Enrollment Management Revisited Again: Post Pandemic

Event Jump Nav Block Mobile

General Concerns
Educational Policies Committee

Part I. Introduction

In 2009, the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) adopted a paper titled Enrollment Management Revisited that sought to provide an updated, fresh perspective on enrollment management, to provide faculty with a detailed backdrop of the higher education landscape, and to empower faculty with “strategies to assist them as they participate in local enrollment management activities and policy development”(ASCCC, 2009a).

The current environment, after the 2020 Covid-19 Pandemic, that higher education finds itself operating in, both at national and state levels, reinforces the call to action made in the 2009 paper. Therefore, while the basis of the 2009 paper remains relevant and useful for ongoing and needed conversations on enrollment management and the role of faculty and academic senates in those discussions, important systemic and structural changes prompted the ASCCC to pass a new resolution at its 2018 Fall Plenary Session.

F18 17.01 Guided Pathways, Strategic Enrollment Management, and Program Planning

Whereas, Previous resolutions and papers from the Academic Senate have encouraged faculty participation in curriculum development, program planning, enrollment management, and scheduling;

Whereas, California Community Colleges Guided Pathways is intended to create a sustainable framework for institutions to develop local implementations that serve the needs of all students in helping them identify and meet their educational goals;

Whereas, Availability of courses and programs in conjunction with the time and place they are offered represents key factors that directly impact the success of students; and

Whereas, Colleges have traditionally developed schedules by disciplines or departments in contrast to considerations across disciplines and across general education;

Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge local academic senates to review the faculty representation on enrollment management committees to ensure broad representation, program expertise, and general education expertise; and

Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges update the paper Enrollment Management Revisited (2009) in light of the new Student-Centered Funding Formula, California Community Colleges Guided Pathways, and the implementation of AB 705 (Irwin, 2017) and bring the updated paper to the Spring 2020 Plenary Session for adoption.

This paper is a response to Resolution 17.01 F18 and aims to build on the still relevant information offered in the 2009 paper related to “strategies to assist [faculty] as they participate in local enrollment management activities and policy development” (ASCCC, 2009a). Hence, where appropriate, this paper will incorporate sections from the 2009 paper that remain valid even in the current context.   

The COVID-19 global pandemic led to significant changes in many people’s social lives and interactions, and the implications these changes have had on higher education demand a rethinking of enrollment management. In addition to the global pandemic crisis, the California Community Colleges system has undertaken important and needed systemic initiatives—such as guided pathways, the Student-Centered Funding Formula, the Chancellor’s Office Vision for Success, College Promise, and expansion of dual enrollment—that have resulted in structural changes that necessitate a strategic approach to enrollment management. Legislative actions regarding equitable placement—AB 705 and AB 1705—and transfer—AB 928 and AB 1111—have current and future impact on enrollment management discussions. These systemic initiatives were already impacting enrollment, and when they were combined with the unforeseen global pandemic, conversations regarding enrollment management took on a much different tenor than that of 2009.

In 2009, the California Community Colleges system was feeling the effects of the Great Recession. Much like in 2009, the system is currently looking to navigate a challenging environment where recovery from loss of enrollment due to the global pandemic has been slow and painful. Yet, what has not changed is the charge leveled in the 2009 paper: “Whether in times of scarcity or abundance of student demand for courses, faculty must become involved in the development of enrollment management decisions that protect students’ access and nurture their success in the learning environment” (ASCCC 2009a). This paper does not seek to supplant the 2009 paper; instead, it seeks to help build upon relevant information from that paper in the context of the second and third decades of the 21st century. This paper is intended to provide a source of knowledge and direction for local academic senates and those who participate in enrollment management discussions on their campus.

What is Enrollment Management in California’s Community Colleges?

Historically, discussions about enrollment management typically focus on universities, whose aim is to maximize or limit enrollment by selecting the most prepared students in ways that seem foreign for California community colleges, which remain as open-access institutions of higher education. When one defines enrollment management for California’s community colleges, much broader educational factors should guide faculty discussions with other constituent groups. The 1999 ASCCC paper The Role of Academic Senates in Enrollment Management quoted Michael G. Dolence as follows:

The term “Strategic Enrollment Management” (SEM) is a comprehensive process designed to help an institution achieve and maintain the optimum recruitment, retention, and graduation rates of students, where optimum is defined within the academic context of the institution. As such SEM is an institution-wide process that embraces virtually every aspect of an institution’s function and culture. (ASCCC 1999, p. 4)

Notably, this definition includes the words “within the academic context,” serving as a reminder that academic considerations such as student access and success should be paramount in decision making. The definition also points out the goals of student retention and graduation rates. While those goals are appropriate, they are insufficient, for California’s community colleges fulfill multiple missions. An improved definition would make reference to students meeting all of their academic goals, whether certificates, degrees, career skills, transfer, basic skills, or enrichment.

Public universities in California have historically managed over-enrollment and under-enrollment by raising or lowering the academic standards for admission. Since community colleges are committed to open access, scheduling and course offerings have been used as the principal mechanisms for controlling or enhancing growth. Today, enrollment management increasingly is being utilized to address a broad range of college policies and processes, including matriculation, onboarding, curriculum development, instructional delivery and style, and student support. All of these matters must be placed within the proper institutional context.

The 1999 paper The Role of Academic Senates in Enrollment Management introduces the concept of enrollment management by stating that “[l]ocal academic senates are in a position to frame and articulate the philosophical context of enrollment management from a faculty perspective” and then proceeds to define the term as follows:

Enrollment management is a process by which students enrolled and class sections offered are coordinated to achieve maximum access and success for students. All enrollment management decisions must be made in the context of the local college mission and educational master plan in addition to fiscal and physical considerations. (ASCCC 1999, p. 3)

Several aspects of this introduction and definition are worth highlighting. First, the statement that “[l]ocal academic senates are in a position to frame and articulate the philosophical context of enrollment management from a faculty perspective” still serves as an important reminder to academic senates to ensure that their colleges’ enrollment policies are developed with faculty at the table and with their students foremost in mind. Academic senates should ask what their local enrollment management policies are and whether they reflect the academic senate’s philosophy, whether the local academic senate has such a philosophy, and whether the college has an approved enrollment management policy. If the answer is no to any of these questions, the academic senate should take the lead to remedy the situation.

Secondly, the 1999 definition continues to reflect a sound and still viable definition of what enrollment management should be in community colleges, with a focus both on access and student success. However, the interplay of these two factors poses a challenge: a college would not want to focus on access exclusively and encourage enrollment practices that hinder success, or vice versa. For example, a program’s enrollment could increase and realize more success in terms of completion if no prerequisites were required, or success might increase if the college became more selective about whom it serves.

Enrollment management includes several components: first a philosophy, which then informs an enrollment management policy, procedures, and daily implementation practices. While the level of faculty participation in the procedures and implementation will vary across the state, academic senates should ensure that they are at the front of the line in the development of a philosophy and policies for enrollment management.

A comprehensive enrollment management policy takes into account such things as the overall balance of the curricular offerings, department and program plans, the college’s mission and educational master plan, accreditation requirements, certificate and degree requirements, student needs and interests, facilities needs and availability, staffing, performance goals, program discontinuance and reduction policies, and new program development criteria. Enrollment management policies and practices need to consider the multiple missions of the California community colleges while maintaining or increasing student access and student success. The underlying challenge, however, is how to make best use of resources without compromising effective educational practice.

As local academic senates discuss enrollment management, one of the first reviews should be whether the college has a policy and whether it needs to be revised. The following are several questions to include in enrollment management policy discussions by an academic senate:

  1. How does the enrollment management policy link to the college’s stated mission and the educational master plan? What is the relationship between other college committees and processes—budget and allocation committees, deans’ council, union—and the enrollment management processes? Does the college’s program discontinuance policy also have criteria for program reduction, or should such criteria also be in the policy? Do policies also address program growth criteria?
  2. What are the academic priorities for the college or district at this time and for the future, both short term and long term? Do certain programs require additional resources, and, if so, for how long? What weight is given to factors such as past enrollment data versus courses needed for students to reach their many different goals?
  3. In a multi-college district, does the enrollment management policy—as well as the processes or results—need to be the same at each campus or college? What local or district considerations or issues need to be evaluated and agreed upon? Can local decisions be made within some general guidelines? What does the faculty bargaining agreement say about these matters?
  4. When new courses or programs are developed, should they automatically be given slots in the schedule? How do they fit into the overall offerings?
  5. How can enrollment management committee members be encouraged to consider the overall needs of the students and college rather than only argue for their programs? How can the college prevent pitting faculty against faculty or departments against departments? Should committee members leave department concerns at the door and look at the big picture of the college? If the faculty are not successful at that, does that decision contribute to administrators making enrollment management decisions without faculty present?
  6. What are the minimum class size policies, which is also a collective bargaining issue? How is class size in distance education addressed? Would it be useful to consider something like the “The Break Even Calculator,” which the CCA/CTE union developed to calculate the number of students needed in each class in order for the college to break even in costs associated with teaching that class? Can the college provide flexibility within a department by offering small sections if others are larger and the overall numbers are sufficient?
  7. If the college needs to increase or decrease enrollment, how will decisions be made? What is the process? What data will be used to make decisions? Are across the board reductions acceptable, such as reducing all departments by 10%? If not, how can appropriate or necessary reductions be made? How might a policy prevent the appearance of favoritism among programs when reducing?
  8. How can the policy take into account the effects that will occur to student services when scheduling changes are made, such as to weekend or off-site classes?
  9. How does the policy recognize the many variables that go into class section additions and subtractions? Can the guidelines address these variables and provide clear direction for both additions and subtractions?
  10. How is a balanced schedule determined, with considerations for weekend, summer, evening, weekday, and inter-session offerings as well as across programs and departments?

Academic senates will also want to have discussions about applied procedures related to established policies. Faculty must be mindful of holistic support for students in these procedures, including taking into account the real-life barriers students face.

