ED 464 687

AUTHORTITLE

INSTITUTION

PUB DATENOTEAVAILABLE FROMPUB TYPEJOURNAL CIT

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

IDENTIFIERS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

JC 020 389

Adams, Julie, Ed.Senate Rostrum: The Newsletter of the Academic Senate forCalifornia Community Colleges, 2002.Academic Senate for California Community Colleges,Sacramento.2002-02-0034p.

For full text: http://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us.Collected Works Serials (022)Senate Rostrum: The Newsletter of the Academic Senate forCalifornia Community Colleges; Feb-Oct 2002MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.Academic Standards; *Accreditation (Institutions);Accrediting Agencies; Articulation (Education); BasicSkills; College Faculty; College Outcomes Assessment;*Community Colleges; Cultural Pluralism; *Diversity(Institutional); Institutional Evaluation; SchoolCounselors; Technology; *Transfer Policy; Two Year Colleges*Academic Senate for California Community Colleges;*California; Intersegmental Coordinating Council CA

The 2002 newsletter of Senate Rostrum contains the Februaryand October issues. The February issue covers the Accrediting Commission forCommunity and Junior Colleges' January 2002 hearing on Draft A of theproposed new accreditation standards. Members of the Academic Senate attendedthe meeting in order to voice their concerns regarding the new standards.Senate President Hoke Simpson's article, "'Ignore Us at Your Peril!' The SanFrancisco Accreditation Hearing," describes Senate members' objections to theCommission's emphasis on quantifiable outcomes rather than educationalquality. In addition, Linda Collins outlines the proposal in "The ProposedAccreditation Standards: A Summary Critique." She argues against therevision's aim to import quality assurance approaches from business, and thecontinuous monitoring of outcomes rather than assuring adequate educational,fiscal, human, and physical resources. Other articles in the newsletter are:(1) "The Lessons of IMPAC" (Kate Clark); (2) "Horse Sense for People--Don'tFence Me In" (Renee Reyes Taylor); (3) "The Disciplines List Hearings" (ScottA. Lukas); (4) "A Report from the Affirmative Action and Cultural DiversityCommittee" (Dibakar Barua; (5) "Local Senates" (Kate Clark); (6) "Efforts ToImprove Basic Skills in Community Colleges Show Promise" (Mark Snowhite); and(7) "Technology Resources Showcased at Fall Session" (Mark Lieu). The Octoberissue covers valuing diversity among faculty and staff members, the role oflocal senates in times of crisis, and the status of occupational facultyconsidering activities of states and vocational education. Other articlesincluded are: (1) "French Fries, Funding, and Student Success: Occasions forUnity" (Hoke Simpson); (2) "Information Competency: Moving Ahead Despite..."(Kate Clark and Dan Crump); (3) "Vocational Faculty--What's Happening?"(Shaaron Vogel); and (4) "The Accountability Game: Stanford 9 in K-12, HMO'sin Health Care...MSLO's in CC's" (Leon F. Marzillier) . (NB)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

Senate Rostrum:

The Newsletter of the Academic Senate forCalifornia Community Colleges, 2002.

Julie Adams, Editor

February-October 2002

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

0 This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.Minor changes have been made to improvereproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE ANDDISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN

GRANTED BY

R. M. Silverman

TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCESINFORMATION CENTER (ERIC)

2

111111/111.

enatetrumACADEMIC SENATE FOR CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES NEWSLETTER

"Ignore Us At Your Perin":The San Francisco Accreditation Hearing

gnore us at your peril!" Those were thesing words of Los Angeles Valley Senate

esident Leon Marzillier during testimony atthe Accrediting Commission's hearing onDraft A of the proposed new accreditationstandards. The hearing, held on Sunday,January 6th in San Francisco, was the onlyone to be scheduled in the continentalUnited States.

Besides Marzillier, faculty members testify-ing were Academic Senate President HokeSimpson, Past President Linda Collins,Treasurer Ian Walton, and Representative-at-Large Scott Lukas, all from the AcademicSenate Executive Committee, and SenatePresident Ophelia Clark, and Vice PresidentSusan Lopez, both from City College of SanFrancisco. Also testifying were Jim Per ley,representing the American Association ofUniversity Professors, and Regina Stanback-Stroud, Past President of the AcademicSenate and currently Vice President forInstruction at Skyline College.

All of the participants were in communica-tion with one another prior to the hearing,with the result that the overlap in testimonywas minimal. It will surprise no one whoattended the Fall Plenary Session, or who hasread the resolutions generated there, thatthose assembled to provide testimony cameto persuade the Commission to abandon their

by Hoke Simpson, President

Julie Adams, Executive Director

misguided emphasis on quantifiable outcomes,and to focus instead on educational quality.

Scott Lukas led off the testimony by calling foran extension of the Commission's timeline foradoption of a new set of standards. Lukas calledfor the delay in order "to allow for more dialogue[on the standards], for additional hearings to bescheduled, for more time to allow for furtherwritten comments to be submitted,and for the commission to ad-equately share its research with thepublic." "As a social scientist andresearcher," Lukas said, "I canattest to the desirability of sharingone's background materials withtheir presentation of completedwork. Particularly in this case wherethe adopted standards will impactso many institutions, we feel that itis absolutely necessary that thecommission share all backgroundmaterial and data with the public."

Ian Walton testified to his experi-ence as a member of a visitingaccreditation team and as standardchair for Governance and Adminis-tration during his own college'srecent self-study and visitation."During both of these processes,"Walton said, "I observed that formost colleges the current ten-

-

-

A

-so - Do

Of A

-

-

--

-

. - :

-

-

A

. A

- -

President's Message

HokeSimpson

:,\

°

2 Senate Rostrum

'IsiArhere are We, alai What are

ci

a0

0

a

We Doing Here?"

"Where am I?" and "What am I doing here?"is a brace of questions that ExecutiveCommittee members ask often, as they wakeup in strangeor vaguely familiarhotelrooms, having departed home turf for YAM(yet another meeting). I recall that my owndisorientation was chronic when, as VicePresident, I was often traveling four to fivetimes a week. Things are better as President;now I just wake up on cold rainy mornings inSacramento wishing that the sun would shine.

"Where are we, and what are we doing here?"have become questions of some urgency forour system to answer, for, if we don't, there areothers who seem more than willing to answerthem for us. And I'm not sure we'll like theiranswers.

So, where are we? We're here at the beginningof 2002, the largest postsecondary system inthe known universe, in a state whose governorseems to be an educational elitist without aclue what the community colleges do, alegislature in which those who do have a clueare quickly being termed out, a Master Planon the verge of publication, the highereducation portion of which is being written,by his own admission, by a staffer namedCharles Ratliff,' whose history shows him tobe enamored of corporate accountabilityschemes and a "do more with less" mentality,and, oh yes, we're in an economy that's goneSouth, our base funding's been cut, and morecuts are promised. That's where we are.

What are we doing here? We're struggling, asalways, to fulfill our multiple missions: weare trying to be the gateway to higher educa-tion for millions of people who, for the mostpart, need substantial preparation if they areto succeed at our four-year universities; andwe are offering vocational education to new

' ME Ratliff asserted, at a meeting of the IntersegmentalCoordinating Council (ICC) on January 18, 2002, that.because the Master Plan workgroups had had little timeto attend to higher education (they were almostexclusively concerned with I:421. he would be the authorof the higher education portion of the new Plan.

by Hoke Simpson, President

and incumbent workers and, through theEconomic Development Program, trying tohelp regional businesses become morecompetitive. And we're trying to do all thiswith the lowest per student funding of all thesegments of public educationfive timeslower than UC, and two times lower thanCSU.

To help matters along, we are faced withconstant criticism from those who think weshould be doing more: the Governor and theLegislature think our transfer rates are toolow; UC and CSU, now that their facilitiesandfrom their perspectivetheir fundingare impacted (we should have their fundingproblems), want us to handle the freshmenand sophomores they have no room for; andbusiness people can't seem to decide whetherthey want entry-level workers to provide aquick fix for their bottom line, or skilledgeneralists who will be with them for the longhaul, so, for them, we are either too slow or toofast. It's little wonder, in the face of all thesedemands, that we find ourselves a littleconfused about what we're doing here.

As institutions of higher education, theanswer should be simple: we provide qualityeducation, the equivalent of anythingstudents would get in any of the publicpostsecondary segments. This should be thecase, whether the student's goal is transfer orvocational training. The distinction betweenour transfer and vocational education func-tions has been blurred, in fact, by the CareerLadders Initiative of our Board of Governors.The blurring occurs in the repeated call forthe "integration" of vocational and "aca-demic" education for the traditionalvocational education student. What this callacknowledges is that the best vocationaltraining will not only have the specific focusof a vocational area; it will also include astrong component of general education, withexposure to the arts and sciences, to historyand language and mathematics, to all thoseareas that have classically been considered to

Continued on page 15

The Lessons of IMPAC

Surely by now you've heard about theIMPAC Project (Intersegmental MajorPreparation Articulated Curriculum), aproject of the Intersegmental Committee ofAcademic Senates (ICAS). Literally hun-dreds of community college faculty havejoined their discipline counterparts from UCand CSU to discuss curriculum, and yes, theA & T words: ARTICULATION AND TRANSFER.

The IMPAC project enables faculty whogather at five regional and one statewidemeeting to identify issues associated withtransfer, to note trends or external pressuresupon the discipline, and to seek innovativeand collaborative solutions. The IMPACproject seeks to ensure that students arefully prepared for their transfer into themajor and that duplication of coursework isminimized, thereby fostering students'success in the four-year institutions.

Faculty's work this year, however, has beenaugmented by the inclusion of articulationofficers who have been assigned to one of the16 on-going discussions.* At the regionalmeetings, these articulation officers notevariances among perspectives in the regions,ask pertinent questions about problemsassociated with prerequisites, and provideinformation about the articulation process:how articulation is coordinated and agree-ments crafted; how local requirements canbe established; how case managementapproaches can be instituted.

While remarkable progress is being made,and while faculty are forging professionalcontacts with their discipline colleaguesthroughout the state, they have also taken toheart a few lessons themselves. Among thoselessons are these:

*Disciplines currently under discussion are: chemistry,biology', physics, math, geology, ICS, nursing, agricul-ture, food science and nutridon, administration ofjustice, business administration, computer science,geography, engineering, political science, economics.

by Kate Clark, Vice President

1. that discipline faculty work in partnershipwith articulation officers and that theirmutual respect enables articulationofficers to complete their responsibilitiesand ensures the academic integritydiscipline faculty wish CO see institution-alized through articulation;

2. that the work of counseling faculty is toooften maligned, particularly by ourtransfer partners who have little under-standing of the professional status of ourcounselors who have faculty rank;

3. that the instructional wing and studentservices wing truly do have as their sharedgoal the educational development of ourstudents and that working in tandem ismore efficient than working at odds;

4. that intersegmental problems requireintersegmental responses, and the failureof any one entity to participate incurs theenmity of the others;

5. that efforts to articulate courses across thesegments can be eased by the commonidentifying number assigned by the CANSystem;

6. that agreements upon courses or majorpreparation, once articulated, must bereadily available to students, faculty, andcounseling staff in all segments, on acommon data baseASSIST;

7. finally, that the failure of any one of thesesupportive mechanisms will impair theability of the others to function withcredibility.

These lessons seem self-evident to those ofus in the community college for whomtransfer has been a pressing matter. But theyhave been less evident, perhaps, to mycolleagues in my own department, and to our

Continued on page 7

00

0

0

a

The Lessons of IMPAC

Kate Clark

Senate Rostrum 3

Counseling Task Force

El

Renee Reyes Tuller

4 Senate Rostrum

Horse Sense for People)"13on't Fence Me InEEN" 2002

by Renee Reyes Tuller, Consultation Task Force on Counseling Chair

I have been in love with horses ever since Ibegan riding as a young girl in my smallhometown of Reed ley, California. I am also agreat fan of Monty Roberts, the HorseWhisperer. Roberts' extraordinary workpioneered an entirely new approach to horsetraining, and if other trainers could be said tobe working within the "fenced pastures" ofolder methods, Roberts' thinking definitelysought out the "open range." Key to histransformative method is the skill of listeningand communicating according to the indi-vidual needs of each horse. Roberts' new book,Horse Sense for People, reveals this and otherprinciples that he developed for communica-tion with and understanding of horses, whichcould effectively be applied to studentsneeding mentoring and guidance, and morebroadly to creating effective educationalenvironments.

The value of applying these principles in theeducational arena seems obvious as weencounter more and more demands to justifywhat we do in terms of quantifiable out-comes. In the face of pressures to considerstudents as widgets, our thinking is going tohave to seek the "open range" if we are toinform them, mentor them, and free them tofind that special educational path they eachdeserve.

The demands for quantity over quality willlikely increase unless counselors insist onbringing our knowledge to the conversation.The year 2002 should be the time forcounseling faculty to raise awareness regard-ing the creative approaches needed for ourstudents. Through discussions, both at localcampuses and statewide, we can contribute topolicy perspectives and underscore thecreative and vital role we play in students'success. Monty Roberts offers some ideas withregard to creative mentoring, and his perspec-tives seem quite apt where policy changes inour education system are being considered.Here are a few of his observations that weneed to keep in mind.

"MANY PEOPLE WATCH, BUT FEW SEE."

Given the nature of our one-on-one access tostudents we have the opportunity as counsel-ing faculty to share our knowledge of themany obstacles and issues our students face.Within our counseling processes and proce-dures we have opportunities not affordedclassroom faculty who deal with students enmasse. Counselors come to possess a moreholistic picture of the long-term needs ofstudents, as well as each individual student,beyond the classroom. We "see" students andhelp them in spite of the obstacles withwhich we contend within our limitedresources. As a rule, and not the exception,students attending community colleges mustovercome unbelievable odds. Yet, with ourhelp and despite those odds, many perseveresemester after semester and achieve theireducational goals. Through all of this we tryour best to "see" ways in which to help thempersevere. In fact, we counselors "see" whatmany other folks do not. We know how torelate to each student's individual needs andhow to avoid "fencing" students into one-size-fits-all solutions.

Quantifiable, "fenced in" outcomes do notaccurately measure the quality of the work wedo and never will. In this regard, I encourageall of you to be aware of the proposed newaccreditation standards. The proposed newstandards in Draft A primarily focus onoutcomes and pay little attention co thecounseling component, suggesting only thatall student services be evaluated in terms ofquantifiable student learning outcomes. Theframers of these standards "watch" but do not"see." The context of the draft seems blind tothe needs of our students with regard to thevery essence of the one-on-one "seeing" thatcounselors provide. For example, neither theword "counseling" nor "counselor" appears inthis new draft, although the term "advisor"with its connotation of less-than-professionaltrainingdoes. This should trigger a red flagto the counseling faculty of the California

Continued on page 16

0

Li

a

The Disciplines List Hearingsby Scott A. Lukas, Standards and Practices Committee Chair

0 The Disciplines List Hearings are just aroundthe corner! As many of you now know, the

Li review of the proposed changes to the disci-o plines list is moving along. The disciplines list

establishes the minimum qualifications for theo faculty of California community colleges. Theo Academic Senate has the responsibility ofao making recommendations to the Board of

Governors regarding proposed disciplines listo2,

changes. The following is provided to giveeveryone an update on the status of this year's

o review, what has happened and what will becoming up in the two hearings and Spring

o Session.

O By the time of Fall Session, the Standards andPractices Committee had received over tendisciplines list proposals. At a very lively andwell-attended breakout at session, faculty

o expressed their opinions on the first set ofproposals. By the time of the deadline for all

a revisions, our committee received over thirtyproposals. The final list of accepted disciplineslist proposals includes thirty-threethe

o largest number of submissions since the

a

0

instituting of the process. The proposalsrepresent eighteen different disciplines where

o recommendations have been made regardingthe minimum qualifications of disciplines.Many of these proposals reflect the changes

o occurring in disciplines across the state andthe offering of new programs of study in higher

o education. Other revisions seek changes in theo level and nature of qualifications for disci-a plines. These particular revisions would

require a change of Title 5. Twelve proposalso have been submitted to argue for the establish-o ment of new disciplines to the list. For those ofo0

you who have not yet had the opportunity toreview the proposals, feel free to check them

o out at the Academic Senate website.

o The disciplines list proposals have been senta out to local academic senate presidents,0o college presidents, chief instructional officers,

curriculum committee chairs, personnelOfficers and representatives of various disci-plines organizations. Already our committeehas received excellent feedback on the propos-als and we would like to thank the many

individuals and groups who have taken thetime to look over the proposals. In addition tothe commentary we have already received, theStandards and Practices Committee relies onthe disciplines list hearings to gather testi-mony on the proposed revisions. This yearthere were two hearings, one in the North andone in the South. The North hearing was heldon Friday, January 25, 2002 in Oakland andthe South hearing was held on Friday,February 15, 2002 in Los Angeles. Thehearings were intended CO provide an opportu-nity for those concerned with proposeddisciplines list changes to comment on theproposals. Comments from the hearings willbe summarized and available through theSenate Office. In addition to the commentaryprovided through direct testimony at theNorth and South hearings, testimony was alsogiven through E-mail.

Following the hearings the Standards andPractices Committee will compile summariesof the testimony provided for distribution atthe March area meetings. Discussion of thedisciplines list proposals at the area meetingswill provide the Academic Senate furtherindication of the level of support for theproposals. Based on reaction from the field,the Executive Committee will select thoseproposals that appear to have significantsupport for adoption. These proposals will beheld for presentation at the Spring Session inApril where delegates will vote on them asresolutions. Depending on the result ofresolution voting, the Board of Governors willbe presented with a first reading of proposedchanges to the disciplines list in July 2002.

The disciplines list review is a long butinteresting process, highlighting the impor-tant responsibilities given to the AcademicSenate by AB 1725. As I hope I have madeclear, the process also illustrates the realpower of consultation and collaboration. Thedisciplines list review is happening, and Iwould like to thank the many people through-out the state who have submitted disciplinesproposals and to those who have taken thetime to provide commentary and suggestions.

Standards and Practices

a raLi

D

0

3

a

Li

0

0

Li

a

Li

a

0

a

a0

a

Li

Li

0

Li

Li

0

Scott A. Lukas

Senate Rostrum 5

Affirmative Action/ Cultural Diversity Committee

000

0

0

00

0

00

0

0

0

000

0

0

0,

0

0

0

000

00

00

0

0

Dibakar Barua

6 Senate Rostrum

A Report From the AffirmativeAction and Cultural DiversityCommittee

0

0C7

000

000

0

0

0

Recently, the addition of new members hasbrought a new infusion of energy into the AA/CD committee. Just in time, too, because weare revising and updating the 1993 StudentEquity handbook entitled "Student Equity:Guidelines for Developing a Plan" for the springplenary session in April. AA/CD is in the processof discarding unnecessary or old information,adding new materials where needed, updatingdefinitions, adding new and useful materials on

o campus climate, classroom assessment, learningstyles, and academic mentoring, and updatingfunding sources. One thing we are need is dataon exemplary programs to promote student

o equity. Last year's turnaround survey onStudent Equity yielded only thirty or soresponses, many of them simply stating thatthere were no exemplary programs on theircampuses. We are going to make one last ditcheffort to collect more useful data and send out a

o follow up memorandum to all colleges. Our aimis to get more information on programs orprojects on various campuses that promotestudent equity in any of the five areas specified

O by the student equity regulationsnamely,a access, course completion, ESL and basic skillso completion, degree and certificate completion,a and transfer rate. We want to collect information

on well-planned exemplary programs with

oa

proven effectiveness in promoting studentsuccess, to give you a more than compendium of

O all programs initiated in the name of studentequity.

0a

a

L7

00

EJ

0000000

0

To repeat something you all know by now, arecent court action (Connerly v. State PersonnelBoard, et al.) has invalidated many Title 5regulations aimed at achieving diversity inhiring on the premise that such regulationsespecially those asking for district goals ortimetables for the hiring of minorities andwomenviolate constitutional guarantees ofequal protection under law. The question now ishow do we ensure diversity and equal opportu-nity in employment, required by both federaland state constitutions and various statutes

by Dibakar Barua, AA/CD Committee Chair

for example, Government Code §11135,Assembly Bill 1725, and several sections of theEducation Codewithout the benefit of most ofthe instruments and mechanisms so far used bycommunity colleges under Title 5 Regulations.The Chancellor's Office has reiterated itslongstanding commitment to equity anddiversity, so revisions of Title 5 Regulations arebeing planned to remove sections renderedproblematic by Connerly and strengthen equalopportunity and nondiscrimination regulations.The Chancellor has also convened a Task Forceon Equity and Diversity to "recommendchanges in policy, Board regulations, or state lawneeded to carry out the system commitment todiversity and student equity," according to theTask Statement. Diversity, in this new context,is "a work force that provides equal employmentopportunity to all regardless of race, color, creed,national origin, ancestry, sex, marital status,disability, religious or political affiliation, age,income level, socio-economic status, priorhardship, or sexual orientation."

Diversity in the work force is also a studentequity issue. That a diverse faculty and staffwould promote equity and success for our verydiverse student population is a prima facieargument. We want equity and success for all ofour students, regardless of their color, creed,gender, or economic status. No reasonableperson will deny that California's communitycolleges, more so than its other segments ofhigher education, have precisely this mission.California's community colleges are the lastbest hope, so to speak, for the vast majority ofour high school graduates. And we need effectiveprograms to implement various measures forstudent equity and successnot just good orindifferent Student Equity plans on paper. TheChancellor has stated that the system willenforce minimum conditions regarding studentequity plans. That may not go far enough sincesimply writing a good plan does not ensure thatmeaningful progress is being made in achievingstudent equity

0

0

00

0

0

0

0

003

ozJ flantes

If you don't know much about the Rela-tions with Local Senates Committee, yousoon will. Our members are busy this springwith three projects having direct bearing onyour local academic senate.

First, a committee member or an ExecutiveCommittee member will be contacting yousoon to establish a date to meet on yourcampus with your senate, your officers, andother interested faculty. We hope to visiteach community college campus to learn ofyour successful ventures and your concernsor local issues. We hope to exchangeinformationto provide you with alertsand reminders in keeping with adoptedresolutions, and to secure from you modeldocuments and data of use to the AcademicSenate and its various committees. If youare particularly eager to have someone visityour campus soon and wish more informa-tion, please Email the Local SenatesCommittee Chair and Academic SenateVice President, Kate Clark atkclark@ivc.cc.ca.us.

by Kate Clark, Vice President

Second, the committee is finalizing arevision of a handbook previewed at theFall 2001 plenary session breakout. Thatdocument, much updated and reorganized,will be considered for adoption at thisspring plenary session. Watch for thesession materials to arrive in March for yourpreview copy.

Finally, the committee is working with theAcademic Senate's office to create a Leader-ship page, much like other web pages availablefrom the Academic Senate's website athttp://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us.This page will ultimately contain linksinternal and externalto materials andresources of particular use to local senateofficers. If there are particular features youwould to have readily accessible, wewelcome your suggestions. Our committeelooks forward to meeting each of you in thecoming months!

The Lessons of IMPACContinued from page 3

fellow faculty in all three segments whoteach geology, or business, or computerscience, or chemistry, and whose day-to-day preoccupations have seldom beenfocused on the frustrations associated withthe transfer process. For them to suddenlysee the benefits of ASSIST, and the needfor UC participation in an improved andrevised CAN process seem significantlessons indeedgenuine "oh, ha!" mo-ments. Equally significant is the faculty'snew appreciation for the work of articula-tion officers and the complexity ofcounseling students uncertain about theirmajor or the institution to which they wishto transfer.

These have been the correlative lessons ofIMPAC. To learn more about the IMPACproject or to join our efforts, please visitour Web site at http:///www.cal-impac.org.There you will find notes from regionalmeetings, names and email addresses offaculty and articulation officers whoattended, and links CO other resources. Youmay also register there for cost-freeattendance at the IMPAC Statewidemeeting, April 12-13 at the LAX SheratonGateway.

Local Senates

Kate Clark

Senate Rostrum 7

Basic Skills

a

a

a

Mark Snowhite

a

a

a

a

a a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

a

aa

a

C") aa 1;=,1

a

a

a

8 Senate Rostrum

vccs .2cr4 IINgovumtrarta C

SLID Pr Ise

With v(r,l1 Over fifty percent of community,colIege entering students assessed as being`under\prepared to do college-level work inEnglish, mathematics, and/or reading,according to our 1998 Basic Skills Survey,California community colleges face amonumental task of providing effectivebasic skills instruction. This challengeseems daunting when we consider the degreeto which many of these students lackrudimentary skills in reading, writing, andcomputationusually after completing highschool. With drop-out rates among thesestudents extremely high, how much successcan we expect in the future?

Surprisingly, we can expect a great deal ofsuccess, but only when our institutionscommit to improving basic skills instructionand student success aE these levels as a toppriority. We already know what practicesyield improved results. Both Hunter Boylan,of the National Center for DevelopmentalEducation (sponsor of the Kellogg Institute),and Norton Grubb, Chair of UC Berkeley'sCommunity College Cooperative (sponsor ofthe Basic Skills convocations), have pub-lished work and presented workshopsdescribing best practices that have beendocumented successes and that we canreplicate on our local campusesof course,with the necessary institutional commit-ment.

And some of our colleges are making impres-sive progress in basic skills instruction. Toget a picture of what practices have been inplace in recent years in the our communitycolleges, the Basic Skills Committee hascompleted a second comprehensive survey,with a 60 % return to date. This surveyreveals what our institutions are doing tohelp students make critical gains inprecollegiate basic skills. With a Board of

ask Skinsunity CoDLIEJ

a

a

Mark Snowhite, Chair ofBasic Skills Committee

a

a

a

Governors grant to follow up on this survey,the Senate's Basic Skills Committeealongwith a number of college administrators,representatives from the other public highereducation segments, a K-12 representative,and research advisorswill use this data andthe available information on best practicesin basic skills to identify programs in theCalifornia community colleges that bestachieve student success. This expandedcommittee will determine ways to usedatasome subjectiveto demonstratesuccess in basic skills instruction. We hopeto develop data collecting models thatmight be useful for all colleges to demon-strate the successes of their efforts.

We already have a good idea of best practices.They include having highly integratedinstruction and student support services, theuse of a variety of instructional approaches,faculty development activities that encour-age sharing successful strategies, providingsupport for part-time faculty and promotingtheir full integration into instructionalapproaches, the use of a variety of learningcommunities, designing curriculum thatallows for clear steps of advancement inskills levels, and many more.

We need CO increase our efforts in identifyingthose practices in our colleges and usingthem as models we can replicate at or adaptto other colleges. We also need to developbetter means by which we document oursuccesses. To this end we must maintaincontrol of the design for collecting and usingdata that help us promote what works. Withthe Board of Governors grant and the help ofbright, dedicated administrators and othersfrom the other systems and segments, theBasic Skills Committee looks forward to avery productive period.

10

VaccIaiolkopauE.' wa [E]iJ Sasal

asmunuozez Sihoggccased

At'the Fall 2001 Session of the AcademicO i Senate; attendees were given overviews of MO

important technology resources. Actually, thefirst of the two, the MERLOT Project, ismiscast when categorized as a technologyresource because it is first and foremost ateaching resource, which just happens to beavailable through the Internet. The Multime-dia Educational Resources for Learning andOnline Teaching, aka MERLOT, was begun atSonoma State University, hence itsviticulturally influenced acronym, and its titleexplains its function although MERLOT isuseful for all educators, not just those teachingonline. While there are many teaching resourcesites on the Internet, the uniqueness ofMERLOT comes from its evaluative function.

