75/25 Ratio

Fall
2002
Resolution Number: 
13.04
Contact: 
Assigned to : 
Category: 
General Concerns
Status: 
Ongoing

Whereas, AB 1725 supported a 75/25 ratio of courses taught by full-time and part-time faculty in the California Community Colleges System as beneficial to students and educational institutions;

Whereas, The California State University Academic Senate recently adopted a resolution in support of achieving a 75/25 ratio of courses taught by full-time and part-time faculty in that system;

Whereas, Current Chancellor's Office implementation guidelines prescribe a minimum number of full-time faculty but fail to examine the actual full-time/part-time ratio; and

Whereas, In good economic times colleges are required to satisfy only their minimum full-time faculty obligation and in bad economic times colleges receive waivers on their full-time faculty obligation, allowing them to actually backslide in their efforts to achieve the 75/25 full-time/part-time ratio;


Resolved, That the Academic Senate work with the Chancellor's Office and the Board of Governors to revise the implementation guidelines for attainment of the 75/25full-time/part-time faculty ratio such that progress toward the attainment of75/25 is required in good economic times, and a minimum maintenance of the current ratio is expected in difficult economic times;

Resolved, That the Academic Senate oppose in Consultation Council and all other venues any granting of waivers or deferrals to the full-time faculty hiring obligation; and

Resolved, That the Academic Senate oppose the current proposed permanent 50% waiver scheduled to be considered by the Board of Governors at its November 2002 meeting.
MSC Disposition: Board of Governors, Chancellor's Office, Local Senates Note:The Board of Governors approved the 50% waiver at its November 2002meeting.

Status Report: 

By the end of Spring 2003, consensus had been reached by Consultation representatives on changes to Title 5 that would move the system toward achieving the 75/25 goal. The waiver was opposed at the November meeting. However, see the President's Message in the Spring 2003 Rostrum suggesting that this part of this resolution was ill advised.