Whereas, in 1968 and 1969, students of color at San Francisco State University and UC Berkeley formed the third world Liberation Front (twLF) to demand that ethnic studies programs be created and taught at their university, 

Whereas, although many of the demands by the twLF at both schools were met those years, UC Berkeley’s ethnic studies programs in 1999 faced cuts due to a “budget crisis,”

Whereas, the revived twLF at UC Berkeley protested and not only succeeded in sustaining the ethnic studies programs they already had, but also in pushing administrators to make several improvements, including hiring more faculty over the next few years, returning money that was cut from ethnic studies departments the year prior, and creating a space for a multicultural center,

Whereas, ethnic studies programs here at UC Irvine were born under a similar fashion when, in the 1990s, students of color united to form the Ethnic Student Coalition against Prejudicial Education (E.S.C.A.P.E.) and fought for the creation of ethnic studies programs at their school,

Whereas, E.S.C.A.P.E.’s success in the 1990s and the continuing existence of ethnic studies today, being testaments to the strength of student organizing and activism, are a part of a collective student history and therefore a collective student identity,

Whereas, critical studies programs such as ethnic studies and women’s studies are essential to the development of cultural competency, critical citizenship, and civic engagement for a well-rounded student,

Whereas, today, such skills are necessary for interacting in an increasingly multicultural society and in recognizing and challenging injustices in an economy and political climate where issues of equality and politics intersect with race, class, gender, and other aspects of identity,

Whereas, any attack on critical studies is itself an example of such an injustice to be recognized and challenged,

Whereas, the Diversity Statement adopted by the University of California in 2006 stated: 

Diversity should also be integral to the University’s achievement of excellence. Diversity can enhance the ability of the University to accomplish its academic mission. Diversity aims to broaden and deepen both the educational experience and the scholarly environment, as students and faculty learn to interact effectively with each other, preparing them to participate in an increasingly complex and pluralistic society.

Whereas, members of an Academic Planning Group (APG) and Budget Working Group (BWG) met to discuss the status of the following departments within the School of Humanities here at UCI:

African American Studies

Asian American Studies

Comparative Literature 

East Asian Languages and Literatures

French and Italian

German

Women’s Studies

Whereas, the chairs and directors of departments in the School of Humanities received a memo authored by the APG and BWG on November 15, 2011, hereafter referred to as the “Needs Attention Memo,”

Whereas, the Needs Attention Memo also evaluated the Chicano/Latino Studies department in the School of Social Sciences,

Whereas, the Needs Attention Memo classified these select departments as “Needs Attention” if the “quality and/or productivity of the [department] fell short of expectations and requirements in this period of severe financial constraint,” or more specifically, if these departments’ student-faculty ratios were “extremely low,”

Whereas, the memo evaluated these departments on the criteria of majors per full time equivalent (FTE) faculty and student credit hours (SCH) per FTE faculty,

Whereas, Professor Jim Lee, the Department Chair of Asian American Studies, noted the inconsistent application of this criteria, pointing out, for example, that the memo regarded the Classics Department’s student-to-faculty ratio of 1379 as being “exceptional” and the Asian American Department’s ratio of 1209 as being “low,”

Whereas, the Department Chair of Women Studies, Professor Jennifer Terry, stated that “...[the department chairs in question] were never given a directive [to] concentrate specifically on increasing [their] number of majors nor any target number that would be deemed optimal for their number,”

Whereas, departments deemed as “Needs Attention” will no longer receive additional resources until they addressed their enrollment issues, according to Professor Jim Lee,

Whereas, the memo also judged departments on vague, undefined criteria such as “quality of faculty,” and “clarity of purpose and focus” and determined that “[n]one of these relatively low-enrollment units [the departments in question] has achieved a level of scholarly distinction that would justify support on that basis alone”

Whereas Professor Jim Lee, in his department’s response, refuted this claim, naming several professors in the Asian American Department who hold positions in prominent national organizations or have received thousands of dollars in grant money,

Whereas, the memo claimed that enrollment within the departments in question and the likelihood of sustaining their numbers are low,

Whereas, the departments in question, for example the Women Studies and Asian American departments, have “held consistently high enrollments” that continue to increase, in spite of their limited resources and under-staffing,

Whereas, the memo claimed that the Culture and Theory PhD program, which is served by the ethnic studies and Women’s Studies departments, had no faculty from these departments who served as director for the PhD program and that “few have taught core or elective courses”

Whereas, Professor Jennifer Terry writes that “all Women’s Studies faculty members have served as core faculty in the Culture and Theory PhD program,” and that they have also “taught seminars, conducted directed readings, and provided academic advising and dissertation supervision to Culture and Theory students,”

Whereas, under Article III of the ASUCI Code of Ethics, it is the duty of ASUCI to “make advocacy and representation for the interests of the student body our highest priority,”

Whereas, the memo violates Article XII, Section A, Subsection 5 of the ASUCI Constitution, which reads, “Students have the right to influence decisions which affect them,”

Whereas this past January, a reestablished E.S.C.A.P.E. issued a response in which they challenged the memo and made demands to improve the state of ethnic studies at UCI,

Let it be resolved that the Legislative Council will sign E.S.C.A.P.E.’s response letter to the Needs Attention memo,

Let it be resolved that ASUCI condemns the APG and BWG’s lack of transparency in their judging criteria and repercussions for schools that continue to not meet this criteria,

Let it be resolved that the APG and BWG release information for students and faculty on how statuses of “Needs Attention,”  “Maintain,” and “Protect” affect funding for schools and their departments, and information on who is the authority in making decisions regarding budget and funding allocation,

Let it be resolved that ASUCI considers the APG and BWG’s judgment of these departments as uninformed and unbalanced, due to the lack of correspondence with the chairs of the departments in question,

Let it be resolved that the APG and BWG include the chairs and faculties in the evaluation of their respective departments, with the chairs and faculties being able to determine how their department is evaluated, what issues they need to address, what their solutions are, and how to implement these solutions,

Let it be resolved that, in addition to the current undergraduate student members sitting on the APG and BWG, the APG and BWG open their meetings to the general student population and include them in their discussion,

Let it be resolved that ASUCI supports the current plan for an open townhall regarding the issue and encourages more cooperative efforts to create spaces in which dialogue can occur between the students, faculty, and administration

Let it be resolved that ASUCI considers the memo’s unfair and factually inaccurate evaluations as a direct and deliberate disregard of these three educational values’ importance,

Let it be resolved that ASUCI stands against this unfair treatment and any attacks on these departments in the School of Humanities,

Let it be resolved that ASUCI recognizes the role of the departments in question in cultivating cultural competency, critical citizenship and civic engagement.