Here's how MERLOT works. Anybody cansuggest an online resource for inclusion underMERLOT These resources can be commer-cial sites or websites created by an individualinstructor. The resources are listed undersubject areas to facilitate access by teachers.Then comes the important part. Subject areateams made up of educators in the specificdiscipline work to evaluate the submittedresources using a defined set of criteriaestablished by the project. The peer reviewsare rigorous and include specific informationas to how the site can be best used, theaccuracy of .site information, and the overallquality of the sire. These evaluations are thenadded to the resource listing. In addition,users of the resource can add their owncomments about each resource. Some teachershave encouraged students to evaluate sitesafter using them with their classes. When youview resources in MERLOT, whether you usethe subject area listings or perform a search,you can specify whether you want evaluatedresources to appear first.

The California Community Colleges are justone of 23 participants in the MERLOTProject, which involves institutions of highereducation from throughout the country. IanWalton, ASCCC Treasurer, is on the math-ematics team, and his co-presenter at the FallSession, Michelle Pilati, participates on thephysics team. These teams evaluate between

Mark Lieu, Chair Technology Committee

12 and 30 sites per year. I recommend that youvisit the site at www.merlot.org for yourself.You may find materials for an upcoming lesson,or you may have a resource you want to suggestfor inclusion. If you have questions aboutMERLOT, you can contact Ian aEian_walton@wvmccd.cc.ca.us and Michelle atmpilati@rh.cc.ca.us.

The California Community College SatelliteNetwork, aka CCCSAT, is appropriatelylabeled a technology resource. Funded by aTMAPP grant, the goal of CCCSAT is toprovide the California Community CollegeSystem with the infrastructure necessary totake advantage of satellite technology for thedelivery of digital information throughout thestate. While the current focus is on delivery oftelevision, Project Director Sherilyn Hargravesemphasizes that any type of digital informa-tion can be delivered using CCCSAT

Seventy-one districts in the California Com-munity College System have the equipment inplace to downlink from CCCSAT, and more arebeing added all the time. Districts candownload programming that can be telecast inlabs or classrooms or over district-run cablechannels. CCCSAT was recently awarded apublic interest channel on the DISH network,which increases its capability to reach Califor-nia residents, and provides districts withoutaccess to cable channels an alternate way toreach students in their districts. This channelis called the Community College Network(CCN), and its current schedule is primarilyprograms available over public broadcastingchannels. The channel will also be used ropublicize the California Community CollegesSystem and what the System accomplishes forthe State of California.

Project Director Hargraves emphasizes,however, that CCCSAT encourages collegesand districts CO provide content to CCCSAT forstatewide distribution. CCCSAT is not just away CO receive programming, it is also a way tomarket programs you develop locally through-out the state. For more information aboutCCCSAT, you can reach Sherilyn Hargraves atshargraves@palomatedu.

lii

Technology Resources

Mark Lieu

cz.)

Senate Rostrum 9

Ignore Us At Your Peril

" Ignore Us At Your Peril!"o

0

continued from page 1

o standard process is still a very new experience.It includes two standards (3 and 4) that

0closely resemble your proposed revisions andtheir heavy emphasis on so-called quantifiable

a outcomes. But most colleges have had extremedifficulty meeting those standards or have

a failed them. And you have no evidence thatthe very few colleges who have succeeded in

a meeting those standards are in fact providinga superior education to students as a result....

CI

And yet," Walton continued, "you want toinvolve us all in a giant leap of faith by

a making your entire process similar to thesetwo unproven standards. To my logicalmathematician's mind that seems close to

o lunacy. If I were a CEO I think I would beterrified. Why not practice what you preach

o and collect some data first, before you leap."

Next to testify was Jim Perley. Perley, a pasta president of the AAUP and past chair of its

Committee on Accreditation, had alsochallenged the standards as a panel member

aat the Fall Academic Senate Plenary Session.

a Perley and AAUP are sufficiently concernedover the Commission's direction that he madethe trip from Decatur, Illinois, where he iscurrently Dean of Arts and Sciences atMillikin University, specifically CO testify.Perley said that his concerns centered onacademic freedom and shared governance,"areas which have historically been thought tobe indicators of quality in higher education....The emphasis on 'outcomes," he said, "ratherthan process in the new proposed standards isa threat to the exercise of academic freedomwhich allows excellence to emerge." In hisconcluding remarks, Perley said that "If newstandards for accreditation lead to a percep-tion of the elimination from consideration ofostructures that have assured...quality, then I,for one, will lobby for a new and different

a mechanism and structure for achievingaccreditation that will insure the mainte-nance of...high standards of quality."

Linda Collins presented the Commission witha synopsis of her earlier written commentaryon the proposed standards. Collins cited theCommission's claim that it has reduced thenumber of standards to avoid redundancy."However, upon closer examination, it isnoteworthy that the proposed draft is actually

`7ust looking at 0°O

° outcomes is °0

notsii cient...you

0

0

0

C

0

00

0

0

0

have to look

at thestudent's

starting place,

the process

and the end-

ing place."

1 0 Senate Rostrum

quire redundant," she said. "Essentially thereis but one overarching standard, repeated overand over again. What is required above all is a'systematic cycle of evaluation, integratedplanning, implementation and re-evaluationto verify effectiveness.' This 'standard' is thenexpected to be applied across the institution,be it in instruction or student services,administrative processes or governance."Draft A, she said, "completes a retreat fromhistorically understood approaches to stan-dards in two ways. First, the Commissionmoves away from prior expectations thatbaseline standards of resources and qualitywill apply to various areas of the college.However, requiring that colleges meetincreasing expectations for productiveoutcomes without regard for the resourcescolleges use or need CO attain these outcomescreates systemic pressure to cut corners.Second," Collins continued, "the draft avoidsany real commitment to or discussion of thelevels of achievement expected of students orthe educational rigor and integrity of theofferings. It is quite possible to imagineinstitutions with 'systematic cycles' ofevaluation and planning used to enhance'outcomes' whose offerings are not education-ally sound and whose transcripts will not behonored by transfer institutions. In fact, tocompel attention to outcomes while removingthe underpinning of expected standards inboth of these senses is a prescription fordisaster in higher education. Focus on quanti-fiable outcomes without the checks andbalances afforded by attention to baselinestandards of quality and rigor creates premiumconditions for accreditation of and institu-tional pressures toward diploma mills."

Ophelia Clark, from City College of SanFrancisco, was also critical of theCommission's lack of attention to essential"inputs," and of its apparent unwillingness tospend time listening to faculty. Her colleague,Susan Lopez, said that "There should be moreemphasis on what is known as 'value added.'The student enrolls already possessing (orlacking) certain skills and motivation. How isthe student transformed by the process? Andwhat is the process, what is the institutioncontributing to the equation? Just looking atoutcomes is not sufficient," Lopez said, "youhave co look at the student's starting place,the process and the ending place." Lopezwent on to observe that "The standards

12

a0

a

should speak clearly and eloquently to thereader, but as written, they fail to convey anysense that education is a noble enterprise onthe part of the learner and of the educatoronthe contrary, the pursuit of knowledge is madeto sound completely mundane."

Hoke Simpson told the Commissioners thatthey should not be surprised that "I am here

o CO make a case for writing the academicsenates back into the accreditation stan-dards." The argument, he said, that the

o standards are necessarily vague about gover-

a nance because all of the institutionsO accredited by the commission do not have the

same statutory and regulatory requirements asthe California Community Colleges, is a weak

0 one. Citing examples of local academicsenates' protection of academic quality on

0their campuses, Simpson said that all collegeswould clearly benefit from the requirement

0 that they have a faculty organization en-o trusted with decisions about curriculum and

a program quality. Simpson was also.critical ofo the Commission's emphasis on outcomes.

Arguing that the principal outcomes of aO higher education are the largely intangible

o changes wrought over the course of an entireo lifetime, he said that the best way CO tell if a

a college contributes to producing theseO positive lifelong results was to look at how it

made its decisionsthat is, at its governance.O "For it is here," he said, "in the ways that

people deal with one another, that an institu-O tion will modelor fail to modelthose

traits of personal character that it hopes COo effect in its students, and those social and

political processes that it hopes to seesustained in the larger society."

Leon Marzillier told the Commission that hisacademic senate at Los Angeles Valley

a College was sufficiently concerned by the newstandards to pay his way to San Francisco totestify. One focus of their concern, he said, was

a the language of proposed Standard III con-cerning faculty evaluation: Evaluation of facultyalso includes effectiveness in producing stated student

learning outcomes. "Depending upon whoestablishes these so-called 'learning out-comes," Marzillier observed, "this could havethe exact opposite effect stated aE thebeginning of Draft A as being the purpose ofthe commission: 'To assure quality' and 'Topromote the ongoing pursuit of excellence.'Instead, the above-proposed language is liable

000

00ci

ci0

to create institutional pressures towardreduction of rigor, grade inflation, and loweredacademic standards." Should the Commissionfail CO abandon its current course, saidMarzillier, "I for one will be joining those atthe senate's Fall Session expressing theopinion that as a system, we should simplyfind another, more responsive body, underwhich CO be accredited. With all due respect,"he concluded, "ignore us at your peril!"

Regina Stanback-Stroud told the Commis-sion, "I have CO inform you that the standardsare bankrupt. There is absolutely no expecta-tion that institutions make any type ofresource, service, or scholarship commitmentthat is generally recognized to insure somemeasure of academic and educational qual-ity." The abandonment of such expectations,she said, and the shift to an exclusive relianceon outcomes as a measure of quality "isoccurring aE precisely the time when peoplewho classify themselves as white are no longerin the majority...Now," she said, "the meansof certifying quality shifts from the commit-ment of the institutions to the exclusiveperformance of the now very diverse studentpopulation." Stanback-Stroud continued,"The over reliance on the value based rhetoricof accountability and taxpayers' interest isflawed in that it presumes that the taxpayerswho demand accountability are somehowdifferent than the students who attend thecommunity colleges. The community collegestudent as a whole works more than 40 hoursper week and pays payroll and income taxes.They live in the community and pay salestaxes. Yes, these taxpayers do demand ac-countability. They demand to know thatwhen they need to see a counselor they can,that there will be a core of full time faculty toserve them, that the facilities will be decentand suitable for their educational experiences,that the college will have instructionalresources to support their learning experienceand that the college is stable enough that iEwill be there by the time they complete theireducational goals."

The Commission thanked the participants fortheir testimony. There were no questions.

In summing up the day's testimony, theAAUP's Jim Perley said that it was "Brutal,but effective!"

Ignore Us At Your Peril

o

o The over

oD reliance on0 3o the value

based rhetoric°.DD

of account- 9

ao

D

ability and `,3,

a taxpayers'

interest is Da

flawed in

o that itpre-o sumes that

0

the taxpayers Do

o

a

awho demand 0

a a. .

accountabzlztyoo

are somehow °

different than a

tut, students Du

o who attend op

D

a D

the commu-0

C nity colleges.''D

D

D

Daa

0

0 000

a

Senate Rostrum 1 1

Accreditation Standards

Linda Collins

12 Senate Rostrum

The Proposed AccreditationO Standards: A Summary Critique

O At its recent session, the Academic Senatepassed a record number of resolutions

o concerning the proposed accreditation0 standards. Other faculty organizations haveo also gone on record opposing the proposed

draft standards, including the Communityo College Council of the California Federation

of Teachers as well as representatives fromo the American Association of University

Professors. The Commission currentlyo intends to adopt a revised draft at their June

2002 meeting.aa The Academic Senate has called upon theo Commission to extend their timeline and

engage in a more inclusive deliberativeprocess. Certainly, the Commission should

o hold more than one public hearing each inCalifornia and Hawaii.

0a

o

a The Academic Senate has also requested thatthe Commission make available to the publicthe materials and research upon which theybased their extensive proposals.

a

00

According to the Commission's "ProjectRenewal" plan, the revision aims to importquality assurance approaches from businessand to address inclusion of the wide variationin institutions now on the higher education`market." But to widen the umbrella in thisway essentially reduces the standards to thelowest common denominator.

The content of the standards has beennarrowed from the assurance of adequateeducational, fiscal, human, physical resourcesand conditions to the continuous monitoring

o of outcomes.

The number of standards has been reducedf rom ten to four; but close reading revealsthat these four are restatements of onetheme. Essentially, there is but oneoverarching standard, repeated over and overagain. What is required above all is a "sys-

o tematic cycle of evaluation, integratedplanning, implementation and re-evaluationto verify effectiveness." This "standard" isthen expected to be applied across the

Linda Collins, Accrediting Commission Liaison

institution, be it in instruction or studentservices, administrative processes or gover-nance. This approach would inappropriatelyimpose a singular educational philosophy andpractice upon all institutions. This representsa radical departure and places the Commis-sion in too partisan a stance in relation tocurrent policy debates about educationalreform.

The proposal completes a retreat fromhistorically understood approaches tostandards in two ways. First, the Commissionmoves away from prior expectations thatbaseline standards of resources and qualitywill apply to various areas of the college (full-time faculty, basic counseling and libraryservices, adequate or at least tolerablelibraries, or sound deliberative processes forensuring curricular integrity) At precisely thetime our students are the most diverse in thehistory of the region, the Commission wouldcountenance a retreat from an assurance thatthe minimum resources and standards ininstruction and student services are availablefor them to fulfill their educational dreams.

Second, the draft avoids any real commitmentto or discussion of the levels of achievementexpected of students or the educational rigorand integrity of the offerings. It is quitepossible to imagine institutions with "sys-tematic cycles" of evaluation and planningused to enhance "outcomes" whose offeringsare not educationally sound and whosetranscripts will not be honored by transferinstitutions. Focus on quantifiable outcomeswithout the checks and balances afforded byattention to baseline standards of quality andrigor creates premium conditions for accredi-tation of and institutional pressures towarddiploma mills. Privileging educationalproductivity over educational quality risksthe academic reputations of the colleges andundermines the credibility of our degrees andcertificates in the eyes of transfer institutionsand employers alike. This is no service to ourstudents.

