture of the book overlooking part of LA from my hotel room:
The book is great read by the way ...
Thursday, December 29, 2011
UC Davis Chancellor putting increased emphasis on communications
Just got this email announcement and I thought I would share. As many know, in the aftermath of the pepper spray incident, whether you support the UC Davis Chancellor or not, it was pretty clear that communications regarding the incident were, well, poor at best. Hopefully this will improve things. Of course, action is more important than communication --- but I am glad to see the Chancellor responding to communication issues ---
Dear Colleagues,
I write to inform you about additional actions that I am taking immediately to strengthen Strategic Communications. These steps will help us address needs and challenges facing UC Davis today while preparing us to take advantage of opportunities that lie ahead.
You may recall that in September 2011 I eliminated the office of Vice Chancellor of University Relations and shifted Communications, Government Relations, and Special Events to the Office of the Chancellor, reporting directly to me. Shortly thereafter, Cynthia Barbera was brought on to serve as the acting Executive Director of Strategic Communications pending the appointment of a permanent director.
In meetings with various colleges and departments over the past three weeks as well as in other contexts, I heard many comments and clearly expressed concerns about the ability of Strategic Communications to meet our present needs. I share many of these concerns.
Accordingly, I have asked Barry Shiller to serve as interim Executive Director of Strategic Communications. He will assume day-to-day management of the campus’s central communications activities, effective January 5, 2012.
Barry brings to us an extensive background in strategic communications, diverse career experiences from the UC system and elsewhere, and – as a proud Aggie parent (Class of 2007) – particular appreciation for UC Davis' distinctions and excellence.
Most recently, Barry served for more than three years as the Associate Vice Chancellor for Communications & Marketing at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). There, he guided UCSC’s marketing and institutional communication efforts including media relations, branding and marketing, and campus communications. He closely collaborated with students, faculty, staff, foundation and alumni representatives, campus leadership and others on a comprehensive effort to highlight UCSC’s many distinctions in teaching, research and service. Under his leadership, UCSC achieved greater regional and national prominence.
Barry previously served in a similar capacity for nearly five years at Saint Mary's College of California. Prior to that, he held communications and public affairs leadership positions at a San Francisco public relations agency; an e-commerce start-up firm and the northern California affiliate of the American Automobile Association (AAA). Barry earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of San Francisco and completed advanced studies in insurance and risk management.
I am confident that Barry will serve us extremely well as the interim leader of our central communications activities. I hope you will join me in warmly welcoming him to the UC Davis family.
It is also essential that we launch and complete a comprehensive national search for the permanent director of our central communications unit. Many faculty and others have expressed an interest in helping to shape and inform the long-term direction of our campus communications activities. Community input will be critical to this search as well as the ongoing evolution of our strategic communications efforts.
I have asked Jessie Ann Owens, Dean of Humanities, Arts and Cultural Studies, to chair the Recruitment and Selection Committee for this important position, and Dean Owens has graciously agreed. You may expect details early in the New Year about the search process and in particular how faculty, students, staff and other members of the campus community can contribute to this endeavor.
I’ll continue to share updates as we work to improve our communications efforts. Your assistance is critical to our success.
I wish each of you much peace as we enter the New Year.
Sincerely,
Linda P.B. Katehi
Chancellor
Dear Colleagues,
I write to inform you about additional actions that I am taking immediately to strengthen Strategic Communications. These steps will help us address needs and challenges facing UC Davis today while preparing us to take advantage of opportunities that lie ahead.
You may recall that in September 2011 I eliminated the office of Vice Chancellor of University Relations and shifted Communications, Government Relations, and Special Events to the Office of the Chancellor, reporting directly to me. Shortly thereafter, Cynthia Barbera was brought on to serve as the acting Executive Director of Strategic Communications pending the appointment of a permanent director.
In meetings with various colleges and departments over the past three weeks as well as in other contexts, I heard many comments and clearly expressed concerns about the ability of Strategic Communications to meet our present needs. I share many of these concerns.
Accordingly, I have asked Barry Shiller to serve as interim Executive Director of Strategic Communications. He will assume day-to-day management of the campus’s central communications activities, effective January 5, 2012.
