AN ACT Relating to establishing limits on the percentage of courses taught by faculty without tenure track status at community and technical colleges;
Summary
SB 5397 would require Washington’s community and technical colleges to adopt policies limiting the share of courses that may be taught by faculty without tenure-track status. By July 1, 2025, each college must set a policy that caps the annual percentage of courses taught by non-tenure-track faculty at no more than 75 percent, and the cap must be maintained on an ongoing basis thereafter. The bill defines “tenure track status” to include probationary faculty who are eligible for tenure review as well as faculty who have already been awarded tenure.
The bill also requires annual reporting to the Legislature. Beginning July 1, 2025, and each year after, the college boards must submit a report to the appropriate legislative committees describing the steps colleges have taken to comply with the new limit, along with the most recent calculated percentage of courses taught by faculty without tenure-track status at each institution and any relevant data. The measure adds a new section to chapter 28B.50 RCW, which governs community and technical colleges.
Impact
SB 5397 would create a new statutory requirement for community and technical colleges in Washington, directly affecting institutional staffing and course assignment practices. It would not change tenure law generally, but it would impose a statewide policy floor on the proportion of instruction that may be delivered by adjunct, contingent, or other non-tenure-track faculty, and it would require colleges to track and report compliance to the Legislature. The bill would therefore affect college boards, administrators, faculty hiring and scheduling practices, and legislative oversight of higher education staffing.
Sentiment
The available context shows no committee transcript or recorded vote history, so there is no documented debate or formal vote pattern to indicate support or opposition. Based on the bill’s subject matter and structure, it appears to be a workforce and governance measure aimed at increasing the share of instruction delivered by tenure-track faculty and improving accountability through reporting. However, without discussion records, the overall sentiment cannot be assessed beyond the bill’s clear policy intent.
Contention
The main likely point of contention is the mandated cap on courses taught by non-tenure-track faculty. Supporters would likely view the bill as a way to strengthen instructional quality, faculty stability, and academic governance, while critics may argue it reduces institutional flexibility, increases labor costs, and could be difficult for colleges to meet given staffing realities. The reporting requirement may also be seen as an accountability tool by supporters and as an administrative burden by opponents.
Interim study to examine compensation for laboratory hours taught at a community college and to review the statutory definition of the laboratory hours