The Cornerstones planning process began in 1996 and yielded a set of general principles and supporting recommendations designed to guide CSU into the next century. In adopting the Cornerstones report in January 1998, the Trustees directed the Chancellor to pursue implementation of its recommendations.

Implementing a report as far-reaching as Cornerstones is challenging because, for implementation to occur, general principles and recommendations must be converted to specific, concrete actions. Doing so requires hard choices to be made about priorities, about what is most important to do now as opposed to later and about the procedures for moving from principle to action.

The need for a plan that is more exact about how Cornerstones should be implemented is based on the large scope of Cornerstones, its commitment to giving the campuses significant autonomy in how the recommendations are carried out, and the likelihood that many of the principles are subject to wide ranges of interpretation. To promote both clearer direction and accountability across the system, a plan is needed that is specific about what should be done and that assigns responsibility for action.

This plan includes those actions related to Cornerstones that all universities will be expected to address owing to their priority, importance, strategic value, or factors of timing and sequence of those actions. To varying extents, the plan spells out what is meant for an action to be addressed. For a great majority of the initiatives, individual campuses will have substantial flexibility in deciding how to implement an action; this is in keeping with Cornerstones Principle 10. A smaller number of actions call for a more common set of approaches to implementation across all campuses. This is especially applicable to many of initiatives in the access section (Principle 5). In many cases, campuses are already acting on some of the principles and need only to integrate those activities with the Cornerstones plan.

The plan indicates for each action where responsibility will reside. Again, in recognition of the Cornerstones commitment to campus autonomy and flexibility, many actions call for responsibility at the campus level, especially for those actions concerning the curriculum, teaching-learning process, and faculty activity. Other initiatives recognize a shared responsibility for implementation among the campuses and the system-level offices of the Chancellor and Board of Trustees. Such system responsibility may include the functions of policy-making, coordinating common approaches to campus implementation, facilitating communication among campuses, seeking support for various initiatives, and helping to avoid duplicative efforts.

No clearer statements exist for giving meaning and direction to our discussion of how CSU should move into the next century than Cornerstones, adopted by the Board of Trustees in January 1998, and the Baccalaureate Study, approved by the Statewide Academic Senate in November 1997. Each, in its own way, invites serious attention to that which all our efforts are directed: teaching and learning. Each, in its own way, asks us to forget about impediments and to recreate and shape the CSU for the demands of the 21st century. Each, in its own way, calls for the full participation of the whole CSU community, to accomplish the tasks before us. And, each, in its own way, is prelude to the particular work we propose the system and the campuses to undertake. It is daunting, to say the least, but it must be undertaken.

No statement about the hopes and directions embodied in Cornerstones and its implementation can be made without constant attention to the students of CSU; in fact, underlying every principle and recommendation is the given that the end to which all the Cornerstones activities are directed is the development of the educated and productive citizen. To achieve that end, CSU needs the collaboration and support of its current students and CSU alumni/ae to fulfill our vision for CSU in the 21st century.

We have asked the faculty to combine their current efforts in order to generate creative, integrative, and collaborative ways in which the system, under the principle of joint investment but tolerance of variability, can move forward in concrete ways to implement Cornerstones. We have proposed that the faculty and staff, students and alumni/ae, deal with such issues as learning outcomes and their assessment; program requirements; public school outreach; faculty development and support; baccalaureate education; graduate and post-baccalaureate education; accountability; institutional autonomy and system governance. The ultimate goal of all of these initiatives is to ensure a productive teaching and learning environment of high quality, strengthen student development, and expand access to CSU's services.

Campuses, in short, are asked to reexamine what universities have been dealing with for centuries: in the face of growing numbers of calls for change, what is it about the university that ought to change, and what ought not to change? We know the faculty are up to the tasks we place before them, as we direct new attention to best fulfilling our mission, without any loss of quality and within the contexts of the new demographics and the new economics. Campuses are appropriate sites for these deliberations where the faculty, who are the main repository of institutional values, have been, along with campus administration and students, wrestling with these issues and proposing changes.