Barry brings to us an extensive background in strategic communications, diverse career experiences from the UC system and elsewhere, and – as a proud Aggie parent (Class of 2007) – particular appreciation for UC Davis' distinctions and excellence.
Most recently, Barry served for more than three years as the Associate Vice Chancellor for Communications & Marketing at the University of California, Santa Cruz (UCSC). There, he guided UCSC’s marketing and institutional communication efforts including media relations, branding and marketing, and campus communications. He closely collaborated with students, faculty, staff, foundation and alumni representatives, campus leadership and others on a comprehensive effort to highlight UCSC’s many distinctions in teaching, research and service. Under his leadership, UCSC achieved greater regional and national prominence.
Barry previously served in a similar capacity for nearly five years at Saint Mary's College of California. Prior to that, he held communications and public affairs leadership positions at a San Francisco public relations agency; an e-commerce start-up firm and the northern California affiliate of the American Automobile Association (AAA). Barry earned his bachelor’s degree from the University of San Francisco and completed advanced studies in insurance and risk management.
I am confident that Barry will serve us extremely well as the interim leader of our central communications activities. I hope you will join me in warmly welcoming him to the UC Davis family.
It is also essential that we launch and complete a comprehensive national search for the permanent director of our central communications unit. Many faculty and others have expressed an interest in helping to shape and inform the long-term direction of our campus communications activities. Community input will be critical to this search as well as the ongoing evolution of our strategic communications efforts.
I have asked Jessie Ann Owens, Dean of Humanities, Arts and Cultural Studies, to chair the Recruitment and Selection Committee for this important position, and Dean Owens has graciously agreed. You may expect details early in the New Year about the search process and in particular how faculty, students, staff and other members of the campus community can contribute to this endeavor.
I’ll continue to share updates as we work to improve our communications efforts. Your assistance is critical to our success.
I wish each of you much peace as we enter the New Year.
Sincerely,
Linda P.B. Katehi
Chancellor
Friday, December 23, 2011
Reminder - Monthly Omics Office Hours at #UCDavis Genome Center - Schedule
For those at UC Davis interested in learning a bit about various omics issues - this may be of interest:
Email from the responsible parties:
The UC Davis Genome Center holds an Omics Office Hour from 9:00-10:00am each month in Room 3209 of the Medical Education building in Sacramento. These drop-in sessions are open to anyone in the SOM community with questions regarding Genomics, Epigenomics and Gene Expression, Proteomics, Metabolomics, Network Biology and Bioinformatics.
The mission of the Genome Center is to facilitate your "omics" research at UC Davis. Genome Center staff and faculty will be on hand for consultation in a friendly, informal setting. If you have ideas that you would like to explore, we would be happy to discuss it as well as the possibility of pilot grants.
The next session will be Friday, January 6, 9:00 am in Room 3209 of Med Edu Bldg.
NOTE: THE DECEMBER 23, 2011 MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELED!!!!!
For more details, please link to:
http://www.genomecenter.ucdavis.edu/outreach-and-giving/omics-office-hour-2012
The schedule is also available as a Google Calendar called "'Omics Office Hours". For anyone who wants to subscribe to the calendar, here are instructions:
For Google Calendars:
1- go to Google Calendar
2 - under "Other calendars" click Add/Add by URL
3 - past the iCal link shown below into the box (https://www.google.com/calendar/ical/o6rt68uree1205hictul75m614%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics)
4 - click Add Calendar
5 - DONE
For iCal:
1- just click on the link below (might require some advanced Mac skills)
- or -
1- open iCAL
2- in the menu select Calendar/Subscribe
3 - past the iCal link shown below into the box (https://www.google.com/calendar/ical/o6rt68uree1205hictul75m614%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics)
4 - click Subscribe
5 - DONE
The mission of the Genome Center is to facilitate your "omics" research at UC Davis. Genome Center staff and faculty will be on hand for consultation in a friendly, informal setting. If you have ideas that you would like to explore, we would be happy to discuss it as well as the possibility of pilot grants.
The next session will be Friday, January 6, 9:00 am in Room 3209 of Med Edu Bldg.
NOTE: THE DECEMBER 23, 2011 MEETING HAS BEEN CANCELED!!!!!
