برچسب: State

UC, Cal State, community colleges should work together to boost transfer rates, auditor says

The Transfer and Reentry Center in Dutton Hall at UC Davis helps transfers get acclimated to their new environment.

Credit: Karin Higgins/UC Davis

Few students who intend to transfer from California’s community colleges do so successfully. To reverse that trend, the state’s public college systems will need to work collaboratively.

That’s the finding of a report released Tuesday by the California State Auditor, which, at the direction of the state Assembly’s Joint Legislative Audit Committee, examined the state’s community college transfer system.

Only about 1 in 5 students who entered community college between 2017 and 2019 and intended to transfer did so within four years, the audit found. Rates were even lower for Black and Latino students, as well as for students from certain regions of the state, including the Central Valley.

Many students struggled to navigate what critics call a complex transfer system in California, with variations in transfer requirements across the University of California and California State University systems, the audit found.

The report recommends that UC and CSU work with the community college system to streamline the transfer process. UC should consider widely adopting the associate degree for transfer (ADT) model that is already in place at CSU, and the systems should also share more data, according to the audit’s recommendations. The Legislature could also step in and appropriate funding to help CSU and UC better align their transfer requirements.

Complexity leads to low transfer rates

Students wishing to transfer often face obstacles that prevent them from getting to a four-year university. If students are considering multiple four-year universities for transfer, that often means a different set of requirements for each.

For example, the auditor reviewed six potential four-year campuses to which a community college student studying computer science could transfer: UC Berkeley, UC Santa Barbara, UC San Diego, CSU San Marcos, San Diego State and Stanislaus State.

The course requirements vary greatly across the four-year campuses. UC San Diego and San Diego State require potential transfer students to complete a course in intermediate computer programming, whereas the other four campuses do not. UC San Diego is also the only campus to require an additional calculus course. Meanwhile, that campus does not require students to take differential equations, but UC Berkeley and UC Santa Barbara do.

The audit calls out the ADT as a promising model at CSU, but even that has shortcomings, the report notes. The ADT, created in 2010, is a two-year degree that is no more than 60 credits and is fully transferable to CSU.

Although completing the ADT guarantees a student admission into CSU, it does not guarantee students admission to a specific major campus. That’s a problem, the audit notes, because transfer-intending students are more likely to enroll if they’re admitted to their preferred program.

UC, meanwhile, has not adopted the ADT at all and instead relies on its own transfer programs, such as the transfer admission guarantee. That program does admit students to specific campuses and majors, but not all campuses participate in the program, and for those that do, some majors are excluded. UC’s three most selective campuses — Berkeley, Los Angeles and San Diego — are the three that do not offer the transfer admission guarantee.

Among the transfer-intending students who entered community college between 2017 and 2019, 21% transferred within four years and less than 30% did so within six years.

Among Black students, between 16.1% and about 17.3% successfully transferred within four years for each cohort. For Latino students, between 14.5% and 15.6% in each cohort transferred in that time frame. That compares to more than 28% of white students in each cohort and as many as 30% of Asian students.

There were also differences depending on a student’s location.

The audit found that community colleges in the San Francisco Bay Area and San Diego regions, for example, had higher transfer rates than colleges in the Central Valley, Inland Empire and northern parts of the state.

“One factor contributing to this difference may be the distances between community colleges and CSU and UC campuses in those regions. Students are more likely to transfer to a nearby university for a variety of reasons, including challenges associated with relocating,” the audit states.

That’s true for students at Lassen Community College in northeastern California, according to an administrator there. The administrator told auditors that “proximity is a major barrier” for transfer-intending students. The closest CSU or UC campus is Chico State, which is still more than a two-hour drive. In fact, about three-quarters of students who did transfer from Lassen went to an out-of-state university.

Streamlining transfer

The report offers several recommendations to lawmakers and the public college systems that could streamline the transfer process.

Auditors recommend that lawmakers consider providing funding to the colleges to align requirements and make the ADT more widely accepted across the state.

The community colleges and the four-year systems could also do their part to improve the ADT. For the community colleges, that means analyzing why certain community colleges don’t offer the ADT for some majors. CSU, auditors recommend, should do the same for campuses that don’t accept the ADT for certain majors and then determine whether their reasons make sense.

UC should either widely adopt the ADT model or, for campuses unwilling to do that, ensure that their transfer options “emulate the ADT’s key benefits for streamlining course requirements,” auditors say. Last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom did sign Assembly Bill 1291 to create a pilot program at UCLA in which students beginning in 2026-27 will get priority admission if they complete an associate degree in select majors. The pilot will eventually expand to more campuses, though some students and advocacy groups criticized the legislation because it won’t guarantee students admission to their chosen campus.

The audit also recommends better data-sharing between the three systems.

The community college system could share data with UC and CSU about students who intend to transfer, which UC and CSU could use to better tailor their advice to those students.

Additionally, UC and CSU could share more data with the community colleges about the students who successfully transfer, which could help the community colleges better evaluate their transfer efforts and determine which ones are most effective.

Sonya Christian, chancellor of the community college system, said in a letter responding to the audit that the system looks forward to working with UC, CSU and lawmakers to implement the report’s recommendations, but said there could be challenges, including with data-sharing.

Christian said consistent and timely data remains a “persistent challenge” for the system because of its decentralized nature, which requires each of the 73 local community college districts to individually report data to Christian’s office.

“The lack of a common data platform hampers our ability to collect timely and reliable data on transfer rates and gaps and hinders our ability to be able to accelerate transfer for the students of California through real-time data sharing with four-year system and institutional partners,” she said.

But, Christian added, she has made it a priority since becoming chancellor last year to improve those processes and “let the data flow.”

“I look forward to carrying forward recommendations around improvements to our data, research, and system-wide policy leadership,” she added.

Source link

10/05/2025
New Cal State Bakersfield president says campus should see Kern County’s education problems ‘as our own’

Vernon B. Harper Jr.

Courtesy of California State University, Bakersfield

Vernon B. Harper Jr. is scratching the word “interim” from his nameplate at California State University, Bakersfield.

Harper, who has served as the university’s interim president since the end of 2023, was named CSUB’s permanent president on Wednesday, the second day of a Cal State board of trustees meeting dominated by discussions about the financial pressures facing the university system. The system is projecting a $400 million to $800 million budget gap in 2025-26 as state leaders signal their intention to reduce funding for CSU.

CSU Bakersfield has been able to prevent students from feeling the effects of a reduced budget, Harper said, buoyed by growing enrollment this school year. His focus is on making what he calls a “pivot towards the community” — expanding programs to boost the number of Kern County high school graduates and community college transfer students who enroll at CSUB. The Central Valley is growing rapidly but has lower college attainment than the rest of the state.

