Literaturnachweis - Detailanzeige
| Institution | BW Associates, Berkeley, CA.; California Community Colleges, Sacramento. Commission on Innovation. |
|---|---|
| Titel | Coordinated Decentralization: Restructured Governance for the New Community Colleges. Commission on Innovation Policy Discussion Paper Number 6. |
| Quelle | (1992), (43 Seiten)
PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei |
| Sprache | englisch |
| Dokumenttyp | gedruckt; online; Monographie |
| Schlagwörter | Stellungnahme; Change Strategies; College Governing Councils; Community Colleges; Decentralization; Educational Change; Governance; Organizational Development; Policy Formation; Power Structure; Two Year Colleges |
| Abstract | Intended to provide background information and preliminary policy options for the California Community Colleges' Commission on Innovation, this document explores changes in local and systemwide college governance to enhance efficiency and effectiveness. Following introductory materials detailing the Commission's charge, the current state governance system is reviewed, including a history of governance systems from 1910 to 1992 and a discussion of the role of the legislature, the Board of Governor (BOG) and Chancellor's Office (CO), and the district boards. This section also describes the governance system in practice, indicating that the BOG has limited authority over the colleges, the legislature micromanages college affairs, and interest groups dominate the policy making process. Next, the paper proposes the establishment of a unified and coherent community college system with increased local college freedom and accountability called coordinated decentralization. The following features are described: (1) the BOG would assume from the legislature the principal governing authority for the system; (2) the BOG would delegate broad authority for college operations to local districts; (3) Chancellor's Office staff would become employees of the California Community Colleges, and would no longer be hired under laws of the Civil Service system; (4) district governing boards would be expanded to include members from sectors in the community with a stake in the colleges; (5) districts would emphasize policy oversight for accountability rather than administrative decision-making; (6) the system would establish common student performance standards and accountability procedures; and (7) the systemwide budget would include incentives for the support of statewide priorities. (Contains 52 references.) (KP) |
| Erfasst von | ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC |
Literaturbeschaffung und Bestandsnachweise in Bibliotheken prüfen
Permalink als QR-Code
Inhalt auf sozialen Plattformen teilen (nur vorhanden, wenn Javascript eingeschaltet ist)
Teile diese Seite:
