The Limits of Civility

How did Clark Kerr, former UC president and architect of the 1960 Master Plan, evaluate California’s commitment to the plan 40 years later?

On August 24, 1999, Clark Kerr evaluated the Master Plan on the eve of its fortieth birthday. In his testimony before the Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education Kindergarten through University, Kerr gave his assessment of the Master Plan and expressed his fears for education in California. Kerr explained that the major problem he and his committee faced in 1960 was the “tidal wave” of students entering the university. Kerr and his fellow Master Plan designers dealt with the tidal wave by guaranteeing access for every high school graduate by organizing and stratifying the three types of campuses. Forty years later, however, the state looked very different. The “tidal wave” generation gave way to an even larger and more diverse population, the post war economic boom gave way to a weaker economy struggling in an era of globalization, and a strong mid century secondary education system gave way to a state ranking near the bottom in quality of secondary education.

Kerr warned of the dire situation California faced. The Master Plan’s principle architect did not mince his words about the threat ahead: “For twenty years we’ve been on this suicidal course of going downhill and now we face this choice: are we going to continue the suicidal course of the last twenty years or are we going to move in the direction of paradise regained?” Kerr identified three especially troubling issues for which he reserved the word “disgrace.” The first disgrace for Kerr was the disappointingly low number of students transferring from community and junior colleges to four-year campuses. For Kerr, the second disgrace was the dangerously high teacher turnover rate in secondary schools. (33% of teachers leave the profession after their first year.) Finally, Kerr identified the disparity in access to Advanced Placement (AP) high school classes as the third disgrace. High school students from high income areas have access to a full range of AP classes, giving these students both a better education and a higher chance of getting into their choice college. We often think of education as the principle way of improving one’s economic situation, but without access to courses competitive in college admission considerations, students have little chance of climbing the economic ladder. At the turn of the 21st century, Kerr and the Committee to revamp the Master Plan realized that the reconceived Master Plan must take into account not just higher education, but also grades Kindergarten through high school.

Facts and figures from Kerr’s speech:

Average college graduate makes 80% more in lifetime earnings than a high school graduate.
In 1960 20% of our jobs were in the fields of management, scientific endeavors, and technical endeavors. By 1996 that figure went up to 30% and will only continue to rise.
In 1960, California ranked near the top nationally in secondary education. In 1999, California ranked 41st among the fifty states.
Teacher turnover rate for first year of teaching: 33 percent.
According to the ACLU, 120 high schools in California have no AP classes. 330 high schools have four or fewer AP classes.

In 1960 the Master Plan made Californians an impressive promise: universal access to an affordable and high quality education. Today, that promise is in jeopardy. A growing population, a struggling economy, and rapidly rising tuition costs threaten the ideals of a plan developed during a booming postwar economy. In current discussions over the present and future of higher education in California, politicians, administrators, and students cite the Master Plan as a promise that needs to be kept.

Keeping the promise will be no easy task. For fiscal year 2011-12 the UC expects to have a budget shortfall of $900 million. UC San Diego Chancellor Gene Block estimates that without any significant changes, tuition, housing, and books could top $40,000 per year for a UC student.

Recent talks on the budget crisis accompany references to the Master Plan. UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi urged California to “reassert the genius and vision of our own master plan for higher education through increased state investment.” UC San Diego Chancellor Gene Block challenged state legislators to protect the public institutions from which many of them received their college and graduate degrees. UC President Yudof sounded a more dire warning when he predicted that soon not all eligible Californians would be guaranteed admission to a UC.

How can we fulfill the promise of the Master Plan in the future? Can the Master Plan survive the current economic climate? Should we maintain our commitment to the Master Plan or has it become outdated?

In 1960, Clark Kerr created the original Master Plan for Higher Education in California. Kerr intended the plan to last from 1960 through 1975, to accommodate the “tidal wave” of students entering the University of California. However, California remains committed to the ideals of the Master Plan and continues to renew and renovate Kerr’s original promise.

1960 California Master Plan for Higher Education guarantees access to higher education for all California high school graduates
1972 The California Master Plan for Higher Education in the Seventies and Beyond: Reviewed Master Plan and concluded that the basic structure of the 1960 plan should be retained
1987 The Master Plan Renewed: The Commission for the Review of the Master Plan for Higher Education determined that the four most important factors to emphasize for higher education in California included: Unity, Equity, Quality, and Efficiency
2002 The Joint Committee to Develop a Master Plan for Education determines that while the original Master Plan was still a valuable blueprint, the twenty-first century Master Plan had to take into account k-12 education in addition to higher education

What is the future of the University of California? Can the UC maintain excellence in the midst of an economic crisis? How can the UC sustain its commitment to the Master Plan in such a challenging and uncertain future? How can the UC’s commitment to civility help determine its future?

On July 16, 2009, Chairman of the UC Regents Russell Gould composed a letter to the UC Regents. Citing the nearly fifty-year-old Master Plan, Gould proposed the UC establish a Commission on the Future to preserve the vision of the Master Plan and carry it into the twenty first century. Gould declared that in order for the UC to continue serving California and the nation through excellent education, the UC would need to develop creative strategies to weather the grim economic climate. Gould identified five major questions:

How can UC best meet the needs of California and at the same time maintain access, quality, and affordability in a time of diminishing resources?
What is the appropriate size and shape of the University going forward?
Where should we grow? or should we?
What educational delivery models will both maintain quality and improve efficiency for UC’s future?
How can traditional and alternative revenue streams be maximized in support of UC’s mission?

Gould then established five working groups:

Size and shape of UC
Education and Curriculum
Access and Affordability
Funding Strategies
Research Strategies

How are the Master Plan and UC Commission on the Future related to civility? As the population of the state of California and the UC increases and while economic times remain bleak, achieving civility will be a challenge for the UC. Although the Commission on the Future is not specifically charged with promoting civility on campus, we cannot ignore the important role civility will play in the UC’s future. As the UC continues to grow, change, and serve California, taking measures to promote civility on campus will help guide the necessary changes for the UC in the twenty first century. Civility is not a footnote to the university mission, but an integral part of its successful future.

Home \| Inspecting Foundations \| The University on Paper \| Fractures and Opportunities