Compliance with USM Textbook Policy: May 1 Publication

The Board of Regents passed the USM Policy on Textbook Affordability Measures at the February 13 meeting held at Towson University.  One of the more progressive portions requires all textbook selections to be finalized and published by May 1 for fall semesters and December 1 for spring semesters in II.1 of the policy.  This allows both for early access for students and assurances for the bookstore on which books will be used in the coming semester.  This advance knowledge allows bookstores to purchase textbooks at a higher price during buy-back.  The policy reads (III.10.II.1):

All University System of Maryland degree-granting institutions shall post on the institutional website ISBN, title, author, publisher, and edition for required course material as soon as faculty members and the bookstore have finalized the textbook selection but no later than May 1 for the fall semester and December 1 for the spring semester.  In the case that a course has not been assigned a faculty member by the given deadline, textbook selection shall be conducted and communicated to enrolled students expeditiously upon selection of the materials.

As of May 1, today, 7 USM institutions have complied with the USM policy.  They include:

• University of Maryland, Baltimore County
  
• University of Maryland, College Park
  
• Bowie State University
  
• Towson University
  
• Salisbury University
  
• University of Baltimore
• University of Maryland, Baltimore

 Four institutions have not complied with the USM Policy:

• University of Maryland University College
• Coppin State University
• University of Maryland, Eastern Shore
• Frostburg State University
  

I have been in contact with USM officials on this issue.  Preliminary discussion yields that the USM is under the impression that the newly passed state legislation "trumps" the USM Policy in this area.  The state legislation requires that universities publish textbook selections on their websites three weeks after the original selection by the professor and one week after for other bookstores.  There is no specific drop-date as in the USM policy.

But there are a few problems with the USM intepretation.  First, the USM Policy should be in effect already becuase it goes into implementation with the textbook selection process for classes in Fall 2009.  Second, and more importantly, the USM policy goes further than the state legislation, in setting a drop-date deadline (May 1 for fall and December 1 for spring) and requires immediate publication upon finalization of the order.

Because compliance with the USM policy does not preclude compliance with state law, why cannot the USM policy be followed?  The language goes further than the state legislation.  More details and updates to come...

Swine Flu Updates

With significantly more cases confirmed in the United States confirmed, the World Health Organization and the United States government have raised warning levels for the issue of the Swine Flu.  Of note, the levels are NOT at the level of a pandemic.  The characteristics of "person-to-person" transmission and the transmission across a number of nations are concerning.  So, what to do?

Here is a link to the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention website (www.cdc.gov/swineflu).  This website provides basic information and explanation of the current concerns.  

Swine Flu

The Swine Flu has hit a number of places in North America, including Mexico and New York.  Eight cases have been identified, as of Sunday, in New York.  With a number of USM students traveling to Mexico for spring break, the flu is a legitimate threat in Maryland.  The USM has an Emergency Preparedness Policy that delegates the coordination and planning in such emergencies to institutions.


Institutions have been asked to meet and discuss plans in the case that the Swine Flu shoes up in Maryland.  Will post on more updates...


In the meantime, here is some advice from Dr. Frank Calia, Professor and Chair of the Department of Medicine, and Acting Vice Dean for Clinical Affairs of the UM School of Medicine.  Dr. Calia, who is an expert in infectious diseases, offers the following:

************

       1) Do not panic.

       2) Although swine flu has not yet been discovered in Maryland, it may hit here, however, to date the strain that has been discovered in the US is relatively mild and so far is responding well to two anti-virals

       3)The anti-virals are plentiful and readily available.

       4) They should NOT be given in advance of disease symptoms, since doing so widely may result in a flu strain developing for which the anti-virals will not work.

       5) The good news is that all swine flu, like all flu, prefers cold weather.  While we may see an outbreak, the chances will diminish as the weather gets warmer.

Tuition Freeze Passed

The Board of Regents passed a tuition freeze for in-state, undergraduate students today at a special board meeting.  Increases for out of state students do not exceed 4%, and increases for graduate and professional students do not exceed 7%.

The tuition freeze marks the fifth year of the same tuition for in-state undergraduates with the fourth straight freeze.  In a time when other states are considering massive increases in tuition to offset loss in state support revenue, Maryland has maintained state funding to make higher education more affordable for families.

Check out this article in The Sun .

Tution Freeze Vote set for Thursday, what do you think?

The Board of Regents will meet in a special session on Thursday, April 23 at 11am at Towson University to vote on tuition and mandatory fee rates for the 2009-2010 academic year.  The Board will consider a tuition freeze for in-state, undergraduate students.  Out-of-state tuition increases for undergraduate students does not exceed 4%, and for graduate students does not exceed 7%.  The Governor is set to hold a press conference to announce the Board's decision immediately after.  If the Board chooses to approve the tuition freeze, in-state, undergraduate students will not have seen an increase in tuition in five years.

