Statement of Report Preparation
The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges acted in January 2016 to reaffirm Las Positas College’s accreditation for eighteen months and to require a Follow-Up Report. The college has worked to resolve the identified deficiencies and meet the Standards noted in the Commission’s Recommendations 2, 3, 4, and 5 and District Recommendation 5 (IN1). This Follow-Up Report affirms that the college demonstrates academic quality, institutional effectiveness and sustainability.
The college has made an effort to establish regular college processes that address ACCJC Standards. In the spring of 2016, Las Positas College’s Accreditation Liaison Officer created an ongoing Accreditation Steering Committee with guidance from the Academic Senate and approval of the College Council. A standard governance committee document was developed; it includes the charge, responsibilities, membership and terms of service (IN2). Her goal was to build formal structure in order support sustainable institutional work to meet the Commission’s Standards. In previous years, the College Council was generally responsible for accreditation activity and developed Steering Committees in an ad-hoc manner.
The membership of the new Accreditation Steering Committee is as follows:
- Accreditation Liaison Officer (appointed by the President)
- Faculty Lead (recommended by the ALO / appointed by the Academic Senate)
- Director of Institutional Research
- A Faculty Member (appointed by the Academic Senate)
- Document / Archivist person.
The membership structure of the Accreditation Steering Committee allows for its expansion to support the various stages of the report-writing and Team Visit preparation needs of the accreditation cycle.
In response to the Recommendations made to the college and district, the first expanded Accreditation Steering Committee was formed and started meeting in spring 2016. Its members, approved by the Academic Senate and College Council, have institutional expertise in the areas to which the recommendations referred, including the co-coordinators of the Student Learning Outcomes Committee, a counselor involved with Distance Education support, and faculty who had previously worked on the Self-Evaluation Report.
Listed below are the members of the Accreditation Steering Committee and their roles:
Chart 1: Lead People involved in the preparation of the Follow-Up Report 2017
|Roanna Bennie||Vice President of Academic Services||Accreditation Liaison Officer||n/a||925-424-1103|
|Elena Cole||English Faculty||Faculty Lead Writer||0.2||925-424-1250|
|Ann Hight||Biology Faculty||Recommendation #2 and #3||0.1||925-424-1307|
|John Ruys||Psychology Faculty||Recommendation #2 and #3||0.1||925-424-1267|
|Joel Gagnon||Counseling Faculty||Recommendation #5||0.2||925-424-1439|
|Tina Inzerilla||Library Faculty||Recommendations for Improvement (#1, #6-#9)||0.07||925-424-1158|
|Rajinder Samra||Institutional Researcher||Recommendation #3||n/a||925-424-1027|
|Krista Johns||Vice Chancellor of Educational Services||District Recommendation #5||n/a||925-485-5244|
In addition to creating and supporting an expanded Accreditation Steering Committee, the college provided reassigned time for each of the Accreditation Steering Committee faculty members and the four faculty members who served as SLO Liaisons for the four academic divisions. These SLO Liaisons were tasked with supporting and facilitating dialogue about CSLO and PSLO assessment within each division and discipline (IN3, IN4, IN5, IN6, IN7, IN8).
The expanded Accreditation Steering Committee organized and propelled the college’s work to address and capture evidence of its progress. Throughout the preparation of this Report, each of the expanded Accreditation Steering Committee members was responsible for working with, and reporting to, college constituents as appropriate. In addition, the ALO provided regular updates on the progress of the tasks for the Follow-Up Report at the monthly Town Hall meetings, and reports were made at Division meetings in spring and fall 2016 (IN9, IN10).
The expanded Accreditation Steering Committee met, on average, twice a month, from August through November 2016, to provide updates on the college’s work to address the Recommendations and Standards. The meeting time was also used for editing and revising the Report. In addition to the expanded Accreditation Steering Committee meetings, individual committee members met with the Institutional Researcher, the ALO, or the Faculty Lead to discuss the collecting of evidence and assist in writing the Report. Finally, the ALO and the Faculty Lead met weekly from August through December. (IN11, IN12, IN13)
The Follow-Up Report was vetted in accordance with the college’s and district’s governance processes. The Accreditation Steering Committee set up a site on the LPC website that allowed the college community and others to read drafts of the Report and provide feedback. This feedback, reviewed by the Accreditation Steering Committee, guided revisions of the Follow-Up Report. (IN14 – need to provide Evidence) The Report was presented to and approved by the following bodies:
Chart 2: Accreditation Steering Committee review and approval dates for the ACCJC Follow-Up Report 2017
|Associated Students of Las Positas College (ASLPC)||November 4th||First review|
|Classified Senate||November 10th||First review|
|College Council||November 17th||First review|
|Associated Students of Las Positas College (ASLPC)||November 18th||For approval|
|Academic Senate||November 30th||First review|
|Classified Senate||December 8th||For approval|
|Due to President’s Office||December 9th||Preparation for Executive Staff|
|Executive Staff||December 13th||Review for submission to the Board|
|Academic Senate||December 14th||For approval|
|College Council||December 15th||For approval|
|Board of Trustees meeting||January 17th||First reading|
|Board of Trustees meeting||February 21st||Board approval|
|Steering Committee||February 22nd||Send to ACCJC|
|ACCJC||March 1st||Due date|
The preparation involved to write the Follow-Up Report drove innovative structural changes at the college. The new Accreditation Steering Committee and the SLO Liaisons, both supported by reassigned time, provided the structure needed to propel sustainable, quality work in addressing the Recommendations and the Standards. Communication about the work was facilitated by the Accreditation Committee members and the SLO Liaisons. The Accreditation Committee members and the SLO Liaisons provided regular reports to various college constituencies and actively sought feedback about the Report through a systematic review and approval process.
- IN.1 - Commission Actions Letter
- IN.2 - Minutes 4b - College Council - 4-28-16
- IN.3 - Minutes - SLO Liaison - SLO Committee item 11 - 9-12-16
- IN.4 - Other Document - SLO Liaison Report Template - 9-20-16
- IN.5 - Other Document - SLO Liaison Position - 9-12-16
- IN.6 - Report - SLO Liaison Report CATSS Division - Fall 2016
- IN.7 - Report - SLO Liaison Report BHAWKS Division - Fall 2016
- IN.8 - Report - SLO Liaison Report H&A Division - Fall 2016
- IN.9 - Agenda - Townhall - 9-17-16
- IN.10 - Agenda - Townhall - 10-5-16
- IN.11 - Agenda - Accreditation Steering Committee - 2-29-16
- IN.12 - Agenda - Accreditation Steering Committee - 12-9-16
- IN.13 - Agenda - Accreditation Steering Committee - 10-28-16
From fdenisco - 2016-11-18
I know that the intention was to keep the steering committee small, and then expand it when necessary as the accreditation cycle expands and contracts. I also know that we as a Classified Senate have been involved in approving the follow up report through this wiki and visits to senate meetings, and were involved in the Accreditation Self-Study. I would like to suggest that one classified professional, perhaps the president of the Classified Senate or designee, also sit on the accreditation steering committee as a Classified Lead for Accreditation. Thanks!