For more details, please link to:
http://www.genomecenter.ucdavis.edu/outreach-and-giving/omics-office-hour-2012
The schedule is also available as a Google Calendar called "'Omics Office Hours". For anyone who wants to subscribe to the calendar, here are instructions:
For Google Calendars:
1- go to Google Calendar
2 - under "Other calendars" click Add/Add by URL
3 - past the iCal link shown below into the box (https://www.google.com/calendar/ical/o6rt68uree1205hictul75m614%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics)
4 - click Add Calendar
5 - DONE
For iCal:
1- just click on the link below (might require some advanced Mac skills)
- or -
1- open iCAL
2- in the menu select Calendar/Subscribe
3 - past the iCal link shown below into the box (https://www.google.com/calendar/ical/o6rt68uree1205hictul75m614%40group.calendar.google.com/public/basic.ics)
4 - click Subscribe
5 - DONE
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Email regarding UC Davis Academic Senate Special Committee re: Pepper Spray
Posting for anyone interested (email from Linda Bisson - Chair of UC Davis Academic Senate)
Dear Colleagues:
There was an issue with the set up of the email address for the Special Committee that has now been corrected by IT. If you sent an email to the committee prior to Wednesday December 21st, we request that you send it again. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Linda
*original message*
Dear Colleagues,
During an emergency teleconference meeting, on November 20, 2011, the Davis Division Executive Council approved formation of a Special Committee to review the incident in which protestors were pepper sprayed on November 18, 2011. The Executive Council Special Committee on the November 18th Incident has been appointed. The charge and membership are available on the Academic Senate website: http://academicsenate.ucdavis.edu/committees/exec-council-nov-18.cfm. If you wish to provide the Special Committee information, please forward an e-mail message to: specialcommittee@ucdavis.edu. I anticipate receipt of the report from this committee in February 2012.
Sincerely,
Linda F. Bisson, Chair
Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Friday, December 16, 2011
Two #UCDavis Academic Senate Ballot Initiatives related to #OccupyUCDavis Pepper Spray Incident
Just got this email and thought it would be of interest to some
Colleagues,
This message provides notice of two impending ballots, as required by Davis Division Bylaw 17: http://academicsenate.ucdavis.edu/cerj/manual/dd_bylaws.cfm#17-. You have received this notice as a voting member of the Davis Division of the Academic Senate. The Davis Division received at least 50 valid signatures with each petition, requiring initiation of a formal notice and electronic ballot. More information, including the method for gathering pro and con statements and the voting period, will be distributed on January 9, 2012. The petitions are summarized below:
1) Petition received on December 6, 2011, requests a vote regarding a lack of confidence in the leadership of Chancellor Katehi, with the result of the vote to be communicated to the Board of Regents and UC President.
2) Petition received on December 15, 2011, requests a vote regarding 1) condemnation of both the dispatch of police and use of excessive force in response to non-violent protests on November 18, 2011; 2) opposing violent police response to non-violent protests on campus; 3) demanding that police deployment against protestors be considered only after all reasonable efforts have been exhausted and with direct consultation with Academic Senate leadership; 4) acceptance of Chancellor Katehi's apology; 5) expression of confidence in Chancellor Katehi's leadership and efforts to place UC Davis among the top public universities in the nation.
Sincerely,
Ines Hernandez-Avila
Secretary, Davis Division of the Academic Senate
Chair, Native American Studies
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Fact Sheet from #UCDavis Administration annotated by some skeptical faculty #OccupyUCDavis
Just got a pointer to this by email and thought some would be interested (not endorsing everything that is there but it is definitely worth a look - the Fact Sheet they are annotating rubbed me the wrong way too).
5 UCD faculty members prepared an annotated version of the "fact sheet" sent by the Chancellor's office last week: https://sites.google.com/site/realfactsheet/realfactsheet.pdf
This is designed not only to give more of the relevant facts, but also to analyze the quality of communications coming out of the Chancellor's office. The list of endorsers is at https://sites.google.com/site/realfactsheet/endorsers.pdf
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Meeting of Faculty in College of Biological Sciences w/ Chancellor Katehi #UCDavis
A few days ago I got the following email:
I got to LS1022 a few minutes early, and chatted with a few of the faculty from the College of Biological Sciences who were milling around. Then the Dean showed up and we all waited for the Chancellor. We were told she was running a few minutes late and the room started to fill up. And then she arrived with her chief of staff Karl Engelbach.
