Accreditation: Follow Up Report

Presented at: Dialogue with the PresidentApril 26, 2012

Tina Leisner McDermott, Faculty Accreditation Coordinator

ACCREDITATION CYCLE

Follow-Up Report Work Group Members

Follow-Up Report Deadlines

Midterm Report and Self Eval– Standards Committees Recruitment

Std. I. A. – Mission

Std. I. B. – Institutional Effectiveness

Midterm Report and Self Eval– Standards Committees Recruitment

Std. II. A. – Instructional Programs

Std. II. B. – Student Support Services

Std. II. C. - Library

Midterm Report and Self Eval– Standards Committees Recruitment

Std. III.A. – Human Resources

Std. III. B. – Physical Resources

Std. III. C. – Technology Resources

Std. III. D. – Financial Resources

Midterm Report and Self Eval– Standards Committees Recruitment

Std. IV. A. – Decision Making

Std. IV. B. – Board and Administration Org.

Standards Committee Structure

Midterm Report Deadlines

RECOMMENDATION # 1 (a-d)

In order to comply with the standards, it is recommended that the college modify its processes in a manner that creates documentation and other forms of evidence that can be used to reveal the college’s progress toward implementation of SLOs and assessment of those outcomes. More specifically, the team recommends that to show compliance with the standards, that the college:

RECOMMENDATION #1 a.

Develop a method to monitor progress made when implementing activities identified in the program reviews to include listing steps in action plans, listing of individual student learning outcomes for each course and assessment activities matched against progress made to achieve assessment activities (I.B.3)

We’re doing great in WEAVE!

Response to Rec. #1 a.

Numerous new training workshops for WEAVE by SLO Committee and Research Office Flex events One on one WEAVE training Video and Power Point tutorials

Better promotion and awareness of deadline dates and compliance rates per Division Welcome Back Day Meetings with Divisions SLO newsletters

Increase faculty participation via Flex Events

Response to Rec. #1 a.PROGRAM

REVIEWACTION PLANS

WEAVE training

Campus Awareness

SLO Flex Events

RECOMMENDATION #1 b.

Provide evidence in the form of documents or other deliverables to result from the operation of the integrated planning cycle (I.B.3)

Response to Rec. #1 b.

New budget request narrative form for SPBC to include P/SLO information

Dean of IERP is now Admin. Co-Chair of SPBC to better facilitate incorporation of SLO/PLOs and Action Plans into financial decisions

SLO and Program Review Co-Chairs will report regularly to SPBC to facilitate better communication

RECOMMENDATION #1 c.

Provide evidence that outcomes demonstrate the integrated planning cycle, from SLOs to making budget decisions (I.B.5).

Response to Rec. #1 c.

SLOAssessments

SPBC

Budget RequestsBy Deans

ProgramReview

SLOAction Plans

Budget Subcommittee

Improved Linkage and Communication between Committees

Example: Graduation Office

Example: Physics

SLO trends in Program Review

Semester Fall 2009 Spring 2010 Fall 2010 Spring 2011

COMM 101SLO #2 (delivery)  64% 64% 65% 70%

6.4   The Communication Studies faculty has identified a list of needs within our discipline based on SLO data results that showed that one of our greatest needs is in improving students’ verbal fluency and speech delivery abilities. While we have seen improvementwe a, re still well below our benchmark SLO pass rate of 80%:

Action Plans that correlate to Program Review For Fall 2010, an additional lab activity relating

to solutions will be added to the schedule to address SLO 2. Physical models capable of representing solute solvation and ion dissociation would also help students learn the topics involved in SLOs 2 and 6. The department currently has animations to show solvation, but models to physically manipulate would help students visualize concepts like dilution and ion dissociation. Budget Amount Requested: $800.00

RECOMMENDATION #1 d.

Assess Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) and provide evidence of program, student service and administrative changes and improvements as a result of changes made (II.A.1.a.; II.A.1.c).

Response to Rec. #1 d.

76 identified programs on campus 72% have approved PLOs

PLOs are in progress New PLO Workbook Committee Approval of remaining programs in

progress Assessments occurring WEAVE reporting – trends over time

RECOMMENDATION #2 a.

