Introduction - East Los Angeles College

east los angeles college
Accreditation Self Study 2009
Start at ELAC…
Go Anywhere!
Accreditation Self Study 2008.indd 1
12/8/08 9:16:42 AM

Institutional Self Study 2009 in Support of
Reaffirmation of Accreditation
Submitted by
East Los Angeles College
1301 Avenida Cesar Chavez
Monterey Park, California 91754
January 2009
Submitted to
Accrediting Commission for
Community and Junior Colleges of the
Western Association of Schools and Colleges
Start at ELAC…
Go Anywhere!
Accreditation Self Study 2008.indd 2
12/8/08 9:16:47 AM

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
College History ................................................................................................................... 1
College and Community Profile ......................................................................................... 3
Organizational Structure ..................................................................................................... 9
Organization of the Self Study .......................................................................................... 18
CERTIFICATION OF ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS ................................................... 23
RESPONSES TO 2003 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 29
ABSTRACT OF THE SELF STUDY ................................................................................... 41
STANDARD I INSTITUTIONAL MISSION AND EFFECTIVENESS
Mission ............................................................................................................................ 45
Improving Institutional Effectiveness ............................................................................. 49
STANDARD II STUDENT LEARNING PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
Instructional Programs ................................................................................................... 59
Student Support Services .............................................................................................. 107
Library and Learning Support Services ........................................................................ 148
STANDARD III RESOURCES
Human Resources ......................................................................................................... 177
Physical Resources ....................................................................................................... 195
Technology Resources ................................................................................................. 199
Financial Resources ...................................................................................................... 214
STANDARD IV LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE
Decision-Making Roles and Processes ......................................................................... 227
Board and Administrative Organization ....................................................................... 240
PLANNING AGENDA SUMMARY.................................................................................. 263

introduction
meet elac people
Wendy Vargas
Computer Applications &
Office Technologies
“
If I could change the past, I would have
started ELAC as soon as I graduated
from high school. I felt I had to get a job
as quickly as possible to help my family.
I have learned how important education
is. The academic courses were tough for
me, but I used all the special help the
college provides. The library, writing
center and math lab helped me get
through the academic classes. I liked the
CAOT computer lab so much that I
”
was able to get a job tutoring there.
Start at ELAC…
Go Anywhere!
Accreditation Self Study 2008.indd 3
12/8/08 9:16:48 AM

INTRODUCTION
College History
East Los Angeles Junior College was established in June 1945 by the Los Angeles City
Board of Education. The college opened its doors for the fall 1945 semester in September in
a wing of Garfield High School boasting 19 faculty members and 380 students, most of
whom were World War II veterans.
The college quickly outgrew the borrowed high school facilities. In 1947, the Board of
Education was able to purchase 82 acres of agricultural land thanks to funding from a bond
issue. Two years later in January 1949, classes began at its present location in wooden
bungalows moved to the campus from the Santa Ana Army Base. More than nineteen
hundred students enrolled that year.
An evening program begun in 1947 was expanded and offered at many locations. By 1954,
the popular program offered classes at 25 different locations. The Civic Center program
alone enrolled 1,927 students that year.
In 1948 a name change was proposed. Angeles Bella Vista College, Ramona Hills College
and Hillview College were considered. The following year “Junior” was dropped and the
name East Los Angeles College (ELAC) was firmly established.
Permanent buildings were constructed to accommodate growing enrollment. In 1951 the
stadium and auditorium were built. More classrooms, an administration building, library,
planetarium, men’s and women’s gyms, a swim stadium, theatre, and art gallery followed.
Today ELAC boasts the Vincent Price Art Museum, which houses the largest and most
valuable art collection in a two-year college thanks to donations and support from actor
Vincent Price.
During the 1960s and 1970s, buildings to house the nursing program, a new library, and later
the automobile technology center were added to the campus. Many of the original bungalows
were still used as classrooms until 2007 when they were finally demolished to make way for
new campus structures.
In 1969 the California State Legislature clearly defined higher education in the state and
separated the (then) eight community colleges of the Los Angeles Unified School District
and formed the Los Angeles Community College District. A seven-member Board of
Trustees was elected to govern the new district. The ELAC service area was defined to
include the communities of Alhambra, Bell, Bell Gardens, City of Commerce, Cudahy, East
Introduction Page 1

Los Angeles, Huntington Park, Los Angeles, Maywood, Montebello, Monterey Park,
Rosemead, San Gabriel, South San Gabriel, South Gate and Vernon.
In 1972 the City of Monterey Park annexed the college and surrounding neighborhood,
officially changing the main campus address. ELAC began growing, adding faculty
members, programs and classes as demand for higher education increased.
ELAC hosted swimming and field hockey events during the 1984 Olympics, welcoming
thousands of spectators to campus and increasing the international visibility of the college.
Despite funding challenges that limited growth during the 1980s, ELAC continued to offer a
variety of vocational and transfer programs.
During the 1990s ELAC experienced unprecedented changes. Enrollment grew from 13,000
to approximately 30,000 students and the number of permanent faculty almost doubled.
Outreach programs were located throughout the service area for the convenience of students
who could not easily travel to the main campus. The full-service South Gate Educational
Center was established in the southern part of the service area so students could complete a
transfer program and several career programs without attending the main campus. In 2007, a
third site was opened in Rosemead to serve students in the northeastern portion of ELAC’s
service area.
Growth during the first decade of the 21 st century was not limited to increasing enrollment.
An emphasis on student-centered education and providing support that engendered student
success increased ELAC’s graduation numbers. Since 2000, East Los Angeles College has
graduated the highest number of Latinos in California and has consistently been listed as one
of the top 100 colleges nationally for exceptional graduation rates by Community College
Week, a trade paper reporting on community colleges in the United States.
Two bond issues, Propositions A and AA, initiated by the LACCD were approved by voters
at the beginning of 2000. Funding of over $281,000 allowed ELAC to begin the most
ambitious building program in its history to substantially improve the college’s
infrastructure. A state-of-the-art technology building, started with state funds, opened in fall
2004 showcasing the first of many buildings and improvements that are planned or under
construction.
By 2008, completed projects include a renovation of the Helen Miller Bailey Library, a
refurbished stadium, a new baseball diamond and facility, and numerous upgrades to existing
buildings and grounds. Many other projects are underway. The front of campus is undergoing
total renovation. A parking structure that will provide more than 1,800 spaces is scheduled to
Introduction Page 2

open spring 2009 followed by a remodeled Student Center, main entrance plaza, the Library,
and Administration Building the following year.
The three-building Visual and Performing Arts Complex was begun in fall 2008. Located at
the east side of the campus, the complex will house the Vincent Price Art Museum as well as
theatres, labs, classrooms and studios for art, music, dance and theatre programs. Completion
is scheduled for 2010.
In November 2008, the voters passed a third bond, Bond J, for additional construction. Plans
for a Math and Science Building, gardens, plazas, and additional classrooms are moving
toward approval and construction. Building is scheduled to continue for the next decade.
When completed, East Los Angeles College will be positioned to provide the education and
services our students and community so richly deserve.
College and Community Profile
East Los Angeles College is a large community college with over 58,000 enrollment each
semester. Our academic, career technical, noncredit, and In-service Training Academies
serve more than 30,000 students representing 22,250 full-time equivalent students. The
communities served by ELAC include those immediately surrounding the college’s main
campus in Monterey Park and surrounding its Rosemead and South Gate Educational
Centers. The college’s service area has a population of over 1.5 million people and is
expected to grow at a rate faster that the District, County, State, and the United States. In
addition, current population estimates report that over 40 percent of the ELAC population is
under the age of 25. The combined growth and age data support a robust population in need
of academic and career technical services.
East Los Angeles College
(ELAC)
Los Angeles Community
College District (LACCD)
2008
Estimated
Population
2015
Projected
Population
1,522,314 1,610,339 88,025 5.8
5,284,641 5,468,068 183,427 3.5
%
Los Angeles County (LA Co.) 10,116,810 10,452,926 336,116 3.3
California (CA) 37,338,070 39,109,364 1,771,294 4.7
United States of America
(USA)
305,330,264 317,237,948 11,907,684 3.9
Introduction Page 3

