In 1988, AB 1725 (Vasconcellos) required that minimum qualifications be established for faculty at California’s community colleges.  The process for establishing the minimum qualifications must be jointly agreed upon by the academic senate and the governing board.  As early as the second edition of the Minimum Qualifications for Faculty and Administrators in California Community Colleges handbook (Jan. 1994), and perhaps earlier (I was unable to locate a copy of the first edition), the minimum qualifications for mathematics have included the option of a bachelor’s degree in mathematics or applied mathematics and a master’s degree in math education.  This year, faculty from Bakersfield and Saddleback Colleges requested a revision to the minimum qualifications for mathematics that would require those meeting these qualifications to also complete an additional 18 units of graduate-level mathematics.

Given that the master’s in mathematics education has long been included in the minimum qualifications handbook, and that the discipline itself has not changed significantly at the community college level, it is worth considering what professional organizations have to say on the matter and whether this proposed change is in the best interests of the discipline and our students. 

As artificial intelligence (AI) tools rapidly enter classrooms, colleges and universities are faced with a pressing question: how can AI be integrated in ways that support learning without undermining fairness, academic integrity, or skill development? To better understand student perspectives, a survey was conducted with 299 composition students at De Anza College during the Fall 2025 and Winter 2026 quarters.

The results challenge simplistic narratives that frame students as either enthusiastic adopters or resistant skeptics. Instead, De Anza students articulate a nuanced, values-driven position: they are open to AI as a learning aid, but not as a replacement for thinking, effort, or human judgment. 

The California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office recently released its 2026 Report on the Fifty Percent Law, providing valuable data on district compliance across the system. While the report identifies which districts are meeting or failing to meet the law's requirements, it also highlights opportunities to address accountability gaps identified by the California State Auditor.

The report shows that most districts comply with the Fifty Percent  Law, though many do so by narrow margins. It also identifies a significant enforcement challenge for Basic Aid districts, those funded entirely through local property taxes rather than state apportionments. According to the report, "This enforcement mechanism does not apply to Basic Aid districts, limiting available fiscal oversight tools." As a result, when these districts fail to meet the Fifty Percent Law, the Chancellor's Office currently has no meaningful way to ensure compliance.

The California Community College system recently entered into partnerships with Google, Microsoft, and Instructure, the parent company of Canvas. These partnerships have led to a suite of artificial intelligence (AI) tools being directly integrated into the Canvas Learning Management System. While these tools have the potential to enhance teaching and learning, their implementation also raises important questions about faculty workload, intellectual property rights, data privacy, and academic freedom. It’s imperative that faculty are aware of these issues and actively engage in discussions about them, including at the bargaining table.

Academic senates must address aspects of these AI tools through 10+1, particularly as they relate to student success, retention, and professional development. At the same time, it is essential not to overlook that these tools carry significant implications for faculty working conditions.

A new era of accountability has arrived in California higher education, and it comes down to a single question: How quickly can students recoup the cost of their education?

The Price-to-Earnings Premium (PEP) is a dominant measure of institutional value. This metric, prominently featured in the U.S. Department of Education's College Scorecard data, calculates the number of years it takes for a graduate's increased wages to offset the cost of their education. Divide a student's total net cost by their annual "earnings premium" compared to high school graduates, and you get a simple number that policymakers, accreditors, and funders increasingly use to judge which institutions offer the best return on investment (ROI). 

After over 30 years of attending my students' graduations, I recently had the profound honor of witnessing a commencement ceremony like no other. As my term as FACCC President was coming to an end, I was thrilled when the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office extended an invitation to attend the Rising Scholars graduation at the California Rehabilitation Center, celebrating the achievements of incarcerated students from Norco College and other community colleges across the state.

On the day of the ceremony, we arrived hours early, leaving our phones behind in our cars. As I waited to enter the enclosed yard where the outdoor event would be held, I met dedicated faculty who had made the long drive from colleges like Palo Verde to support their Rising Scholar students. 

Recognizing Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) Heritage Month, we proudly introduce Oranit Limmaneeprasert, the incoming Faculty Association of California Community Colleges (FACCC) President. A long-time professor in the English as a Second Language (ESL) department at American River College, Oranit brings decades of experience, a deep sense of purpose, and a leadership style shaped by her Thai and Chinese heritage. Her two-year term begins on June 15.

In this special feature, Oranit reflects on her journey, what Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month means, and how she draws on her background to lead and advocate in California's community colleges.

A perspective I have adopted is a line from one of my favorite artists, Supaman, that “Everything traditional was once brand new”. Growing up, the thought of empowering California Community College faculty never crossed my mind, and if you had told me I would be doing so in the future, I likely would have laughed at you. Having no belief that I could one day attend college, I whole-heartedly posited that college was not for people like me. Although a few relatives of mine have attended four-year universities, neither of my parents have and I assumed that I would follow in their steps. As a teenager, I attended five different high schools and had no aspirations to pursue higher education, let alone earn my GED. Prior to enrolling at Sierra College, I worked as a night-shift caregiver and provided care to an in-home patient, often working over 100 hours a week. I am proud of the work I did and know that I made meaningful contributions to people’s livelihoods, but it came with a cost. 

