Re: [Google Group CCCSenates] Elimination of a content area

[Stev...@aol.com]

George,

 

I'll add to the comments I made last month about senates and RIFs.

 

At Cypress College we had a similar experience a few years ago when our computer science instructor's position was eliminated.  That was my introduction to the 39-month rule. 

 

For those who don't know about the rule, my understanding of it and its rationale is this:
The reduction in force is permissible because the district has determined that it no longer has a need for the services provided by the instructor.  If the district decides to offer ANY of the courses taught by the instructor within the next 39 months, it must rehire the instructor on a full-time basis.  Thus, no instructor can teach the courses on a part-time basis. 

 

Our senate objected to the elimination of the CS position on the grounds that this was a de facto change to the college's curriculum – which would last over 3 years – but it couldn't do much more after things were already set in motion.  As it turned out, the instructor decided to retire rather than be RIF'd, and the college could continue to offer at least some of the courses he taught.

 

At the time, I wasn't able to find anything in Title 5 that would prevent our district or your district from doing what they did, but maybe someone with more experience with the state's curriculum rules might know something I don't. 

 

Given that our computer science courses were chronically under-enrolled, it was difficult to argue that the decision to eliminate the position was improper.  The 39-month rule simply produced an unintended consequence, and I suspect our administration wasn't even aware of it when they first made the decision.

 

I assume lack of demand was the primary reason for eliminating the earth science position, but if it wasn't, you might have a stronger argument that the decision had a significant negative impact on your curriculum.

 

The senate should also focus on whether the decision to use a RIF (to cut costs?) was the result of a proper shared governance process. 

 

And if your district has adopted a program discontinuance policy that was mutually agreed to by the senate(s) and the district, you should check to see if any provisions of that policy were violated.  Be aware, however, that your earth science "program" might not be a program under the Title 5 definition of that term.  Our CS "program" wasn't.  If you want a different local definition, be sure to try to get it put into your district policy.

 

If the senate believes that either the decision to use a RIF or the process that produced it was faulty, it should at least pass a resolution expressing its concerns.  Stay out of the personnel issues, though.

 

Steve Gold

Senator Emeritus

Cypress College

[Tom Heaney]

Steve, you're reference to your college's CS as not being a "program,"
leads me to ask some questions.

Our college is now in the throes of March 15th letters as are many of
you. And, I'm detecting a great amount of confusion on both the
faculty and administration about the details, and I'm wondering what
observations the members of this forum might offer.

As I understand things, full-time faculty can be laid off due to
either "program discontinuance" or straight "reduction in force."

1) If the former, then an "educational program" (one leading to a
degree or certificate as defined by Title V) can be ended (the degrees/
certificates no longer awarded) and without the degree, usually the
courses in a specific discipline are likewise discontinued because
students won't be enrolling much. Thus the faculty in that discipline/
area is eliminated. (Skipping over the rights of transfer/bumping/
etc.) If any of the courses that instructor taught are offered again
in the next 39 months, then that faculty member has the right to be
rehired. (Can they be hired as part time if only 1 or 2 classes are
scheduled?)

2) In the case of a straight reduction in force, then it is by
individual faculty seniority (at least for most bargaining units its
"last hired, first fired") without regard for program, correct?

In our case, there are some very strange things being discussed. For
example, the President is proposing the elimination of the Library
Science "program," but we don't have one. There's no degree (and no
classes). Our librarian is a tenured, non-teaching faculty and one of
our most senior FT faculty members, and the President just wants to
lay him off. This seems legally unsupportable to our reading of Ed
Code.

Anyway, can anyone shed light on numbers 1 and 2 at least?

Sorry to appear so dense on this issue,
--Tom Heaney, PhD
Division Chair, Liberal Arts and Sciences

[Paula Demanett]

Does your college have a program discontinuance policy? Usually the
Academic Senate has provided a process which has criteria to consider
for program discontinuance. The Program Review Committee is often
involved in the following of the process. At least that is how our
college has set things up. Accreditation is looking for a process that
was followed through the governance policy since discontinuation of a
program falls under curriculum which is part of the 10+1.

Eliminating the librarian issue has been on another list that I belong
to and many legal citations and accreditation language has been
forwarded to the librarian at your campus. In essence, one cannot
eliminate a "library science" program if no courses are offered. What
is being eliminated is an instructional support service that is staffed
by a faculty member. This being said, then one is eliminating the need
to buy books, provide database access, and support information
competency. Does your college have institutional outcomes? Information
competency is often one of the outcomes and if so how will the
institution meet its outcomes?

Although it may feel like you have no recourse, you may have one that
does not often tempt a faculty member to use...and that is a letter to
your accrediting body. The accrediting body can sometimes be an ally
and not the enemy during this time of budget cuts.

Anyway, just some thoughts to mull over.

Paula Demanett
Librarian
Past President, Academic Senate
Fresno City College

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "CCCSenates" group.
This group has NOT been established or endorsed by the Academic Senate
for California Community Colleges or its Executive Board. This
discussion group is not moderated, and any opinion expressed is solely
that of its author.
To post to this group, send email to CCCSe...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
CCCSenates-...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/CCCSenates

[Richard Mahon]

Hi Paula & all~

There is a forthcoming Rostrum article on program discontinuance (it should be available in early April), but here are links to both an adopted Senate paper (1998) and recommendations for local policy from the CIOs and CCCAOE:

http://www.asccc.org/Publications/Papers/Program_discontinuance.html

www.asccc.org/Events/VocEd/2007/Program_Discontinuance_Models.doc

A Resolution was passed in fall 2009 to review and potentially update the Senate paper.

While you’re waiting for the paper, you might want to look at Title 5 §51022 and 55601 and at Accreditation Standard II.A.6.b.
--
“Nothing endures but change.”  
Heraclitus

“…scholars have only interpreted the world… the point is to change it.”  
Karl Marx, 11th Thesis on Feuerbach



Dr. Richard Mahon
Associate Professor in Humanities

Chair, Curriculum Committee
Riverside City College
4800 Magnolia Avenue
Riverside CA 92506-1299
office:  (951) 222-8862
email:  richar...@rcc.edu
web support:  http://faculty.rcc.edu/mahon