BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
X-WR-CALNAME:www.indybay.org
PRODID:-//indybay/ical// v1.0//EN
BEGIN:VEVENT
UID:Indybay-18831499
SEQUENCE:18983832
CREATED:20200314T001800Z
DESCRIPTION:There will be a speak-out at the Community College Board of Governors 
 against the corporatization and attacks on community. colleges.\n3/16 
 Speak-out At Community College Board of Governors Meeting in Sacramento 
 Against Attacks On Community Colleges \n& Against Corruption \nCommunity 
 College Board Of Governors \n1102 Q Street, 6th Floor \nSacramento, CA 
 \n\nPress Conference \nMonday, March 16, 2020 \n12:00 PM \nSpeak Out At 
 Board \n1:00 PM \n1102 Q Street, 6th Floor \nSacramento, CA \n\nCommunity 
 Colleges are under attack and many classes are being canceled. This is part 
 of corporatization of community colleges with a new funding proposal that 
 \npunishes our Community Colleges. This Board and California politicians 
 have passed AB 705 which guarantees unprepared community college students 
 will FAIL \n\nAlso we are against the corruption with the on-line community 
 college that was funded with $120 million. This funding took place without 
 proper oversight and high paid \nadministrators while faculty at community 
 colleges are being layed off thousands of classes are being cut. 
 \n\nSponsored by \nHigher Education Task Force 
 \nhttps://ccsfheat.wordpress.com \n\nMonday, March 16, 2020 \n\nMonday, 
 03-16-2020 from 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.* \n\nMembers of the public may 
 participate via Zoom videoconferencing using the this link 
 (https://cccconfer.zoom.us/j/631704028) or by calling in to the meeting at 
 (669) 900-6833 Webinar ID: 631 704 028. \nMembers of the public wishing to 
 comment on an agenda item or another topic within the jurisdiction of the 
 Board of Governors will be given the opportunity to ask questions via Zoom 
 or may submit questions via email at: ccastro [at] cccco.edu. \n*All times 
 are approximate and subject to change. Order of items is subject to change. 
 \n\nAgenda Item Details \nMeeting Mar 16, 2020 - Board of Governors Meeting 
 Category Standing Orders of Business Subject Call to Order - Amended Type 
 Procedural \n\nAll Board of Governors meetings are held in locations that 
 are wheelchair accessible. Other disability-related accommodations, such as 
 alternate media materials, sign language interpreters, or real time 
 transcription, will be provided to persons with disabilities upon request. 
 Persons requesting such accommodations should notify Christina N. Castro at 
 1102 Q Street, Sacramento, California, 95811 or ccastro [at] cccco.edu, 
 (916) 323-5889, no less than five working days prior to the meeting. The 
 Chancellor’s Office will make efforts to meet requests made after such 
 date, if possible. \n\nPublic testimony will be invited in conjunction with 
 board discussion on each item. \nPersons wishing to make a statement to the 
 board on a subject not on the agenda shall address the board during the 
 time listed for public forum. \n\nMission Statement \n\n“Empowering 
 Community Colleges Through Leadership, Advocacy and Support.” \n\nVision 
 For Success Goals \n\nIncrease by at least 20 percent the number of 
 California Community Colleges (CCC) students annually who acquire 
 associates degrees, credentials, certificates, or specific skill sets that 
 prepare them for an in-demand job. \nIncrease by 35 percent the number of 
 CCC students transferring annually to a University of California or 
 California State University. \nDecrease the average number of units 
 accumulated by CCC students earning associate’s degrees, from 
 approximately 87 total units (the most recent system-wide average) to 79 
 total units—the average among the quintile of colleges showing the 
 strongest performance on this measure. \nIncrease the percent of exiting 
 Career Technical Education (CTE) students who report being employed in 
 their field of study, from the most recent statewide average of 60 percent 
 to an improved rate of 69 percent—the average among the quintile of 
 colleges showing the strongest performance on this measure. \nReduce equity 
 gaps across all of the above measures through faster improvements among 
 traditionally underrepresented student groups, with the goal of cutting 
 achievement gaps by 40 percent within five years and fully closing those 
 achievement gaps within ten years. \nReduce regional achievement gaps 
 across all of the above measures through faster improvements among colleges 
 located in regions with the lowest educational attainment of adults, with 
 the ultimate goal of fully closing regional achievement gaps within ten 
 years. \nVision For Success Core Commitments \n\nFocus relentlessly on 
 students’ end goals. \nAlways design and decide with the student in mind. 