I often slept only two hours a day and stayed up for 48-hour stretches. The implications of my work became increasingly more pronounced, leading me to question if it was sustainable. One morning after working a twelve-hour shift, I took my car into the shop to have it serviced. While waiting, I struck up a conversation with a man next to me. We discovered that we had the same name, were both Native American (although from different tribes), and had many common interests. We hit it off and soon became friends, having conversations often. In one of our exchanges, he mentioned he attended Sierra College and encouraged me to consider enrolling. I laughed and told him that college was not a place for people like us. Despite my skepticism, he insisted that I should look into attending, sharing that there was a support program for Native American students. Although unconvinced, I cared deeply about what he said and held on to his suggestion.

Perhaps this is stating the obvious, but students enroll into our colleges to engage in courses, which is why within the California Community Colleges system there is something called the 50% Law. According to the California Community Colleges Chancellor's website, the 50% Law “requires each district to spend at least half of its current expense of education each fiscal year for salaries and benefits of classroom instructors.” The purpose of this law is to maintain small class sizes and curb administrative expansion, yet despite its implementation, recent years have witnessed administrative growth, as evidenced by my analysis of the Chancellor’s Office Staffing Reports.

Table 1: Number of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) Community College Administrators and Faculty, 2010-2022

On March 7, 2024, hundreds of faculty, students, and community members marched through Sacramento to demand a more just and equitable education system in California's Community Colleges.  In preparation for the march, dozens of dedicated employees worked tirelessly to obtain approval and coordinate its organization. I collaborated with AFT 1521 student-interns to speak in several sociology classes to engage students and encourage their participation. For me, this event began in the early hours of the 7th, when I met with over one hundred students and faculty at Burbank Airport before traveling to Sacramento. I was thoroughly impressed by the AFT 1521 student-interns who took charge right away in the morning, handing out boarding passes and shirts to everyone before we went through security.

If you’re like me and enjoy spending winter break analyzing data from the state Chancellor’s office, then you might be interested in the effects of AB 705 on completion levels in math and English. 

AB 705 was legislation that prohibited, except under very narrow circumstances, colleges from requiring students to enroll in remedial math and English. The logic was that if not enough students were completing transfer-level math and English classes within a one-year timeframe because they were taking remedial classes, then if we eliminate remedial classes they will finish  faster, correct? The main data source is their Management Information Systems Data Mart. I was interested in looking at enrollment trends over the last several years, and, not surprisingly, we see a downward trend in enrollment. Below are the enrollment totals statewide and in General Math (TOP Code 170100) and English (TOP Code 150100)

California's AB 1705 (2022) legislation and the corresponding Community College Chancellor’s Office guidance mandated that community colleges directly place students into transfer-level math and English courses rather than requiring stand-alone pre-transfer courses. The goal was to increase the number of students completing transfer-level requirements. A recent FACCC survey seeking qualitative data from students provides insight into how this policy change has impacted students taking math and English courses for the first time in community college.

First, approximately one-third of survey respondents completed their first transfer-level math course with an A, B, or C grade. Over half completed their first English course successfully. Direct placement allowed these students to bypass pre-transfer courses and make progress towards their degree. We celebrate these students and want to build on their successes.

ChatGPT launched just over a year ago and the tool quickly entered the already fierce debates about education technology. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly advancing into education, but faculty often remain unsure about using it in their classrooms. It's understandable to worry what could happen if AI becomes a permanent part of colleges. Will it replace human connections and weaken teacher roles through increased use of automation? Will tenure track educators be replaced all together? How will bias and data issues be handled? And, who will provide quality control when AI provides incorrect information?

These are just a few of the concerns I’ve heard from FACCC members when discussing the role of AI at colleges. I strongly share this perspective and have positioned FACCC to be proactive in the realm of AI policy as it relates to community colleges and promoting the role of faculty. However, I believe thoughtfully implemented AI could complement faculty, not replace them. It could allow more time for mentoring and individualized support of students. The key is approaching AI primarily as a supplemental teaching support tool, which will require policymakers and administrators to reinvest in teaching and learning while resisting the pressure to consider AI as a cost savings tool. If we stay focused on students and educators while understanding AI's shortcomings and risks, we can carefully evaluate when AI may improve learning and when it should be kept away from the learning process.

In December 2022, an event occurred that caused a revolution in how we find, interact, and record information- ChatGPT was released. In response to the growing array of newly introduced software, the term "AI" (Artificial Intelligence) became a notable addition to our vocabulary. AI has revolutionized the process of writing both fiction and non-fiction books, creating artwork, and modifying existing films. This is one of the major issues in the SAG-AFTRA strike. Notably, it has been used to de-age actors, as seen in movies like the latest "Indiana Jones" and "The Mandalorian". Technology has enabled the creation of abstract animated images, as shown in the introduction to "Secret Invasion" on Disney+. These advancements in visual effects have opened new possibilities for filmmakers to bring imaginative and visually stunning scenes to the screen. This article will focus on the potential advantages of integrating AI within your roles of higher education, exploring its application in the creation of non-fiction literature, and navigating the collaborative process of working with AI as co-authors and editors.

