Resolved that the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges to send a copy of the visiting team report to each person signing a college's self-study.
Resolved that the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge local senates to encourage local faculty to participate in the accrediting process.
Whereas the Accrediting Commission will meet in October, 1992 to formulate proposed new processes and procedures to strengthen accreditation,
Resolved that the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges adopt the recommendations in the paper entitled "Strengthening the Accreditation Process" (4/6/92) as amended, and direct the Executive Committee to work with the Accrediting Commission to implement the recommendations to the greatest extent possible. (See Document).
Whereas in the list of Actions on Accredited Institutions of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, "deferment" of an accrediting decision is a relatively new addition to the options of the Accrediting Commission in determining accreditation status, and
Whereas "deferment" is seen by the Commission as a confidential negative action but for public community colleges operating under the Brown Act such confidentiality cannot apply, and
Whereas, Participation in accreditation is one of the responsibilities of academic senates identified in Title 5 53200;
Whereas, The Faculty Role in Accreditation was adopted by the Academic Senate more than eight years ago, in Spring 1996;
Whereas, Since the adoption of that paper, there have been significant changes in how the process of accrediting colleges is carried out as well as changes in how the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) conducts business that may affect the faculty role in these processes; and
Whereas, The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), a division of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), has adopted the new 2002 Accreditation Standards, which include insistence on the application of Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) at the course, program, and institutional level;
Whereas, The 2002 Standards offer a range of significant threats to areas of faculty primacy, and the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges has objected to the 2002 Standards in many resolutions;
Whereas, The 2002 Accreditation Standards for California Community Colleges require specified Student Learning Outcomes and assessments; and
Whereas, The Student Learning Outcomes are written, coordinated, managed and integrated through a faculty-driven process;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) to ensure that faculty comprise a minimum of 25% of the site visiting teams; and
Whereas, Section II.A.6 of the 2002 Accreditation Standards states, "In every class section students receive a course syllabus that specifies learning objectives [emphasis added] consistent with those in the institution's officially approved course outline," and Commission representatives have interpreted "learning objectives" as Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs), thus creating confusion in the field;
Whereas, The concerns about the new accreditation standards are widespread and still un
Resolved; and
Whereas, Even members of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges agree that the assessment of student learning outcomes is a new and evolving approach;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate urge the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges to continue to use the current accreditation standards while engaging in more extended dialogue about any proposed new standards, and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate pursue multi-level strategies to respond to accreditation draft B and any subsequent drafts including:
to continue to seek dialogue with the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), seek extension of the timeline for adoption, and work in concert with other interested groups to create opportunities for continued discussion on future accrediting standards,
to continue to develop analyses of the proposals and suggest alternative proposals and wording,