Harper envisions the university taking a more active role alongside local K-12 schools to increase the number of students who meet A-G requirements, the coursework that makes students eligible to start college at a Cal State or University of California campus. Only 36% of Kern County high school graduates completed such coursework in the 2022-23 school year, according to state education data, compared with 52% of high school graduates statewide.

“That’s the real transition that the institution is making. It is to accept those problems as our own,” Harper said. “We’re partnering with our K-12 providers and making sure that we’re doing absolutely everything we can to raise that statistic. We’re not just going to sit back passively and watch our community go in a direction that we don’t want it to go.”

One example of the work Harper hopes to get done: CSUB’s teacher education program is forming a task force with the Kern County Superintendent of Schools Office and the Kern High School District in a bid to increase the number of students who are A-G qualified, he said.

The campus is also experimenting with ways to get local students thinking about college even before they leave middle school. It recently started a pilot program with four middle schools and four high schools in which students as young as 12 will receive notices that they are guaranteed admission to CSUB so long as they meet A-G requirements.

“We’ve seen that with young people, especially in under-resourced populations, their vision is truncated by their circumstance,” Harper said. “Whatever we can do, we have a responsibility to do, to extend that vision as far as it can go.”

The past decade has seen rising graduation rates at CSUB. Among first-time, full-time freshmen who entered Cal State Bakersfield in 2017, 49% graduated in six years, an almost 10 percentage-point increase from 2007. But the school has not caught up to some of its Cal State peers. Systemwide, the six-year graduation rate for the same group of students in the fall 2017 cohort was roughly 62%.

Harper said that the intervention that seems to have the most impact on improving graduation rates is pairing students with an academic adviser who works with them throughout their time at CSUB, guiding them through unforeseen challenges, like switching into a course that fits the student’s work schedule.

“As much as we can invest in that activity, the more positive outcomes that we (see),” he said.

The university is also experiencing some of the same longstanding graduation equity gaps that exist across California higher education. The six-year graduation rate among Black students who entered CSUB as freshmen in the fall 2017 cohort was 40%, lagging Asian, Latino and white students.

Harper has backed several CSUB initiatives to attract and retain Black students. Harper said that community college students at Bakersfield College who participate in the Umoja program, which includes courses on African American culture as well as mentorship and academic counseling, will find they can continue receiving similar support now that CSUB has its own Umoja program for transfers. The campus plans to open a Black Students Success Center in the spring and has already hired a group of faculty members whose work is focused on minoritized communities, Harper said.

Harper’s tenure as CSUB’s permanent president begins at a moment when the California State University system is raising financial alarm bells.

Cal State leaders are anticipating that a $164 million increase in revenue from tuition hikes will not be enough to alleviate other stresses on its budget. The system expects that state general fund revenue will drop nearly $400 million, according to a September budget presentation, and that $250 million in compact funding will be delayed. The university system also faces rising projected costs, including for basics it can’t avoid like increased health care premiums and utilities expenses.

Speaking at a Sep. 24 meeting, trustee Diego Arambula said the university system has “almost been too effective at making these cuts year over year over year” without explaining to legislators the impact those budget reductions are already having on students.

“We are doing everything we can to make them as far away from students, but a hiring freeze is a hiring freeze, and that does impact students if we’re not bringing someone into a role that we know is important,” Arambula said. “It’s impacting our staff, who are taking on more to try and still meet the needs of the students who are here.”

CSUB officials last spring said they planned to cut the school’s 2024-25 net operating budget by about 7%, citing a decline in enrollment and increased salary and benefits costs. The school had less than a month of funding in its rainy day fund in 2022-23, slightly less than the net operating budget across the CSU system at that point.

But Harper said enrollment this year is up between 4% and 5%, driving tuition growth that is alleviating some budget pressure. The campus also has made temporary cuts to areas that aren’t student-facing, he said, such as professional development.

“We’ve been able to really, really shield any negative effects on students,” Harper said.

Harper succeeds Lynnette Zelezny as president. He was previously Cal State Bakersfield’s provost and vice president for academic affairs. He will receive a salary of $429,981 and a $50,000 housing allowance.

Harper was first hired at CSUB in 2016. Prior to his arrival at Cal State Bakersfield, he worked at West Chester University of Pennsylvania, Wilkes University of Pennsylvania and the State Council for Higher Education of Virginia.

He holds a bachelor’s degree in communication from Pennsylvania State University, a master’s degree in rhetoric from West Chester University and a doctorate in human communication from Howard University. He served eight years in the U.S. Army Reserve.

Source link

10/05/2025
New York: State Education Commissioner Blasts Governor Hochul!

Dr. Betty Rosa has a long career in education as a teacher, principal, District Supervisor, Chair of the New State Regents and now the New York Commissioner of Education, selected by the Regents. She believes strongly that all schools should meet state standards, including the politically powerful yeshivas run by ultra-Orthodox Jews. They are politically powerful because they vote as a bloc. Presently they are loyal to Trump because of his commitment to giving taxpayer dollars to religious schools. At the state level, the yeshivas want to be free of the state requirement that they teach their students in English.

The Hasidic community was eager to persuade legislators to lower the standards for their schools. The State Education Department demanded that they comply with state law and provide a “substantially equivalent” education to their students. They prefer to teach in Hebrew or Yiddish or both. Yesterday the New York Times reported that Hochul was going along with the Hasidim. Terrible! She wants to run again, and she wants their support in 2026.

State Commissioner of Education Dr. Betty Rosa wrote the following letter to Governor Hochul:

Governor Hochul – you and legislative leaders have sold out children attending private schools in a most cynical manner- to curry favor with religious sects for purely political reasons.

The deficiencies in these schools are well documented by the State Education Department and in the media – most notably the New York Times. I know you are well aware of those findings.

As a former superintendent of schools and college president I encountered the deficiencies in yeshiva education first hand as we sought to help orthodox students achieve college degrees following “education” at a variety of yeshivas and seminaries. The yeshiva graduates were often illiterate, and could not demonstrate basic knowledge and skills let alone do college level studies. How could you allow this to continue?

Your failure to protect these children demonstrates lack of leadership and unwillingness to defend the basic rights of children to standards based educational opportunities that prepare them for life.

And then you have the audacity to pretend what you’ve done is just another option when it is a sham that will allow educational neglect to continue.

I have a long history of public service and educational leadership that put the interests of students first.

As a lifelong activist Democrat I am disgusted that you would not demonstrate principled leadership to stop this travesty.

Your attempt to appease the religious leaders who threaten your electoral success will almost certainly fail – and in the process you have alienated a significant number of us who would otherwise have voted for you once again.

Shame on you Governor.

Bravo, Dr. Rosa!