 \nPair high expectations with high support. \nFoster the use of data, 
 inquiry, and evidence. \nTake ownership of goals and performance. \nEnable 
 action and thoughtful innovation. \nLead the work of partnering across 
 systems. \nAbout the Board \n\nThe Board of Governors of the California 
 Community Colleges, by statute, provides leadership and policy direction in 
 the continuing development of the California Community College System. 
 Among its charges are establishing minimum academic and personnel 
 standards; evaluating and reporting on the fiscal and educational 
 effectiveness of the 73 districts; conducting research and providing 
 appropriate information services; and administering fiscal support programs 
 (both operational and capital outlay). \n\nThe 17-member board, appointed 
 by the governor, includes 12 public members (two of whom must be current or 
 former elected members of local boards); one voting and one non-voting 
 student member currently enrolled in a community college; two voting 
 tenured faculty members; and one voting classified staff member. \n\nThe 
 work of the board is supported by the staff of the California Community 
 Colleges Chancellor’s Office. \n\nBoard of Governors Live Webinar \n\nUse 
 the following Zoom link to view a live feed of the Board of Governors 
 Meeting: \n\nhttps://cccconfer.zoom.us/j/631704028 \n\nCaptions are 
 provided during the webinar. \n\nChancellor's Office Administrators 
 \n\nEloy Ortiz Oakley, Chancellor \nDr. Daisy Gonzales, Deputy Chancellor 
 \nMarty Alvarado, Executive Vice Chancellor of Educational Services & 
 Support \nBarney Gomez, Vice Chancellor of Digital Information & 
 Infrastructure \nPaul Feist, Vice Chancellor of Communications & Marketing 
 \nMarc LeForestier, General Counsel \nKelley Maddox, Vice Chancellor of 
 Internal Operations \nRhonda Mohr, Vice Chancellor of Educational Services 
 & Support \nLizette Navarette, Vice Chancellor of College Finance & 
 Facilities Planning \nSheneui Weber, Vice Chancellor of Workforce & 
 Economic Development \nVacant, Vice Chancellor of Educational Services & 
 Support \nVacant, Vice Chancellor of Governmental Relations \nVacant, Vice 
 Chancellor of Institutional Effectiveness & Innovation 
 \nrequest-to-address-the-board-of-governors-public-comment-a11y.pdf (148 
 KB) \nPUBLIC COMMENT \n\nName: Address: \n\n( Please provide a business 
 card ) \n\nAffiliation: \n\nAgenda item # : (or subject on which you wish 
 to speak) \n\nBOARD OF GOVERNORS CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES \n\nRequest 
 to Address the Board of Governors \n\nSpeakers are limited to 3 minutes 
 each \n\nPublic testimony will be invited after Committee discussion on 
 each item. \n\nSpeakers are limited to 3 minutes each, subject to change by 
 the Board President. Please keep within this time frame. If you have 
 written materials to present to the Committee, please give the Board's 
 staff 50 copies prior to addressing the Board. \n\n\n\nWith $120 million 
 and few students, California’s new online community college faces audit 
 after corruption scandal & Protest On March 16 At Board Meeting 
 \nhttps://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/With-120-million-and-few-students-15090852.php 
 \n\nAre Community Colleges Meant Mainly to Crank Out Workers for Business? 
