June 11, 2014
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sanfrancisco/accrediting-commission-throws-ccsf-a-lifeline/Content?oid=2820925
By Laura Dudnick
ldudnick@sfexaminer.com

·                         The body overseeing CCSF’s accreditation announced a proposal that would give the school more time to comply with requirements it needs to fill to stay alive.

After much uncertainty for California’s largest community college, a ray of hope has been cast upon embattled City College of San Francisco as it fights to regain accreditation.

On Wednesday, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, which last summer voted to revoke CCSF’s accreditation effective this July, proposed a new policy that would give CCSF more time to meet accrediting requirements.

Under the proposed policy, an institution that lost accreditation for failing to meet ACCJC standards could apply for “accreditation restoration status.”

The policy, which will undergo a public-comment period and must be approved by the U.S. Department of Education, could give CCSF the time it needs to come into full compliance with the ACCJC.

School leaders have told the commission they need at least 18 more months to reach that goal.

“While ACCJC concern about CCSF noncompliance remains, the commission also recognizes the need to balance the impact of such a decision on students with its commitment to holding CCSF and all postsecondary institutions accountable in meeting core standards,” read an ACCJC statement released Wednesday.

Restoration differs from candidacy status, which the commission had previously urged CCSF to seek. Candidacy would have required CCSF to withdraw its accreditation, a move Chancellor Art Tyler refused. With restoration status, however, a school would remain accredited.

Tyler told The San Francisco Examiner on Wednesday that he needed more time to digest the letter before he could comment.

Another CCSF official, spokesman Jeff Hamilton, said no decision on possibly applying for the special status has been made. But he was pleased with the development.

“It seems that all the hard work of the City College community and our supporters is beginning to pay off, but the devil is in the details and we’re studying them carefully,” Hamilton said.

CCSF supporters were also generally optimistic about the news.

“We are encouraged that the commission appears willing to provide City College with a path forward to complete its recovery,” Paul Feist, a spokesman for the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, said in a statement.

“We want to be assured, however, that any action taken removes the immediate threat of loss of accreditation and allows City College adequate time to come into full compliance,” he said.

Tim Killikelly, president of CCSF’s faculty union American Federation of Teachers Local 2121, agreed that the ACCJC proposal appears to be positive, but cautioned against celebrating just yet.

“The uncertainty still remains and that’s not good for the college,” he said.

The proposed policy calls for a two-week public-comment period, concluding June 25. The ACCJC will then issue a final policy, contingent upon written confirmation from the U.S. Department of Education that the proposal does not violate federal law.

The policy emerged following the commission’s final scheduled meeting of the year, held last week in Sacramento. Wednesday’s announcement comes on the heels of weeks of politicians calling upon the ACCJC to give CCSF more time to come into compliance with commission standards.

In January, a judge barred ACCJC from taking any action on accreditation until a lawsuit filed by The City is resolved.

Losing accreditation would effectively force CCSF to close.

ACCJC Statement issued June 11, 2014, 3:00 p.m. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges

(ACCJC), 10 Commercial Blvd., Suite 204, Novato, CA 94949; 415-506-0234
accjc@accjc.org.

At its meeting last year, June 5-7, 2013, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) took action to terminate the accreditation of City College of San Francisco (CCSF)based on the institution’s failure to meet many of the Commission's accreditation standards. The decision to terminate CCSF’s accreditation was not in reaction to a single issue or to problems that occurred over a short period of time. Instead, the decision was made due to years of inaction by CCSF to address serious deficiencies identified through peer reviews and acknowledged by the college. These deficiencies, spanning across all areas of the Accreditation Standards, severely impacted academic quality and the operational sustainability of the college. Since the termination decision, CCSF leaders have taken the need to implement changes at the institution seriously and have begun the work to address deficiencies identified by ACCJC. The leaders of CCSF have acknowledged, however, that the institution is at least 18 months from being in compliance with ACCJC standards.
As the July 31,2014, effective date of termination quickly approaches, there havebeen increased calls for the Commission to rescind its decision. However, the Commission has been, and will continue to be, steadfast in its decision, which was clearly warranted. While ACCJC concern about CCSF noncompliance remains, the Commission also recognizes the need to balance the impact of such a decision on students with its commitment to holding CCSF and all postsecondary institutions accountable in meeting core standards. In response to this need, the Commission has worked to identify a path forward that maintains the termination decision and holds the college accountable for addressing the standards, but would enable the college reasonable but limited additionaltime to come into compliance with ACCJC standards.

