LOS ANGELES TIMES INTERVIEW : Chang-Lin Tien : Maintaining Berkeley’s Excellence at a Time of Stiff Budget Cutbacks

Among hot seats in higher education, few are warmer than UC Berkeley’s chancellorship. The Berkeley chief is duty-bound to maintain the campus’ high academic prestige, help provide services to a multiethnic student body of 31,000 and settle sticky political problems with city government and local radicals. All that, plus cope with immense enrollment pressures and a budget crisis.

With his appointment as chancellor in 1990, Chang-Lin Tien faced skepticism that he might be a chilly technocrat, that his thick accent and engineering background might hinder communication with the campus. Then, disasters ensued: a fraternity fire, a hostage siege at a student pub and infernos in nearby hills brought death and destruction to the campus scene. Through it all, Tien was on the spot, comforting victims, rallying spirits and winning admirers. Calculated or not, Tien maintains a public optimism even after his most recent crisis, when an armed intruder, possibly intent on assassination, broke into his house and was killed by police. Tien and his wife were unharmed.

Born in China, Tien and his family fled to Taiwan after the communist takeover of the mainland. He emigrated to the United States, earning a master’s in mechanical engineering at the University of Louisville in Kentucky, where he faced some racial difficulties. Tien then received a doctorate from Princeton University and joined UC Berkeley’s faculty. A naturalized citizen and a NASA consultant on space shuttles, he was Berkeley’s vice chancellor for research and UC Irvine’s executive vice chancellor before becoming the UC system’s first Asian-American chancellor.

Tien and his wife have three grown children, all UC Berkeley graduates. A small man with a shock of dark hair, Tien, 57, still carries himself with the bounce of the basketball player he was in his youth.

Question: What educational changes are you trying to bring to UC Berkeley?

Answer: Academic institutions have a lot of tradition, a lot of institutional culture, and so it’s not easy to change. . . . Many people fear Berkeley is such a large, complex institution, perhaps sometimes impersonal. So I think we have to really make a change. We want to make Berkeley not only the great research and graduate-program institution, but also an institution with a very good undergraduate education and good campus atmosphere. So that’s my goal and I think we’ve made tremendous progress in undergraduate education. One example: This coming year, we will have 200 freshman and sophomore seminars in small groups taught by most experienced faculty.

*

Q. There seems to be so much pessimism about the future of the University of California because of the state budget mess. Do you think the university is threatened, that it will be radically different?

A: I’d like to use my Asian background. When we talk about a crisis, we use a (Chinese) word with two parts: wei-gee. Wei means danger. Gee means opportunity. . . . Crisis certainly poses some danger, no question about it. But also, don’t forget, crisis also means opportunities. So it’s a combination. So, I must say, I’m confident that we can come out of it with some good wisdom and strong leadership. . . . Public confidence in higher education dropped a lot. You know, you look at Stanford University and the indirect cost-(recovery) issue, at Rockefeller University president’s resignation (in a research scandal) and not to say exactly the compensation (controversies at UC). All this creates some clouds. So I don’t blame everybody else. We should also self-examine ourselves.

*

Q: Aren’t some cutbacks by the Legislature possibly fueled by anger over UC system President Gardner’s large retirement package?

A: Well, this is a very sensitive topic for me because, as chancellor, I work with President Gardner and he’s a great leader . . . On the other hand, since you ask me a question, I give you my answer. Many community members and students and faculty have those views and in many ways that makes my position difficult, particularly because Berkeley is always identified as the flagship campus--I shouldn’t say flagship too much to UCLA.

*

Q: Well, do you think the university, Berkeley or systemwide, is going to be smaller or have fewer departments?

A: I cannot speak too much in details on that . . . I think certain consolidation is probably wise. But we’ll have to do it very carefully and not overlook the general campus environment that requires a certain kind of broad coverage. We’re talking about educating people in the liberal arts--particularly undergraduates. Even they are going into professional schools, they should have the broad-based curriculum and preparation. So there are certain elements you must cover. Otherwise you get a vocational school. So when we say consolidation, we should think carefully.

*

Q: What about the future of student fees? There’s a lot of anger about the increases.

A: You know, at University of California at Berkeley campus now, our average student family income is $60,000 roughly and we have actually 175 of our students whose families have over $100,000 income. They pay $3,000 dollars (in annual fees). Is this the reasonable thing? I’m not saying we want to increase fees. But maybe we should adjust to a system--for those who are able to pay, maybe they should pay more. For those who are unable to pay, for a disadvantaged group, we should provide more financial support to make them attend.

*

Q: There are more minority students at Berkeley than there have ever been. About 55% of undergraduates are from minority groups. Has this changed life on campus?

