UCLA needs open forum to discuss charged issues like transfer admissions
By Eitan Arom
March 11, 2012 11:16 p.m.
The headline, “How student transfers hurt public universities,” was not Matthew Kahn’s idea. But by the time the Christian Science Monitor revised the headline and the blog post that ran with it, the damage had already been done.
The original post was up for all of two days, but as it came from a distinguished professor of economics, his comments were enough to rile up the transfer community to such an extent that a sit-in protest was planned for Kahn’s lecture this morning.
The response to Kahn’s blog post is understandable. The original post suggested, with little tact, that transfer students are both less academically prepared and less loyal to the university than incumbent students. At one point, Kahn even used the word “transient” to describe the manner in which transfers quickly pass through their time at UCLA.
The speed and intensity of the response to Kahn’s blog post illustrates the need to change the way the UCLA community approaches charged issues like those of transfer admissions. In order to allow for productive debate about how to improve the university, administrators should seek input from the community by establishing a town hall-style forum to ensure that a diverse range of voices can be heard without the vitriol of the current controversy.
In a video address to the campus community that went out on Friday, Chancellor Gene Block restated the need for informed discussion.
“We may not always agree with each other, but it’s important that we keep working on ways to share our views in an environment of civility and respect,” Block said. “This is one of my top priorities.”
Transfer students make up a large percentage of the undergraduate population ”“ 29 percent, according to the UCLA Office of Analysis and Information Management. By unfairly criticizing such a large segment of the community, Kahn’s comments isolated a diverse and robust segment of the UCLA community.
Though Kahn is undoubtedly entitled to his freedom of speech, his position as a faculty member endows him with a responsibility to refrain from marginalizing the students he is paid to teach, especially in a setting as public as a blog.
“It’s worldwide. Everyone can read it,” said Judith Smith, dean and vice provost of undergraduate education. “He’s a very distinguished faculty member, … so he is seen as an authoritative figure.”
Kahn’s attempt to provoke discussion ended up instead eliciting ire and ill will among an important portion of the university population. Kahn said his intention was to provide an economist’s impartial approach to the problem of revenue generation. Nonetheless, the results of his comments were regrettable.
“I’ve built up a portfolio of ideas of how to improve the college,” Kahn said. “This was the one where I touched the third rail and made an ass of myself.”
Poor tact and inflammatory language aside, Kahn’s blog post was an effort to broach an important topic of debate and consideration. Is UCLA enrolling an optimal number of transfer students? Once here, are transfer students being properly integrated into the university community? It is paramount to the health of the university that dialogue on this issue occurs.
When an event like Kahn’s post ignites the campus community, it is the responsibility of administrators like Block to capture the ensuing response in an open and respectful setting.
Sincere and courteous communication has the power to mitigate conflict and generate meaningful solutions. A town hall meeting incorporating faculty, students and administrators could provide the forum for this type of productive communication.
The takeaway from the Kahn fiasco, as he put it himself, is that “words matter.”
Do you think town hall-style meetings would help campus climate? Email Arom at [email protected]. Send general comments to [email protected] or tweet us @DBOpinion.