The following list offers additional considerations for enrollment management procedures, including scheduling:

  • What roles do the academic senate, discipline faculty, and faculty chairs play in the daily procedures of enrollment management?
  • If urgent decisions must be made about course offerings, how are they made and by whom?
  • When classes are canceled, how are students immediately notified and by whom?
  • What are the criteria for opening additional sections when needed during the registration period? What is the waitlist procedure?
  • Whenever reductions are made, what criteria need to be considered, such as the impact on students meeting their goals—whether for basic skills, certificates, degrees, or others—or eliminating the sections needed for a full-time load, which is also a union consideration?

Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) in the California Community College System

Over the past several years, the California Community Colleges system has evolved from the idea of enrollment management to Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) (California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office, n.d.b). The SEM program was created in 2016 through the Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative at the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office (CCCCO). Many of the California community colleges have been a part of the SEM program, which includes multi-day academies and SEM coaches. The SEM program has also produced numerous guides and resources to help colleges to reframe their enrollment management. These resource documents can be accessed through the CCCCO Vision Resource Center (CCCCO, n.d.b) and include guides on the following:

  • A roadmap for strategic enrollment management planning;
  • Developing and managing the class schedule;
  • High impact retention, persistence, and success practices for strategic enrollment management;
  • Support services for SEM;
  • Data tools and metrics for strategic enrollment management; and
  • Understanding and calculating FTES and efficiency.

These documents demonstrate the need for holistic planning for strategic enrollment management that impacts all areas and roles of the college, including all faculty, whether instructional, non-instructional, part-time, full- time, tenured, or non-tenured.
The SEM framework identifies several strategies and practices that are essential (Hasson, 2019):

  • Scheduling and Program Pathways—Clearly defining program pathways that lead to degree, certificate, and transfer, all aligned with student education planning;
  • Support and Services—Proactive and integrated wraparound student academic and support services;
  • Marketing and Communication—Strategies for targeted student groups and promoting the educational value of the institution;
  • Outreach—Streamlined recruitment and admissions policies, processes, and practices;
  • Success and Completion—Equitable focus on saleable strategies to improve student success and completion; and
  • Retention and Persistence—Focus on equitably improving course retention and persistence.

One of the key elements of the SEM program is a focus on aligning enrollment management directly with the college's mission and other institutional planning processes and documents. This practice is consistent with the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges’ (ACCJC) mission-centric policies and standards (ACCJC, n.d.).  The SEM program recommends that SEM planning be purposely aligned to the college decision-making processes, that SEM goals are aligned to the mission and strategic planning goals, and that SEM must be developed using a cross-functional group that includes the expertise of instructional and non-instructional faculty. “Since all areas of a college impact enrollment and outcomes, all constituent groups must be engaged and there must be good representation from staff in instructional and non-instructional units and departments” (Hasson, 2019). The program recommends creating a cross-functional planning group to support the operationalization of strategic enrollment management.

A Philosophy of Enrollment Management

Policies and practices for implementing enrollment management should be based on a clear philosophy that is aligned with the college mission and created collegially.

Two broad approaches may explain a philosophy of managing community college enrollment:

  • Courses are selected and scheduled to meet students’ needs with an emphasis on the current students and ensuring their success and goal attainment, or
  • Courses are offered to maximize apportionment, often with a focus on attracting new students.

While these two approaches are not mutually exclusive, they can compete with one another. The first philosophy echoes the theme of the ASCCC’s 1999 enrollment management paper— putting students’ needs first—while the second perspective narrowly focuses on what is sometimes referred to as chasing apportionment. Faculty need to be ever vigilant regarding the motivations for enrollment management decisions, questioning whether maximizing apportionment should be the primary factor in enrollment management to the exclusion of other values. This focus supports the old adage that it is easier to keep students than to recruit them.

Strategies for Local Discussions of Enrollment Management and Policy Development

No single best practice can fit all colleges in their development of enrollment management policies and procedures because colleges are unique in their curricular offerings, student needs, committee structures, and local cultures. Various suggestions might assist different academic senates and faculty members as they participate in these discussions. The following ideas are presented as a smorgasbord from which to select the most appropriate approaches for the local circumstances. These ideas also can be used to begin or advance any local conversation about enrollment management.

An academic senate might develop a statement of its philosophy about enrollment management, which could include such values as the following:

  • A focus on student needs, access, and success as well as the quality of programs and services;
  • A recognition of the multiple missions of the community college system and a commitment to the local balance of course offerings as determined through participatory governance;
  • A commitment to using good qualitative and quantitative data to inform decisions;
  • A recognition of fiscal and facilities realities;
  • Compliance with regulations;
  • A recognition that student retention, student persistence, and student success are inherently linked and are key measures that can be used to evaluate effective enrollment management plans; and
  • A commitment to transparency, inclusiveness, and collaboration.

As colleges institutionalize a commitment to student success, they may need to adjust their course schedules in terms of what they offer, when, and to whom. California’s community colleges take pride in their multiple missions as well as enrichment and lifelong learning. These missions lay the foundation for determining the courses, programs, and services provided. Yet, if a college is not mindful, one or more of its multiple missions may be compromised. For example, some people both inside and outside the system remain narrowly focused on the transfer mission as if it were the only mission. Faculty need to be vigilant regarding behaviors that limit options for students and compromise fulfilling the locally determined college mission.

In a 2007 Rostrum article, ASCCC President Ian Walton reminded readers, “Just setting foot on campus changes the life of many of our most disadvantaged residents—whether they take a noncredit ESL class or a single class for their employment or a more structured program” (Walton, 2007). The ASCCC is committed to multiple missions for California community colleges, as affirmed by Resolution 6.03 F04 [1], and in order to preserve these multiple missions, colleges must provide a range of courses, although local colleges determine the balance of offerings that is appropriate for them and their communities. While periodically some people argue against the necessity of certain courses in the schedule, the local faculty who work directly with students understand and recognize what the students need in order to complete their various goals: occupational preparation, skills building, general education, degree requirements, enrichment, and transfer preparation.

Two of the recommendations in the 2001 ASCCC paper The Faculty Role in Planning and Budgeting not only speak to some fundamental principles for budget processes but also might be adapted to apply to enrollment management:

  • The enrollment management philosophy, in an academic context, should be a bottom up process that trusts the expertise of faculty to determine what is needed to serve students most effectively.
  • If the academic senate finds that existing enrollment management policy or processes are not providing students with an education of the highest possible quality, the academic senate should initiate appropriate changes to existing policy/processes (ASCCC, 2001).

These caveats can be used when academic senates or other college committees develop a local enrollment management philosophy statement, as the processes should be guided by a philosophy that the academic senate has developed either alone or in collaboration with other college constituents.

Title 5 §53200 establishes the academic senate’s roles, including responsibility for recommendations about the academic and professional matters of curriculum, educational program development, standards and policies regarding student preparation and success, and processes for planning and budget. The faculty understand why students need a general education and should determine the pedagogically appropriate class size, the course sequencing, and the prerequisite courses. Even the task of preparing a class schedule requires a balance of principles and pragmatism and certainly needs faculty participation. Scheduling includes clarifying what students need, what classes they take, when they take the classes, and which faculty members and facilities are available, all of which must be considered along with budgetary constraints and with meaningful faculty involvement.

Part II. Enrollment Management: Data, Planning, and Funding

Enrollment management is a complex process that requires extensive data analysis, planning, and dialog. Important considerations include data types and sources, alignment of enrollment management to college planning and priorities, and impact of the Student-Centered Funding Formula. The CCCCO provides multiple dashboards for colleges to track longitudinal data. The following graphs offer a picture of statewide community college enrollment trends that can be found through the Chancellor’s Office Data Mart (CCCCO, n.d.a).

Figure 1: Student Enrollment 2017-2022 Headcount

Figure 1. Downward trend of Annual Headcount from 4,150,000 in 2017-2018 down to 3,300,000 in 2021-2022.

The data on headcount shows a significant decrease in the number of individual students enrolling in California community colleges, indicating a 19.99% decrease over five years. Many of these students were impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic that began in 2020, but data shows that the decrease in enrollment was already beginning in 2018.

Figure 2: Student Enrollment 2017-2022 Credit FTE

Figure 2 shows a slight downward trend of Annual Credit FTES from 1,118,241 in 2017-2018 down to 913,076 iin 2021-2022

Similarly, an 18.37% decrease occurred in credit full-time equivalent students (FTES) over the same five years. FTES is defined as the equivalent of one student enrolled fifteen hours per week for two 17.5 week semesters. This calculation is how colleges measure enrollment, and it is largely how system funding is determined and distributed. It assumes a student has 15 hours x 35 weeks = 525 hours of instruction in the academic year (Kern Community College District, n.d.).

Figure 3: Student Enrollment 2017-2022 Noncredit FTE

Figure 3 shows a downward trend in Annual Credit FTES from 70,627 in 2017-2018 to 30,530 in 2020-2021 then up to 36,188 the next year.

Noncredit enrollment was even more heavily impacted due to the Covid-19 pandemic, notably losing 48.75% of FTES over the same five years with a significant 46.37% loss between 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. Since 2021, noncredit enrollment has started to inch higher

Figure 4: Student Ethnicity 2021-2022

Figure 4 shows American Indian/Alaskan Native and Pacific Islander below .5%. African-American, Filipino, Multi-Ethnic and Unknown ranges between 4-5.5% with Asian at 11%. White Non-Hispanic is 24% with Hispanic the highest at 47%.

This figure reports 2021-2022 California community college student headcount disaggregated by race and ethnicity. Colleges can also look at longitudinal data on race and ethnicity to identify trends. Data from 2021 shows that Hispanic students are the largest student group in the system. It also shows that 4.15% of students identify as multi-ethnic.

Figure 5: Student Age 2021-2022

Figure 5 shows student ages for 2021-2022 wiht 19 and less the highest at 608,000 students with a down trend to ages 35-39 at 103,000 then up slightly with 50 plus at 138,000 students.

This figure shows that most students in the California Community Colleges system are under the age of 25. Through enrollment management, colleges may wish to identify opportunities to enroll older or non-traditional students.

These charts show some of the statewide enrollment trends over five years and illustrate a few of the variables that colleges should consider when planning their course offerings. Enrollment patterns are not static, and the students who enroll today may not share the same characteristics as those of ten or twenty years ago. While the state level data may be interesting, this information alone is insufficient for local enrollment management decisions. Colleges and districts would benefit from looking at similar data about local student characteristics, including information about student course selection and enrollment patterns across academic programs. If enrollment management policies do not take local student characteristics and trends into account, the planning is incomplete.

In addition to data on access, enrollment management planning should also consider data elements such as retention, success, and persistence.

Figure 6: Student Success Rate for Fall 2022 Disaggregated by Race

Figure 6 shows Fall 2022 ethnic rates with Unknown, White Non-Hispanic and Asian between 80-82%, Multi-Ethnic and American Indian/Alaskan at 70 and 75% with African-American, Pacific Islander and Hispanic 66 to 69%.

Discussion on success data could center on equity gaps such as those shown by this figure. This data indicates that African-American, Hispanic, Pacific islander, and American Indian/Alaskan Native students have lower course success rates. Those students may be less likely to persist to the following semester.

Figure 7: Fall 2022 Retention Rates by Ethnicity.

Figure 7 shows Fall 2022 Retention rates with Unknown, White Non-Hispanic and Asian between 91 to 93% with other ethnic groups ranging from 85% to 88%.

This figure again illustrates a gap in retention rates for Africa-American, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Hispanic, and Pacific Islander students.

Academic senates should work with their institutional research colleagues to access and review these data points in the context of student success and strategic enrollment management.

Importance of Data Disaggregation

When reviewing data, colleges should disaggregate that information for a more complete analysis. This practice supports colleges’ integration of inclusion, diversity, equity. anti-racism, and accessibility into enrollment management plans. The CCCCO and local data tools and dashboards provide opportunities to disaggregate data by multiple factors, including by demographics, financial aid status, and other impacts. This process encourages colleges to look at individual groups, identify specific needs, and create targeted interventions.

  • The 80% Rule: The 80% rule is based on the question of whether any subgroups achieve the desired outcome less than 80% of the time that the highest achieving or reference subgroup successfully achieves that outcome.
  • The Proportionality Index: The proportionality index helps determine, for example, whether a subgroup of students that represents 45% of the student body also represents at least 45% of the students who achieve the desired outcome. Representation in the outcome group at a rate lower than their representation in the general student body may indicate disproportionate impact, depending on how large the observed difference is.
  • The Percentage Point Gap Index: The percentage point gap approach reflects the difference in percentage points between a given demographic group and the observed overall average or mean across all demographic groups. The larger the difference, the more likely that such a difference is reflective of disproportionate impact.

Student Success Metrics and the Vision for Success

In addition to demographic data provided on Data Mart, the CCCCO provides a dashboard of student success metrics that focus on students’ progression along their educational journeys from access to completion (CalPass Plus, n.d.). Such data on retention and success is essential for conversations about enrollment management and keeping students enrolled so that they complete their educational  goals. These metrics align with the CCCCO Vision for Success goals, which include the following (CCCCO, n.d.f):

  1. Over 5 years, increase by at least 20% the number of California Community Colleges students annually who acquire associate degrees, credentials, certificates, or specific skill sets that prepare them for in-demand jobs.
  2. Over five years, increase by 35% the number of California Community Colleges students transferring to a UC or CSU.
  3. Over 5 years, decrease the average number of units accumulated by California Community Colleges students earning associate degrees.
  4. Over 5 years, increase the percentage of exiting CTE students who report being employed in their fields of study.
  5. Reduce equity gaps across all of the above measures through faster improvements among traditionally underrepresented student groups.
  6. Over 5 years, reduce regional achievement gaps across all of the above measures through faster improvements among colleges located in regions with the lowest educational attainment of adults.

Per the CCCCO, colleges are required to align their local goals with those of the Vision for Success. Sample enrollment management data related to the Vision for Success includes metrics such as the following:

  • Applicants who enrolled in a California community college.
  • Course success rate.
  • Completed transfer-level math and English.
  • Persisted from fall to spring.
  • Earned 9+ career education units.
  • Successfully completed semester unit thresholds in an academic year.
  • Transferred to a four-year institution.

Data regarding the student success metrics can be broken down by college, district, and region if colleges wish to compare information. Data can also be disaggregated by race or ethnicity, gender, age, financial aid status, special programs (DSPS, Veterans, Foster Youth), and first-generation students.

Program Review, Program Creation, and Discontinuance

A focus on systematic evaluation of data can be incorporated into a college’s program review processes. Program review is a powerful tool for faculty to longitudinally review data, identify equity gaps, and propose new ideas. The ASCCC has various resources, including the 2009 paper Program Review: Setting a Standard (ASCCC, 2009b), that discuss the essential role of faculty in program review. Also aligned to academic and professional matters under Title 5 §53200 are faculty driven processes in program creation and discontinuance (ASCCC, 1998), which should also include enrollment-focused data. Due to the essential nature of this data to the work of academic senates, faculty and local senates have easy access to live data. Academic senates should work with local institutional research offices to set up access and support.

Guided Pathways and Enrollment Management

All of the California community colleges have adopted the guided pathways framework. While implementation of a scaled structural reform will look different at each college or district, the guided pathways framework has two central goals: improving student success outcomes for all students and closing equity gaps for racially minoritized students. The second through fourth whereas clauses of ASCCC Resolution 17.01 F18 assert the importance of faculty involvement in an intentional strategic enrollment management approach:

Whereas, California Community Colleges Guided Pathways is intended to create a sustainable framework for institutions to develop local implementations that serve the needs of all students in helping them identify and meet their educational goals;

Whereas, Availability of courses and programs in conjunction with the time and place they are offered represents key factors that directly impact the success of students; and

Whereas, Colleges have traditionally developed schedules by disciplines or departments in contrast to considerations across disciplines and across general education;

The guided pathways framework is structured on four pillars: clarify the path, enter the path, stay on the path, and ensure students are learning. At the heart of the structural reform is an effort to redesign the student experience and close equity gaps to ensure all students are able to achieve their educational and career goals. For example, colleges are encouraged to break down silos and coordinate across disciplines and programs. Within the clarify the path pillar, colleges have grouped programs of study and disciplines into similar career clusters or meta-majors to encourage interdisciplinary collaboration and community for both faculty and students.

Many colleges have developed some version of an academic map that provides students with a big picture view of their academic pathways, including general education and major program courses, milestones, and other important information. If created with intentionality, these academic maps can serve not only the students but the college’s enrollment management strategy as well. Courses are listed on the academic map term by term to indicate the preferred order of course taking and hopefully the actual availability of required courses within each term. Course availability should not be a mystery to the students at any point in their journeys at the institution, except in rare circumstances such as the sudden loss of the sole instructor that teaches a course. Course scheduling also should not be a mystery for the counselors and other student service paraprofessionals that help students navigate educational planning and course scheduling.

While academic maps are typically created between discipline faculty and counselors, tailored student education plans are created between students and counselors based on student goals and needs. Both of these instruments—academic maps and student education plans—are only as good as the availability, timing, and schedule of courses. Colleges should take steps to consider how students can achieve the goals of the map with current scheduling and offerings. Guided pathways offers a systematic approach to enrollment management, one that requires structural reform that is coordinated and is student and equity focused.

Additionally, given that the emphasis of guided pathways is to eliminate racial equity gaps, understanding students’ needs is critical for success in scheduling. For example, a college may identify Latinx/Chicanx students as being disproportionately impacted in its STEM meta-major or pathway. Discipline faculty within the STEM meta-major or pathway may engage in collaborative program review where data is reviewed and analyzed. This type of collaboration may lead to both structural and also programmatic reform. The structural reform is where academic maps and scheduling patterns may reflect the needs of the Latinx/Chicanx student population, such as offering more evening courses or providing students with mentors. These types of changes would not only impact and improve outcomes for Latinx/Chicanx students, but they would also be beneficial to others as well. Thus, scheduling becomes more dynamic and responsive to students’ actual needs: in this case, the needs of disproportionately impacted students within the STEM meta-major or pathway.

Non-traditional strategies geared to meet the needs of diverse student populations at the college should be used in order to retain these student populations. The timing, modality, and selection of courses need to be flexible. Online and hybrid course delivery, short-term courses, and stackable credentials that lead to careers, degrees, and transfer are essential to supporting students’ economic upward mobility. College calendars and curriculum development processes need to be structurally responsive.

 CCCCO Required College Specific Student Equity Plans

Since the 2009 ASCCC paper on enrollment management, the CCCCO has introduced a new initiative called the Student Equity and Achievement Program (CCCCO, n.d.e). In 2018, this program was created by merging the funding from three previous initiatives: The Student Success and Support Program, the Basic Skills Initiative, and Student Equity. Contingent to the funding of this initiative is the requirement for each college to have a Student Equity Plan. Colleges are required to review disaggregated data on success indicators including successful enrollment, completion of transfer-level math and English, persistence from primary term to secondary term, completion, and transfer. Again, these data points align to the goals in the CCCCO Vision for Success. This disaggregated data is used to pinpoint disproportionately impacted student groups. The RP Group has created a resource on Using Disproportionate Impact Methods to Identify Equity Gaps (Sosa, 2022). This report discusses the CCCCO definition of disproportionate impact:

According to the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (CCCCO), “disproportionate impact is a condition where some students’ access to key resources and supports and ultimately their academic success may be hampered by inequitable practices, policies and approaches to student support” (Harris, 2013). Therefore, differences in educational outcomes between subgroups of students may suggest that one group has less access to support services, needs relatively greater support, and/or must address certain obstacles in order to attain those outcomes at rates comparable to their peers. (p.6)

In multi-year Student Equity Plans, colleges are required to review data and create action plans to address disproportionate impact. Work done in enrollment management should align with and be informed by data and action planning in the college’s Student Equity Plan.