A system like ours honors the various campuses for their multiplicity of functions and differentiation through centers of excellence. It also recognizes that some major concerns are "borderless," meaning we share common educational goals; we want the best education made available to our students based on shared and relevant goals; we jointly want to demonstrate accountability for achieving these goals; we want to achieve cooperation with all campus partners; and we jointly want to explain our mission in a way that is articulated clearly, well integrated, fair, consistent, and understandable.

By any account this discussion has taken place within a short time line; however, the discussions and debates have been responsive and rich, a sign of a vital university system. The campuses and other stakeholders have responded in most thoughtful, constructive ways; the campus discussions and those of the statewide Academic Senate became timely occasions for focusing time-honored beliefs about the academy in relation to the initiatives embodied in Cornerstones and to the public policy concerns of the 21st Century.

The California State Student Association constructively and importantly brought the student perspective to the refinement of the implementation plan. The CSU Alumni Association made timely, critical, and important improvements to the Plan.

All the responses recognize and note the preponderance of evidence showing ongoing Cornerstones activity already anticipated and taking place on the campuses. The campuses have taken upon themselves to attempt, within the context of competing demands for resources, to implement whatever Cornerstones initiatives that might be amenable to their individual cultures. This climate of activity, these many attempts to make CSU the University of the 21st Century, must be sustained and supported. Support will be given to efforts that foster faculty development; develop appropriate and meaningful reward structures; effect changes in workload which accurately reflect different modes of teaching and learning; and ensure accountability by collecting evidence of results of experiments on the use of new modes of teaching and learning.

The implementation discussion has brought a growing clarity of focus on such matters as the changing roles of faculty, students, the campuses, and central administration. Cornerstones and the beginning of organized implementation have been occasions, as they were designed to be, to rediscover the ends to which we are all directed – to develop the educated and productive citizen in the context of California and the 21st Century.

The benefits of this exercise have been: 1) the remarkably thoughtful and insightful responses which have come from the campuses and their faculty and students, 2) the unmistakable evidence of the ongoing attempts of campuses to translate Cornerstones into practice, and 3) the admirable commitment to CSU and its mission which has resurfaced as a result of this discussion.

The following Cornerstones Implementation Plan is proposed for trustee consideration and approval. Following the implementation plan are the Academic Senate Resolution
Response to the Draft Cornerstones Implementation Plan, the Overview of CSSA's
Response to the Draft Cornerstones Implementation Plan, and the Alumni Council
Response to the Draft Cornerstones Implementation Plan.



California State University's highest obligation is to prepare students who will live most of their lives in the 21st Century. While there is much we do not know about the next millennium, we do know it will provide our graduates with significant new challenges and opportunities. During their working years, most will change not just jobs, but professions several times, requiring uncommon adaptability to changing circumstances. They will need extraordinary skills to understand the exponential increase of information over their lifetimes. They will need the ability to cross cultural boundaries with sensitivity, facility, and understanding, as well as the ability to function effectively in a global context. They will need to confront the opportunity and the risks associated with expanding technological capacity, and to balance its potential effects with strong ethical principle. They will face conflicts and issues in their community, state, nation, and the world that are more complex than any presented this century and requiring solutions that can only be achieved through interdisciplinary perspective and collaborative problem-solving.

CSU's academic programs have always sought to offer students a sound foundation for personal and civic success; however, we can and should raise the bar. To ensure that our students are well prepared, we must focus our efforts collectively on helping them develop their intellectual skills to the highest possible level, for they must not only master content, they must also develop the ability to analyze, evaluate, and apply their knowledge to deal with the complex challenges ahead. And most importantly, we must provide our students with the foundations they need for self-reliant lifelong learning.

The following Cornerstones principle asks each campus faculty to work collaboratively to explicate publicly the knowledge, skills, and values they believe students will need; to accept responsibility for assessing students for demonstration of those outcomes; and to use the results of that assessment for the improvement of academic programs. The goal is not to create separate or parallel outcomes or assessments to those established by faculty in courses and programs, but for faculty to declare the highest intellectual outcomes they expect of students and intentionally to infuse the development of these outcomes into the institution's teaching and learning process.