 CFT AFT Leadership Was Aware In 2011 Of ALEC Lumina In CA \nAFT pair: "All 
 of us know what the replacement of funding based on enrollment with funding 
 based on completion would mean—cuts and scarcity and a 'streamlining' of 
 the community college system that would limit access and eliminate programs 
 and classes.” https://patch.com/california/lamesa/teachers-union-blasts 
 \n\n\nAccelerating Student Success Project is part of the Lumina 
 Foundation’s efforts to champion and support the California Community 
 Colleges Student Success Initiative \nAmy Supinger Works For Lumina and The 
 Community College Chancellor’s Office 
 \n\nhttps://foundationccc.org/News-Room/News-Archives/2012-Archive/CPEF-supports-student-success 
 \nFoundation expands support of student success initiatives \nAttacks On 
 Working Class Students & Corporatization of California Community Colleges 
 With AB 705 and AB 1440 Backed By California Democrats Including SF Ting, 
 Chiu and Weiner 
 \nhttp://www.capoliticalreview.com/capoliticalnewsandviews/ab-705-guarantees-unprepared-community-college-students-fail/ 
 \n\nAB 705 and AB 1440 \n\nAB 705: Guarantees Unprepared Community College 
 Students FAIL \n\nSeptember 19, 2017 By Stephen Frank 1 Comment \nHow do 
 you guarantee failure for students and tens of millions in wasted tax 
 dollars? You enroll students that received a “D” average in LAUSD (45% 
 of 2016 “graduates” had a D average) then NOT give them or allow them 
 remedial classes to bring them up to 8th or 9th grade level. So, as the 
 functional illiterates fail their college classes and eventually leave 
 school. Who wins? The Democrats that believe everyone is college 
 material—and even those that need help are refused it. \n“Assembly Bill 
 705 would prohibit them from placing a student in a remedial course “that 
 lengthens their time to complete a degree,” unless the college can prove 
 the student would fail. Remedial classes do not count toward an 
 associate’s degree nor a university transfer. \nIn order to succeed under 
 the new model, the bill essentially corners colleges into doing what 
 Cuyamaca and Mesa have done — concurrently enroll students in 
 college-level math and a remedial breakout course — though it doesn’t 
 explicitly require them to.” \nWe already know that up to 80% of 
 California High School graduates need remedial English and/or Math classes 
 for the State Colleges. Imagine how many going to community college need 
 it? This is why government has more than enough money—they know they are 
 harming young people ans wasting tax dollars. \n\n-- \nCheck out the Save 
 CCSF Webpage here: \nhttp://www.saveccsf.org/ \n--- \nYou received this 
 message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "FightBack and 
 SaveCCSF" group. \nTo unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails 
 from it, send an email to fightbacksaveccsf13+unsubscribe [at] 
 googlegroups.com. \nTo view this discussion on the web visit 
 https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/fightbacksaveccsf13/1C2B04A0-115A-476A-9561-0FDA44395986%40igc.org. 
 \n\nBill Would Force Community Colleges’ Hands On Remediation Reforms 
 \nBy Megan Burks, KPBS, 9/18/17 \n\nCuyamaca College saw a seven-fold 
 increase in the number of students passing college math last year. Instead 
 of requiring underprepared students to catch up on high school math first, 
 it put them in college math with extra help. Mesa College did the same for 
 English and saw its pass rate double for students in the pilot program. 
 \nNow, state lawmakers want every community college to make the change. 
 \nAssembly Bill 705 would prohibit them from placing a student in a 
 remedial course “that lengthens their time to complete a degree,” 
 unless the college can prove the student would fail. Remedial classes do 
 not count toward an associate’s degree nor a university transfer. \nIn 
 order to succeed under the new model, the bill essentially corners colleges 
 into doing what Cuyamaca and Mesa have done — concurrently enroll 
 students in college-level math and a remedial breakout course — though it 
 doesn’t explicitly require them to. \n“The research behind these 
 changes is so clear that it’s sort of hard to argue at this point,” 
 said Katie Hern, co-founder and director to the California Acceleration 
 Project, a statewide faculty workgroup that has been researching the model 
 and supports the bill. “It’s hard to argue that community colleges 
 should be able to keep doing what we’ve been doing when the results are 
 so bad for traditional approaches and so much better when we reform our 
 placement practices and implement corequisite models.” \nThe bill would 
 also do away with the standardized placement tests community colleges give 
 to incoming students. Instead, they’d use high school grades, which 
 research has shown to be a more reliable indicator of whether a student 
 needs remediation. \nGrossmont College, and several other colleges in the 
 state, have already moved away from placement tests with strong results. 