The Chancellor has recommended, specifically, the tuition freeze for in-state undergraduates.  The Governor in his original proposed budget set aside $16 million to fund the lost revenue from the tuition freeze.  The legislature cut $5.9 from the base budget and a one-time fund balance cut of $9 million.  Additionally, the $16 million now is funded through the federal stimulus dollars, which will run dry after two years.

I support the proposed tuition freeze, becuase I believe that the provided budget serves the system well in maintaining quality and expanding access for in-state undergraduates.  While the subsequent cuts from the legislature will be felt, Maryland sits better than all other states during this diffucult time.

Members of the USM Student Council echoed its previous concerns of an "unfunded" tuition freeze, of which this is partially unfunded.  Members explained that they were concerned that politics was taking control of tuition.  Further, they expressed that policy leaders must engage in long-term planning to prevent major tuition increases in out years.  They explained that tuition predictability was just as important as affordability.  The USMSC has asked to address the Board of Regents at the meeting.

Even with the lost tuition revenues from the in-state, undergraduate tuition freeze, the operating budget fares better in the USM than any other place in the United States.  Despite the proposed budget cuts, USM saw an increase in state support.

What are your thoughts on a tuition freeze?

Josh Michael for SGA Senate!

UMBC students - I have spent the last year representing you (and students from across the USM) as the USM student regent and am excited to serve you in the SGA Senate next year.  Working with student leaders across Maryland this year, I see the potential for what the UMBC SGA can do for you.  Here's what I would like to do:

• restore mission and professionalism to the SGA
• prioritize advocacy in the operation of the SGA
• establish concrete outreach plans to return the SGA to UMBC students

I have been involved on campus a fair amount, as well as in student advocacy in the state:

• Student Regent, University System of Maryland (2008-present)
  
• Student Commissioner, Maryland Higher Education Commission (2007-2008)
  
• UMBC Representative/Ex-Officio Member, University System of Maryland Student Council (2006-present)
  
• Director of Community and Governmental Affairs, UMBC SGA (2007-2008)
  
• Assistant Director of Community and Governmental Affairs, UMBC SGA (2006-2007)
  
• Volunteer in Baltimore City schools (Fall 2006 - Winter 2007)
  
• Member of the UMBC Honors College
• Member of the UMBC Sondheim Public Affairs Scholars Program
• Brother of Pi Kappa Phi (2007 - present)
• Studying Political Science and Secondary Education, to graduate in Spring 2010
  

Visit my facebook page to learn more.  

Elections will take place through Blackboard Monday to Wednesdsay (April 20-22).  Vote through this link. If you have difficulty voting, send me an email at joshmichael@umbc.edu or call me at (410) 294-8581 and I will ensure that you have the opportunity to vote.

Please leave comments and questions.  Thanks!

Textbook Legislation Passes

The General Assembly considered an amended bill in the House and Senate late last Thursday and passed it in both chambers.  Most problems have been removed from the bill, although university bookstores are required to hand over unconfirmed textbook selections to private, off-campus bookstores one week after the original submission by faculty.

Legislative leaders bypassed the traditional "conference committee" process (described in a previous post ), and simply developed a back-room compromise.  This procedure allowed for the bill to advance late in the session.  (Recall that recent days have been swamped by a discussion of a screening of a porn film at UMCP).  The new bill addresses a number of amendments that I had concerns with but still places an undue burden on campus-based bookstores of turning over information to private bookstores prematurely.  I believe this could have an unintended consequence of raising book prices for students.

Yet, the bill contains a number of positive components for students, warranting its passage:

• guarunteed ISBN publication to students
• publication to students prior to the week before classes
• requirements on publishers in providing information to faculty
• a process that has faculty consider a number of factors in selecting a textbook, including the cost, content revisions in a textbook, and the necessity of supplementary materials

Combining the federal legislation passed in Fall 2008, the USM Board of Regents policy passed in February 2009, and the new state legislation, students have been well served in enacting policy to lower the cost of textbooks.

Check out this article in the Diamondback highlighting the passage.

A Porn Policy?

After a failed attempt to cancel a showing of Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge by State Senator Andy Harris, he tried to tie capital construction funds for the USM to the development of a policy limiting explicit material on campuses.  Senate President Miller called the amendment to the budget out of order.  The chamber supported Miller by a vote of 35-12. 

But surely, this issue is far from over.  The legislature may ask governing bodies of public institutions to report on policies for explicit material.  And, governing bodies, like the Board of Regents, may pass a policy to preempt any legislation limiting funding for higher education before next session.  It looks like the issue has cooled off for now, but keep your eyes open on the issue.

