After the reserve pool has been established, 20-25% of the remaining unrestricted fellowship funds will be put in the general support pool. Every division will receive a share of these funds proportional to its share of the PhD enrollment. Certain limitations will be put on how PhD enrollment is counted. The funds will be distributed to divisions within two weeks after the department receives its unrestricted fellowship fund allocation for the coming year. Divisions will award these funds to their students following the departmental funding priorities. It is likely that the funds would be used for recruitment of new PhDs, underrepresented minority students in any degree program, and PhD students in their designated full-time engagement year.
Total PhD enrollment will be calculated for each division based on enrollments the third
week of Fall Quarter. Adjustments will be made as needed for enrollments over or under targets.
For example, a division's total PhD count could not be greater than the total it should have if all
CGDAS's enrollment targets were followed. The target total would be the maximum count
possible. In addition, PhD students enrolled in less than 12 units during Fall Quarter and PhD
students who have exceeded the departmental standard for timely progress will not be counted.
Unrestricted fellowship funds in this category will then be awarded to each division proportional to
its (adjusted) percentage of the total PhD enrollment for all divisions combined. The division will
be free to allocate these funds to students, following the priorities and qualifications previously
agreed upon.
Unrestricted Fellowship Funds: Targeted Support Pool (Appendix F)
After the reserve pool has been established, 50% of the remaining unrestricted fellowship funds will be put in the targeted support pool. These funds will be held until May. Before then, a variety of efforts will be made to have eligible students obtain promises of funding for the upcoming year (e.g., a GSR or GSI). In May, the Fellowship Committee will determine the funding status for every PhD student who would be in the full-time engagement year or the second/third years of the Project 88 and Chancellor's Fellowships. An effort will be made to allocate targeted support pool funds to each division as needed to bring all eligible division students' funding up to a total of $16,000. However, limits will be put on divisional allocations so that those to any one division do not exceed departmental standards for equitable treatment across divisions. Divisions must award these funds to the eligible full-time engagement year students and second and third year Project 88 and Chancellor's Fellowship students. If the total funds given to any division are less than that needed for all division students eligible for targeted support, then the division must support Project 88 and Chancellor's Fellowship students are required by the University. The division will decide how to allocate the remaining targeted support funds among the full-time engagement year students
Unrestricted Fellowship Funds: Leftovers
By the end of Spring Quarter, there will be some unrestricted fellowship funds that have not been allocated: reserve pool and perhaps some from the targeted support pool. The Task Force is divided about how these should handled. Some prefer to have the Fellowship Committee decide how to use them, some prefer to allocate them to divisions based on the incentive percentages, and some prefer to allocate them to divisions based on the general support pool percentages. This will need to be decided.
In Candidacy Fee Offset Grant
ICFOG grants, which have traditionally been handled by Grad Division, will now be part of each department's allocation. The department will allocate this money to its students providing that they have advanced to candidacy and are making satisfactory progess. We will develop a list of students in each division who have advanced to candidacy during the year and are eligible for ICFOG funds (meaning, they have not exceeded the enrollment limit). Each division would then be allocated ICFOG funds proportional to its percentage of such students. Some minimum award amount would be established so that every division with at least one eligible student would receive some ICFOG funding. Each division would decide how to award its ICFOG funds to its eligible students. It could create a few large dissertation year awards or more medium-sized awards; it could divide the funds equally among all eligible students, or it could do something else.
Non-Resident Tuition Fellowships (Apprendix G)
ˆ set priorities for which students will receive support,
ˆ required supported students to be making timely progress,
ˆ limited how long students can receive support,
ˆ restricted divisional allocations according to targeted enrollment levels and actual enrollment,
ˆ identified NRTFs as a special type of funding,
ˆ supported recommending underrepresented minority students for all fellowships, and
ˆ encouraged having every doctoral student serve as a GSI and a GSR.
The other 5 endorsed recommendations address funding more generally. They did the following
things:
ˆ asserted that NRTFs and unrestricted fellowship funds are departmental resources,
ˆ set multi-year support and research engagement as goals,
ˆ asked faculty to handle contracts and grants and positions they fund in ways that maximize
student support,
ˆ urged that students are hired as GSRs whenever possible, and
ˆ asserted that the Development Office should raise more student support funds.