To meet the standards, it is recommended that the college establish clear connection with and document the involvement of members of professions, association and professional organizations when curriculum is being modified and at other appropriate points in time to demonstrate input from vocational/occupational advisory boards and experts in the field so that the College can verify the quality of educational programs is based on experts in the profession (II.A.2.b).

Response to Rec. #2 a.

24 Advisory Committees on campus

Minutes provided

New Minutes template for consistency

RECOMMENDATION #2 b.

To ensure each department is being consistently evaluated under the Program Review Process it is recommended that the college develop a list of minimum areas considered to ensure a rigorous self examination is conducted consistently across the college (II.C.1).

Response to Rec. #2 b.

Data Elements list being reviewed by Program Review Committee for consistent use of data in every Division

New rubric for peer review of Program Reviews

Dept. of IERP and Prog. Review Committee developing annual updates on WEAVEonline

RECOMMENDATION #2 c.

To meet the standards requirement that adequate resources be allocated to support the Library function of the college, it is recommended that the college conduct a comparative analysis against other similarly sized colleges to assess whether the amount of resources to meet the needs of students who rely on the Library to complete their educational goals (I.B.7).

Response to Rec. #2 c.

-50

-40

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

Library Expend.

Librarians

Staff

Software $

EBSCO

Print Books

E-Books

Response to Rec. #2 c.

Funding Sources

2010 - $70K approved by District and SPBC for electronic resources

2011 – State of CA will now pay for EBSCOhost

Library reviewing purchasing decisions for $70K

RECOMMENDATION #2 d.

To meet the standards and to enhance the effectiveness of its technology, it is recommended that the college adjust its technology advisory committee structure to ensure that the needs of administrative and instructional computing are equally well addressed, and that this dialogue then results in equitable priorities, implementation, and budget allocations for all technology needs (III.C.1 and III.C.1.d).

Response to Rec. #2 d.Quarterly Life Cycle (Needs assess.)

Constituent Groups SS, BCSED, LC, LA, HR, A&R,

MSE, IRES, ITS, Palmdale, IMC, TE, Facilities, HS, FA, Bookstore, PE, AS,

VAPA, OSD, etc.

Schedule & Implement

(ITS)

Need Assessment

(ITS)

Consolidate/Estimate/Scope

(ITS)

Prioritization (IT Committee)

Budget Request (SPBC)

Step 1

Step 2

Step 3

Step 4

Step 5

Response to Rec. #2 d.

HELP DESKINSTRUCTIONAL

NEEDS PRIORITIES

1. Repair any “classroom

down” situation.

2. Open call to ITTech to support

instruction

3. Lab/classroomIssues in current

semester

Response to Rec. #2 d.

Distance Ed Committee is now DISTANCE EDUCATION AND TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE (DETC) –

covers any technology for teaching – online or in class

RECOMMENDATION #3

To enhance the effectiveness of its technology, a variety of different levels of network security should be implemented to permit more flexible responses to instructional computing requests, while maintaining appropriate security for administrative data (III.C.1 and III.C.1.d).

Response to Rec. #3.

Goal = balance instructional flexibility needs with administrative security needs

expansion of its Open Digital Campus Program (ODCP) Role based security; software updates; security education

Perkins Program 2011 allowed for upgrades across campus to replace old software (almost complete)

Segregate IP traffic

New infrastructure for Wireless, starting in H&S

RECOMMENDATION #4 To comply with the standards it is recommended that the

college, when making its short-range financial plan, e.g. the annual budget of the college, consider its long-range financial obligation to pay the cost of the GASB 45 – Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB) as the costs are incurred instead of delaying payment to some future date. Specifically, the college is encouraged to prepare a comprehensive plan to prevent disruption of services offered to students by paying the Annual Required Contribution (ARC) determined using generally accepted accounting principles into an irrevocable trust fund at the amount equal to the actuarially determined Annual required Contribution (III.D.1.c).

Response to Rec. #4

Currently conducting an actuarial study to determine our liability and annual funding of ARC

Irrevocable trust is ready to be funded through CCLC’s JPA

3-year budget plan presented to SPBC

Plan to set aside $387,113 from SERP savings to be set aside annually starting 2012-2013