1LA

Student outcomes measurements are noto complete and exclusive measures of quality.a The evaluation of institutions should in factao avoid singular measures. As Wellman haso noted, "One strength of accreditationo historically is that it has avoided one dimen-c sional measures of quality,o instead...[institutions must] demonstratea performance in a variety of areas, includingo curriculum, faculty, finances, governance ando student services. Academic freedom, institu-a tional commitment to the public interest,

and other important aspects evaluatedaa through the governance standard should not

be sidestepped." (J. Wellman, Chronicle ofHigher Education, Sept. 22, 2000)

0a

aO The proposed Draft significantly weakens the

previous standards with respect to sufficiencyof fiscal resources, fiscal stability and fiscalaccountability. This is a mistake. The publichas a right to expect that accredited institu-tions are fiscally responsible, stable and withsufficient resources to make it likely the

a institution will be there long enough to allowstudents to complete their studies.

The proposed Draft would require that allO student development, support services and

0

oa

learning support services be systematicallyo assessed against student learning outcomes.

This presumes that one can establish a causalconnection between say, a counseling hour, ora visit to the library, and a specified set of

o learning outcomes. Such an instrumentalistapproach to justifying student servicesappears to presume that students do not have

o rights to access essential student services,o including financial aid advisement, health

services, and student access to cultural andsocial events. While we strongly support

o program review and assessment of studentservices, and would agree that all such

o services should be both relevant to studento needs and effective, we do not agree that all

colleges should be required to try to prove theefficacy of each service in terms of learning

o outcomes, as though learning outcomes werethe only measurement of a college's function

o within society.

O Much that we do in higher education has longo term or longitudinal effects, and could noto always be shown to be of immediate efficacy.o The approach here is overly simplistic, ando could have damaging consequences.

a

o

a

Myriad other new requirements would beimposed including: regular validation ofcourse and program examinations; theidentification of competency levels andmeasurable student learning outcomes for allcredit, degrees and certificates, as well asgeneral and vocational education programs.Yet there is no rationale cited to suggest thatdocumentation of this magnitude is necessaryand appropriate in all colleges, nor to justifyrequirements this extensive.

The Draft also calls for evaluation of facultyto include "effectiveness in producing statedstudent learning outcomes." This particularsuggestion is the most likely to exert immedi-ate downward pressure on academic integrity,rigor and standardsespecially given theabsence in the Draft is any stated commit-ment to tenure, due process and other centralacademic norms.

The proposed draft groups all "personnel"together and de-emphasizes distinctionsamong employees. This reflects a generalinattention in the document to faculty, theirqualifications, and their role as teachers,mentors and discipline experts. There is anotable absence of any mention of therelational aspects of teaching and learning.Attention to the discipline expertise offaculty is a critical component of ensuringconfidence of transfer institutions, and we de-emphasize it at our students' peril.

Of the thirty-four (34) institutions that haveundergone the accrediting process in the lastseveral years, only four (4) have satisfactorilymet the Commission's expectations withregard to current standards 3 and 4. Yet these,particularly the current standard 3 oninstitutional effectiveness, really are the"guts" of the new draft proposal.

This should raise flags for all involved. Itsuggests that the framers of the new stan-dards may be so taken with the outcomesagenda that they are not sufficiently con-cerned with the very real considerations ofcost or practicality. For any college to success-fully implement the Commission's newmandates will require significant, sustainedand targeted investment in professionalresearchers, data analysis and computingcapability, professional development, andfaculty and staff time. This is particularly

Th

Accreditation Standards

"The proposed Do

Draft signifi-a

cantly weak- ac,

ens the previ-a

ous standards a

with respect to°.a

sufficiency of D.

afiscal re- a

asources, fiscal

astability and a

afiscal account- DE,

ability" aaaa

a0a

aa

a

a

aa

a0a

a

aaaaaaa

a

a0

a

aaaa

Senate Rostrum 13

Accreditation Standards

000

LI

0

"The ACCJC

draft retreats

ftom a com-

mitment to

collegial

governance."

14 Senate Rostrum

problematic (especially for the publicinstitutions that ACCJC* serves) at a timewhen public funding for community collegeshas been cut across the region, and we standon the threshold of major economic downturn.

The diversion of resources on the scale thatwould be required will by necessity siphonfrom those places most likely to provideenhanced student achievement: the class-rooms, counseling offices, and libraries wherefaculty and students interact. Prior toembarking on such an expensive and ex-tended experiment, the colleges, thecommunities we serve, as well as state levelpolicy makers deserve CO see a more detailedanalysis of the projected costs, impact andimplications of this shift in standards for thecolleges. Such an approach constitutes amassive unfunded mandate, and will ulti-mately undermine our shared goal of servingstudents in the community colleges.

Ironically, while other minimum educationalstandards are no longer salient, there is oneexception. The draft inserts a new, prescrip-tive emphasis on ensuring baseline resourcesfor technology in teaching. No correspondingplan is required regarding some of the othergenerally agreed-upon, fundamental resourcesthat support the provision of excellenteducation such as qualified faculty and staffor sufficient learning resources.

The singling out of technology mediatedinstruction, particularly absent any evidencethat such instruction is good for our students,or enhances their "learning outcomes,"suggests that the Commission is working topromote distance education and reorient thestandards in favor of institutions (such asWestern Governors University, Bob JonesUniversity or the University of Phoenix) thatare organized primarily around delivery bydistance modality.

Judith Eaton, President of the Council forHigher Education Accreditation (CHEA),recently noted that

"Six core academic values sustain regional

accreditation. They are the valuing of: institutional

autonomy; collegiality and shared governance; the

intellectual and academk authority of faculty; the

*Accrediting Commission for Community and JuniorColleges

degree (whether associate, baccalaureate,

professional, masters, or doctorate); general

education; and site-based education and a community

of learning." www.chea.orglResearchlcore-values.cfm

The ACCJC draft retreats from a commit-ment to collegial governance. This retreat isclearest in the proposed standard on "Leader-ship and Vested Authority." Gone are thecurrent requirements that faculty have asubstantive role in institutional governance,established academic senates and appropriateinstitutional support. Faculty, staff andstudents now only need to have a "mecha-nism or organization" to give "input" onbudget, policies and planning.

This overall retreat is particularly problem-atic in light of the larger agenda in the draft.If colleges are to be organized around theproduction of student outcomes, then thedeliberative processes designed to ensure theintegrity of the curriculum and educationalprograms are even more, not less, critical.They serve as one of the interconnected andnecessary checks and balances in colleges anduniversities. Without sound governance,functional academic senates, and curriculumreview processes that ensure the role ofdiscipline expertise, the credibility of ourtranscripts can and will be challenged by ourfour year partners.

"Leadership" is not an adequate proxy forgovernance. The draft also places heightenedemphasis on the "vested authority" of theCEOs and governing boards. The generalapproach to "leadership" appears to be anattempt to reinstate a dated and hierarchicalmodel.

In general, the Academic Senate prefers themore balanced approach to institutionalaccreditation in the existing standards, andurges a return to multiple measures ofeducational excellence. While we recognizethe current pressures arising from externalsources, notably the federal Department ofEducation, we do not believe that theCommission should adopt unproven, perhapseven faddish measurements and therebyabandon its long-standing commitment to aninstitution's educational quality evidenced inmany ways.

The Commission has simply gone too far. Inattempting to accommodate differencesamong the institutions accredited by ACCJC,the Commission should not lower generallyaccepted standards, or simply sink to thelowest common denominator. If accreditationis to be of continued value and viability, itmust be credible, and that credibility rests inlarge measure on a shared belief that accredi-tation does in fact uphold accepted standardsof educational excellence.

The Academic Senate believes this proposalshould occasion widespread discussion of therole of the Commission and the accreditingprocess. The Commission serves the educa-tional community, and a substantiveredefinition of the basis of accreditationshould not be the Commission's alone todetermine.

We urge all faculty to carefully read the newdraft and contrast it with the current stan-dards. We urge you to work with your localacademic senate and other faculty organiza-tions to organize and express concern aboutthese proposals. We urge you as well to workwith classified staff, students, administratorsand trustees to raise these concerns with theCommission.

Note: These remarks are drawn a lengthier document

submitted to the Commission, available atwww.academicsenate.cc.ca.us ACCJC materials can

be found at www.accjc.org

Since this article was written, the AccreditingCommission has published Draft B of the Standards.

Draft B is available for download au Imp://

www.accjc.orgj. The Academic Senate is currentlyanalyzing the new draft, and is sending its liaison

Linda Collins to testify at the fearing on March 13thin Hawaii.

President's messagecontinued from page 2

prepare one to live a rich life and to functioneffectively in the world.' The Career LaddersInitiative, in other words, recognizes that, asNeil Postman tells us in The End of Education,the preparation for making a living has alwaysbeen well served by a good general education.'

A quality public education is one which doesnot serve a public, but which creates a public, tocite Postman again.4 Its goal is the self-actualization of its students, the creation ofliterate, compassionate people, capable ofcontributing to a democratic society. AsHoward Bowen tells us, the goal of highereducation is the development of the whole

2We might note that a plumber who works on pipes and

drains is called a "plumber" and is said to have a"vocation": a plumber who works on the human anatomy iscalled a "doctor" and is said to have a "profession." AsRegina Stanback-Stroud has pointed out (Vocational

Education Seminar, San Diego, February 8, 2002), our four-year universities are deeply involved in vocationaleducation through their professional schools. And we

would add that the need for a good general education is noless pressing for these professionals than for our vocationalstudents.

'Postman, Neil, The End of Ednethon: Redefiningthe lidue of

School. Vintage Books, New York, 1995, p. 32.

' I Ind, pp. 18, 57, 197.

person, involving the transformation ofresources, not into things, but into "desiredintangible qualities of human beings."'

As obvious as this concept of quality mayseem, it appears to be lost on many of theMaster Plan staffers and accreditationcommissioners of the world, whoperhapsforgetting their own educationsseek todefine quality in terms of "measurableoutcomes" and the acquisition of "skill sets."

Over the years, my own commitment to oursystem of community colleges has deepened asI have witnessed, again and again, the dedica-tion of colleaguesvocational andacademicto the "whole person," to enhanc-ing and enriching the potential of students'lives. We can't let ourselves be distracted fromor confused about what we are doing here. It'ssimply too important, and we must keep ourconception of quality as the actualization ofpotential clearly in focus, both for ourselvesand our friends and our critics. And with thatclarity of focus, we must demand the resourcesto make the promise of quality a reality.

'Bowen, Howard R., Invesernew in Learning: The Individual and

Soahl Value of American Meier EducainsaJohns Hopkins

University Press, Baltimore, 1987, pp. 33-36, p. 12.

17

Accreditation Standards

a

LI

aLI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

Li

LI

LI

LI

ii

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

LI

0LI

LI

LI

0LI

00

LI

0LI

LI

0LI

a

LI

Ms obvious as

this concept

of qualityLI may seem, it

appears to be

a lost on many

D° of the Master

D Plan staffers

p° and accredi-.

tation corn-.o missioners of

° the world...

Senate Rostrum 15

The Academic Senatefor California

Community Colleges

President: Hoke Simpson

Publications Committee:

Beiierly Shue, ChairLos Angeles Harbor College

/ Julie Adams, EditorAcademic Senate

Edgart Aguilar,Mt. San Antonio College

Dibakar Barua,Golden West Co//ege

Charles Donaldson,Santa Monica College

Carol Hartman,American River College

Renee Reyes Tuller,

Grossmont College

Design and LayoutRita Sabler,

Publications Specialist

The Rostrum is a publicationof the Academic Senate for

California CommunityColleges, 910 K Street,

Suite 300, Sacramento, CA,95814.

The Rostrum is distributedto all faculty through

college academic senatepresidents and by individual

mailing.

Letters and unsolicitedarticles by faculty members

are invited. For deadlineinformation call (916) 445-

4753 or email us atasccc@ix.netcom.com

You can find this and theprevious issues of thispublication online at:

www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us

cp9E-Wc,,,

Horse Sense for PeopleContinued from page 4

community colleges. It shows a kick ofunderstanding and acknowledgement of ourunique roles and our services to students. Getinvolved. Learn more from your academicsenate on this issue. Let's refiloye theblinders. (Links to the Academic Senate'scommentary on Draft A are found on theSenate Website: hap://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us.)

"MAKE IT EASY FOR IIINI '10 DO RI(I II ANI)DIFFICUIT FOR .ro DO WRONG."

When it comes to the complex game ofincreasing transfer and graduation rates, whoknows better than counseling faculty, whatworks and what does not for our students? Acollaborative CSU-CCC steering committeeis now in the process of developing a draft fora statewide CCC/CSU (4CSU) program,which will address the goal of assisting andsupporting community college students totransfer to and graduate from CSU. I stronglyencourage you to read the draft, which wasplaced on the Counseling List Serve January2002. If you arc not on the Counseling ListServe, please Email Lindy Williams in theChancellor's Office at lwilliam@cecco.eduand request to be included. If you need morespecific information on this draft, you canalso Email me at renee.tuller@gcccd.net. Iwill send you the draft in progress. Ibur inputis highly appreciated and valued. This iswhere your professional expertise is essentialfor our steering committee to represent yourideas and concerns. Thgether, we can make iteasier for our students to succeed, moredifficult for them to fail.

"EXPERIENCES FATHER DRAW GS IN OR ICSII 1;;S

AWAY. TI1EY Ern IER CRENIE RESIS1ANGE, WIIIGII

RESI;EIS IN EIGIITING oR FLEEING, OR 'nu'GRE.:AFE (0NINIITNIENT ANI) GOLLARORAFION."

Pa/mars/4 AT Excellence was not the first timein our history that we have been asked Coincrease transfer and success rates. However,now the spotlight is shining brightly on thesepolitically expedient focal points. We keephearing from our leaders that they really wantto increase transfer rates. We keep hearing the"talk," but, in the absence of a commitmentof resources, we have grown to distrust it.Counselors in the trenches and on the frontlines all over the state know that talk ischeap, whereas a quality education is not.

