Campus tutoring programs should be combined into one service

Last week, I made an appointment with Covel Peer Learning Labs’ tutoring services to see what future students will miss out on next year, when the program no longer exists.

My tutor didn’t turn my writing into Pulitzer Prize-caliber work, but she did help me realize where my writing was unclear and where I needed to elaborate.

There’s no question that UCLA needs to have tutoring options available to all students ““ it’s an essential service. Professors here demand a lot from their students and it falls on the university to make sure we as students have the support to succeed in these classes.

Instead of simply cutting Covel’s tutorials, which are open to all students, the administration should redirect funding from all current sources into one streamlined program. The new tutoring service would have one set of managers, joint office space and shared resources, saving administrative costs for all of the programs.

While it’s easy to disagree with the decision to close Covel and demand that the administration change its decision, it’s not easy to say what should be cut instead. According to Judith Smith, vice provost and dean of undergraduate education, her office has received a 15 percent cut. The programs she oversees include freshman clusters, Fiat Lux seminars, undergraduate research, honors, academic counseling and the Academic Advancement Program. All of these are important programs for the university to offer.

Though Covel is also critical, its $400,000 budget is large enough that Smith said that she does not expect its services will be saved in the future.

But instead of scrapping Covel tutoring, the university offices should combine existing tutoring programs.

Currently, there are several: AAP and Athletics offer peer learning services for their students, the math department has drop-in tutoring operated by its graduate students, and the Student Retention Center offers workshops similar to those that Covel offered.

AAP, Covel, Athletics, and individual departments have different groups of students they serve and are very different programs, but their tutoring components are not that different. Tutoring is tutoring.

Consolidating all tutoring programs would save administrative costs, reduce the number of full-time staff needed for management and continue offering services to students. A combined tutoring service would also help save money on resources, training, hiring and advertising. AAP’s budget for peer learning could be shifted to this consolidated tutoring service, Athletics could fund it in part, and departmental tutors could be listed in one go-to place for students.

It would also be easier for students who want tutoring to go to one place instead of debating where to go for extra help.

There are thousands of students who get tutoring through various programs. The demand is obviously there and an academically challenging university like UCLA has a duty to support all of its students.

Instead of asking that the university change its decision of cutting Covel tutoring, students should suggest a better way of doing things. A Facebook group with a few hundred members won’t change the minds of administrators (remember Undie Run?).

The tutors who will be jobless next year and the students who receive tutoring know best how tutoring organizations function. They are the best people to suggest streamlining plans to the Division of Undergraduate Education.

Cutting programs to their bare minimum is not the answer to budget cuts. No one wants to have to book academic counselors weeks in advance.

But the answer is also not cutting essential services. Tutoring, counseling and research are all essential for a university.

Eliminating redundancies and consolidating programs that have similar missions can save money for the university and streamline a convoluted bureaucracy.

Should UCLA cut counseling and honors instead? E-mail Ramzanali at “¨[email protected]. Send general comments to [email protected].