1 / 18

Accreditation 2012-2013

Accreditation 2012-2013. Proficiency level for Student Learning Outcomes - March 15, 2013 ACCJC College Status Report on Student Learning Outcomes Implementation Respond to the 4 Accreditation Recommendations- File a report by March 15, 2013. Commission Recommendation 2.

adonai
Download Presentation

Accreditation 2012-2013

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Accreditation 2012-2013 Proficiency level for Student Learning Outcomes - March 15, 2013 • ACCJC College Status Report on Student Learning Outcomes Implementation • Respond to the 4 Accreditation Recommendations- • File a report by March 15, 2013

  2. Commission Recommendation 2 In accordance with Standard III.D.2.a, c, and g and Eligibility Requirement #18, the District needs to resolve outstanding audit findings identified in the Department of Education letter dated May 20, 2011 referring to Audit Control Number (CAN) 09-2009-10795. That letter identifies the findings for each of the four colleges as those findings relate to Department of Education areas of funded programs including Title IV and Financial Aid. Additionally, the District should resolve all audit findings in the Vavrineck, Trine, Day, & Co. LLP, Certified Public Accountants’ audit reports for years 2008, 2009, and future audit reports issued after the date of this recommendation. Although the District has resolved a significant number of the audit findings from prior audits, a number of audit findings remain unresolved. The remaining audit findings need to be resolvedby March 15, 2013.

  3. Commission Recommendation 3 While evidence identifies progress, the District has not achieved compliance with Standard III.D and Eligibility Requirement #17. Specifically, the District has not achieved a long-term fiscal stability related to resolution of collective bargaining agreements on compensation and post-retirement benefits. Therefore, in order to meet the Standards and the Eligibility Requirements, the District must assess its fiscal capacity and stability and implement actions to resolve the deficiencies. The District has secured modifications to the collective bargaining contracts resulting in a soft cap on retiree benefits. The District must demonstrate its ability to maintain its fiscal stability over the long term (beyond three years) and assess the impact of the new revenue achieved through the passage of the parcel tax.

  4. Commission Recommendation 4 While evidence identifies progress, the District has not achieved compliance with Standard IV.B and Eligibility Requirement #3. Specifically, the District has not completed the evaluation of Board policies to the end of maintaining policies that are appropriate to policy governance and excluding policies that inappropriately reflect administrative operations. Therefore, in order to meet Standards and Eligibility Requirements, the District must evaluate all Board policies and implement actions to resolve deficiencies. The District has revised a significant number of its Board Policies. This project needs to be completed so that all policies are reviewed and revised as necessary by March 15, 2013. CCLC Policies and Procedures Chapters Chapter 1: The District Chapter 2: Board of Trustees Chapter 3: General Institution Chapter 4: Academic Affairs Chapter 5: Student Services Chapter 6: Business and Fiscal Affairs Chapter 7: Human Resource

  5. Commission Recommendation 5 While evidence identifies progress, the District/Colleges have not achieved compliance with Standard III.D and Eligibility Requirements #5 and #17. Specifically the District/Colleges do not demonstrate the fiscal capacity to adequately support quality student learning programs and services. Therefore, in order to meet Standards and Eligibility Requirements, the District/Colleges must evaluate the impact of financial decisions on the educational quality and implement actions to resolve any deficiencies. In reviewing the reports, the Commission noted that the four colleges have not fully evaluated the impact of recent District financial decisions on the colleges’ ability to sustain educational programs and services. The District and Colleges reports did describe the principles and practices around fiscal decisions at the District and the colleges; yet, it was unclear to the Commission what specific impact the reductions or changes had and what the future impact of those reductions and changes would be at each college. The colleges’ responses in the upcoming Follow-Up Reports should include an analysis of staff sufficiency and the quality of educational programs and services before and after budget reductions with sufficient detail and evidence to evaluate the impact of these reductions on the overall educational quality of the colleges. The colleges should describe how they intend to deal with any resulting negative impact.

  6. Commission Recommendation 5 In reviewing the reports, the Commission noted that the four colleges have not (1) fully evaluated the impact of recent District financial decisions on the colleges’ ability to sustain educational programs and services. The District and Colleges reports did describe the principles and practices around fiscal decisions at the District and the colleges; yet, it was unclear to the Commission (2) Provide Clarity on what specific impact the reductions or changes had and (3) what the future impact of those reductions and changes would be at each college. The colleges’ responses in the upcoming Follow-Up Reports should (4) include an analysis of staff sufficiency and the quality of educational programs and services before and after budget reductionswith (5) sufficient detail and evidence to evaluate the impact of these reductions on the overall educational quality of the colleges.The colleges should (6) describe how they intend to deal with any resulting negative impact.

  7. We will need to use Data to tell the Story • The college responses will need to provide data to show the budget reductions have not prevented us from providing quality educational programs and services. • By analyzing data, and showing we have improved student success, we will be able to show evidence that while we have reduced resources, we have effective institutions.

  8. Samples of Evidence • A few samples of the data we can show to tell our story might include examples like the following:

  9. Cohort Trends Summary: ALAMEDA In analyzing the data, Alameda is up in Basic Skills successful course completion even in this time of reduced resources

  10. Cohort Trends Summary: LANEY Laney College showed improvement in the number of degree, certificates and transfers, even during this time of reduced resources

  11. Fall to Fall Persistence Rates Fall First-Time College Students 39% of the new-to-college cohort of Fall 2010 returned for Fall 2011. This is a slight improvement from the 38% rate of the Fall 2009 cohort.

  12. Number of Awards by Type Below is a display the trends in the number of awards granted by Peralta colleges and the number of transfers to the University of California and the California State University systems. For the district, the number of Associate of Arts and Associate of Science degrees earned has been very constant over the past seven years at about 1,200 per year. There has been an increase from 1,142 to 1,242 over the past two years.

  13. Completion Rate Improvement Analysis This analysis suggests that there is a way to dramatically improve college completion rate. The colleges are involved in a good deal of collaboration regarding early entry into a program of study.

  14. Conclusions from the above data tables: • High in African American student transfers to UC and CSU. • Peralta Colleges above or close to average when compared to peers in ARCC performance indicators. • Strong in degree/certificate/transfer. • Many challenges not Peralta-specific but system-wide

  15. Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment • Continue to look at the data and the results of closing the loop for our Student learning outcomes and assessment that will ensure we meet the proficiency level. • Student leaning outcomes and authentic assessments are in place for courses programs support services certificates and degrees’ • There is widespread institutional dialogue about the results of assessment and identification of gaps • Decision making includes dialogue on the results of assessment and is purposefully directed toward aligning institution wide practices to support/improve student learning

  16. Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment • Appropriate resources continue to be allocated and fine tuned • Comprehensive assessment reports exist and are completed and updated on a regular basis • Course student learning outcomes are aligned with degree student learning outcomes • Students demonstrate awareness of goals and purposes of courses and programs in which they are enrolled (cont’d.)

  17. QUESTIONS?

More Related