Environmental Scans

In addition to internal data analysis, colleges should also use external environmental scans to create a picture of enrollment trends. Many environmental factors can impact enrollment. The economy causes shifts in enrollment, as does the number of students in the K-12 system. Potential external data elements could include the following (Hasson & White, 2019):

  • Community demographics: population size, projections, ethnicity, gender, age, education, and income.
  • High school pipeline: graduation rates by county and school and number of those graduates who enroll in community college.
  • Economic workforce trends: labor market data, unemployment rates, job openings, and projected growth.
  • Competitive landscape: competition of other public and private colleges.
  • Technology: innovations, new machinery, software, or improved production processes.
  •  Community views: advisory boards, community organizations, or governments.

This data, both qualitative and quantitative, should be reviewed as part of a comprehensive enrollment management process.

Enrollment Management and the Student-Centered Funding Formula (SCFF)

In addition to understanding how colleges receive apportionment, faculty involved in enrollment management should consider how the economic health of the state affects funding for local districts. In the worst of times, the state reduces all funding to colleges, and sometimes funding is suddenly reduced in the middle of the academic year. Funding reductions can have many effects: colleges reduce their class offerings, part-time faculty are not re-hired, faculty may be pressured to increase class size beyond agreed-upon and pedagogically-sound limits, students cannot get the classes they need to complete certificates, degrees, or transfer, the students with the most need for support—financial and personal—will not enroll or will drop out, and colleges are denied growth funding and are forced to provide classes and offer student services without remuneration or apportionment.

In difficult economic times, colleges must sometimes hold a difficult dialog about what their core programs are and which are more peripheral to the essential core of the college. Another consequence of state budget constraints is that during such periods, a common suggestion is to increase student fees, which in turn affects enrollment. The ASCCC has a long history of strong opposition to fee increases.

As California community colleges are primarily funded through FTES generation, the links between enrollment management and funding are obvious. As colleges discuss changes in enrollment management, the Student-Centered Funding Formula (SCFF) is the unavoidable focus. Colleges should acknowledge the current SCFF structure and its benefits and limitations and include these factors in discussions and planning.

The CCCCO defines the various aspects of the SCFF formula as follows (CCCCO, n.d.d):

  • Base allocation, which largely reflects enrollment;
  • A supplemental allocation based on the numbers of students receiving a College Promise Grant, students receiving a Pell Grant, and students covered by AB 540; and
  • A student success allocation based on outcomes that include the number of students earning associate degrees and credit certificates, the number of students transferring to four-year colleges and universities, the number of students who complete transfer-level math and English within their first year, the number of students who complete nine or more career education units, and the number of students who have attained the regional living wage.

These calculations do not take into account the real-life experiences of students. Discussions of quantitative data points should be balanced with a focus on student success and completion. Some courses may need to maximize enrollment, while others can be lower enrolled to ensure student completion. Some courses may need to be scheduled at a specific time or in an online modality to meet students’ schedules. These considerations require a holistic look at enrollment, including input from faculty, staff, administrators, and students.

SCFF calculations are also based on full-time equivalent students, which does not take into account the reality of most students' lives. According to the CCCCO Datamart, in Fall 2022 only 26.63% of credit students were full-time (CCCCO, n.d.a). Colleges should review their own data on full-time versus part-time status for use in enrollment management. Other considerations involve an increased focus on students' basic needs and their impact on students’ ability to attend college. All data should be contextualized with the real lived experiences of students.

The three calculations of the SCFF have a significant effect on enrollment management. Data should be reviewed to maximize funding for colleges but within the framework of student equity, success, and support. Scheduling and enrollment decisions should not be made solely to meet SCFF targets. Colleges should analyze data aligned to the SCFF in the context of the college mission, equity data, and qualitative data.

Faculty can review data on the SCFF metrics, including those that are a part of the student success allocation, through access to the CCCCO CalPass Plus Student Success Metrics webpage (CalPass Plus, n.d.). Data can be reviewed by state-level, macroregion, microregion, district, or college. The webpage allows for longitudinal analysis over multiple years and is able to disaggregate by demographics, financial aid status, and student programs.

An additional important factor is that some noncredit enrollments are also funded via positive attendance, and many, though not all, noncredit course sections are open-entry/open-exit. Colleges considering developing or expanding noncredit offerings or programs should think carefully about the students they wish to serve, the outcomes they hope to see those students achieve, and how the accounting method and scheduling approach employed might support or undermine the educational mission the college wishes to serve through noncredit offerings.

As faculty participate in enrollment management, whether as academic senators, as department chairs, or in budget and planning committees, they will benefit from understanding how colleges are funded, because others who work on enrollment management will certainly have that awareness. Academic senates might consider various professional learning opportunities on campus regarding apportionment methods along with administrators so that all parties have the same information.

Part III. The Roles of Constituent Groups in Enrollment Management

While this paper, like the 1999 ASCCC enrollment management paper, underscores the need for faculty participation, enrollment management should be a collaborative endeavor. Faculty members are partners with administrators whose job descriptions often include policy implementation and oversight of enrollment. In addition, the faculty collective bargaining organization will negotiate and be responsible for any policy changes that affect working conditions and compensation. The experience, perspectives, and wisdom of all parties will ultimately result in the best decisions for students and the institution.

Enrollment management should be viewed as a college-wide priority with leadership and support from all areas of the college. Enrollment management often is not well understood, and plans and activities are relegated to a small segment of the institution. All parties involved in enrollment planning should be knowledgeable and receive training through professional learning activities. For example, a college might hold professional learning opportunities or workshops about apportionment for all constituents. Like a college’s master plan and strategic plan, an enrollment management plan with a mission, vision, and goals should be developed collaboratively, and its themes might include such values as inclusiveness, collaboration, and transparency. Almost every constituent group on campus is affected by factors of student enrollment, and each group has a distinct and significant role to play in enrollment management discussions.

Faculty Roles through the Academic Senate and Elsewhere

Faculty members can play an assortment of roles in enrollment management: as academic senators, in their positions as department or division chairs, in their departments, when they write a program review self-study or work on educational master planning, and when they serve on college and district participatory governance committees or represent faculty interests through their union work. At some colleges, faculty have not had the opportunity to participate sufficiently in enrollment management policy making and implementation, and thus some institutions need to better understand the rationale for faculty involvement as they shape the enrollment strategies that best suit their students.

The academic senate is the official voice of faculty in academic and professional matters and as such should take the faculty lead in enrollment management policy discussions. Title 5 regulations and Education Code both codify a rationale for faculty participation through the academic senate in identifying and prioritizing course offerings. At the core, the curriculum that is offered is an academic and professional matter under the purview of the academic senate. Education Code §70902 states that the governing board shall “ensure the right of academic senates to assume primary responsibility for making recommendations in the areas of curriculum and academic standards.” Determining which courses to offer, what the pedagogical requirements are, and the best format for courses is certainly part of what is meant by the term “curriculum.”

Title 5 §53200 defines the local academic senate: “Academic Senate means an organization whose primary function is to make recommendations with respect to academic and professional matters.” A number of the areas defined as academic and professional matters in this same Title 5 section demonstrate the need for faculty involvement when determining curricular offerings, including curriculum and prerequisites, processes for planning and budget, processes for program review, and policies for student preparation and success. Local policies should spell out any additional roles for academic senates in all aspects of governance, including enrollment management. Although the specific enrollment management responsibilities of deans, department chairs, and faculty members in each department may vary from college to college, all academic senates should review their policies and consider whether their rights, responsibilities, and roles are correctly clarified in policies and procedures.

While no one would be likely to dispute that curriculum is part of the academic senate responsibility under Title 5, some parties might not understand that this responsibility should involve more than writing course outlines. Faculty are academic experts. The academic senate not only recommends curriculum through the curriculum committee but also makes recommendations regarding degree and certificate requirements. Academic senates, as well as faculty members in their departments, participate in developing and conducting program reviews: they set standards and policies for student preparation and student success, establish pre-requisites, and know the needs of the workplace for occupational programs and the requirements of universities for students who transfer. Therefore, faculty must be major participants in setting the academic directions for the college, including enrollment management and scheduling policies.

When developing an enrollment management philosophy statement or policy, academic senates should be certain to include diverse faculty whose points of view will enrich and improve the decisions. Diversity should be present in terms of ethnicity, language, and culture as well as a mixture of disciplines from across campus. In addition, any policy that is developed or process that is implemented should recognize the important role played by faculty in student services, who can provide a unique perspective. For example, counselors meet with a variety of students with a myriad of needs on a daily basis, so they hear which courses were unavailable, which sections were closed or canceled, what prerequisites may have been oversubscribed, when the registration system failed, or which courses in the catalog had potential demand but were not offered. Counselors are experts in understanding student characteristics and are sensitive to scheduling challenges faced by students with jobs or family care responsibilities. They tend to be more informed regarding graduation and transfer requirements, and they know where holes exist in the class schedule. As academic senates develop a philosophy statement or participate in developing a college policy for enrollment management, they should ensure the full participation of faculty from student services areas.

Administrative Roles

College deans and vice presidents, as well as other college and district administrators, may have the task of managing enrollment in their job description. While job descriptions vary by position and district, administrators typically are tasked to ensure that adequate oversight takes place so that the college’s resources are spent on academic offerings and student support services that advance the broader goals of student access and success. Simultaneously, administrators may experience pressure to increase productivity, and this pressure could be in opposition to academic senate values when setting enrollment goals.

The leadership function of administrators in enrollment management is critical, as administrators are in a position to encourage and support constituent participation in planning as well as to ensure policies are implemented. Ideally, they work collaboratively with the academic senate and with other faculty who participate in day-to-day decisions, such as department or division chairs. The most effective administrators know that the participation of all constituents is best for the students and the institution. They ensure full participation and are alert to prevent occasions that bypass or circumvent participatory governance processes.