And then she gave a very brief mini introduction - said she was here to listen to faculty concerns - explained why she was late - said she had learned a great deal in the last few weeks and truly seemed a bit humbled by the whole thing. That lasted just a few minutes and then the next 1.5 hours was spent on faculty asking questions or making comments and Katehi responding. It seemed inappropriate to live tweet the meeting ... so I am going to have to go on my notes and my brain to try and convey what happened.
The first question / comment was about students. One faculty member said that the students really seemed to have two main complaints - increases in tuition and fees and decreases in quality of education. This person said they agreed with the concerns of the students and wanted to know in particular what Katehi planned to do in terms of quality of education. Katehi then responded with some comments/ideas including (1) that the state has major money issues that will be here for some time and that the same issues are seen everywhere in the world - the economy is hurting everything (2) that the current plan for how to deal with the squeezing economy is not working - and that she agreed that something new needs to be done - she made an important point - that the world is changing a lot faster than the university is and that at full UC Davis speed we cannot likely match the changes that occur in the world around us (3) that students just cannot be asked to pay more anymore. Throughout the discussion of these points the Chancellor seemed to be really trying to interact and get a feel for what the faculty thought about these issues (at least to me).
The next question/comment was a critique regarding past changes made by Katehi/the administration which the questioner said we too much "in the box" - as in - too much business as usual. Interestingly (to me) this comment related to the centralization of administrative functions which the questioner clearly did not like and this person suggested that actually decentralization might be better and more cost effective. That is - having the administrative functions closer to the users (i.e, the departments and the faculty). I am not sure I bought this point - I mean - yes - having more direct contacts with grants and accounting and HR and legal and such people could be useful but I think I agree with the Chancellor on this in that there was enormous redundancy and some of this could be eliminated to save money.
The next question was about the quality of education at UC Davis and the questioner expressed concern that students are getting less quality as class sizes are going up and TAs are being cut and lecturers are being cut. And the concern was expressed that this will damage UC Davis in many ways including that students will not have as positive an experience and that this in turn might affect long term interactions with alumni. In addition the suggestion was made that students never remember the large classes fondly and that the key to positive alumni interactions is small classes. I definitely did not buy this point - I think certainly eliminated TAs and lecturers is not a good idea but I also feel that large classes can be taught well or poorly and that it is not as simple as saying we just need smaller classes. When I was at Harvard as an undergrad my favorite classes including small ones (e.g., Creative Writing, Conservation Biology tutorial) as well as big ones (e.g., Stephen Jay Gould's History of Earth and of Life class). I think class size is less important than instructor passion ...
But Katehi certainly seemed open to the notion that quality of instruction was critical. And then she recounted a story about her daughter (but first apologized if anyone had heard the story before) having a wonderful experience with education at a very large school (U. Indiana). The key to the story was a TA who wrote to Katehi and her husband to nudge them to encouraging their daughter to switch from studying business to studying English.
Other people chimed in on this issue and expressed concern about the possible plan for UC Davis to add more students in the future. They said that we should figure out how to improve the quality of education before increasing the number of students on campus.
Alas - I am going to have to summarize some of the other points without providing too much detail as I have to get my kids to sleep soon so here are some other points raised:
1. Many suggested that the Chancellor needs to reduce her separation from the people of the University and to not be locked off with administrators all the time. The wording one person used was "we should deprofessionalize the administration". That is, too many administrators who were removed from the daily lives of the constituents - the faculty, staff and students. There were many comments about having the Chancellor and hopefully others in the administration spend more time outside of the Administration building (Mrak Hall) and more time with students, staff and faculty. Katehi agreed with the need for this.
2. Multiple people expressed concern with the Chancellors new "Advisory Board", in particular the corporate members as well as one ex-UCD administrator (I note - I critiqued this group as soon as someone pointed it out to me). Katehi accepted the critiques and said that the Board was announced before it was completed and that also it was really supposed to be a UC Davis advocacy group - to fight for UC Davis - and not an advisory group to her per se. Katehi noted that people were selected for this group in part if they were UC Davis Alumni. And some in our meeting supported her appointment of such Alums. But others expressed frustration that this group was just unseemly. I pointed out that the naming of this group was yet another sign of poor communication and a lack of rapid/nimble responses to critiques.
