My best friend from back East recently told me about NBC’s television show Community, now in its third season, which takes place in a Colorado community college and tells the story of an offbeat group of students: a lawyer suspended from practice, an aging millionaire, a straightedge and strait-A student with an erstwhile Adderall addiction, a football star, a single mother, and so forth.
If I were on the show, I guess I’d be the studious and serious Annie Edison – not because an addiction to prescription study aids caused me to have a nervous breakdown and jump through a plate-glass window, but because I am not, according to a task force assembled to review educational and financial policy at City College of San Francisco, the community college "type."
I take classes at City College, despite already having a degree from a well-regarded university back East, and I love it. I have amazing teachers whose dedication to their jobs measures up to anything I experienced during my undergraduate career. But if the Student Success Task Force’s agenda passes in Sacramento this spring, my access to these opportunities will be targeted — along with that of many other students who don’t fit into the task force’s streamlined model of successful community education.
The SSTF has assembled an eighty page document recommending that sweeping changes to the funding model of California’s community colleges be passed in state legislature. The intention is to make more funding available for “typical” community college students – those on the fast track to their Associate’s Degrees or to transfer to a four year institution – but the point (one that NBC's comedy makes lavish use of to draw its laughs) is that community college students are rarely typical.
The recommendations are meant to support full-time students, but even among students who have the same goals in mind as the task force – an AA or transfer – the ability to attend classes full time is rare. Many students can only take a partial load because of work or family obligations; students struggling hardest to make ends meet, working multiple jobs, are those most in need of the funding the SSTF would deny part-timers. In addition, there are those who want to improve their skills in order to find work or do a better job in the work they already have — goals which will ultimately serve to boost the state economy, which is, of course, where the motivation for the task force’s recommendation lie in the first place. There are older citizens looking to stay sharp and expand their horizons, there are high school students seeking enrichment — and yes, there are those, like me, who are simply there to be educated. After all, that’s the whole point of a “community” college in the first place, right?
In addition to eliminating state funding for any student not transferring to a university within a strict two-year deadline (regardless of that student’s residency), the report recommends eliminating non-credit courses, creating a one-size-fits-all placement test system, and cutting down on any course offerings which don’t feed directly into a degree-granting program.
These changes would not only be detrimental to students who see ongoing education as a vital part of a fulfilling life, and to professionals seeking to develop their skills, but to the degree-seeking students themselves. They would lose the opportunity to interact with a wide range of students from all sorts of educational and professional backgrounds. They would lose the opportunity to supplement their core courses with a wider and more enriching curriculum, and they would lost the opportunity to participate in a system of community education that values learning for learning’s sake – not because a degree or a job depends on it, but because it makes us better, fuller human beings.