Nearly 16% of the full time equivalent students in the California Community College System in 2017-2018 were enrolled in distance education courses, according to DataMart from the CCC Chancellor’s Office. This percentage has doubled since a decade prior.
In order to best serve LBGTQ+ students, colleges must first help them to claim and nurture their identities on campuses that support and reflect them by providing targeted services and opportunities for the building of community and the fostering of academic success.
Note: The following article is not an official statement of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. The article is intended to engender discussion and consideration by local colleges.
Libraries can play an integral role in the guided pathways framework rolling out across the state; however, much uncertainty still exists regarding the ways in which libraries fit into a larger guided pathways framework.
In 2009, the Academic Senate adopted the paper Noncredit Instruction: Opportunity and Challenge, which described the state of noncredit instruction at that time and provided a set of recommendations for changes that could improve various aspects of noncredit instruction. In the 10 years since that paper was published, many things have changed for noncredit programs, and those changes are reflected in the updated paper Noncredit Instruction: Opportunity and Challenge, which will be presented for adoption at the Spring 2019 Plenary Session.
The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) has a well-established position opposing performance-based funding based on the lack of evidence for its effectiveness, the potential impact on academic rigor, and concerns regarding the incentives it creates.[1] Indeed, the California Community College System as a whole rejected the concept of performance-based funding through the legislatively-established Student Success Task Force in 2011, with a majority of the task force concluding that “the lack of national evidence demonstrating that outcomes-based fundi
For seasoned academic senate presidents, chances are that the following scenario is a familiar one: you are approached by a vice president, director, or other administrator, handed a document, and told that it needs to be signed or the college will face sanctions, lose money, or be out of compliance and that the document needs to be signed today, this hour, or this minute. If you have not yet had this experience, the question of whether or not to sign a document as the college or district academic senate president will very probably arise during your tenure as a faculty leader.
Newly elected academic senate presidents often have important documents handed to them at the last minute before they are due or are not appropriately included in approving the documents at all. This situation occurred not long ago at one of the colleges in a multi-college community college district. At the time, this particular college had been operating at a financial deficit for at least three consecutive years.
Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) is now 50 years old—younger than some but older than many faculty that are currently involved with the organization. The success that the Academic Senate has had as a resource for faculty and as a state-level voice on academic and professional matters during its first fifty years is solely due to the contributions of faculty throughout the state. When individuals consider service with the ASCCC, many questions, as well as hypotheses, arise regarding how one becomes involved.
California community colleges comprise the largest system of higher education in the United States, educating approximately 2.4 million students.[1] As the largest system of higher education teaching one of the most diverse groups of students, the California Community Colleges must ensure that the student population sees itself represented by the community college faculty.