|
For the many
employees too
young to remember, back in the golden years of the Pat Brown era
(1960s), California invested in its future. Highways, bridges,
schools, colleges and universities were built, and the funds were
available to utilize them.
In order to
promote a vision of educational access, the state developed the Master
Plan for Higher Education, a document that defines the roles of the
three segments of California's post-secondary education: community
colleges (then called junior colleges), California State Universities
(then often called state colleges), and the University of California.
Each of the
segments would serve a specific population: the UC system would accept
all eligible high school graduates in the top 12.5 percent of their
class; the CSU would accept the top one-third, and the community
colleges would be the open door to anyone over eighteen years of age
"who can benefit from instruction."
Community colleges
had zero fees and the CSU and UC systems were remarkably inexpensive.
Times change. Over
the years, community colleges were legally separated from the K-12
systems that many of them were rooted in. Fees were imposed at two-year
colleges for the first time in 1982 (not long after Proposition 13
drastically reduced funding for local schools and community colleges, as
well as cities and counties.)
Fees have gone up
(and briefly down during the boom years of the late 1990s) and are now
being proposed for $26 per unit starting July, 2004—more than double the
fees of July, 2003.
In addition to fee
increases at all three levels of higher education, the current state
budget calls for 10 percent of UC and CSU eligible students to be
"re-routed" to local community colleges for their first two years of
transfer coursework. Of course, many of these students will not attend
a two-year college. They worked hard to quality for universities, and
they will seek other alternatives, including private and out-of-state
four-year university options.
Meanwhile, the
majority of community college students, that is, the underserved, often
underprepared, low-income, immigrant students, including many who did
not complete high school and/or are returning to college after time in
the workforce, will continue to have their access reduced due to fee
increases and class cuts.
The community
colleges were intended to keep the doors open to higher education. The
mission was and continues to be to give every Californian the chance to
move up the socio-economic ladder through education. Community colleges
produce most of the skilled workforce, including nurses and health care
technicians, aviation mechanics, graphic artists, police and fire
officers, and numerous other technical employees.
To deny access to
our two-year colleges and to the four-year universities which
Californians take such pride in, is to deny the future workforce its
opportunity to maximize potential.
Studies indicate
that the two-tier job market is increasing. According to the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, California has lost jobs in higher-paying sectors such
as information services and gained jobs in low-wage sectors such as
retail trade and hospitality. Without an adequately trained workforce,
these trends will only continue.
The Master Plan was
designed to keep us the golden state, the epitome of the land of
opportunity. Unless Californians reject the current belt-tightening of
higher education, the future looks less promising for those seeking the
California Dream.
&
back to top
|