Dealing With the Impact of Funding Shortfalls on the Winter/Spring
Admissions of Transfer Students
AS 2920-09/FGA (Rev)
RESOLVED: That the Academic Senate of the California State University (ASCSU) express its concern regarding the strategy of curtailing enrollment of transfer students in spring 2010; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the ASCSU recommend that the California State University (CSU) devise strategies that do not disproportionately affect transfer students as a way of controlling excess enrollment; and be it further
RESOLVED: That the ASCSU urge campuses to take into account the pent-up demand by transfer students when making admission decisions for fall 2010: and be it further
RESOLVED: That this resolution be sent to the Chancellor and the Board of Trustees, campus Presidents, and campus Senate Chairs.
RATIONALE: The California State University has had to deal with an unprecedented cut in State funding of over 500 million dollars in the 2009-10 academic year. In order to cope with this funding cut, the CSU had to increase student fees, reduce classes, furlough most employees, and curtail enrollment of transfer students in spring 2010. However, the California Education Code Section 66202 states that after continuing CSU students, transfer students from California Community Colleges who have successfully concluded a course of study in an approved transfer agreement program or who met all of the requirements for transfer have a higher priority for admissions over all other groups. While the academic leadership of the CSU may have felt that the system had no other choice than to deny admission to eligible transfer students in spring 2010 in order to deal with its unprecedented funding cut, denying admission to eligible transfer students appears to run counter to the State’s Education Code. More importantly, denying admission to this group of students will have the effect of delaying their graduation from a CSU and may result in many potential students opting not to continue on to obtain a baccalaureate degree in the CSU. Other strategies that do not single out a group of students who have been “following the rules” and making progress towards their degrees are preferable and should be carefully investigated.
Approved – January 21-22, 2010