Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Concord Schedule topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Education committee disapproves Concord Career College's nine'week instruction schedule; board cites regulatory definition of 'quarter'
Summary
The Education Committee recommended disapproval of Concord Career College's request to retain a nine'week instructional schedule (with finals in a partial tenth week), citing the board's regulatory definition that a quarter/term must include at least 10 full weeks of instruction.
The Dental Hygiene Board of California's Education Committee voted on March 21, 2025 to recommend disapproval of Concord Career College's request to accept its current academic schedule (nine weeks of instruction with finals in a partial tenth week) for its dental hygiene programs at Garden Grove, San Bernardino and San Diego.
Board staff presented the regulatory background: 16 CCR contains definitions for "quarter" and "term," and the board's regulation interprets a quarter as at least 10 weeks of instruction. During a review of Concord's submitted materials and site visit reports, staff found that Concord's published schedules included instruction labeled in a tenth week that functioned as a final exam period; staff said those final-week activities had been recorded as "instruction" in earlier materials but that the board's quarter definition requires a full 10 weeks of instruction, excluding finals. Staff said an earlier oversight had allowed the schedule to continue without correction, and the site visit findings therefore required action.
Concord representatives, led by attorney Edward Kramp and program director Kimberly Pennington, argued the colleges run accelerated, quarter-like terms that historically have produced acceptable student outcomes and that many students choose accelerated formats to finish sooner. Kramp said Concord's programs meet or exceed required contact hours and have long used the schedule with strong pass rates. He and Pennington said the tenth week includes some instruction, labs and clinics as well as finals, and they asked the board to treat the schedule as an equivalent under the board's flexible rules.
Board members and multiple public commenters pushed back. Several faculty letters submitted after the publishing deadline were reviewed and described compressed clinical schedules, limited study time before finals, and student mental-health concerns. Council member Joanne Galliano and multiple practicing educators urged the committee to prioritize student preparation and continuity-of-care in clinical clinics. Committee member Joanne Pacheco and others described hearing consistent concern from faculty during site visits and said the board must enforce the 10'week instructional minimum.
The committee motion to recommend disapproval of Concord's request was made by Nalini Tribble (listed in the transcript as a maker of the motion) and seconded; the roll call vote passed. The committee instructed staff to continue working with Concord on compliance requirements before the July 1 compliance deadline.
What the committee decided: The Education Committee concluded the current published schedules do not meet the regulatory definition of a 10'week quarter and recommended disapproval. Staff said they would work with Concord to return to a schedule that meets the regulatory instruction minimum or submit a justified equivalent for later consideration.
Public comment and process notes: Several anonymous faculty letters and on'record faculty and student statements influenced the committee's decision. Concord said it would pursue modifications and noted it had previously been approved in similar schedule forms; staff said the earlier approvals reflected an oversight now corrected.
