Student Learning Outcomes and Faculty Evaluation

Resolution Number
John Stanskas
Assigned to
Status Report

We recommended. ACCJC ignored us.  Not sure there is a lot more to do at the moment.

Whereas, Standard III A.6 of the Accreditation Standards[1] adopted in June 2014 by the Accrediting Commission for Colleges and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) states,

The evaluation of faculty, academic administrators, and other personnel directly

responsible for student learning includes, as a component of that evaluation,

consideration of how these employees use the results of the assessment of learning

outcomes to improve teaching and learning;

Whereas, The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, in its 2004 paper The 2002 Accreditation Standards: Implementation[2], has stated its opposition to the use of student learning outcomes (SLOs) as a basis for faculty evaluation, noting the potentially negative impact on evaluation as a collegial peer process, on academic freedom, and on local bargaining authority, and further affirmed in Resolution 2.01 F08 Opposition to Using SLOs in Faculty Evaluation “That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges affirm its opposition to including the attainment of student learning outcomes as an aspect of individual faculty evaluations”[3];

Whereas, College personnel experience an inability to reach consensus regarding how to interpret Standard III A.6, which causes confusion about the impact on performance evaluations, including evaluations for faculty; and

Whereas, The assessment of student learning and professional development of faculty are academic and professional matters, and engagement in professional development, such as practices identified in numerous ASCCC publications and by the ASCCC Professional Development Committee, is an established and valued component of evaluation;

Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recommend that Standard III A. 6 of the Accreditation Standards, adopted in June 2014 by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), be interpreted for faculty as follows and disseminate this interpretation to local colleges, system partners, and the ACCJC:

Faculty are responsible for using the results of the assessment of student learning to participate in college processes to evaluate student achievement at the course, discipline, and college-wide scale as appropriate.  Faculty should engage in professional growth and development that improves teaching and learning.  The active participation of faculty in these collegial processes may be a factor in the evaluation of faculty; however, the results of assessments of learning outcomes are not a basis for faculty evaluation.