3. There were many concerns expressed with top down decision making that did not include discussions with the faculty.
4. Katehi suggested that there was enormous pressure from outside UC Davis for growth (e.g., to take more students) and for certain types of changes.
5. Katehi said that the UC Davis budget still needs to be completely reworked and that what we have is a "legacy" system which does not work and is very opaque (even to her). She noted that in the past everyone on campus - every group - has expressed concern to her that they believe that their group subsidizes everyone else on campus. That is - everyone thinks they are getting the shaft and that they deserve more financial support than other groups. (I note - this could be because the central UC offices or the UCD administration takes too much of the money and thus everyone is right - everyone may be getting the shaft).
6. Katehi, in response to a question, said she believed they had done a decent job of reducing the size and cost of the administration but that it was very difficult to move fast in such things.
7. There was a very strange question about pepper spray dosage - Katehi wisely did not answer and after a moment of hushed silence she said "I do not know what to say to that" or something like that
8. There was a question/statement about "salary recovery" for faculty. Apparently, there has been some reduction in the College budget where one of the possible (or even the only) solution presented to some faculty has been that they will have to recover more of their salary than they currently do (I think most recover summer salary or some equivalent). I am not sure what the issue is here as I have not heard any discussion of this. But clearly people were very upset by this issue - pressure to recover more salary without apparently alleviation of some teaching. Katehi seemed to not know what had been told to faculty and my guess is that this was a College of Biological Sciences level issue and perhaps she had no direct way of knowing about it. And I note - I am not sure what the complaint here was - I personally recover more of my salary than I have to via grants and I have never complained about it since I would like to free up funds to be used for other purposes. But perhaps I am understanding the issues here.
9. There was a concern expressed with a claim that the University Counsel got in the way of many initiatives and also seemed to insulate Katehi and others from the campus. Apparently, the University Counsel reports to the UC Office of the President and not to Katehi. Such a structure, if true, seems like it might introduce a lot of complications. Whatever the structure, clearly some of the faculty in the college are not happy with interactions with the University counsel.
10. One concern I did not expect related to UC Davis joining the NCAA Division I in sports a few years back. One person raised this as an issue and said that much money could probably have been saved by never doing that. It was suggested that Davis could give up it's move to Division I. Katehi, who was not involved in the move to Division I, said that turning back the clock on this would be hard - much money had already been spent on the changes and it was possible to stay in Division I and yet retain some of the old flavor of UC Davis where sports was less about a few big programs and more about broad participation.
11. A final, somewhat funny, concern was that for the construction going on on campus, someone suggested that they may want to remove the total amount of $$ being spent on projects from the signs at the project sites. A few million here to there on those projects may make students feel like they are really getting screwed when asked to pay more. Someone else later also noted that one could simply put all such projects on hold and take the $$$ from them an apply it to teaching and students. Katehi said that was not possible for many projects since the money came from sources in many cases that stipulated that it could only be used for those construction projects.
That's about all I can recall. I note - I think Katehi handled the discussion very well overall. She seemed truly interested in hearing what people had to say and in changing the tone and pattern of the UC Davis administration as well as in really turning the pepper spray incident into a catalyst for improving the lives of students on campus. As many know - I personally did not make any calls for Katehi to resign but I also have not signed any letter of endorsement as some faculty have. I am more and more confident that Katehi will really try to do a better job with many issues in the future in response to this incident and since overall I thought she was doing a good job as chancellor before I am hopeful for the future of UC Davis. I still am reserving judgement about whether or not real changes occur.
Good Afternoon,And today was the day. It was a very hectic day for me. AM kid related duties. Then I dropped off two pairs of broken glasses to get soldered (one of which had broken on the day of the major post-pepper spray rally at UC Davis. Then off to lab where I had only a short period of free time before lab meeting (alas, unlike last week, this meeting was indoors). And then off to the meeting with the Chancellor. Here are some notes from that meeting --- more of a stream of consciousness than detailed notes in many cases but hopefully this will give a gist of how the meeting went.