Universities should have the authority and responsibility to develop their own learning outcomes in general education and major programs as well as procedures for assessment. Many also believe that previous work on general education outcomes found in the Statewide Academic Senate's Baccalaureate Study, and existing Title 5 policy, can be valuable as a base from which to proceed. To the extent that faculty from various universities find it helpful, such system-level activities as those being sponsored through the CSU Institute for Teaching and Learning (ITL) will be expanded. The ITL will continue to support faculty across the system as they discuss general education outcomes and assessment. The Institute also will organize systemwide groups of faculty by disciplines to enable discussions of outcomes and assessment by program major. These disciplinary faculty groups can also lead consideration of such other Cornerstones issues as length of degree, lower-division major preparation (see Principle 2), course alignment, articulation, transfer, and unit requirements for the major.

PRINCIPLE 1: The California State University will award the baccalaureate on the basis of demonstrated learning as determined by our faculty. The CSU will state explicitly what a graduate of the California State University is expected to know, and will assure that our graduates possess a certain breadth and depth of knowledge together with a certain level of skills and are exposed to experiences that encourage the development of sound personal values.

The specific recommendations supporting this principle are:

1a. Campus Priority Each university will have a faculty-determined, comprehensive set of general education outcomes that are sufficiently specific to support a public declaration of educational results, and sufficiently general to allow each college and department to develop its own educational outcomes. (By fall, 2002)
1b. Campus Priority Each university faculty will have systems of learning assessment that enable students to demonstrate learning in both courses and programs. These assessment tools will be developed with a broad consensus as to their proper use and will vary substantially among the disciplines. (By fall, 2002)
1c. Campus Priority Each university will periodically collect, analyze, and evaluate evidence of the extent to which its students are achieving the learning outcomes to which it is publicly committed. (Beginning fall, 2002 or sooner)
1d. Campus Priority Each university will use the assessment results in their process for review and improvement of programs. (Beginning fall, 2002 or sooner)
1e. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will devote sufficient resources to faculty development and the resources and time required to develop appropriate assessment techniques to redesign programs, and to shape definitions of credit, including responding to individual university requests for exceptions, on a pilot-basis, to certain system requirements. (Continuing funding and program priority)


Quality depends, in part, on the responsiveness of CSU's degree programs and services to student needs. Every member of the university community – faculty, staff, administration, and students themselves – has a responsibility to help students succeed. This responsibility extends beyond making sure that academic requirements are clear and that basic services are accessible. In line with CSU's distinctive commitment to teaching and learning, this responsibility has meant actively reaching out to students, understanding their individual learning and personal needs, and providing academic and support services that help each student meet these requirements.

As the needs and diversity of California's population change, universities must ensure that the kind of programs and their requirements reflect those changes while always maintaining quality. CSU's students, alumni/ae, and California's employees are valuable sources of advice regarding needs and performance.

These changing needs of students also will require universities to ensure that support services respond to the needs of a wider range of students. The needs, priorities, and satisfaction levels of students should regularly be assessed and used to assure that programs and services are responsive. The later recommendations on graduate, post-baccalaureate, and continuing education also speak to the principle of responsiveness to students.

PRINCIPLE 2: Students are the focus of the academic enterprise. Each campus will shape the provision of its academic programs and support services to meet better the diverse needs of its students and society.

The specific recommendations supporting this principle are:

2a. Campus Priority In accord with Board of Trustee program review policy, each university shall make special efforts to ensure that programs and courses are strengthened, added, retained, and eliminated according to explicit criteria and procedures. These campus criteria and procedures will be designed to ensure that programs are continually responsive to, among others, societal needs and the needs of an increasingly diverse student population, changes in disciplines, and campus priorities. The views of students, alumni/ae, and employers should regularly be sought concerning what programs are needed and the extent to which existing programs are yielding important student outcomes. (Policies and practices amended by fall, 2000)
2b. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will ensure that all students are able to complete baccalaureate degree program requirements within a reasonable length of time. Recognizing that on some campuses there is a large population of students who must support themselves while attending the university, no time-to-degree limit will be imposed. The Board of Trustees will reduce the Title 5 baccalaureate degree unit requirement from 124 to 120 units. Each campus will re-examine the unit requirements for graduation and provide a monitoring system to ensure that acceptable justification is provided for all program requirements that extend the baccalaureate unit requirement beyond the normative minimum of 120 units. (Policy amended by January, 2000; campus requirements amended by fall, 2001)
2c. Campus Priority Each university will ensure effective services for all students, including those with non-traditional schedules, such as older and working students. These academic and student development services should be evaluated regularly to ensure effectiveness. (Continuing commitment)
2d. Campus Priority Each university will design its academic calendars and class schedules to maximize the availability of courses in a significantly wider range of times and modes, both with regard to the weekly schedule of courses and the fuller use of the calendar year. (Continuing commitment)
2e. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will redesign current standards and processes for facilities utilization, so that the universities can offer courses when appropriate throughout the year and throughout the hours of every day of every week, to enhance student-faculty contact, advising, and instruction. (Continuing commitment)


Teaching and learning are central to the CSU mission. Building on this critical strength and orientation, the quality of teaching and learning can be taken to an even higher level by enriching the interaction among faculty and students. Commitment to this principle will help to secure CSU's unique reputation for high-quality teaching and learning.

The search for ways to enhance the learning relationships among faculty and students may lead to the greater use of the external community as environments in which students learn both from faculty and practitioners, and are able to relate or apply their learning in an experiential manner. This search also may find faculty capturing increasingly the benefits of students learning from each other. Technology is providing yet another way to strengthen interaction between faculty and students. It also should be noted that these efforts to add even more quality to the CSU teaching and learning experience will require more faculty time and support with associated workload and funding implications.

The system should create and support an environment within which faculty can develop and test new ways to augment their current strong commitment to teaching and learning. Because they carry out this most central process of the university, faculty should determine what methods are used and ensure that quality is always maintained or increased.

PRINCIPLE 3: Students will be expected to be active partners with faculty in the learning process, and the university will provide opportunities for active learning throughout the curriculum.

The recommendations in support of this principle are:

3a. Campus Priority Each university will require that all students work with faculty and staff in planning their academic careers to include taking a more active role in their own learning and the development and improvement of academic programs and services. (Continuing commitment)
3b. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each campus will facilitate such practices of active learning as collaborative learning, internships, problem solving, and the use of interactive technology. (Continuing activity)
3c. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each campus will provide opportunities and arrangements for students to engage in community-service learning experiences. (Continuing activity)
3d. Campus Priority Each campus will expand student involvement in scholarship, research, and creative activity under faculty guidance, because these activities are central to the teaching and learning mission of a comprehensive university. (Continuing activity)


Faculty are central to carrying out CSU's teaching and learning-centered mission. For CSU to strengthen already strong performance of this mission, it will look to its faculty, individually and collectively, within the universities and through its representative systemwide bodies: the Academic Senate and the California Faculty Association.

Cornerstones asks faculty to take additional steps to bring the effectiveness of teaching and learning to a new level, a level which few other systems will approach. In doing so, we should recognize that CSU faculty are teachers, and scholars, meaning that CSU faculty work with knowledge at its highest levels. Such scholarship, including research and creative activity, is essential to conveying knowledge at the highest levels of effectiveness. To do so, faculty must be able to develop continuously not only new knowledge, but also to develop various ways to transmit it. So, as we ask faculty to take CSU's mission to an even higher level, we must recognize the critical role of scholarship in doing so and find ways to lend greater support to scholarship.

CSU faculty are unique in American public higher education for translating into practice the dual emphases on teaching and the scholarship related to teaching. As California's population is changing, so are the needs and challenges for teaching and learning. It is crucial that faculty be supported in their efforts in order to meet the more diverse and challenging needs of the future.

PRINCIPLE 4: The California State University will reinvest in its faculty to maintain its primary mission as a teaching-centered comprehensive university. Faculty scholarship, research, and creative activity are essential components of that mission.