A: The key element is we have to pay a lot of attention at the freshman level. When they first come to the university, in many cases, is the first time students are leaving their home environment and coming to a complex, highly diverse environment. And inherently they will feel insecure. Many people. Whites and African-American and Asian-American. When they encounter those situations, they subconsciously will draw themselves into their own kind. So Asian-American always like to be associated with Asian-American. Because inherently they feel more secure. They are same kind. African-American the same. Now if we don’t do something in the freshman year or freshman or sophomore years to encourage them to mix, to interact, then by the time they reach junior or senior, it’s already separated.

*

Q: What can you do?

A: I’m not saying they shouldn’t have the Asian-American clubs or African-American association--because for many disadvantaged groups they need a kind of self-supporting environment. They need identity. They need to build up self pride. And those will help. But the university should really provide opportunities for different groups of people of different background to interact. . . . In the residence halls. Study groups. Freshman classes. Laboratory sections. We don’t want to force them. But just give them opportunity.

*

Q: Has there been a lot of tension among different groups?

A: Oh yes. Oh sure. A university really, in microcosm, reflects the larger society. Many people probably reflect some of their parents’ view.

*

Q: There is this old image as Berkeley as a center for radicalism. Does Berkeley deserve it or has gone totally yuppie?

A: No, no, I don’t go for the “center of radicalism.” . . . I would say it is still certainly much more liberal than many other parts of the state or perhaps other parts of the nation. But on other hand we have a wide spectrum of opinions among the student body. If I remember correctly, the largest student group actually is Young Republican organization. So the students really cover a wide range of spectrum of views. . . . I love that. We don’t want to see the political correctness kind of situation.

*

Q: Do you think that political correctness exists or is it a myth of conservative people?

A: No, I do think it exists in some peoples’ minds. The atmosphere sometimes rightly or wrongly is such, some people don’t want to speak out as candidly. That’s not good. . . . I think we should always be very concerned about universities becoming a place with limited freedom of expression. I think, whether on the right or left, we have to protect the freedom. . . . But on the other hand, I think many books coming out like (Dinesh D’Souza’s) “Illiberal Education” and others--I disagree with their basic theme. I think many of the things quoted in those books are correct factually--but they missed a very important premise. Because we’re in this very rapid change, this transformation of student demographics . . . And I think if you take that in context, . . . the political correctness development is transitional.

*

Q: Have you, as the first Asian-American head of a UC, experienced problems?

A: Not much in the university. I did have some hate mail. They think whatever I do, I’m trying to protect Asian-American and the (authors) still look at you from a color line. . . . When I went to the postseason football (Citrus Bowl) game in Orlando, our opponent was Clemson from South Carolina. So some of the Clemson fans started to chant “Buy American, buy American.” So I said, even a chancellor cannot, you know, completely escape that. You know because they see an Asian-American, they don’t feel he is American. . . . But I don’t get too upset.

. . . I tell students about my experience, 36 years ago, in Kentucky, at that time with segregated buses, segregated drinking fountain, segregated washing, everything. I grew out of that. I fear if I cannot channel those very unpleasant discriminatory experiences into a positive energy, into a constructive direction, then I’m not really doing the right thing for my own group or for the larger community.

*

Q: How much of your time is involved in fund-raising?

A: It’s very hard sometimes to separate, say, fund-raising from alumni relations or public relations. I would say about, under all that, roughly 30%. For instance, I can say last year, in one year, I made seven trips to Asia. You know we’re getting a lot of international support right now.

*

Q: Are these fund-raising problems and other problems in higher education causing the turnover in college presidencies lately? There have been resignations at Stanford, Yale, Columbia, Chicago. Are these jobs getting so tough people don’t want them, or is it just a coincidence?

A: I sense it’s maybe a combination of factors. It is becoming much tougher, the demands. Also I find, institutionally we see various constituencies. Students always have their own group; faculty another, and the staff, administration, regents and alumni. So you have all different kind of constituencies, I fear. . . . As institutional leaders, we should try to integrate all different constituencies more. We’ve got to present our common interest. Especially with some very, very tough financial changes.

*

Q: So you can remain optimistic with all those problems?

A: My family lost a fortune before they came as refugees. I came as a immigrant student and went through some bad experiences. But I feel so positive about this country, about the state, about the future. I couldn’t imagine 36 years ago, I never dreamed I would be chancellor of one of the greatest universities in the United States. So I’m very positive and I think we have to take the long view. . . .

Next year, University of California celebrates our 125th anniversary. We went through controversies like the Free Speech Movement and we went through the McCarthy period and all that. You know, many of them were tough and we came out still always No. 1. Let’s keep perspective.