The CCSF Student Task Force is a group of board members, administrators, professors and students that was put together in 2010 by Chancellor Donald Griffin to analyze and respond to the findings of the college’s 2009 equity report, which found that larger percentages of black, Filipino, Latino, Pacific Islander
and Southeast Asian students wanted four-year degrees than did their
Asian and white counterparts. Yet, according to the report, those same
groups — except for Southeast Asians — transfer to four-year schools at
significantly lower rates than Asians and whites. The graduation or
transfer rate for blacks is 24 percent; for Latinos it is 23 percent. For white
non-Hispanics, it is 31 percent” (Pogash 2010).
The CCSF Task Force was also a response to the State’s Student Task Force, which was put together in order to gain insight into the state colleges’ inequities and needs. According to the CCSF Chancellor’s Task Report released in 2011, “The [CCSF] Taskforce was organized in May 2010 to strategically work on the planning and assessment of City College’s intervention efforts to address the student achievement gap.” In a December 2010 article in City Currents: A Newsletter for the City College Community, CCSF Academic President Karen Saginor pointed out that the Task Force was focused on defining student success, in all of its manifestations, including successful transfer to a four-year college, an AA degree, a certificate, or employment. She elaborated on her blog: “The concerns expressed by most of the students were getting into classes AND getting the resources (whether jobs, books, loans, scholarships, etc.), and support learning, followed my requests for more dedicated space and dedicated support from counselors and others for affinity groups (International students, AB540 students and veterans)” (Saginor 2011).
Serving around 100,000 students across San Francisco, CCSF is to my knowledge the largest community college in the nation and contains an extremely diverse student body, in terms of student age, nationality, socio-economic status, family status, and employment status. Compounding these challenges, multiple budget cuts issued from Sacramento have hit California education with a sledgehammer. According to Joe Fitzgerald in a 2011 article in The Guardsman, a CCSF student publication, “The City College Board of Trustees voted to approve a budget of $191 million for the remainder of the college’s 2011-2012 fiscal year. This budget includes cutting a whopping $1.9 million in funding for classes, a sacrifice made in the face of an ongoing statewide fiscal crisis meaning that thousands of students are in danger of not getting into classes” (2011). According to Board President John Rizzo, “Last fall 15,000 students could not get into classes due to budget cuts” (Akinyemi 2011). On Monday, January 9th, 2012, the Community College Board voted to approve the Task Force recommendations, which, in the words of San Francisco Chronicle writer Nanette Asimov, “support a systemwide overhaul that could end many free classes for older adults and squeeze out students who fail to move quickly through the system” (2012).
CCSF’s English Department, in which I teach, was asked to cut its curriculum roughly in half in order to increase student retention by eliminating some of the potential leak points in the educational pipeline, and has managed to create and assess an accelerated pathway for students who can afford the time to take 6-credit classes that cover two sections in one semester. After piloting these new courses in 2011, the English Department Chair, Jessica Brown, indicated, “close to two times as many students will complete their English sequence through this accelerated pathway.” Still according to data that Brown presented, “49% (over 5,000) students who attempted to get into English classes were unable to enroll; due to budget cuts, many sections of English have been cut for Spring 2012” (Griffin 2011).
The Task Force recommendations, according to a Press Release available on the CCSF Educational Access TV webpage, “are meant to radically defund the community college system,” and “shrink government sponsored education” (Kappra). Furthermore, they would place the assessment of student placement and success in the hands of state legislature instead of the academic departments, prioritize registration for students that are declared as transfer students, and prioritize funding for students based on defining academic “success” on very narrow, state-mandated standards. There has been strong opposition to the CCSF Task Force recommendations by teachers and administrators, including the CCSF Board of Trustees itself. As Academic Senate President Karen Saginor (2011) stresses:
No single definition would cover the diversity of student educational needs at City College. We want definitions of success that reflect all of our students and not just some of them. We reject criteria that will narrow our focus from multidimensional learning to superficial credentials. And we want measurements of progress that will apparently value those students whose rates of achievement are slowed by the need to work full-time to support a family, by the absence of role models or technological tools, or other socio-economic obstacles that the college lacks sufficient resources to ameliorate.
Partially sponsored by the Lumina Foundation, with input from the right-wing American Legislative Exchange Counsel (ALEC), the State Task Force recommendations envision student success as applying only to transfer students, by and large to US citizens, and primarily to students who succeed at a state-mandated rate. The CCSF Task Force recommendations mirror state and national visions of student success as a race-to-the-top, as a motivational issue to be handled by punishing student failure, in this case not meeting the state’s arbitrary timeline, rather than interpreting the stories of the students and providing support wherever needed.