The recommendations in support of this principle are:

4a. System Priority The CSU system will provide faculty with a fair and reasonable incentive and reward system, including closing the faculty salary gap. (Continuing funding priority)
4b. Campus Priority Faculty scholarship, research, and creative activity will be broadly defined and recognized as appropriate to each campus. (Continuing activity)
4c. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will support research, scholarly, and creative activities for the faculty as a central element of a rich learning environment for our students. (Continuing activity)
4d. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will provide a more coordinated and substantive faculty development effort. These efforts will be supported by seeking new resources and by recognition of faculty time needed for these purposes. The Academic Senate, the California Faculty Association, and the CSU administration should be appropriately involved in developing this effort. (Continuing funding and program priority)
4e. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will seek resources for instructionally-related technology support. (Continuing funding priority)


Providing access to the baccalaureate degree of high quality is the most important role of CSU. The vast majority of students seeking the social and economic benefits of a baccalaureate education look to CSU. In light of the size and diversity of California's population, no other system of public higher education faces such a challenge, particularly given CSU's commitment to providing access while adhering to high standards. These access challenges only will increase as CSU seeks to raise standards and at the same time assist a wider range of people to complete successfully a high-quality degree.

Strengthening access to the degree will require CSU to address many current barriers to successful access including making CSU programs more available to students who have time, schedule, place, or financial barriers to academic programs. Given that a great majority of community college students seek to complete the baccalaureate degree at CSU, it is critical the transfer process be as effective as possible. And perhaps most important, access to a CSU degree depends on all students coming to CSU fully prepared to begin a high-level of study, which for too many students is not now the case. Addressing this problem will require a comprehensive, systemwide series of joint CSU-public school efforts to reach students while still in school to convey CSU standards for beginning college-level study and to help them to meet these standards.

PRINCIPLE 5: The California State University will meet the need for undergraduate education in California through increasing outreach efforts and transfer, retention, and graduation rates, and providing students a variety of pathways that may reduce the time needed to complete degrees.

The recommendations in support of this principle are:

5a. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will continue the current Trustee policy to strengthen the connection between the CSU and K-12, and our collaborative relationship with the California Community Colleges. (Continuing activity)
5b. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will devote greater attention to the articulation of required lower-division, major courses and/or competencies, both within the CSU and between the CSU and community colleges. Both systems will help define the nature of any problems and, if warranted, ask faculty disciplinary groups across the CSU to seek common requirements. (By winter, 2001 or sooner)
5c. Campus Priority Each university will continue and expand programs to reach traditionally underserved communities through increased efforts at outreach and retention. (Continuing activity)
5d. System Priority The CSU system will revisit the competencies needed to begin college-level work and how best to assess them. This review will focus on the relationship of CSU's general education expectations to the skills and knowledge students should bring to college. (By January, 2000)
5e. System Priority The CSU system will intensify its support for early diagnostic testing of ninth, tenth, and eleventh grade high school students in English and math to determine progress being made in meeting CSU expectations. (Beginning fall, 1999; continuing funding priority)
5f. System Priority The CSU system will make standardized, nationally normed, placement tests available to K-12 students in English and mathematics during their junior year. Students who pass would be granted appropriate CSU placement. (Beginning fall, 1999; continuing funding priority)
5g. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will strengthen alliances with the public schools. These alliances will focus on developing a clear understanding of what the CSU math and English placement standards are and how best to achieve them. Special funding will support these efforts. (Beginning fall, 1999; continuing funding priority)
5h. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will expand the number of well-trained CSU students helping K-12 students achieve stronger English and math skills. (Continuing commitment)
5i. System Priority The CSU will seek more effective methods and structures by which remedial education will be provided, including extended learning and expansion of partnerships with community colleges, public schools, and other institutions. (Continuing commitment)


Graduate education and continuing education are not only critical elements in CSU's mission but should be expanded and strengthened. Increasingly, economic success will hinge on more education beyond the baccalaureate, both at the Master's degree level and in other forms of continuing and certificated learning.

Additionally, CSU faculty-scholars need the interaction with students in graduate programs in which higher level teaching, learning, scholarship, and research combine to produce new knowledge and its effective transmission; moreover, CSU should seek to widen avenues for its faculty to lend its considerable talents to meeting needs for doctoral-level programs and research.