The Task Force assumed that these recommendations should be incorporated into its current
proposals and believes it has succeeded in doing so. In many cases, the report's text and
appendices do not specifically state that a relevant recommendation is implemented (e.g., that
student awards follow the endorsed funding priority), but the Task Force assumed that they would
be implemented. We also believe that the new recommendations contained in this report are all
compatible with those previously endorsed by the facultyin 1994.
Reports and Evaluation
Several reports will be needed to carry out the proposed student support allocation process.
These include the following: recent in-candidacy students, anticipated full-time engagement year
students, anticipated second and third year Project 88 and Chancellor's Fellowships students,
possible positions for these students, promised positions for these students, anticipated call on
NRTF funds, promised and completed actions that merit incentive points, PhD head count, and
yearly enrollment targets for each division. In addition to these necessary reports, there should be
an annual report that provides basic information about all aspects of student support (for example,
jobs and fellowships listed, applicants, hiring patterns; numbers of students by division in each
degree program, full-time engagement year, and second and third years of special fellowships;
incentive points awarded; dollar amounts of funding by types allocated to divisions and to students
by divisions; yearly enrollment targets and actual enrollment for each division). The report should
be prepared by the Office of Student Services and be reviewed by the Fellowship Committee,
Department Chair, and Dean. It should be available for review by faculty, and its main elements
should be presented and discussed at a departmental faculty meeting each fall. The first report
should be prepared for Fall 1996, with the content reflecting the extent to which we have moved to
the new model.
If the Task Force's model is adopted, we recommend that it be evaluated during the
1999-2000 academic year. A full report with any recommendations for change should be
presented to the faculty by the beginning of Spring Quarter 2000. This evaluation would occur
during the third year of operation of the system. The first time the recommended student support
model could be implemented is in 96-97 for funding during the 97-98 academic year. An
evaluation that began in Fall Quarter 1999 would have data from two full years of operation to
examine. This seems adequate for a reasonable assessment of how well the system is working to
support the department's most important goals.
Near the end of Spring Quarter 1995, the Task Force was reactivated specifically to address the outstanding student support issues. It met twice in June. In Fall Quarter 1995, three members of the original Task Force (K.C. Boatsman, Burton Clark, and Patricia McDonough) were unable to continue to serve. They were replaced by Therese Eyermann and James Trent. The reconstituted Task Force members agreed that their work would be completed during Fall Quarter 1995. They met five times and worked in between meetings. Preliminary proposals were discussed with faculty, students, and staff. The Task Force Chair met on December 7 with the Faculty Executive Committee to discuss the preliminary recommendations. Revisions were made based on feedback from these activities. This report incorporates them. It is being submitted to the Department of Education faculty for a vote at the departmental meeting scheduled for December 14.
Establish in the Office of Student Services the system for announcing departmental positions
and fellowships, accepting applications, and recording who is hired.
Establish among the faculty the processes for listing positions and fellowships and for
reviewing all applicants.
Decide on the percentages to allocate to the four support pools into which unrestricted
fellowship funds are divided.
Decide on the details of the incentive point system.
Have CGDAS establish regular means for setting yearly enrollment targets for each division,
monitor what divisions do, and keep a record that can be used over the years.
Decide on the details of the PhD head count for the general support pool.
Have each division develop and CGDAS approve the structure of the full-time engagement year
for that division's PhD students.
Develop a system to inform PhD students about the full-time engagement year and elicit their
commitment to it in advance of receiving support for that year.
Decide how to limit targeted support allocations to divisions so that they stay within
departmental standards for equity across divisions.
Decide how to allocate the reserve pool and any other remaining unrestricted fellowships
funds.
Decide on the details of how to allocate ICFOG funds to divisions.
Decide how to handle NRTF funds after 96-97.
Establish departmental caps on student support, taking UCLA standards into account, and a
process for adjusting support if a student would otherwise exceed the cap.
Develop a process for handling nonperformance by a student who is receiving student support
funds.
Have those divisions with regular (non-Leadership) EdD students decide what this degree
program is designed to achieve for whom and what that means about student support
needs. If the division believes it has a case to make to alter the student support and
advancement principles endorsed at the June 1994 faculty meeting and those we hope will
be endorsed at the December 1995 meeting, then make that case. All divisions except
SSCE currently have students enrolled in a regular EdD program; ACT has most such
students.
