This resolution was deemed infeasible because the intent is unclear.
Whereas, Co-curricular programs significantly impact student transfer success and access by enabling students to attain scholarships and transfer acceptance to universities and professional schools (i.e., law school and medical school);
Whereas, Many universities are using `holistic' application processes in response to the June 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision that ruled that the University of Michigan's undergraduate admissions process was unconstitutional, and consequently, co-curricular participation directly impacts a student's transfer success;
Whereas, Co-curricular programs enable students to increase their ability to enter into leadership roles and salient decision-making roles through their enhanced learning and experience derived through participation in co-curricular programs; and
Whereas, Variance in an institution's degree of support and commitment toward co-curricular programs exists and a skewed relationship in commitment may exist, it is vital that we examine equity in co-curricular programs;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges survey co-curricular programs regarding support of staff, curriculum (e.g., units awarded), technology, facilities, faculty, and compensation (e.g., stipends, release/reassigned time) allocated for co-curricular programs; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges compare diversity data and the surveyed co-curricular program data, and report the results. MSC Disposition: Local Senates