In my previous post, I noted my opposition for any limitations, in legislation or policy, on First Amendment rights and freedom of expression on university campuses:

Viewing a pornographic film on campus in the student union is distasteful.  But this conversation is about much more.  It's about the innapropriate use of legislative authority.Senator Harris' attempt to use the power of the purse to limit academic freedom and societal discourse at USM institutions is irresponsible and out of place.  The film cost no money to the university, and the student activities board thought it to be a positive component to the discourse on the UMCP campus.  While i find the movie distasteful, I fear of the potential for censorship to come on Senator Harris' and other's moral beliefs.  When dealing with adults in our nation, we have celebrated a long standing tradition of free speech.  Why should this change in campuses of public universities?  Additionally, the legislature should respect the administrative authority of the USM and the UMCP administration in governing public universities in Maryland on such administrative issues.  This move flies in the face of the principle of the First Amendment.

Accordingly, I will likely not support a USM policy, envisioned by Senator Harris.  Thoughts?

USM Budget Compromise

With the legislative session in Annapolis on Monday, Senate and House leaders have been hard at work coming to a compromise on budget issues, including funding for the University System of Maryland.  In his original budget for higher education, Governor O'Malley proposed at $28 million increase for the University System of Maryland, $16.9 million dedicated to offsetting lost revenues from a tuition freeze for in-state students.  Recall, the House and Senate were at odds on cuts from the Governor's original budget, in an effort to offset lower-than-expected tax revenues:

• House - $10.8 million from annual budget; $10 million from fund balance
• Senate - $5.4 million from annual budget; $4 million from fund balance

The Budget Conference Committee reconciled the budget late Tuesday night.  Here is the outcome:

• $5.8 million annual budget; $9 million from fund balance

It's questionable as to whether this $14.8 million cut will afford the system a tuition freeze again this year.  The Board of Regents will discuss and decide on this issue in coming weeks.  More to come on the Governor's federal stimulus supplementary budget...

Pornographic Films and First Amendment Freedoms

Senator Andy Harris and Senate President Mike Miller challenged the showing of a pornographic film Pirates II: Stagnetti's Revenge last thursday by levereging $400 million of state appropriations for the USM institutions.  The student-led activities board that selects movies chose to air the film after they were presented with a free license from Digital Playground.

In response, the UMCP administration overrode the student activity board and stopped the showing of the film.  Outrage from UMCP students and others ensued.  The film has been shown at Northwestern, UCLA, and Carnegie Mellon already. Since, students at UMBC and UMCP have moved forward in sponsoring showings of the pornographic film, not for pure entertainment purposes, but to resist the infringement of academic freedom on college campuses. Many argue that the choice of viewing such a film is option, and it is not the job of the legislature to censor adult material from adults on college campuses.  Any step to limit explicit material is a step in the direction of limiting academic freedom and discourse.

The topic has recieved significant press:

• http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/politics/bal-te.md.porn03apr03,0,7632367.story
• http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/education/bal-md.porn04apr04,0,2590515.story
• http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bal-op.porn05apr05,0,2964274.story
• http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2009/04/03/pornography
• http://www.diamondbackonline.com/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticlePrinterFriendly&uStory_id=6a52747e-0736-4e12-8730-6b13518d318e
• http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/04/sex_senators_and_stupidity.html
• http://voices.washingtonpost.com/rawfisher/2009/04/campus_sex_shows_um_panics_whe.html
  
• http://media.www.diamondbackonline.com/media/storage/paper873/news/2009/04/06/News/Students.Push.On.With.Porn-3698133.shtml
  

Here's my view:  Viewing a pornographic film on campus in the student union is distasteful.  But this conversation is about much more.  It's about the innapropriate use of legislative authority.

Senator Harris' attempt to use the power of the purse to limit academic freedom and societal discourse at USM institutions is irresponsible and out of place.  The film cost no money to the university, and the student activities board thought it to be a positive component to the discourse on the UMCP campus.  While i find the movie distasteful, I fear of the potential for censorship to come on Senator Harris' and other's moral beliefs.  When dealing with adults in our nation, we have celebrated a long standing tradition of free speech.  Why should this change in campuses of public universities?  Additionally, the legislature should respect the administrative authority of the USM and the UMCP administration in governing public universities in Maryland on such administrative issues.  This move flies in the face of the principle of the First Amendment.

Student Costs in Higher Education

"How much does it cost to go to college?"  Too many of us have simply looked at the "tuition" dollar and assumed that was it.  Yet, those of us in school know this is only the beginning.  And the next question most of us ask is "where does our money go?"  So, here are some answers!

