Cal Poly Pomona Chapter
Gwen Urey, Chapter President; Maureen
Burton, Faculty Rights Chair
e-mail:email@example.com homepage: www.csupomona.edu/~cfa
- An increase in class size is a change in workload, and if done without
faculty consultation, is a violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement
- The administration cannot unilaterally increase class size for budgetary
- There is no contractual obligation for faculty to meet FTE targets.
- Key factors in determining faculty workload are “past practice” and faculty
consultation. For details see the CBA, Article 20.
- Case Point: The CSU lost an arbitration (CSUDH vs. CFA, October, 17, 2007) at CSU
Dominguez Hills for increasing class size without appropriate faculty consultation.
- Case Point: Class sizes were raised in a certain department at Cal Poly
Pomona for winter and spring 2008, without appropriate faculty consultation.
The justification given was that “temporary” increases were necessary because
of FTE targets and the budget crisis. However, the department has a well
documented “past practice”, and when the faculty was actually consulted,
the department voted not to accept the temporary increase. The increases
were rescinded for spring.
- CFA’s position is that increasing class size adversely affects the quality
of instruction and increases faculty workload, and non-instructional cuts
should be made before instructional cuts (reducing the number of sections
or increasing class sizes).
- Small, “temporary” increases in class size add up to large, permanent
increases in class size and workload.
- Faculty may voluntarily add students above the class size up to the room
capacity. However, doing so both weakens the argument that an increase in
class size adversely affects instruction and contributes to an excessive