Source link

09/05/2025
Enrollment ticks up 2% at Cal State, its first increase since 2020

Cal State Fullerton commencement 2022

Credit: Cal State Fullerton/Flickr

California State University’s fall 2024 enrollment has risen to 461,000 students, driven by record gains among first-time, first-year students that nonetheless left the system short of its fall 2020 peak.

Preliminary data shows enrollment across the 23-campus system has inched up 2%, buoyed by more than 68,500 new first-year students this fall.

But Cal State has not yet returned to its 2020 high point, when enrollment hit 485,550 students. Headcount dipped for each of the next three school years, settling at 454,640 students in fall 2023.

In a news release, Chancellor Mildred García said the system is pursuing a “multi-year, holistic enrollment growth strategy” and is focused on recruiting and retaining students, including community college transfers.

“This promising upward momentum demonstrates the confidence that Californians have in the extraordinary power of a CSU degree to transform lives, particularly for America’s new majority, comprised of first-generation students, students of color, low-income students and adults seeking new opportunities,” García said.

Cal State reported a 7% increase in enrollment among transfer students, a 2% increase among graduate students and a 1% increase among continuing undergraduate students.

Preliminary figures show that 54% of CSU’s first-year students are Latino and that 4% of first-year students are Black. CSU did not break out data on Native American, Asian American and Pacific Islander student enrollment, nor was campus-level enrollment reported. The university system expects to release final systemwide numbers in November.

FAFSA fallout?

Increased enrollment at Cal State will be welcome news to observers who feared that the rocky rollout of the new Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) application might depress enrollment.

Changes to the application that debuted last year were designed make the process faster and more efficient for families. But delays and glitches plagued the new form, a critical step students must complete to find out whether they’re eligible for federal aid such as Pell Grants, loans and work-study programs.

The troubled FAFSA cycle sparked worries that students who were uncertain about their financial aid packages would put off enrolling in college this school year. Previous research has found that receiving grant aid boosts students’ persistence and degree completion.

Financial aid officers and advocates also voiced concern about how the new application was affecting California students from mixed-status families. Many of those students — those with at least one parent without a Social Security number — had trouble submitting the FAFSA form.

The delays prompted both Cal State and the University of California to extend their spring deadlines for new students to declare their intent to register for fall 2024 classes, a recognition that many families would need more time to better understand how much their education would cost.

California ultimately fared better than most other states in terms of FAFSA completions, according to data from the National College Attainment Network. The state notched a 56% FAFSA completion rate, exceeding a rate of roughly 52% among high school seniors nationwide. That’s despite a 7% year-over-year decline in the number of FAFSA completions in California.

Cal State credited financial aid staff at its universities with helping students to work through a frustrating FAFSA cycle and processing provisional financial aid offers quickly. (The news release cited a rise in federal Pell Grants at CSU, but did not say how much awards increased.)

Difficulties with the FAFSA rollout might also have been offset by California’s universal FAFSA completion policy, which was passed in 2021. Assembly Bill 132 tasks school districts with ensuring that graduating seniors complete the FAFSA or the California Dream Act Application, but gives students the ability to opt out of doing so. A recent report by the Public Policy Institute of California found that applications from high school seniors ahead of UC and CSU’s March 2 deadline climbed 16% in the policy’s first year.

Denise Luna, the director of higher education policy at research and advocacy nonprofit EdTrust-West, said in a written statement that Cal State’s preliminary numbers indicate that giving prospective students more time to consider the costs of a CSU education was not just the right thing to do, but also “the strategic thing to do.”

“This year’s applicants need the same flexibility,” she wrote. “Since financial aid application timelines are delayed again, we will be looking to the CSU to plan to once again extend their intent-to-register deadline in 2025.”

Post-pandemic prognosis

CSU’s preliminary fall headcount is also a step toward reversing pandemic-era enrollment declines.

Enrollment across the CSU system fell 1.7% in fall 2021, part of a nationwide drop during Covid-19. Seventeen of the system’s 23 campuses saw a year-over-year enrollment slump.

Cal State campuses reacted with strategies designed to entice students back, including programs to re-enroll students who stopped attending college with incentives like waived fees and priority registration.

But CSU enrollment continued to slide in fall 2022, a consequence of record-low enrollment at the state’s community colleges, which had the knock-on effect of fewer transfer students entering Cal State.

Demographic trends in the state’s K-12 system may also affect CSU’s student body going forward. In the 2022-23 school year, K-12 public school enrollment fell for the sixth consecutive year. The California Department of Finance projects a drop of more than 660,000 public K-12 students over the next decade if current fertility and migration trends continue.

Still, CSU sees this fall’s numbers as a good omen. Preliminary fall 2024 enrollment, though 5% below the 2020 peak, “signals additional growth in the coming years,” a system announcement said.

Source link

09/05/2025
Grant rollout fiasco: CDE announces $470 million in Golden State Pathways awards for a third time

Students in a Linked Learning Engineering Pathway.

Photo: Linked Learning Alliance

This story has been updated to include the news that the California Department of Education announced the awards for a third time.

Will the third time be a charm?

The California Department of Education announced the recipients of $470 million in grants for the Golden State Pathways Program, for a third time on Friday.

The ambitious effort is aimed at high schools creating career pathways in fields such as STEM, education and health care, but it has faced a troubled rollout.

CDE first announced the grant awards in May and then pulled them back in July. The announcement that the grants were revoked once again came on Oct. 1.

CDE said the agency temporarily removed the September grants results after school districts “questioned the funding results,” according to a statement from CDE spokesperson Scott Roark. This decision was made to “ensure the integrity of the grant distribution process, so that all [Local Educational Agencies] receive their allocated funds based on correct and verified data.”

Advocates call the Golden State Pathways an important investment to improve the economic mobility for the next generation of Californians. But they are frustrated that more than two years after the legislature approved the program, money has not begun to roll out.

“To our knowledge, the CDE hasn’t been forthcoming about why they’ve recalled these latest results, nor why we’re seeing yet another delay, which we find alarming,” said Denise Luna, the higher ed policy director for EdTrust-West. “What we need to see as soon as possible is grant award information that the CDE can stand by and for those monies to flow to districts immediately.”

The advocacy group was one of the signatories of a September letter calling on state leaders to release the promised funds by November.

The Golden State Pathways Program was approved by the legislature in 2022. The application called for grant proposals for programs that would begin in April. But the CDE didn’t announce the grant results until May 31. In July, CDE announced it was recalling and reviewing those grants.

CDE has offered no explanations about what caused the problems that led to the recall of the May grant results or those results announced Sept. 20.

After the July recall, administrators told EdSource that there were some clear red flags: some school districts had been awarded up to three times the amount of funding that they had applied for. Schools were counting on that money for this school year.

