The CSU at the Beginning of the 21st Century:

Meeting the Needs of the People of California

The report surveys teaching and learning in the CSU at a crucial juncture: many indicators of quality--the student-faculty

ratio, library collections, and more--have failed to recover from the fiscal crisis of the early 1990s, but

the CSU faces both greatly increased student demand and large numbers of faculty retirements.

At the same time, that the State of California

faces a new economic downturn.

We do not anticipate that all our recommendations will be--or could be--immediately implemented.

It is our hope that our analyses will inform future budget planning and policy making.

We look forward to working cooperatively and collegially with the CSU faculty, administration, Trustees, and, as necessary, the legislature to accomplish these goals.

3. Challenges to Achieving the Highest Levels of Quality Students Teacher-Learner Contact Graduate Study Infrastructure Staff Faculty Relations Between and Among Systems

Contact between Teachers and Learners “Research shows that the more

satisfied students are with their contact with professors, the more they will learn and the more likely it is they will graduate.”

--U.S. News and World Report

Contact between Teachers and Learners

Student-Faculty Ratios, CSU, 1980-81 to 1999-2000

17

18

19

20

21

1980

-81

1981

-82

1982

-83

1983

-84

1984

-85

1985

-86

1986

-87

1987

-88

1988

-89

1989

-90

1990

-91

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-200

0

Print Periodical Subscriptions and Expendituresfor Print Periodical Subscriptions, All CSU Libraries,

1980-81 through 1999-2000

40,000

47,500

55,000

62,500

70,000

1980

-81

1981

-82

1982

-83

1983

-84

1984

-85

1985

-86

1986

-87

1987

-88

1988

-89

1989

-90

1990

-91

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-200

0

Num

ber

of P

erio

dica

l Sub

scrip

tions

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

Perio

dica

l Exp

endi

ture

s (t

hous

ands

of

dolla

rs,

in c

onst

ant d

olla

rs, 2

000

= 1)

Periodical Subscriptions Periodical Expenditures (X $1,000, in constant dollars, where 2000 = 1)

Infrastructure: Library Collections

Library Staffing, 1980-81 through 1999-2000

0.3

0.5

0.7

1980

-81

1981

-82

1982

-83

1983

-84

1984

-85

1985

-86

1986

-87

1987

-88

1988

-89

1989

-90

1990

-91

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-200

0

FTE

Libr

ary

Staf

f per

100

FTE

Stu

dent

s

Changing Patterns of Faculty HiringChanging Numbers of T/tt and Temporary Faculty,

and Enrollments, CSU, 1980-81 to 1999-2000.

220000

240000

260000

280000

1980-8

1

1981-8

2

1982-8

3

1983-8

4

1984-8

5

1985-8

6

1986-8

7

1987-8

8

1988-8

9

1989-9

0

1990-9

1

1991-9

2

1992-9

3

1993-9

4

1994-9

5

1995-9

6

1996-9

7

1997-9

8

1998-9

9

1999-2

000

FT

ES

6000

8000

10000

12000

Fa

cu

lty

FTES (AY) Tenured and tenure-track All others, mostly part-time lecturers

Faculty Professional Development: Maintaining Currency through Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity CSU students expect to learn from faculty

current in their disciplines; thus, ongoing professional development for the faculty is central to the effective teaching that is at the heart of the CSU mission.

Research, scholarship, and creative activity contribute to building an education of high quality through their roles in developing an intellectually engaged and productive faculty.

Faculty Professional Development: Maintaining Currency through Research, Scholarship, and Creative Activity

“Research, scholarship, and creative activity in support of its undergraduate and graduate instructional mission is authorized in the California State University and shall be supported by the state.”

--The Donahoe Act, as amended, California Education Code

4. Meeting the Needs of the People of California Enrollment Projections The Crisis of Physical Infrastructure The Crisis of Faculty Hiring Developing New Programs to Meet

State Needs Funding Quality and Funding Growth

CPEC projects a 37% increase in CSU student enrollment--

a surge of some 130,000 additional students,

from 349,804 students in Fall 1998

to nearly 480,000 by the year 2010.

