Did this administration make absolutely sure that the realignment of the college’s academic divisions would withstand legal scrutiny and follow Chancellor’s Office policies? Does comprehensive data exist to support such realignment? Were reasonable voices heard and, most importantly, is it in the best interest of students?
If this administration’s infamous record is any indication, the answer is probably no.
Let’s review the record.
Cancelling of Winter Intersession was vehemently defended in 2013 by this administration and the District. But a judge from the State of California’s Public Employment Relations Board found that such cancellation was in violation of the Educational Employment Relations Act.
The District was ordered by the judge to cease and desist from unilaterally changing the school calendar without allowing the Pasadena City College Faculty Association an opportunity to bargain.
Whether realignment will hold-up to such legal scrutiny has yet to be seen. There could still be another cease and desist order in this administration’s horizons.
The administration also defended their decision to add an Extended Spring term in 2013 and yet again they were ordered to rescind this action.
This time the order came from the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office.
“The district had incorrectly acted to extend the spring term without first receiving approval from the CCCCO, as required under Title 5. To correct this infraction the district will rescind that action and instead offer the courses as part of the summer term,” according to internal emails from the CCCCO to the administration obtained by The Courier at the time.
Changing Extended Spring to Summer One caused a myriad of transfer problems that should not had happened for hundreds of students.
Are we sure that this new realignment is following all applicable CCCCO regulations or is a barrage of internal emails from the Chancellor’s Office on its way to the administration’s inbox?
We wont get into the “Pre-Wreck” fiasco. We’ll let that speak for itself.
Where’s the data?
Has the administration put forward comprehensive data to support such realignment?
In a letter dated Feb. 12 to President Rocha from the professors in the humanities school, such data was requested.
“To date, the administration has not presented a data-based rationale for the upheaval of the school’s administration structure, which was revealed only a week ago campus-wide, nor has campus-wide feedback been requested,” the letter read. “Decisions like these need to be planned, feedback from all constituents received and considered, and data acquired, reviewed and analyzed. All of this takes time and should not be done at this accelerated pace. What’s more, policies and procedures should be followed when doing so…”
This administration has a history of ignoring reasonable voices like they did with Winter Intersession and Extended Spring.
We urge the administration to listen to the concerns of students, faculty and staff in regards to this new realignment, not to ignore them yet again. Otherwise, the administration can pick its own cliché: “One who does not remember their past is condemned to repeat it,” for instance. Or: “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting a different result.” Or the ever popular: “Oops they did it again.”
We’re all in this together and if we are to continue to educate students and prepare them for their futures we must do this together or not at all.