Roark acknowledged that this delay is “frustrating” but stated that the reevaluation was done to “ensure the integrity of the grant distribution process.”

“The review of these results is a top priority for CDE as we work to expedite the process and deliver final outcomes as quickly as possible,” he wrote, in a statement.

Tulare County Superintendent of Schools Tim Hire, who is heading the lead agency for the state, said that he is not sure what kind of technical issues the CDE is facing in rolling out these grants. However, he has seen the CDE take additional steps to ensure the grants are rolled out more smoothly, such as bringing on Erika Torres, deputy superintendent of strategy, policy and special projects.

“I think there’s been some movement and some effort by the CDE to improve the process,” he said.

Right now, everyone is in a “holding pattern,” said Hire, but these regional agencies are doing everything they can to prepare for the grants to be disbursed — and ultimately help students to have unique experiences and opportunities that prepare them for fulfilling careers.

“We’re continuing to plan and try to do everything we can to prepare the regional leads,” he said, “so that when the allocations come — and everyone agrees that they’re appropriate and accurate — they can fast-track the work of the districts.”

Source link

08/05/2025
San Francisco schools must avoid state takeover at all costs, education veteran warns

A sign in support of public school is seen outside a home next to Sutro Elementary School in San Francisco on Oct. 9, 2024. The school is among the 11 schools previously proposed for closure within San Francisco Unified School District amid decline in enrollment and budgetary woes.

Credit: Stephen Lam/San Francisco Chronicle via AP

San Francisco must do everything it can to avert a state takeover of its schools.

That’s the stark message brought by Carl A. Cohn, the only outside educator to be brought in to help the team of city administrators set up by Mayor London Breed to help the school district overcome multiple crises, including a looming budget shortage, declining enrollment, and the departure of its superintendent, the second in two years.

“I remain a huge fan of local control,” said Cohn, a revered figure in education circles in California and nationally. “I fundamentally believe that if historically underserved students are going to be rescued, it is going to be by locals, not by state government or higher levels of authority.”

Carl A. Cohn

The challenges facing the 48,000-student district are being experienced to some degree by many others around the state. Just across the San Francisco Bay, Oakland Unified and West Contra Costa Unified, which includes Richmond, are grappling with comparable challenges.

San Francisco’s, however, seem especially acute.

“I think the loss of federal pandemic relief funds, coupled with declining enrollments will make things difficult for most districts, but San Francisco is probably ahead of the curve on this,” he said.

There’s little that Cohn, who projects calm and reassurance but can also be disarmingly direct, has not seen in his 50 years in an array of roles in public education.

He was superintendent of the San Diego and Long Beach school districts, the second- and third-largest in California after Los Angeles Unified (LAUSD). His 10-year tenure at Long Beach was especially noteworthy for fostering academic excellence and accountability, resulting in the district winning the prestigious Broad Prize For Urban Education.

He was appointed to the State Board of Education by then Gov. Jerry Brown, who later recruited him to lead a new state agency, the California Collaborative for Education Excellence.

He has been brought in to deal with various trouble spots over the years. He co-chaired a commission of the National Academy of Sciences to look into whether District of Columbia schools had exaggerated their academic results under the leadership of Michelle Rhee, then arguably the best-known, and most controversial, school superintendent in the nation.

He was the court-appointed monitor overseeing a consent decree to improve special education in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Currently, he is co-leading an initiative with Harvard professor Jennifer Cheatham to prepare school superintendents to cope with the political polarization roiling school districts across the country.

He has also been a mentor to generations of school superintendents, and trained many of them as a professor at Claremont Graduate University, and at the University of Southern California before that.

Cohn has never had to close schools himself and says that San Francisco must do everything it can to find alternatives to doing so. That is similar to a mindset Breed appears also to have embraced, and was a major reason behind the resignation of Superintendent Matt Wayne last week.

For now, at least, school closure plans are on hold. “The challenge with closing schools from a symbolic point of view is that it can be seen as the beginning of the death of a community,” Cohn says.

“There are multiple ways to cut a school district budget,” he says. “And if you have to, there are ways to do it so it is not a huge negative.”

He recalls being sent to Inglewood Unified a dozen years ago by then-State Board President Michael Kirst to take stock of the deep financial hole the Southern California district was in.

He found a lackadaisical attitude among school officials about the prospect of a state administrator with the power to overrule local decisionmaking. “They seemed to think the takeover wasn’t such a big deal, that after the bailout they would get their authority back,” he says. “And here we are, 12 years later, with the district nowhere near having an elected school board with any authority.”

The district is still overseen by an administrator appointed by the county.

Cohn has yet to meet Breed, but two weeks ago he came from Palm Springs, where he is based, to meet with the mayor’s School Stabilization Team made up of top San Francisco officials, co-led by Maria Su, the longtime head of the city’s Department of Children, Youth and Their Families. In an unexpected move last week, the school board appointed Su to be the new superintendent, at least until June 2026.

He points out that, unlike other large urban districts in California, the city of San Francisco commendably contributes funding to its schools, which means it has a more direct stake in their functioning.

What is essential is strict oversight over how the district spends its money, he says. He recalls the first day he was given a tour of the administration offices at Long Beach Unified as a 31-year-old educator in the district.

On the second floor was a tiny office with a sign on the door reading “Position Control” right next to the budget office. He was told it was the most powerful office in the district — one that determined what staff could be hired at a school. “Even if you were the superintendent you could not get a position filled unless Position Control said it was in the current budget.”

In addition, each year the district’s research office issued what was called a “quota bulletin,” which decreed how many employees a school qualified for based on its enrollment. Its edicts, he says, were “treated as a sacred document that had been handed down from Mt. Sinai.”

A similar parsimonious ethos is in place in parochial schools. “What is notable about these schools is that they are not over resourced,” said Cohn, who advises the California Catholic Conference on its schools. “You won’t find an assistant principal, a counselor, a reading specialist unless the school has the enrollment to support it.”

“My impression is that these types of controls were not present in the San Francisco school system,” he says. “It’s important for spending to be based on actual enrollment and not on wishful spending.”

He says it would be important to bring all key parties together — the mayor’s stabilization team, incoming Superintendent Su and her deputy, board representatives, State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team, a state-sponsored oversight agency — and put them all in the same room to have a “candid conversation.”

“Getting a handle on what exactly they need to do to retain local control seems like a real important value,” he said.

One thing schools can have no impact on is declining birthrates, Cohn points out. So other strategies to attract and retain students will be needed.

He notes that San Francisco has many private, parochial and charter groups — more than most communities. He suggests conducting focus groups with people who are opting out of more traditional public schools to find out more precisely “what it is that those schools are offering that San Francisco isn’t.”

