[img]1769|right|Dr. Mark Rocha||no_popup[/img]The deeply disgruntled faculty of Pasadena City College dispatched this Not-So-Happy Valentine’s Day message last week to the object of their disaffection, President Mark Rocha.
Under the banner “Letter to PCC President Rocha from Concerned Faculty,” the missive also was directed to the “Campus Community.”
“Last week the new School of Humanities and Social Sciences held a meeting at which faculty once again pointed out the ongoing problems resulting from major policy changes your administration has been imposing. In academic and professional matters, the college administrators are obligated by state law (Ed Code 70902 (b) (7) to rely primarily on the advice and judgment of the faculty senate and/or reach mutual agreement. Neither has occurred. Faculty have repeatedly requested empirical evidence supporting the effectiveness of your poorly planned policy changes; our requests for information have been denied, our input ignored.
• To date, the administration has provided no student success data to merit a policy of increasing the number of students per class by 20 percent. Students at PCC deserve reasonable class sizes to facilitate their success. In fact, the research shows that students perform better when there are fewer students in a class. Class size is determined through a process based on pedagogically sound practices, but your comments at the meeting regarding class size reflect a lack of interest in and understanding of student success. Your intention to overcrowd certain classes to serve as a source of revenue for other programs at PCC is not to the benefit of students, and this system will destine some students over others to fail. Approximately 300 full-ime compared to 900 part-time professors currently teach at PCC — we should reduce overcrowded classes by increasing the full-time to part-time faculty ratio if student success is indeed PCC’s goal. It is in the student’s best interest to uphold the class size limit, which is the policy that has already been established.
• To date, the administration has provided no data to the Board or the faculty for the August 2012 decision to eliminate the winter intersession and for changing the calendar to a tri-mester. In fact, PCC had had a winter session since 2004 but you eliminated it in 2012. A study by the calendar committee indicates that students get better grades overall when PCC offers a winter intersession. The academic calendar is determined through year-long input from a team of faculty, staff and students, which never proposed or approved a tri-mester calendar. You have given multiple explanations for this change, none of which was based on data. In November 2013, the California courts ruled that PCC violated an Unfair Labor Practice by cutting out the winter session. Now you are wasting more of our students’ and our tax dollars by appealing the labor board’s decision.
• To date, the administration has not presented data-based rationale for the upheaval of the school’s administrative structure, which you shared a week ago campus-wide, nor has campus-wide feedback been requested. Once again, no evidence exists, that a costly top-heavy administrative structure will promote our students’ academic achievement.
Thousands of students are potentially affected by these wide-sweeping changes. Decisions like these need to be planned, feedback from all constituents received and considered, and data acquired, reviewed and analyzed. All of this takes time and should not be done at this accelerated pace. What’s more, policies and procedures should be followed when doing so, but you and your administration circumvent them. Last year, the faculty at large gave you a vote of no confidence as did the faculty senate. The student government approved a resolution to censure the PCC administration and gave you a vote of no-confidence. It should be completely clear why we continue to have no confidence in you and your leadership.
Sincerely,
Professors in the Humanities School (Social Sciences, Languages, ESL, English)
