Page 35 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 35 of 137 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
27
A major non-voter initiated funding measure was passed by the legislature and
signed into law in the form of Assembly Bill 1725 (AB 1725) in 1988. The bill had far
reaching affects, not only on the finance of the California community colleges but also
its missions (Livingston, 1998). The bill also shifted some finance power from the
state back to the local board, as well as modifying a number of faculty management
and hiring practices (Livingston, 1998). Assembly Bill 1725 replaced average daily
attendance (ADA), by “program based funding”. The measure would account for
“full-time equivalent students” (FTES), square footage of leased or owned property,
and a percentage of fixed overhead such as administrative costs. Beyond CCC
financing, the bill also sets a goal that 75% of credit instruction be by full-time
instructors. The bill created an effort to reduce the number of hours of instruction by
part-time, or “adjunct” instructors to a maximum of 25% of credit instructional hours.
However, this figure is a proposed goal and not a mandate. However, in an effort to
actually “cap” the proportion of adjunct instruction, Education Code Section 84362,
better know as the “Fifty Percent Law” mandates that a minimum of 50% of
instructional costs be for salaries of full-time instructors (California Community
College Systems Office, 2008).
By the early 1990’s, not only had student tuition fees increased to $13 per unit,
but the proportion of funding for CCC required by Proposition 98 was suspended. As
the result, the CCC began receiving funding that was proportionately less than that
required by law, while the proportion of funding for K-12 districts were increased.
Object Description
| Title | Finance in the California community college: Comparative analysis and benchmarking of instructional expenditures |
| Author | Karamian, Martin |
| Author email | martinsfsu@netzero.com; karamim@piercecollege.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-17 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-26 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Melguizo, Tatiana Vega, William |
| Abstract | The goals of this empirical study of community colleges are to 1) create a benchmark for per student instructional expenditures; and 2) account for variations in instructional expenditures among a peer group of community colleges in Southern California. The peer group sample included 22 single campus community college districts in the Los Angeles area. Using data for three fiscal years a refined mean benchmark value for instructional expenditures of $2,676.71 per full-time equivalent student (FTES) was estimated with a standard deviation of $326.54. Using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, 11 variables were correlated with instructional costs per FTES. The largest and only statistically significant determinant included the number of part-time instructors (-0.424). While other variables were correlated, none were statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval. The results from the sample suggest that larger colleges have lower instructional costs per FTES despite higher faculty pay. Expanding credit student enrollment within the funding growth limits set by the State, along with additional part-time instruction within the limits set by the State will likely result in lower instructional costs per FTES and an economy of scale effect. The effect of increased institutional size on quality of education was not assessed. |
| Keyword | finance; California; community college; comparative analysis; benchmarking; instructional expenditures; economics; higher education; spending; instruction; education; economy of scale |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 1990/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3775 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Karamian, Martin |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Karamian-4454 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume23/etd-Karamian-4454.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 35 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 27 A major non-voter initiated funding measure was passed by the legislature and signed into law in the form of Assembly Bill 1725 (AB 1725) in 1988. The bill had far reaching affects, not only on the finance of the California community colleges but also its missions (Livingston, 1998). The bill also shifted some finance power from the state back to the local board, as well as modifying a number of faculty management and hiring practices (Livingston, 1998). Assembly Bill 1725 replaced average daily attendance (ADA), by “program based funding”. The measure would account for “full-time equivalent students” (FTES), square footage of leased or owned property, and a percentage of fixed overhead such as administrative costs. Beyond CCC financing, the bill also sets a goal that 75% of credit instruction be by full-time instructors. The bill created an effort to reduce the number of hours of instruction by part-time, or “adjunct” instructors to a maximum of 25% of credit instructional hours. However, this figure is a proposed goal and not a mandate. However, in an effort to actually “cap” the proportion of adjunct instruction, Education Code Section 84362, better know as the “Fifty Percent Law” mandates that a minimum of 50% of instructional costs be for salaries of full-time instructors (California Community College Systems Office, 2008). By the early 1990’s, not only had student tuition fees increased to $13 per unit, but the proportion of funding for CCC required by Proposition 98 was suspended. As the result, the CCC began receiving funding that was proportionately less than that required by law, while the proportion of funding for K-12 districts were increased. |