To all “Faculty Members Only” of the College of Biological Sciences:
Chancellor Katehi has requested a meeting with the faculty members of the College of Biological Sciences. For this particular session, the invitation is extended to faculty members only.
This will be an opportunity to ask questions and to hear the Chancellors plans for moving forward.
Date: Thursday, December 8, 2011
Location: Conference Room – Life Sciences Building / 1022
Time: 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm
I got to LS1022 a few minutes early, and chatted with a few of the faculty from the College of Biological Sciences who were milling around. Then the Dean showed up and we all waited for the Chancellor. We were told she was running a few minutes late and the room started to fill up. And then she arrived with her chief of staff Karl Engelbach.
And then she gave a very brief mini introduction - said she was here to listen to faculty concerns - explained why she was late - said she had learned a great deal in the last few weeks and truly seemed a bit humbled by the whole thing. That lasted just a few minutes and then the next 1.5 hours was spent on faculty asking questions or making comments and Katehi responding. It seemed inappropriate to live tweet the meeting ... so I am going to have to go on my notes and my brain to try and convey what happened.
The first question / comment was about students. One faculty member said that the students really seemed to have two main complaints - increases in tuition and fees and decreases in quality of education. This person said they agreed with the concerns of the students and wanted to know in particular what Katehi planned to do in terms of quality of education. Katehi then responded with some comments/ideas including (1) that the state has major money issues that will be here for some time and that the same issues are seen everywhere in the world - the economy is hurting everything (2) that the current plan for how to deal with the squeezing economy is not working - and that she agreed that something new needs to be done - she made an important point - that the world is changing a lot faster than the university is and that at full UC Davis speed we cannot likely match the changes that occur in the world around us (3) that students just cannot be asked to pay more anymore. Throughout the discussion of these points the Chancellor seemed to be really trying to interact and get a feel for what the faculty thought about these issues (at least to me).
The next question/comment was a critique regarding past changes made by Katehi/the administration which the questioner said we too much "in the box" - as in - too much business as usual. Interestingly (to me) this comment related to the centralization of administrative functions which the questioner clearly did not like and this person suggested that actually decentralization might be better and more cost effective. That is - having the administrative functions closer to the users (i.e, the departments and the faculty). I am not sure I bought this point - I mean - yes - having more direct contacts with grants and accounting and HR and legal and such people could be useful but I think I agree with the Chancellor on this in that there was enormous redundancy and some of this could be eliminated to save money.
The next question was about the quality of education at UC Davis and the questioner expressed concern that students are getting less quality as class sizes are going up and TAs are being cut and lecturers are being cut. And the concern was expressed that this will damage UC Davis in many ways including that students will not have as positive an experience and that this in turn might affect long term interactions with alumni. In addition the suggestion was made that students never remember the large classes fondly and that the key to positive alumni interactions is small classes. I definitely did not buy this point - I think certainly eliminated TAs and lecturers is not a good idea but I also feel that large classes can be taught well or poorly and that it is not as simple as saying we just need smaller classes. When I was at Harvard as an undergrad my favorite classes including small ones (e.g., Creative Writing, Conservation Biology tutorial) as well as big ones (e.g., Stephen Jay Gould's History of Earth and of Life class). I think class size is less important than instructor passion ...
But Katehi certainly seemed open to the notion that quality of instruction was critical. And then she recounted a story about her daughter (but first apologized if anyone had heard the story before) having a wonderful experience with education at a very large school (U. Indiana). The key to the story was a TA who wrote to Katehi and her husband to nudge them to encouraging their daughter to switch from studying business to studying English.
Other people chimed in on this issue and expressed concern about the possible plan for UC Davis to add more students in the future. They said that we should figure out how to improve the quality of education before increasing the number of students on campus.
Alas - I am going to have to summarize some of the other points without providing too much detail as I have to get my kids to sleep soon so here are some other points raised:
1. Many suggested that the Chancellor needs to reduce her separation from the people of the University and to not be locked off with administrators all the time. The wording one person used was "we should deprofessionalize the administration". That is, too many administrators who were removed from the daily lives of the constituents - the faculty, staff and students. There were many comments about having the Chancellor and hopefully others in the administration spend more time outside of the Administration building (Mrak Hall) and more time with students, staff and faculty. Katehi agreed with the need for this.