A cursory investigation of our service area has shown some notable findings, including the
fact that there are more than 50,000 households below the poverty line in our community.
Conditions created by poverty will require the college to increase psychosocial support to
students through ancillary services while they are working toward their educational goals.
This support will include increasing the accessibility of student services such as financial aid.
In addition, it will be necessary to investigate the occupational needs of our community and
work to provide programs that develop well qualified students to fill positions that are in high
demand. The Education Plan seeks to address these issues in a comprehensive manner
through goals to improve educational opportunities and access, student success and planning
accountability and service.
2008 - Estimated Population
ELAC LACCD LA Co.
N % N % N %
African-American 40,680 2.7 506,955 9.6 871,692 8.6
Asian 219,751 14.4 666,814 12.6 1,341,091 13.3
Caucasian 100,520 6.6 1,360,357 25.7 2,863,594 28.3
Hispanic 1,139,678 74.9 2,640,374 50.0 4,835,012 47.8
Others 21,686 1.4 110,141 2.1 205,419 2.0
Total 1,522,315 100.0 5,284,641 100.0 10,116,808 100.0
Data on Los Angeles County educational attainment further exemplifies the need for higher
education in the ELAC service area. Approximately a quarter of Los Angeles County
residents never received a high school diploma and an additional 38.7% report completing
high school as their highest level of education. These figures are less dramatic in the student
population with only 5.8% of students reporting never having attained a high school diploma.
The student body population is predominantly Hispanic or Latino, with Asian or Asian
Pacific Islanders representing the second largest demographic Group on campus. The ethnic
demographics of the student body have remained relatively unchanged over the past five
years and are representative of the general community in the ELAC service area with a slight
under representation of Caucasian and African American students.
75%
African
-American
Asian
20%
1%
2%
2%
Hispanic
White
Other
62%
38%
Female
Male
Demographic data excludes In-service Training Academies
Introduction Page 4

The college has an over-representation of female students, above national trends. Nearly half
of the student population is under the age of twenty-four representing ages usually
considered to be traditional college students. However, the college also serves a great number
of non-traditional students with sixteen percent of the student body over the age of 35 and an
additional five percent of students concurrently enrolled in local high schools.
21%
5%
34%
16%
24%
Concurrent
High School
Under 20
20 - 24
35%
39%
26%
Less than 6
6 - 11
12 or More
25 - 34
Enrollment trends also demonstrate that nearly three-quarters of our students are part-time
students. The student survey also indicates that nearly a third of students work at least 40
hours a week, and a quarter have dependent children. These results have led to an increased
concentration on addressing the needs of part-time and/or working students, including issues
related to childcare, employment and complex schedules. These factors were considered in
the creation of the Educational Master Plan and in our efforts to develop programming to
improve student success and basic skills completion rates in our student population.
The ELAC student body has been consistently fed by local high schools. The top ten feeder
high schools for the main campus have remained fairly consistent across the last four years.
The following table lists the top feeder high schools for the main ELAC campus and the
Rosemead and South Gate Educational Center satellite campus. All top feeder schools have a
majority of students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged with some schools having
over ninety percent of their student body fitting this category. The high rates of children who
are socioeconomically disadvantaged are indicative of higher poverty rates in some of the
surrounding communities.
Introduction Page 5

Feeder
Rank
High School
Number of
Students
Included in the
2007 API
Socioeconomically
Disadvantaged
Students (%)
2007
Base API
1
Garfield (James A.)
Senior High
3,201 93.3 553
2 Schurr High 2,127 64.8 687
3
Roosevelt (Theodore)
Senior High
3,276 88.2 557
4
Huntington Park Senior
High
2,915 93.1 543
5 Montebello High 2,348 71.1 643
6 Bell Senior High 2,903 92.5 580
7 Alhambra High 2,258 67.1 708
8 Mark Keppel High 1,705 60.8 784
9 South Gate Senior High 2,260 87.0 565
10 Bell Gardens High 2,317 86.6 622
* API scores from California Department of Education DataQuest System
There are also indications that students arriving from local feeder schools may need
additional basic skills curriculum in order to succeed at the college level. The API presented
for each school is a numeric index (or scale) based on state standardized scores that range
from a low of 200 to a high of 1000. Any score over 800 is considered passing by the federal
No Child Left Behind Act. None of the ELAC top feeder schools have a passing API score
and the average API score for the top ten main campus feeder schools is 624. These scores
are indicative of the lack of preparation of students entering ELAC and our continued focus
on basic skills programming as a venue to enhance student success.
Low entry level skills are also seen in college assessment data. Over eighty-five percent of
assessed students test into mathematics and English courses that are below transfer. In
addition, more than nineteen percent of assessed students are referred to or placed in ESL
level courses. These results have stimulated a beneficial dialogue on basic skills
improvement that can be seen in the Educational Plan, including goals of improving
remediation, supplemental instruction, and basic skills training.
In spite of the challenges related to low entry-level skills, a third of students intend to transfer
to a four-year university. These reports may even be understated as the student survey
indicates that more than half of ELAC students intend to receive a Bachelor’s or higher
degree.
Introduction Page 6

Vocational
31% 33%
Transfer
21%
6%
9%
General
Education
Transitional
Unknown/
Undecided
ELAC has seen an increase in some student outcomes. More students are attaining
certificates, with the majority of the growth taking place in the attainment of certificates that
require fewer than eighteen units. The number of certificates attained has increased more
than one hundred percent, far more than the increase in enrollment. The importance of these
figures plays into the efforts to identify new vocational programs that can address student
needs for improved job preparation in emerging occupational fields.
2002 – 2003 2003 – 2004 2004 – 2005 2005 – 2006 2006 – 2007
N % N % N % N % N %
Associate of
Arts
1,046 45.0 989 55.2 1,146 51.8 1,021 39.0 1,055 29.4
Associate of
Science
91 3.9 114 6.4 123 5.6 164 6.3 186 5.2
Certificate 202 8.7 197 11.0 182 8.2 149 5.7 251 7.0
Skills
Certificate
986 42.4 492 27.5 760 34.4 1,284 49.0 2,101 58.5
Total 2,325 100.0 1,792 100.0 2,211 100.0 2,618 100.0 3,593 100.0
ELAC has shown steady retention and success rates throughout the college. Over eighty-five
percent of students are retained through the semester and more than two-thirds of students
successfully complete the courses in which they enroll.
Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007
% % % % %
Retention Rate 85.7 85.1 85.7 86.5 86.7
Success Rate 65.6 67.4 65.7 68.2 67.1
Introduction Page 7

