<p>
</p>
<p>Well, I don’t necessary think that “they (the departments) don’t want to spend those resources to teach undergrads.” Once again, I believe that the only departments that need to spend monetary “resources” in teaching actual classes are departments which have demonstrations. Chemistry 1A demonstrations come to mind. But other than that, I would argue that the vast majority of resources of all departments which are spend on undergrads are spent on undergrad research. And I actually believe that most of the departments spend large amounts of “resources” on that. If that wasn’t the case, Berkeley undergrads from all disciplines wouldn’t be getting into so many graduate programs that require undergradaute research experience. (Basically all, with the arguable expection of Law and Business School.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I very much agree. But it’s not just the professors in impacted department though, it’s the chairs which allow these practices to occur in the first place. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree with what you’re saying. What I have a problem with is one of the solutions which you propose. You seem to support a system in which the number of faculty in a given department is almost entirely dependent on the number of undergraduate students said department has. I believe that such a system would not only be difficult to legally institute, but that it would cripple Berkeley’s reputation in the academic community. Why? Because once a university like Berkeley fires professors in otherwise “popular” or “influential” fields for anything other than academic incompetence or professional misdemeanors, it more or less destroys its credibility as an employer. (See ealier posts for more discussion on this.)</p>