Template for Team Responses to the Accreditation Standards

 

1. Review the Specific Standard Section

 

e. The president works and communicates effectively with the communities served by the institution.

 

2. List of Team Members working on this Standard

 

Debbie Trigg  Renee Gonzales  Sahar Yousef  Joe McLaughlin

 

3. Read and Review Self-Study Questions and Suggested Source of Evidence

 

Major reference source for analyzing accreditation standards:

“Accreditation Commission Self Study Guidelines, August 2004, Guide to Evaluating Institutions”

http://www.ohlone.edu/org/instruction/docs/200408accredcomm-guidetoevaluatinginstitutions.pdf

 

4. Locate and Review the Evidence.  Include Suggested Sources of Evidence from the “Guide to Evaluating Institutions” as well as additional engagement activities conducted by your Team, such as team meetings, special meetings of existing groups, special focus groups, open forums, surveys, etc…)

 

List of evidence being reviewed and engagement activities being conducted:         Involved in several community organizations and agencies ie. Rotary club, City of Newark, etc. Open door policy for outside agencies to discuss new ideas that may enhance the campus and community Encourages community members to utilize the Ohlone facilities for community events.

 

5. Descriptive Summary

 

Draft a brief one or two paragraph description of what the College is doing to meet the standard.

 

The President attends regular community meetings (civic groups, workforce?, commerence groups, and other external groups) to promote a positive image for the college especially new center - Ohlone Newark Center. The President directed?? the administrative staff to create and strengthen community partnerships (Fremont/Newark/Union City High schools) to provide outreach and collaborative opportunities for the college. The President attends all college foundation meetings and activites. The President holds four world forums ( a year) to discuss cirtical issues around the world.   What about the sister college - China?

 

6. Integration Review

 

Is there an expression of our College Values?  Is there a contribution to our College Goals?  Is there an expression of the Accreditation Themes?

 

 

7. Self Evaluation

 

Provide a rating of how well the College is addressing the specific standard using this scoring rubric:

 

1. Superior: College has worked in this area and considerable improvement is noted

2. Satisfactory: College has taken some actions to address the area and some improvement is noted.

3. Needs Improvement: College has not adequately addressed the area.

 

Rating:

 

Draft a one or two paragraph explanation for this rating based upon your assessment of the College’s activities in relation to the standard. Pay particular attention to the quality of our involvement and interventions since the last WASC self-study report.

 

Faculty and staff as part of a survey were asked on a scale of one to five (X being least positive and X being most positive) if they receieve communication about the college on a regular basis. The average score of XX indicates on overall positive rating for communication to faculty and staff.

 

8. Planning Agenda

 

If the assessment process does not identify areas in need of change, simply state, No Plan Required

 

If the assessment process identifies areas in need of change, a planning agenda for improvement should be developed. The planning agenda should identify the activities and processes the institution should implement, or is implementing, to produce improvement.  How will these plans be incorporated into the evaluation and planning processes of the institution?  How will the outcomes of this planning agenda improve student learning and foster institutional improvement in general.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adapted from:  “Self Study Manual,” August 2006, A Publication of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges Western Association of Schools and Colleges; and City College of San Francisco Self-Study Template