Accjc gone wild


West Valley College - Warning



Download 2.61 Mb.
Page80/121
Date13.06.2017
Size2.61 Mb.
#20740
1   ...   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   ...   121

West Valley College - Warning

The July 3, 2014 from Beno stated “The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges, at its meeting on June 4-6, 2014, reviewed the Institutional Self Evaluation Report and the Report of the External Evaluation Team that visited West Valley College March 17-20, 2014. The Commission took action to issue Warning and require the College to submit a Follow-Up Report by March 15, 2015. The Report will be followed by a visit of Commission representatives and should demonstrate that the College has addressed the Recommendations noted below, resolved the deficiencies, and meets Eligibility Requirements and Accreditation Standards.”


“The Commission found West Valley College deficient in meeting the following Eligibility Requirement, Accreditation Standards: Eligibility Requirement 21, Standards I.B.2, II.A, II.A.1.b, II.A.1.c, II.A.2.a, II.A.2.b, II.A.2.h, II.A.5, II.A.6.b, III.A.1.b, III.A.1.c, III.C.1, III.C.2, and IV.A.4.

class=WordSection3>



College Recommendation 1: To satisfy the Eligibility Requirement and meet the standard, the team recommends that the College review its instructional programs with respect to the percentage of online offerings and submit a Substantive Change report to the accrediting body on programs that have equaled or exceeded the 50 percent threshold in online offerings. (ER 21; II.A.1.b; IV.A.4)
College Recommendation 2: To meet the standards, the team recommends that the College establish institution-set standards for student performance so that the degree to which they are achieved can be determined and widely discussed. (I.B.2; II.A.1.c; II.A.2.b; II.A.2.h; II.A.5; II.A.6.b)
College Recommendation 4: To meet the standards, the team recommends that the College satisfy the Sustainable Continuous Quality Improvement requirement for Student Learning Outcomes and Program Learning Outcomes and regularly assess and monitor non-credit courses. (ILA; II.A.1.c; II.A.2.a)
College Recommendation To meet the standard, the team recommends that the College evaluate all personnel systematically and at stated intervals. (III.A.1.b)
College Recommendation 6: To meet the standard, the team recommends the District and the College ensure that faculty and others directly responsible for student progress toward achieving stated student learning outcomes have, as a component of their evaluation, effectiveness in producing these learning outcomes. (III.A.1.c)
College Recommendation 7: To meet the standard, the team recommends the College integrate technology planning with institutional planning, and that the College and the District develop a comprehensive technology plan for the entire organization which addresses and incorporates the needs of both instructional and non-instructional areas. (111.C.1)”
Again we see the ACCJC interfering in collective bargaining in the area of faculty evaluations.
“West Valley College should fully resolve the noted deficiencies by March 2015.”
“Recommendations have been made for West Valley College to improve institutional effectiveness. Recommendations for improvement may be made to highlight areas for continuing or expanding excellent practices. Recommendations for improvement may also be made when an institution is currently in compliance with Standards, but additional levels of effort should be demonstrated in the future.”
Get this - being in compliance is not enough to satisfy the Commission. A college may also be called upon to improve beyond current requirements. And so the letter from Beno states “the College should plan to fully address all improvement recommendations in the Midterm Report.
College Recommendation 3: To increase effectiveness, the team recommends that College Closely monitor, fully implement and evaluate the newly developed Budget Resource Allocation Process to determine whether it is meeting the needs of the College and providing more transparency into the budget allocation process. (I.B; III.D; III.D.1d; III.A.6)
College Recommendation 8: To increase effectiveness, the team recommends that the College work with the District to assure the continued development and support of West Valley College's physical resources, and continue to work on updating the Educational and Facilities Master Plan in accordance with the five-year timeline. Additionally, the team recommends that the Facilities and Security Council regularly meet as scheduled. (III.B)”

Victor Valley College - Probation

In the May 3, 2014 letter to Victor Valley College Beno stated that “The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges, at its meeting June 4-6, 2014, reviewed the Midterm, Follow-Up, and Special Financial Review Reports submitted by Victor Valley College and the Report of the Evaluation Team that visited Wednesday, April 16-Thursday, April 17, 2014.