2. Multiple people expressed concern with the Chancellors new "Advisory Board", in particular the corporate members as well as one ex-UCD administrator (I note - I critiqued this group as soon as someone pointed it out to me). Katehi accepted the critiques and said that the Board was announced before it was completed and that also it was really supposed to be a UC Davis advocacy group - to fight for UC Davis - and not an advisory group to her per se. Katehi noted that people were selected for this group in part if they were UC Davis Alumni. And some in our meeting supported her appointment of such Alums. But others expressed frustration that this group was just unseemly. I pointed out that the naming of this group was yet another sign of poor communication and a lack of rapid/nimble responses to critiques.
3. There were many concerns expressed with top down decision making that did not include discussions with the faculty.
4. Katehi suggested that there was enormous pressure from outside UC Davis for growth (e.g., to take more students) and for certain types of changes.
5. Katehi said that the UC Davis budget still needs to be completely reworked and that what we have is a "legacy" system which does not work and is very opaque (even to her). She noted that in the past everyone on campus - every group - has expressed concern to her that they believe that their group subsidizes everyone else on campus. That is - everyone thinks they are getting the shaft and that they deserve more financial support than other groups. (I note - this could be because the central UC offices or the UCD administration takes too much of the money and thus everyone is right - everyone may be getting the shaft).
6. Katehi, in response to a question, said she believed they had done a decent job of reducing the size and cost of the administration but that it was very difficult to move fast in such things.
7. There was a very strange question about pepper spray dosage - Katehi wisely did not answer and after a moment of hushed silence she said "I do not know what to say to that" or something like that
8. There was a question/statement about "salary recovery" for faculty. Apparently, there has been some reduction in the College budget where one of the possible (or even the only) solution presented to some faculty has been that they will have to recover more of their salary than they currently do (I think most recover summer salary or some equivalent). I am not sure what the issue is here as I have not heard any discussion of this. But clearly people were very upset by this issue - pressure to recover more salary without apparently alleviation of some teaching. Katehi seemed to not know what had been told to faculty and my guess is that this was a College of Biological Sciences level issue and perhaps she had no direct way of knowing about it. And I note - I am not sure what the complaint here was - I personally recover more of my salary than I have to via grants and I have never complained about it since I would like to free up funds to be used for other purposes. But perhaps I am understanding the issues here.
9. There was a concern expressed with a claim that the University Counsel got in the way of many initiatives and also seemed to insulate Katehi and others from the campus. Apparently, the University Counsel reports to the UC Office of the President and not to Katehi. Such a structure, if true, seems like it might introduce a lot of complications. Whatever the structure, clearly some of the faculty in the college are not happy with interactions with the University counsel.
10. One concern I did not expect related to UC Davis joining the NCAA Division I in sports a few years back. One person raised this as an issue and said that much money could probably have been saved by never doing that. It was suggested that Davis could give up it's move to Division I. Katehi, who was not involved in the move to Division I, said that turning back the clock on this would be hard - much money had already been spent on the changes and it was possible to stay in Division I and yet retain some of the old flavor of UC Davis where sports was less about a few big programs and more about broad participation.
11. A final, somewhat funny, concern was that for the construction going on on campus, someone suggested that they may want to remove the total amount of $$ being spent on projects from the signs at the project sites. A few million here to there on those projects may make students feel like they are really getting screwed when asked to pay more. Someone else later also noted that one could simply put all such projects on hold and take the $$$ from them an apply it to teaching and students. Katehi said that was not possible for many projects since the money came from sources in many cases that stipulated that it could only be used for those construction projects.
That's about all I can recall. I note - I think Katehi handled the discussion very well overall. She seemed truly interested in hearing what people had to say and in changing the tone and pattern of the UC Davis administration as well as in really turning the pepper spray incident into a catalyst for improving the lives of students on campus. As many know - I personally did not make any calls for Katehi to resign but I also have not signed any letter of endorsement as some faculty have. I am more and more confident that Katehi will really try to do a better job with many issues in the future in response to this incident and since overall I thought she was doing a good job as chancellor before I am hopeful for the future of UC Davis. I still am reserving judgement about whether or not real changes occur.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