What are some of the experiences that haveweighed against creating an atmosphere ofcommitment and collaboration in the areas ofimproving transfer and student success rates?For one, the divisive discussions of the 50%law have been particularly painful to counse-lors. Because our salaries fall on the "wrong"side of the ledger, we are challenged to "proveour worth" each time we seek replacements ornew counseling positions. Then there is thefailure to provide adequate funding forASSIST ASSIST is our backbone tool, yet itis now 5400,000+ short of the resourcesneeded to be fully operational. And now thereis the Governor's January budget: CalWORKScut S58 million, S26.8 million cut fromMatriculation, 55.2 million cut from Facultyand Staff Development, SIO million cut fromthe Fund for Student Success, S19.8 millioncut from Telecommunications and Technol-ogy Infrastructure, and SI million cut fromthe Nursing Program Expansion. What kind of

'ssa6e Woll Id you say that sends to coIMMI-nity college faculty and to our students?Community colleges have long suffered underdiscriminatory funding, with full funding ofprograms long overdue and students short-changed, and now the cuts are hitting thebone. So, as nice as it may be to hear howimportant transfer and success are from ourleaders, it would be much nicer if the .

resources were there Co back up their "talk."Resources go where the priorities are, and themessage is that our students, our faculty andwhat we do are a low priority in California.This hardly sets the stage for commitment,collaboration and creative approaches tostudent success.

'TRUS'E IS INIPOR'EANE IN SFITING 1;1' THE

IDEAL ENVIRONNIENT FOR LEARNING."

I propose that what seCilis obvious, whetherfor Monty's training methods or our students'success, as to the necessity for creating anoptimal educational environment, should alsobe obvious to our leaders. However, theyrefuse to "see" and seem blind to the obviouswhen budgets are slashed and priorities aremisplaced. I look forward to a day when trustin our administrators and legislators ismerited based on their recognition of whateducation truly needs, when faculty are trulyrespected and valued for the incredible workwe do for the remarkable students we serve.

ACADEMIC SENATE FOR CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES NEWSLETTER

Valuing Diversity

will never forget my interview forthe job I still hold, 33 years later,as an instructor of philosophy atGrossmont College. I sat in a room

with the president and vice presidentof the college and, for more than twohours, engaged in a heated discussionabout teaching.' Employing a variation ofMcCluhan's "medium is the message," Iargued that the principal lesson taught intraditional college classes was that studentsshould sit still and do what they're told,that this lesson was the same no matterwhat the nominal subject matter of thecourse, and that the primary function ofcollege, therefore, was that of quashingany tendencies to uniqueness and turningout docile citizens who would dependablyfunction within a limited range of socialnormalcy. Whatever I did in my classes,I assured them, would be designed toundermine and subvert this oppressivetradition. My students might or mightnot learn much about philosophy, butthey would sure as hell learn whatcollege was designed to do to them, andthey'd learn a great deal about how tofight it. My interlocutors argued, withequal vehemence, that my attitude wasirresponsible both to my discipline and mystudents.

I I had already met with the faculty; the "interview"lasted ten minutes. My first year was to be as asabbatical leave replacement, and they had clearlyalready determined to offer me the job based on myrecommendations from graduate school.

by Hoke Simpson, President

They hired rne the next day.

For the next few years, I engaged in whatmight be generously characterized as"cutting-edge, experimental, non-direc-tive"-teaching, until it gradually dawnedon me (1) that what my students werelearning seemed to be that my classeswere an easy 'A! if only they were willingto show up and emote, and (2) that myown traditional education had not leftme feeling or acting particularly op-pressed. (I know, we might argue that itwas precisely that oppressive traditionthat was the cause of my slow epipha-nybut to go there would only prove,again, that the intellect can be a tool ofmasochism.) My teaching, as a result,eventually worked its way to within thebounds of the normal. In the meantime,the senior members of my department, totheir credit, protected me from subse-quent administrations, less sympathetic tomy need to experiment.

It was not until 11 or 12 years later thatI was asked to serve on a hiring commit-tee myself, and was first exposed to thesystem that is still with us today. The hirewas in the department of Computer Sci-ence and Information Systems, in which Iwas, by then, teaching parr of my full-timeload. Because of my peripheral role inthe department, I was not involved in thepaper screening or in the preparation of

Valuing Diversity 1

French Fries, Funding, and Student

Success: Occasions for Unity 2

Information Competency: MovingAhead Despite 3

If I Have to Explain, You Wouldn'tUnderstand 6

Vigilance and Self-Defense: The Lo-

cal Senate's Response to Crisis. 10

Vocational FacultyWhat's Happening? 12

Local Senates 13

The Accountability Game 14

the interview questions, but was onlyasked to participate in the interviewsthemselves. Prior to the first interview,committee members were handed asheet of prepared questions, it was de-cided who would read which of themto the candidates, and the interviewsbegan. I found the process appalling.Both interviewers aud intervieweeswere stripped of their humanity andrequired to engage in a stilted simu-lacrum of communication. It was asthough authenticity had been bannedfrom the room. No one in this processwas encouraged to be themselves:the interviewers were required to be

CONTINUED ON PAGE 4

BEST COPY AVAILABLE

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

Hoke Simpson

French Fries, Funding, and StudentSuccess: Occasions for Unity

by Hoke Simpson, President

A s I write this, I'm sitting in theRoadhouse Café in LAX, Terminal7, with a two-hour wait for aconnecting flight. I was here a few

weeks ago with Executive Director Julie Adamsfor a pause of similar proportions; we got alot of work done (see accompanying photo),but, as importantly, we both noticed what apleasant place it was to wait. The Roadhousehas a sign on the outside window, "Last Chancefor Good Eats" (a believable enough claim asyou're about to board an airplane), it has aRoute 66 theme on the inside, and it seems tobe a family enterpriserun by a very functionalfamily. Everyone working here is upbeat, theytreat one another with care and respect, andthey are very solicitous of their customers. Myorder of french fries (excellentreal potatoes)was greeted with as much enthusiasm as mysteak and scampi order at the Palm SpringsDoral last night (a meeting of the occupationaldeans, who don't fool around about theirmeeting sites). The world needs places like this,places where being there is easy. Sure, we needchallenge, danger and excitement, too; butjust coming into an airport these days remindsus that there's more than enough of that, and

that it's the peace and tranquility and thewelcoming atmosphere that require the work.

Our community college system seems to meto be behaving more like a functional familythan it has in the past, a trend that can onlybode well for our students. There are severalopportunities for faculty to contribute to thattrend this year, and I want to urge you to takeadvantage of them.

First, there are, as always, issues of funding. Ihave heard from all over the state that campusconstituencies have been working together to-ward the passage of Proposition 47, as well as,in many cases, for local facilities bond issues.We are all hoping for a big payoff on Novem-ber 5th, and a much-needed renaissance in ourfacilities.

I also hope that academic senates are workingwith their administrations, staff and studentson our voter registration and student mobi-lization campaign, designed to bring our 2.6million students into the political process tolobby in their own interest on communitycollege issues, with funding at the forefrontof these. This is a project that needn'tinfact, shouldn'tend on November 5th, for

the aim is not a vote ona particular measure,but ongoing contactwith legislators and theGovernor to create thepolitical will to addressthe disparate funding ofthe public higher educa-tion segments. If we cansuccessfully get this ef-fort off the ground, wecan, in the future, lookto more sophisticatedand more focused waysto employ communitycollege "voter power."In the meantime, wehave the opportunity tobring all our constituen-

Academic Senate Executive Director, Julie Adams at the Roadhouse Cafe in LAXCONTINUED ON PAGE 8

2 SENATE ROSTRUM

2 0

INFORMATION COMPETENCY

Information Competency:Moving Ahead Despite

by Kate Clark and Dan Crump

t its September 2002 meeting,\ the Board of Governors was\'\ poised to adopt a new graduation

requirement for all Californiacommunity college students. This newrequirement for information competency,employing the definition of informationcompetency adopted by the Academic Senate,would indicate to transfer institutions and toemployers that our students had the ability torecognize the need for information and to find,evaluate, use, and communicate informationin all its various formats. It combines aspectsof library literacy, research methods andtechnological literacy. Information competencyincludes consideration of the ethical and legalimplications of information use and requiresthe application of both critical thinking andcommunication skills. [Proposed Revisionsto Title 5, Chapter 6, Subchapter 10, Section55601]

However, just days before the Board was toapprove this requirement, the Department ofFinance (DOF) declared that a review of gradu-ation requirements would present an "unfundedmandate" to districts; thus, the DOF informedthe Board that it was not to adopt this newrequirement and that moving ahead to considerit at that time would be illegal.

This frustrating development, a clear intrusioninto the right of the system to make its owndeterminations about educational programs,requirements, and quality, is a source of ongo-ing discussion throughout the state. The Board,the Chancellor, the Consultation Council, andcommunity college faculty supported this newrequirement and had tacitly understood thatany attendant "costs" would be borne by localcolleges or districts in an effort to improve theeducational experiences of all our students.

This procedural setback, however, has not damp-ened faculty's enthusiasm for this requirement.Because local districts remain free to adopt thisgraduation requirement independent of Boardaction, colleges, led by their faculty and especial-ly their curriculum committees, continue to press

forward in identifying how the local curriculumcan best meet the local needs of students and thecommunity by introducing information compe-tency. Prompted perhaps by the once-pendingadoption of such a requirement, faculty, deans,and other administrators across the state havelaunched their own spirited discussions.

The Academic Senate will present for adoptionat the Fall 2002 Plenary Session, a second paperin what will no doubt be a series of documentspublished to support these efforts to institute lo-cal information competency requirements. Thisnew document demonstrates how six colleges(Diablo Valley, Glendale, Cabrillo, Cuyamaca,Santa Rosa, and Merced) have gone aboutmaking and implementing their local decisions.Often beginning with the definition of infor-mation competency adopted by the AcademicSenate, these faculty fostered a college-wide dis-cussion by asking such questions as these: Whatcourses currently offered address informationcompetency? What sort of additional coursesmight be offered? How might the componentsof information competency be integrated intoexisting courses?

We urge local senate presidents to share thedraft document widely (available electronicallyat http://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us) andsolicit faculty comment prior to session; presum-ing the paper's adoption in October, we thenhope that the final publication of this informa-tive paper in hard copy and on the AcademicSenate website will further stimulate your ownlocal innovation.

In support of resolutions adopted in Spring2001 and Fall 2001, the Academic Senate alsourges faculty to consider how such an informa-tion competency requirement might be appliedto vocational and technical programs, especiallyto certificate programs of 18 units or more. Atthe 2002 Fall Plenary Session, the CurriculumCommittee and the Occupational EducationCommittees will jointly sponsor a breakouton this very topic to explore with faculty therelevance of such competencies to these areas ofstudy. We invite you to join these discussions.

21SENATE ROSTRUM 3

DIVERSITY

Valuing Diversity"neutral" in their responses; and the candidateswere required to pour themselves into the moldconstituted by the predictable, insipid, systemati-cally inoffensive questions.

The top finalist was, of course, predictable, insipid,and systematically inoffensive (until she was hired).The best candidate, in my view, was one who wasleast able to contain herself within this process; shekept verging on breaking out and being herself. Inthis context, though, she was perceived as "weird"and slightly dangerouswhich, of course, she was.Each flash of authenticity threatened to explode theprocess, to reflect it back on itself and reduce it to aheap of embarrassed rubble.

The interviews completed, I went to the dean andexpressed my dismay at what had come to passin our hiring procedures. The contrast, I pointedout, between this recent, Kafkaesque experienceand my own hiring interview could not have beenmore stark. The people interviewing me wanted toknow who I was, and genuinely encouraged me toshow them what I was made of. And they, in turn,did not hesitate to convey to me their own deeplyheld convictions. The result was an impassioneddialogue that left me feeling that this place was onewhere I truly wanted to work. I could not imaginea candidate feeling that way about our college asthe result of the interviews we had just conducted.In fact, if I wanted to communicate that our collegewas a haven for those who were most comfortablewhen repressing their humanity, seeking othersequally at ease with a denial of their personhooda community, in other words, of crazy peopleIcould find no better way to do it than through theprocess we had just engaged in.

That meeting with the dean was the beginning ofwhat has been a 20-year effort to inject human-ity into a process that has become the norm in theCalifornia Community College system. I am nowconvinced that the effort should be abandoned, andwith it the process itself.

What has brought me to this point is a series ofreflections on the "crisis" in our hiring policybrought about by the Third Appellate Court rulingon Proposition 209 in the Conner ly case. By strik-ing down the statutes and regulations governingaffirmative action, the court is seen to have strucka blow to efforts to achieve diversity within thecommunity colleges, and to have presented us withthe challenge of achieving diversity through othermeans. To accept that challenge is to seek to iden-

tify the obstacles to achieving diversity, and then tofind ways to overcome them.

Whatever else Ward Conner ly and Proposition 209have done, they have not robbed us of the tools suf-ficient to achieving our goal. That much at least isclear from the dismal record of our progress. If weare going to think anew about how to diversify ourfaculty and staff, then, we need to move beyond thedesire for new regulations to replace those struckdown, and begin with the as yet unanswered ques-tions: What has kept us from getting there so far?and, once the obstacles are identified, How do weovercome them?

One obvious place to look for the impediments todiversity is at the attitudes of those serving on thehiring committees. Are they pro or con, activelyseeking to hire diverse candidates, or activelyorpassivelyresisting? My own experience on hiringcommittees in my district suggests that this is a gen-uine source of our problems. And my experienceas a human being living in America also suggeststhat these attitudes are heartbreakingly difficultto change. We must continue to try, and we musteventually succeed if we are to succeed as a civilizednation; but we cannot hang our hopes of achievingdiversity in our ranks in the short term on changingpeoples' hearts.

