Transcript Slide 1

Accreditation Self-Study
Progress Update
Presentation to the SCCCD
Board of Trustees
Madera Center
October 5, 2010
Tony Cantu, Fresno City College
Marilyn Behringer, Reedley College
Deborah Ikeda, North Centers
Purpose of Accreditation
•
To provide assurance to the public
that education provided by
institutions meets acceptable
levels of quality
•
To promote continuous
institutional improvement
•
To raise the quality of higher
educational institutions in the
region/nation
Accrediting Commission for Community
and Junior Colleges (ACCJC)
Western Association of Schools
and Colleges (WASC)
Standards
•
•
•
•
Standard I: Institutional Mission and
Effectiveness
Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
Standard III: Resources
Standard IV: Leadership and
Governance
Standard I: Institutional
Mission and Effectiveness
A. Mission- The institution defines its:
• Purpose
• Intended population
• Commitment to student learning
Standard I: Institutional
Mission and Effectiveness
B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness- The
institution provides evidence it:
• Collects and uses student achievement
and student learning outcomes data in
the program review, planning, and
resource allocation processes
• Conducts program review and other
ongoing, systematic evaluation
• Uses a systematic cycle of assessment,
planning, resource allocation,
implementation, and re-evaluation to
improve educational effectiveness and
institutional quality
Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
A. Instructional Programs- The institution:
• Offers high quality instructional
programs wherever and however they
are offered
• Identifies student learning outcomes and
evaluates how well students are
learning
• Assesses student achievement
• Assesses programs systematically
• Uses assessment data as the basis for
improvement of all programs including
distance education and off-campus
programs
Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
B. Student Support Services- The institution:
• Researches and identifies the support
needs of its students
• Provides appropriate, comprehensive
student support services regardless of
location or delivery method
• Provides precise and accurate
information about the institution to
students and the public
Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
B. Student Support Services- The institution:
• Assesses the quality of those services by
evaluating student achievement and
student learning outcomes as
appropriate
• Uses the results of evaluation as the
basis for improvement to student
support services
Standard II: Student Learning
Programs and Services
C. Library and Learning Support Services- The
institution:
• Offers sufficient services to support
student learning and the quality of its
instructional programs
• Includes library, tutoring, technology,
and other learning support services
• Trains students and staff to use these
services
• Assesses services systematically using
Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) as
appropriate
• Uses assessment data as the basis for
improvement of services
Standard III: Resources
A. Human Resources- The institution:
• Employs qualified personnel
• Evaluates all personnel on a regular
basis
• Ensures professional development of
personnel
• Assesses its performance in employment
equity and diversity
• Uses human resources to support
student learning
• Integrates human resource planning
with institutional planning (driven by
educational planning)
Standard III: Resources
B. Physical Resources- The institution:
• Provides safe and sufficient facilities and
equipment
• Evaluates the quality of its physical
resources on a regular basis
• Ensures physical resources support
student learning
• Integrates physical resource planning
with institutional planning (driven by
educational planning)
Standard III: Resources
C. Technology Resources- The institution:
• Ensures its technology supports
facilities, research, and college-wide
communication
• Provides training to students and
personnel in the use of technology
• Ensures that technology supports
student learning programs and services
• Integrates technology planning with
institutional planning (driven by
educational planning)
Standard III: Resources
D. Financial Resources- The institution:
• Assures fiscal stability and integrity
• Plans for short-term and long-term
financial needs
• Assures that financial resources are
sufficient to support student learning
programs and services and to improve
institutional effectiveness
• Integrated financial planning with
institutional planning (driven by
educational planning)
Standard IV: Leadership and
Governance
A. Decision-Making Roles and Processes- The
institution:
• Uses ethical and effective leadership
that enables it to identify values, set and
achieve goals, learn, and improve
• Provides for staff, faculty, administrator,
and student involvement in governance
• Establishes and evaluates the
effectiveness of governance structures
and processes
• Assures that governance supports
student learning and improves
institutional effectiveness
Standard IV: Leadership and
Governance
B. Board and Administrative Organization- The
institution:
•
•
•
•
Has an independent governing board that sets
policy, assures quality and integrity of student
learning programs and services and financial
stability
Has a chief administrator who provides
leadership for institutional quality and
improvement
Has clearly defined and effective lines of
authority and responsibility between colleges
and the district/system in a multi-college system
(functional map)
Ensures that board and administrative
organization supports student learning and
improves institutional effectiveness
Accreditation Timeline for All Campuses
Informed campus community of next site visit, began preparation for the self study,
attended the ACCJC self study workshop on September 24th at Merced College,
steering committee begins meeting and approves operating agreement, reviewed all
documents related to the 2005 self study
Subcommittees for each standard formed
Data Collection - Survey faculty/staff/students
GAP Analysis and Review
1st draft submitted to campus constituency for review
Campus Forums/Workshops
2nd draft submitted to campus constituency for review
Begin validation, finalization and constituency approval
August - October 2009
January 2010
April-May 2010
October 2010
Ongoing
January 2011
February-March 2011
Self-study completed and sent to Chancellor
May 2011
Submit for Board Review
June 2011
Board of Trustees approval
July 2011
Pre-team site visit
August 2011
Report submitted to visiting team and commission
August 2011
Team visit
October 2011
Commission Meets
January 2012
College Notified of Commission Action
February 2012
Fresno City College Progress
•
The college began working on the accreditation
self study process in fall 2009.
•
The Accreditation Steering Committee meets
every other week to review progress.
•
Standard sub-committees have been meeting on a
regular basis and have submitted the first draft,
which is under review by campus constituencies.
•
Sub-committees continue to gather and catalog
supporting evidence.
Fresno City College Progress
•
The format for mapping course Student
Learning Outcomes (SLOs) to program and
institutional outcomes has been identified.
•
Forums are planned to solicit input from
the campus in response to draft of the selfstudy report.
•
A second draft will be completed before the
end of the semester for campus review and
input in January 2011.
Reedley College Progress
•
Chairs for the committee and for each
standard were selected in Fall 2009.
•
Teams for each standard were selected
and began working in Fall 2009.
•
First draft completed August 2010.
•
Teams are working to complete gap
analysis and update forms.
•
Teams are gathering evidence.
•
Help session are being held for each
subsection.
Reedley College Progress
•
Discussing, presenting progress
• Town Halls
• Newsletters
• SLO Faculty Summits to discuss and
develop strategies
• Board of Trustees meetings
•
Second draft due November 2010.
•
Spring Duty Day – Review of Drafts.
•
Full draft due December 10, 2010.
•
RC/NC joint Accreditation Steering
Committees Meetings.
Willow International Progress
towards Candidacy
•
Chairs and committee members selected and
recruited Spring 2010.
•
First draft was completed by May 2010.
•
First Draft was reviewed during the summer.
•
Fall Duty Day was spent working on Program
Level and Institutional Outcomes and the ACCJC
expectations for Planning, Program Review, and
SLOs.
Willow International Progress
towards Candidacy
•
Monthly Accreditation Updates in Newsletter.
•
SLO Summits for NC and RC.
•
Twice a month Steering Committee Meetings.
•
Second Draft due November 2010.
•
Full Draft due Dec. 10, 2010.
•
Spring Duty Day – Review of Self-Study Drafts.