ELAC has shown excellent outcomes on the District and VTEA core indicators. ELAC has
the higher Fall to Fall persistence rates than most schools in the district and is above the
District average in ARCC measures of Basic Skills improvement rates and rates of students
earning more than 30 units. In addition, the college has made significant gains in rates of
student progress and achievement. ELAC is also the highest rated college in the District in
terms of institutional efficiency. VTEA core indicators demonstrate that ELAC is excelling
beyond the state average on most measures of effectiveness.
State
Performance
Level Goal (%)
Statewide
Performance
Level (%)
2006 – 2007
LACCD
Performance
Level (%)
ELAC
Performance
Level (%)
Skill
Attainment
78.8 76.4 82.1 88.5
Completions 59.8 74.4 81.4 83.1
Placement 83.2 82.6 81.5 84.4
Retention in
Employment
Non-
Traditional
Participation
Non-
Traditional
Completer
82.8 82.9 83.6 86.7
29.0 37.9 38.9 33.6
27.0 35.8 46.5 46.9
ELAC serves a diverse community through its academic, career technical and non-credit
programming. State, District and college indicators show many areas in which the college is
currently excelling. College leadership is involved in the review of college data and has
worked to plan for the needs of students, including offering vocational and basic skills
curriculum that meets the needs of the current student body and the general community.
Introduction Page 8

College Organizational Structure
East Los Angeles College
Ernest H. Moreno, President
Vice President
Administrative
Services
Robert Isomoto
Vice President
Academic Affairs
Richard A. Moyer
Vice President
Workforce Edu. &
Economic Devel.
Reneé Martinez
Vice President
Student Services
Oscar Valeriano
President - Functions:
College Budget
College Governance (Committees, Policies &
Procedures, Structure)
College Image
College Liaison with Chancellor’s Cabinet
College Representation to Governing Board
(including College agenda items)
College-Wide Planning
Community Relations
Educational Facilities Master Plans
Personnel
Public Information (including coordination with
District)
Committee Responsibilities:
President’s Cabinet
Extended President’s Cabinet
Administrative Council
Planning & Budget Council
Facilities Committee
Marketing/Recruitment Committee
Introduction Page 9

Academic Affairs
Dr. Richard A. Moyer, Vice President
Functions:
Dean,
Liberal Arts
Karen Daar
Dean,
Liberal Arts
Vi Ly
Dean,
Liberal Arts
Kerrin McMahan
Dean,
South Gate
Al Rios
Academic Master Plans
Accreditation Liaison Officer
Chief Instructional Officer
College Coordinator for Reassigned Time
Curriculum Articulation within District (JCAC)
Curriculum Oversight (new program development & revision in
conjunction with deans)
Educational Policies and Procedures
Faculty Staffing Recommendations (through deans)
Faculty (reporting through chairs/coordinators and deans)
Coordination of Prerequisite enforcement (co-responsibility with
VP Student Services)
Oversight and Approval of College Class Schedule and Catalog
Tutoring (through deans)
Faculty Collective Bargaining/Administrative Representative
Oversight of Faculty Evaluation (through deans)
Instructional Operations: rooms, class schedule, catalog,
curriculum, enrollment data
Monitor educational Policy/Procedure Compliance
Committee Responsibilities:
Work Environment Committee
Student Learning Outcomes
Student Success
Matriculation
Transfer Committee
Department Chairs
District Committee: Vice Presidents Council
Introduction Page 10

Dean, Liberal Arts
Karen Daar
Dean, Liberal Arts
Vi Ly
Dean, Liberal Arts
Kerrin McMahan
Dean, South Gate
Al Rios
Chairs/Coordinators:
Chemistry
English
Life Sciences
Physics
Social Sciences
Chairs/Coordinators:
Art
Music
Philosophy
Physical Edu. – Men
Physical Edu. – Women
Speech/Theatre
Chairs/Coordinators:
Anthro/Geol/Geog/Int. Trade
Chicano Studies
Foreign Languages
Mathematics
Psychology
Other:
Learning Assistance Center
Mente Lab
Distance Education
Schedule
Move Liaison
COMMON DIVISION DEAN FUNCTIONS*
Planning: Development, revision
Faculty, Classified Staffing: Proposal development, recruitment, selection, orientation, assignment, supervision evaluation
Budget: Development, administration
Curriculum: Development, revision, articulation with K-12 and university
Class schedule: Development and administration
External resource development
Discipline labs/centers supervision
*with chairs, faculty and subordinate administrators, as appropriate
Position-specific Functions:
Catalog
Curriculum
Educational Planning Com.
Degree Audit
Matriculation
Student Learning Outcomes
Transfer Committee
Position-specific Functions:
PACE
Planning for Art Complex
Position-specific Functions:
Distance Education
Technology Planning
Committee
Position-specific Functions:
Off Site Committee
Introduction Page 11

Workforce Education & Economic Development
Ms. Reneé Martinez, Vice President
Functions:
Dean,
Career Technical Edu.
Laura M. Ramirez
Dean,
Continuing Edu.
Adrienne Ann Mullen
Dean,
Academic Affairs &
Economic Devel.
Gayle Brosseau
Assoc. Dean,
CalWORKs
Angelica Toledo
Academic Master Plans
Chief Instructional Officer
College Coordinator for Reassigned Time
Curriculum Articulation within District (JCAC)
Curriculum Oversight (new program development & revision in conjunction with deans)
Educational Policies and Procedures
Faculty Staffing Recommendations (through deans)
Faculty (reporting through chairs/coordinators and deans)
New full-time faculty orientation
Coordination of Prerequisite enforcement (co-responsibility with VP Student Services)
Oversight and Approval of College Class Schedule and Catalog
Tutoring (reporting through Associate Dean)
Instruction budget development
Faculty Collective Bargaining/Administrative Representative
Oversight of Faculty Evaluation (through deans)
Instructional Operations: rooms, class schedule, catalog, curriculum, enrollment data
Monitor educational Policy/Procedure Compliance
Adjunct faculty professional development
Committee Responsibilities:
Budget Committee • Career Technical
Matriculation • Work Environment Committee
Title V • Transfer Committee
Planning Committees: Facility, Educational, Off-Site, and Technology
Student Learning Outcomes Student Success
District Committees:
CTE Deans • Vice Presidents Council
HR Council • Nursing Task Force
Prof. Dev. Task Force
Other Committees:
Beverly Hospital: Board of Directors, Board Governance, Strategic Planning
Crystal Stairs Board
Introduction Page 12