We can, however, change the process which seemsas though it were designed, however unconsciously,to give comfort to the opponents of diversity and tosilence its advocates. The process I have describedabove, the one we have all employed for decadesand which we take for granted in all of our discus-sions, is one which does just that. I have no doubtthat the process was designed by well-intentionedpeople to promote fairness and to eliminate biasand cronyism in hiring. The process is fatallyflawed where diversity is concerned, however, for itidentifies "fairness" with "uniformity" or sameness,whereas to celebrate diversity is to embrace varietyor difference. From the interviewer's perspective,even those who might champion diversity are shutdown, for this process allows no championing, noovert encouragement nor overt challenge. From thecandidate's perspective, we must recognize that inhiring procedures the medium truly is the message,and our process screams "No variety wanted here!"

So, if we abandon our current way of doing things,identifying it accurately as a major obstacle to theachievement of diversity, what do we do instead?We invite candidates to lunch or to dinner, we sitdown with them and engage them in serious discus-sion, we challenge them to show us what they're

SENATE ROSTRUM

22

really about, and we let them see who we are aswell. And, sure, we have them teach a real classof real studentsand we don't worry that theyaren't the same students for each candidate orthat each candidate might teach a different topic.In short we treat candidates and ourselves likehuman beings interested in discovering if theywant to be one another's colleagues for the nextthirty years.2

But how can we guarantee fairness in such cir-cumstances or, beyond that, ensure that we don'tjust choose as colleagues those who are mostlike ourselves? Short of absolute guarantees, wecan, in fact, do a great many things to promotefairness and the championing of diversity We canask that every academic senate form a committeeon hiring and diversity, and that this committeeestablish, with the full support of the administra-tion, a training program for all members of hiringcommittees. We can ask that such programs seek,in the words of a recently adopted Academic Sen-ate paper, to

convey a sense of the educational, vocational,and social value to students and the campuscommunity of a rich variety of backgroundsand perspectives among its members;

reduce trainees' fear of, and induce a positiveappreciation of, cultural differences;

communicate clearly that discrimination basedon cultural and racial difference is wrong, andillustrate the damagesocial, socioeconomic,and psychologicalthat has occurred as aresult of discriminatory practices;

communicate the importance of campusesbecoming cultural models for students: that,by providing an environment which honorsdiversity and is free of prejudice, the collegecan produce in students attitudes that willcontribute to the elimination of bigotry in thelarger community;

provide trainees with specific strategies andtechniques for promoting inclusiveness in jobdescriptions, advertising, paper screening, andinterviews, as well as eliminating unintendedexclusiveness; [and]

persuade trainees that good hiring practicedemands reaching the broadest pool of poten-

2 As far as I have been able to determine, there are no legalobstacles to such an "opening up" of our interview pro-cedures. In fact, interviews in the UC system appear tobe conducted in much the fashion that I have described.The rigidity of our own procedures seems to be groundedprimarily in a fear of lawsuits.

tial candidates and hiring the candidate whowill be the greatest asset to students and thecampus community.3

We can ask, as some colleges already do, that noone be permitted to serve on a hiring committeeunless they have undergone training, and thatthere be a requirement that all potential commit-tee members be "re-certified" on a regular basis.And we can ensure adherence to this policy byhaving the academic senate make all appoint-ments to hiring committees in consultation withdiscipline faculty. Our aim would be, in part, thatthose who are frightened by their own humanity,who, that is, are afraid of difference, would eitherget over it or self-select themselves out of whatthey perceived as an onerous process.

We can charge academic senates with the devel-opment and oversight of part-time hiring policiesthat ensure the same level of professional consid-eration as is accorded to full-time hires.

We can ask academic senates to take the lead ininitiating and sustaining internship programs,such as the SDICCCA program in San Diego.

I am not suggesting for a moment that the processunder which I was hired 33 years ago be takenfor a model. In fact, in almost everything but theinterview, that process was deeply flawed. Wehave indeed come a long way since then in termsof our awareness of the value of diversity andof the factors that contribute to our achievinga more diverse faculty. But we have also madesome mistakes, mistakes that I believe impede theachievement of our goal.

In conclusion, the Third Appellate Court rulingdid not revoke section 87360 (b) of the CaliforniaEducation Code, the section that makes facultyhiring policies the product of joint agreementbetween academic senates and their governingboards. Those policies must now be reconsti-tuted in the light of the Conner ly decision. Iam suggesting that academic senates must takeresponsibility for realizing the value of diversityin their own ranks, and that this might best be ac-complished by first removing the straitjacket thatidentifies fairness with uniformity, and replac-ing it with an open process that permits diversecandidates and the champions of diversity amongthe faculty to affirm the value of human varietyand difference.

3 A Re-examination of Faculty Hiring Processes andProcedures. Academic Senate for California CommunityColleges, adopted Fall 2000.

DIVERSITY

SENATE ROSTRUM

6

COUNSELING ISSUES

SENATE ROSTRUM

If I Have to Explain, YouWouldn't Understand

by Renee Reyes Tuller, Counseling and Library Faculty Issues Committee Chair

here is a saying in the biker world(I mean the Harley Davidsonworld) that seems apropos to ourstate of affairs on the front line as

community college counseling faculty.

That saying is: 'If I have to explain, youwouldn't understand." What do I mean andhow does it relate to riding a Harley Davidsonmotorcycle?

Well, my husband opened my eyes to the bikerworldthe love of the outdoors, and the "feel-ing" of freedom in riding on the open road.The beauty of that "feeling" makes everythingelse seem insignificant. It is meditation onwheelswords just cannot explain this "feel-ing" better. Bikers have a hard time explaining"that feeling" to folks who don't understand"that." In other words, if a biker gets into asituation when there is a need to explain "it",then you just wouldn't understand "it". Thereis a deep connection of bikers to bikers sincewithin that subculture there is no need forexplanation; they share that mutual apprecia-tion for that freedom of riding. No words needto be spoken, no justifications for the choicesmade. There is an "us" reality, and for thosethat don't understand, a "them" reality.

In the last 20 months as your South Represen-tative for the Academic Senate, I have had theopportunity to realize how this "us and them"phenomenon in the biker world is oh so similarand prominent in the educational world withinthe California community colleges. When I getaround "them," I realize how absolutely com-plicated it is to explain the frontline truth thatin the counseling "us" world we know so wellas faculty. "They" want us to explain why ourtransfer numbers to CSU and UC are not risingmore steadily. "They" want "us" to explainwhy we need retirement positions replacedwith another full-time counseling position."They" want "us" to explain why we need newpositions to accommodate the growth happen-ing at so many community colleges in the state.

Counseling faculty are consistently put on thedefensive unlike other faculty on campus. Thereality for many counseling faculty is "If wehave to explain, we know you won't under-stand." For the sake of this article, I am goingto try to explain.

"We" are the faculty on the front line whoare counseling and educating the most diversestudents on the planet in the largest educa-tional system in the world. We must wear anumber of hats in accomplishing this missionand adapt quickly to the ever changing needsof our students. In a nutshell, we are ourstudents' advocates, teachers, mentors, healers,tutors, parents, sisters, brothers, holistic guides,diplomats, cheerleaders, academic and personalcoaches, friends, politicians, and drill sergeants.We are the lucky ones to witness first hand theenormous changes our students go throughto attend class, to achieve simple goals, totransfer, and overcome unbelievable odds. Wefeel our students' journey as we guide them likesherpas up the Himalayan mountains. We feeltheir pain, we rejoice in their victorieshow-ever small or large. We provide the ingredientsthat will never be explained through numbersand statistics that are so heavily relied upon by"them" in measuring our success. We are thatpowerful a force in many of our students' lives.We know that.

As counseling faculty we also know that manyof our colleagues and administrators on ourown campuses do not fully recognize, under-stand, acknowledge or value what we really do.Recently, I heard a story of a college presidentwho walked into the counseling departmentand saw the hordes of students waiting in thelobby. The president asked a counselor, "Whatare all these students doing here?" The counsel-or said, "It's fall registration. This is our busiesttime." That seems trivial, but to have a collegepresident not understand this, shows the lackof understanding about what we do.

With $22 million dollars cut from matricula-tion, $30 million cut from CalWORKs, and all

2q

of the $5.2 million Staff Development mon-ies eliminated, the target of the cuts show anobvious attack on where we are most vulner-ablestudent services, specifically counseling.I have asked my colleagues across the stateatconferences and on the counseling listserve"How are the budget cuts affecting yourcollege?" Many counseling faculty respondedto that question. Here are just a few responses.

At one college, all adjunct counseling resourceshave been eliminated. At another college, allcounseling positions have been frozen. At anumber of colleges, since all staff develop-ment money is gone, there will be no collegeconference money for counselors to attendthe counselor training conferences at UC andCSU. At another college, the Learning Dis-abled students will no longer have tutoring.Many CalWORKs programs are eliminatedor will have a skeleton crew to transition theCalWORKs students to other programs. At onecollege, there was a reduction to their counsel-ing contracts for seven counselors that weremoved from 215 days to 195 days, a 20-dayreduction. The total savings was $38,943 andthe loss to students was over 4,000 studentcontacts. This same college asked counselorsto return to work for reduced pay. Severalcounselors chose take the lower rate of payto protect their jobs. They were told therewasn't any money, and then more money wasfound. One college simply slashed 38% out ofthe counseling department. Some colleges areconsolidating positions, eliminating others anddownsizing support staff. Another counselormentioned the issue of "college starter" pro-grams, whereby the K through 12 students canattend the community collegeyet the state isnot funding such programs. Instead the state isslashing the budget and allowing the youngstersaccess to community college education.

These are only a handful of examples of thefallout counseling faculty are seeing as the bud-get knife has cut into the heart of counselingand student services. Many counseling facultyare trying to do the best they can with the setof cuts that have hit them and to see as manystudents as possible. However, the consensus is"we" know our students are being hurt. This ishappening at a time when our colleges, "they,"are asking "us" counseling faculty

Why our transfer numbers are not risingmore steadily.

Why we cannot open for longer hours andon the weekends.

Why we cannot start an online, web advis-ing program.

Why we cannot start an ambassador pro-gram.

Why we cannot do more outreach with lessrelease time.

Why we cannot offer more classes.

Why specialists cannot be in different de-partment areas.

Why we cannot be more involved on com-mittees.

Why we cannot see more students in lesstime.

Why we cannot provide more careercounseling workshops, transfer workshops,probation workshops, time management,stress management and life skills work-shops.

"They" want "us" to explain why we can't domore with less. "They" want more transfernumbers, more graduation numbers, moreoutreach numbers, more application numbers,more FAFSA numbers. The goal is to havemore, more, bigger and more impressive num-bers to display and revel in.

How do we get those larger numbers? Out-comes, Student Learning Outcomes is thecurrent mantra in the planning circles thatare humming the answer to our prayers,saying outcomes over and over again. "Out-comes"we are now expected to go alongthe "outcome" path to la la land without trulyquestioning the legitimacy of what that reallymeans. What does that mean for counselingfaculty? Just what are we doing and for whatreason? Is our success solely dependent on big-ger numbers? What about our students?

These are really bad budget times. We all knowthat. The one thing that seems clear to me isthat as colleges struggle to adapt to the budget

2 h

COUNSELING ISSUES

SENATE ROSTRUM 7

8

COUNSELING ISSUES

SENATE ROSTRUM

cuts, something has to go. That somethingcomes down to either we reduce access, orwe reduce services or quality of services toour students. There are going to be conse-quences for either path. Since most collegeswill not consider reducing access, what op-tion does that leave?

It is unmistakable in these economic timesthat "we" counseling and library faculty fallon the 50% law's dark side of the ledger. Aslong as we are not considered faculty on theother side of the 50% law, we are open tar-gets. The matriculation cuts have hit deeplyinto of many of our counseling departmentsand Transfer Centers. How can we continueto give our students less than they deserve?As long as "we" are on the dark side of the50% law, we will be treated differently thanother faculty. "We" are vulnerable and theAcademic Senate has adopted resolutions insupport of our position on the issue. (Seebelow.)

So one way to move beyond "us" and "them"is to stay current with the issues we are dealingwith in the state. We must work together as aunited counseling faculty and bring our insightand expertise to the table. Get involved on alocal level. I urge you to become involved withyour local academic senate and your unions. Itis up to "us" to attempt to bridge the gap of un-derstanding with "them." Our students dependon us. We know that.

*(If you would like to be on the counsel-ing listserve, please e-mail Renee Tullerreneetuller@cox.net)French Fries, Funding, andStudent SuccessCONTINUED FROM PAGE 2

cies together in the shared recognition that weneed a stronger political base if we are ever tosolve our most enduring problems.

Finally, a major occasion for working togetherpresents itself this year in the areas of equity

MIEZOLUIr

Fal 1999REAFFIRM its

previous position

that counselors,

librarians,

and other

faculty whoseassignment may

not be primarilyin the classroom

are faculty.

012 11=n,`TEED (Ir©

Spring, 2001WORK to amend California Education Code 84362(b)(1) and

(d) to include the salaries of "counseling and library faculty";WORK to amend California Education Code 84362 (d) such that

the minimum percentage of any district's apportionment spent

on classroom, library, and counseling faculty salaries increases

from the present standard of fifty percent to a percentage thatis commensurate with the inclusion of counseling and library

faculty members;

and REAFFIRM the importance of establishing a statutory

minimum percentage of instructional expenditure by districts and

the value that such a criterion has in protecting the academicstandards and central importance of instruction in the California

Community Colleges.

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

and diversity. The Chancellor's Office TaskForce on Equity and Diversity, formed inresponse to the Conner ly v. State PersonnelBoard decision, will soon be issuing its report,in which it will propose that we achieve ourlong-held goals by assigning primary responsi-bility and timelines for each goal to differentsystem constituencies, and by getting a publiccommitment from each constituency that itwill meet its objectives. For virtually everygoal, there is the recommendation that theresponsible group coordinate its activities withone or more other constituencies. In otherwords, there is the recognition that we are allgoing to have to make progress together if weare going to make progress at all.