We need new metaphors for City College student success. Donald Schön states, “a ‘metaphor’ refers to a certain product – a perspective or frame, a way of looking at things – and a certain kind of process – a process by which new perspectives on the world come into existence” (1996: 137). We need to remember the community in the very idea of the community college. As City College instructor Ed Murray in last week’s SF Chronicle article, “Don’t cut the poorest of our society. Where are they going to go if they can’t go to community college? To prison?” That is apparently what the state and the community college board are telling us, that the community college is now a junior college, a gateway through which the fortunate can move briskly into four-year colleges. Schön defines a generative metaphor as “a particular kind of SEEING-AS, a meta-pherein’ or ‘carrying over’ of frames or perspectives from one domain of experience to another” (1996: 137). We need to carry over the original vision of Archibald Cloud, the founder of San Francisco City College, who as Chief Deputy Superintendant of the San Francisco Unified School District in 1930, saw a need for an educational system that served the many in the community whose educational paths had been sidelined by the Great Depression: as City College biographer Austin White defines the students that Cloud intended to serve, “students without adequate monetary resources who want to obtain a college education; students who had to make up academic deficiencies in order to gain access to college education; students who wanted to enroll in semi-professional training so they could enter vocational fields” (2005: 4). This was and should still be the original intent of San Francisco City College as well as the community college as a whole, as should serve as a metaphorical frame that is “carr[ied] over” into each new year at City College, and in the California community college system as a whole.
President Obama has repeatedly stressed the crucial role that the community college is to play in getting Americans back to work and restoring this nation’s middle class. “Calling them the ‘unsung heroes of the American educational system,’ Obama said community colleges ‘may not get the credit they deserve, they may not get the same resources as other schools, but they provide a gateway for millions of Americans to good jobs and a better life’” (Superville, Gorski, and Turner 2010).
Casey Davin recounted his story from motorcycle wreck to drug addiction to homelessness, to rehabilitation and to City College, in Etc. Magazine, a student-run periodical. “I can tell you that since I started here at City College of San Francisco, I’ve never felt better. I have a sense of accomplishment, just simply going to school.” We need a metaphor for City College student success that includes students like Casey, students whose lives interfere with a seamless transition into a four-year institution, students who need individual support and resources. As Saginor says in regard’s to Casey’s story, “I opine, every week that he showed up for classes and added something to his skill sets instead of taking drugs marked a success, not a failure” (2011). Since the mid-nineteenth century, the community college has been centered on serving the community’s needs. This requires placing principle before policy, by interpreting the diverse needs of our community, and framing the plight in a generative metaphor that includes its diverse range of needs. While social policy is commonly thought of as problem-solving, Schön asserts, “Problems are not given. They are constructed by human beings in their attempts to make sense of complex and troubling situations” (1996: 143). California sees the time it takes for students like Casey to fulfill their educational dreams a problem and needs to pan out and consider the issue through a larger lens. Perhaps the problem isn’t Casey, but our state’s prison system, which has grown into a financial burden that overshadows education, and our extremely underfunded K-12 system, which ranks among the lowest in per-student funding in the nation.
In my six years of teaching at City College, one of my former students, Lerone Matthis, comes to mind as a model student in the community college, and serves as a generative metaphor for community college success. Entering my English 93 class, a developmental – what the state would call remedial – composition course designed to prepare students for English 1A, the university-level freshman composition course. Like Casey’s, Lerone’s experience in public high school, in his case in Richmond and Vallejo, “was a joke,” a cruel one at that, that, instead of inspiring him and teaching him valuable skills for adulthood, sent him into petty crime, juvenile detention, and homelessness. When he entered my 93 class, just out of homelessness, struggling to support two children, and recently having passed his GED exam, he was extremely nervous, stuttered incessantly, but had a warm smile and a relentless drive to improve his life.
Over the last four years, Lerone has completed the English sequence – he took 1A and 1C with me and completed an honor’s paper on black social responsibility – and has been accepted into the UC system for the fall of 2012. He is active on campus, is a coordinator of the Student Activity Office, and was a student member or the Task Force. While he appreciates the option to take accelerated courses, he also appreciates the opportunity to move through the curriculum at his pace, taking advantage of as many opportunities as possible along the way. In a recent conversation with him, he shared a touching anecdote:
I recently explained my idea of the problem of patting down black 12-
year-olds at a dance. I related it to my whole idea from the essay I am
writing and once I was done I almost cried. I fully explained my idea to
the people listening and answered rebuttals without a problem. Now, I
think back to the beginning when I began your class, I could never
articulate my thoughts as well or make my argument stick as well as it
just did. I can really accredit you because if I never took your class in the
summer of 2008 I would have never realized any of this. Thank You.
