California University Tuition Hikes and Students Protests
The year 2009 saw one of the most effective students’ protests in the University Of California System, UCS. The protest started in September 2009 and continued throughout the year (Ayres, 2009). As students protested, they were joined in by other persons, notably faculty members, varsity employees and parents (Duke, 2009). Although there were protests all over the country due to hiked tuition fees, the University of California System was the most affected, as students protests over a 32% increase in the amount of money paid for tuition per annum (Duke, 2009). This had been an initiative of the universities throughout the country, but is appeared that the university of California system had gone too far to increase the fees by a large amount than any other university in the country. In addition, the students and other protestors were not happy with the new cutbacks initiated in other areas of the system (Nittle, 2011).
The protests were attended in large masses, with thousands of students participating throughout the period. The Los Angeles City was the main center of protests, but other cities in the states were affected as well (Ayres, 2009). During the protest, the students had vowed to remain peaceful if their demonstrations were not forcefully interfered with. However, there were scenes of violence, as students fought running battles with the police. For instance, in September 15th 2009, the regents at the university had met to vote for the fee increase, which triggered off protests, characterized with bitter reception by the students and their supporters (O’leary, 2009). As the police were called to contain the students and prevent them from gaining access into the regents meeting place, the students attempted to pass forcefully, surged against police barricades and eventually gaining access to a major building in the school compound.
The police, realizing the danger and responsibility involved, used taser guns to disperse the students and remove them from the university premise. In the process, about 20 students were arrested, which further intensified the need to protest (O’leary, 2009). The protest appeared more the same as the popular 1960s student protests, and there were fears that if this would continue, other universities throughout the country would join in the protest, hurting the education and the entire economy within the cities involved.
The scenes were even made popular by the reaction of the police and the media. For instance, the police used several helicopters to monitor the situation, and all the time that the regents were meeting in the university, police helicopters were seen on television hovering above the varsity premises for the better part of the day. Media houses, on their part, intensified their coverage, with several of the national and local media houses briefly suspending their normal programs to broadcast the situation live on television. Students were seen playing drums and guitars, as they performed angry songs, which looked just like the infamous 1960s series of protests (Duke, 2009).
At one point during these protests, students involved themselves in what they called ‘sit-down strike’-sitting all over a great part of the road leading to the university. At this point the university of California System student leader Michael Hawley used as bullhorn to address the public. In his few sentences speech, Michael challenged the regents meeting in the university compound to come out and tell the students and the entire nation why America, being the richest country in the world, was planning to deny some students their rights to higher education due to increased fees (Ayres, 2009). In addition, he pointed out that most of the students would not be able to meet the school fees once the increment was implemented, as the world economic recession was at its peak. As there was no way the regents meeting could be disrupted at this hour, the police responded immediately by telling Michael and his over 2000 fellow protestors that they had only few minutes to disperse their demonstration, remove the blockade and accept the fact that the meeting was just crucial and could not be interfered with. The police, sensing the danger involved if the students were to force their way into the varsity premises, quickly led the regents into another building, and covered them, while the police choppers kept hovering above the varsity premises.
The students were very defiant to the police advice, and while this was happening, they fearlessly advanced towards the university gates. At this moment, Chimiela Okwandu, a student believed to be a sophomore and a foreigner, addressed the crowd saying that the students had the right to stay within the university, and even sleep in the compound if this would be necessary. In addition, he pointed out that the university was their own place, and the police had nothing to do with their issues (Duke, 2009). Speaking to the New York Times, Okwandu said that the initiative would see the university increase tuition fees by at least 2,500 dollars, which would be a major problem to the students and their families, as they struggled to look for extra cash to meet the fees (Duke, 2009).
Looking at the students complains, there were other factors that intensified the protest, apart from the fee hike. For instance, the student Okwadu claimed that previously, students were being denied a right to be at the university because the entry points had been hiked for some time, but there were no complains or protests. He pointed out that the university system, not only in the state but throughout the country, had become rogue and was willing to do all what it pertains to ensure that they had the cash required to pay the executives rather than meet the education demands for the people. Another student named Veronica Hernandez, a Hispanic, claimed that the fee hiking initiative was another project by the authorities to reduce the number of minorities in the university system (Duke, 2009). She claimed that previously, the university had tried several affirmative action initiatives, which had just seen the number of students from the minority groups increase significantly, and thus attempted to balance the situation. However, this initiative, as far as she could observe, would greatly reduce the number of students from the minority groups, mainly because these groups are known to be less economically stable, and most of their families are laborers in the Californian region (Ayres, 2009).
On its part, the university administration termed the situation as unfortunate but inevitable. According to the university of Californian president Mark G. Yudof there were concerned on the situation, but the states had little money to fund the education system, while education must continue (Duke, 2009). He claimed that the university was facing great shortage of cash and other resources due to reduced funding and the increasing number of student population in the university (The UPI news, 2011). However, the students had further arguments from facts. For instance, they accused the California state government was spending excessive amounts of finance in funding prison system. For example, in 2008 and 2009, the state had spent more on prison funding than the education, despite the increasing demand for higher education (The UPI news, 2011).
From the facts, it is quite true that the education system in the state, as well as in other states in America, had deteriorated for the past few years. For example, in the early 2000s, the upper division class had 30 or less students per class, but by 2009, it had reached between 80 and 100, yet the number of teaching staff and the number of classes was either stagnant or reducing (Duke, 2009). The professors, according to Emily Bischoff, a fourth year student and demonstrator, were forced to give multiple choice examinations, even in major papers, in order to reduce the marking time, as the workload is quite high (The UPI news, 2011). The number of professors per student population was reducing with each intake, but little was being done to address the issue. They further blamed the state’s tax revolt as the major cause of the situation at the states university system.
In all these situations, it is quite clear that the students complains goes beyond the university and fees system, to include the errors made by both the states and the federal government. For instance, the situation in the universities higher education system was deteriorating due to poor funding, despite that fact that the Californian state government was spending more on other issues such as prisons, while the feral government was spending a lot on foreign projects such as the Iraq and Afghanistan war, while neglecting the education system.
References
The UPI news. (2011). Students protest California tuition hikes. Retrieved from http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/04/14/Students-protest-California-tuition-hikes/UPI-34601302780956/
O’leary, K. (2009). Tuition hikes: Protest in California and elsewhere. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1942041,00.html
Duke, A. (2009). University of California students protest 32 percent tuition increase. The CNN. Retrieved from http://articles.cnn.com/2009-11-19/us/california.tuition.protests_1_tuition-increase-angry-students-ucla-building?_s=PM:US
Ayres, I. (2009). Why California’s tuition hike might be a god thing. Retrieved from http://www.freakonomics.com/2009/11/23/why-californias-tuition-hike-might-be-a-good-thing/
Nittle, N. D. (2011). Class in Session: California’s Tuition Hikes Force out Students of Color. Retrieved from http://beverlyhillshousing.com/news/big-tuition-hikes-loom-as-cal-state-university-faces-budget-cuts.html
