Showing posts with label ACCJC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACCJC. Show all posts

Wednesday, August 24, 2011

What the accrediting agency recommended to our colleges

     AS YOU KNOW, at each college, drafts of follow-up reports—to recently issued Accreditation recommendations—are being circulated. Obviously, in these reports, the colleges seek to satisfy the ACCJC (the accrediting body) that they have responded adequately to their recommendations.
     Both colleges have been given a "warning," so this is serious, accred-wise.
     Oddly, at least at Irvine Valley College, members of the college community seem to have been given only three days to provide feedback. (LDA sent out the draft on the 22nd of August. She wrote: "Please send all comments to myself and Dean Werle ... by Friday 8-25-11.")
     I offer the following as a reminder of the recommendations. Both Irvine Valley and Saddleback Colleges received six “district” recommendations. I list them below. (IVC also received a single college recommendation, listed at the end)*:
District Recommendation 1: The teams recommend that the chancellor develop and implement both a strategic short-term and long-term plan that is inclusive of the planning at the colleges and that this planning structure drive the allocation of district resources for the colleges, …ATEP, and the district….

District Recommendation 2: The teams recommend that the district and the colleges develop and implement a resource allocation model driven by planning that includes all district funds and is open, transparent, inclusive, and that is widely disseminated and reviewed/evaluated periodically for effectiveness….

District Recommendation 3: The teams recommend that the college, district administrators, faculty and staff develop a communications process among the entities on key issues of district-wide concern including academic calendar, planning, ATEP …, technology and building priorities….

District Recommendation 4: The teams recommend that the Board of Trustees widely communicate the results of its self evaluation process annually and use this as the basis for improvement….

District Recommendation 5: The teams recommend that the Board of Trustees develop a clearly defined policy for a code of ethics which must include dealing with violations of the Board‘s code of ethics….

District Recommendation 6: The teams recommend that the district provide a clear delineation of its functional responsibilities, the district level process for decision making and the role of the district in college planning and decision making. The district should perform a regular review of district committees, conduct an assessment of the overall effectiveness of services to the colleges and communicate the results of those reviews….
For Irvine Valley College, this recommendation was added:
College Recommendation 6: Although the college and its constituent groups have achieved a collegial working relationship with the current president to address issues with a new optimism, the college does not have this same type of relationship with the district leadership and the Board of Trustees. While some progress has been made and policies have been developed, the team feels that Recommendations 7 and 8 … of the 2004 visiting team Accreditation Team have not been fully met.
Babs
2004 IVC Evaluation Report Recommendations  7 & 8:
7. [DEFINING ROLES] Consistent with the recommendations of the 1998 team, the 2004 team recommends that the Board of Trustees, District leadership and College leadership define, publish, adhere to, regularly evaluate, and continuously improve the respective leadership roles and scopes of authority of college and district constituent groups and governance committees in meaningful, collegial decision-making processes….

8. [REDUCE HOSTILITY & DESPAIR] Consistent with the recommendations of the 1998 team, the 2004 team recommends that the Board of Trustees, chancellor, presidents, administrators, managers, faculty senates and unions, classified senates and unions, and students come together and take measures to reduce the hostility, cynicism, despair, and fear that continue to plague the college….
• See IVC’s Accreditation documents here.

• See Saddleback College’s Accreditation documents here.

*Source: recently distributed draft of IVC follow-up report

Monday, August 4, 2008

Indications of a willingness to kick academic butt

Recently, I attended a meeting in which faculty and others discussed Saddleback College’s accreditation difficulty. The Accreds had sent the college a letter in February essentially requiring the college to “address” long-standing recommendations (in a report due Oct. 15)—or else.

Clearly, one reason the Accreds’ latest threat has not inspired much reaction in some is the conviction that the Accreds are all bark and no bite. Given their history, that view is understandable. The SOCCCD’s two colleges have been dinged for trustee micromanagement and a “plague of despair” for years. (Hell, they were carping about that ten years ago!) We’re still living under such dingage. And we’re still accredited.

But things change. At the meeting, I explained the special circumstances that we are now in: some time ago, the Dept. of Education spanked the Accrediting agency (ACCJC/WASC) hard for failing to enforce its own rules—for being namby-pamby. Prima facie, this gives the Accreds a motive to finally kick some academic butt.

It’s a bit more complex than that—we’ve reported on the details here on this blog for quite some time—but, essentially, we’d be taking a hell of a chance ignoring or discounting the Accred’s threat to pull the colleges' tickets. (Both of our colleges got such letters.)

Well now hear this. Our old pal Jeff Gottlieb over at the Times is reporting on some Accred butt-kickage in LA (Los Angeles Southwest College is put on probation).

According to Jeff, “Los Angeles Southwest College has been placed on probation by the regional accrediting agency, an action local college officials call unwarranted.”

Here’s the kicker. The president of Southwest asserts that “It's completely unprecedented to put a college on probation where there was no previous indication the college was in trouble….”