 But Grossmont’s math department co-chair said she worries AB 705 goes too 
 far in placing limits on remediation. \n“The language in this bill is 
 both strict and general at the same time. What does it mean? We cannot 
 require a student to take a remedial course unless it is absolutely 
 necessary, or that all community colleges will have to add support courses 
 to all of their college-level courses?” said Shirley Pereira, referring 
 to the section of the bill that prohibits remedial placement. \nPereira 
 said she worries about limiting options for students, especially military 
 veterans, former housewives and other nontraditional students who are far 
 removed from high school coursework. \n“The number of remedial courses 
 should be minimized at all of our colleges,” she said. “We do this by 
 placing students correctly, but it does not mean that we get rid of all of 
 our remedial courses. Remember the community college charge: access is 
 first and foremost.” \nHern said the bill would not limit options; it 
 would simply require colleges to look deeply at whether the remedial option 
 is best for students. \n“It really sort of shifts the burden of proof 
 away from students having to prove that they should have access to a 
 college-level course, and it shifts to colleges having to prove that 
 students should not have access to the course because they are highly 
 unlikely to succeed there,” Hern said. \nWhen Cuyamaca College allowed 
 students who needed remediation to go straight into a college-level course, 
 the pass rate soared. It went from 10 percent to 67 percent. At Mesa 
 College, 75 percent of students enrolled in a pilot program that eliminated 
 remedial English passed college-level English. That is compared to 38 
 percent of students not in the pilot. \nPereira pointed out change under 
 the bill would not be swift, especially for larger colleges. In addition to 
 shifting the class schedule, teachers must shift how they teach. With 
 students coming in at various levels, they must be able to give 
 individualized support. \nIt is not clear how quickly the changes would 
 need to be implemented under the bill. First, the governor must sign it. He 
 has until Sept. 30. \nThe California State University is currently 
 implementing similar changes. \n\nVote of No confidence due to the lack of 
 participatory governance by the State Chancellor of the California 
 Community Colleges \n\nhttp://lrcft.org/vote-of-no-confidence/ \n\nWhereas, 
 the principle of participatory governance in the California Community 
 Colleges has been established and codified in law (AB1725); Whereas, 
 participatory governance only functions when it is practiced at all levels 
 of the administration and faculty governing bodies; Whereas, confidence in 
 the leadership of the chief executive of a college system is integral to 
 the effective administration of the California Community College mission; 
 Whereas, the faculty of the Los Rios College Federation of Teachers (LRCFT) 
 AFT 2279 recognizes that participatory governance has ceased to function at 
 the state level where the State Chancellor’s Office has closed the normal 
 channels of communication with the faculty organizations such as the 
 Academic Senate (ASCCC), the Community College Council of the California 
 Federation of Teachers, the Community College Association of the California 
 Teachers Association, the California Community College Independents, and 
 the Faculty Association of California Community Colleges; Whereas, the 
 State Chancellor’s Office has demonstrated a lack of transparency and 
 collegial consultations which includes, but is not limited to; \n• 
 Introducing legislation and state budget for Guided Pathways; \n• 
 Introducing language into AB 19 that requires districts’ and colleges’ 
 participate in Guided Pathways in order to receive funding; \n• Reducing 
 the meetings to consult with stakeholders on the budget change proposal and 
 legislation to a single meeting; \n• Making Consultation Council a 
 reporting of State Chancellor’s Office activities rather than a forum 
 where consensus can be achieved on critical issues facing community 
 colleges; \n• Failing to engage in consultation and consensus building 
 with stakeholders concerning AB 705. There was a lack of discussion and 
 preparation of the college districts for the changes required in AB 705. 