AI writing tools can be used to generate outlines, create lecture notes, develop assessments, provide feedback on student writing, identify areas for improvement, suggest revisions, and create personalized learning experiences based on individual needs and learning styles. For instance, an English instructor could use an AI writing tool to generate a list of potential essay topics for their students, while a history instructor could use an AI writing tool to create a timeline of events for a particular historical period. Choosing the right AI writing tool is crucial for success. Each tool has its own unique strengths and limitations, so it is important to select the one that aligns with your specific project requirements. AI writing tools can be a valuable resource for community college instructors, helping in developing course materials, providing feedback to students, creating personalized learning experiences, and enhancing their own writing. These tools can help instructors streamline their workflow, improve the quality of their teaching materials, and provide more individualized attention to their students.

So, you have mastered Zoom teaching, you are an expert at asynchronous classroom design, and you can adeptly handle yourself in a face-to-face classroom. Now, it’s time to flex those teaching muscles yet again, or to be more precise, hyflex them. Hyflex is the latest teaching disruption to come to the community college classroom; with many schools actively using it this fall as part of the normal schedule options for students and faculty. 

First, what is a hyflex classroom?
A hyflex classroom refers to a versatile learning space that combines both face-to-face and remote teaching methods. It allows students to participate in a single-class session through various modes, including physical attendance, virtual participation, or by accessing recorded lectures. By utilizing technology tools like video conferencing and learning management systems, hyflex classrooms enable seamless interaction and engagement among students and instructors, regardless of their location. This approach prioritizes flexibility and accessibility, accommodating different learning preferences and circumstances. The idea behind adopting the hyflex model is that educational institutions can work towards establishing inclusive and flexible learning environments that encourage student engagement and cultivate a sense of community among both in-person and virtual learners.

 “It’s week one and I’m already tired.”
“I’m depressed because I can’t retire yet.”
“There’s so much to do that I don’t know where to start.”
“I just don’t know if I care anymore.”
“This job isn’t what I thought it was going to be.”

Sound familiar? The World Health Organization (2019) defines burnout as sustained workplace stress characterized by exhaustion, cynicism, and reduce efficacy. More and more faculty members report suffering from burnout, often to the point of at least considering leaving the profession. 

In recent years, there has been much talk about the California community colleges offering baccalaureate degrees. Amidst the buzz, little attention has been brought to the fact that certain private four-year universities are now offering associate degrees. Currently, two such programs are operating in the United States: Arrupe College, associated with Loyola University of Chicago, and Dougherty Family College, associated with University of St. Thomas. Come To Believe Network, an organization based in New York, is driving the development of  these programs in partnership with four-year universities. Their goal is to offer associate degrees at ten more four-year universities within the next five years.  This year, they provided grants to University of San Diego, University of the Pacific, Canisius University, Holy Cross College, University of Portland, and Xavier University to establish affiliated two-year colleges.

With a password-protected Board of Directors webpage and limited information about their origin, not much is clear about Come To Believe Network – other than the fact that they firmly believe that the community colleges are unable to accomplish their mission to serve students who can benefit from associate degrees. Their website is rife with damning statistics about community colleges, spotlighting their low transfer rates in comparison to the outcomes of students who have completed associate degrees at the private colleges they funded. The message is wrapped in a bow of equity, proclaiming that the privatization of associate degrees and community college educations are the key to inclusive, accessible, and successful two-year programs.

AB 1705 is bad policy and will cause a significant set-back to both equity and education for California’s most-underserved students.

Imagine yourself in a restaurant. You know what you want to eat and you know what condiments you want to add.  But the menu says you can only do that after you’ve consumed ten servings of ketchup.  That was the basic skills scenario ten years ago when students were often required to take a long sequence of remedial courses that resulted in poor success rates and low transition into college transfer courses.

Just a few years ago it was agreeable that equity meant everyone gets what they need as opposed to equality, where everyone gets the exact same thing. Yet today, equity is the buzz word sprinkled in our rhetoric to make anything more palatable, just as we might sprinkle cinnamon in black coffee and then claim it’s been sweetened. The problem is, adding cinnamon to coffee doesn’t actually sweeten it– it’s still bitter. And adding the word equity to something doesn’t make it equitable if it doesn’t actually do the nuanced work of addressing individual need. 

AB 1705 follows a pattern that we’re familiar with in education. Educators, who have never stopped saying we need smaller class sizes in addition to a multitude of requests to better support students, are finally relieved when legislators pay attention. Except they’re only half paying attention and instead of supporting the solutions educators have been requesting for over three decades, they have their own ideas about who’s to blame and what the solution is. This leads to the next phase: Sweeping reform without substance that calls on the buzz words of its era– equality, meritocracy, and promises that no child will be left behind, or every student will succeed. Not only do these not achieve the desired outcomes, they actually cause harm in the long run and educators are left holding the metaphorical bill and are scapegoated for the failure of the reform.