The Crisis of Faculty Hiring

Among the CSU tenured faculty in 1996-97, two out of every nine either retired or entered FERP by Fall 2000.

By 2010, half or more of the current tenured faculty are likely to have retired.

The Crisis of Faculty HiringFull-time Faculty by Age, 1980-1999

Age 29 or younger

30-39 years of age

40-49 years of age

50-59 years of age

Age 60 and older

0

25

50

75

100

1980

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Pe

rce

nta

ge

The Crisis of Faculty Hiring

At least half of the current t/tt faculty will reach retirement age before 2010.

To maintain current levels of tenure-track faculty, this will require 4,853 new t/tt hires.

The Crisis of Faculty Hiring

Hire 4,853 t/tt faculty to replace retiring tenured faculty

Hire 3,198 t/tt faculty to handle enrollment increases (based on 75% of 4,264 additional FTEF)

Total t/tt hires needed by 2010: 8,051 Total current t/tt faculty: 9,705

The Crisis of Faculty Hiring:

Separations, Searches, and Hiring of t/tt Faculty Members, 1988-1999

Year

Number of T/ttFaculty Leavingthe CSU for all

CausesNumber ofSearches

Total Appoint-ments of New T/ttFaculty Members

Success Ratefor Searches

1995-96 425 486 367 75.5%1996-97 513 506 401 79.2%1997-98 639 511 388 75.9%1998-99 409 759 543 71.5%1999-2000 795 889 616 69.3%Totals 2,781 3,151 2,315 73.5%

Source: CSU Report on Faculty Recruitment Survey, 1998 and 1999.

The Crisis of Faculty HiringCPEC Parity Figures and Actual CSU Salary Increases,

1986-87 through 2000-01

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1986-

87

1987-

88

1988-

89

1989-

90

1990-

91

1991-

92

1992-

93

1993-

94

1994-

95

1995-

96

1996-

97

1997-

98

1998-

99

1999-

2000

2000-

1

2001-

02

Perc

ent

CSU Parity Figure Actual Increase

The Crisis of Faculty HiringAverage Salary, Assistant Professors, 1986-1999

30000

38500

47000

55500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Dol

lars

(for

con

stan

t dol

lars

, 200

0=1)

Average Salary, Current Dollars Average Salary, Constant Dollars (2000=1)

Developing New Programs to Meet State Needs With the proper resources, the CSU

could expand its curriculum to meet emerging state needs in several areas.

With the proper resources, the CSU could expand existing masters' degree programs and develop new, applied graduate degree programs at masters' and doctoral levels, including the Ed.D.

Funding

Funding Educational Quality Funding Scholarship Funding Growth Funding in the CSU and Funding in the UC

Recommendations Requiring Legislative Action: Provide to all CSU faculty members the

opportunity to devote a minimum of one-fifth of their assigned workload to research, scholarship, and creative activity.

Revise current budget formulae to restore and enhance the quality of education and to encourage new program development.

Authorize and provide appropriate funding to CSU campuses to offer independent applied doctoral degrees.

Other Recommendations:

Reduce the current student-faculty ratio to the level typical before the state's fiscal crisis of the early 1990s.

Remedy insufficiencies due to delayed maintenance and delayed purchasing during the early 1990s. Bring state-of-the-art technology to more CSU classrooms.

Augment CSU library collections and restore library staffing.

Other Recommendations (continued): Establish incentives to attract new faculty members of

the highest quality, including improved benefits, housing subsidies or subsidized housing, and moving expenses.

Hire additional tenure-track faculty and improve funding for searches; reduce the current proportion of lecturers by hiring more tenure-track faculty.

Increase the number of secretarial/clerical staff and technical staff who provide services to students and faculty. Improve staff wages and benefits to attract and retain the best quality staff in these positions.

Other Recommendations (concluded): Increase support for the research, scholarship, and creative

activity that are required for effective teaching; specifically, provide additional sabbaticals and other research support for CSU faculty and reconfigure the CSU faculty workload so that a one-fifth is devoted to faculty development (including research, scholarship, and creative activity).

Adjust CSU faculty salaries to achieve parity with comparison institutions to remain competitive with other academic institutions.

Improve the current CSU physical plant to provide adequate

facilities for existing programs and for growth.