 There was a lack of funding for the workload required for the mandated 
 activity for AB 705 and none has been planned in the future. There has been 
 no discussion on the unintended consequences of AB705 implementation. The 
 State Chancellor’s Office has announced that reading programs will be 
 eliminated based on AB 705 even though the bill contains no language to 
 that effect; \n• Failing to consult with any stakeholders before the 
 introduction of the online college in the Governor’s budget in January 
 2018. Alterations In the online college proposal have been made when 
 testifying before the budget and higher education committees without 
 consultation with faculty. New programs such as medical coding have been 
 proposed by the State Chancellor without a functioning local Academic 
 Senate (no faculty have been hired yet) and as a consequence no 
 participatory governance. In addition, an online medical coding program 
 will directly compete with the current program at Cosumnes River College. 
 The online college will be subscription based and competency-based without 
 discussion with a local Academic Senate and another example of a lack of 
 participatory governance. These academic and professional matters could 
 have been at least discussed and possibly resolved with the State Academic 
 Senate, but that did not occur. The new faculty for the online college will 
 not be represented by a union, will not have a collectively bargained 
 contract, and will be on a meet and confer basis. The State Chancellor has 
 not engaged with the faculty unions about the parameters of contract for 
 the online college faculty; \n• Failing to consult with any stakeholders 
 before the introduction of the new funding formula in the Governor’s 
 budget in January 2018. There were virtually no simulations run to test the 
 viability of such a funding formula or to determine unintended 
 consequences. The Chancellor’s Office convened a task force of Chief 
 Executive Officers to seek alternative proposals from which faculty were 
 excluded; Whereas, these and other examples have illustrated that the State 
 Chancellor has demonstrated a lack of transparency and collegial 
 consultation with the faculty organizations, has actively blocked faculty 
 leadership access to meetings in which decisions have been made, and 
 exhibits a general lack of acknowledgement of the concerns of faculty; 
 \nTherefore, be it resolved, that the Los Rios College Federation of 
 Teachers affirms a vote of no confidence for the California Community 
 College Chancellor, Eloy Ortiz Oakley and transmit said resolution to the 
 Board of Governors; Be if further resolved, that the Los Rios College 
 Federation of Teachers send this resolution to the Community College 
 Council President, Jim Mahler, and request that a similar vote of no 
 confidence resolution be introduced and passed by the Community College 
 Council of the California Federation of Teachers. \n\nUnion Busting 
 Corporate Controlled California Community College Board of Governors Pushed 
 AB 705 
 \nhttps://assessment.cccco.edu/ab-705-implementation\nhttps://ccsfheat.wordpress.com\n\nWith 
 $120 million and few students, California’s new online community college 
 faces audit after corruption scandal\n\nNanette Asimov Feb. 27, 
 2020\nhttps://www.sfchronicle.com/news/article/With-120-million-and-few-students-15090852.php\n\n\nDerek 
 Gordon, chief operating officer of Calbright, is the college’s highest 
 paid employee at $295,000 a year.\nPhoto: Paul Kuroda / Special to The 
 Chronicle\nThe California state auditor will take a deep look at the 
 state’s unaccredited new online community college, Calbright, to learn 
 whether it’s offering students what it promised — and whether its $120 
 million cost to taxpayers so far is money well spent, lawmakers said this 
 week.\n\n“We have some concerns regarding Calbright College,” 
 Assemblyman Jose Medina, D-Riverside, told the state’s Joint Legislative 
 Audit Committee Wednesday. He and two other lawmakers, Sen. Scott Wiener, 
 D-San Francisco, and Assemblywoman Sharon Quirk-Silva, D-Fullerton (Orange 
 County), asked for the audit at the request of community college faculty 
 leaders.\n\nThe idea behind the fully online public college has been to 
 help teach more people faster and cheaper than at traditional community 
 colleges. But to critics, Calbright has appeared slow to enroll students 
 and hire instructors, and expensive to run. Faculty leaders from other 
 schools have long complained that the 115th community college duplicates 
