“A California budget proposal to incease community college enrollment with an emphasis on the neediest districts should focus on the Inland Empire, the Central Valley and Los Angeles, according to California Competes.”
“A new report from the Oakland-based higher education policy institute argues that these regions should receive the vast majority of a proposed $155.2 million in new funding for enrollment growth next year, which Gov. Jerry Brown has prioritized for districts with the greatest unmet need in adequately serving their community’s higher educational needs.”
“The California Community Colleges chancellor’s Office condemned the report’s conclusions, saying it would deny community college access in other parts of the state.”
Why would the Chancellor’s office “condemn” the reports conclusion? The Chancellor himself has made “access” his goal for the system, so does he want unequal access, i.e., meaning distribution of growth funds equally across the board to all districts at same rate, which essentially would mean that districts with the lowest participation rates will never be able to catch up to serve/educate students living in these districts.
MSJC is one of the most under served districts in the state. A new funding formula metric which creates a funding stream for such districts to increase access up to the state average would go a long way in assisting MSJC and other under served districts to serve students at a higher level of participation and create a more educated workforce in these areas of our state for the benefit of taxpayers.
The Chancellor’s Office response to the Governors proposal seems counter to its purpose.