Administrators are in a different position from most faculty members. Because they are not attached to specific departments, administrators should be able to provide a wider view of the needs of multiple programs. However, one might argue that a strong enrollment management committee that includes representatives from multiple groups with a broad range of interests, including academic senate or union appointees with administrators, is also able to have a wider perspective, provided a spirit of sharing information and collaborating exists. For example, members might remind others of the need for a balance—though perhaps not 50/50—of day and evening classes,  short length and full-term classes, and distance education and traditional classes as well as classes that meet at various times of the day. A well-functioning committee working with administrators could develop the broad perspective needed while simultaneously presenting specific real-world perspectives, such as the need to consider both room capacity and pedagogical needs when assigning classes to particular classrooms.

An important function of administrators is to ensure that enrollment decisions are informed by robust data; they can ensure that the most current, relevant information is made available to all parties involved. When all parties have the best and the same information, everyone learns and grows together and the best decisions can be made. When information is withheld or not widely distributed, not only are decisions compromised but the opportunity for making use of everyone’s best judgment is also sacrificed.

At some colleges, the class schedule is developed solely by administrators, while at others it is developed in concert with faculty or even by the faculty in their departments or divisions alone. Local academic senates and administrators, along with the collective bargaining unit, will determine the structure and the role of faculty that fits local needs best but should be aware that different colleges take different approaches to this process.

Faculty who serve as department or division chairs may have duties similar to those of deans elsewhere, and they carry some responsibility for managing the enrollment in their areas or perhaps across the college. Both deans and faculty chairs should work with the department faculty to meet institutional goals, not just the needs of the departments they represent. In these cases, an ideal model would be one involving shared values such as inclusiveness, openness, sharing information, a focus on the needs of the many as well as the few, a climate of trust, and a commitment to do the best for the students as well as the institution.

Administrators and academic senates should ensure that the college has established guidelines for decision making. If such processes are not codified by collective bargaining unit agreements, local policies should clarify the processes for when a course should be canceled, what the minimum enrollment levels are for new courses or first offerings, how courses in a sequence are handled including when they have traditionally been low-enrolled, what the dates are for notifying faculty of their assignments, and what the process is for the reduction or discontinuance of courses and programs. Although the role of faculty in curriculum matters is established in Title 5, enrollment management issues such as these can become problematic if no prior discussions and agreement have taken place between faculty and administration.

Collective Bargaining Unit Role

Academic senates and collective bargaining units each have an important role to play in enrollment management, especially in matters such as class size, staffing, academic calendar, teaching schedules, compensation, and other workload issues. In addition, increasing demands for productivity— which can sometimes translate to increased class size—can lead to more work for the same pay, which is clearly a union issue. Whenever discussions involve working conditions and compensation, including teaching load, they become issues for the union. Title 5 §53204 states, “Decision-making policies and implementation cannot detract from negotiated agreements on wages and working conditions.” The 1999 ASCCC enrollment management paper pointed out, “Enrollment management plans should include the input of the two faculty entities that best represent the interests of all faculty—the local academic senate and the local collective bargaining agent” (ASCCC, 1999, p.8). That paper effectively enumerated the areas in which colleges should be certain to involve the collective bargaining agent. Academic senates can set a tone of collaboration, particularly in areas where an overlap of senate and union interests exists.[2]

If enrollment management decisions reduce a program to such a degree that a full-time faculty member’s teaching load is affected, the collective bargaining unit should be involved. All colleges should have a program discontinuance policy. The ASCCC paper Program Discontinuance: A Faculty Perspective (ASCCC, 1998) provides background on such policies. In addition, senates should work with local unions to ensure that a policy is established to guide program reduction criteria.

If enrollment management decisions reduce a program to such a degree that a full-time faculty member’s teaching load is affected, the collective bargaining unit should be involved. All colleges should have a program discontinuance policy. The ASCCC paper Program Discontinuance: A Faculty Perspective (ASCCC, 1998) provides background on such policies. In addition, senates should work with local unions to ensure that a policy is established to guide program reduction criteria.

College and District Enrollment Management Committees

Some colleges and districts have special committees that focus on enrollment management, while elsewhere decisions are made in other standing committees. In a worst-case scenario, decisions are made by a few individuals in isolation. The ASCCC paper The Faculty Role in Planning and Budgeting (ASCCC, 2001) provides suggestions that can be useful to enrollment management committees. In addition, the ASCCC and the Community College League of California (CCLC) jointly developed a document called Participating Effectively in District and College Governance (ASCCC & CCLC, 2020). This publication poses questions and suggests answers to some of the challenges of participatory governance. Both resources are available on the ASCCC website at asccc.org

Colleges that do not have a dedicated enrollment management committee might consider whether they should institute one or whether another standing committee can be modified to ensure appropriate constituent participation and transparency. As is the case with other participatory governance committees, whenever academic and professional matters are discussed in an enrollment management committee—e.g., class size as it relates to pedagogy or the effect of how many hours a class meets in a day on student learning—the academic senate has primacy in developing recommendations. If the committee membership includes many constituent groups, then decisions regarding academic and professional matters should not fall to majority rule but rather, after committee discussion and input, should rely on collegial consultation with the academic senate and its representatives. When the roles of the academic senate and the bargaining unit overlap, the two groups should collaborate (ASCCC, 1996).

Developing sound enrollment management policies and collaborative processes in a multi-college district can be especially challenging. Districts should be mindful that policies do not, in allowing each college to attempt to maximize efficiency, distort the development of sound enrollment management principles at one college in order to remain competitive with others in the district. If the district exerts authority over the scheduling of online sections, which potentially attract students from throughout the district and beyond, it should consider the potential to harm enrollment in face to face sections at neighboring colleges. The district should also consider how the enrollment management philosophy at one college might skew funding in a multi-college district. If one college chooses to develop a number of expensive programs, the district should avoid holding its other colleges to pedagogically unsound enrollment management goals in order to fund a sibling campus. This issue is especially dangerous if the district has not developed a clear resource allocation model. If enrollment management is a challenge for single college districts, it is even more so for multi-college districts and especially those where constituents do not have effective methods for collaborating across college boundaries.

The Roles of Students and Staff

Many college governance committees have seats for staff members and students in order to ensure that their concerns and ideas inform recommendations. In the case of enrollment management, the effects on students and staff can be great, for example, when scheduling the hours that staff members work in labs or when class cancellation criteria are established.

Title 5 §51023.5 states that local governing boards must “provide district and college staff the opportunity to participate effectively in district and college governance,” especially regarding matters that “have or will have a significant effect on staff,” such as changing the academic calendar. For example, the staff in areas such as the Admissions and Records Department clearly are affected by enrollment management decisions.

Title 5 §51023.7 delineates the areas that pertain to students’ roles in participatory governance. While students do not have the same recommending authority reserved for academic senates, colleges—and especially academic senates—should ensure that they provide opportunity for student participation. Title 5 states that the local governing board shall “adopt policies and procedures that provide students the opportunity to participate effectively in district and college governance,” including “formulation and development of district and college policies and procedures that have or will have a significant effect on students.” The regulation also indicates that the governing board “shall not take action on a matter having a significant effect on students until it has provided students with an opportunity to participate in the formulation of the policy or procedure or the joint development of recommendations regarding the action.”

Title 5 lists the areas that can have “significant effect” on students. Those that are relevant to enrollment management policies might include the following: courses or programs which should be initiated or discontinued, student services planning and development, and any other district and college policy, procedure, or related matter that the district governing board determines will have a significant effect on students (Title 5 §51023.7).

When an academic senate develops a philosophy statement or participates in a college’s enrollment management policy development, it should ensure that students and staff have an opportunity to participate in discussions in order to offer their perspectives and concerns and that those viewpoints are taken seriously and given every fair and reasonable consideration.

The Role of the “Silent Constituents”

In addition to the obvious constituent groups involved in enrollment management, other factors within colleges can have an effect on which courses are offered or which sections are most or least subscribed; however, instead of being people, these factors are tools or external pressures. These other elements act as a kind of “silent constituent,” exerting influence over enrollment practices.

For example, the software applications that a college employs—such as Colleague, Banner, or PeopleSoft—can influence class enrollment patterns and procedures such as prerequisite enforcement, registration procedures, and maintaining waitlists. Sometimes the technology seems to inappropriately drive academic decisions; some have likened these software applications to the character HAL in the film 2001: A Space Odyssey, the computer that takes over the humans’ control of the spaceship. College processes and student needs should drive software rather than software limitations driving college processes. The primary concern that faculty raise is that some programs with cookie cutter approaches may not be capable of doing what the local college needs, and the cost to modify the programming is often out of reach. As a result, the decisions that faculty, administrators, and staff make regarding enrollment procedures may never be implemented. For example, at some colleges, when registration is only available online, it can affect who registers and selectively reduce access.

On the positive side, a benefit of such computer programs is that registration may be more transparent to the users: faculty and staff can quickly view real-time enrollment data such as class size to enroll students efficiently and make changes as needed. As is the case with the relationship between planning and budget, planning for enrollment, scheduling, and registration should be driven by academic priorities rather than primarily by the limitations of technology.

Other silent constituents may also affect enrollment management. The course requirements of transfer institutions have a powerful influence over college offerings, and the end of term dates of local high schools can influence the college calendar. Such matters as early printing deadlines for schedules and catalogs can limit some flexibility to be responsive in offerings and in the college’s ability to deliver curriculum needed by the community or workplace. Some courses require specialized facilities, complicating the scheduling process. Sometimes faculty complain that they receive local, regional, or statewide data that is inaccurate or incomplete. This situation can occur because the college has no researcher or because the workload is too large for the current staff. While they do not blame the researchers, faculty do indicate that the inability to access the information they require hinders making the best academic decisions. All of these factors can be seen as silent constituents influencing enrollment management. The most effective policies and procedures will consider the human and non-human constituents that determine course offerings.