Undertake a serious effort to inform current and future students about the student support and
advancement model the faculty have endorsed in June 1994 and (we hope) in December
1995, especially the nature of the full-time engagement year and the likely consequences for
everyone of adopting the proposed student support model. Unrealistic concern should be
alleviated; real issues should be clarified and appropriate means of addressing them
identified.
If on December 14 the faculty vote to endorse the student support model proposed here, it
cannot be implemented until next year. There are several aspects of it that are not yet in place and
could not be put in place in time to use the full system this year. There are, however, several parts
that could be put in place now and used this winter and spring for funding decisions for 1996-97.
The Task Force recommends that the faculty vote to adopt the following portions of the model
now:
Collect all possible information that would be collected were the system in place;
Gather information on how students are supported now;
Establish the employment and fellowship service in the Office of Student Services by the end
of Winter Quarter 1996;
Have all paid positions and fellowships announced through the listing service beginning Spring
Quarter 1996;
Inform all students who will be second and third year Project 88 and Chancellor's Fellowship
students in 1996-97 and any students who would be in a division's full-time engagement
year about the funding they need and sources of it;
From the unrestricted fellowship funds, set aside a reserve pool of about 20% (or around
$100,000) to be allocated by the Fellowship Committee in the middle of Spring Quarter
1996;
Within two weeks of receiving notice of our unrestricted fellowship fund amount from Grad
Division, allocate all but the reserve pool of the unrestricted fellowship funds to the
divisions proportional to doctoral enrollment in the third week of Fall Quarter 1995, with
the following restrictions: do not count MA, MEd, and Executive EdD students, count
EdD students who first enrolled before 1995-96, do not count any student who has been
enrolled more than 18 quarters, and do not count any student who was enrolled in less than
12 units;
Distribute ICFOG funds in the manner proposed in this report; and
Distribute NRTF funds in the manner proposed in this report.
These suggestions make it clear that we can do much this year to begin to implement a new
model of student support. As members of the Task Force, we have spent more than two years
learning about each other, our divisions, and university policies. We believe we have found a
good system for the department, one that appropriately balances several goals and needs. We hope
the rest of the faculty will agree with us. We look forward to putting the model into place,
beginning with some of it this year.
(1) At the highest level of priority are funding packages that promote the three goals of enrolling those new PhD students whom divisions find most attractive, increasing the participation of underrepresented minority students in all degree programs, and supporting participation of all PhD students in the full-time residency year.
(2) At the next level of priority are funding packages that promote the goal of full-time engagement of PhD students in their program in years other than the stipulated full-time residency year.
(3) At the next level of priority is support for EdD students who are not professionally employed while engaged in their degree program.
(4) At the next level of priority is support for students in degree programs that are of relatively short duration or that are organized so as to facilitate continuation in professional employment while engaged in the degree program. This puts at the lowest priority support for students in masters programs, the Executive EdD program, and--should it be approved--the PhD for Professionals program when students are continuing in their professional position. Exceptions to this policy include TEL recipients of Dean's Scholar awards and underrepresented minority students in masters programs with the expectation that they will apply to one of our doctoral programs.
E2. Continuing students receive student support moneys (unrestricted fellowship funds, NRTFs, GSRs, GSIs, Dean's Scholars funds, Spencer fellowships, Community College fellowships, etc.) only when they are making timely progress toward their degree objectives, as reflected in the written report of the yearly review (see D3 above). The only exception is students who receive cross-campus awards (e.g., Project 88) that require the department to support them during their second and third years so long as they are earning acceptable grades. The performance of such students will also be closely monitored to ensure they are making timely progress, and their second and third year support will as much as possible be from GSR, GSI, or other apprenticeship-type appointments.
E3.* Students are limited in the total number of quarters they can receive all types of student support funds (including GSR and GSI appointments).
The Task Force suggests that that limit be set at the normative time to degree for that student's degree program.
E4.* [REMOVED]
E5.* When student support moneys that are part of a departmental student support pool are allocated to the divisions, the amount allocated must be in line both with the division's actual enrollment and any enrollment targets set under B9 above. Divisions that are over-enrolled in terms of any targets set under B9 above get no more money than what they should receive if their enrollments were within the target. Divisions that are under-enrolled in terms of any target set under B9 above get no more money than that determined by their actual enrollment.
