Reaffirming Statutory Authority for
Faculty Development of
Curriculum
AS-2601-03/AA - May 6-7, 2003
ATTACHMENT TO AS-2601-03/AA
RESOLVED: The Academic Senate of the California State University
request both the Board of Trustees and the Office of the Chancellor of the
California State University to join with its Academic Senate in urging the
members of the Legislature of the State of California to adhere to the
provisions of sections 3560 (c) and sections 3561 (b) and (c) of the
California Government Code of Regulations which indicate unequivocally that
the development and execution of curriculum within the California State
University and its 23 member campuses should be insulated from political
influence.
RATIONALE: With an appreciation for the need to keep the
development and execution of the curricula of the campuses of California's
higher education systems free from political influence, the Legislature of
the State of California, in collaboration with the Governor, enacted the
provisions of sections 3560 (c) and 3561 (b) and (c) of the California
Government Code of Regulations. These code provisions acknowledge the need
for insulation of higher educational curricular process from the influence
of politically mediated and/or politically motivated intrusion, to wit:
"The people of the State of California have established a system of
higher education under the Constitution of the State of California with the
intention of providing an academic community with full freedom of inquiry
and insulation from political influence in the administration
thereof."
Within the California State University, generally, and on all 23 campuses of
the system specifically, institutionally imbedded processes of curriculum
development and approval involving faculty discipline specialists, departments,
and curriculum committees at both the college and university level ensure the
focus, breadth, integrity and quality of the curriculum. Groups lobbying on
behalf of specific disciplines have succeeded in convincing our state
legislative bodies that the long-term benefits to be derived from leaving
the development and execution of curriculum to curriculum specialists within
higher education disciplines were neither genuine nor meaningful. Because
the legislative process is neither designed nor equipped to develop curriculum
through collegial collaboration, fostering widespread institutional buy-in,
curricular mandates originating within the legislature run the risk of imposing
poorly crafted, inadequately fiscally supported curricula and curriculum
development guidelines on our universities.
While it is imperative that both legislators and the legislative process have
access to and input from specialists in areas germane to legislative inquiry,
when these inquiries suggest a need for curricular change the legislature is
urged to follow both the language and the intent of the relevant government
codes and refer suggestions for curricular changes to the appropriate faculty
body.
APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY - March 6-7, 2003 |
