Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education And Licensing Pipeline topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board warns Sonoma State program cuts could shrink pipeline of licensed geologists
Summary
The Board discussed a planned elimination of Sonoma State—s geology program and sent a letter to CSU leadership expressing concern that program closures and consolidations could reduce the number of graduates who meet California—s licensure education requirements.
The Board for Professional Engineers, Land Surveyors and Geologists discussed concerns about Sonoma State University—s planned elimination of its geology program and the wider threat that program cuts pose to licensure pathways in California.
Board staff said they drafted and sent a letter to Sonoma State leadership, the CSU chancellor—s office and the CSU trustees—office to highlight how program reductions can reduce the number of graduates who complete the field-intensive coursework the board requires for geologist licensure.
At the meeting, Josh (board staff) said Sonoma State—s field geology program —is going away— and that the university planned a —teach-out— period for currently enrolled juniors and seniors. Rick (executive officer) told the board the letter was distributed on March 18 to the Sonoma State president, the CSU chancellor and the CSU trustees—office.
Maddie Mukherjee, chair of Sonoma State—s geology department, told the board the department received a one-year extension of layoff dates that will allow faculty to teach out the program for students currently enrolled. Mukherjee said the department—s curriculum is unusual in the CSU system because —every one of our core major classes has an associated field class— and added, —geology majors are made. They are not recruited.— She warned that losing small, field-intensive programs would reduce the pool of graduates qualified to practice in the region.
Board and public commenters urged the board to keep working with universities, the CSU system and professional associations. Christopher Keane, director of geoscience higher education at the American Geosciences Institute, told the board —maximizing the throughput of qualified individuals for licensure is really critical— and noted market demand for geoscience professionals in consulting and public-sector roles.
Board staff and several board members said they are exploring options to reduce the unintended licensing barrier created by California—s strict course-based education rules. Rick and staff described ongoing work to consider possible regulatory or legislative approaches to allow specified professional experience to substitute for narrowly defined field course requirements in some cases. A staff speaker said any such change could require regulation or legislation and would be brought back to the board for consideration.
The board and multiple public commenters said outreach and coordinated advocacy may help; staff said the board—s letter was sent to university leaders and that the board would follow up with the professors who raised the concern. Members suggested also sharing the letter with local Assembly and Senate members and the governor—s office.
Board members did not take a formal regulatory action at the meeting beyond confirming the letter had been sent and directing staff to continue developing policy options. Staff said they will return to the board with draft proposals if a regulatory or legislative path is appropriate.
The discussion included a sustained public comment period that featured faculty from Sonoma State, Cal State San Bernardino and other California programs who described field-course structures, the local workforce role of program graduates and outreach efforts into high schools and community colleges.
