Page 1 of 8
Posted on September 11 at 7:53 p.m.
I agree with ddjim and georgy. The college enrollment should be managed better, and SBCC should aim to serve the local community. Instead it seems like they want to grow and use what used to be Adult Ed facilities for more credit classes. Too much money and too soon after Measure V.
On Democrats Split on SBCC Bond
Posted on September 1 at 9:26 p.m.
Gaskin is a definite improvement over Serban - anyone would be - but she has made some big blunders since in office, most of which the average public person wouldn't know about. Serban put the knife into Adult Ed, but Gaskin happily took that knife and chopped it up into pieces and now those pieces are hemorrhaging. Don't believe the optimistic spin some people put on the non-credit programs! Measure S will undermine those struggling programs, making way for credit classes to take over both the Wake and Schott Centers.No on S.
On Measure S: The $288 Million Question
Posted on September 1 at 6:39 p.m.
Indyholio, you hit it in the head with your 3 excellent points. I hope you write a letter to the editors of all the papers and make those same points. Also, Georgy, thanks for reminding us about how Dr Gaskin, the PE Chair and the Athletic Director at SBCC shafted a stellar tennis program. It's shameful what happened behind the scenes with SBCC tennis last year. Another example of Dr. Gaskin not knowing the community.
Posted on August 29 at 5:52 p.m.
I'm getting pretty tired of President Gaskin's pat phrases she throws out. I've heard her say something like "there are so many moving parts" too many times for too many situations. She is a newcomer to Santa Barbara so she doesn't know that SB residents are "on it" too. We ask questions, we pay attention and we want real answers. I believe SBCC facilities need updating. But there are a lot of questions that remain unanswered. For instance, if the Schott and Wake Centers are upgraded, is that in order to house more credit classes, and thus more (outside) students? Will the new Center for Lifelong Learning (CLL) be put out, right at a time when they are struggling to establish themselves? Instead of growing, the college should be limiting it's enrollment so that the impact it has on the surrounding area is minimized.Another point: I don't understand how a college that decimated the best Adult Ed program can now ask that same voting community to put out more money for a school that forsake them.
Posted on July 7 at 6:51 p.m.
Georgy makes some good points.Trying to draw a straight line from a CC to a UC is a flawed effort. Most people do not go to SBCC to get an advanced degree yet the majority of students still benefit tremendously from attending the college. The state government, the chancellor's office, the SBCC board of trustees and the new SBCC president need to recognize that fact and not try to push and rush students through the conveyer belt of higher degrees. Many community members attend the college to improve their lives and become better and more engaged citizens. I applaud them for their efforts, along with the minority of CC students who are going for a higher degree.
On Skewed Distribution in Transfers to UC
Posted on May 15 at 8:49 p.m.
A couple of things wrong with foofighter's logic. It's obvious he has never been a teacher. Sure, there are instructors who don't take a lot of time to prepare, but they don't last long in this kind of setting. There is usually 30 to 60 minutes of prep or post class time per instructional hour involved with teaching. Second, the CLL classes don't average 20 people in their classes. Many classes have 10 - 12 students. I took a class that had 9 students who showed up last term. Nice to get the attention of the teacher, but I also learn from others in the class so I liked it when there were more people.BTW, this was a highly regarded teacher who had a wait list before. It's a good class and I would take it again but she has decided not to teach it anymore.
On One Year into Lifelong Learning
Posted on March 14 at 3:58 p.m.
The CLL did NOT take pressure off the general fund. Fee based classes do not use state money, never did, never will, never "put pressure" on the general fund. It was the administrations decision to eliminate almost all the state-funded Adult Ed classes so that it could use that money in other ways. Now the administration is finding it hard to justify all that money for only the credit campus. The local community members lost out big time with that decision.
On SBCC Announces Good Money News
Posted on November 14 at 10:40 a.m.
Thanks for this informative article. I like the cruise ship visitors and wondered myself the pros and cons of so many ships visiting. And thanks to Channelkeeper. I really appreciate what you're doing and I'm glad a light is shining on your work. But now I feel bad that I stopped donating last year to you. I will "re-up" today!
On The Cruise Ship Question
Posted on June 11 at 8:03 a.m.
This is great news. Congratulations again, SBCC!You have ALWAYS been on track with the priority being matriculation and workforce training. SBCC serves all the community - always has - but with adjustments when the economy or public need shifts. The difference is that now with so many ways to get the word out to a larger audience, more people are hearing about and aware of the good the college does. Keep up the good work!
On City College Welcomes Citrix Academy
Posted on May 29 at 1:35 p.m.
I watched this meeting online on the SBCC website. It's great to be able to see the meetings like that.Congratulations to Mr. Patino. The crew there works very hard and it's nice that he's recognized.All four speakers during public comment made complete sense to me. It's sad the way Adult Ed has been cut back so much but I get it with the budget cuts before. Now the funding is slowly being brought back so I hope the college can keep the PCW's and other parent ed classes, also some classes for seniors who can't afford to pay otherwise.
On Class Availability Up at City College