1. Accreditation Self-Study Progress Update Presentation to the SCCCD Board of Trustees Madera Center October 5, 2010 Tony Cantu, Fresno City College Marilyn Behringer, Reedley College Deborah Ikeda, North Centers

2. Purpose of Accreditation To provide assurance to the public that education provided by institutions meets acceptable levels of quality To promote continuous institutional improvement To raise the quality of higher educational institutions in the region/nation

3. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) Standards Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services Standard III: Resources Standard IV: Leadership and Governance

4. Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness A.Mission- The institution defines its: Purpose Intended population Commitment to student learning

5. Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness- The institution provides evidence it: Collects and uses student achievement and student learning outcomes data in the program review, planning, and resource allocation processes Conducts program review and other ongoing, systematic evaluation Uses a systematic cycle of assessment, planning, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation to improve educational effectiveness and institutional quality

6. Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services A.Instructional Programs- The institution: Offers high quality instructional programs wherever and however they are offered Identifies student learning outcomes and evaluates how well students are learning Assesses student achievement Assesses programs systematically Uses assessment data as the basis for improvement of all programs including distance education and off-campus programs

7. Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services B. Student Support Services- The institution: Researches and identifies the support needs of its students Provides appropriate, comprehensive student support services regardless of location or delivery method Provides precise and accurate information about the institution to students and the public

8. Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services B. Student Support Services- The institution: Assesses the quality of those services by evaluating student achievement and student learning outcomes as appropriate Uses the results of evaluation as the basis for improvement to student support services

9. Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services C. Library and Learning Support Services- The institution: Offers sufficient services to support student learning and the quality of its instructional programs Includes library, tutoring, technology, and other learning support services Trains students and staff to use these services Assesses services systematically using Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) as appropriate Uses assessment data as the basis for improvement of services

10. Standard III: Resources A. Human Resources- The institution: Employs qualified personnel Evaluates all personnel on a regular basis Ensures professional development of personnel Assesses its performance in employment equity and diversity Uses human resources to support student learning Integrates human resource planning with institutional planning (driven by educational planning)

11. Standard III: Resources B. Physical Resources- The institution: Provides safe and sufficient facilities and equipment Evaluates the quality of its physical resources on a regular basis Ensures physical resources support student learning Integrates physical resource planning with institutional planning (driven by educational planning)

12. Standard III: Resources C. Technology Resources- The institution: Ensures its technology supports facilities, research, and college-wide communication Provides training to students and personnel in the use of technology Ensures that technology supports student learning programs and services Integrates technology planning with institutional planning (driven by educational planning)

13. Standard III: Resources D. Financial Resources- The institution: Assures fiscal stability and integrity Plans for short-term and long-term financial needs Assures that financial resources are sufficient to support student learning programs and services and to improve institutional effectiveness Integrated financial planning with institutional planning (driven by educational planning)

14. Standard IV: Leadership and Governance A. Decision-Making Roles and Processes- The institution: Uses ethical and effective leadership that enables it to identify values, set and achieve goals, learn, and improve Provides for staff, faculty, administrator, and student involvement in governance Establishes and evaluates the effectiveness of governance structures and processes Assures that governance supports student learning and improves institutional effectiveness

15. Standard IV: Leadership and Governance B. Board and Administrative Organization- The institution: Has an independent governing board that sets policy, assures quality and integrity of student learning programs and services and financial stability Has a chief administrator who provides leadership for institutional quality and improvement Has clearly defined and effective lines of authority and responsibility between colleges and the district/system in a multi-college system (functional map) Ensures that board and administrative organization supports student learning and improves institutional effectiveness

16. Accreditation Timeline for All Campuses Informed campus community of next site visit, began preparation for the self study, attended the ACCJC self study workshop on September 24th at Merced College, steering committee begins meeting and approves operating agreement, reviewed all documents related to the 2005 self study August - October 2009 Subcommittees for each standard formedJanuary 2010 Data Collection - Survey faculty/staff/students GAP Analysis and Review April-May 2010 1 st draft submitted to campus constituency for reviewOctober 2010 Campus Forums/WorkshopsOngoing 2 nd draft submitted to campus constituency for reviewJanuary 2011 Begin validation, finalization and constituency approvalFebruary-March 2011 Self-study completed and sent to ChancellorMay 2011 Submit for Board ReviewJune 2011 Board of Trustees approvalJuly 2011 Pre-team site visitAugust 2011 Report submitted to visiting team and commissionAugust 2011 Team visitOctober 2011 Commission MeetsJanuary 2012 College Notified of Commission ActionFebruary 2012

17. Fresno City College Progress The college began working on the accreditation self study process in fall 2009. The Accreditation Steering Committee meets every other week to review progress. Standard sub-committees have been meeting on a regular basis and have submitted the first draft, which is under review by campus constituencies. Sub-committees continue to gather and catalog supporting evidence.

18. Fresno City College Progress The format for mapping course Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) to program and institutional outcomes has been identified. Forums are planned to solicit input from the campus in response to draft of the self- study report. A second draft will be completed before the end of the semester for campus review and input in January 2011.

19. Reedley College Progress Chairs for the committee and for each standard were selected in Fall 2009. Teams for each standard were selected and began working in Fall 2009. First draft completed August 2010. Teams are working to complete gap analysis and update forms. Teams are gathering evidence. Help session are being held for each subsection.

20. Reedley College Progress Discussing, presenting progress Town Halls Newsletters SLO Faculty Summits to discuss and develop strategies Board of Trustees meetings Second draft due November 2010. Spring Duty Day – Review of Drafts. Full draft due December 10, 2010. RC/NC joint Accreditation Steering Committees Meetings.

21. Willow International Progress towards Candidacy Chairs and committee members selected and recruited Spring 2010. First draft was completed by May 2010. First Draft was reviewed during the summer. Fall Duty Day was spent working on Program Level and Institutional Outcomes and the ACCJC expectations for Planning, Program Review, and SLOs.

22. Monthly Accreditation Updates in Newsletter. SLO Summits for NC and RC. Twice a month Steering Committee Meetings. Second Draft due November 2010. Full Draft due Dec. 10, 2010. Spring Duty Day – Review of Self-Study Drafts. Willow International Progress towards Candidacy