And why is that percentage so low? In a survey of over 2,800 students, we found that 50% delayed because they can’t get the classes they need.

So it would follow that a solution to increasing graduation rates would be to provide more classes. However Governor Jerry Brown’s new budget proposal is taking a much more drastic approach.

According to the proposal, Jerry Brown is seeking to make students graduate in 5 years by charging students “the full cost of tuition” if they exceed certain unit caps. And what exactly does “the full cost of tuition” mean? Essentially that California residents will be charged at the same rate as an out of state student once they exceed these unit caps.

In Fall of 2013, students will be capped at 180 semester or 270 quarter units. In Fall of 2015, students will be capped at 150 semester or 225 quarter units, equal to about 5 years of education. Community College students will be equally effected, capped out at only 90 semester units.

How drastic is this difference? A student who took 24 units in a year would only pay about $5,472 in tuition. But an out of state student would pay $14,400, nearly 3 times the cost of in state tuition. 

What kind of students would be affected by this?

• Students who, unable to get the classes they need, took others in order to stay enrolled, keep financial aid, campus housing etc.
• Students who transferred in with too many units from the community college system
• Students who’ve changed their major
• Students who’ve double majored or minored
• Students who took a major with high unit requirements (more than standard 120)
• Students who’ve had to take several pre-requisite courses to take major courses

Considering how many students fit any number of the above situations, it’s clear that this proposal places unfair blame on us instead of addressing the root of the problem, that the system is set up in a way that keeps students from graduating on time.

The fact is students WANT to graduate. We DON’T want to rack up more debt. Instead of motivating us to graduate on time, this cap will only make it more difficult. Many students simply won’t be able to afford these increases and will be forced to instead drop out, a loss of investment for both students and the state as a whole.

Brown’s proposal places a cap on our education, it disinvests in students, and it creates incentives for students to drop out, rather than graduate. 

Join us in sharing why you are against the education cap by tweeting either how this would affect you or why you’re against the measure to #cappedout

“California State University Trustees have postponed reviewing a plan to improve access and reduce time to degree. The proposal to modify the current undergraduate fee structure was part of the agenda for today’s Board of Trustees meeting and will now be reviewed at a later date after Trustees gather additional information and input from stakeholders.”

The fees were promptly removed from both today’s and tomorrow’s agenda.

This is a huge victory for students. We were successful in convincing the Board of Trustees that the three proposed “punishment fees” they were considering were poorly thought out solutions to helping students graduate.

The results of our “Survey on CSU Students’ Obstacles to Graduation”, that was shared with both trustees and the media before the Trustees meeting, demonstrated not only that higher fees will not cause students to graduate faster, but that it would cause them to delay their graduation even more.  The survey also demonstrated the need for CSU itself to conduct its own research, and seek input from students, faculty & academic advisers to explore real solutions that would help, rather than punish students who are struggling to graduate.  SQE surveyed over 2,400 students—the Chancellor surveyed zero.

After several weeks of outreach to the Trustees, they have agreed to our request to postpone any further discussion or action on these “punishment fees”, in order to gather additional information from students on what will really help students overcome obstacles to graduation.

Today’s postponement is a victory for students who have been fighting against fee increases for years. This is the first time in a decade that CSU students have successfully stopped a fee increase vote from occurring, and it is thanks to the efforts of every student who signed our petition, filled out a survey, and spoke to the media about this issue, as well as the collective efforts of our student governments, the Student California Teachers Association, UAW Local 4123 (CSU grad students), the faculty Academic Senate, and the California Faculty Association who communicated their opposition to these fees.  The cancellation of this fee vote is a testament to students’ hard work, and student power has won the day.

There is always a possibility that the Trustees may reconsider these fees at a later date. We must be vigilant as time goes on, but for today, let us revel in our success and hope it continues for days to come.

As the stakeholders referred to in the Trustees press release, we expect the Board of Trustees to involve students statewide in the process of identifying proactive solutions to the real obstacles student face when struggling to graduate. We look forward to working with the Trustees and the newly appointed Chancellor Tim White in being proactive in developing policies that will help, rather than punish, struggling students.

