Standards and Practices Committee 2005-2006
Gary Holton (Chair), San Diego Mesa College
Lauren Coodley, Napa Valley College
TerriAnn Linn-Watson, Chaffey College
Kimberlee Messina, Santa Rosa Junior College
With special thanks to Greg Gilbert, Copper Mountain College, and Mark Snowhite,
Crafton Hills College, for their expertise and experience in revising this
document.
Table of Contents
Executive Summary
Introduction
The Meaning of Equivalency
Benefits of Equivalency
Legal Requirement
Principles
Criteria for Determining Equivalent Qualifications
The Problem of Determining Eminence
A Process for Determining Equivalent Qualifications
Faculty Responsibilities
Determination of Equivalency for Part-time Hires
The Single Course Equivalency Issue
Determining Equivalency in Multi-college Districts
Survey of Equivalency Practices
Conclusion
Recommendations
Appendices
A. Equivalency Policy: A Proposed Model
B. Legal Opinion on Single Course Equivalency
Executive
Summary
Introduction
In 1988 the Community College Reform Act (AB 1725) began a phase out of credentials
in favor of a process for establishing minimum qualifications and the determination
of equivalencies that are at least equal to the state-adopted minimum qualifications
for a particular discipline. According to Education Code §§ 87359
and 87360, someone who does not possess the minimum qualifications for service
may be hired as a faculty member if he or she is judged to possess qualifications
that are at least equivalent to the minimum qualifications & Equivalency
is a term used in the Disciplines List, a list of Board of Governors adopted
minimum qualifications for hiring faculty. District equivalency policies
recognize three ways of demonstrating equivalency: 1) course work, 2) work
experience, and 3) eminence in the field (a sub-set of experience). A combination
of the three may be recognized. But whatever the means are for making determinations,
equivalency should never mean less than the qualifications specified on the
Disciplines List. Because the equivalency process was created by AB1725 and
chaptered into the California Education Code, districts are not free to ignore
provisions within the law.
This paper concludes with recommendations
for the determination of equivalencies, including
who determines equivalency, that equivalency
is granted for a discipline (not for courses
or subject areas with disciplines), that polices
and procedures must be consistent, objective,
evidence based, mindful of general education
and specialization, and that local governing
boards include action on the equivalency as part
of their subsequent hiring action.
Appendices
A. Equivalency Policy: A Proposed Model
B. Single Course Equivalencies Legal Opinion L 03-28 Letter dated December
23, 2003
