San Gabriel Valley Tribune, Editorial

 Monday, February 25, 2002

 

Our View: CSU should teach, not train

 

Politicians in Sacramento and California State University administrators make budget plans about school construction, technology, student services and how they are going to fund for a "tidal wave" of additional students. But all of these budget plans omit one thing: quality of student education.

 

At CSU, part-time (on-the-run) lecturers outnumber full-time professors. And these part-timers, while qualified, are not providing students the attention they need. We wonder: Is a good education really what these policymakers want for the students? Or rather, do they want to create a viable corps of future workers who receive job training rather than an education?

 

There is a huge difference between training and education. Unfortunately, California State University Chancellor Charles Reed does not see it that way.

 

Reed, at a recent round-table meeting with the media at Cal Poly Pomona, said the school system's main mission is to provide "access work force for the state of California."

 

With this attitude, the CSU's mission seems to be no more than a glorified trade school. Bring 'em in, train 'em, ship 'em out. This, Reed implied, is CSU's function.

 

Perhaps that's why during last year's teacher evaluations, 20 percent of elementary teachers who graduated from a CSU received a failing mark. Reed prefers to look at it as 80 percent succeeding. But that one in five CSU graduates are poor teachers is alarming.

 

Instead of providing students a proper education and teaching future teachers to think for themselves, CSU would rather make improvements like new technology or better student services.

 

Administrative costs have risen during Reed's reign, too. According to a study by the California Faculty Association, since the 1994-95 school year, administrative costs have exploded, rising 33 percent. For example, at nearby Cal State Fullerton, President Milton Gordon has seen his salary rise from $140,000 in 1995 to $200,000 this year.

 

Instead of spending money on full-time professors who can make themselves available to students, the university is spending its money hiring part-time lecturers whose time helping students after or before classes is limited by their busy schedules.

 

Fortunately, Reed has decided to undertake an aggressive campaign to hire 1,000 full-time professors by next year. In order to attract highly qualified professors to the CSU, Reed said the system will offer affordable housing for teachers and to try and help reduce PhD loans, among other incentives.

 

But he said absolutely nothing about paying the professors more. According to the California Postsecondary Education Commission, the CSU faculty will earn 10.6 percent less than faculty at other colleges and universities similar to the CSU.

 

Perhaps it is time for Reed to make tough choices and skip some new generations of technology, streamline administrative costs and temporarily cut some student service programs so that he can focus on what should be the top priority of CSU -- the quality of student education.

 

The 23-campus CSU system provides many students the opportunity to further their educations. Reed must not see it as merely a supplier to the work force, but rather as a place where future doctors, managers, politicians, engineers and other professionals are educated.