That could suggest strategies that San Francisco could offer — from more child care to innovative magnet schools — to support families and to encourage them to enroll their children in district schools.

San Francisco schools are especially vulnerable to being taken over by the state. In recent years, when the state bails out a district financially, authority to appoint an administrator has been delegated to the county offices of education. But because San Francisco is both a city and a county, it would be subject to, in Cohn’s words,”an old-fashioned state administrator.”

With Mayor Breed up for reelection in two weeks, and with four of seven school board seats also on the ballot, the district faces many unknowns.

Regardless of what happens on Election Day, Cohn says a fundamental issue the district has to address is “what kinds of resources a school gets based on its enrollment so that future spending doesn’t spiral out of control because someone thinks ‘I need this’ or “I need that.’”

Source link

07/05/2025
Cal State posts uneven graduation progress as initiative finish line approaches

Cal State Northridge is one of 23 CSU System institutions.

Larry Gordon/EdSource

As the end of a decadelong push to graduate more students nears, California State University made slight progress in 2024 on increasing the four-year graduation rate for freshmen but saw six-year freshman rates stall and four-year transfer rates drop, new statistics show.

Those numbers show the difficulties the university system faces in its final efforts to improve its graduation rates, even after significant overall improvement toward ambitious goals over the previous nine years.

The data were presented Tuesday at a two-day symposium on graduation goals ahead of spring 2025, when the system’s much-scrutinized Graduation Initiative 2025 effort is supposed to end. California State University (CSU) officials urged colleagues to learn more about why many students are dropping out or taking so long to finish.

Across the CSU system, freshman six-year graduation rates have plateaued at around 62%, the same as in 2023 and 8 percentage points below the system’s graduation goal for 2025. Freshman four-year graduation rates ticked up to 36% in 2024, a 1 point gain from the previous year. But they fell shy of the system goal to hit 40% by 2025.

Transfer students’ performance was a mixed bag. Cal State is just 1 percentage point from reaching its goal of a 45% two-year graduation rate for transfers, a decent increase from 41% in 2023. But among transfer students who entered CSU in 2020, four-year graduation rates dropped from 79% in 2023 to 75% this year, putting them 10 points below the Graduation Initiative 2025 target.

CSU also tracks graduation rates for its 23 campuses, all of which have been assigned varying goals. But the university system has not published campus graduation rates for 2024 to a dashboard available online, and those were not included in the public report Tuesday.

Though the system’s current graduation rates compare favorably to similar public universities, Chancellor Mildred García said they are “not good enough.”

About 25,000 first-time students who entered CSU in 2018 did not graduate in six years, Garcia noted. “That’s 25,000 students whose dreams are deferred, 25,000 students who left — and because of the cost of living in the state, are leaving with debt,” she said. “We’re not going to take responsibility for that? I think we have to, we have to talk about the elephant in the room and really examine, again: Are support services really helping? Are we listening to our students?”

García said the university system must also do more to connect recent graduates with careers, like a Cal State graduate she encountered working in a hospitality job who said they can’t find work in their desired field.

“Where is our responsibility there?” she said. “There’s so many options for them. How are we teaching them about the amazing career options that are out there, so they could know which way they want to go?”

García’s remarks followed a presentation about the system’s graduation and persistence rates by Jennifer Baszile, the associate vice chancellor for student success and inclusive excellence.

The system is yet to close the gap between students without Pell Grants (more affluent students) and lower-income students receiving such assistance. Among the CSU cohort that started in fall 2017, roughly 68% of more affluent students without Pell Grants graduated in six years. Among Pell Grant recipients, that figure was just 56%.

Officials have previously attributed at least part of their trouble closing equity gaps to the coronavirus pandemic, which added pressure on students who have to work or care for family members.

Cal State also touted some good news. Since the effort began, the system has nearly doubled its four-year graduation rate, Baszile said. A Cal State analysis comparing CSU to state systems like the City University of New York and the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education — after making adjustments to leave out top-tier research institutions — found that CSU’s six-year graduation rates for freshmen was near the top of the pack.

Higher graduation rates are also a good deal for students. Baszile noted that getting their degrees faster means money in the pockets of Cal State graduates, since they can join the workforce sooner and save on the additional fees and tuition they would have paid if it took longer to finish their programs.

A closer look at how some students fared

The past 10 years have seen notable demographic changes at Cal State. The university saw its incoming freshman classes grow 31% between 2009 and 2019. During the same period, the population of first-generation, Pell Grant and/or historically underserved students increased by 50%, according to Baszile’s presentation.

Baszile then turned to persistence rates, which measure the percentage of students who return to a campus after each year of education.

Overall, the analysis found that 84% of first-time students in the 2018 cohort came back to campus for a second year. But equity gaps emerged early. First-year persistence among students who were Latino, male and first-generation was 78%, lagging 6 points behind the system average.

Disparities were amplified in subsequent years. The divide ultimately fed into lower graduation rates: 48% of Latino, male and first-generation students graduated in six years, again trailing the 62% graduation rate among all students in the 2018 cohort.

“More than 50% of the Latino, male, first-generation students who started in 2018 are no longer with us. They are gone,” Baszile said. “We might be able to help them re-enroll. There’s always a chance. But think about on your university campuses: How much energy, how much effort, how much investment is required to have students fully depart and have to identify them, re-engage them and bring them back?”

How to stop students from ‘leaking out of the pipeline’

Baszile and Dilcie D. Perez, Cal State’s deputy vice chancellor of academic and student affairs, urged colleagues to learn more about the specific reasons why students leave CSU — in the hopes of preventing more students from following them out the door.

Students, Perez said in remarks following the presentation, are “leaking out of the pipeline.” She said a Cal State initiative to welcome back students who have stopped out has been difficult to establish, hampered by bureaucracy and processes.

“We’ve got to find a way to go get those students and bring them back,” Perez recalled saying to Baszile in one of the many conversations the two have had about improving student persistence. “And (Baszile) was like, ‘Yes, but how about we never lose them?’”

President Richard Yao of Cal State Channel Islands said his campus has started using exit surveys. The first challenge is getting a response; once students leave, he said, they can be hard to reach. The next is making sense of the idiosyncratic reasons students depart.

“When we look at the exit data, why students are leaving, it is not just one thing,” Yao said. “The variability is off the charts, and it’s so individual. So for us, right now, we’re struggling.”

One throughline in the data, he said, is that students who leave are struggling academically. But he encouraged colleagues to look beyond academic performance, too.

“We have to identify what’s happening in that first year in our classrooms, in our residential areas, in our co-curricular — what is it that may be contributing to those poor outcomes, whether it be mental health, basic needs — and maybe taking a deeper dive into what is contributing to those poor academic outcomes as well,” he said.

