Contents
Cal Poly Pomona

P&R Responses for recommendation 6

Recommendation 6
Department Liberal Studies
Consensus Opinion 5 out of 5 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation
We believe that not only should the Liberal Studies Department remain an academic department, as detailed in our response to Phase I of P&R, but that LS needs to be in the same administrative subunit as the multiple subject and special education programs (1) to ensure a seamless transition for the majority of our students who wish to be teachers, (2) to enhance faculty collaboration and team teaching among LS and EDU faculty, and (3) to reduce structural barriers to cooperation, for instance in grant writing. We also believe strongly that LS and the credential programs should be housed in a separate COLLEGE of Education. Cal Poly Pomona has recently re-emphasized its commitment to teacher education, and yet the proposed realignment disconnects the undergraduate programs from the credential programs, which seemingly flies in the face of that commitment. In fact, even the single subject programs might find a more welcome home in a College of Education, since they are often ignored by their departments. Future teachers already have a difficult time being respected by the academic community, since they aren’t in a traditional “discipline”: the academic community often seems to treat our majors as “second-class citizens” since the majority of our students are “only going to be teachers”. LS courses model interdisciplinary teaching, which is now required of elementary teachers. We also teach critical thinking in all of our courses. Our LS 459 & 460 are necessary introductions to the socially and ethnically diverse populations our students will be teaching. While there is one TED course that also helps with this, these LS courses go into more depth on the issues of teaching, schools and society.

Cal Poly Pomona higher administrators have said over and over that a major campus priority is the education of future teachers, and K-12 education is the second strand shown on page 1 of the Phase II report, yet this same report proposes to show such support by subordinating education to a school within a college.

In other words, we strongly believe that future teachers should be shown the respect they deserve by maintaining a College of Education, with Liberal Studies as a Department within that College.

We also have concerns about future accreditation. Cal Poly is moving towards accreditation from the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). This accreditation takes into account undergraduate as well as graduate programs, and the overall structure of the teacher education effort. Having well-recognized department and college structures co-equal with the structures of other academic programs will help meet accreditation guidelines. Although some CSUs have a School, rather than a College, of Education, such Schools are on the same structural level as the Colleges, and not subordinated to another college. The only exceptions seem to be two campuses where education is in an independent school of professional studies.

In summary our reasons for maintaining LS as a Department within a COLLEGE of Education are:
(1) seamless transition for students
(2) enhanced faculty collaboration
(3) reduce structural barriers to cooperation
(4) accreditation concerns
(5) respect for future teachers


We urge Cal Poly Pomona, with its professed strong commitment to teacher education, to not denigrate, belittle and disparage students wishing to be teachers by making the College of Education one of the “disappeared”.

We also concur with the Dept of Education response to recommendation #6, and we also “… believe that Recommendation 6 contradicts the CSU commitment to K-12 education, and the P&R Phase I inclusion of K-12 education as a major theme at CPP. It also weakens CEIS’ ability to develop synergies with local schools and opportunities for external funding, and could actually increase redundancies in teacher preparation by eliminating its role as an independent coordinating unit."
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Liberal Studies
Consensus Opinion 5 out of 5 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation We believe that not only should the Liberal Studies Department remain an academic department, as detailed in our response to Phase I of P&R, but that Liberal Studies needs to be in the same administrative subunit as the multiple subject and special education programs (1) to ensure a seamless transition for the majority of our students who wish to be teachers, (2) to enhance faculty collaboration and team teaching among LS and EDU faculty, and (3) to reduce structural barriers to cooperation, for instance in grant writing. We also believe strongly that LS and the credential programs should be housed in a separate COLLEGE of Education. Cal Poly Pomona has recently re-emphasized its commitment to teacher education, and yet the proposed realignment disconnects the undergraduate programs from the credential programs, which seemingly flies in the face of that commitment. In fact, even the single subject programs might find a more welcome home in a College of Education, since they are often ignored by their departments. Future teachers already have a difficult time being respected by the academic community, since they aren’t in a traditional “discipline”: the academic community often seems to treat our majors as “second-class citizens” since the majority of our students are “only going to be teachers”. LS courses model interdisciplinary teaching, which is now required of elementary teachers. We also teach critical thinking in all of our courses. Our LS 459 & 460 are necessary introductions to the socially and ethnically diverse populations our students will be teaching. While there is one TED course that also helps with this, these LS courses go into more depth on the issues of teaching, schools and society.

Cal Poly Pomona higher administrators have said over and over that a major campus priority is the education of future teachers, and K-12 education is the second strand shown on page 1 of the Phase II report, yet this same report proposes to show such support by subordinating education to a school within a college.

In other words, we strongly believe that future teachers should be shown the respect they deserve by maintaining a College of Education, with Liberal Studies as a Department within that College.

We also have concerns about future accreditation. Cal Poly is moving towards accreditation from the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE). This accreditation takes into account undergraduate as well as graduate programs, and the overall structure of the teacher education effort. Having well-recognized department and college structures co-equal with the structures of other academic programs will help meet accreditation guidelines. Although some CSUs have a School, rather than a College, of Education, such Schools are on the same structural level as the Colleges, and not subordinated to another college. The only exceptions seem to be two campuses where education is in an independent school of professional studies.

