POTENTIAL BENEFITS OF SSDPs
PLEASE NOTE: This list is a compilation of views expressed by individuals and groups holding a wide array of positions regarding SSDPs. Our Task Force does not endorse any of these views; nor has it sought to evaluate them empirically. Once we have identified the most salient potential benefits and concerns, we will evaluate them by drawing upon experience with existing UCLA SSDPs.
Access, Affordability, Diversity
- Provide access to UCLA quality education to specific student populations, such as diverse working professionals, with targeted and alternatively-scheduled programs.
- Expand access to out-of-state and international students without impacting in-state students.
- Generate revenues that can be directed to student financial aid.
- Attract students earning or expecting to earn high salaries who have lower financial aid needs.
- Expanded enrollment of international students in SSDPs enrich student experiences by introducing them to diverse perspectives and cultures.
Quality of Programs and Students
- SSDP courses co-enrolled with state-supported courses bring traditional students into enriching contact with working professionals and international students.
- Program elements supported by SSDPs can benefit students in state-supported programs.
- Greater control over and predictability of revenues allow investment in innovative programs.
- Enable financial and other access to field-based resources (employers, field-based lecturers), enhancing the quality of state-supported programs and encouraging professional partnerships.
Furthering the UCLA Mission and Brand
- Allow for creation of new programs to serve public need for professional education.
- Greater public visibility and access to a larger population enhances the UCLA reputation and brand nationally and internationally.
- SSDP revenues and flexibility help maintain quality of SSDPs and state-supported programs, and hence support the UCLA brand.
Faculty Resources
- Aid in faculty recruitment and retention by augmenting salaries with overload teaching.
- Allow for development of programs that intersect with research interests of faculty.
- Generated revenues can be used to increase faculty, provide a broader range of electives to all students, and expose students to a greater range of professionals working in the field.
Financial Risks and Benefits
- Greater predictability in revenues and enhanced capacity to plan for budgets.
- Help offset overhead costs of state-supported programs and provide resources to improve facilities shared with state-supported programs.
- Generate revenue for state-supported programs through cross-enrollment.
- Generate surplus revenue that can be reinvested in state-supported programs.
- Salvage state-funded programs discontinued due to cuts in financial support.
POTENTIAL CONCERNS WITH SSDPS
PLEASE NOTE: This list is a compilation of views expressed by individuals and groups holding a wide array of positions regarding SSDPs. Our Task Force does not endorse any of these views; nor has it sought to evaluate them empirically. Once we have identified the most salient potential benefits and concerns, we will evaluate them by drawing upon experience with existing UCLA SSDPs.
Access, Affordability, Diversity
- High tuition and limited student aid reduce access for financially disadvantaged students and will disproportionately affect underrepresented US minority students, negatively impacting diversity at UCLA.
- The debt resulting from high tuition and limited financial aid will discourage students in SSDPs from pursuing careers in public service.
Quality of Programs and Students
- Financial incentives, goals and criteria outweigh academic incentives, goals and criteria, negatively impacting the quality of self-supporting programs and students.
- Quality of teaching and advising in SSDPs suffers due to low involvement of ladder faculty.
- High involvement of ladder faculty in SSDPs negatively impacts state-supported programs.
- High tuition and limited financial aid in SSDPs result in greater financial burden for students, negatively impacting academic performance.
- Inconsistent oversight and staffing of SSDPs results in inconsistent quality of programs.
Impact on UCLA Mission and Brand
- SSDPs are at odds with the principles, values, and mission of UCLA as a public university and negatively impact university and faculty commitment to public service and to California residents.
- Growth of SSDPs may lead to further reduction of state support if SSDPs are seen as not serving state residents and as demonstrating a lack of need for state support.
- Growth of SSDPs may result in expansion of professional programs relative to academic programs, transforming and perhaps endangering campus identity and brand as a top research university.
Impact on Campus
- Increase disparities in financial resources and faculty compensation between programs with and without access to markets for SSDPs.
- Increase trend of division of campus into isolated units rather than integrated community.
- Students in state-supported programs may be crowded out of courses with concurrent enrollment for SSDP students.
Faculty Resources
- State-budgeted ladder faculty teaching in SSDPs on an overload or buy-out basis negatively impacts faculty involvement in state supported programs, research, university and public service.
Financial Risks and Benefits
- Achieving and maintaining self-support is uncertain, given market-driven nature of student demand and market-based limits on competitive tuition levels.
- Non-state campus resources may be diverted to SSDPs, due to ill-defined scope of activities, lack of proper budgeting policies and practices, start-up costs, inadequate indirect cost calculation and recovery, and programs that fail to achieve self-support.
- Net financial benefit of SSDPs to campus beyond home unit is uncertain, particularly when revenues in excess of costs as well as indirect cost-recovery assessments stay in unit.
OBSERVED OR ASSERTED PROBLEMS WITH POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR SSDPS
Lack of Clarity
- Lack of clarity over requisite detail and documentation in proposals on budget; faculty resources, research, compensation; safeguards to state-supported programs; access, affordability and diversity.
- Lack of clarity with regard to authority of faculty and administration in review process.
- Definition of “non-traditional students”—a key criterion for SSDPs—is vague.
- Need for a clearer articulation of the role of SSDPs in long-term campus planning and goals.
Inconsistent Implementation and Oversight
- Inconsistent oversight and staffing of SSDPs.
- Lack of uniformity in compensation for ladder faculty teaching in SSDPs on overload, buyout, and “summer ninth” basis.
Burdensome Procedures
- Lengthy and burdensome review process for SSDP proposals in relation to financial and other pressures for expedited review of SSDPs.
- Increased burden on academic senate committees involved in the review of SSDP proposals.
