Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to describe academic program downsizing strategies implemented by divisions of sciences at Southern California community colleges in response to severe state funding reductions. Specifically, the study describes the magnitude of reduction in course offerings, the extent to which reductions were criteria-based, the criteria used in targeting program/course reductions, and other cost saving measures implemented in response to budget cuts. The study also examines deans' decisions regarding the selective targeting or protection of specific programs or constituencies during academic retrenchment efforts, and identifies retrenchment actions that met with high or low resistance to implementation. Methodology. This descriptive study analyzed qualitative research data acquired in face-to-face interviews with twenty-two deans of sciences from Southern California community colleges conforming to a set of selection criteria. Interviews addressed division-level responses to funding shortfalls for a specified period from spring 2003 through spring 2004. Data collected were grouped by themes reflecting categorized responses to eight research questions. Findings. Reduction in sections offered was a common response to budget stress, but varied in magnitude and timing among colleges. The majority of deans employed criterion-based reduction strategies, most commonly including productivity factors, course/program centrality to division mission, and overall quality of the courses. Similar criteria guided deans' decisions with regard to selective protection or targeting for reduction at the programmatic level. Additional cost-saving measures included reduced operational costs, reductions in personnel, and increased class sizes. Reductions in personnel and reduced section offerings were cited as producing greatest resistance among division constituents, while reductions to supply and divisional operating budgets were perceived to have generated the least resistance. Conclusions. In agreement with reports from previous literature, retrenchment decisions were typically rational, based on criteria of productivity, mission centrality, and program quality. Additional reduction strategies employed were primarily incremental, including reduction of operations and personnel costs. Targeted program-level reduction occurred less frequently and was primarily based on criteria similar to those in operation at the section-reduction level. Despite anticipation of dire impacts of reduced state funding, science deans reported that resistance in their divisions was actually relatively low.