Dean, Career Technical
Education
Laura M. Ramirez
Chairs/Coordinators:
Admin. of Justice/Fire
Tech/EMT
Journalism
Life Sciences: HIT, Elec.
Microscopy, Resp. Therapy
Nursing
Photography
Dean, Continuing Education
Adrienne Ann Mullen
Coordinators:
Community Services
Non Credit
Basic Skills
Rosemead Center
Swap meet
Dean, Economic Dev.
Gayle Brosseau
Chairs/Coordinators:
Architecture
Auto Tech
Business/CSIT
CFES
CAOT
Electronics
Engineering
Library
Associate Dean, CalWORKs
Angelica Toledo
Other:
RCAT
MESA
Other:
Tech Prep
COMMON DIVISION DEAN FUNCTIONS*
Planning: Development, revision
Faculty, Classified Staffing: Proposal development, recruitment, selection, orientation, assignment, supervision evaluation
Budget: Development, administration
Curriculum: Development, revision, articulation with K-12 and university
Class schedule: Development and administration
External resource development
Discipline labs/centers supervision
*with chairs, faculty and subordinate administrators, as appropriate
Position-specific Functions:
Liaison with business and
industry
VTEA budget: Development,
administration, reporting
Joint Hires
Matriculation
Student Learning Outcomes
State Equipment
Position-specific Functions:
LA/Orange Deans
State Equipment
Student Success
Technology Discussion Group
Introduction Page 13

Student Services
Mr. Oscar Valeriano, Interim Vice President
Rahmani Vanterpool
Administrative Secretary
Jeremy Allred
Dean
Admissions and Records
Daniel Ornelas
Chair
Counseling
Paula Palomino
Director
University Center
Scholarships
Vacant
Dean
Suzette M-Guerra
Counselor
Matriculation
Michael Simone
Director
Child Development Center
Janet Huang
Counselor
Career/Job Center
Danelle Fallert
Associate Dean
EOPS
Sonia Lopez
Associate Dean
Student Activities
Assessment
Vacant
Associate Dean
Outreach and Recruitment
Student Health Center
Grace Hernandez
Disability Specialist
DSPS
International Students
Lindy Fong
Manager
Financial Aid
Introduction Page 14

Administrative Services
Mr. Robert G. Isomoto, Vice President
Administrative Assistant
Civic Center Permits
Susan Okawa
Senior Office Assistant
Monica De La Parra
Administrative Aide
April Aragon
Associate Vice President
Administrative Services
Erlinda De Ocampo
Associate Vice President
Administrative Services
Tom Furukawa
Facilitie Manager
Richard Guy
Info Tech Manager
Gonzalo Mendoza
Deputy
L. A. County Sherrif
Jose Garcia
SPOC
Office Supervisor
Operations Manager
Senior Office Asst.
Norman Cheung
Brundo De Silva
John Turner
Claire Figueroa
Introduction Page 15

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Board of Trustees
Organizational Structure
Board of Trustee
Member
Ms Georgia Mercer
Board of Trustees
Member
Ms Nancy Perlman
Board of Trustees
Member
Ms Angela Reddock
Board of Trustees
President
Mr Kelly Candaele
Board of Trustees
Vice President
Ms Mona Field
Board of Trustees
Member
Mr Miguel Santiago
Board of Trustees
Member
Ms Sylvia Scott - Hayes
Board of Trustees
Student Trustee
Ms Rosemarie Bustos
Personnel
Commission
Chancellor
Dr . Marshall E . Drummond
( See Org Chart )
Prepared by Human Resources – Data Analysis
As of 29 August 2008
Introduction Page 16

LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Office of the Chancellor
Organizational Structure
Chancellor
Dr. Marshall E.
Drummond
Counselor on Loan to
Dept. of Homeland
Security
Mr. F. Quiambao
Deputy Chancellor
Dr. A. Barrera
Chief Financial
Officer/Treasurer
Ms. J. Gordon
General Counsel
Ms. C. Goulet
Vice Chancellor for
Educational
Support Services
Mr. J. Clerx
Executive Secretary
to the Chancellor
Ms. M. E. Jauregui
Executive Director
Facilities Planning
and Development
Mr. L. Eisenberg
Vice Chancellor for
Economic and
Workforce
Development
Mr. M. Martinez
Vice Chancellor for
Institutional
Effectiveness
Mr. G. Colombo
Assistant Secretary
to the Chancellor
Ms. J. Hughes-Fields
City College
President
Dr. J. Moore
East LA College
President
Mr. E. Moreno
Harbor College
President
Dr. L. Spink
Mission College
President
Dr. J.Valles
Pierce College
President
Mr. R. Garber
Southwest
College
President
Dr. J. Daniels, III
Trade-Tech
College
President
Dr. R.
Chapdelaine
Valley College
President
Dr. A. Carleo
(Limited)
West
LA College
President
Dr. M. Rocha
= Unit Manager
= Supervisor
Prepared by Human Resources – Data Analysis
As of 29 August 2008
Introduction Page 17

Organization of the Self Study
East Los Angeles College (ELAC) is pleased to submit this Institutional Self Study for
Reaffirmation of Accreditation. Formal planning for this study began in spring 2007 with the
selection of the faculty self study chair by the college president and the Accreditation Liaison
Officer (ALO) and approval by the Academic Senate. The organizational structure for the self
study was developed during summer 2007 for implementation during fall 2007. During fall 2008,
an administrative co-chair assisted in the completion of the self study.
Training for the Self Study Process
On February 22, 2007, Dr. Barbara Beno and Jack Pond from the Accrediting Commission
provided an all-day training session for members of the steering committee and standards cochairs
from the three Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) colleges (East,
City, and Trade Tech) entering their self study year.
A follow-up session for the three colleges, led by Gary Colombo, Vice Chancellor for
Institutional Effectiveness, was held on February 28, 2007. Representatives from the three
LACCD colleges that had previously completed their self studies discussed issues that they
faced and presented tips for developing productive self studies.
On June 5, 2007, over 50 committee members for the standards attended a half-day workshop
conducted by the faculty co-chair on the self study process and the timeline for completion of
the standards drafts. District representative, Gary Colombo, explained the role of the district
office in the process.
Participation in the Self Study Process
By the Steering Committee. The Steering Committee, led by the self study co-chair and the
Accreditation Liaison Officer and comprised of one co-chair from each of the four standards,
the Dean of Planning, the Associate Dean of Research, and the SLO coordinator, was
established to oversee the process. The Steering Committee members communicated
regularly at meetings and via e-mail.
By Standard Co-Chairs. The co-chairs for the four standards were selected by a campus
leadership group, including the faculty self study co-chair, the ALO and vice president of
Academic Affairs, the vice presidents of Workforce Education, and Administrative Services,
and Student Services, and the Academic Senate president. The co-chairs were selected from
three campus personnel groups, faculty, classified, and administrative. At least one faculty
member and one classified employee or administrator was selected to co-chair each standard.
By Committee Members. Communications inviting participation in the process were
circulated to all campus personnel via e-mail, the Weekly Bulletin, a newsletter, and flyers.
The self study co-chair made presentations to the Academic Senate, the department chairs,
and the East Los Angeles Shared Governance Council (ESGC), the primary shared
governance body. The Associate Dean of Students assisted in the effort to recruit students.
Direct invitations were made to the officers and members of the Associated Student Union.
Standards co-chairs also recruited committee members from faculty, staff, and students.
Introduction Page 18