Developing SEM Purpose, Guiding Principles, and Plan

Enrollment management discussions should include multiple constituencies. Recommended work of this cross-constituent dialog is to create a clear enrollment management purpose or guiding principles. Creating a common understanding and purpose for an effort like enrollment management is important for systemic change. The SEM project offers as a best practice the idea of a purpose or guiding principles statement for enrollment management efforts. Starting with the purpose will help facilitate the planning process, center the committee on shared understanding, and help prioritize goals and recommendations. Discussions in the committee may become personal and impact members’ areas or departments. Having an established shared goal and purpose may help in navigating these difficult conversations. The college's purpose statement or guiding principles should be shared across the campus and used to support professional learning. The purpose or guiding principles should also be aligned with already established college missions or goals.

Once a committee or group has established and shared its purpose or guiding principles, colleges may choose to create a Strategic Enrollment Plan. This plan should be integrated with all other college planning documents and review cycles. Areas of the plan may include the following:

  • Defined enrollment goals and objectives aligned to the institution’s broader mission, strategic goals, and plans for budget fluctuations;
  • Identified data elements including internal and external scans with both quantitative and qualitative data;
  • Action plans with identified roles and timelines; and
  • Method and defined cycle of plan assessment.

Once developed, this plan should be shared widely and approved through locally defined participatory governance processes, including review and approval by the local academic senate. Such a planning document aligns with the academic senate’s responsibility for institutional planning and budget development under the academic and professional matters listed in Title 5 §53200.

Part IV. Putting the Academic Senate Into Action Through Strategic Enrollment Management

Curriculum, Scheduling, and Course Sequencing

California’s community colleges face tremendous challenges, even in the best of times. The colleges have multiple missions and a widely diverse student population with a huge variance of needs and goals. Community college funding is a fraction of that of the universities, and colleges cannot be certain what the funding will be from year to year. The communities and the workplace have ever-changing needs to which educators strive to adapt. Community colleges must meet all of these challenges while remaining open access. The balancing act that colleges must do several times each year in creating a class schedule is daunting, and it will continue to be a challenge with the trend toward year-round colleges. Deciding how many sections of a given course should be offered in the next term as weighed against all the other courses at the college requires a well-informed and very collaborative team.

The structure of every community college includes different but related ongoing activities that contribute to course planning and ultimately to enrollment management decisions: the educational master plan, program review, department/division/unit plans, the budget allocation policy, a strategic plan, the college mission statement, and accreditation requirements and plans. Finding a way to weave all of these plans and activities together within the college processes and committee structures should benefit all. Of course, the most expedient method to conduct enrollment management is an autocratic or top-down approach. The fewer the people involved in making decisions, the simpler reaching decisions will be. However, given that curriculum is the most important function of a college and that curriculum is an area of faculty purview, all policies for determining which courses are offered must be made with faculty leadership.

A committee that is considering the balance of its college’s curriculum might start with a pie chart to represent the college’s overall curriculum offerings. If the pie represents all of the course or section offerings in a given term, and the pieces show the percentage of courses offered in each department, division, or program, how the pie is divided in each academic term will represent the implementation of the current enrollment management policy. In the absence of an overarching academic philosophy for enrollment management and guidelines for determining where sections should be added or deleted, enrollment management occurs haphazardly. If a college wishes to successfully define what a balance is and then find appropriate strategies to create the balance, it will need the participation of many groups and may have to break with status quo practices. Colleges will make the best decisions with current data.

Course Delivery Modes, Compressed Calendars, and Alternate Scheduling

The way some instruction is delivered and the length of academic terms have evolved, and the changes affect enrollment management decisions. Today, many more college classes are taught via distance education (DE). According to the CCCCO, in 2007-08 nearly 200,000 more full time equivalent students were enrolled in DE than in 1998-99 (ASCCC, 2009a).

DE has moved beyond correspondence and television courses to various formats where instruction may be fully online or delivered in hybrid forms, where students must attend in-person class meetings as well as complete work online. The trend toward offering more DE classes may ameliorate demands for classroom space but also requires alternative institutional resources in the form of faculty training and support for both faculty and students. Space constraints may lead to pressure to offer more courses via DE in the absence of adequate resources. Per Title 5 §§55202 and 55206, courses must only be taught via DE after appropriate curriculum approval processes are followed, and all institutional policies related to DE should ensure that the needed resources, including faculty training, are in place. Only discipline faculty working through their curriculum committee processes should determine whether or not a course should be offered via DE.

Once discipline faculty decide a course is suitable for DE and it has received the necessary approvals in the curriculum committee, the question of how many sections to offer arises. Such decisions should be informed by the college’s enrollment management philosophy, perceived student demand, historical enrollment data, and the availability of qualified faculty not only prepared with the minimum qualifications for the discipline but also prepared to teach in the DE mode. Such decisions should not be driven solely by faculty load considerations or the need for classroom space. Unfortunately, in some cases staffing and scheduling decisions are made without the appropriate considerations and not always for the best pedagogical reasons.

Faculty need to conduct serious discussions to optimize the effectiveness of DE offerings. They should ask such questions as whether offering basic skills sections online is appropriate, whether the goal simply is filling class slots rather than being concerned about success or persistence to the next term or next course in the discipline, whether first-time students are prepared for DE studies, and whether large sections of DE courses ensure the same effectiveness as traditional class sizes or delivery methods. In the matter of class size, Title 5 §55208 says the following:

The number of students assigned to any one course section offered by distance education shall be determined by and be consistent with other district procedures related to faculty assignment. Procedures for determining the number of students assigned to a course section offered in whole or in part by distance education may include a review by the curriculum committee established pursuant to §55002(a)(1).

ASCCC resources—including resolutions, papers, and Rostrum articles—can inform faculty about the factors that should influence decisions regarding DE course offerings; faculty should share those resources with their department colleagues and deans. An example is the February 2006 Rostrum article “An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: Getting Ahead of the Enrollment Chase in Distance Education” (James Hanz, 2006). Additionally, colleges can research the retention and success rates of students enrolled in DE by going to Data Mart on the Chancellor’s Office website (CCCCO, n.d.a).

Another change in instructional delivery mode is the increase in offering courses within learning communities, which are classes that are linked or clustered during an academic term, often around an interdisciplinary theme, and enroll a common cohort of students. A variety of approaches is used to build these learning communities, with all intended to restructure the students’ time, credit, and learning experiences to build community among students, between students and their teachers, and among faculty members and disciplines. The three general types of learning communities are student cohorts or integrative seminars, linked courses or course clusters, and coordinated study (Saulnier, et.al., n.d.).

Scheduling learning communities requires special consideration. Factors such as whether students are required to enroll in multiple courses as co-requisites, which classrooms will be used, and whether the faculty plan to attend their colleagues’ class meetings need to be considered in the scheduling and room allocation process. While learning communities require resources and logistical considerations, if the college is committed to providing them, the challenges can be overcome. Given that learning communities are a recommended method for working with basic skills learners, and given that research suggests these communities lead to better retention, success, and persistence, more colleges are deciding to schedule them. However, in times of budgetary challenges, pressure may arise to eliminate learning communities, particularly if they involve any added costs. Once again, the faculty must advocate that academic considerations be the driver of policies.

Academic Calendars and Course Length

In addition to an increase in distance education offerings, many more colleges today are operating under a compressed calendar, so the semester that once was eighteen weeks is now fifteen or sixteen weeks long. As local academic senates have deliberated about whether to compress their colleges’ terms, the most important factors they discuss are the effects on learning, student success, and support services. Academic senates, in consultation with collective bargaining units, have contemplated such questions as the following:

  • Would learning, retention, success. and persistence be enhanced or harmed?[3] Ideally, a college would try to track or evaluate effects of any implemented calendar change.
  • Would students learn certain course material as well in programs such as foreign language, mathematics, or nursing if the classes met for fewer days per week and per term and for more minutes in each session or fewer overall minutes? Would students learn some coursework better in a shortened term? Is sufficient time allowed for completing homework?
  • How can the effects on learning be determined, whether they are positive or negative?
  • Is local research being considered that supports the efficacy of alternative models?
  • How does the calendar under consideration compare with educational calendars at other local schools, colleges, and universities, and will enrollment be affected positively or negatively?

Colleges on compressed or alternate calendars have also had to determine whether to hold an intersession and, if so, how long the term should be, which courses would or would not be suitable, and which students are best suited for accelerated curriculum. For example, colleges must ask whether a typical community college student can master the lessons in a 3-, 4-, or 5- unit course that is compressed into three or four weeks. If the goal of having an intersession is to increase annual enrollment, the college must ask whether an inter-session actually does increase the numbers or merely shifts them from a regular term to the intersession. The same questions are often asked about summer sessions. Faculty must decide which courses can be accelerated without sacrificing quality or quantity of material covered and learned. Academic senates, guided by discipline faculty, must first address questions such as these, and their conclusions can then be used to inform the collective bargaining related to academic calendars.

Today, because of the alternate calendars at many colleges, decisions about which courses to offer, how many sections, and how to schedule classes now must be considered in that new light, making the class schedule determinations much more complex than in the past. In addition, the last decade has also seen more variety in the scheduling of classes. For example, many classes that used to meet on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays for an hour now meet twice per week; more classes meet on weekends or one night per week, and more sections are offered in condensed time frames. The length of a term for individual sections is another important variable that affects enrollment management determinations, and many colleges are scheduling fast track or accelerated classes.