-Students for Quality Education

You can view the full document here or click on the thumbnail below:

Our findings clearly show that CSU students want to graduate. They don’t need higher tuition as an incentive to graduate; they just can’t get classes they need. Students say they will need more than four years to graduate because they can’t get classes and because of their personal economic situation, not because they are taking too many classes and prefer to stay in school longer.

70% of respondents have had to delay their planned graduation date and half of the students who took the survey said the delay is because they can’t get classes they need.

Chancellor Reed has is all it wrong: higher fees will not cause students to graduate faster. Almost two-thirds of respondents say the proposed fees would have caused them to delay their graduation even more.

The survey shows CSU students who take extra units do so in order to graduate on time and get courses the need — not to extend their time in college. This fee would discourage students who take heavier course loads in a session with the goal of graduating faster. The chancellor claims that these fees would provide “equitable and efficient paths to graduation” but this fee clearly does the opposite of that by limiting the paths available to students.

Respondents include students from all 23 campuses. Like the CSU student population as a whole, survey respondents are overwhelmingly working students, with 14% working full-time while attending college. Most already have student loans and about half depend on financial aid grants. Many are first-generation college students and more than a third have transferred to the CSU from another college or university.

Students aren’t gaming the system. Students are struggling to graduate. And we need to give them more help to graduate, not tear them down. Our demand is help, not punishment.

Editorial: CSU fees an insult to students, voters

With passage of Proposition 30, voters spared California’s public universities from major budget cuts and student fee increases.

Students in the California State University system who have seen significant tuition increases – from $3,000 five years ago to $5,500 today – won’t see a new general increase.

Yet CSU Chancellor Charles Reed, in a parting shot to close out his 14-year tenure, is rushing through a proposal before he turns the CSU system over to a new chancellor at the end of December. It would impose three new fees on students for the fall 2013 term.

This is outrageous. The Board of Trustees should reject the new fees at their meeting on Tuesday.

The ostensible aim of the fees – providing “incentives” to students not to take too many courses or repeat courses, so slots can open for other students – can be handled through enrollment priorities and other policies.

In reality, the proposed fees are an “ambition penalty” on students who want to graduate early or on time or pursue a double major or high-unit major (such as engineering).

Even worse, these fees favor wealthier students who can afford to pay, creating differential access to courses.

And the proposed fees do nothing to deal with the real problem, which is that students often cannot get classes they need for their major – so they take whatever classes they can get in order to keep financial aid.

That is the problem the new chancellor will need to tackle.

Reed’s proposed fees are simply an insult to Californians, a thumb in their eye after they voted to pass Proposition 30.

One would require students to pay out-of-state tuition ($372 per semester unit) if they take more courses than they need to graduate (160 units in 2013 and 150 units in 2014). Yet if there really are so-called “super seniors” who have met all requirements for their declared degrees, campuses already have authority to graduate them. This should be a non-issue.

Yes, some students who have more than enough units to graduate still need to fulfill some requirements. But what if they can’t get into the classes they need? That is the problem that needs to be solved. Fees don’t do it.

A second fee would hit students with $91 if they retake a course. Some states, such as Florida and Texas, charge a fee – but only if students take a course for a third time. No second chances with Reed’s proposal, however. If you get a D or F in a course, you could not retake it unless you paid the fee – even if you need that course for your major or for graduate school.

The CSU system already forbids students who get a C or better from repeating a course. If the concern is that repeaters take spaces, set policies giving priority in registration to non-repeaters.

A third fee would charge students $182 per unit if they take more than a full course load (18 semester units). This, of course, would discourage students from graduating early or taking an extra load when classes are available. If the concern is that these students “hog” classes, why not do a separate registration for those who want extra classes after the initial registration run, as many CSU campuses already do?

When pressed, CSU says the real issue is that some students – they don’t say how many – sign up for an extra load only to drop classes when it’s too late for others to sign up. So why penalize all students who want to take an extra load? Why not craft a policy to address that problem?

For example, in Florida, students may not take more than 18 credits per semester without special permission from their academic adviser, who can assess whether they really are capable and serious about handling an extra load.

The critics are right that this “pay up or drop out” policy doesn’t assure that students can get the courses they need to graduate in timely fashion. Nor does it acknowledge that there are other ways to make sure students don’t take too many courses or needlessly repeat courses.