In the area of student equity, for example,the Academic Senate is assigned responsibilityfor updating the document Student Equity:Guidelines for Developing a Plan by October,2002 (we've met that deadline), and the CEOsare charged with adopting updated studentequity plans by March 2004, in coordination

with all other district and college constituen-cies. We have, for years, bemoaned the factthat the original Board mandate to createthese plans did not require regular updates orserious implementation, and have called forthat to change (Resolution 6.01 F00). Withthe Task Force Report and the focus of theBoard of Governors on the implementationof the report's recommendations, we nowhave an opportunity to work collaborativelyto make revitalized plans and effective studentequity strategies a reality in every district.

As delineated in the Student Equity: Guide-lines document, a key ingredient in anyplan will be a campus climate study, and thedocument proposes the sorts of research thatcan go into that. While we are exercising ourcollaborative skills, and thus making progresstoward becoming a more functional commu-nity college family, let me suggest an additionto the research proposed on campus climates:Be sure to include a field trip to the Road-house Café.

Spring 2001URGE the Chancellor to protect counseling

faculty and library faculty form unwanted attacksand work with the appropriate associations in

gathering data and developing a survey to assess

the impact of the 50% law on student success;

and WORK with the Chancellor on re-convening

the 50% law task force to review and study the

data and to consider whether to recommendamendments to the 50% law (such as substantially

increasing the percentage to include counseling

and library faculty).

Spring 2002OPPOSE the layoff of any

counseling faculty as a

result of matriculationbudget cuts.

CORMSEL CaCULTU

SENATE ROSTRUM 9

10

LOCAL SENATES

SENATE ROSTRUM

Vigilance and Self-Defense: The LocalSenate's Response to Crisis'

by Kate Clark, Vice President

---N rom time to time, every localsenate finds itself in the midst ofcrisesinternal or organizational,at the college or within the district,

lasting or transitory. Based on the experiencessome senates have endured, we offer thesesuggestions for your considerationand forwider debate and discussion. What follows,then are thoughts about the collectiveresponsibilities of local senate members andadvice particularly suited for local senatepresidents and officerswhether in crisis ornot.

ROLES OF LOCAL SENATES IN TIMES OF CRISIS

Local senates must remain aware of changesin local or state regulation or in statute thatimpinge upon our dutiesand upon those withwhom we share governance roles. As a personalobservation, I recommend that local senatesconsider retaining separate counsel familiarwith education law and that they establish sepa-rate, legal defense funds independent of collegefunding mechanisms. This resource, in time ofhappy, conciliatory relationships, affirms ourcontentions and keeps us abreast of pendinglegislative or regulatory threats; in times ofcrisis, such counsel assumes duties and does notcompel harried faculty to become masters oflegal code, writs of mandate, formal grievancesor other implements of legal recourse. By dis-tributing the responsibility for vigilance, legalresources can ensure our informed participa-tion.

Local senates must also confront moral andlegal infringements upon shared governancein their institutions. Full participation shouldalways be assumed, but never left unquestionedby the senate. Resistance need not be con-frontational, but it should never be oblique; itmust be clearly articulated and visible to all inthe college community. The ability of tenuredfaculty to oppose injustice without reprisaloften obligates them to do so on behalf of oth-

' This article is an adaptation of an address given at the2001 and 2002 Faculty Leadership Institutes.

ers, particularly untenured faculty, the staff andstudents who are or who feel most vulnerable.

Local senates must never be complacent abouttheir roles in educating and re-educating boards,new administrators, and new faculty. Senatesneed to present to these groups well-organizedorientations that outline senate authority andthe past practices that distinguish one campusfrom another. This need is particularly true ofthe smaller siblings of multi-college districts:board members and district administrators needinformation to compensate for the sometimeslouder voice of the larger siblings; collegeadministrators need such data and clarity if theyare to advocate confidently for their institution.

With due diligence, the local senates must carryout their statutory responsibilitiesand seekappropriate support for these governance tasks.At the same time, we must be prudent, respect-ing and reinforcing the delegated authoritiesof other bodies: the faculty bargaining unit,the classified senates, administrators' councils,and student government. Publicly supportingtheir work and resisting outside efforts to pitus against one another ensures open communi-cation. Having a clearly articulated statementabout college governance structures can alsoprevent incursions into other entities' "territo-ries." Continual review of these locallyandlegallydefined relationships translates intoa continual renewal of commitment amongleaders of governance groups. Joint planningor goal-setting among these groups can furthercement resolve and mutual respect for the pa-rameters of authority and consultative power.

Should rifts between segments or factions ofthe faculty occur, local senate leaders mustseek to bridge these schisms whenever possible.Local senates should use flex week activitiesor presentations before the board trustees tohighlight collaborative inter- and intra-collegeefforts, to emphasize what is positive, encour-age future cooperation, and provide the mediawith positive examples. It is naïve to presumethat wounds will heal quickly or that grievanceswill be forgiven. Senate leaders, however, must

28

present a professional model of decorum andreconciliation to be emulated by others.

Local senates clearly, then, must developongoing strategies to promote the quality oftheir programs and the institution. Key facultyleaders must continuously cultivate trustingrelationships with legislative aides, with localofficials, with influential community leaders,with foundation members, with colleagues inthe K-12 and postsecondary communitiesandwith the press. Such efforts are of apparentbenefit in times of crisis; but they also build ourlocal reputations, or enable us to explain to thegeneral public our need for bond issues or pro-posed legislation. They provide us with forumsfor ongoing conversations about educationaland pedagogical matters often misunderstoodby those outside of the academy. Some districtsface a particularly daunting task in rebuild-ing a shattered reputation resulting from themalfeasance of trustees or college members.Rebuilding public trust in an institution cannotbe done alone by a public relations officer whoissues press releases; it will be accomplishedby the one-on-one assurances made by thosewith the most enduring concern for the institu-tionits faculty.

Finally, as members of the local senates, wemust clearly segregate acts of vengeance fromthose of vigilance. We must seek to prevent,after the crisis has passed, the same sort ofretaliatory actions we denounced under a previ-ous regime or on prior occasions. In takingaction, we need to make the case for the skep-tics within our institution and for the publicoutside of it; we must explain why the battleswere necessary to preserve the institution as awhole.

FOR LOCAL SENATE PRESIDENTS OR OFFICERS

For a senate presidentor any faculty leaderin time of crisis, we suggest these rather generaltruisms; however self-evident, they seem tobear repeating:

1. Take immediate stock of your own personaland professional resources. Admit yourweaknesses publicly to your own smallgroup of trusted comrades and solicit theaid of others who can do what you are notcomfortable doing; now is not the time toacquire and practice new skillsyou will betoo busy just managing what lies before you.

If others are more adept at massaging thepress contacts or interpreting the budgets, letthem do so. Share the burden and commu-nicate your gratitude to them in ways theyhear and feel.

2. Do not delay gratification. Give yourselfpermission to ignore the phone calls, todeclare your household off limits, to takea trip during which you are incommuni-cado. Listen to the experts: eat right andexercise regularly. It does matter and it willenable you to endure the steady accretionof worries and details, slights, wrongs, andother generally bad news to which you will(regrettably) fall heir.

3. Understand the truism that being privy tocertain kinds of information and having thecounsel of those in "high places" necessarilyisolates youfrom friends, from your fellowofficers, from the faculty at large. Regardlessof the assurances of others they stand behindyou, remember that they are, indeed, behindyou, and thus it is that leaders suffer theslings and arrows. Such isolation can be themost demanding of all your burdens.

4. Cultivate and nurture interdisciplinaryfriendships. Retain social connectionsbeyond the politics and continue to sharebooks, movies, jokes, parental woes, andlunches with those who may disagree withthe new political shift or who are inherentlyapolitical. While their retreat from the fraymay easily be misconstrued as a personalaffront, not all of your colleagues have thecourage to participate. Be grateful for andproud of those who muster the spirit; bepatient with those who do not and hold onto your previous acquaintanceships withthem. Ultimately, their friendships can helpyouand your institutionrepair the rends.

S. Continue to think long-range, beyondtoday's immediate crisis, beyond your termof office, beyond this president or that chan-cellor or board of trustees, or those policies.You will endure, your classroom teachingwill inspire, your students will matriculate,your friends will remain with you. Do thevery best you can do, intellectually andmorally, for the greatest number who maybenefit, and then, pass the torch.

2 "--)

LOCAL SENATES

SENATE ROSTRUM II

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

12 SENATE ROSTRUM

Vocational FacultyWhat'sHappening?

by Shaaron Vogel , Occupational Education Committee Chair

-74 he purpose of this article is tohighlight for occupational educationfaculty what is happening at thestate level around vocational'

education.

As you all know, this budget year has not beenvery good for California or community colleges.While we have not suffered as much as some, wehave still seen cuts in very important programs. Forexample, CalWORKs and matriculation funds havebeen cut. Many students rely on federal and statefunds to attend college, particularly vocationaleducation students. Without this funding, somestudents will not be able to complete or continuetheir education. The Academic Senate is monitor-ing current legislation and continues to fight tosave funding for all community college programs.The Senate is also very sensitive to the funding forvocational students.

Nursing is a particularly hot subject this upcom-ing year. AB 2314 was signed by the Governorand is now law This law would encouragecommunity colleges to standardize all nurs-ing program prerequisites statewide, encouragearticulation agreements between the communitycollege and CSU systems, and require implemen-tation of the recommendations of the IMPACproject by September 1, 2004. This has some seri-ous implications for community college nursingprograms. The inability of small colleges to offera full complement of prerequisites, for example,must be taken into account when addressing theissue of their standardization. Community collegenursing faculty and their chairs need to attend theIMPAC meetings in large numbers and raise theirvoices. Community college nursing programs arevery different from those at CSU and communitycolleges must ensure that their students' needsare addressed in IMPAC. You can find out moreinformation about the IMPAC Project and theupcoming meeting dates by visiting the IMPACWebsite at www.cal-impac.org. Please ensure thatyour college is represented at the regional andstatewide meetings.

In June 2002 a validation study on AssociateDegree Nursing Prerequisites was completed. Thiswas done by the Center for Student Success: A

Health Care Initiative Sponsored Project. TheChancellor's Office and the Academic Senatehave some concerns regarding the implications ofthis study. This study examined the student selec-tion measures that could be applied to improvethe successful completion of ADN students inCalifornia community colleges. The goals are toincrease successful program completion by reduc-ing attrition and dropout from ADN programsand yet maintain access. The study involved 20community college nursing programs and 5,000students over a five year time period. The findingsrevealed that four factors were best predictorsof student success in completing the nursingprogram: overall GPA, English GPA, core BiologyGPA, and core Biology repetitions (the fewer therepetitions the better). The issues that developfrom this study center around access and studentequity and opportunity. When the selection crite-ria involving higher GPA requirements and fewerrepetitions of core Biology courses were evalu-ated, it was found that the diversity of the studentpool was reduced. It was found, not surprisingly,that students admitted under these selection crite-ria had higher success rates. However, in today'snursing world we need more diversity, NOT less,so it would seem that tightening selection criteriais not an appropriate approach for communitycolleges. The study was very frank in stating thatit was successful in evaluating institutional factorsaffecting success but had great difficulty withsituational factors and dispositional characteristicsthat affect success. The study acknowledges thatfurther study needs to be done. The authors ofthe study and the Chancellor's Office agree thata multi-faceted approach needs to take place withthe following goals: 1) increase numbers of nurs-ing slots available in our programs; 2) increaseoutreach to recruit students into nursing; and 3)have counseling, advising, and other interventionstrategies in place to help students succeed. Con-tact the Academic Senate for a copy of the study.

The Academic Senate has an OccupationalEducation Committee comprised of six to sevenvocational faculty members. The committee plansbreakouts for the Academic Senate plenary ses-sions each fall and spring as well as for the twoOccupational Education Leadership conferences

offered each year. We urge you to watch yourmailboxes for more information regardingthese sessions and conferences. Additionally,as we begin to plan these events, please let usknow what you would like to see incorporatedin our planning. We want to know the hot oc-cupational issues. Please plan to participate. Weknow that the faculty development funds havebeen cut from most budgets; however, the Oc-cupational Education Leadership conferencescover your travel expenses, food and lodging.Your attendance is paid for, and the resourcesand breakouts are informative and offer anopportunity to network and connect with otheroccupational faculty.

The Academic Senate for California CommunityColleges is seeking occupational education facultyto participate on a number of statewide commit-tees. We want to hear your voices. As you mayknow, this last spring a vocational faculty memberwas elected to the At Large position on the Execu-tive Committee for the Academic Senate. However,one member cannot serve on the many committeesat the state level where the voice of occupationaleducation is needed. Please turn in a nominationto serve form (available on our website) if you areinterested in serving.

Local Senates

J

he Relations with Local SenatesCommittee serves as a resource tolocal senates by assisting with localconcerns related to strengthening

the ro e of academic senates. This articleprovides background on some of the work ofthe Committee.

The Committee continues the tradition of twomembers from each Senate area. This year'smembers are:

Area A: Mike Butler (Redwoods) and TeresaAldredge (Cosumnes River)Area B: Kate Motoyama (San Mateo) and Cris-tine Ducoing (Solano)Area C: Dorothy Williams (Antelope Valley) andGary Morgan (Oxnard)Area D: Terri Ann Linn Watson (Chaffey) andMary Lee Meiners (San Diego Miramar)

Last year the Academic Senate initiated a pro-gram of visits to local academic senates. Thesevisits were carried out by either a member ofthe Relations with Local Senates Committee orthe Executive Committee. The purpose of thevisits was to enhance the ability of the AcademicSenate to provide support and advice to localsenates by observing and gathering informationabout recent concerns and successes. The visitsprovided an ideal opportunity to share currentinformationand in some cases war stories. Thisyear the Local Senates Committee plans to con-tinue visits to colleges beginning with those that

by Ian Walton, Relations with Local Senates Chair

were not visited last year. If you are interestedin having a member attend your local senatesmeeting soon, please contact committee chairIan Walton at ian_walton@wvmccd.cc.ca.us toschedule a convenient time.

Over the summer the new Local Senates Hand-book was publishedthe result of much hardwork by last year's committee. The revisedHandbook is a great resource for your localsenate. Your local senate office should havereceived a paper copy but you can downloadyour very own copy from the Senate websiteat: http://www.academicsenate.cc.ca.us/LocalSenates/Hb.htm. You can also contact theSenate Office for additional copies.