The ASCCC has more than a dozen resolutions with cautions regarding compressed academic calendars or individual classes offered in a short timeframe. A few of the positions taken in these resolutions are excerpted below[4]:

  • 13.04 F01: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge local senates to take a leading role in any decision to adopt compressed and/or alternative calendars since the decision will impact the student learning experience.
  • 9.02 S02: Resolved, That the Academic Senate reaffirm the role of faculty, through its curriculum committees, in developing and modifying all courses;
    Resolved, That the Academic Senate urge local curriculum committees to exercise their Title 5-mandated responsibilities and to be especially diligent when making decisions regarding format, method of delivery, and related matters (e.g., compressed formats and distance education).
  • 20.03 S06: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges strongly urge local academic senates to communicate with vocational faculty to understand their unique needs under a compressed calendar and to advocate for their interests.
  • 9.01 F06: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recommend that when a course of three or more semester or equivalent quarter units is to be offered in a time frame of fewer than six weeks, the local curriculum committee, as part of the curriculum approval process, engage the discipline faculty in a separate review of the course for the following: academic integrity and rigor, the method for meeting Carnegie units, the ability for students to complete and for faculty to evaluate assignments, including those done outside of class, and the appropriateness of the method of delivery, to determine whether the course should be offered in a specific shortened time frame.
  • 9.09 S06: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges insist that when a course of three or more units is offered in a format of less than six (6) weeks, the course must be reviewed by the local curriculum committee prior to it being scheduled; and
    Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recommend that the local curriculum committee review include the following: academic integrity and rigor, the method for meeting Carnegie units, the appropriateness of the method of delivery, and the class size.

As is evident from this sampling of positions, the ASCCC has expressed numerous concerns about ensuring curricular integrity when scheduling courses in reduced timeframes.

Many local discussions about enrollment management also include consideration of the mode of delivery and the length of courses. Some overarching questions faculty should ask when considering delivery mode and length of course include the following:

  • Who is making the decisions about delivery mode, length, and meeting schedule of the courses? Why are courses offered in various modes and time frames? The academic senate, working with discipline faculty, should have primacy in making these decisions.
  • Where and when are such decisions made: in silos that do not communicate with one another, such as in administrator meetings and faculty department meetings separately, or in a concerted, thoughtful, policy-driven manner?
  • What format produces the most success for students? Because that answer can vary for different populations of students and for different courses, only faculty should make the pedagogical determination. Local academic senates can make the case that because these questions are curricular in nature, they should fall to the faculty per Title 5 regulations.
  • What effect on learning and student success might occur in any given situation?

Growth, Accounting, and Caps

Enrollment is also influenced by the state establishment of an enrollment cap and the funding mechanisms affected by the cap. An annual cap for community college growth is set during the state budget development process. When enrollment caps limit funded enrollment, enrollment management is practiced whether or not an enrollment management policy is in place.

Each college locally sets a growth target, or FTES goal, usually on an annual basis. This target—and actual local growth from previous years—is often used in multi-college districts to allocate annual funds from the district to each college. Within the college, the desired FTES for a given year will form the backdrop or parameters for expected course and section offerings. While faculty have often not participated in discussions of growth or FTES goals, these goals are critical to the level of access at the college. These agreed-upon goals are integral to curriculum and program planning, as well as tied to budget decisions. As such, local academic senates should work with their administrations to establish the process and criteria by which these larger parameters for enrollment management are set. This process can occur both at the district and the college level.

In addition to enrollment caps, faculty should also discuss curricular and pedagogical caps that focus on optimizing student learning. These caps are based on effective teaching environments rather than the capacity of a classroom. The ASCCC has an established paper titled Setting Course Enrollment Maximums: Process, Roles, and Principles (ASCCC, 2012) that discusses pedagogical factors for enrollment management. This paper supports the faculty role in discussions of class enrollment caps.

Not only is having an enrollment management policy in place essential, but the procedures for scheduling also should be clarified. Because academic senates promote enrollment management strategies that are driven by the goals of the institutional mission and student success, they should be aware that apportionment regulations can inappropriately affect the schedule of classes. Some courses are subject to full-term census accounting, in which colleges are funded for the enrollment in a class on the census date, which is generally the third Monday in the semester. No funding adjustment is made for sections that have unusually high or low retention or success rates. Other courses are funded on the basis of positive attendance, which requires that the instructor maintain accurate attendance records for every class meeting. For these classes, unlike term census courses, colleges are funded only for actual student attendance. Because state accounting methods have the potential to encourage decisions based more on apportionment than on academic goals, policies should explain how the competing goals will be addressed.

Curriculum Balance

One college convened an ad hoc committee which it called the “Balance of Curriculum” committee, chaired by the academic senate president and populated mostly by faculty from each area of the college—occupational programs, student services, basic skills, and transfer—and representatives from administration, staff—including the researcher—and students. The purpose of the committee was to provide a coordinated plan for college decisions in determining the direction of curriculum, programs, and services and allocation of resources to support targeted goals. The committee determined its core values and considered its niche as compared to neighboring colleges, including the primary targeted student population and specialized programs and courses. The committee’s deliberations eventually informed the development of the college’s budget allocation model—with academic concerns driving budget decisions—as well as the enrollment management policies, the college’s educational and facilities master plans, and even the faculty hiring policy, which states that the academic senate, working with the faculty division chairs, makes the recommendations for which faculty positions should be filled the next year directly to the college president.

Faculty might consider organizing something like a balance of curriculum committee to develop its own philosophy to guide enrollment management policies and practices. Alternatively, the academic senate and administrators could convene an enrollment management summit to develop or revise the college’s policy.

Part V: Enrollment Trends

The unprecedented growth and development in online learning programs due to the COVID-19 pandemic now serve as an impetus to increase access and extend educational enrollment opportunities to non-traditional—matriculating from high school—students. With the increase in demand for a more highly skilled workforce, community colleges have a responsibility to offer all students a high-quality educational experience layered with current and relevant knowledge to support their learning. As programs are created, developed, modified, or expanded, academic senates should play a key role through collegial consultation. The expansion of these opportunities should be student-centered and focused on a holistic approach to identify and address student needs and emerging challenges tailored to support student success rather than meeting enrollment goals.

Increases and Changes in Noncredit Programs

Over the past several years, a much greater recognition and understanding has developed regarding the integral role that noncredit instruction plays in community colleges. The ASCCC has written papers on this topic [5], the CCCCO sponsored the Noncredit Alignment Project, and SB 361 was passed in 2006, which among other things increased the funding for certain noncredit classes. The increased funding is now an incentive for colleges to expand their noncredit offerings. Enrollment management policies and practices may need to be modified in light of changes in noncredit programs, especially if the college has decided to expand its number of noncredit courses. In addition, all stakeholders involved in enrollment management would benefit from reviewing the resources from the CCCCO and the ASCCC website regarding noncredit instruction. Any significant change in the kinds of classes offered means the college may need to re-think its priorities. Colleges may need to create more noncredit programs to equip students with skills and knowledge that will help them navigate information technology-related  work and life challenges. Technology is a critical part of people’s livelihoods, and colleges with information technology non-credit programs would be better positioned to experience further increase in student enrollment.

Noncredit Career Development and College Preparation (CDCP)

One discussion issue around noncredit and enrollment management is the equitized funding for noncredit classes classified as career development and college preparation (CDCP). These classes are, per Title 5 §84151, a sequence of noncredit courses that lead to noncredit certificates and adult high school diplomas in four specific noncredit categories: elementary and secondary basic skills, workforce preparation, short term vocational with high employment potential, and English as a Second Language. Only courses designated as CDCP are eligible for enhanced funding. Noncredit courses not under the CDCP definition are funded at a significantly lower rate. CDCP is an important initiative that encourages, supports, and engages high school students to enroll in community colleges to advance their education.

Early College and Dual Enrollment

Another area of significant full-time equivalent student growth has been early college. Early college programs cover dual enrollment, high school enrichment, and middle or early college programs. Dual enrollment programs provide high school students with opportunities to take college courses while still enrolled in high school, earning both high school and college credit.  According to a study from the UC Davis Wheelhouse titled A Leg Up on College, 12.6% of California high school seniors are enrolled in a community college course at some point while in high school (Friedman, et.al., 2020). Since 2017, the number of students enrolled in dual enrollment has continued to steadily increase. Enrollment planning should include discussion of dual enrollment courses and how they impact student enrollment. Research has shown significant benefits for students participating in dual enrollment community college courses. Students who take college courses while in high school are more likely to graduate from high school, enroll and continue in college, and earn a bachelor’s degree in a shorter period of time because they were well-prepared and better supported prior to enrollment compared to traditional college freshmen. Enrollment planning should include a discussion of enrollment management between the traditional college program needs and the expansion of dual enrollment opportunities, including local enrollment patterns and trends. The significant role of faculty and academic senates in dual enrollment discussions is highlighted in ASCCC Resolution 09.02 F16, which states, “That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge local senates to engage in discussions with their administrations to ensure that the development and implementation of dual enrollment programs occur with endorsement through collegial consultation with the academic senate.”

Restorative Justice Programs

In recent years, large growth has occurred in restorative justice programs that focus on supporting incarcerated or formerly incarcerated students. The CCCCO has a program called the Rising Scholars Network whose goal is to “expand the number of justice-involved students participating and succeeding in the community colleges” (CCCCO, n.d.c). In Fall 2022, 15,393 incarcerated or formerly incarcerated students were enrolled in the California Community Colleges System, an increase of 30% over the previous five years (CCCCO, n.d.a). Colleges with restorative justice programs or that are developing such programs should include these students and programs in enrollment management and planning discussions. Restorative justice programs are essential to provide formerly incarcerated students with the guidance, map, pathway, and opportunity to be happy, healthy, contributing members of society as well as achieving their academic goals.

Legislative Impacts on Enrollment

Legislation has also significantly impacted enrollment. Bills such as AB 705 (Irwin, 2017) and AB 1705 (Irwin, 2022) focused on equitable placement and created large shifts in enrollment. These bills effectively eliminated reading courses and programs across the state. The bills drastically reduced basic skills offerings in math and English, shifting enrollment to transfer-level courses. In response, colleges created co-requisite courses to support students in transfer-level courses. Local academic senates must continue to be part of the discussions on the impact of these bills.