The board should allow incoming chancellor Timothy P. White to assess the need for new policies to help students graduate in timely fashion and open slots for more students. This is no time to expand fees.

© Copyright The Sacramento Bee. All rights reserved.

See the original link here.

Update: just added the recently passed resolution from the statewide academic senate!

Student Government Resolutions Against the Fees:

• CSU Dominguez Hills Resolution

• CSU East Bay Resolution

• CSU Fresno Resolution

• Humboldt State Resolution

• CSU Los Angeles Resolution

• CSU Long Beach Resolution

• CSU Monterey Bay Resolution

• CSU Northridge Resolution

• CSU Sacramento Resolution

• San Jose State Resolution

• California State Student Association: Scheduled to vote on a resolution this Sunday, November 11

Faculty Resolutions Against the Fees

• California Faculty Association Letter & Resolution

• Statewide Academic Senate Resolution

• CSU Dominguez Hills Academic Senate Resolution

SF Chronicle:

CSU Eyes Fee Increases for Some Students

“It makes me angry,” said Marcela Pimentel, a communications major at San Francisco State University who said she would be affected by the third-tier fee because she likes to take extra units “to get things done faster.” She works two jobs because she doesn’t qualify for financial aid – which wouldn’t cover the new fees – and has student loans. So Pimentel needs to move through quickly.

Justin Blea, a philosophy major at Cal State East Bay, is concerned that he’ll have to pay a graduation incentive fee because he accumulated numerous credits at community colleges before arriving at CSU.

“I don’t see how punishing students for an underfunded system is going to help those students graduate,” he said.

But CSU officials say they have turned away “tens of thousands of eligible applicants in recent years” and they need to do something about it.

“By being more efficient, we’ll open up space for more students,” said university spokesman Mike Uhlenkamp. “It’s not necessarily a money grab.”

Insider Higher Education:

Golden Day for the Golden State?

While the California State University System is refunding some students, avoidance of the trigger cuts is not stopping the system’s board from considering a raft of fees next week that, while designed to change student behavior more than generate new revenues, could result in higher bills for many students.

The board will weigh fees on students who take more than the required number of credits to graduate, who take more than a full course load in any given semester, and who repeat a course they have already taken. Those proposals have already angered some students.

San Jose Mercury:

CSU plans higher fees for ‘super seniors’ and course-repeaters

In response, students have organized protests on campuses including Cal State East Bay, San Francisco State and San Jose State. They argue that the university shouldn’t “blame students for a broken system,” but address issues of access and timely graduation by opening more sections and improving academic advising.

Associated Press/Press Democrat:

CSU mulls 3 fee hikes to push graduation

“This is not a money-making plan,” said Robert Turnage, assistant vice chancellor.

David Allison, president of the California State Student Association, has said the fee hikes may unfairly punish students who switch majors or receive poor academic counseling.

Oakland Tribune:

UC, Cal State students protest fees, even after Proposition 30 passes

Some students dismissed such arguments, saying the university should help them graduate by offering better advisement and more opportunities to take the courses they need, not by punishing them when they don’t conform to a timeline.

Charging “super seniors” more is wrongheaded, said Krystal Bates, a fifth-year senior with a double-major in dance and business. Oftentimes, she said, students can’t graduate on time because the courses they need aren’t offered. Overwhelmed academic advisers are often of little help, she said, which leaves students to figure out their plans.

“I don’t understand why they want to free up space for more students when they can’t afford the students they have,” Bates said.

Still, the CSU administration says it is confident the “super senior” fee in particular — $372 for each semester unit above 160 (120 is the average number of credits needed for graduation) — would have an immediate effect.

“If there is a fee levied on you, that’s definitely going to change your behavior,” said Michael Uhlenkamp, media relations director for the Office of the Chancellor.

LA Times:

Cal State University seeking new fees next fall

Many students argue that new fees will unfairly punish those who switch majors or face other obstacles. The activist group Students for Quality Education is holding protests at several campuses this week and plans to demonstrate at next week’s board meeting.

“We don’t have enough classes, not enough sections are being offered and now they want to punish us with extra fees,” said Carol Linton, 23, a sociology major at Cal State Dominguez Hills.

