California Faculty Association.
While CFA believes that online education can be a
successful mode of instruction for some students and while we wholeheartedly
support the goal of expanding access to higher education in California, we have
deep concerns about some proposed legislative solutions that mandate online
instruction or call for blanket standardization of curriculum across a variety
of institutions.
CFA also fundamentally rejects the belief that
after years of deep cuts in state support for the CSU the solution to restoring
the greatness of the system lies in throwing open the doors to private vendors
and privatizing operations. CFA fought for additional revenue and the voters of
California overwhelming supported those efforts. In a post-Prop 30 world, the
focus should be on restoring funding to the CSU and focusing on the core
mission of education, not turning it into an experiment with student success
hanging in the balance.
We believe that it is a strength of our system
that the 23 campuses of the CSU (and the campuses of the UC and CC systems as
well) each offer rich and unique educational experiences that are shaped by the
needs of students on that particular campus and by the needs of the community
surrounding the campus.
Legislation that seeks to create curricular uniformity
across all campuses puts the current educational diversity that reflects our
social diversity at risk. Such legislation would also make it more
difficult for campuses to foster student success by tailoring curriculum
(sequences of courses, for instance) to the educational backgrounds of students
on that campus.
We also firmly believe that affordability and
quality are critical to any meaningful notion of access. Students in public
higher education institutions should not be required to pay additional costs to
take a course (whether online or in-person) that is required to graduate.
Students must also be assured that the courses
they take will be taught using a mode of instruction that offers them their
greatest chance of success. Research on student success in online education
clearly indicates that this mode of instruction is not for everyone and not
ideal for many, many students it is our mission to educate.
While we know that partnering with others outside
the CSU can potentially provide benefits to students, handing off the core
function of educating CSU students to entities whose primary missions may not
be the public good would weaken the integrity of the CSU and the public’s
ability to hold us accountable for quality and effectiveness.
For so many Californians, our public colleges and
universities are still the largest and most consistent providers of quality
courses (in a variety of formats), rich opportunities for academic success, and
relatively affordable prices. We believe that providing Californians with
meaningful access to higher education requires that we provide adequate public
investment in our university system.
Simply increasing online offerings (on the
questionable assumption that it is cheaper) or handing off education to private
vendors will not serve California well in the long run.
Legislators’ well-intentioned efforts to increase
access for students ignore a proven solution that we know will increase access:
investing resources into more class sections. Legislation that promotes too
good-to-be-true alternatives to reinvesting in our public colleges and
universities will not solve the state’s needs for an educated citizenry.
CFA continues to monitor and is negotiating with
legislators with legislation impacting higher education and will keep you
updated on the latest developments.
No comments:
Post a Comment