[ Golden Gater Online - December 11, 1997 ]
Jesse Garnier
Staff writer
SF State faculty went on the offensive Wednesday, urging the further delay of a controversial deal between California State University and four major technology companies.
Faculty spoke out against the California Educational Technology Initiative at an Academic Senate forum at McKenna Theater. The forum was put together after a petition signed by about 100 faculty members demanded further action against the CETI proposal.
"The way this has been laid upon us is wrong," said Julian Randolph, professor of foreign languages and literature. "It's reflective of the fundamental differences between the corporate and academic cultures. We're ready to jump into bed with Darth Vader Gates, who is ready to make education his next conquest."
Jan Gregory, chair of the faculty rights panel of the California Faculty Association, presented a resolution urging the deadline for a final CETI agreement be pushed back to March 1998. Although the roughly 75 faculty at the forum unanimously supported the proposal, they were well short of the 200 required to pass an Academic Senate resolution. The proposed resolution will now go before the entire faculty as a referendum, with voting to take place before the end of the semester.
Already, faculty and student pressure have changed the terms of the CETI deal, said David Ernst, executive director of CSU's Integrated Technology Strategy.
"The issue of digital course work will not be part of the January agreement," Ernst said. "That will be talked about sometime after July 1998, and any further discussions about this will have to be led by the faculty. After all, it's their material."
What started as a quiet, academic atmosphere turned quickly to near pandemonium nearly 20 minutes into the forum, as a concurrently-scheduled student protest over CETI marched into McKenna Theater.
After about 10 minutes, the forum resumed, after Academic Senate chair Mark Phillips welcomed the students to share their concerns side-by-side with faculty.
"We're here because the legislature has largely abdicated its responsibility to support higher education," Phillips told the students.
Although the timing of the CETI proposal is a problem, the content is even worse, said humanities professor Arthur Chandler.
Chandler said CETI blurs the lines of intellectual property -- which means ownership of instructional materials -- by proposing classes be offered electronically or over the Internet.
"If we do what we do with someone else's equipment, who owns what?" Chandler asked. "CSU has no business getting involved with the corporate sector."
Accounting professor Bob Daniels wondered "who was paying off who" to get the CETI deal approved.
"It's a goofy idea to go into a partnership to sell something to yourself," Daniels said. "This deal mortgages the future of the CSU system by entering into $300 million of debt that must be paid back somehow."
Daniels was also concerned that the paid student Internet access plan proposed by CETI would create a two-tiered system of information access. He is worried that students who opt for the free Internet plan may not have access to the same "enhanced features" of the paid access, and their academic performance could suffer as a result.
"If you pay, you get an 'A'," Daniels said. "And if it's free, you get a 'C.'"
[ Golden Gater - December 11, 1997 ]