He notes, reports Jeff, that “probation was primarily given to colleges that failed to respond to accreditors' recommendations from previous visits.” That’s not Southwest’s situation.

So, here’s evidence that things have changed in Accredville re butt-kickage. Take note.

Tuesday, January 26, 1999

1999: "Malfunction and misfortune": Accrediting Team Strongly Rebukes SOCCCD Leadership


Accrediting Team Strongly Rebukes Leadership at College District


By ROBERT OURLIAN - LA Times

JAN. 26, 1999

     Citing a “sad, sad state of affairs” at South Orange County Community College District, a national accrediting panel is demanding top-to-bottom reforms—especially within the board of trustees—before renewing accreditation for the district’s two colleges.
     In a pair of scathing reports, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges denounced the way Irvine Valley College and Saddleback College have been governed for the last two years.
     Bluntly rebuking trustees, the reports demanded that the board immediately begin stepping back from day-to-day operations.
     “Some members of the board of trustees do not understand the extent of the climate crisis in their colleges,” the team wrote.
     “Furthermore, they do not accept responsibility for their role in contributing to the situation. . . . Some trustees are in a state of denial in that they said they would not do anything differently if they had it to do all over again.”
     The reports stated that “Irvine Valley College and its district . . . are organizations in crisis—primarily a governance crisis. . . . A multiplicity of deep and bitter divisions characterize virtually all entities and relationships. . . . The district had become wracked by malfunction and misfortune.”
     Both campuses remain accredited for the moment, but district officials had hoped for reaffirmed accreditation, though with some conditions.
     The reports released Monday were “less than we wanted,” said Cedric A. Sampson, the district’s new chancellor, who took over last year and has the daunting task of dealing with the problems.
     Formal notification about actual accreditation status and terms for winning reaffirmation are expected any day, he said.
     College trustee David Lang said at Monday night’s board meeting, “I hope we will accept their input in a renewed spirit of cooperation and commitment.”
     He proposed that the seven trustees immediately begin putting some of the accreditation panel’s recommendations into effect. 
     Specifically, Lang said, he hoped the board would relinquish control over executive hiring, delegate non-policy district matters to the chancellor and rededicate itself to “shared governance” with the two campuses’ faculty, staff and students.
     But trustee Steven J. Frogue took a less conciliatory tone.
     “I’m always led back to the question, ‘Who evaluates the evaluators?’ ” he said.
     The accreditation team’s reports said that trustees have taken actions that violated their own policies and procedures. It said also that some trustees may be in a “state of denial” regarding their responsibility for problems at the two colleges.
     “Although . . . these trustees think they are doing what is best for the colleges, they have failed to evaluate their performance and accurately assess the consequences of their behavior,” said the report on Saddleback College. “Our assessment is there is a need for immediate, extensive intervention and change.”
     The reports cite contention at all levels, including faculty groups vs. the faculty union and one college against another.
     But they focus more on the bloc of four—Board President Dorothy Fortune, former President John S. Williams, Frogue and former trustee Teddi Lorch—that has dominated the campuses for the past two years.
     That “high-profile, often controversial group of trustees felt obliged to involve itself actively in the day-to-day operations of the district and of the colleges far beyond the traditional roles for trustees,” the Irvine Valley report stated.
     The result was the development of two factions on the board—the one led by Fortune and Williams and another that unsuccessfully tried to block what it called “micromanaging.”
     The reports noted that Raghu Mathur was chosen president of Irvine Valley in 1997 on a 4-3 board vote after a stormy selection process run completely by the trustees. The accrediting team found the effects of split votes on that and on other issues to be unacceptable.
     “The board itself interviewed all 19 presidential applicants!” the team wrote.
     “This policy brings the board totally out of compliance” with standards, it said.
     While the team members did not question Mathur’s qualifications to be president, they wrote that the controversy over his appointment could threaten the college’s ability to comply with accreditation requirements.
     The reports also criticized a controversial 1997 administrative overhaul on both campuses.
     The commission is expected to give the district until June to show how it will comply with detailed recommendations—or face serious consequences for its accreditation status.
     Colleges need accreditation so students can transfer credits to other schools and to attract federal grants and foundation support.
     The release of the reports came a week after Orange County Superior Court Judge Tully H. Seymour slammed the trustees in a court ruling for “persistent and defiant misconduct” in disobeying the state’s Ralph M. Brown Act, which governs open meetings. The ruling was in response to a lawsuit against trustees filed by a faculty member at Irvine Valley.
     The presidents of the two colleges on Monday noted that the accrediting teams found the educational structures—classes, programs and facilities—to be in good shape.
     “They did talk about our excellent programs, which is gratifying,” said Dixie Bullock, president of Saddleback College.
     Mathur, of Irvine Valley, said the reports underscore the need for the campuses to pull together.
     “We have to focus on things that unite us, and that is: we are here to serve the students.”

SEE ALSO:


Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...