E6.* All unrestricted fellowship funds and NRTFs awarded to the department by the Graduate Division are considered part of a departmental student support pool that is used to support the most important departmental goals.
E7.* [REMOVED]
E8.* Because NRTFs pay for tuition that is only charged to students who are not California residents (international students and US citizens/permanent residents whose residency is outside California), their allocation is handled differently than is that for other funds. The allocation is still done so as to further the most important departmental goals, but it is restricted to international and out-of-state students in each priority category (see E1 above).
E9.* All underrepresented minority applicants (this includes Asian-American applicants) recommended for admission to our masters and doctoral programs are sent cross campus for consideration for university-wide fellowships targeted to underrepresented minorities (some of these fellowships include and some exclude Asian-Americans). Underrepresented minority admits (including Asian-Americans) are also among those recommended for other university-wide fellowships for which they qualify.
E10. GSI and GSR positions ordinarily begin the second or later years of a doctoral student's program. Because they enhance a student's training, we strive to have every doctoral student serve in both GSI and GSR positions during his or her program.
E11. Faculty bring grants and contracts in through the university and write the proposals so that they will be able to hire doctoral students as GSRs and to hire them at a high enough percentage of time that the grant or contract also pays educational and health fees for the student.
E12. Whenever responsibilities of the position permit it, students are hired into the occupational category of Graduate Student Researcher rather than some other occupational title that does not require the hirer to pay educational and health fees for the employee.
E13. The Development Office staff devote considerable effort to raising student support funds, particularly those that match support with apprenticeship-type training.
E14. An important long-range goal is to provide students with multi-year support packages and active engagement in research throughout the period of support.
* = Recommendation revised from that presented in the April 22, 1994 draft of the Task Force
Report; also note that some recommendations that appeared in the April 22 draft were removed
altogether from the May 23 report and therefore not endorsed by the faculty.
A. Be admitted as a UCLA graduate student and registered and enrolled in at least 12 graduate units. Course 375 for TAs and independent study courses (500 level) for GSRs may be used toward the 12-unit minimum. (Students on a leave of absence and not paying fees DO NOT qualify for employment.)
B. Have at least a 3.0 GPA at time of appointment
C. Hold apprentice teaching titles for no more than four academic years (12 Quarters) or hold apprentice teaching and research titles combined for no more than five years (15 Quarters). Students who wish to exceed these time limits must have approval from the Chair of the Department to continue their employment.
D. Serve under the active supervision of a regular faculty member
II. Department Hiring Policies and Procedures:
According to University policy, academic units employing graduate students as "apprentice
personnel" are responsible for establishing, publicizing, and using explicit standards and
procedures for the selection, training, supervision, and evaluation of apprentice employees.
Furthermore, each employing department must have written procedures specifying the recruitment
pools from which appointees are selected, the means by which eligible students are notified of
available positions, the selection procedures, and the means by which appointments will be made
in exceptional circumstances where normal procedures cannot be followed.
In keeping with these University mandates, Department of Education faculty, administrators, and
staff who seek to hire a graduate student for a GSR, GSI, or any other paid position are required to
do the following:
A. Write a job description with specific information on the requirements of the position,
including the relevant experience and expertise necessary for appointment. Descriptions
should be explicit about the level trainin /apprenticeship students will receive in this
position, the required number of hours per week, amount of travel entailed, etc.
The description should list all of materials -- e.g., curriculum vitae, list of references, statement of research or teaching interests, etc. -- that students need to submit as part of the application process. The description must also state that University policy mandates that appointments are made without discrimination on the basis of race, ethnicity, color, national origin, sex, handicap, age, or sexual orientation.
B. All job descriptions and application procedures, including deadlines, must be filed in the Office of Student Services (OSS) and available for students during regular office hours, including two evenings a week. Photocopies of these descriptions should be available for students upon request.
Public notices of job openings should be posted in Moore Hall on a designated graduate student employment bulletin board, printed in Department/Division newsletters, and posted electronically on the Department Web page by ETU.
Job descriptions should be submitted to OSS, posted in Moore Hall, and given to ETU to post electronically no less than two weeks before the application deadline.