Costs in Higher Education:

• Tuition (UMBC - $6484 in-state/$9500 state for in-state students/$15216 out of state) - This money is used to operate the university function.  This means most everything besides the student union, athletics, residential life, and dining services.  Out-of-state students see the real cost of tuition, while in-state students receive a hefty "supplement" from the state government that goes directly to the university.
• Mandatory Fees (UMBC - $2296) - Everyone pays the same for this.  These fees help pay for non-primary functions, such as transportation, athletics, and student activities.  It also helps repay debt service for non-primary buildings on campus, such as the student union and other facilities.  
• Room (UMBC - 5500 for a dorm room) - Room costs pay for residential life facility use and for programming.  Prices range on the availability of amenities like a kitchen, bathroom, etc.  Also, the status of a single room can also cost more.  Apartment style is usually the most expensive option.
• Board (UMBC - 3460 full meal plan) - Means plans can cost a lot for students.  Students can purchase smaller plans, but here is the full cost of food if one chooses to eat on campus.
• Lab Fees - Lab fees vary, but usually occur more in science and technology courses.  
• Textbooks (Average $1000 per year) - Textbooks.  They cost a lot (although check out this policy  that I helped pass through the USM to lower the cost.)  Again, this cost depends on discipline.  Some courses can get away with more inexpensive options, while others cannot.  100 level courses often have the most burdensome selections with bundles and many supplemental materials.
• other institutional costs ( a range) - This can include transcript fees, graduation fees, lost books, parking tickets, student event tickets, etc.
• Total cost - for an out-of-state student, costs reach close to $35,000.  For in-state students, they reach about $20,000.

So there's the breakdown.  It's a lot of money, but the pot is sectioned off for sure.  Thoughts on cost?

Tuition for Undocumented Immigrants...Updates

The Arkansas Senate voted down legislation that would provide undocumented immigrants with in-state tuition rates, if they attend an Arkansas public school for atleast three years and recieve a high school diploma.  Similar legislation has been approved by 10 states in the U.S.  Yet, many states have been hesitant to move forward with such legislation, including Maryland, becuase of possible violation of federal law, as covered in a recent article in DIVERSE.

Congress passed the Illigal Immigration and Immigration Responsibility Act in 1996 to address a number of issues in the immigration debate.  One issues is that of tuition for undocumented immigrants.  The IIRIRA reads:

In General.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, an alien who is not lawfully present in the United States shall not be eligible on the basis of residence within a State (or a political subdivision) for any postsecondary education benefit unless a citizen or national of the United States is eligible for such a benefit (in no less an amount, duration, and scope) without regard to whether the citizen or national is such a resident.

In essence, Congress intended to eliminate the ability for states to afford in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants through this bill.  The ten states that provide in-state tuition for these individuals, and those who attempted to do so, see a loop hole in this clause by affording in-state tuition rates for any individual who attends school for three years in-state.  Accordingly, this can be an in-state citizen, an out-of-state citizen, a legal immigrant, or an undocumented immigrant.  

Congress since attempted to overturn the limiting clause from the IIRIRA through the DREAM Act.  A major leader in this effort is Senator Richard Durbin (D-Illinois).  Votes for approval are in place, but some in the Senate have blocked this from through a failed cloture vote on the past. A recent article in Inside Higher Education highlights that proponents are attempting to attach an amendment to another bill, such as the Department of Defense Authorization Act.

Of note, the Supreme Court has yetto take up the issue of whether the federal law preempts state laws in this specific area of immigration.  Yet, the California Court of Appeals recently invalidated the California law permitting this policy in a case Martinez v. Regents of the University of California, et al. (2008).  The case has been appealed to the California Supreme Court.

I have written a paper on this issue, which you can read at your leisure.  Here is a brief abstract:

In 1996, Congress passed the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, intending to end the practice of affording undocumented immigrants in-state tuition rates for college. Subsequently, state legislatures have acted to circumvent the federal law through technical changes in the requirements for in-state tuition. In light challenges in federal regulation of immigration, many illegal immigrants reside in America and progress through K-12 public schools. 65,000 undocumented immigrants graduate from high school each year and over 1.5 million undocumented immigrant children attend public K-12 schools. A technical battle has ensued in courts, debating the balance of federal intent and textual interpretation in a federal preemption challenge. While courts have periodically dismissed cases on procedural grounds in the past, a recent California Court of Appeals Decision in Martinez v. Regents of the University of California, et al. (2008) invalidated a California law allowing for in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants. The case has subsequently been appealed. Yet, without a U.S. Supreme Court decision, varied interpretations of the federal law will result in incongruent execution of a critically important policy of higher education tuition for undocumented immigrants.