Recent legislative mandates including AB 1460 (Weber, 2020), which created an ethnic studies general education requirement for the California State University, and the recent Title 5 §55063 regulations on an ethnic studies requirement for California community college associate degrees have created a surge in the need for ethnic studies courses. Colleges, many of which did not have established ethnic studies programs, have scrambled to write courses, hire faculty, and schedule enough classes to meet student needs. Discussion of how many sections to offer and planning for the 2024 ethnic studies graduation requirement should be a focus of enrollment management planning.

Another forthcoming impact on enrollment management comes from AB 928 (Berman 2021), which requires a single general education pattern for California State University and University of California transfer. The 2025 implementation of this requirement will have impacts on what courses are scheduled and the number of sections. This new pattern will be particularly impactful for programs in the CSU lifelong learning general education area, which will not be included in the new California General Education Transfer Curriculum (CalGETC) pattern. This issue should be another proactive discussion area for college enrollment management groups focusing on supporting students and programs through the changes.

Increase in Diversity of Student Body

Most colleges have adopted policies and regulations advocating for increased inclusivity in their student composition. The document Report and Recommendations for Improving Black and African American Student Outcomes (CCCCO, 2020) identified a significant increase in the number of students from marginalized groups. Students from minority communities have increasingly seen the need for and value of a higher education. Colleges have adopted policies that seek to enhance culturally sensitive pedagogy and practices of inclusivity. The Covid -19 pandemic caused many individuals to re-evaluate their careers or need to earn a higher living wage. Community college courses offer older students the flexibility and access to return to college for a second career or gain a more current and competitive set of skills to boost their career progression at an affordable cost, which may further contribute to a more diverse community college student population in terms of both age and culture.

Part VI. Conclusion And Recommendations

In 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic began, California community college enrollment went into freefall. Colleges moved all courses online, and enrollment across the system went down almost 20%. While this global event was a huge catalyst for enrollment discussions, many colleges across the state had been facing enrollment declines for multiple years before the crisis. The need for enrollment management and recovery was and is crucial to the success of both colleges and students.

The work of enrollment management also aligns with Governor Newsom's Recovery with Equity plan that defines strategies, policies, and practices to help colleges emerge from the pandemic and racial reckoning by focusing on students and institution-facing recommendations (California Governor’s Council for Post-Secondary Education, n.d.). Several of the recommendations from the governor’s taskforce align directly with strategic enrollment management:

  • Retain students through inclusive supports.
  • Provide high tech, high touch advising.
  • Support college preparation and early credit.

Faculty, through their local academic senates, have a role in creating policies, practices, and philosophies of enrollment management that will meet local and statewide needs. Faculty need to work with students, classified professionals, and administrators to support enrollment strategies, student onboarding, scheduling, student education plans, persistence and retention support, and more to help increase enrollment and retain current students. Enrollment efforts should intentionally focus on racial equity and center on discussions of inclusion, diversity, equity, anti-racism, and accessibility. The guided pathways framework recommends that everyone on campus should work together to get students on the path and help them stay on the path.

Several of the recommendations from previous ASCCC papers on enrollment management are still relevant today and should be revisited as colleges attempt to recover from enrollment decline.

Continuing Recommendations for Local Academic Senates from Previous Papers

  1. The academic senate should create a forum to review or create the policies and procedures for enrollment management at the college or district.
  2. Academic senates should make the case for why faculty should participate in enrollment management policy development and decision-making. Title 5 §53200 says that the academic senate’s roles include responsibility for recommendations about academic and professional matters, curriculum, educational program development, and standards and policies regarding student preparation and success as well as processes for planning and budget.
  3. The academic senate should clarify with administrators and collective bargaining units which decisions should be primarily the purview of the academic senate versus those that an enrollment management committee—with academic senate representation—should decide.

Additional recommendations for local academic senates that reflect the new environment of California community colleges have been developed since the 2009 paper.

New Recommendations for 2023 Paper

  1. Local academic senates should support professional development for faculty related to enrollment management, including creating space for cross functional conversations among faculty, classified, and administrative partners.
  2. Local academic Senates should review current enrollment management policies and procedures to ensure data used in decision making is disaggregated to review for racial equity.
  3. Local academic senates should work with administrators to create emergency plans and processes for the event of future academic interruptions such as pandemics, fires, or earthquakes.
  4. Local academic senates should work with administrators to strategize how to support funding under the Student Centered Funding Formula through supporting student success and racial equity and increase faculty professional development support on the SCFF and its impact.
  5. Local academic senates should have access to real time data on student enrollment, access, success, persistence, and retention that can be disaggregated.
  6. Local academic senates should be consulted collegially in discussions on creation and expansion of programs in distance education, dual enrollment, early college, noncredit, and other enrollment strategies.
  7. Local academic senates should remain informed regarding legislative mandates and proposed bills that impact enrollment management and establish processes to address requirements and potential unintended consequences for students and programs.


2022-2023 Educational Policies Committee

Juan Arzola, College of the Sequoias (Chair)
Julie Clark, Merced College
Stephanie Curry, Reedley College
Christie Dam, Los Angeles Trade Tech
Maria Figueroa, MiraCosta College
Carlos Guerrero, Los Angeles City College
Chantal Lamourelle, Santa Ana College
Matais Pouncey, Vice President of Academic Affairs, Evergreen Valley College

With special thanks and acknowledgement of the authors of the 2009 Enrollment Management Paper.  (Identified below in their 2009 roles)

2008-2009 Education Policies Committee

Jane Patton, Mission College (Chair)
Dolores Davison, Foothill College
Marilyn Eng, Citrus College
Karolyn Hanna, Santa Barbara City College
Michelle Grimes-Hillmen, Mount San Antonio College
Ian Walton, Mission College
Jannette Jackson, Vice President of Instruction, College of Alameda
Uriel Vasquez, Student, Orange Coast College


Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (1996). Developing A Model for Effective Senate/Union Relations.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (1998). Program Discontinuance: A Faculty Perspective.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (1999). Role of Academic Senates in Enrollment Management.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (2001). The Faculty Role in Planning and Budgeting.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (2009a). Enrollment Management Revisited.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (2009b). Program Review: Setting a Standard.

 Academic Senate for California Community Colleges. (2012). Setting Course Enrollment Maximums: Processes, Roles and Principles.

Academic Senate for California Community Colleges & Community College League of California. (2020). Participating Effectively in District and College Governance. https://www.asccc.org/papers/participating-effectively-district-and-col…

Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. (n.d.). Purpose and Process. https://accjc.org/purpose-and-process/

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (2020). Report and Recommendations for Improving Black and African American Student Outcomes. https://www.cccco.edu/-/media/CCCCO-Website/Reports/black-aa-panel-fina…

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.a). Datamart. https://datamart.cccco.edu/DataMart.aspx

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.b). Division of Institutional Effectiveness and Strategic Enrollment Management Program: https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Chancellors-Office/Divisions/Institution…

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.c). Rising Scholars Network. https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Chancellors-Office/Divisions/Educational…

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.d). Student Centered Funding Formula. https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Chancellors-Office/Divisions/College-Fin…

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.e). Student Equity. https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Chancellors-Office/Divisions/Educational…

California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. (n.d.f). Vision Goals and Core Commitments. https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Vision-for-Success/goals-and-commitments

California Governor’s Council for Post-Secondary Education. (n.d.) Recovery with Equity. https://postsecondarycouncil.ca.gov/initiatives/recovery-with-equity/

CalPass Plus. (n.d.). Student Success Metrics. https://www.calpassplus.org/LaunchBoard/Student-Success-Metrics.aspx

Friedman, E., Kurlaender, M, Li, A., &Rumberger, R. (2020, January). A Leg Up on College: The Scale and Distribution of Community College Participation Among California High School Students. Wheelhouse The Center for Community College Leadership and Research. https://education.ucdavis.edu/sites/main/files/ucdavis_wheelhouse_resea…

Hasson, C. (2019). A Roadmap for Strategic Enrollment Management Planning. 2nd Ed. California Community Colleges Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative. https://vrccdn.cccco.edu/vrccdnpublic/sem%20resource%20guide/semroadmap…

Hasson, C., & White, M. (2019). Data Tools and Metrics for Strategic Enrollment Management 2nd ed. California Community Colleges Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative. https://rpgroup.org/Portals/0/Documents/Projects/IEPI/Resources_Guides/…

James Hanz, P. (2006, February). An Ounce of Prevention is Worth a Pound of Cure: Getting Ahead of the Enrollment Chase in Distance Education. Senate Rostrum. https://www.asccc.org/content/ounce-prevention-worth-pound-cure-getting…

Kern Community College District. (n.d.). How FTES is Calculated. https://committees.kccd.edu/content/how-ftes-calculated#:~:text=Full%2D…(FTES,instruction%20in%20the%20academic%20year.

Saulnier, B., Brooks, N., Ceccucci, W., & White, B. (n.d.). Learning Communities in Information Systems Education: Developing the Reflective Practitioner. http://www.isedj.org/5/4/Saulnier.txt

Sosa, G. (2017). Using Disproportionate Impact Methods to Identify Equity Gaps. California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office. https://www.cccco.edu/-/media/CCCCO-Website/About-Us/Divisions/Digital-…

Sosa, G. (2022). Using Disproportionate Impact Methods to Identify Equity Gaps. The RP Group.  https://rpgroup.org/Portals/0/Documents/Projects/MultipleMeasures/AB705…

Walton, I. (2007, February). The Rules of the Game - And When to Break Them. Senate Rostrum https://www.asccc.org/content/rules-game-and-when-break-them

1. See the full text of all ASCCC Adopted Resolutions.
2. For further discussion of such collaboration, see the 1996 ASCCC paper Developing A Model for Effective Senate/Union Relations.
3. See Bangasser, S. (2007, February). Senate RostrumWhat Can We Say About the Impact of Compressed Calendars and Courses on Student Success?”.
4. See the full text of all ASCCC Adopted Resolutions.
5. See, for example, Noncredit Instruction: Opportunity and Challenge (2019) pdf