Source link

06/05/2025
Graduation rates up at most Cal State campuses, but some worsen

Cal State Fullerton commencement 2024.

Credit: Cal State Fullerton/Flickr

While 14 Cal State universities notched six-year graduation rate increases over the previous year, nine schools in the system saw their rates decline.

San Jose (+ 4.6 percentage points), East Bay (+ 2.4 percentage points) and Fresno (+ 2.1 percentage points) were among the campuses with the greatest increases in six-year graduation rate. Those figures represent the difference in completion among first-time, full-time freshman students who started in 2018 and those who began in 2017.

But several campuses’ graduation rates slipped year-over-year, with the deepest dips at three of Cal State’s smallest campuses. Cal Maritime posted the biggest downswing, falling 7 percentage points. Stanislaus (- 4.6 percentage points) and Monterey Bay (- 4.1 percentage points) recorded the next-largest decreases. Two of Cal State’s largest campuses — San Diego (- 1.8 percentage points) and Long Beach (- 1 percentage point) — also saw six-year freshman rates go down slightly.

That’s according to campus-level statistics the system unveiled this week, coinciding with Cal State’s November board of trustees meeting. The university system is nearing the end of a decadelong campaign to graduate more students, which will conclude in spring 2025. It has made marked improvement toward hitting top-line goals across the system, but is falling short on some targets. Cal State officials have said that the pandemic set back progress on some graduation metrics. They also cite a need to focus on retaining students entering their second and third years of school, particularly students of color.

Cal State knows “that we have a leak, that in that second to third year we’re losing a significantly high number of our students of color and probably male students of color, quite honestly,” said Dilcie D. Perez, Cal State’s chief student affairs officer. “We’re bringing them in. But if the mechanism doesn’t change, we’re going to lose students.”

Systemwide data presented last month shows that Cal State’s freshman four-year graduation rate across all campuses increased slightly during the 2023-24 school year over the previous year, but that its six-year freshman rate plateaued and four-year transfer rate fell.

Cal Maritime, the university system’s smallest campus, was an outlier in terms of how much graduation rates fell from spring 2023 to spring 2024. The school, which specializes in shipping and oceanography programs, experienced the system’s greatest decrease in four-year graduation rates among students transferring from the California Community Colleges over the past two school years. Flagging enrollment has plunged the school into financial difficulty, which culminated this week in a vote to merge the maritime academy with Cal Poly San Luis Obispo in order to keep it afloat.

Eight other campuses including Bakersfield (- 3 percentage points) showed declines in four-year transfer graduation rates. Humboldt (+ 5.8 percentage points) and Monterey Bay (+ 4.1 percentage points) gained the most, comparing four-year transfer graduation rates for the 2018 cohort to their peers a year earlier.

Systemwide, Cal State is aiming to have 40% of first-year students graduate in four years and 70% of first-year students graduate in six years by spring 2025. Individual campuses also have their own graduation rate targets, which can be more or less ambitious than those that apply to the system as a whole.

None of the system’s universities met their individual campuses’ graduation rate targets for first-time, six-year graduation rates among students who started in 2018. There has been more success on four-year rates. San Diego, Long Beach, San Jose, Sacramento and Northridge met their four-year target for first-time students who started in 2020.

Source link

02/05/2025
State Board criticized for soft-pedaling reporting on low student test scores

Students exchange ideas in a science classroom.

Credit: Allison Shelley / EDUimages

Clarity matters when explaining to parents how their children did on standardized tests. An imprecise characterization of a complicated score can mislead parents into assuming their kids performed better than they did.

That issue is at the heart of the opposition to draft revisions to descriptions of students’ scores on the Smarter Balanced assessments that are sent home to parents. While the degree of difficulty of the tests and their scoring wouldn’t change, the characterization of the results would, like replacing the term “standard not met” with “inconsistent” for the lowest scores.

Parent focus groups this week

The California Department of Education is scheduling three online focus groups to gather thoughts, questions and concerns on proposed changes to how scores on the Smarter Balanced statewide assessments will be reported publicly. The meetings are for parents, teachers and students.

Tuesday, Dec. 3, 6 to 7 p,m.: Session 1, in English

Wednesday, Dec. 4, 7 to 8 p.m. Session 2, in English for students only

Thursday, Dec. 5, 6 to 7 p.m. Session 3, in Spanish

Go here to register and complete this interest form to participate.

The State Board of Education delayed its adoption at its November meeting because of criticism that the revised wording may compound, not solve, current unclear language.

Board members listened to children’s advocacy groups who chided state officials for not first consulting with teachers and parents before taking any action — which state officials acknowledged they hadn’t done.

In a letter to the state board about the proposed changes, particularly the labeling of low test scores, nine student advocacy groups — the Alliance for Students — argued that the revised language “will only serve to obfuscate the data and make it even more challenging for families and advocates to lift the needs of our most underserved students.” Signers of the letter include Teach Plus, Children Now, and Innovate Public Schools.

Getting the terms right is important for the assessment scores to be useful to parents and teachers, Sarah Lillis, executive director of Teach Plus California, told EdSource. “We want to make sure the signals sent by the descriptors foster dialogue” and encourage parents to ask the right questions.

“We echo the concerns of our colleagues,” testified Lindsay Tornatore, representing the California County Superintendents at the board’s Nov. 13 meeting. “Outreach to parents, families and the community should have been prioritized to engage in multiple opportunities prior to the changes being made.”

In response, the California Department of Education hastily scheduled online presentations this week for parents and teachers, with the expectation that they will consider any recommendations at their next meeting in January.

How scores are reported

A student’s scores on the Smarter Balanced tests in English language arts and math and on the California Science Test fall within one of four achievement levels that provide context on how the student performed. Level 4, with the highest attainable scores, is also labeled “Standard Exceeded.” Level 3 is labeled Standard Met; Level 2 is Standard Nearly Met, and Level 1 is Standard Not Met. Many of the dozen states and territories that give Smarter Balanced use the same definitions.

The target is to score at least Level 3, which indicates a student is working at grade level. In the 2023-24 results, fewer than half of students achieved Levels 3 or 4: 53% scored at levels 1 or 2 in English language arts, and 64.5% scored at Levels 1 or 2 in math. The tests are given to students in grades three through eight and grade 11.

Statewide scores were worse in science, which is given to students in grades five, eight, and once in high school, 69.3% failed to meet Level 3 — the grade-level standard — in 2023-24.

In response to criticism that the existing labels are vague, imprecise and confusing, Smarter Balanced representatives decided to create a new set of labels and brief descriptions, which states have the option to use. This is particularly so for Level 2 — the “Standard Nearly Met” label. Many parents don’t understand what nearly meeting grade-level standards in particular means.