In summary our reasons for maintaining LS as a Department within a COLLEGE of Education are:
(1) seamless transition for students
(2) enhanced faculty collaboration
(3) reduce structural barriers to cooperation
(4) accreditation concerns
(5) respect for future teachers


We urge Cal Poly Pomona, with its professed strong commitment to teacher education, to not denigrate, belittle and disparage students wishing to be teachers by making the College of Education one of the “disappeared”.

We also concur with the Department of Education response to recommendation #6, and we also “… believe that Recommendation 6 contradicts the CSU commitment to K-12 education, and the P&R Phase I inclusion of K-12 education as a major theme at CPP. It also weakens CEIS’ ability to develop synergies with local schools and opportunities for external funding, and could actually increase redundancies in teacher preparation by eliminating its role as an independent coordinating unit.”
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Math and Science Help (MaSH), College of Science
Consensus Opinion 3 out of 3 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation MaSH response to P&R recommendation #6, November 16, 2007

Facilitating student retention is essential to the University mission and support programs play an essential role. While MaSH supports the idea of partnership among the groups who carry out this important role, we have concerns about maintaining the quality of our program with the proposed changes. MaSH is proud of the quality of our program and the role that we play in supporting student learning in the service courses in the College of Science. Our success is due to the strong partnership we have with the faculty teaching these classes and who help with content specific issues, tutor selection and training. Our location, within the College, is also essential for access and convenience both for our supporting faculty and our students. Struggling students are more likely to use our services when we are located close to the classrooms they use.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Math and Science Help (MaSH), College of Science
Consensus Opinion 3 out of 3 faculty/staff : With modifications
Consensus Explanation MaSH response to P&R recommendation #6, November 16, 2007

Facilitating student retention is essential to the University mission and support programs play an essential role. While MaSH supports the idea of partnership among the groups who carry out this important role, we have concerns about maintaining the quality of our program with the proposed changes. MaSH is proud of the quality of our program and the role that we play in supporting student learning in the service courses in the College of Science. Our success is due to the strong partnership we have with the faculty teaching these classes and who help with content specific issues, tutor selection and training. Our location, within the College, is also essential for access and convenience both for our supporting faculty and our students. Struggling students are more likely to use our services when we are located close to the classrooms they use.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Office of Student LIfe and Cultural Centers
Consensus Opinion 7 out of 13 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation Maximizes resources and enhances collaboration.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Orientation Services
Consensus Opinion 3 out of 3 faculty/staff : Con
Consensus Explanation If a School of ED is created within the CLASS, there would be an inconsistent structure to the university because Collins School would be the only stand-alone. With this structure there is concern with a loss of credibility and the appearance that one college (the stand alone) is more important, more credible, more succcessful, etc. than the others.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation

Recommendation 6
Department Science Educational Enhancement (SEES)
Consensus Opinion 28 out of 28 faculty/staff : Con
Consensus Explanation The Science Educational Enhancement Services (SEES) Department is against recommendation #6, Learning Coalition (Support Programs P&R Recommendations). SEES is college-based, and its goal is to support, retain, and graduate diverse students in the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields. Data submitted in the original report demonstrates that SEES achieves its goal. Therefore, for maximum effectiveness, SEES needs to remain in the College of Science. SEES provides a supportive learning community for STEM students as well as opportunities for academic support, leadership training, professional development, networking, career advisement and community outreach. SEES has significantly different goals than the other programs, except Maximizing Engineering Potential, MEP.

Nationwide there is a shortage of underrepresented minorities (URM) in STEM fields. It is a well-documented fact that retention and graduation of STEM students, especially those from URM groups, depend upon a number of factors that can only be found in college-based programs:
Strong student-faculty interaction SEES students receive one-on-one advising from faculty in the College of Science; students attend professional conferences with faculty.
Presence of role models SEES lower division students are constantly interacting with upper division students through academic excellence workshops and tutoring, and in the SEES study and computer rooms. They meet faculty informally in the SEES area, as well as in social settings and travel to professional meetings with them.
Professional development SEES students are eligible for support to carry out research, attend professional meetings (with faculty members), and for support for graduate/professional school preparatory courses, the GRE, and application fees.
Leadership development SEES students have the opportunity to participate in our facilitator training for the academic excellence workshop program.
Academic Excellence Workshop (AEW) program SEES students participate in this program to improve their grades; it is not a remedial program. Our data show that those students who participate in AEWs increase their grade by about 0.5 above class average.


Since 1999, the SEES program has received significant external funding from agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the National Science Foundation (NSF), The California Endowment Foundation, The California Wellness Foundation, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI), and the Department of Education: Womens Educational Equity Act (WEEA).

External funding for the SEES program during the current academic year are the following:
The California Wellness, $70,000; HHMI, $40,000; WEEA $60,000; NSF, $10,000 giving a total of $180,000.

Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : NA
Minority Explanation N.A.

Recommendation 6
Department University Development
Consensus Opinion 12 out of 12 faculty/staff : Pro
Consensus Explanation It is clear that CEIS is already moving in the proposed direction. Our major concerns moving forward with this are that this does not negatively impact accreditation, and that the mission, goals, and objectives of the new School of Education be refined so it will become a stronger, more specialized school in it's own right. When these are taken into account we should see increased funding (private and public) for the new school and it's programs.
Minority Opinion NA out of NA faculty/staff : With modifications
Minority Explanation

Recommendations not submitted through the forms are available in this folder. They mainly consist of Microsoft Word or Adobe Acrobat documents. If none were submitted for this recommendation, the folder will be empty.