Within the context of the SCR 43 project, the University's significant investment and the momentum it has generated must not be lost. The President will need a continuing committee to work with him in the allocation of resources, program assessment, and reorganization that we believe must occur next. The Committee's first task, however, should be to review the recommendations in this and other recent reports.

2. Review of Existing Administrative and Academic Programs. In the early 1970's structures were hastily put in place in response to demands from Hispanic faculty and students for academic and student services programs closely aligned with their interests. In efforts to serve these interests, there developed, in effect, a policy of separatism on the campuses. Student services and advising were isolated in departments of Chicano Student Services, relieving other staff and non-Hispanic faculty of responsibility for providing basic and specialized services to this segment of the student population.

At the same time, some ethnic and Chicano studies departments and organized research units were established to better serve the academic and research interests of Hispanic students and faculty. But these departments and centers have, with few exceptions, suffered from lack of integration into the mainstream of campus academic life, as evidenced by their limited financial support and constant challenge, from within and without the units, of their academic viability and raison d'être.

Recent divisional Academic Senate deliberations illustrate also the ambivalence the UC faculties retain when considering the contributions ethnic studies courses may make to the general education of all students preparing to live and work in an increasingly diverse society. And other respected universities, attempting to respond to these changes, have been roundly criticized nationally for enhancing the traditional Western European basis for all curriculum in favor of a larger intellectual basis which incorporates the philosophy and wisdom of other civilizations.

The Committee recommends, therefore, that the University of California set in motion a thorough and thoughtful evaluation of the following structural areas which are basic to the concerns expressed in this report. These recommendations contain implications for substantial restructuring of some units, or changes in procedures. These in no way should be interpreted as recommendations for dismantling existing programs, but rather for strengthening their effectiveness.

A- The University should review the recruitment, academic advising, and learning and social support provided to minority undergraduate and graduate students, including examination of resources, the role of staff, physical and administrative locations, activities, results, integration into the campus community, and the role of faculty in these activities. For example, should learning skills centers be directed by faculty or staff, and should they be administered in the student services area or in academic affairs? Is academic advising for minority students largely delegated to minority staff members? How effectively are student services delivered in a segregated setting, as compared to units which provide such services to the general student population? Are minority students better mentored by a faculty member with similar ethnic background, or by any faculty member with similar academic interests?

B. The University should review the role of ethnic studies departments in the campus community, to include relative allocations of funding and Fm compared to other departments; the definition and integration of the instructional agenda in the context of the undergraduate curriculum; and the definition of the departmental research agenda and its growth beyond the cultural context of ethnic studies. Of particular concern here are "fifty-fifty" faculty appointments in ethnic studies and a "traditional" discipline, and the impact of such appointments on the success of young faculty members seeking tenure.

C. The University should review the status of Chicano Studies, Mexican Studies, and Latin American Studies ORU's on the campuses, including their support and locations, especially in relation to other ORU's. These include the Latin American Center at Los Angeles, the Center for Latin American Studies at Berkeley, the Chicano Studies Research Center at Los Angeles, the Center for Chicano Studies Research at Santa Barbara, the Center for Iberian and Latin American Studies at San Diego, and the Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies at San Diego. Recommendations which have emerged from their five-year reviews, and responses to those recommendations, should be reviewed. The Committees review indicates that most, if not all, of these programs are seriously underfunded.

3. Review of Existing Faculty Appointment and Promotion Policies and Procedures. The University's efforts as an institution to increase the representation of Hispanics and other minorities among the faculty clearly are not successful. The Committee sensed that in many instances affirmative action policies and the procedures by which they are managed actually contribute to hiring decisions which are hardly affirmative. There exists widespread confusion about the terms, "Equal Opportunity" and "Affirmative Action." It is possible that stringent justification, defense of hiring and promotion decisions, and fear of challenge are leading to the employment of more white males and fewer minorities and women.

The Committee recommends, therefore, a systemwide examination of the effectiveness of affirmative action, as defined in the University and by federal law, to determine to what extent current procedures serve as a deterrent to the University's objectives.

It also recommends that the Academic Senate commence a review of promotion decisions in the cases of minorities and women, and particularly in the cases of those concentrating on ethnic or women's studies, to determine how those working in these relatively new fields are assessed by their departmental colleagues, and further to determine the impact of the "double jeopardy" encountered by those with joint appointments.

And finally, the members of the Committee believe that it is time for the University of California to abandon its inferiority complex vis a vis the Ivy League. If they can hire their own graduates without lowering their standards, surely UC can also.

4. Graduate Students. The preparation of Hispanic graduate students for academic careers is of critical importance to increasing their representation in the nation's universities, but their numbers are decreasing alarmingly, and retention of those admitted to graduate study is a serious problem. The Committee recommends:

A. That recruitment of promising Hispanic students to graduate study begin at the undergraduate level, and that undergraduate support and advising systems work closely with graduate divisions in this effort.

B. That faculty committees be involved in the recruitment and admissions processes for "at risk" graduate students, with particular attention paid to identifying students who are in fact prepared for such study and likely to complete a higher degree.

C. That graduate opportunity fellowships be committed for the full length of normative time toward the student's doctoral degree objective, i.e., 4-5 years, and particularly at the time of dissertation research.

D. That increased postdoctoral fellowship Opportunities be available to the

campuses as a resource for early development of potential faculty members, and that selection of fellows be made at departmental, rather than Universitywide, levels to insure a departmental investment in the individual.

5. Teacher Education. The University's role in the training of California's future teachers and K-12 administrators is important to the State and to the development of the University's future students. But such programs enjoy little priority in the recruitment and student support areas of the University's graduate divisions. The Committee recommends that UC should allocate substantial amounts of fellowship support to graduate students, and particularly to Hispanic graduate students, in Schools of Education and Teacher Education programs.

6. Staff Recruitment, Employment and Promotion. The management-oriented and highly decentralized practices of the University's personnel offices require immediate attention, for they are a barrier to the employment and promotion of Hispanic staff members. Single position recruitment, inconvenience, and lack of attention to the qualifications of the individual applicant for many kinds of University employment are deterring excellent prospective Hispanic, other minority and women candidates from pursuit of University employment at a time when industry and other segments of the public sector are competing heavily for such workers. Lack of training records, the poor credibility of University training courses, and the absence of a career ladder or targeted internal recruitment are barriers to advancement within the system.

The Committee recommends that a review of staff personnel office priorities, resources, and practices be conducted in order to assess what changes are necessary to promote active recruitment, placement, and promotion of staff employees in the University, and particularly minorities and women.