برچسب: full

  • CSU to expand student grants to cover full  tuition and living expenses

    CSU to expand student grants to cover full  tuition and living expenses


    Briana Munoz felt forced to take seven courses last semester to graduate on time and protect her financial aid status.

    Courtesy, Briana Munoz

    California State University trustees voted Wednesday to expand grants to fund the full cost of tuition and living expenses for students who show they need it to attend college. 

    The decision is the first step in a commitment the trustees made to students last fall that at least a third of revenue from a  6% annual tuition hike would go to financial aid. A more detailed plan will be presented to the board in May.

    Over the five-year period of the tuition increase, more than $280 million will go toward financial aid, increasing total funding to the State University Grant to $981 million by the 2028-29 school year.

    About 87% of Cal State students have their tuition fully or partially covered by grants and aid. Yet, some students still struggle with the cost of attending college due to living expenses such as food, housing and transportation. 

    Although there is regional variation of housing and food costs, total attendance costs statewide range from $22,000 to $32,000 annually. Nearly 40% of CSU students rely on loans to make up the difference between financial aid and actual costs.

    “The fact is tuition as the price of admission is not what keeps students away from CSU,” trustee Julia Lopez said. “Almost nine out of 10 students get some sort of tuition grant, but it’s other costs.” 

    The trustees favored giving students stipends, once their tuition costs are met, to cover their expenses, with the expectation that students would work less and graduate sooner. The State University Grant has traditionally been used to cover tuition. The stipends would be up to $5,000 and prioritize students with the greatest needs. 

    The trustees also voted to create consistent financial aid measurements and communications for students and their families after learning of significant differences across the 23 campuses, making it difficult for families to compare financial aid offers.

    But there is one immediate challenge CSU is facing in its financial aid improvement goals – the current national rollout of FAFSA simplification. The new, simplified Free Application for Federal Student Aid application was delayed from Oct.1 to Dec. 31. Colleges and universities received notification on Tuesday that they wouldn’t receive students’ financial aid information until March, squeezing students who generally have until May 1 to select a college.

    Nathan Evans, CSU’s vice chancellor for academic and student affairs, said the problems with the new FAFSA may be even worse for California.

     Students who are permanent residents or U.S. citizens, but who have an undocumented parent, are unable to complete the new application because the system requires a Social Security number for each parent or guardian. Parents without Social Security numbers are also locked out of contributing to existing FAFSA forms.

     Evans said leaders from CSU, the University of California, the community colleges, and the state’s independent colleges met earlier this week with the California Student Aid Commission to plan potential workarounds. 

    Another complication for CSU’s financial aid plans – the scheduled expansion of the Cal Grant, which aids the state’s low-income students – was expected to also begin in 2024-25. But the Legislature must first approve funding. CSU’s institutional aid numbers to students would depend on the amounts students receive in other federal and state aid. 

    “This is a year like none other,” Evans said. “There are some additional complexities this year, given that not only has the application been revamped, but calculations are changing … so there is a lot of unpredictability in the process.”





    Source link

  • Community college faculty should all be allowed to work full time

    Community college faculty should all be allowed to work full time


    Students at Fresno City College

    Credit: Ashleigh Panoo/EdSource

    When most people think of part-time employment in the public sector, they assume that it (1) could be a steppingstone to a full-time job; (2) pays less than full-time, chiefly because it involves fewer hours of work; (3) is voluntary, and (4) is primarily meant to supplement a family’s income.

    When it comes to California’s 36,000 part-time community college professors, the facts defy all four assumptions.

    Unlike workers in other professions, part-time college instructors, regardless of length of service and/or quality of performance, will not be promoted to full-time unless they are lucky enough to secure an increasingly scarce full-time position teaching on the tenure track. Part-time instructors, many who work for decades off the tenure track, have been called “apprentices to nowhere.”

    Over the last five decades, colleges have gravitated toward part-time instructors for the flexibility of their semester-length agreements with no obligation to rehire, and their lower expense.  For example, while all full-time instructors receive state-paid health insurance, only about 10% (3,742) of the state’s part-timers do.

