Template   IV.a.2 for Team Responses to the Accreditation Standards

 

1. Review the Specific Standard Section

 

b. The institution relies on faculty, its academic senate or other appropriate faculty structures, the curriculum committee, and academic administrators for recommendations about student learning programs and services.

 

2. List of Team Members working on this Standard

 

 

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:   College Council – 6 full time faculty (participate in developing new programs, open forum for full participation in decision-making   Curriculum Committee (formerly CAPAC) works on  proposals for adding, expanding, deleting, or modifying programs and courses – academic divisions have at least one full time faculty representative   Faculty Senate make recommendations regarding curriculum, degree requirements, educational programs, the role of faculty in district governance and accreditation activities, professional development policies, program review, institutional planning and budget   Learning Task Force – Learning Communities, Experimental Classrooms   International and Multicultural Task Force – expand faculty diversity, increase international education offerings and cross-cultural curricula     Environmental and Sustainability Task Force     SLOPE work that led to new program review guidelines    GE Committee Distance Education Faculty Mentor program WebAdvisor – electronic rosters and grades 16 week calendar     Faculty web pages, blogs and wikis     Faculty survey on effectiveness of committees?   any strategic plans at the department level?   Discusion of Program review to strategic planning linkages. College Council just used program reviews to allocate one time funds and has. Currently the alocation of funds is   Do faculty feel connected to the programming process... are the committees effective?   Should we develop a matrix or grid showing all campus groups and committees?

 

5. Descriptive Summary

 

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

 

College administrators and the Board rely on faculty to recommend and guide student learning programs and services.Academic divisions have at least one full time faculty representative on the Curriculum Committee (formerly CAPAC), which reviews and recommends proposals for adding, expanding, deleting, or modifying programs and courses.           Faculty Senate reviews proposals and recommendations regarding curriculum, degree requirements, educational programs and the role of faculty in district governance and accreditation activities. This representative body of Ohlone faculty is also responsible for providing input on professional development policies, program review, institutional planning and budget.  College Council, composed of faculty, staff and administrators, also participate in the development of new programs and provide an open forum for full participation in decision-making.

 

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.

 

In 2004, a joint task force of the Faculty Seante and CAPAC (Student Learning Outcomes Professional Enthusiasts = SLOPE) developed operative definitions and guidelines for development of a Learning College curriculum. The goals were to develop a program to  improve student course and program completion success rates and to provide continuous learning for all personnel in a manner consistent with the Learning College Model. The Instructional Program and Discipline Review Report Guidelines was approved, and continues to be reviewed by, the Faculty Senate.    The addition of the curricunet program standardized all course submissions and exsisting outlines, eased the ability of the faculty to update, edit and review these materials.  The end result has ben an accessable, shared environment for colaboration.       Add in the data from the survey results  from the campus survey Add in survey results from "curricunet story"        Add any applicable survey results and grid of campus committees and groups   The college has developed processes for tying program review to strategic planning. In 2007, one time funds became available for additional program development. The College Council reviewed the previous year’s program review documents and recommended spending based on the each department’s published recommendations and long term plans.   Link to governance, Strategis planning

 

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.

 

Who do want to vist:     College Council     Faculty Senate                         CAPAC                         Learning College/ Lerning Community groups                         ITAK/ATAK- Technology Committees                         Academic Deans     Develop questions from last self study/report "where are we now"

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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