The particular strengths and roles of continuing education programs in CSU should be recognized. These self-support programs for many years have been effective examples of how to make both credit and non-credit education more accessible to thousands of people and of how to combine private and public support of higher education.

PRINCIPLE 6: Graduate education and continuing education are essential components of the mission of the California State University.

The recommendations in support of this principle are:

6a. Campus Priority The CSU system will provide increased access to graduate education and continuing education in programs central to the mission of the university, to lifelong opportunities for our students, and to the continued health of California's community and economy. These programs include the liberal arts and sciences that define a university, teaching, nursing, and such newer fields as biotechnology. This recommendation suggests a significant expansion of professional and other programs in areas of high need, financed at least partly through program reductions in other areas. New systems of financing these programs will be explored. (Continuing activity)
6b. System and Campus Priority In support of the CSU mission and recognizing its proven capacities to be creative, flexible, and innovative, continuing education is able to undertake key roles in such areas as assessing needs, testing new technologies, promoting collaboration among universities, starting new programs, and responding to emerging, transient, or cyclical needs. (Continuing activity)
6c. System and Campus Priority The expansion of opportunities in these areas will require a significant integration of programs in both the state-supported and fee-supported modes; the specifics of a more integrated program need to be developed, including the proper institutional and financial relationships. (Continuing exploration)
6d. System Priority The expansion of opportunity in these areas requires significant increases in financial aid for graduate, credential, and continuing education students. This initiative will require both institutional aid and a commitment to amend state and federal aid policies. (Continuing commitment)
6e. Campus Priority Universities will build new partnerships with community and business institutions to make education available beyond the campus, and to increase the immediacy of education that is applied and professional. (Continuing activity)
6f. System and Campus Priority The CSU and its universities will increase investment in their graduate and post-graduate educational programs while maintaining the CSU's commitment to undergraduate education. Consideration will be given to the following possibilities for increased support.
  1. Seek State recognition of the higher cost of graduate (relative to undergraduate) education and the alignment of funding accordingly (without reducing support of undergraduate education). (Continuing funding priority)

  2. Establishment of differential fees for undergraduate and graduate students to reflect the higher costs associated with graduate education, in parallel with increased financial aid for graduate students. (Continuing assessment)

  3. Allowing campuses and programs to charge differential fees in accordance with costs, competition in the marketplace, and demand, subject to adequate financial aid to assure access. (Continuing assessment)

6g. System and Campus Priority The CSU's role in doctoral and professional education will be increased through relationships with the University of California and other public and private higher education institutions. (Continuing commitment)


Securing the resources needed to support CSU's agenda for achieving even higher levels of quality and access is a responsibility to be shared by the Board of Trustees, Chancellor, campuses, faculty, students, alumni/ae, the California Faculty Association, private enterprise, and the State of California.

As the Board and Chancellor seek these resources for the whole system, the campus administrations, faculty, students, staff, and alumni/ae are asked to continue their effective past and current efforts, which have resulted in CSU's high quality and access. These efforts include substantial progress campuses have made in acting on many elements of the Cornerstones agenda. One purpose of this implementation plan is to establish for all campuses across the system a set of action priorities, which guide the allocation of time, effort, and resources. That many campuses have already institutionalized many of the Cornerstones initiatives speaks well of a shared sense of priorities.

Described below is a series of funding-related initiatives which CSU will seek. It is important to note that securing such support will in part depend upon the commitment of the campuses and Chancellor to a specific agenda and to a process that will provide evidence to funders that progress is being made on critical priorities. Seeking and securing more resources, in short, must go forward with commitment, action and accountability.

PRINCIPLE 7: The State of California must develop a new policy framework for higher education finance to assure that the goals of the Master Plan are met. This framework should be the basis for the subsequent development of periodic "compacts" between the State and the institutions of higher education.


PRINCIPLE 8: The responsibility for enhancing educational excellence, access, diversity, and financial stability shall be shared by the State, the California State University system, the campuses, our faculty and staff, alumni/ae and students.

CSU will pursue the following financing initiatives:

8a. Development of future budget compacts with the State.