By the District. The LACCD Office of Institutional Effectiveness under the leadership of
Vice Chancellor Gary Colombo assisted the college in the preparation of this self study by
serving as the liaison for the district office. Vice Chancellor Colombo, assisted by Ms.
Deborah Kaye, conducted a series of meetings (February, April, August, and December 2007
and September 2008) which were attended by the co-chairs and ALOs for the self studies of
the three colleges that are currently undergoing reaccreditation. These meetings were
invaluable as they provided the three colleges with the opportunity to share information,
speak with representatives from other district colleges who previously underwent
reaccreditation, and learn more about the operation of the district. The Office was also
instrumental in the preparation of the functional map and presented the map to the colleges
for approval.
The faculty co-chair and the ALO reported the college’s progress in the completion of the
self study to the Board of Trustees’ Planning and Student Success Committee on September
19, 2007, and June 11, 2008. The college presented the completed self study to the Board of
Trustees’ Planning and Student Success Committee for review and formal approval on
December 17, 2008.
Data Gathering for the Self Study
The college researcher provided regional demographic and economic data, prepared and
administered a faculty/staff/administrator survey, produced a student and faculty profile, and
provided the data from the district-administered student survey. The researcher also assisted the
committees in evaluating the data. Standard committee members interviewed appropriate
individuals and reviewed supporting documents to collect and verify the data presented in this
self study.
Progress Reporting for the Self Study
Accreditation and self study progress are standing agenda items for the bi-monthly meetings of
the East Los Angeles Shared Governance Council and the Academic Senate. All members of the
various standard committees were in constant communication with one another and with the self
study co-chairs via e-mail as well as through meetings of the standards. Some committees chose
to use the SharePoint Portal for reporting progress. Two newsletters were published.
Campus-Wide Review of the Draft of the Self Study
The drafts of the standards were available for review and comment from October 30 to
December 1.
Announcements about the availability of the self study for review were posted campus wide
in the Weekly Bulletin, via e-mail and the college Microsoft SharePoint portal, and in
Introduction Page 19

presentations to the Academic Senate, the department chairs, and the Shared Governance
Council.
The drafts were posted on the SharePoint portal and distributed in hard copy to the
department chairs, to the Associated Student Union government, and other campus
leadership. Hard copy could also be requested directly from the self study co-chairs.
During the review period, three campus-wide discussion forums, two at midday during the
college hour and one in the late afternoon before evening classes, were conducted in mid-
November. The Academic Senate also held discussion at an all-faculty meeting on November
25.
Ultimately, individuals representing all segments of the college community participated directly
in the self study process, with many others participating by completing surveys related to
accreditation/college issues and reviewing the draft of the self study and participating in forums
before its publication.
This self study report is the outcome of the dialogue that occurred throughout the above
described process. The self study is recognized as an ongoing process and is a significant part of
the college's long-term planning strategy. It will serve to strengthen the institution's directions
and decision-making processes for preparing its students to function efficiently and effectively in
a rapidly changing world. It reflects an open and honest interpretation of the state of health of the
college and the issues that confront the Los Angeles Community College District and
consequently the college.
Introduction Page 20

ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY 2007-2008 STEERING COMMITTEE
Brenda K. Baity, Self Study Faculty Co-chair
Associate Professor, Computer Applications & Office
Technologies
Self Study Faculty Co-Chair
baitybk@elac.edu 265-8932
Karen Daar
Dean, Academic Affairs (currently)
Associate Professor, Anthropology
Former Curriculum Chair & Standard II Co-chair
daarkl@elac.edu 415-5374
Evelyn Escatiola
Professional Development Coordinator
AFT Chapter Chair 2007-2008
Standard IV Co-chair
escatie@elac.edu 265-8757
Ran Gust
Acquisitions Librarian
Standard I Co-chair
gustrg@elac.edu 265-8628
Richard Guy
Director, College Facilities
Standard III Co-chair
guyrm@elac.edu 265-8754
Robert Isomoto
Interim President (until April 2008)
Vice President, Administrative Services (current)
isomotorg@elac.edu 415-4110
Veronica Jaramillo
Assistant Professor, Chemistry
SLO Coordinator (2008-2009)
jaramiv@elac.edu 265-8851
Reneé Martinez
Vice President, Workforce Education and Economic
Development
Standard IV Co-chair
martinrd@elac.edu 265-8973
Ryan Cornner
Associate Dean, Research
cornnerr@elac.edu 265-8967
Kerrin McMahan, Self Study Admin. Co-chair
Dean, Academic Affairs
Standard I Co-chair
McMahakm@elac.edu 415-4135
Ernest H. Moreno
President (since April 2008)
morenoeh@elac.edu 265-8662
Richard A. Moyer,
Accreditation Liaison Officer
Vice President, Academic Affairs
moyerra@elac.edu 265-8678
Leonor Perez (currently on sabbatical)
Dean, Research and Planning
Standard I team member
perezlx@elac.edu 415-4138
Anthony A. Samad
Associate Professor, Political Science
SLO Coordinator (2006-2007)
samadaa@elac.edu 265-8938
Editing and Support Staff
April Aragon, Administrative Services
Olga Barnes, President’s Office
Patrick Hauser, Faculty
Susan Okawa, Administrative Services
Staff, Information Technology Department
Dean Athans, Academic Affairs
Patricia Glover, Graphic Design
Catalina Medina, President’s Office
Melissa Rabago, Academic Affairs
Sharon Tate, Marketing Director
Acknowledgements
Special thanks to District Office personnel, Gary Colombo, Vice Chancellor for Institutional
Effectiveness, and Deborah Kaye, Self Study Liaison to the Cityside Schools.
Introduction Page 21

certification of eligibility requirements
meet elac people
Christal Hernandez
Administration of Justice/Forensics
“
It is fascinating to me that one small
piece of evidence can be used to recreate
a crime scene. When my teacher Ms.
Cavannaugh lectures it doesn’t seem like
teaching—it’s more of a story and problems
that we have to solve. She also helps
us to make connections, find information
and solve problems, even our personal
ones. ELAC has helped me in every
way—from financing my education to
”
helping me find a rewarding career.
Start at ELAC…
Go Anywhere!
Accreditation Self Study 2008.indd 4
12/8/08 9:16:49 AM

ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCREDITATION
1. AUTHORITY. East Los Angeles College’s authority to operate as a degree granting
institution is the continuous accreditation by the Accrediting Commission for Community
and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, an institutional
accreditation body recognized by the Commission on Recognition of Postsecondary
Accreditation and the United States Department of Education. This authority is noted on the
inside cover page of the college catalog.
2. MISSION. The mission statement appears in campus publications and is the basis for all
operational efforts. The previous revision of the current college mission statement occurred
in 1991; it was reaffirmed by the college in 1997, 2000, and 2003. The most recent revision
occurred in 2008. It was evaluated by the Office of Institutional Planning and the college's
Educational Planning Subcommittee with input from all campus constituencies. It has been
approved by the college Shared Governance Council and will be approved by the Board of
Trustees in early 2009.
3. GOVERNING BOARD. An eight-member Board of Trustees, seven of whom are elected
at large plus one student trustee, governs the nine-college Los Angeles Community College
District. Trustees are elected to the Governing Board for four-year staggered terms from the
entire district, which includes all of the Los Angeles Unified School District and several of
the incorporated and unincorporated communities, within and adjoining the city of Los
Angeles. The student trustee, elected by the student body, serves a one-year term on the
Board, and acts on District business (except for closed session issues) in an advisory
capacity. No member of the Board of Trustees shall have any financial interest in any
contract or purchase order made by the Board (BR 7100.15). The Governing Board holds
meetings twice a month. They are open to the public, with notices and agenda widely posted
in advance. In order to be widely accessible to members of the large Los Angeles
Community College District, the Board holds many of its meetings at the colleges. The
District Academic Senate and the District’s seven bargaining units report to the Board on a
regular basis.
4. CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER. The Chancellor of the Los Angeles Community College
District is selected by the Governing Board. Dr. Marshall Drummond, Chancellor, is the
District’s chief executive officer whose primary responsibility is to the District. The
President of the college is selected by the Governing Board in consultation with the
Chancellor. The college’s chief executive officer, President Ernest H. Moreno, has served
has served in this capacity since 1994, except for a 22-month period from June 2006 to April
2008 to oversee the operation of another district college.
5. ADMINISTRATIVE CAPACITY. The college administration is adequate in number,
experience, and qualifications to provide appropriate administrative oversight. The college
organization charts appear in this Self Study.
6. OPERATIONAL STATUS. East Los Angeles College (ELAC) is a comprehensive college
that meets the varied educational needs of our community. Students are enrolled in a variety
Eligibility Requirements Page 23

of courses that lead to certificates of completion for non-credit basic skills, certificates of
competency for non-credit vocational, certificates of achievement for state-approved
programs of 12 or more units, skills certificates for non-state approved programs of 17.5
units and under, associate degrees, transfer, and personal development.
7. DEGREES. The majority of the college’s offerings are in programs that lead to degrees as
described in the college catalog. ELAC offers 28 Associate in Arts Degrees and 13
Associate in Science Degrees.
8. EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS. The College’s educational programs are consistent with
its mission, are based on recognized fields of study, are of sufficient content and length, and
maintain appropriate levels of quality and rigor for the degrees and programs offered. Basic
skills courses in reading, writing, and mathematics help students develop the proficiency
necessary to advance to college-level curricula or to qualify for entry-level employment. The
college, led by the Student Success Committee, is currently attempting to create an
identifiable, official program to address the problem of academically underprepared
students. Those with limited English proficiency may enroll in ESL courses. Community
Services provides valuable short-term courses for personal development, leisure, recreation,
and special interest.
9. ACADEMIC CREDIT. Academic credit is based on Title 5 – 55002 (Standards and
Criteria for Courses and Classes) of the California Administrative Code.
10. STUDENT LEARNING AND ACHIEVEMENT. East Los Angeles College defines and
publishes program educational objectives in course outlines, in the college catalog, in
occupational program brochures, and in instructional planning documents. All are reviewed
and updated in accordance with Title 5 and district guidelines. The college has adopted
institutional core competencies that identify expected outcomes in the areas of academic
skills, personal growth and enrichment, and cultural and global awareness. All units,
academic disciplines, student services, and administrative, are developing program-level,
course-level outcomes, and assessments. Currently, student success is measured by faculty,
based on the successful completion of course objectives and student learning outcomes
which are stated on the course syllabus. Course objectives are clearly stated on the course
outline of record. Student learning outcomes appear as an addendum to the course outline of
record. All courses, regardless of mode of delivery or location, follow the same course
outline of record.
11. GENERAL EDUCATION. General education at East Los Angeles College is part of every
degree program and has been structured to ensure breadth of knowledge, promote
intellectual inquiry, demonstrate competence in writing and computational skills, and serve
as an introduction to major areas of knowledge. Courses in general education meet the
quality and rigor appropriate for higher education.
12. ACADEMIC FREEDOM. The college abides by the policy on academic freedom stated in
LACCD Board Rules (BR 1204.12) adopted in February 2006 and Article 4 of the
LACCD/Los Angeles College Faculty Guild agreement, which states, “The Faculty shall
Eligibility Requirements Page 24

have the academic freedom to seek the truth and guarantee freedom of learning to the
students.” The campus maintains an environment of intellectual freedom and independence.
13. FACULTY. As of fall 2007, East Los Angeles College had over 260 full-time faculty
including nineteen full-time counselors. In addition the college employs over 660 adjunct
faculty, working in a variety of positions within the academic and career technical
departments, Child Development Center, and the Counseling office. These full-time and
adjunct faculty provide teaching and student support services for all of the educational
programs at the institution in pursuit of the college mission. The college ensures the quality
of its instructional faculty through a comprehensive evaluative process during hiring and
regular assessment of teaching effectiveness through faculty evaluations. The names,
degrees, and year of hire for full-time faculty are listed in the college catalog. Information
on full-time hires occurring between catalog years and all adjunct are held in the personnel
office and in the SAP record keeping system. Faculty responsibilities are set forth in the
Faculty Handbook and Adjunct Faculty Handbook and in the contract between the American
Federation of Teachers College Guild and the Los Angeles Community College District.
Included in faculty responsibilities is the development and review of curriculum through the
college’s curriculum review process and the assessment of student learning within the
classroom.
14. STUDENT SERVICES. East Los Angeles College provides appropriate services to
students and develops programs that meet the educational support needs of its diverse
student population. The college provides services in the following areas: Admissions and
Records, Articulation, Associated Student Union, Basic Skills/Citizenship/GED, Bookstore,
CalWorks Program, Campus Food Services, Career/Job Placement Center, Child
Development Center, College newspaper (Campus News), Community Services (non for
credit programs), Cooperative Agencies Resources to Education (CARE), Counseling
Department, Cultural Activities, including The Vincent Price Art Museum, Disabled
Students Programs & Services, Enrollment Center, Extended Opportunity Program &
Services, Financial Aid, Fiscal Office, Health Center, Honors Program, Intercollegiate
Athletics, International Student Program, Learning Assistance Center, Library, Little
Theater, Los Angeles County Sheriff Services, Matriculation, Mentor Program, MESA
Program, Puente Program, Scholarships, South Gate Educational Center, Student Center,
University Center, and Veterans Services.
15. ADMISSIONS. College admissions policies are consistent with its mission and conform to
the parameters outlined in the state law and college regulations. They are published in the
college catalog, the schedule of classes, and on the college website. An individual must meet
the published requirements to enroll at East Los Angeles College.
16. INFORMATION AND LEARNING RESOURCES. East Los Angeles College provides
information and learning resources and services to support its educational mission. The
resources are provided by many different programs, departments, centers and labs, but
primarily by the Helen Miller Bailey Library and the Learning Assistance Center.
Eligibility Requirements Page 25