Linton said the six classes she needs to graduate by next spring would put her close to or over 18 units. She also wants to retake a class in her major to improve her grade-point average and her chances at being admitted to a good graduate school.

“They argue that students are trying to game the system, but I would have to drop out,” Linton said. “I wouldn’t have the money to go to school.”

SFSU Golden Gate Xpress:

SQE Raise Awareness About Possible Cal State University Fee Increase

“With these fee raises it’s going to to be harder for me to get classes,” Cardenas said. “It’s already expensive to live on campus and with these fees, I wouldn’t be able to live on campus anymore.”

A volunteer of SQE, kinesiology major, Grant Tuttle, and a U.S. Veteran, and these fees will force him to take too many classes.

“I only have four years of federal funding,” Tuttle said. “These fees force me to take over 16 units.”

Sacramento Bee:

CSU considers new fees to discourage ‘super seniors’

Executive Vice Chancellor Ephraim Smith said most students will not pay the fees. The point of them is to change student behavior, he said.

CSU Fresno Collegian:

CSU Board of Trustees Talks New Fees

“Robert Turnage, vice chancellor for budget, and other trustees responded that there is no way to craft this perfectly,” Kiernan said. “No matter how it is written, you could always find one situation that the fee would apply to when it really should not.”

STUDENTS FOR QUALITY EDUCATION

________________________________

For Release on November 7, 2012

For more information about the Northern Cal events, see the names with the events listed below.

For more information about students at the Trustees meeting, call Carol Linton 323-346-8810 or Ojaala Ahmad 714-721-5362

Cal. State U. Trustees meet next week;

They plan to impose more student fee increases

• Students on Northern Cal campuses will hold protest actions this week

• Students at Southern Cal will protest at the Trustees meeting next week

The California State University Board of Trustees indicate it will take action on more student fee increases at their meetings next Tuesday and Wednesday, Nov. 13 & 14, according to the agenda released to the public today.

The agenda shows that however the vote on Proposition 30 turns out on Election Day, the Trustees still want to increase fees.

The across-the-board fees have been unpopular with the public and legislators, so the Trustees are taking another tactic to charge students more in the name of “modifying” students “behavior” claiming that students don’t try hard enough to graduate from one of the 23 CSU campuses.

The new fees will punish students who take too long to graduate, who rack up more units than their majors ostensibly require, or want to focus on more than one field with double majors or minors, along with other “behaviors.”

At the last CSU Trustees meeting, outgoing Chancellor Charles Reed said students are “gaming the system” and staying in school too long and they are taking up space. He offered no proof that this is a real problem.

In a flyer being distributed on campuses, Students for Quality Education says that students are the ones getting gamed when class sections are cut and not offered often enough. Now, the Trustees plan to punish students for not taking those classes on time.

There are a lot of reasons students need more time to get to graduation and the events listed below will invite students to tell their stories.

Also, Students for Quality Education is collecting surveys of students about the actual obstacles to graduating they are facing. SQE will bring surveys to the Trustees to show them how their policies punish students and don’t solve the actual obstacles.

The survey is at http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/CSUGradObstacles

SQE thinks the Trustees should adopt policies that help students graduate; not fees that punish students who are struggling to reach graduation.

For example, more academic counseling can help students know exactly what classes to take and when to take them. Another need is a commitment to open up more sections of a course when there is not enough room for all the students who must take it.

These exorbitant fees will only mean students run up more debt and work more hours, meaning the problem only gets worse and a lot of students will drop out.

*  *  *

The CSU Trustees agenda for their meeting on Nov. 13-14 is at http://www.calstate.edu/bot/agendas/

You can read about the fee increases by clicking on Committee on Finance and in the PDF going to “Joint ED POL_FIN 1_1112”

*  *  *

Fresno State Speak Out! Against the New Student Fees

Wednesday, November 7, Fresno State U.

11:00-2:00 Tabling at Maple Mall/ Free Speech Tabling area

2:00 Speak Out! And Procession

For more information call Rebecca Asami 559-790-5670

• Students will gather petitions/surveys to encourage the CSU Board of Trustees and Chancellor Reed to not pass these new student fees. We will also use the info gathered to ask Fresno State President Welty to voice our opinion at the meeting next week. At the Speak Out! we will have a mural for students to paint on as a way to express how they will be affected. At 2:00pm there will be a mic check for students to Speak Out! against the fees. Then a delegation will march to the president’s office to meet with him and encourage him to voice our opinion against these fees.