C. Completed applications should be returned to OSS by the specified deadline. Faculty, administrators, and staff who receive applications after the designated deadline are not required to consider late applicants.
D. Faculty are required by University policy to evaluate all candidates for apprentice teaching (GSI) and research (GSR) appointments on the basis of their scholarship and promise as teachers and creative scholars. Student applicants for every position are to be evaluated on the basis of the requirements stated in the job description. Faculty are also encouraged to hire Ph.D. students who are entering their year of full-time engagement in the Department for GSR positions in particular.
E. When faculty, administrators, or staff choose a candidate from the applicant pool, they
must inform OSS that the position has been filled and which applicant(s) has been hired.
According to University policy, each proposed appointment, reappointment, and
advancement of a student in an academic apprentice position (GSR, GSI) is subject to
review and approval by the Dean of the Graduate Division/Vice Chancellor-Academic
Affairs. Chairs of academic units are responsible for maintaining all standards established
for the appointment of graduate students.
In addition to the above procedures, the Task Force recommends that OSS maintain a
notebook of CVs/resumes of graduate students seeking employment. This notebook would serve
as a reference for faculty, administrators, and staff who are trying to find qualified students for a
particular job.
At the present time Fellowships Controlled by the Department consist of the following awards:
We recommend that Fellowships Controlled by the Department be managed in accordance with the policies governing GSI's and GSR's (Appendix B, above) with the following two modifications:
I. Student Qualifications:
General student qualifications will be supplemented by any specific criteria relevant to the terms of the fellowship as supplied by the donor or granting agency. Current examples of supplemental criteria include specific preferences for students preparing to teach elementary school or for students engaging in research among at-risk populations.
II. Selection Policies and Procedures:
For each Fellowship that is going to awarded to a continuing student, the faculty or administrative steward (PI or other) of the award will establish a selection committee of no fewer than three ladder track faculty to make selections. If the steward wishes, he or she will add one or more students to the selection committee. The steward of the award will make the names of the selection committee members known to the Dean, the Chair, and the Director of the Office of Student Services prior to the announcement of the competition for the awards. These committees will follow standard policy, as enumerated in Appendix B, in advertising, selecting, and notifying candidates. Whenever possible, selections for the next academic year will be announced by about the middle of April.
For each Fellowship that is going to be used for recruitment purposes, the faculty or administrative steward shall notify all faculty of the parameters of the award and seek nominations. This notification must be made through both paper and electronic means and must take place at least two months before the deadline for applicants to accept our offer of admission (usually the middle of April). Faculty or administrative stewards shall establish a selection committee of no fewer than three ladder faculty (student members may be added at the steward's option). The steward will make the names of the selection committee members known to the Dean, the Chair, an the Director of the Office of Student Services. The selection committee will review all candidates nominated for Departmental Fellowships and shall complete their selection process no later than one month prior to the deadline for accepting our offer of admission. Notification of selections for Departmental Fellowships will be made to OSS and to the Fellowship Committee.
III. Limitation on Awards:
Students may not receive two of these Special Fellowships the same year. If it should happen
that the same student is selected for more than one such Fellowship, then a choice of one of
them will be negotiated by the Fellowship Committee, the faculty or administrative steward of
the relevant Departmental Fellowships, and OSS. In most cases, the student will receive the
more lucrative of the awards.
...create new courses that have GSI positions associated with them
(point when the proposal is submitted for review, points for first two years of
teaching if approved and GSI funds awarded and Education GSIs hired)
...submit contracts and grants that include student support funds
(point just for doing this, not adjusted for amount of such support)
...hire Education PhD students as GSRs
(points for each quarter hired, for summer hiring, for hiring at levels where fees
kick in)
...hire Education PhD students in any position during their full-time engagement
year
(point for each quarter hired)
...hire Project 88 Fellowship students in their second or third (non full-time
engagement) year
(point for each quarter hired)
...hire as GSRs or GSIs underrepresented minority students in any Education
degree program
(points for each quarter hired, for summer hiring, for hiring at levels where fees
kick in)
...hire Education students in divisions other than that of the hiring/supervising
faculty member
(point for each quarter hired)
For any of the above that involve more than one faculty member: if they are all from the same division, that division gets the point(s); if they are from different divisions, the faculty stipulate whether one division gets the point(s) or the point(s) are fractionally divided among the faculty members' division.