    Part-time instructor salaries are not pro-rated based on a typical full-time salary; instead, they are a separate scale which amounts to about 50-60% of the full-time instructor rate. To be clear, this doesn’t mean they receive 50-60% of the income of a full-time instructor: California law caps part-time faculty workload at no more than 67% of full-time. This workload cap, when combined with the discounted rate of pay, means that the average California part-time instructor teaching at 60% of full-time receives about $20,000 while the average annual income for full-time instructors is in excess of $100,000 a year. 

    Surveys conducted by the American Federation of Teachers in 2020 and 2022 found that roughly 25% of part-time community college faculty nationwide were below the federal poverty line.

    With no natural transition from part-time to full-time, this two-tier workplace takes on features of a caste system, especially as both full-time and part-time instructors satisfy the same credential requirements, award grades and credits that have the same value, and have the same tuition charged for their courses.

    While California college instructors are represented by faculty unions (primarily the California Federation of Teachers or the California Teachers Association), the priority of those unions would seem to be tenured faculty, as evidenced by the differences in the collectively bargained working conditions. 

    In the case of workload, for example, while part-time instructors are barred from teaching full-time, full-time instructors may elect to teach overtime, often called course overloads, for additional income. Full-time instructors displace part-time jobs whenever they do. In fact, full-timers generally get to choose their courses, including overloads, before part-timers are assigned courses.

    A bill being considered at present in the California Legislature is Assembly Bill 2277.  It would raise the current part-time workload restriction from 67% to 85% of full time, which, in theory, could enable some part-timers to teach more classes and earn more income. But if passed, AB 2277 would hardly solve the problem for part-time instructors.

    To make a more meaningful improvement, AB 2277 could be amended in two ways, neither of which make an impact on the state budget:

    • Remove the artificial workload cap outright, thereby enabling part-time instructors the opportunity to work up to 100% of full time when work is available. 
    • Impose a ban on full-time tenure-track instructors from teaching overtime (overloads).

    One possible source of opposition to these changes could be California’s faculty unions, which are dominated by full-timers. While supportive of earlier attempts at raising the cap to 85% (e.g., AB 897 in 2020, AB 375 in 2021, and AB 1856 in 2022) — neither union has shown a willingness to support elimination of the cap outright or curbing full-time overloads.

    In 2008, AB 591 adjusted the cap from 60% to the current 67%, but the first iteration of that bill proposed outright elimination of the cap (as does our suggested amendment), which was opposed by the CFT (see the April 16, 2007 legislative digest and commentary assembled in a California Part-Time Faculty Association (CPFA) report). 

    Another source of opposition could be those full-time instructors accustomed to teaching overtime/overloads; they could oppose losing that option, which underscores the conflict of interest in a two-tier workplace when more for one tier means less for the other.

    Gov. Gavin Newsom acknowledged that California “community colleges could not operate without part-time faculty” who “do not receive the same salary or benefits as their full-time colleagues” in his Oct. 8, 2021 veto of AB 375 based on budgetary concerns — the fear that the state’s 36,000 part-time instructors would suddenly qualify for health care. (That fear has since been addressed by a 400% increase in the state’s contribution to the Part-time Faculty Health Insurance Program from an annual $490,000 to $200 million.) In the meantime, part-time faculty continue to be barred from working full time. 

    Faculty unions and lawmakers should take a step toward abolishing California’s faculty involuntary part-time work restriction by allowing them to work full time and protecting their jobs. An amended version of AB 2277 is a no-cost way of doing so.

    •••

    Alexis Moore taught visual art at colleges and universities for over three decades and served on the executive board of the Pasadena City College Faculty Association of the California Community College Independents (CCCI). 

    Jack Longmate has long served on the Steering Committee of the Washington Part-Time Faculty Association and taught for over 28 years at Olympic College in Bremerton, Washington, where his ending annual salary was about $20,000 for teaching at 55% of an annual full-time teaching load. 

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the authors. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners

    Map: MMR and full vaccination rates in California kindergartners


    This interactive map shows kindergartners’ vaccination rates at more than 6,000 public and private schools across California. According to the state health department, at least 95% of students need the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) vaccine to maintain herd immunity and prevent outbreaks. Yet in many parts of the state — including areas around Sacramento, Oakland, the Central Valley, and Los Angeles — vaccination rates fall short of that threshold, raising concerns about community vulnerability.

    Data source: California Department of Public Health and EdSource Analysis





    Source link