Today, ACCJC is proposing a new accreditation policy. The policy generally would permit any postsecondary institution that hasbeen notified of termination for failure to meet ACCJC standards to apply, prior to the effective date of termination, for restoration of its accreditation. The proposed policy language, attached, has been posted to ACCJC’s website, allowing for a two-week public comment period, which will conclude on June 25, 2014, at 5:00 p.m. Pacific Time. ACCJC will carefully review all public comments and issue a final policy soon after the two-week comment period has concluded. Final approval is also contingent upon written confirmation from the U.S. Department of Education that the proposed policy is not in conflict with federal regulation or law. Recent communications with U.S. Department of Education officials have been constructive and productive; the language of the policy and its application to CCSF have been vetted, and the ACCJC is optimistic that such a letter will be provided. Under the proposed policy, the institution seeking "accreditation restoration" status would first have to be determined eligible and then undergo an intensive review to demonstrate its ability to come into compliance with all standards within a two-year period. Then, if approved for restoration, the institution would have no more than two years to show full compliance with all standards. If after this period the institution has not met all accreditation standards –or if restoration status is not approved to begin with --the prior termination order would be activated without any opportunity for an appeal.

If this policy is adopted as expected, CCSF would have the opportunity to take steps to be designated as being inrestoration status. Its application for the status would need to be filed prior to the termination effective date of July 31, 2014, and, if the eligibility report demonstrates all eligibility requirements are met, the initial comprehensive evaluation would be conducted no later than four months following that application. On receipt of the college’s request for restoration status, the date of termination would be deferred during the review and (if granted) restoration status. In restoration status, CCSF would have two years to show full compliance with all standards. Other institutions in comparable circumstances would have a similar opportunity under the new policy. Additional Information can be found on the ACCJC website at www.accjc.org: Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges Western Association of Schools and Colleges (ACCJC) Policy on Commission Actions on Institutions (Approved for First Reading, June 2014; Excerpt- changed section)V.

Actions that Terminate Accreditation
If, in the judgment of the Commission, an institution has not satisfactorily explained or corrected matters of which it has been given notice, has not addressed deficiencies within the period specified by the Commission,or has taken an action that has placed it significantly out of compliance with the Eligibility Requirements, Accreditation Standards, and Commission policies, its accreditation may be terminated. The Commission will give the institution written reasons for its decision. Termination of accreditation is subject to a request for review and appeal under the applicable policies and procedures of the Commission. The accredited status of the institution continues pending completion of any review and appeal process the institution may request. Otherwise, the institution's accreditation ends on the date when the time period permitting such a request expires. Restoration Status. Prior to the termination effective date or completion of any requested review and appeal process, whichever is later, the institution may submit a request for granting of restoration status. If, however, an institution has been granted a good cause extension to come into compliance with any standard prior to the termination action, the institution may not apply for restoration status following termination. The request for granting of restoration status must be accompanied by a completed eligibility report, demonstrating compliance with the Eligibility Requirements. Upon receipt of the institution’s request, the Commission shall schedule a comprehensive evaluation of the institution no later than four months following the request. The institution must submit an institutional self evaluation report no later than six weeks prior to the scheduled visit. For the period leading to completion of the comprehensive evaluation for restoration status, the termination effective date will be rescinded and the termination implementation will be suspended. The institution’s accredited status will be “accredited, pending termination.”The comprehensive evaluation for restoration status will determine if the institution meets all of the Eligibility Requirements and has demonstrated either its compliance with all of the Accreditation Standards and Commission policies or the ability to meet them within the two-year

Is this the end of teacher tenure in California?

Nanette Asimov, Bob Egelko and Melody Gutierrez Updated 7:54 am, Wednesday, June 11, 2014

A Los Angles Superior Court judge threw out California's teacher tenure laws Tuesday, calling them unconstitutional and declaring in a landmark ruling that public school students and their teachers are cheated by the state's system of hiring and firing instructors.
Judge Rolf Treu said the evidence he heard in Vergara vs. California supported the plaintiffs' contention that firing bad teachers can take "two to almost 10 years and cost $50,000 to $450,000 or more."
Treu called that noteworthy because the number of "grossly ineffective teachers" employed in California ranges from "2,750 to 8,250," or 1 to 3 percent of teachers and that their negative impact on students "shocks the conscience."
He said he heard compelling evidence that the worst teachers cause students to lose more than nine months of education each year, compared with average teachers.
Yet firing them is "complex, time consuming and expensive," the judge said. The lawsuit was filed against the state on behalf of nine students in May 2012 by Students Matter, a nonprofit founded by David Welch, a Silicon Valley entrepreneur.

'Reverse this decision'

The state's teachers unions later joined as co-defendants, and Tuesday their lawyers dismissed the ruling as just the beginning of a long legal battle.
"I am confident that the Court of Appeal will reverse this decision," said James Finberg, lead attorney for both the California Teachers Association and the California Federation of Teachers. "Having the security that you won't be fired without cause is one of the things that makes teaching an attractive profession."
"The interests of teachers and students are fundamentally served" when teachers are confident they won't be fired "at the whim and caprice" of employers. It's also an issue of academic freedom, he said.

For example, teachers who face criticism for teaching about Islam or global warming - unpopular subjects with some groups - would be at greater risk of being fired without current protections, Finberg said.

3 main issues

The case dealt with three main issues:

• The requirement that teacher layoffs be based on seniority, known as the “Last-In, First-Out” statute.