No “Pay Up, or Drop Out” Fees! Teach-In

Thursday, November 8 at Sacramento State

Noon to 2:00 pm at the University Union Delta Suite

For more information call Erica Zamora (559)836-3607 or Yeimi Lopez(916)896-9077

• Teach in about the three proposed fees by the CSU Board of Trustees that will be voted on November 13^th at 3:30pm. We hope to get the word out to the members of the Board of tTustees who don’t have a clear understanding of what the fees would do to CSU students. We hope to consolidate support from all Sacramento state students, faculty and our local and statewide student representatives.

• Banners, students writing messages about more fees, speakers starting at 12:15. Speakers include students affected by the fees and representatives of campus groups.

Stop student fee extortion!

Thursday, November 8 at CSU East Bay

Noon to 2:00 pm at the Agora Stage

For more information call Justin Blea (310) 880-1186

• Teach-In on 3 proposed fees which blame students for a broken CSU system. Information blitz with speakers, interactive student-debt oriented 3-D displays, open mic for students to tell their stories

Speak Out against New Fees!

Thursday November 8at San Jose State U.

11:30 am to 1 pm in the Art Quad across of the Student Union

For more information contact Herlinda Aguirre 909-287-4867

• Speak Out is an action to give students a venue to speak against new fees. The new proposed fees are the Super Senior Fee, Course Repeat Fee, and Third Tier Fee. The CSU chancellor stated the students are the reason why other students are struggling because they are “abusing and gaming the system” However, this speak out is to allow people to hear the true reasons why students are taking more than 4 years to graduate. Students will have picket signs and noise-makers.

No Fee November

Thursday November 8 at San Francisco State

11-1 at Malcolm X Plaza

12:30 Teach-In on the CSU

For more information call Marcela Pimentel (562) 201-9759

• Students will be signing surveys, playing games like the “Rack Up Your Debt” Game, See the Tuition increase chart, and participate in t-shirt making. The activities will be followed by a teach-in at 12:30pm that will focus on the power structure of the CSU.

Rally and Speakout Against Fees

Tuesday, November 13, CSU Monterey Bay

3pm Rally Starts at the Library Plaza (by Tanimura and Antle Family Memorial Library)

4pm March through campus

For more information call Jessica Stroh 209-740-1654

• We will rally while the Trustees are meeting on the new fees in Long Beach. At the rally we will have speeches and drumming. Then we will be chanting and marching.

·      “Students are gaming and abusing the system.”

·      “It is the super-seniors fault, they are hogging all the seats.”

·      “Double Majors are greedy and taking all the classes.”

·      And “we want to make room for REAL students who will graduate in 4 years.”

It is obvious that the trustees are not aware of who they are governing over. These statements are NOT who the CSU Students are and it is time we show them who exactly we are. Please take our quick survey on who exactly are CSU students and let OUR story be heard. The student narrative must be told!

Fill out our survey here.

They are as follows:

1)    The Graduation Incentive Fee in which “super-seniors” will need to pay $372 PER UNIT for those who have 150 units (semester campus) or 225 units (quarter campus) to finish their degrees.

2)    Course Repeat Fee in which every student that would like to or needs to repeat a class will have to pay $100 PER UNIT for that class.

3) Added Units Fee in which any student wishing to take more than 16 units per semester will have to pay $200 PER “EXTRA” UNIT

If you are outraged with any of these fees and feel they will affect you or someone you know sign our petition on change.org. Already the Board of Trustees have been feeling pressure and reaching out to students. So please take a minute or two out of your day to sign our petition:

Sign the petition here.

Read our flyer about Prop 30:

For more information on Prop 30, go to the official campaign website here: http://www.yesonprop30.com/

Read our flyer about Prop 32:

For more information on Prop 32, go to the official campaign website here: http://www.stopspecialexemptions.org/

Want to register to vote online, or want to check the status of your voter registration? Click here.