Dealing with grants that involve curriculum development

1. Dealing with grants that involve curriculum development David Morse – Long Beach City College Craig Rutan – Santiago Canyon College Melynie Schiel – Copper Mountain College

2. Responding to Industry Needs 09.10 • Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges support the identification of ways to appropriately respond to the curricular needs of business and industry in a timely manner, including the identification of mechanisms to expedite local curricular processes and the use of not-for-credit contract education as a means of immediately implementing curriculum delivery; and • Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges explore current practices, identify barriers, and promote effective practices in responding to the curricular needs of business and industry and present this information by the Fall 2012 Session.

3. Current Budget Climate • General fund pool reduced and shrinking. • Not likely to improve any time soon • Services to students threatened. • We do need to look for additional funding opportunities. • Used as an excuse for pushing grant funded programs through. • Don’t want reality to become a justification for ignoring process.

4. Senate Purview – Title 5 • Grants are not specifically mentioned in the senate’s purview, but many things that are tied to grants are • Curriculum • Standards and policies regarding student success • Educational program development • Policies for professional development • Processes for program review (part of monitoring of grants after they are received) • Processes for institutional planning and budget development

5. Criteria for community services offerings • Title 5 does not require that community services offerings be recommended by the curriculum committee as it does with other courses. • Title 5 § 55002 does state that community service offerings must be “conducted in accordance with a predetermined strategy or plan,” and planning processes are under the 10 + 1. • Title 5 § 55002 also states that community service offerings must be approved by the governing board, and thus academic senates must have a chance to speak about them before they are approved.

6. Accreditation Standards extend faculty purview… Standard II.A.2 “The institution assures the quality and improvement of all instructional courses and programs offered in the name of the institution, including collegiate, developmental, and pre-collegiate courses and programs, continuing and community education, study abroad, short-term training courses and programs, programs for international students, and contract or other special programs, regardless of type of credit awarded, delivery mode, or location.”1, 2

7. Many types of grants • Some of the available grants • Federal Grants like Title III, Title V, Nation Science Foundation (NSF) • STEM Grants like MESA • CTE Grants like Perkins (VTEA) • Partnership grants with four year universities that could provide mentorship, counseling, tutoring, research opportunities, etc • Grants provided by individual companies like the annual HP Technology for Teaching Grant • And many, many more

8. Who is watching the grants? • Who is keeping an eye out for grants at your college? Are they located at your college or your district office? • As a faculty member are you hearing about all of the grant opportunities that are out there? • Do you know where your college keeps information on grants that you have applied for is kept? • Who is monitoring the grants that your college has received?

9. A good grant process is key • Do you have a designated grant proposal/acceptance process? • Model or problematic? • What is the communication loop? • Is your institution poised to react to grant requirements once it is approved. • Is it acceptable to all parties? • What can be done to correct problems? • Training? • Knowledge sharing by joining a listserv? • Resolution? • Proactive approach?

10. How can we make the process more acceptable? • Strive to establish shared core values and a vision with the administration regarding categorical money • Let administration know that/which faculty are in favor of seeking out grant opportunities. • Be active with local industry (for CTE). • Have an idea of where grant money could really make a difference. Seek out related grants. • Continuously cultivate a common understanding regarding faculty purview in curriculum development.

11. What is the bigger picture? • Our districts need money. • Grants have specific outcomes. • Outcomes don’t always relate to entity's strategic plan. • Timelines are often compressed. • Faculty often feel backed into a corner when a promise has been made to a funding agency when curriculum hasn’t been approved or even initiated.

12. Nuts and bolts • Conceptual “blessing” by curriculum or senate? • Governance opportunities? • What is the communication loop? • Is your institution poised to react to grant requirements once it is approved. • Know the roles. • Emerging themes. • CTE regional approach • Voluntary Standardization • Programs under scrutiny • Course, program, and institutional assessment requirements • The truth…

13. Contacts: • David Morse: dmorse@lbcc.edu • Craig Rutan: Rutan_Craig@sccollege.edu • MelynieSchiel: mschiel@cmccd.edu