 the offerings of campuses across the state — prohibited in the 
 legislation authorizing Calbright — and that its executives set up the 
 college without consulting instructors. Meanwhile, Calbright employees have 
 felt squeezed by the mandated legislative timeline of less than a year to 
 establish the college from scratch.\n\nThe 7-month audit, to begin in July, 
 will focus mainly on three areas. Auditors will look at whether 
 Calbright’s three courses — cybersecurity, information technology and 
 medical coding — improperly duplicate courses already offered at other 
 community colleges. They will assess its efforts to become accredited and 
 judge whether it’s overspending on everything from salaries and 
 consulting contracts to equipment and office space.\n\nState Auditor Elaine 
 Howle told the committee that she’ll also look at measures of quality, 
 including whether students are satisfied and progressing, and will 
 determine whether Calbright has complied with employment and procurement 
 laws. Typically, state audits come with a set of recommendations to fix the 
 problems, and years of monitoring.\n\nCalbright opened on Oct. 1 and has 
 stumbled often since 2018, when then-Gov. Jerry Brown, a fan of the 
 possibilities for online education, conceived of it.\n\nMost recently, its 
 $385,000-a-year president and chief executive, Heather Hiles mysteriously 
 quit last month after a year on the job as Calbright’s most vigorous 
 cheerleader.\n\nCalifornia’s community college Board of Governors doubles 
 as Calbright’s Board of Trustees.\n\nThe vision for the college has been 
 to train low-wage workers in their 20s and 30s for better jobs at little or 
 no cost to them. Hiles had said the school would not only find jobs for 
 every student, but would provide on-the-job coaching. In July, college 
 officials said they expected to enroll only 300 to 400 students in their 
 first year, giving themselves a better chance of success before opening the 
 doors wide open.\n\nCalbright today says it enrolls 38 students: eight in 
 cybersecurity, 12 in medical coding, and 18 in information technology. 
 Another 510 are enrolled in basic math skills and reading comprehension 
 courses.\n\nThe state Legislature allocated $100 million in startup funding 
 for Calbright and promised another $20 million a year.\n\n“They’re 
 being funded at a rate 1,000 times higher than our traditional community 
 colleges,” Jim Mahler, who heads the California Federation of Teachers’ 
 community college council, told the audit committee.\n\nCalbright’s 
 spokesman, Taylor Huckaby, later called Mahler’s figures an exaggeration, 
 given that the money is intended to fund the college over many years, and 
 that enrollment is expected to rise.\n\nYet this isn’t the first time 
 Calbright has been accused of financial excess.\n\nA year ago, Hiles pushed 
 the trustees to approve a no-bid, $552,00 contractfor a friend and 
 politically connected executive recruiter. Troubled by their own actions, 
 the trustees reduced the contract to $376,000 three weeks later.\n\nA 
 Chronicle review of Calbright records shows that the college is spending 
 nearly $5.6 million on 36 employees, paying them an average of $154,764 
 each. The highest paid employee is its chief operating officer, Derek 
 Gordon, at $295,000 a year.\n\nOf the 36, eight earn more than $200,000 a 
 year.\n\nCalbright also has 22 contracts totaling more than $1.5 million, 
 including one at $23,750 a month — annually, $285,000 — for its interim 
 president and chief executive, Ajita Talwalker Menon, brought on this 
 month. Menon was a special assistant of higher education to President 
 Obama.\n\n“We feel an audit is premature, and its scope covers areas 
 Calbright is still testing,” said Tom Epstein, president of the Board of 
 Trustees.\n\nEven so, he said, “we welcome and share the desire of 
 Assemblmember Media to ensure that Calbright is operating in an effective 
 and transparent manner.”\n\nNanette Asimov is a San Francisco Chronicle 
 staff writer. Email: nasimov@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @NanetteAsimov\n 
 https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2020/03/13/18831499.php
SUMMARY:Speak-out At Community College Board of Governors Meeting Against Attacks
LOCATION:Community College Board Of Governors \n1102 Q Street, 6th Floor 
 \nSacramento, CA 
URL:https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2020/03/13/18831499.php
DTSTART:20200316T190000Z
DTEND:20200316T200000Z
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR