UCLA Anderson Goes Solo: Pros & Cons
“(T)he proposed self-supporting MBA degree remains congruent with the mission of the University: a focus and commitment to the creation and application of knowledge to better the lives and well-being of those around us. The self-supporting MBA program will be identical to the current state-supported program.”
—Proposal submitted by UCLA Anderson to Legislative Assembly of the Academic Senate, Los Angeles Division, to allow Anderson to move away from public funding, to be voted on June 7, 2012.
“[If a school stops using public funds], it won’t necessarily need to respond to public concerns. Access could become an issue. Public institutions have a charge to serve as many students as they can. Private institutions don’t. For the state [of California], its students and even the state’s economy, no outcome [in going private] will lead to more opportunity or greater economic growth for the state.”
—Hans Johnson, senior policy fellow and Bren fellow at the Public Policy Institute of California
“Gaining full control of our resources would allow Anderson to be seen in the same light as those other schools [Yale, Harvard and Stanford etc.]. It sends a signal to prospective students that we’re competing with those private schools.”
—Suzanne Shu, assistant professor at UCLA Anderson.
Source: “Vote may determine UCLA business school’s departure from public funding,” The Daily Californian, May 30, 2012.
This article was originally published on Paul Bodine’s blog. Paul is a graduate admissions consultant with over 13 years of experience, having helped hundreds of applicants get into their dream business, law, medical, and graduate schools. He has also published several books on graduate admissions.