One of the goals of this year's Committee is towork on a Voter Registration drive to realizethe promise of mobilizing students raised atthe Fall 2001 Plenary Session by Brian Mur-phy. Each local senate president was askedto designate coordinators for the drive. If nocoordinator was identified, the local senatepresident and vice president were designatedas the drive coordinators. Recently, materialshave been mailed to your local senate presi-dent and vice president as well as posted onour website. The Committee will also hold abreakout on Voter Registration at this year'sFall Session. Please join us and share your suc-cesses around registering our over 2.6 millionstudents. We are looking forward to seeing youall there.

3

LOCAL SENATES

SENATE ROSTRUM 13

ACCREDITATION

14

Leon E Marzillier

SENATE ROSTRUM

The Accountability GameStanford 9 in K-12, HMO's in Health Care, ...MSLOs in CC's

he increasing demand foraccountability, particularlyin tax-supported institutionsappears to be aimed primarily

at the community colleges. There isnothing intrinsically wrong with expectingaccountability, but, when an activity is heldup to scrutiny, we should ask ourselves: Whatkind of accountability is being called for? Whois demanding the accountability? Why are theydemanding it? And, are the methods used toscrutinize the activity valid?

In June 2002, the Accrediting Commissionfor Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC)passed radical new standards by which to ac-credit community colleges, incorporating theidea of "continuous improvement" of "mea-surable student learning outcomes" (MSLOs)throughout. The ACCJC passed these newstandards over the vociferous objections ofrespected faculty organizations. Nationally, theAmerican Association of University Professors(AAUP) has come out against modifying accredi-tation standards this way, and in California, theAcademic Senate for California CommunityColleges along with the Community CollegeCouncil of the California Federation of Teachers(CCC/CFT) have condemned this radical changeby ACCJC. Why?

The whole concept of MSLOs as the latestfad in education is somewhat akin to the nowdiscredited fad of the '90's, Total QualityManagement, or TQM. Essentially, the ACCJCadopted MSLOs as the overarching basis foraccrediting community colleges based on theirfaith in the theoretical treatises of a move-ment, just as advocates for the use of TQM ineducation (often called continuous quality im-provement or CQI in educational circles) werepart of an ideological movement. After repeatedrequests for research showing that such use ofMSLOs is effective, none has been forthcomingfrom the ACCJC. Prior to large scale imposi-tion of such a requirement at all institutions,

32

by Leon F. Marzillier, Area C Representative

research should be provided to establish thatcontinuous monitoring of MSLOs has resultedin measurable improvements in student successat a given institution. No such research is forth-coming because there is none. If the "learningparadigm" is so superior as to justify its wide-spread adoption, then the research shouldclearly be compelling.

The new standards would require documenta-tion and continuous improvement of learningoutcome measures at the course, program, andcertificate levels. This would require facultyand administration to measure outcomes thatcan be immediately documented, not long-termoutcomes such as successful application ofcoursework in students' careers.

Also, as student learning outcomes are measuresof knowledge or skills a student has attained asa result of a given college course or program,they do not include institutional measures suchas course retention, completion or gradua-tion. Community colleges in California alreadygather data on institutional outcomes, but thiswould require generation and tracking of awhole range of new measures.

Often, objections to MSLOs are met with, "But,you faculty will define what the outcomes to bemeasured are." This assumes that what facultycurrently measure, via exams and grades are notadequate, and that faculty should spend theirtime generating new and much more specificskill based measures. However, no evidence hasbeen presented establishing that the outcomesof our pedagogical efforts are not adequatelymeasured by our current approaches, or thatnew measures would lead to greater studentsuccess.

In addition, much that is most beneficial inhigher education is often difficult or impossibleto measurebut certainly is not measurable atthe course level. A business department mightfeel the most important outcome is that theirstudents use what they learn in the classroom

successfully in a career in the business world.But this is not a learning outcome that can bedocumented at the course or program level.

In the book, "A Beautiful Mind" about thegenius, John Nash, (upon which the movie ofthe same name is based), the early chapters,3,4,5,...describe how undergraduates learnedat Princeton. It is illuminating in how casuallymany of these students acquired knowledge,and certainly not in a measurable way, butlearning was effective, nevertheless. TigerWoods has said that, even though he droppedout of Stanford in his sophomore year, helearned skills important to him in his profes-sional golfing career, specifically in the areaof time management skills. How would onemeasure that outcome?

It is interesting that there is suddenly this pushto get "accountability" from the communitycolleges, the institutions that serve the mostdiverse and working class students, and not thesame push to get it from the elite institutions,even though many universities are, like mostcommunity colleges, dependent upon taxesfor their continued existence. The truth of thematter is that institutions like the Ivy Leagueschools and top universities are not beingthreatened with MSLOs.

Furthermore, the MSLO movement utilizesa scorecard approach, in which you assess inpercentage terms where your students are nowin terms of a defined learning outcome, andhow you would like to increase the percentagein 5 years, say. Then, you set as your goal thepercentage improvement you want to makeeach semester! This requirement, that there becontinuous improvement of learning out-comes, assumes that student achievement canbe increasingly rationalized like a productionprocess.

This push to document and improve studentlearning outcomes essentially creates pressureto focus one's course objectives on discrete,skill-based and hence most easily measuredvariables. Quantitative variables are more easilytracked than qualitative ones. This over timewill yield to a "dumbing down" of the curricu-lum, as broad capacities and more long-term,

qualitative changes in student behavior andperception will be relatively de-emphasized inthe push to measure.

How about faculty members in art decidingthat an outcome is that students have at least arudimentary appreciation of great art and howto recognize it? How does one measure that?How does one measure a sociology depart-ment's desired outcome that their studentshave a more tolerant attitude towards othercultures and ethnic groups? You can probablythink of more examples of the impossibility ofmeasuring outcomes of what we do. Even ifit were possible, is it realistic to expect a 2%(say) improvement per semester in any givenoutcome?

In the teaching and learning process, thereis a two-way interaction, and there has tobe cooperation and interest on both ends.Whether a student succeeds in a class is afunction of not one but many factors. Some ofthese are: the intellectual level of the student'shousehold, the quality of the preparation thestudent received in educational institutions at-tended before reaching ours, the priority thatthe student places on the class, the amount ofeffort a student is willing to apply outside ofclass, resistance to distractions from friends,family, and jobs. Many of these are beyondthe instructor's or college's control. Yes, wecan find new and better ways to present thematerial, and we can use tutors and workshopsto help motivate students and to help themsucceed, but those efforts alone might go fornaught for some students.

Perhaps what irritates us most about the AC-CJC's action, besides the fact that they choseto ignore the best advice of the practitionersin the field (the faculty), is that tying accredi-tation to MSLOs means that the faculty as awhole would have to spend precious time andeffort to engage in measuring everything thatmoves on the campus, diverting our energyand efforts from interacting with students.Will our colleges receive additional fundingfor these efforts? We seriously doubt it! So,we are being asked to engage in what virtuallyamounts to a huge unfunded mandate.

CONTINUED ON PAGE 16

3 3

ACCREDITATION

SENATE ROSTRUM 15

'UOCa ACADEMIC

Ulaa

OgiZinfiff

CALIFORNIA

@CIZETOUT COLLEGE:5

PyGettila 00aU

Publications

Simp on

@malf62242e

04g g ftifigg CD*

&lb Adam

A de IC Senate

cgkeftka65 taxDft

onaldson,

Design etz3

Elo lege

Layout

CA5 kUNPubbeations

Ccati9a.

cSAG,Awg0;coolk

Spec; list

ublieation

Oaliforma

College

Sena e

ftomm ity428 gil9Gge,

acra ento,

9.981

0

gt@ 6tgaiOAV alEANGC3 a".)

a OMANacademic

atic3 by

through

ena e presid nts

individual mailin

12 g esK9 emoiMaGd

effebgi geA0g9 oiaQfftGeo

grgg nava1 Gte

information

445-47513

as QC@IX

deadline

@leMOce we& eo 6e

aGf000twaho

V3o9e,av Wat effo9 609

togla3 c# aft

(*ftrevious

publication

Up* wwwaeademk-senate

Ago@,,glaV

Accountabiiltafa u(:0 (P;VVOVIA 41;

,g)tmcg

ocb*g eoidoilag de de Oandeadvoo-

avaloa oo(f awk5)43 06thw Unkkeed

ftlopigOopoo Ows, ad4 Onevoc,ail

Mame% Tz4loiMboX0 Tam akoa., crardoo

we% Rood -agtglimm av afiow

ealtwq akoo gootw0o0Oom w00--oomoo4A

&Dom° go) kn&I .h OSOCN Omolk ma' des,

Joam04..om e1 itcedg% fp[rtligek6MTM

cstllM vmmakom z0owtaU shon0A Mwawa& Cackttimatiaft giaMq7 aolacdagi

mmAttoodr woolhkg enp &mem@Rik& @Ada* gig at* ow& koqk Qhs ooi0 W* itai owk.4 Maiawftwooraa atm cx%Tokkt3ovo wsv

woocr 6,stx0

ikooMowe alfsmoTome oka aulikt4 k donak XC.0C twevoo4 Am.?? DIM sUllavAO011081a00EM4,1 dOT kwoo0q7 amakikm

anm am AT gomoomOvoam 6X0D WoVnt 1ott c6g-lg

cam ftcoxdakk ,o80(oniog ak vookkoWam

lazdl co) dam don akft OaTo0o7 cs,00grait,

ak M000. imoakVika. (s-voom kFousift an Had kmdkidual CrwookAy 000woo

qv mmoot Aram ointr poWldian 000DT &TO

c&finoN akw (r,mwodav moca &off% maw

ort a3R6VD6OW br ,4.glei,k7 wiwookaba,

mood allocok waom otcrms-on4 okaa* kig

drowooftdaefto Irk Raok4Dire *we *amst-gftkook Ep-Acoo+ottooakbom 8ogag maw-

*woo woodedomOog ak ooff MODk

bok aoweffodbakw (6M%tivoca mum Wooc

k4 aucadoomoocsON wco, roam ooff

(rago0a7 ok000ka ovhfimtemakrog8 gmwoo0q irii AO

Chikkocab Qtgautotim04, gdfi3s- mat

ffTgkmgffig AT g35)(10Tatms' COMMOD Calokalb

Aigt @BMW* atekl-g Crwoo4 Irk zomon,kavokm c.:Onof.tt oRo@, KW KT we kww

[kTTOO amhwe 600 kcal Eamaw sszooack. kmokmooma &a dor* JOJ 000*(n06tftw wt.6.10)orm cod watt> awake ak

tiovOwamatato Avg ooncs' sftoodar&

Ewm Atg Aora% likons awd 4:3

a41llowom mom ak kyttmOay,6 vilowoo ak

qv-v.140mo am% moo 11!jno0a7 ft al% cwwmttg

a 6a ak 5a% dame aftoo arik= gamo0c7 kov.

(00D ifOOk COAIOT.

Agnenagxt* ft how, Ma dm% Ow 30%401 OBOIWA,, CQ-kRiok* Wok .5%.0oTIM

rktc" catOdo qv Oook0 oft ,a_ogok000a,60e %kat

gkft k wag noow IJaWaokolvoo 600 mcook

whreov Oa au% k000 Acomfm, awoimvo

Ftmc1s0i!7 Ofto4wm aCgIT RiVMDAIDg Ogoov

allow @Itcsvoo gtm TatUkinkT Acw goo_lw

Watia..43.1A, MVO MO "CeDs) hot? MO

mooKkao tow covamoaft aco omk-ar000vsr wfka

Dog knee &k...4 aft %take ar kg,

ma co moo (weak% cado vooarg000rk

ACi REV AhVo B.TO Goa.-IWT gib OFTO

Vealth alieaftdan evmotamakvrck

Em00 oroadquocadk @bang 0Dm ,r,modp

alle4gekaom mamcmucemy collo

kw fie AT rapgpam wottdatekaa,Eat wmagaidan pougortcecb

go? Kt wavook an .1 povam&ung MG-M'S wake 7 a cik, oaD+ o ofttkift gowungl-y4ft 60Eiwg kNOD OOOT Ekv&ooidg wmao

k ebkas0. it amk% alQ kfttolyw000me Elba w-

aolOaaboo was-vocr,-c%, krodoodOgn wOkreuk

nod ming Kvpageck.' OG T6aDWaso

Lakirankt DEM gRaCe gOW 4§DATfolk ketOOT

WY% 01)4 kw lit how qk (amoutiwoo Elta dog)

RDWOOOEKkta 4 ATIZe .01VM MPalkot&

kewd b1t doe moknoks packez0

csAloOkAbagho a rics% *vas). RigkikwoN ofio&

Asake000k kmaT lta wwwititt /talk o ammo

Noe ak kodoelvonagaskow MIL04,70ow kallg000k kooew ft ovells6lig owka

kir% to MUD) aM aat C givg.

&kw owa of.1% admallw Eli! k Fowl*atat olAcep Oeoviewooanocao cI1 aikw akaIdoamwk Boo ak aggagaaa6woo st000lat&,

a wall g(0) g'SgSktiN AwftiM*tm an AT

neacso moglatiD6n, goacw ffamair aimata .

ktNN) mftww oft seam' Odm ccli! kw qv mfte

aftk olzalnkfilq7 COD4MMTEK s'ko) Ak0 ft)

cAtte lit, 406* woo km kaki akm pgo

math maim cactcJaaatatia' cmaTim tk=

talw doe 0 0%0M cog 0o*Pow gologgatma? 011

aot, jqwcgM ak wstokfi oka wsv 4(0) kora kw

ft) pOR aor edaDo Oak, nod cogoke To, MD

oo6gs) afitft d000kallotg3 (aussage too ek Pmackl.

ft":1

EFF-089 (3/2000)

U.S. Department of EducationOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

National Library of Education (NLE)Educational Resources information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

Reproduction Basis

ERIC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Release form(either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").