1. Equivalence at MPC Goals: 1.Articulate to the MPC community the expectations for granting equivalency to faculty applicants 2.Clearly define roles and responsibilities in the equivalency process  Division and Department Chairs  Equivalency Committee  Human Resources Personnel

2. Where We Are Now:  Review by AAAG Progress So Far:  Draft expectations developed by the equivalency committee  Forms reviewed and revised by the equivalency committee  Approved by the Academic Senate Tasks for the Future:  Communication to the MPC Community  Review and revision of MPC Board Policy Equivalence at MPC

3.  A district may hire a person who “possesses qualifications that are at least equivalent to the [state] minimum qualifications.” “The process, as well as criteria and standards…shall be developed and agreed upon jointly by …the [local] governing board and the [local] academic senate.” (Title 5, section 53430) What is Equivalency?  We are currently reviewing our “criteria and standards”

4. Why Is Equivalency Important?  One way to ensure the quality of instruction  Budget-minded legislators and/or regulators can “attack” certain credit courses and suggest that they be moved to non- credit or community service through the qualifications of the instructor  Best strategy is to have rigorous hiring and equivalency policies

5. Kinds of Minimum Qualifications 1.Disciplines requiring a masters degree  Mostly transfer  Specific requirements developed by the BoG in consultation with the State Academic Senate 2.Disciplines not requiring a masters degree  Mostly CTE  Associates + 6 years experience or Bachelors + 2 years exp.  Specific requirements developed by the BoG in consultation with the State Academic Senate  Remember, all degrees—masters and non-masters—require both discipline (the major) and general education aspects.

6. A Note on Disciplines Not Requiring a Masters Degree (CTE)  Spring 2010 ASCCC Resolution  “There is no equivalent to the AA Degree”  This resolution failed resoundingly  Many in the CTE fields do not have AA Degrees  Proponents argued that college faculty should have college degrees

7. Minimum Quals Do’s and Don’ts  Does enable one to be hired by the district to serve as faculty  Ensures discipline knowledge  Doesn’t mean the applicant has the ability to teach or serve  Covered by the hiring process  Doesn’t mean the applicant should be hired  Does mean that discipline knowledge is but one part of what a successful faculty member needs

8. Kinds of Equivalency  Full Minimum Qualifications  Encouraged by the state Academic Senate (ASCCC)  Desired by MPC Equivalency Committee  Enables faculty member to teach throughout the discipline  Always used for full-time, tenure-track applicants  “Single Course”  Title 5, Section 53430: "No one may be hired to serve as a community college faculty unless the governing board determines that he or she possesses qualifications that are at least equivalent to the minimum qualifications specified."  ASCCC maintains there is no such thing as a "single course equivalency  2003 legal opinion by Chancellor’s Office General Counsel Ralph Black

9. More on Single Course Equivalency  Still offered by MPC  Called “Selected Courses Equivalency”  Used for adjuncts, never for full-time  MPC is rural and cannot always attract fully qualified applicants  MPC must still address its mission  MPC Equivalency Committee would like to grant as few of these as possible  What differences in expectations between full equivalency and Selected Course Equivalency should be established?

10. What about Eminence? The idea that if somebody is “eminent” they can be hired as faculty  No longer exists in Title 5  Definition is problematical = a big can of worms  ASCCC Spring 2009 Resolution 10.01  Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges conclude that eminence may no longer be used as the sole criterion to qualify faculty when evaluating minimum qualifications during the faculty hiring process;

11. MPC Interpretation of Eminence Eminence is recognized as professional experience  Candidates with appropriate professional experience (2 to 6 years) are eminent in their CTE disciplines  “Eminent” candidates should be able to demonstrate how aspects of their professional experience are equivalent to  GE degree requirements in CTE disciplines  Major degree requirements in Transfer disciplines  All candidates must have taken at least some GE courses

12. MPC Criteria and Standards Expectations focus on differences between:  Full Equivalency and Selected Courses  Process  Discipline expertise  Disciplines that require a masters degree (transfer) and those that don’t (CTE)  How applicant obtained the GE portion of the degree

13. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency General Considerations Person responsible for most of the application paperwork The applicant The department or division chair Courses the instructor can teach All in the discipline Only those specified on the application Additional requirementsNone Must demonstrate that a search for a fully qualified or equivalent candidate was not successful Discipline or major part of the degree Full Equivalency according to the “Minimum Qualifications Handbook” Expertise more narrowly focused than implied by the minimum qualifications Differences between full and specific courses equivalency focus on process and discipline expertise.

14. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency General Considerations Person responsible for most of the application paperwork The applicant The department or division chair Courses the instructor can teach All in the discipline Only those specified on the application Additional requirementsNone Must demonstrate that a search for a fully qualified or equivalent candidate was not successful Discipline or major part of the degree Full Equivalency according to the “Minimum Qualifications Handbook” Expertise more narrowly focused than implied by the minimum qualifications

15. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency General Considerations Person responsible for most of the application paperwork The applicant The department or division chair Courses the instructor can teach All in the discipline Only those specified on the application Additional requirementsNone Must demonstrate that a search for a fully qualified or equivalent candidate was not successful Discipline or major part of the degree Full Equivalency according to the “Minimum Qualifications Handbook” Expertise more narrowly focused than implied by the minimum qualifications This is new Not yet implemented

16. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency General Considerations Person responsible for most of the application paperwork The applicant The department or division chair Courses the instructor can teach All in the discipline Only those specified on the application Additional requirementsNone Must demonstrate that a search for a fully qualified or equivalent candidate was not successful Discipline or major part of the degree Full Equivalency according to the “Minimum Qualifications Handbook” Expertise more narrowly focused than implied by the minimum qualifications MPC Equivalency Committee has carefully granted full equivalency only to those applicants who have clearly obtained the equivalent to a masters degree. This is new Not yet implemented

17. MPC Criteria and Standards Expectations focus on differences between:  Full Equivalency and Selected Courses  Process  Discipline expertise  Disciplines that require a masters degree (transfer) and those that don’t (CTE)  How applicant obtained the GE portion of the degree

18. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency For disciplines that require a Masters degree or equivalent The GE part of the degree Completion of a GE program at the Associates or Bachelors level Completion of a GE program at the Associates or Bachelors level For disciplines that require an Associate degree (Assoc + 6 yrs exp. or Bach + 2yrs exp.) Expectations for the GE part of the degree Completion of, or full equivalency to the GE part of the degree Methods to obtain equivalency to the GE part of the degree GE courses plus or minus professional experience Expectations of Full and Specific Course equivalency are the same in this section

19. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency For disciplines that require a Masters degree or equivalent The GE part of the degree Completion of a GE program at the Associates or Bachelors level For disciplines that require an Associate degree (Assoc + 6 yrs exp. or Bach + 2yrs exp.) Expectations for the GE part of the degree Completion of, or full equivalency to the GE part of the degree Methods to obtain equivalency to the GE part of the degree GE courses plus or minus professional experience No equivalent to the GE program for the masters disciplines

20. Full Equivalency to Minimum Qualifications Specific Courses Equivalency For disciplines that require a Masters degree or equivalent The GE part of the degree Completion of a GE program at the Associates or Bachelors level For disciplines that require an Associate degree (Assoc + 6 yrs exp. or Bach + 2yrs exp.) Expectations for the GE part of the degree Completion of, or full equivalency to the GE part of the degree Methods to obtain equivalency to the GE part of the degree GE courses plus or minus professional experience Equivalency to the GE program for non-masters disciplines

21. Roles and Responsibilities  Division and Department Chairs  Understand equivalency expectations  Read applications carefully  Endorse qualifications of applicants via signature (we’d like improvement here)  Equivalency Committee  Approves applications to assure equitable and consistent implementation of processes  Communicates final approval or disapproval to HR and Divisions  HR Department  Distributes appropriate forms  Brings applications to equivalency committee  Advises applicants on the need for equivalency applications  Does not make decisions on equivalency applications

22. Equivalency  This is a subtle and complex process  It needs your careful consideration and thoughtful comments  Thank You!