For any of the above that involve hiring in centers such as CSE, CRSST, CAIP, Center X,
or ETU, the faculty member who hires the student gets the incentive point.
If the Department develops a set of principles and processes for fairly allocating GSI funds
to departmental courses, then ladder faculty who teach courses that have GSI positions
associated with them would get points when they hired Education students
(points for each quarter hired, for summer hiring, for hiring at levels where fees kick in)
Need a mechanism for getting all possible relevant information about points
Need to decide more about how to allocate points for CSE/CRSST hirings, CAIP, TEL, and ETU,
and maybe for ethnic and area studies centers chaired by our faculty
Any time that head counts are done to establish proportional funding for the divisions, they will be done as follows:
-- Counts will be restricted to students enrolled in our PhD programs
-- Only PhD students making timely progress will be counted
-- Each such PhD student enrolled in 12 or more units will count as one FTE student
-- Any PhD student enrolled in fewer than 12 units will not be counted at all (that is, FTEs will
not be determined by adding up enrolled units and dividing by 12)
-- Counts will use enrollment figures and records of student accomplishments as of the third
week of fall quarter.
January/February. Each year just before NRTFs are initially allocated, the Director of Student
Services will ask division heads if they expect any notable change in their enrollment of
non-resident students.
January-March. At the time each Division is deciding whom to admit and what funding to offer
admits, the Division reviews continuing students and their funding needs, establishes who will
be in the full-time year next year and who will need second and third year Project 88 and
Chancellor's Fellowship support, and discusses sources of support and likely/set awards for
succeeding year. The division has this ready to present to Student Services. The division also
prepares a list of students who have advanced to candidacy so far in the year and who are
expected to do so before the end of the academic year. In addition, the division reviews its
incentive list from the previous year and makes one for the coming year. This should be done
as early in the quarter as possible. The Office of Student Services prepares information on the
PhD head count.
January/February. Within two weeks of receiving our unrestricted fellowship funds allocation
from the Graduate Division, the Fellowship Committee has met to allocate it to the reserve,
incentive, general support, and targeted support pools. The incentive information and PhD
head count information are used to allocate incentive and general support funds to the
divisions. The NRTFs are also allocated to the divisions.
February-April. Divisions use the incentive and general support funds and the NRTFs to recruit
new PhD students and underrepresented minorities in any degree program.
Late March. The Fellowship Committee or a designated subcommittee will meet with all Project 88
and Chancellor's students who will need departmental support and all other PhD students who
are anticipated to enter their full-time engagement year the next academic year. Students will be
informed of the programmatic elements of the upcoming year, the kinds of funding needed and
desirable, and potential sources of funding. There will be a discussion of what funding they
may already expect for the coming year and encouragement to go out and get whatever
remaining funding is needed.
Mid-April. The deadline for accepting our offers of admission and our fellowship offers to new
PhD students.
Late May. The Fellowship Committee will meet to allocate full-time engagement year and selected
fellowship funds to the divisions. It may at this time decide to use the reserve pool funds.
Late May or Early June. Immediately upon receipt of these funds, Divisions meet to award them to
students.
Around September 15. Any incentive, general support, or targeted support funds or NRTFs that
have not been offered and accepted by the end of the Friday closest to September 15 are
returned to the central pool for reallocation. Reallocation may be accomplished by the Office of
Student Services based on a priority listing prepared by the Fellowship Committee or by a
meeting of the Fellowship Committee or by a principle (e.g., the incentive percentages) the
faculty adopt. A deadline will be established for the offer and acceptance of these awards. The
deadline will be such that there is one more opportunity to award funds before the university
deadline for their award and acceptance. Funds not awarded and accepted by this deadline will
again be returned to the central pool for reallocation by either of the two mechanisms described
above.
Around mid-October. All awards from NRTF funds, unrestricted fellowship funds, and ICGOF
funds must have been accepted by Friday of the second week of classes in Fall Quarter.
End of Fall Quarter. A report of all sources of student support, all allocations, and all awards for
the current year is provided to the department chair and division heads and discussed at the last
departmental meeting of Fall Quarter.
Return to Part 1
UCLA Graduate School of Education & Information Studies
pbe: 11Sep96