The California State University is supported primarily by the State's general fund. The University is subject to the variability of the State's overall revenue and the uncertainty of the legislative budget process. Since 1995, the University has had a "compact" with the state that gives multi-year stability to the revenue expectations for the University. This multi-year expectation allows the University to plan for strategic investments in instruction and such instructional support, as technology, that requires implementation over several years. Other areas of need, like compensation increases and maintenance of plant, can be balanced over several years, allowing the University to make better judgments about the amount to spend on competing high priorities within limited resources. (Under negotiation)
8b. Continued commitment to closing the faculty salary gap.

Competitive salaries for all employees of the university are essential. CSU recruits and retains its faculty in competition with all universities. As enrollment increases and as faculty retire, a significant number of faculty will need to be hired. CSU determines the appropriate salary range by using a CPEC-approved comparison salary methodology. In each budget year a majority portion of CSU's budget increase is allocated for keeping salaries competitive, as measured by the comparison faculty salary survey. CSU is committed to closing the faculty salary gap. (Continuing funding priority)
8c. Study of faculty workload issues.

The system should respond to faculty concerns about heavy teaching and other responsibilities with a nationally-based comparative study. This review should document how CSU faculty workload compares to other universities with similar missions. To the extent that faculty utilize instructional technology and develop new ways of providing instruction without traditional fixed time classroom sessions, current methods may be no longer sufficient as ways of measuring both faculty and student workload. (By June, 2000)
8d. Seeking funding to support the integrated technology plan initiatives.

The CSU has determined that substantial investment in information technology is required to provide students with an educational experience that is appropriate for today's society. The investment in campus networks is a new demand on University resources. There is no doubt that this investment is essential. Today's networks provide access to the data and information of the world. They are an essential part of an educational experience in the 21st century. Also, the University needs to replace and update its current administrative systems for improved fiscal controls and improved student service. (Continuing funding priority)
8e. Seeking special state funding for faculty development and direct instructional support.

Instructional support, particularly for information technology equipment and instructional equipment replacement, are among the budget priorities considered by the Board of Trustees each year. A specific budget request will be developed that addresses faculty development required to meet the increased expectations of outcomes assessment and new methods of instruction as outlined in this Cornerstones Implementation Plan. (Continuing funding priority)
8f. Seeking sharper focus of instructionally-related technology support.

Over several years, there have grown many different initiatives and consultative structures that encourage new uses of technology, particularly information technology, in instructional support. These consultative structures will be examined to coordinate and focus the University's efforts in using technology to assist instruction. (By January, 2000)
8g. Seeking special funding for specific systemwide public school outreach efforts.

California has a diverse population. Students eligible for the CSU have come from schools with varying levels of preparation for CSU level work. CSU takes the responsibility to help students in high schools understand the preparation required to perform successfully at the collegiate level. The outreach efforts outlined in the Cornerstones Implementation Plan will be fully developed and the legislature and the Governor will be asked to provide special funds to implement new and coordinated outreach programs to help students prepare for and succeed in university study. (Continuing funding priority)
8h. Campus reinvestment of productivity. The CSU has a program of making continuous productivity improvements. These improvements may result in savings or may result in improved services at the same cost. It is critical that these productivity savings be reinvested at the campuses where they are generated and not be used by the state to diminish the state's obligation to support CSU's instructional program. (Continuing activity)
8i. Seeking categorical funding for applied research.

Applied research is a critical part of the CSU's mission to the people of California. In the last decade, the state has not provided any new support for this part of the University's activities. Investment by the state in applied research, often matched by industry, helps invigorate the state's economy, and assists in preparing students to address problems facing California's society. (Continuing funding priority)
8j. Seeking funding for joint doctoral programs based on need.

