Whereas, The effectiveness of student government and student associated bodies is in decline; and
Whereas, One of the aspects of the community college mission is to prepare students to be good citizens and leaders;
Resolved, that the Academic Senate create a task force with representatives from the state Student Senate to explore ways to assist student government leaders in their efforts to reach their goals of effective participation in community college governance.
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,
to continue to respond in writing and via public testimony,
Whereas, The Chief Executive Officers of the California Community Colleges (CEOCCC) has addressed broad concerns in its statement of March 2002 (see Appendix B); and
Whereas, Those broad concerns address issues of major concern to the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges;
Resolved, That the Academic Senate share the concerns as outlined in the Chief Executive Officers of the California Community Colleges (CEOCCC) March 2002 paper Proposed Changes in ACCJC Accreditation Standards.
Whereas, Among the stated goals set out for the accreditation revision in the Project Renewal planning document (http://www.accjc.org) was to import quality assurance methods from business as well as to address inclusion of a wider variety of institutions now in the higher education marketplace; and
Whereas, Draft B of the proposed accrediting standards requires that faculty be evaluated based on effectiveness in producing student learning outcomes, and such evaluation methods can place institutional pressure toward reduction of rigor and grading standards, especially in the absence of tenure or due process; and
Whereas, Draft B continues to weaken previous accreditation requirements for institutional support of programs, students, and faculty, all of which are essential underpinnings of student success;
Whereas, Both Draft A and B of the Accrediting Commission's new standards make reference to colleges having sufficient faculty but make no reference to having full-time, tenured faculty;
Whereas, Draft B of the new accrediting standards will require all colleges to specify student learning outcomes at the course, program, degree, and certificate levels, and to measure, document, and improve the attainment of these outcomes by students;
Whereas, Draft B will require that colleges specify and measure the competencies expected of students at the course, program, degree, and certificate levels;
Whereas, Draft B will require that faculty validate department or program examinations; and
Whereas, Only four of the thirty-four institutions that have undergone the accrediting process in the last several years have satisfactorily met the Commission's expectations with regard to institutional effectiveness and planning, but nevertheless these expectations will become a central focus of accreditation decisions in the new standards;
Whereas, The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) has revised its proposed draft standards (from Draft A to Draft B) to address, in part, the concerns raised by the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, as well as concerns expressed by other California faculty organizations, the American Association of University Professors, the Research and Planning Group, the Chief Executive Officers, and many other groups and individuals;