ELAC’s resources include a library collection of 137,123 items of print and visual materials,
including 12,966 electronic books, DVDs, 137 periodicals, and microfilm. Within the
library, 18 subscriptions or free vendor electronic resources are accessed through any of the
109 computer workstations; remote access is also available for student, faculty, and staff.
Most ELAC staff and all students and faculty have access to computers, e-mail, and the
Internet.
The South Gate Educational Center houses a small library for students, faculty, and staff.
The collection consists of 3,740 core reference volumes, circulating materials, and DVDs.
Ten computer workstations are provide full access to all of the library’s electronic resources.
All Learning Assistance Center services focus on assisting students to become self-regulated
and responsible for their own learning. The central activity is peer tutoring in various forms:
one-to-one, small group, class-specific workshops, by appointment and walk-in. Students
are assisted with basic skills, study and test taking skills, and support in reading, writing,
mathematics, natural and social science, and other college-level courses. Supplemental
tutoring and study groups are also available. The Computer Assisted Instruction Lab
provides services that complement tutoring or serve as an alternative learning mode. Sixtyfive
computer stations and thirty tutoring stations are available for individual and classspecific
work.
Many classrooms are equipped with smart workstations, allowing faculty immediate access
to a computer linked to an overhead projection unit, a DVD player, and a VCR, as well as
the appropriate software for instructional use. Faculty can check out TV/VCRs for
instructional use in other classrooms.
17. FINANCIAL RESOURCES. As one of the campuses of the Los Angeles Community
College District (LACCD), East Los Angeles College participates in the budget planning of
the entire District. The President and Vice President of Administrative Services are actively
involved in districtwide budget meetings, which discuss the funding base for the fiscal year
and the financial resources and revenues made available to LACCD from the State of
California which becomes the budget allocation for the campuses like East Los Angeles
College.
Once the allocation is received from the District Office, ELAC prepares the budget plans in
consultation with the Vice Presidents of Academic Affairs, Workforce Education,
Administrative Services, and Student Services. Other funding sources received from the
federal, state, county, and local governments are carefully planned and distributed
according to guidelines received from the funding sources.
All funds received by the college are carefully planned to support the mission of the college
and all its educational programs and goals for the success of every student at ELAC. Budget
plans are adhered to, implemented, and monitored on a periodic basis to comply with
federal, state, county, and local governments’ laws, rules, and regulations and to ensure that
they are in line with policies and procedures of the District Office and the campus.
Eligibility Requirements Page 26

18. FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY. East Los Angeles College undergoes an annual audit
by outside independent auditors hired by the District Office. The results of the audit together
with its recommendations and exceptions are evaluated by the District and campus
management and complied with. The audit report can be found in the college President's
Office and in the District Office.
19. INSTITUTIONAL PLANNING AND EVALUTATION. The college creates a Strategic
Master Plan, including an Educational, Facilities and Technology Plan, every six years.
These plans reflect ELAC’s strategic priorities, goals and action plans and are developed
through an integrated system of research, planning and shared governance subcommittees
with committee members representing various college constituencies. The Research and
Planning Office is currently establishing measures for all college goals and objectives in
order to monitor the progress made in all college planning venues. The results of these
measures are intended to be a basis for continued college planning and the decision-making
processes. Course and Program SLOs, College Core Competencies and Institutional SLOs,
and District-established Core Indicators are also utilized as measures of college progress and
student success. A six-year cycle of Comprehensive Program Review with annual program
review updates are also used to evaluate the programmatic progress towards achieving
departmental goals establishing SLOs and determining areas in need of improvement. All
recommendations are approved through the ELAC Shared Governance Council and made
publicly available. The college also has a Viability Review structure in place to assist the
college in determining whether existing programs and services are meeting their stated
purpose and the college’s mission and goals. The overall institutional planning structure and
process is developed, evaluated, and revised as needed on an ongoing basis by the Program
Review and Viability Committee.
20. PUBLIC INFORMATION. East Los Angeles College displays in writing and in practice
the model of institutional integrity. The mission statement of the college is clearly
articulated in the college catalog and college website as well as in the college plans and
other public documents. The college catalog and class schedule and the website also provide
the public with current information about degrees and curricular offerings, student fees,
financial aid, refund policies, admission policies, and information about transfer
requirements. The names and academic preparation of the faculty and administration are
listed in the back of the catalog. The names of the Governing Board members are also listed.
21. RELATIONS WITH THE ACCREDITING COMMISSION. The Board of Trustees for
the Los Angeles Community College District provides assurance that the college adheres to
the eligibility requirements and accreditation standards and policies of the Commission in its
policies and actions and in its validation of this Self Study. The college describes itself in
identical terms to all its accrediting agencies, communicates any changes in its accredited
status, and agrees to disclose information required by the Commission to carry out
accrediting responsibilities. All disclosures by the college are complete, accurate, and
honest.
Eligibility Requirements Page 27

esponses to 2003 recommendations
meet elac people
Tai-Li Lee
Architecture
“
Attending East Los Angeles College
prepared me for the next step. I’m
going to transfer to Pratt Institute in
New York to experience an urban
environment. I won a scholarship at
ELAC that will help me pay my
”
university tuition.
Start at ELAC…
Go Anywhere!
Accreditation Self Study 2008.indd 5
12/8/08 9:16:51 AM

RESPONSES TO THE 2003 VISITING TEAM’S RECOMMENDATIONS
Standard Three - Institutional Effectiveness
Recommendations and Response
3.1 The college should integrate planning with decision making and budgeting processes to
ensure that decisions to allocate staff, equipment, resources, and facilities throughout
the college are based on identified strategic priorities and to ensure a continuous cycle of
evaluation and improvement based upon data (Standards 1.3, 3A.3, 3B.2, 3B.3, 9A.1).
Three documents drive the planning process: the Educational Master Plan, the Facilities Master
Plan, and the Technology Master Plan. The Educational Plan and Technology Plan have been
updated. Once the update of the Facilities Plan is completed, all three plans will be incorporated
into the ELAC Strategic Master Plan.
The East Los Angeles College Shared Governance Council (ESGC) reviews matters related to
the implementation of these institutional plans and has made recommendations related to special
one-time state allocations. The ESGC has directed the Educational Plan Subcommittee, which
oversees prioritization and implementation of the Educational Plan, to provide it with a list of
Educational Plan action items that are unfunded or under-funded. Any unfunded or under-funded
action items may be referred to the Budget Committee for review.
The college’s extensive Program Review process assesses progress towards strategic goals. This
information is integrated in planning the college budget.
As evidenced by the college’s positive ending balance and FTES growth, the college has made
tremendous strides in advancing its strategic goal of ensuring student access. Just prior to the
submission of budget requests, Department Chairs are required to submit annual updates of their
progress toward their Program Review goals. Apart from the successful one-time funding
program, the college does not have an ongoing shared governance process for recommending
one-time allocations from its fund balance.
Through the shared governance process, the Student Success Committee develops action plans
for implementing special State funding for basic skills, which is specifically linked to our
strategic goal of student success.
To further its institutional goals and implement the sort of projects previously funded by onetime
funding, the college has secured Title V funds and other grants. In addition, the college has
planned for economic hardship and the long term with a “rainy day” account of $11 million
dollars.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 29

