September

The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges takes its direction from the collective wisdom of the faculty, expressed in resolutions passed at our biannual plenary sessions, and uses the collective expertise of our faculty to train faculty leaders at our annual institutes. In June 2004, we once again convened the Faculty Leadership Institute, held this year in San Jose. As Chair of the Relations with Local Senates Committee, the responsibility of heading up this year's Leadership Institute fell to me and the other members of the Executive Committee who contributed their talents.

CPR. Girlie Men. Master Plan. "Gut-and-amend." It's interesting vocabulary if we are to learn about legislation and the Legislature!

I was asked recently, "Has the State Academic Senate surrendered its opposition to the new accreditation standards?" My instantaneous reply was "NO!" But then I thought about how the Senate had hosted RP Group workshops and other accreditation related breakouts and discussions at its state plenaries. I considered the Senate's position paper on the 2002 accreditation standards, to be presented at the Fall 2004 Plenary, and the numerous visits by Senate representatives to local colleges to help them prepare to conduct self studies.

This article is based on a presentation made at the 2004 Leadership Institute by Patrick Perry, Vice-Chancellor of Technology, Research, and Information Systems.

INTRODUCTION

In March 2004 we examined the 75/25 Faculty Obligation Number in a Rostrum article subtitled "Why are We Not All There Yet?" Equalization is a somewhat similar issue in the sense that it has a long complex history, has had many attempts at solution, and depends heavily on arcane formulas and calculations. The basic goal of equalization is to provide all districts with similar levels of funding, regardless of their location, history or the wealth of their surrounding community.

"DUCATION IS NOT JUST A BUSINESS," concluded a recent Los Angeles Times¹ article commenting on published national and statewide reports on charter schools.

I awake each morning torn between a desire to save the world and a desire to savour the world. This makes it hard to plan my day. - E.B. White

Four years ago at this time, the Rostrum carried an article on the state of transfer. At that time, we were hopeful that the California Articulation Numbering System (CAN) would emerge renewed and reinvigorated. It didn't. We were hearing administrators from transfer institutions claim that our students took too many "unnecessary classes." Administrators continue to make such questionable claims. Legislators and their aides insisted that transfer should be as straightforward for today's students as it was for them-thirty years ago. It's not.

Recent concerns over corporatization of education led to resolutions adopted by the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. Those resolutions called for more, in-depth information about this issue. The process of developing a position paper started with researching available literature in the field. In doing so, it became apparent that much valuable work has already been done in that area, particularly the recent publication Academic Values, Market Values: The Shifting Balance (American Federation of Teachers [AFT], 2004).

Welcome to the new academic year. On behalf of the 2005-06 Executive Committee I would like to give my heartfelt thanks to my predecessor, Kate Clark, for her untiring work for our system, our students and our faculty, and to wish her well in her new position as articulation officer at her home college, Irvine Valley. And I would like to welcome you to our new leadership team here at the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, one that is ready to carry on the Academic Senate's stellar tradition of leadership on statewide issues and support to you as local leaders.