Objections to the language of 8.3 resulted in significant modifications of the language. SSTF members worked to ensure that the language of 8.3 was not a form of performance based funding.
Whereas, The draft recommendations (as of September 30, 2011) of the California Community Colleges Task Force on Student Success (established in response to Senate Bill 1143, Liu, 2010) state that the California Community College System will “establish an alternative funding model to encourage innovation and flexibility in the delivery of basic skills instruction”;
Whereas, While the intent of this recommendation may be to encourage innovation and flexibility in the revision of basic skills curriculum, the connection of such revisions to funding could well lead to inappropriate pressure on faculty to revise curriculum for the financial benefit of the college rather than for qualitative or pedagogical reasons;
Whereas, Funding based upon student progress can lead to institutional practices that do not benefit students as institutions attempt to maximize funding even when such funding models attempt to incentivize pedagogical improvement; and
Whereas, A structure that offers financial rewards to colleges based on student progression as determined by an assessment test is a form of performance-based funding, a concept that has not been endorsed by the California Community Colleges Task Force on Student Success or approved in any form for the California Community College System;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, while supporting efforts to improve student learning skills and success through sound research and effective innovation in all curriculum development and implementation, oppose the alternative funding model for basic skills as outlined in the California Community Colleges Task Force on Student Success recommendation 8.3 (as of September 30, 2011).
MSC
Appendix A: California Community Colleges Task Force on Student Success