IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

BEYOND THE MASTER PLAN: The Case for Restructuring Baccalaureate Education in California

Listed author(s):
  • Saul Geiser and Richard C. Atkinson
Registered author(s):

    Although a stunning success in many ways, California’s 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education has been a conspicuous failure in one respect: California ranks near the bottom of the states in the proportion of its college-age population that attains a baccalaureate degree. California’s poor record of B.A. attainment is an unforeseen consequence of the Master Plan’s restrictions on access to 4-year baccalaureate institutions. In a cost-cutting move, the framers of the Master Plan restricted eligibility for admission to the University of California and the state colleges (later the California State University) to the top eighth and top third, respectively, of the state’s high school graduates. As a result, 2-year institutions have absorbed the vast majority of enrollment growth in California higher education. In addition to their important role in vocational education, the California Community Colleges now enroll between 40% and 50% of all students seeking a B.A., including those at both 2-year and 4-year institutions. Enrollment at 4-year institutions, however, has not kept pace. California now ranks last among the states in the proportion of its college students that attend a 4-year institution. The paper presents comparative data demonstrating the powerful relationship between 4-year college enrollment and B.A. attainment across the 50 states. Although California’s low rate of baccalaureate attainment is sometimes blamed on the failure of community colleges to produce more transfers, the data point to a more fundamental problem -- lack of 4-year baccalaureate enrollment capacity. The single most critical factor for California to improve B.A. attainment is to expand 4-year enrollment capacity. Yet building expensive new 4-year campuses is an unlikely option given the state’s current and foreseeable fiscal circumstances. The alternative is to restructure California’s existing postsecondary system. The paper reviews a variety of baccalaureate reform models that have been introduced in other states. The most promising of these models involve collaborations between community colleges and state universities to create new kinds of intermediary, “hybrid†institutions. Examples include university centers and 2-year university branch campuses. Under the university center model, 4-year universities offer upper-division coursework at community college campuses, enabling “place bound†students to complete their baccalaureate degree program there. Under the 2-year university branch model, some community colleges are converted, in effect, into lower-division satellites of state universities, thereby expanding capacity at the 4-year level and eliminating the need for the traditional transfer process. What these and other hybrid models have in common is that they help bridge the divide between 2-year and 4-year institutions, enabling more students to enter baccalaureate programs directly from high school and progress seamlessly to their degrees. Amending the Master Plan in the manner proposed here need not alter its essential features. While preserving the distinctive missions of UC, CSU, and the California Community Colleges, the need now is to build their capacity to work together as a system to improve baccalaureate attainment – the one mission that all three segments share.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no

    Paper provided by Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley in its series University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education with number qt19d0t1gn.

    in new window

    Date of creation: 01 Nov 2010
    Handle: RePEc:cdl:cshedu:qt19d0t1gn
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. John Bound & Michael F. Lovenheim & Sarah Turner, 2010. "Why Have College Completion Rates Declined? An Analysis of Changing Student Preparation and Collegiate Resources," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 129-157, July.
    2. John Aubrey Douglass, 2010. "FROM CHAOS TO ORDER AND BACK? A Revisionist Reflection on the California Master Plan for Higher Education@50 and Thoughts About its Future," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt6q49t0hj, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    3. King, C. Judson, 2006. "An Analysis of Alternatives for Gaining Capacity So As to Maintain Access to the University of California," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt3fw17398, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    4. Bridget Terry Long & Michal Kurlaender, 2008. "Do Community Colleges provide a Viable Pathway to a Baccalaureate Degree?," NBER Working Papers 14367, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Cecilia Elena Rouse, 1998. "Do two-year colleges increase overall educational attainment? Evidence from the states," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 17(4), pages 595-620.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cdl:cshedu:qt19d0t1gn. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Lisa Schiff)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.