The ostensible aim of the fees – providing “incentives” to students not to take too many courses or repeat courses, so slots can open for other students – can be handled through enrollment priorities and other policies. In reality, the proposed fees are an “ambition penalty” on students who want to graduate early or on time or pursue a double major or high-unit major (such as engineering). Even worse, these fees favor wealthier students who can afford to pay, creating differential access to courses. And the proposed fees do nothing to deal with the real problem, which is that students often cannot get classes they need for their major – so they take whatever classes they can get in order to keep financial aid. That is the problem the new chancellor will need to tackle. Reed’s proposed fees are simply an insult to Californians, a thumb in their eye after they voted to pass Proposition 30.

Read full article [here].
by The Editorial Board, The Sacramento Bee.

Posted: November 11th, 2012, by: admin. Categories: . Awaiting Comments.