The Midterm Report demonstrated that the College has sustained the work to meet the recommendations from the 2011 comprehensive visit with the exception of one section of Recommendation 3 and Recommendation 6. Therefore, the Commission acted to impose Probation and require the College to submit a Follow-Up Report by March 15, 2015. The Report will be followed by a visit by Commission representatives.
The Follow-Up Report of March 2015 should demonstrate that Victor Valley College has fully addressed Recommendations 3 and 6, noted below, resolved the deficiencies, and now meets Eligibility Requirement 17 and Standards III.A.1.c; III.D; III.D.1.a; III.D.1.c; III.D.2.b; and III.D.2.c.
Recommendation 3: Student Learning Outcomes

As noted in recommendation 2 of the 2005 Accreditation Evaluation Report, and in order to meet the Standards and the Eligibility Requirements, the College should complete the development of student learning outcomes for all programs and ensure that student learning outcomes found on course syllabi are the same as the student learning outcomes found on the approved course outlines of record. The institution must accelerate its efforts to assess all student learning outcomes for every course, instructional and student support program, and incorporate analysis of student learning outcomes into course and program improvements.
This effort must be accomplished by fall 2012, as a result of broad-based dialogue with administrative, institutional and research support. Student learning outcomes need to become an integral part of the program review process, including incorporating detailed documented analysis from SLO assessments and data based research.
Additionally, faculty and others directly responsible for student progress toward achieving stated learning outcomes should have, as a component of their evaluation, effectiveness in producing those learning outcomes. (I.B.1-7, II.A.1.c, II.A.2.a-b, II.A.2.e-f, II.B.4, III.A.1.c, ER 10)

With regard to Recommendation 3, the team reported that Victor Valley has addressed the first four sections of this recommendation and meets Standards I.B.1-7, II.A.1.c, II.A.2.a-b, II.A.2.e-f, II.B.4, and Eligibility Requirement 10. However, the College needs to complete the final section of this recommendation and demonstrate that it meets Standard III.A.1.c.
Recommendation 6: In order to meet the Standards, the College should develop long-term fiscal plans that support student learning programs and services that will not rely on using unrestricted reserves to cover deficits. Additionally, the College should provide timely, accurate and comprehensive financial data and budget projections for review and discussion throughout the institution. (111.D, 1II.D.1.a, III.D.1.c, III.D.2.b, III.D.2.c, ER 17)
With regard to Recommendation 6, the Commission also reviewed the Special Financial Review Report and determined that this fiscal issue has not yet been resolved and the associated

Eligibility Requirement and Accreditation Standards are not yet met. Victor Valley College will need to demonstrate that the fiscal issues, as noted in Recommendation 6, have been fully resolved at the time of the March 2015 Follow-Up Report. This will be verified by the evaluation team during the visit.”
“Victor Valley College should fully resolve the noted deficiencies by March 2015.”
In contrast, a letter from the Spring 2014 Follow-Up Visiting team stated that “The team wishes to commend the Victor Valley College faculty, staff, administrators and trustees for their hard work in resolving the recommendations that remain from the 2011 Comprehensive visit. Since the time of the November 2013 visit, it is clear that the institution has rallied to the Interim president’s leadership and continues to progress. Of particular note — several members of the governing board have provided substantial leadership in shaping the institution's work on financial stability. That being said, we are concerned about the institution's continued fragility particularly with respect to accreditation expertise and detailed fiscal planning.
Accreditation Expertise

As noted in the November Follow-up visit - the college has had three different Accreditation Liaison Officers during the course of the past three years and few faculty and administrative leaders have significant experience with ACCJC policies and standards. For this visit, the institution had improved in its ability to identify and provide evidences of practices that aligned with accreditation standards; but the team nevertheless still had to assist institution leaders in recognizing practices that met standards. This being said, the new Academic Vice President, who serves as the ALO, brings substantial transferable experiences from another regional accrediting commission and seems to have a clear grasp of the need to increase institutional expertise.
Fiscal Planning

The team is still concerned with institutional fiscal planning. The college has indeed refined its short-term financial planning in response to Recommendation 6; however, that plan is still highly contingent on forecasted increased enrollment-related apportionment ("growth”) revenues at a time when enrollments are clearly declining. The plan is also highly dependent on negotiating concessions with employee labor groups. In that regard as noted in the report, the team determined that employee labor leaders seemed to have a change of heart regarding their previous skepticism of the college's fiscal deficit. This was attributed to the college president conducting informational forums regarding college finances and the governing board's public work to develop fiscal policies to eliminate deficit spending and bulwark various funds for fiscal stability. The team felt strongly that the institution needs a "Plan B" in the event labor costs could not be reduced through negotiations and/or the institution failed to achieve its budgeted enrollment growth. In closing, again the team again acknowledges that college leadership, faculty and staff have accomplished a great deal since the November visit.”
Again we see the anti-union bias of an ACCJC Visiting Team which, in this case, had no faculty members on it.




Download 2.61 Mb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   ...   121



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
evaluation team
academic senate