(2012)
Under the “overhauled” system that was put into effect two Mondays ago, Lerone’s story will not be considered a success, at least not a success enough. For many students like Casey and Lerone, community college is literally a way off the streets, out of prison, and onto a better future. We need an inclusive metaphor for student success that includes students Like Lerone, who needed a bit of time to transition into college, but who excelled in academics, wrote research papers for honor’s contracts, become a student leader, and will transfer this year into the University of California.
Lerone feels that, though the Student Task Force at City College did create a successful accelerated sequence in the English Department, it favors students with no special needs, who are full-time students, who of course should be served as well. What we have found to be a success is giving students the opportunity to achieve their academic goals as quickly or as timely as possible. Speaking of the results of the Student Task Force and the current State budget for education, Lerone stated, “We have made gains in some aspects of the CCSF Task Force, but there is a long way to go to get the underrepresented student to consistent academic success. Unfortunately, we are now having our hand forced by the State’s Student Success Task Force, so we will now have to tailor our new, innovative ideas around.” Realizing that the outcomes of CCSF’s Student Task Force is in response to larger state budgetary restrains, and that in many ways the college’s hands are tied, Lerone still feels that the changes will affect students like himself, students that the community college was originally established to serve. “The Student Success Task Force defines success as more restrictions and less money. However, every economist knows that the best natural resource is the knowledge or education of the people who inhabit that country.”
Elizabeth Noyola arrived in California from San Salvador in 1986. Though she had not suffered personal danger from the war, her family was affected greatly by its presence, her brother was killed in prison after he was falsely accused of being a traitor, and her family was in many ways torn apart by the economic and social implications of the war. For a number of years she supported herself, learned English at City College, earned a bachelor’s degree in counseling, and secured a good position in a language lab at the Mission campus of the City College of San Francisco, all while making various attempts to apply attain residency, knowing that, because Salvadorians were not offered amnesty, and, because she was not directly persecuted politically, she would not have a good chance of passing the interviews at the INS. She spoke to me about sleeping three hours a night for over a decade in order to learn English, complete her transfer requirements, and completing the undergraduate program at San Francisco State University. “Education really helped me; that was my medication. Education was my medication. And that’s what gave me the path to be what I am now. Elizabeth’s story is a model for community college student success and, like Casey and Lerone’s should play an integral part in formulating how we metaphorically imagine student success at City College.
Just social policy needs to be formed around principals that are formed through the imaginative and loving interpretation of the stories of those who are affected by it. We need to hear student stories and take a narrative approach to organizational development and social policy. The Task Force recommendations seem to ironically ignore the very students that the 2009 Equity Report argued were the most in need. Nowhere is student equity more important than in the community college system, in which people like Casey, Lerone and Elizabeth find alternatives to the streets, to homelessness, and to the vicious cycle of poverty. New metaphors for community college student success require “a normative leap from data to recommendations, from facts to values, from ‘is’ to ‘ought’” (Schön 1996: 147). We need a new model for student success at City College as serving the community, as a saving grace for those left out of the race, a bottom-up institution in a neo-liberal system that by in large misunderstands those who cannot keep up with the race to the top.
Bibliography
Akinyemi, Yomi
2011 “400 City College Classes Saved from Cuts, 350-400 Still Plan to
Be Cut Next Year. The Guardsman. June 12th, 2011.
Asimov, Annette
2012 “California Community Colleges Approve Overhaul.” San
Francisco Chronicle. January 10th, 2012.
Davin, Casey “Street Student: The Challenges of Doing Homework without a
2010 Home.” Etc. Magazine. City College of San Francisco, Fall 2010.
Fitzgerald, Joe
2011 “Final Budget for 2011-2012 Approved.” The Guardsman. June
12th, 2011. October 11th, 2012.
Griffin, Donald
2011 “Chancellor’s Taskforce Report on Student Equity and the
Achievement Gap.” City College of San Francisco.
Kappra, Rick
2011 “Press Release: Fact Sheet: Recommendations for Student
Failure.” No SSTF. .
Pogash, Carol
2010 “At City College, a Battle over Remedial Classes for English and
Math.” New York Times. June 24th, 2010.
Saginor, Karen
2011 “Student Task Force Recommendations Continue to Trouble
CCSF.” City Currents: A Newsletter for the City College. Vol. 27.
No. 14.
Schön, Donald and C. Argyris
1996 Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method and Practice.
Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 1996
Superville, Darlene, Eric Gorski, and Dorie Turner
2010 “Obama Addresses White House Summit on Community
Colleges.” Huffington Host. 10/5/10.
White, Austin
2005 From Dream To Reality: City College of San Francisco: A Short
History. City College of San Francisco.