There are doctoral programs that CSU is in the best position to provide. Current policy and budget practices work against forming programs that could meet these needs. Fee and funding strategies for high demand doctoral programs should be explored with the state. (Policy under development)
8k. Advancement and fundraising

The Cornerstones priorities, once imbedded in campus academic plans, will provide development directors and other advancement professionals an opportunity to assist with a number of academic and program priorities. The university advancement officer functions best when the university has an academic plan to assist advancement to order its fund-raising, marketing, alumni/ae, and community relations efforts. External fund-raising is becoming extremely important in maintaining CSU's margin of excellence. (Continuing activity)


The Cornerstones process is about charting directions for CSU to carry out its mission for quality and access in ways that will meet the demands of the next decade. Cornerstones is also about a commitment to accountability, to assuring the public that, in exchange for its support, it can expect certain results. We trust that making a case based on clear evidence of CSU's value and commitment to continuous improvement will lead to even greater public support.

The nature, formats, and kind of information included need to be defined carefully with full participation by all parties–individual campuses, Trustees, Chancellor, faculty, students, alumni/ae, and the general public. Great sensitivity must be given to differences in institutional missions, identities, and cultures and to the appropriate level and detail of reports, particularly respecting the nature and process for sharing information about student achievement.

This accountability process is critical and should address at least two reporting relationships: that of each individual campus to the Board of Trustees and Chancellor and that of the overall CSU system to the general public and its governing bodies. The focus of campus accountability to the Board should reside at the highest institutional levels; the Chancellor and Board of Trustees should report for the system as a whole.

PRINCIPLE 9:The California State University will account for its performance in facilitating the development of its students, in serving the communities in which we reside, and in the continued contribution to the California economy and society through regular assessment of student achievement and through periodic reports to the public regarding our broader performance.

The recommendation in support of this principle provides:

9. System and Campus Priority The CSU will expand and/or develop mechanisms for evaluating institutional performance, and develop annual reports appropriately formatted to reach different audiences, describing institutional performance in the areas of student achievement, student satisfaction, the quality of teaching and support services, administrative effectiveness, the provision of service to the community and to the state's economy and society, alumni/ae satisfaction, employer satisfaction, and student, faculty, and staff satisfaction. (By May, 1999)


Cornerstones will be successfully implemented to the extent that its initiatives are institutionalized by the campuses, particularly through their strategic planning and consequent actions. Virtually all actions that affect quality and access reside with the campuses, where CSU's mission is carried out. While all of the recommendations in this implementation plan are expected to be addressed by each university, it is expected that for a vast majority of them, campuses will have substantial flexibility in how they are implemented. This is especially true for initiatives concerning the teaching and learning process, like learning outcomes and assessment, faculty-student interaction, and academic programs.

Some initiatives suggest consideration of such new methods, as the use of technology- enhanced instruction for augmenting the classroom experience or for extending instruction to place- or time-bound students. Determinations as to their use on an experimental or permanent basis should reside with the faculty, who are in the best position to determine if the primary criterion of quality will be at least maintained, if not increased, by the use of such new methods.

It also is important in calling for faculty to consider other approaches that the system support the necessary experimentation. Support includes not only providing readily accessible information technology resources and infrastructure, but also creating an environment that recognizes the faculty time needed to develop and test new procedures and the fact that some experiments conclude with negative findings, which also have value.

Finally, as individual campuses continue to address the recommendations, the system commits to remove barriers to their effective implementation, including relaxation on a pilot basis of such policies as those in Title 5.

PRINCIPLE 10: The California State University campuses shall have significant autonomy in developing their own missions, identity, and programs, with institutional flexibility in meeting clearly defined system policy goals.

The recommendations supporting this principle are:

10a. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will streamline the process governing program development and program approval, minimizing standardization and maximizing institutional flexibility. All of this will balance against greater campus and system accountability for outcomes. (Continuing activity implementing July 1998 Board policy)
10b. System and Campus Priority The CSU system and each university will work cooperatively with external agencies [Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC), etc.], to facilitate appropriate approvals of new and experimental programs and to develop appropriate accountability frameworks. (Continuing activity)
10c. System Priority The CSU system will review current Title 5 and university code requirements to reduce or eliminate regulatory constraints where possible and will authorize appropriate experiments, to promote ways to increase the effectiveness of teaching, learning, and the general CSU mission. (Title 5 review by fall, 2000; continuing commitment to encourage experimentation)

Back to Cornerstones Home Page