top of page

28-29 Academic Calendar Negotiations Update

4 minutes ago
5 min read

Your Voice. Your Calendar. Your Union


Thank you to everyone who provided feedback on the proposed 28-29 calendar at listening sessions, Faculty Senate, PFF, contract conversations, our surveys, and more. As you may remember, the District proposed moving the calendar up one week so that the Fall 2028 semester would begin on August 14th instead of August 21st as we have traditionally done. Their rationale is that it would be more student-friendly because it would give an extra week after the semester ends and before the holidays to finalize grading and avoid late grade submissions. We’ve done our homework and countered on 10/20 with a calendar that starts on August 21st. 


Quick Timeline


  • On 8/17 we submitted an information request to better understand the exact number of classes that submit grades late. We wanted to better understand the problem that this change was fixing. 


  • On 10/9 after repeated reminders and incorrect information provided, we received the following information:


    • Fall 2024

      • 1,977/2,037 Credit rosters posted on time (97.05%)

      • 60/2,037 credit rosters posted late (2.95%)

        • 42 credit rosters by part-time faculty

        • 18 credit rosters by full-time faculty

      • 41/42 noncredit rosters were posted on time (97.62%)

      • 1/42 noncredit rosters were posted late (2.38%)


    • Fall 2025

      • 1,992/2,034 credit rosters submitted on time (97.94%)

      • 42/2,034 credit rosters submitted late (2.06%)

        • 20 credit rosters by part-time faculty

        • 12 credit roster by full-time faculty

      • 49/56 noncredit rosters submitted on time (87.5%)

      • 7/56 noncredit rosters submitted late (12.5%) 


Our Counter


We presented a calendar that begins on August 21st as has been the custom for Fall start dates. The District will take our proposal back to Instruction before further negotiations.


Our Rationale


We compiled all of the feedback and reviewed the data before presenting our counter to keep the start date at August 21st. 


There were some faculty who were supportive of the earlier start date. Some faculty said they would like to see alignment with MiraCosta for consistent scheduling. Others said they would be okay with an earlier start date if the Spring semester were also moved up a week. 


But the overwhelming majority shared negative implications to such a change, especially in terms of enrollment. Here is a breakdown of the concerns we presented:


  • A Solution in Search of a Problem


    • First, the data provided above for the change in calendar does not seem to warrant this big of a change. PFF does recognize the importance of timely grade submission but encouraged the District to explore other ways to achieve this goal. 


  • SMUSD Alignment - Childcare implications


    • For 28-29, SMUSD begins on the 22nd. 


    • “Childcare options and summer camps are generally not available during the final two weeks of August after K-12 schools resume. An earlier college start date would require many faculty members to secure an additional week of childcare during a period when limited options are available, creating both logistical and financial challenges for working families.”


    • “Students will miss class because of lack of childcare. Our colleagues across campus will have to spend more money paying for spring break camps. We are losing money and a chance at a real break.”


  • Compressed Summer window


    • The proposed calendar compresses the time between summer and fall. This negatively impacts summer grading, fall prep, flex week, and any recovery for both students and faculty.


    • “The proposed earlier fall start date doesn't give much time between summer and fall semesters for instructors to recharge our batteries, especially with FlexWeek happening the week after the summer semester ends.”


  • A hanging 2 weeks instead of 3 weeks after Fall break


    • Right now, the final three weeks are already tricky to navigate as students return from Fall break. To shrink this to only two weeks after the Fall break will be even more challenging for both students and faculty to meaningfully finish their courses. 


  • A Seven-Week Winter Break: Impacts and Questions


    • The proposed calendar would give 7 weeks for winter break in between the fall and spring semester.


    • “Through a part-time faculty lens, many of whom teach Fall, Spring, and Summer, there would be no downtime between terms in the summer season and one extra-long break in the winter. We don't want to ask for time off in the middle of the semester for many reasons, including but not limited to derailing class goals and being docked pay.”


    • “For past years when the semester ended super close to Christmas, it made sense to move the start date up a week to create the buffer. However, looking at this specific AY, it doesn't seem necessary because ending on the 16th still leaves an entire week before the week of Christmas.”


    • “I'm fine with the earlier August start date, but then should we start Spring semester a week earlier as well? That would give us consistency with the length of winter break and the length of summer break in 2029 (assuming we continue to start one week earlier in August)”


    • “At the proposed end of the fall 2028 term, classes end 12/9 but I'm assuming student services will still be open until 12/19. Does this mean Counselors (both FT & PT) are still working? PT faculty counselors typically receive an NOHE for the dates of the official term. Would the district allow their contracts to go beyond the end of term to continue working until student services closes for winter break?”


  • MiraCosta Alignment & Other Schools in the area


    • While there are benefits to aligning with MiraCosta for schedule consistency, there are other colleges to consider and benefits to staggering our start date. 


    • CSUSM Alignment: In 28-29, CSUSM begins on August 28th. If we were to move our calendar to the proposed time, CSUSM would have their start date on our Week 3. If there are any CSUSM students who realize last minute they need to crash a class at Palomar College, they would not be able to join our classes in Week 3. 


    • SDCCD Alignment - In 26-27, SDCCD began on August 24th which is in line with our traditional start date. If we move to align with MiraCosta, we may be out of alignment with SDCCD.


    • According to CCCCO Management Info Systems in 24-25, 28% of the CCC schools started on 8/26 similar to our start date while 21% started on 8/19 as is being proposed. We are still aligned with the more popular start time.


    • “One benefit of being after MiraCosta in August – we can pick up students who didn’t realize MC started so early and want to start the semester on time and not just look for late-start classes there.”


    • Some part-time faculty shared that they enjoy having staggered start dates instead of having a more intense workload with multiple schools starting on the same day. 


While the proposed calendar is described as more student-friendly for timely grades, our review shows that there are many other factors for a calendar to be student friendly, especially given our focus on increasing enrollment. Our counter to keep the start date on 8/21 is student friendly in the following ways:


  • Students-who-are-parents-friendly

  • Summer-school-student-friendly

  • FT2-student-friendly

  • CSUSM-student-friendly


Next meetings:

  • Tuesday, October 27th

  • Friday, November 6th


Signing off—but still here for every comma, clause, and cause.


Your PFF Negotiations Team


 
 
bottom of page