A brief history is provided of the efforts undertaken in California to devise alternatives to the current rules concerning credentials, tenures, and evaluation for faculty and administrators, along with a comparison of the recommendations emanating from two legislatively mandated studies of these issues. First, historical background is presented on the state's long-time interest in the possibility of replacing credentials with some other system of minimum qualifications and on the more recent concern with tenure and review standards. Next, the different mandates and perspectives of the two studies are discussed, and it is noted that the report of the Chancellor's Task Force on Faculty and Administrators resulted from debate and consensus building among community college officials with expertise in employment matters, while the reports prepared by Berman, Weiler Associates were based on analytical studies conducted by a consultant outside of the community college system. Next, the recommendations from the two reports are presented side by side, illustrating that both recommend a new system in which: (1) the present credential statutes are repealed; (2) the Board of Governors adopts regulations on minimum employment qualifications which districts are then responsible for applying; (3) a substantially higher level of involvement is assumed by faculty in hiring, evaluation, and tenure decisions; and (4) the probationary period before tenure is lengthened to 4 years. Significant differences between the reports are also discussed. Finally, the continuing efforts of the Task Force to refine and complete its recommendations are reviewed. (AYC)