Under the Smarter Balanced draft for the scoring bands, Level 4 would become “Advanced,” Level 3 would be “Proficient,” Level 2 would be “Foundational,” and Level 1 would be “Inconsistent.”

A draft description for Level 2 in language arts for third to fifth grade would read, “The student demonstrates foundational grade-level skills and shows a basic understanding of and ability to apply the knowledge and skills in English language arts/literacy needed for likely success in future coursework.”

In letters and in remarks at the board meeting, critics indicated they’re fine with “Advanced” and “Proficient” but are unhappy with the labels Foundational and Inconsistent for Levels 1 and 2.

“The language is confusing and not engaging for families with the first two levels,” said Joanna French, director of research and policy strategies for Innovate Public Schools. “If a student is not at grade level, be direct about that. You cannot address a problem you cannot see.”

Tonya Craft-Perry, a 15-year teacher who is active in the Black Parent Network of Innovate Public Schools, said that “’Foundational’ could lead parents to believe their children are doing better than they are. It makes the district and teachers look better, but if a low score requires intervention, a parent needs to know that,” she said.

Several board members indicated that one easy remedy would be to include language in the revision’s current descriptions. The wording makes clear that a student scoring in Level 2 “may require further development” to demonstrate the knowledge and skills to succeed in future grades or, for older students, in college courses after high school. Students scoring in Level 1 “needs substantial improvement” to succeed.

News media oversimplifies

In a two-page explanation, Smarter Balanced blamed the news media for much of the misunderstanding over the current wording of the labels.

“The media often incorrectly reports that students who aren’t proficient ‘can’t do math’ or ‘can’t read.’ This is not true. The Smarter Balanced assessments are aligned to grade-level content, and students who achieve Levels 2, 3, and 4 do, in fact, demonstrate a continuum of grade-level knowledge and skills,” it said.

Students at all three of those levels are showing that they “understand core content,” said Linda Darling-Hammond, president of the California State Board of Education, at the board meeting.

But as scores progress from one level to the next, students convey increasing accuracy and complexity in their knowledge and skills. Smarter Balanced said students demonstrate this in how they respond to more complex reading passages, concepts and advanced vocabulary, or in math, the number of elements in equations and difficult word problems.

Rob Manwaring, a senior adviser to the advocacy group Children Now, said that the new labels would feed the “reality gap in the perceptions of parents that their kids are doing better than they are” in school. In an often-cited 2023 parent survey in communities nationwide, survey firm Gallup and the nonprofit parent advocacy organization Learning Heroes found that, based on their kids’ report cards, parents’ perceptions were out of whack with how their children did on assessments. In Sacramento County, where 28% of students were proficient in math tests, 85% of parents believed their children were proficient.

“Now we are suggesting that students scoring below standard are foundational. Many parents will conclude, ‘My kid is doing fine,’” Manwaring said.

Source link

01/05/2025
Enrollment climbs at some Cal State campuses, tumbles at others

Students walking on the campus of Cal State San Marcos on Dec. 3, 2024.

Credit: Amy DiPierro / EdSource

Diego Lopez, a student in his last year at Cal State San Marcos, gives the north San Diego County campus high marks. The Army veteran likes his classes, feels the campus is generally well-managed and appreciates that at the school’s current size, “you can just chill, and relax, and not get too overwhelmed.”

But Lopez can tell the student body is expanding, especially at the start of the semester, when he has to navigate crowded parking lots.

“The parking lots are so full, so you have to make sure you get here early. And then just right across the street, you see all the construction being done,” he said. “You can definitely tell: This school is growing a lot, and it’s growing fast.”

The number of students at the suburban Cal State San Marcos campus has mushroomed over the past decade. It’s now home to 14,655 students, an almost 15% jump since 2015, among the sharpest increases of any Cal State campus in that period.

But that is not the case across the 23 campuses of the California State University system. Overall system enrollment has settled at 2.7% lower than a decade ago after tumbling more deeply during the pandemic. And behind that number is a more complicated picture, with some individual campuses showing double-digit percent increases even as others have experienced big decreases.

While San Marcos students have raced to find parking in the first weeks of recent academic years, Sonoma State students in contrast can usually find dozens of empty spaces in the Bay Area school’s main parking lot. The campus has suffered the worst enrollment loss in the university system, contracting from 9,408 students in 2015 to 5,784 students in 2024. Recent statistics suggest it had the highest dorm vacancy rate in the Cal State system in spring 2023, prompting the university to open some housing to nonstudents.

Falling enrollment has prompted a period of tight finances at the Sonoma State campus. Tess Wilkinson, a fourth-year transfer student studying communications, said she saw fewer courses being offered. She suspects budget cuts are one reason why.

“I even noticed some professors that had regularly taught courses in my major were no longer on the course schedule at all,” she said. “Some courses were thrown together to accommodate abrupt faculty changes — and student engagement in my classes felt like it had decreased.”

The divergence between San Marcos and Sonoma shows how the enrollment challenge facing the nation’s largest university system defies a one-size-fits-all solution about how to serve students and where to spend money around the state.

The trend continued this fall, with enrollment up from the year before at 15 campuses and down at eight. That uneven distribution of new students is in part due to regional differences in population, the cost of living and labor markets. It may also reflect whether they cater primarily to commuters or on-campus residents, offer higher- or lower-demand degrees and serve more or fewer students sensitive to last year’s federal financial aid delays.

Enrollment at community colleges, a major feeder into Cal State, also slipped during the pandemic, though student headcount has started to recover. Going forward, Cal State will have to grapple with a long-predicted decline in the number of recent high school graduates in California. The Public Policy Institute of California, a think tank, nonetheless projects that CSU enrollment will continue an upward trajectory through 2035, thanks to larger shares of high school students completing college preparatory courses and higher college-going rates.

Even in a year when enrollment across the Cal State system rose a modest 1.5%, some campus leaders enjoyed a banner college acceptance season. Cal State Monterey Bay, whose 16% enrollment bump was the system’s largest 2023-24, sold out on-campus housing for the first time in a decade this fall, according to Ben Corpus, its vice president for enrollment management and student affairs.

At the other extreme, lower-enrolled CSU campuses must contend with the financial fallout from less revenue from tuition and fees. Sonoma State and Cal State Los Angeles, which notched the largest year-to-year enrollment drop in the system, have instituted hiring freezes and cut course sections to bridge funding gaps.

Starting this school year, Cal State also has reallocated funding to universities that exceeded enrollment targets or showed they have higher demand and away from those with dropping enrollments. Anticipated cuts in state funding because of overall state budget conditions may have additional ripple effects, even at campuses with flourishing student bodies.