• The numerous steps required to fire a teacher.

• Teacher tenure, called the Permanent Employment Statute.

California is one of five states that give tenure in two years or less. Forty-one states grant tenure in three to five years.
The judge found that California grants permanent employment too soon and said students and teachers are "unfairly, unnecessarily" disadvantaged by the system.
He said the dismissal statutes result in a "tortuous process" for firing teachers compared with that of other school employees. And he said the layoff system - in which the last-hired teacher is let go "no matter how gifted the newer teacher, and no matter how grossly ineffective the senior teacher" - is a "lose-lose situation."
Treu's crucial conclusion was that the tenure and seniority laws affect "students' fundamental right to equality of education" and "impose a disproportionate burden on poor and minority students."
Finberg said the judge's argument overlooks the fact that laws that make it tough to fire teachers preserve academic freedom. "The statutes say you can only (fire) for cause, and you go through a process, and a decision is made by an independent panel. Nobody, including the California Teachers Association, wants truly ineffective teaching."

The trade-offs

Jesse Rothstein, a public policy and economics professor at UC Berkeley who testified for the defense, said the trade-off of stripping such protections would force schools to pay higher salaries to teachers.
Yet education advocates across the country - including U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan - applauded the ruling that is expected to inspire similar lawsuits in other states. "For students in California and every other state, equal opportunities for learning must include the equal opportunity to be taught by
a great teacher," Duncan said in a statement. "The students who brought this lawsuit are, unfortunately, just nine out of millions of young people in America who are disadvantaged by laws, practices and systems that fail to identify and support our best teachers and match them with our neediest students.
"Today's court decision is a mandate to fix these problems."

In California, however, Gov. Jerry Brown, Attorney General Kamala Harris and Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson were resoundingly silent on the ruling opposed by the teachers unions - the largest and most powerful lobbying group in the state. California's complicated process for firing teachers was thrust into the spotlight two years ago, when Los Angeles Unified School
District paid school teacher Mark Berndt $40,000 in back pay and legal fees to quickly dismiss him and avoid a lengthy appeals process. Berndt was arrested for lewd acts that included spoon-feeding students his semen. He was sentenced to 25 years in prison after pleading no contest to the charges last year.
In the wake of the Los Angeles case, California lawmakers attempted to change teacher tenure rules to make it easier to fire teachers for egregious misconduct, but many of the bills were met with strict opposition from the California Teachers Association and Democrats supported by the union.

'Civil rights victory'

"Today's ruling is perhaps the biggest civil rights victory in recent memory," said Assembly Republican Leader Connie Conway of Tulare. "It has been a partisan issue in the past." On Monday, the state Senate unanimously passed a bill by Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, to create a separate and
streamlined hearing process for teachers accused of egregious misconduct. It was Buchanan's second attempt at the bill after a version was vetoed last year by the governor.

Nanette Asimov, Bob Egelko and Melody Gutierrez are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers.
E-mail: nasimov@sfchronicle.com, begelko@sfchronicle.com, mgutierrez@sfchronicle.com
Twitter: @NanetteAsimov, @Egelko, @MelodyGutierrez

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-throws-out-California-teacher-tenure-laws-5542577.php

http://adjunctactionbayarea-seiu1021.nationbuilder.com/seiu_local_1021_sees_representation_wins_at_san_francisco_art_institute_
mills_college

SEIU Local 1021 Sees Representation Wins at San Francisco Art Institute, Mills College Posted by Jennifer Smith-Camejo 16sc on June 02, 2014 ·
--From Bloomberg BNA Daily Labor Report:

By Joyce E. Cutler

May 30 — Adjunct instructors at San Francisco Art Institute voted May 30 for Service Employees International Union Local 1021 as their bargaining representative, the latest development in the union's nationwide Adjunct Action campaign.

The SFAI adjuncts, called “visiting faculty” by the private nonprofit arts school, voted 124-35 to join SEIU Local 1021.

The SFAI instructors were the second group of teachers at a San Francisco Bay Area private sector school in a month to join Local 1021. Some 138 instructors at Mills College in Oakland, Calif., voted to form a union by a 78 percent margin in ballots the National Labor Relations Board counted May 14.

 “We want an end to a climate of fear that resonates even where we gather online,” Dale Carrico, an SFAI critical thinking professor, said in a statement. “We want the security to do the work on which SFAI depends whether it admits it or not. We want the standing to communicate our knowledge of the needs and problems of the institution to which we are devoted without fear of reprisal.”

 “Our next step is to negotiate the best contracts we can, to reflect and secure our real stake in the shared project of teaching at SFAI,” Carrico, who helped organize the campaign, told Bloomberg BNA.

The next step for the newly organized SFAI instructors is to elect a bargaining team of other adjuncts and conduct a bargaining survey to determine priorities for their contract, Local 1021 spokeswoman Jennifer Smith-Camejo told Bloomberg BNA May 30.

An SFAI representative couldn't be reached for comment.