Getting Everyone On Board With Higher Ed Policy Also Matters

Pat Brown signs law implementing
Master Plan for Higher Education (1960)

A long time ago in a state quite different in many respects from today, California Governor Pat Brown signed the Donahue Act into law implementing the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education. The Plan provided for distinct roles for the three segments of public higher education: UC, what were then called the state colleges (now CSU), and the junior (now community) colleges.

Prior to the Master Plan, it was unclear what the roles of the different segments were supposed to be. Since all three were public institutions, it was deemed important that an acceptable political consensus should exist about those roles.

As we have noted from time to time on this blog, CSUs would like to expand more into graduate (PhD) education. Community colleges would like to offer bachelors degrees. From time to time, someone goes to the legislature and gets incremental permission to deviate from the old Master Plan (which in fact expired in 1975).

UCLA's Civil Rights Project has come out with a report arguing that community colleges should generally offer bachelors degrees.* UCLA is apparently OK with the idea since a recent UCLA Newsroom release touts the report.** (Note that community college enrollment has declined and that the competitive effect of community colleges offering bachelors degrees would mainly fall on CSU.)

What is missing is a process to develop a new Master Plan rather than the kind of ongoing incremental erosion of the old one that has been happening. For community colleges to go fully in the 4-year degree business would require a lot of new resources. Is the legislature prepared for the budget implications? Is the governor? It has been noted that the existing community colleges seem to vary considerably in their ability to prepare students to transfer to UC or CSU. How will the lower-performing community colleges be brought up to speed sufficiently to offer 4-year degrees when they have problems in getting students through the first two years? What about the vocational tracks in those colleges? Will resources be taken out of those programs to fund the expansion into 4-year education? Would that be a Good Thing? Are there enough faculty available? Will there still be associate degrees? 

There needs to be a process involving all stakeholders and political leaders. Otherwise we will continue to get ad hoc programs on a whim. We already had a taste of whim-policy when then-Governor Jerry Brown decided an online community college would be a good idea and had one created. Governor Newsom sought to prescribe UCLA transfer policy in his January budget proposal. We'll soon see if that idea remains in the May Revise budget proposal. But whatever Newsom does, is that really how higher ed policy in California should be made?

Bottom line: At this stage, get a process in place. Worry about the process before envisioning the ends.

===

*The report is at https://civilrightsproject.ucla.edu/research/college-access/underrepresented-students/the-potential-of-californias-community-college-baccalaureate-for-closing-racial-equity-gaps/CCB-CRP-FINAL-REPORT-033023-modified-post-release.pdf.

**https://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/california-community-college-baccalaureate-degree-programs.