Those stakes have not escaped the notice of campuses at both ends of the enrollment yo-yo. EdSource interviewed students, faculty and administrators at Sonoma State and Cal State San Marcos about how they think course offerings, student clubs, construction and, yes, parking are changing as their schools get bigger or smaller.

Students walk on the campus of Sonoma State University.
Credit: Ally Valiente / EdSource

Sonoma State

An hour north of San Francisco, Sonoma State University celebrates its location on the edge of the Russian River Valley by naming its dorms for wine varietals and regions from Beaujolais to Zinfandel.

But wildfires have destroyed thousands of homes in this region of the state since 2017, a shock from which its population and already expensive housing market are still recovering. That has made it harder to recruit students from other parts of the state, who are a significant part of the student body, officials said. Sonoma State’s enrollment has slid almost 39% since 2015. Cal State’s 2022-23 financial statements put the school’s average residence hall occupancy at just 65%. The university has opened some of its student housing to faculty, staff, students with young children or even people visiting campus for a conference.

Collapsing enrollment over the decade slowed to a 1% dip this year. Still, the smaller student body has prompted a serious cash crunch. Sonoma State, which has a $130 million operating budget this school year, anticipates a $21 million budget deficit going into 2025-26.

“It’s pretty simplistic sort of math: We just don’t have enough students paying the tuition to fully cover all of the expenses we have,” Emily F. Cutrer, the university’s interim president, said at an Oct. 28 town hall to discuss Sonoma State’s budget forecast.

Cutrer said the university would have to add more than 3,000 students — a 52% increase over fall 2024 — to cover its current deficit, a goal she estimated is likely three or four years away. The loss of tuition and fee revenue is compounded by rising employee benefits costs, state funding cuts and an estimated $3.6 million that Cal State is expected to reallocate to other campuses.

Sonoma State is under a hiring freeze and is also pressing pause on some travel. The campus in recent years has offered employees early retirements and buyouts. Part-time and full-time lecturer headcount has fallen almost 25% in the last several years, a spokesperson said. Sonoma State notified the faculty union in October that layoffs could be on the way.

“I would ask people to stop asking us to do more with less. It’s exhausting,” Lauren S. Morimoto, who chairs the university’s department of kinesiology, said at the town hall. “We’re demoralized and we’re burnt out.”

Sonoma State’s struggles are a comedown from a campaign under then-President Ruben Armiñana to bill the university as a “public Ivy” – offering plush new facilities at a state university price – in the 1990s through 2010s. Armiñana’s critics charged that the strategy attracted a wealthier and whiter student body compared with the state’s other public universities.

Judy Sakaki succeeded Armiñana in 2016 with the explicit goal of making Sonoma State more accessible and less elitist. Sakaki’s 2022 resignation ushered in a period of leadership turnover; Cutrer is the third person to lead the university since then.

Tim Wandling, who chairs the English department and serves on the board of the California Faculty Association at Sonoma State, said he’s concerned about leadership instability on campus. He also worries that the university’s top brass “want to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on marketing blitzes and new programs, and what they really need to do is just downsize their administrative staff and focus on keeping the good faculty that they have, the good students they have.”

Sonoma State is not alone among Bay Area universities hurting for students. San Francisco State and Cal State East Bay are facing similar declines.

Sonoma State’s relative distance from major population centers has long encouraged admissions staff to look outside their own backyard for prospective students.

Sonoma currently draws 35% of its students from its home county, an additional 63% from elsewhere in California and 1.6% from out of state. University administrators and attendees speaking at the October town hall appeared to favor an all-of-the-above recruitment strategy.

Locally, the campus has struck guaranteed admissions deals with several of the region’s school districts and community colleges. And looking outside Sonoma State’s immediate region, the university is also recruiting in Southern California, looking at ways of retaining students it already has and bringing back students who do not immediately re-enroll each term.

Students work at a library on the campus of Cal State San Marcos on Dec. 3, 2024.
Credit: Amy DiPierro / EdSource

Cal State San Marcos

On a mild December afternoon, Cal State San Marcos student Diana Ortega Caballero was reading a book on a terrace overlooking construction cranes. Building sites are among the most visible cues of how the campus is expanding after some pandemic dips.

Ortega Caballero, a transfer student from MiraCosta Community College in nearby Oceanside, said she had “a really easy transition” to San Marcos. Almost a third of San Marcos students start at a California community college.

San Marcos is in good company among Southern California’s CSU campuses that have welcomed more students over the past decade due to regional population growth. San Diego State University is leading the system in enrollment gains since 2015, followed closely by Cal Poly Pomona and San Marcos.

Campus leaders have also taken concrete steps to steer more students to campus. Administrators have signed a series of guaranteed admissions agreements with school districts and other local education entities. They’ve also coordinated coursework with Murrieta Valley Unified School District and Mt. San Jacinto College to aid students earning software engineering degrees.

Students interviewed at the campus said they’re largely satisfied with San Marcos. Several noted that the campus feels more accessible than larger CSU campuses. But they conceded experiencing occasional snags as the campus expands, like trouble getting into certain classes or a long wait time to see an academic adviser.

Jackson Puddy, who is studying business administration, was standing outside the library waiting for students to arrive for a pickup chess game. He hoped the school’s growing enrollment would bring more money, more professors and perhaps even more members for the small chess club he runs. The only con? “The parking situation — it’s not going to get any better,” he said, even if students can now reliably find a space in a dirt lot downhill from the main quad.

Students recently approved a $210 per-semester fee increase to fund a new wellness and recreation center. Plans call for a turf field on a rooftop deck, indoor courts, cardio and strength training facilities and 550 beds for student housing. In addition, the campus opened a new dorm for 300 students two years ago and is currently building another one for 500.

Cal State system statistics suggest San Marcos has some of the busiest classroom and laboratory space of any school in the CSU system. One of the school’s most urgent goals is to meet surging demand for its engineering program, which began in 2019 with 300 students and has ballooned to 2,000. Campus leaders plan to build a three-story, $110 million building to house its College of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics. The project is expected to break ground in July 2025.

San Marcos’ growth does not immunize it from the belt-tightening other CSU campuses have begun in anticipation of lower state funding. At a board of trustees meeting in September, President Ellen Neufeldt said a lack of additional faculty could lead to larger class sizes and noted that the school has deferred maintenance on aging electrical systems.

“The challenge we now face is that while we are growing, we are unable to hire the essential employees needed to support our mission of student success,” Neufeldt said. “We urgently require more advisers, success coaches, tutors, financial aid specialists and counselors, and the list goes on and on, to assist our amazing students.”

Ally Valiente, a student at Sonoma State University and a member of the Student Journalism Corps, contributed to this story.

Source link

29/04/2025