3.2 The college should develop a model to systematically gather and report evidence of
student learning outcomes at the course, program, certificate, and degree levels in order
to assess institutional effectiveness at multiple levels of operation (Standards 3A.3, 3A.4,
3C.1, 4B.3).
Student Learning Outcomes are a collegewide priority. To support the college’s commitment to
SLOs, a faculty coordinator for student learning outcomes receives .6 FTE reassigned time and
two additional faculty each receive .2 FTE reassigned time to assist the departments in the
preparation and assessment of SLOs through workshops and individual meetings with
departments. They have made presentations at opening days on SLO development and
assessment, rubric development, and at workshops on “What are SLOs,” assessment
development, and what to do with assessment results.
The SLO Committee, in operation since fall 2005 and chaired by the SLO coordinator, reflects
the shared governance structure of the college with membership from the faculty, classified staff,
and administrators. The standing SLO Committee meeting is another venue for discussion of
SLOs and their effectiveness. The committee develops annual goals and objectives with
measurable outcomes for each academic year. The committee recently evaluated software that
will assist in the organization of student learning outcomes. The software selected is TracDat and
training for its use should be in place during spring 2009.
The Office of Research and Planning has been expanded to support the institution’s efforts to
enhance student learning and its ability to assess and evaluate the effectiveness of academic and
student services. An Associate Dean of Research was added to the staff in 2008. The office
works closely with the SLO Committee in assisting departments with the development of SLOs
and the analysis of assessment results. However, due to all of the other responsibilities of that
office, the staff cannot fully meet the demand. Currently no researcher in the office is solely
responsible for assisting faculty and staff with the assessment of their SLOs. When the next
researcher position (previously approved but now on hold due to budget constraints) is filled, a
principal responsibility of that individual will be to assist departments in the assessment of their
SLOs.
SLOs and strategies for attaining them are produced by each department or discipline, which has
its own SLO committee meetings to determine what outcomes will be assessed for each course
and how. Each department has a designated SLO facilitator. Yearly SLO reports with SLOs,
assessment methods, and plans of action are submitted to the SLO Coordinator. Beginning spring
2009, the reports will be reviewed by the newly formed (late fall 2008) SLO Assessment
Committee (SLOAC) to ensure that SLOs are assessed regularly for learning with authentic
assessment strategies, tied to college mission and core competencies, and that results of
assessment are used for improvement in courses, programs, and institution-wide planning.
SLOAC will then report back to departments via each department’s designated SLO facilitator.
SLOAC is composed of the SLO Coordinator, SLO Facilitators, Research and Planning
representative, Academic Senate representative (CTE/Academic), Student Services
representative (when appropriate), and an Administrator (CTE/Academic).
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 30

Course assessments to date have included lab practicum, embedded assessments, reports, and
performances. Some programs have developed their outcomes with outside guidance such as a
career technical advisory committee, or with program guidelines or goals. Student Services and
administrative units are also engaged in developing SLOs.
Student learning outcomes are assessed in each section with a common assessment tool
developed by each department or discipline SLO committee. Many of the assessment results are
analyzed via committee-agreed-upon rubrics. Some program-level outcomes have been assessed
via surveys to student, as well as aggregation of data from course level SLOs.
The results have led to improvement in courses by increasing problem content area emphasis to
help student learning. They have also led to change in curriculum taught, and in adding new
courses to help student learning.
Standard Five - Student Support and Development
Recommendation and Response
5.1 Based on the priorities and objectives in the strategic plan, the college should complete a
master plan for coordinated student services that creates a clear direction for future
development in programs, services, priorities, positions, and leadership for the future.
In 2005, a vice president of Student Services with sole responsibility for that division was
named. Student Services had previously primarily been managed by a dean who reported to the
vice president overseeing both administrative services and student services. The appointment of
the vice president was driven in large part by the urging of faculty leaders, who saw the need for
a strengthened Student Services division. This structure includes more deans, associate deans,
and directors. Three full-time positions, Dean of Student Services, Associate Dean of
Outreach/Recruitment, and Associate Dean of Extended Opportunity Programs and Services,
were restored after years of vacancy. Unfortunately the vice president passed away in early 2007.
An interim vice president currently oversees Student Services.
Completion of Program Review by all of the units in Student Services and the subsequent
development of a cluster plan led by the interim vice president have been the vehicles by which
the division has developed the master plan for its operation. Program review is a cycle of
continuous self-review and refinement of college programs in support of the college mission and
strategic priorities. This is an effective means for monitoring the quality of student service
programs and units and for setting new goals to improve services. As of spring 2007, all
programs and units in Student Services had completed the program review process by
completing a comprehensive program review questionnaire, which includes an internal and
external scan. Units then use these scans in determining future goals. The questions are aligned
with the college mission and goals and each unit demonstrates the extent to which the unit is
contributing the college mission and enhancing student access, retention and success. The
Program Review process also initiates a campus-wide discussion on these issues and the ability
of the unit to impact student learning.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 31

A Program Review Validation Committee, made up of representatives from the campus at large,
reviewed the units’ responses and then provided suggested commendations and
recommendations. Each unit’s commendations and recommendations were then forwarded for
shared governance approval to the East Los Angeles Shared Governance Council. This process
allows all campus constituencies to be involved in an ongoing discussion student success that
includes both academic and non-academic units.
During the fall 2008 semester, Student Services completed its Cluster Review. This review
encompassed the entire Student Services units and enabled division leadership to analyze and
integrate the results of all previous unit evaluations. The cumulative result of this Cluster Review
is a Cluster Plan, which details action items for the division to accomplish in order to increase
student access, retention, learning and success. The Cluster Review entails the same shared
governance processes as the unit reviews, allowing for a campus discussion on student support
services.
Student Service Outcomes (SSOs) for the units within the Student Services Division are in the
developmental stages. During the fall 2007 semester the goal for the Student Services Division
was to have all programs and units identify appropriate Student Service Outcomes (SSOs). As of
the spring 2008 semester all of the programs and units within Student Services had identified
preliminary Student Service Outcomes (SSOs); however, the means of collecting the data have
not yet been developed. The student services units continue to work with the college SLO
Coordinator in order to refine SSOs and to create appropriate assessment tools for measuring
student outcomes. The goal of the division is utilize SSOs as means for ongoing evaluation of
and discussion on improvement of student learning.
Student Support Services is constantly soliciting input from students, staff, and faculty to
improve their effectiveness of services. Students are encouraged to complete and submit student
comment forms about the quality of service or suggestions for improvement to any student
service department. Staff input occurs at the departmental level during regular office staff
meetings, which provide the opportunity for workers to evaluate and adjust services to better
serve the needs of the students. Office staff meetings often include guest presenters from other
departments and/or programs for announcements.
Student Services continues to face many challenges. The college is in the midst of major
construction campus wide. During fall 2007 and spring 2008, all of the Student Services units
and programs were relocated to various locations throughout the campus as the college remodels
the Student Services building (previously designated as the E-1 building). Due to the relocation
of all student service units and programs, there is a lack of student ease in accessing needed
student service units and programs due to their lack of proximity to one other. As an example,
the Admissions and Records Office and the Counseling Department, both critical student service
units, are located in two separate areas of the campus. This has made referral processes and
integration of services difficult in the current setting. However, changes in the operation of the
Student Services unit that are designed to ensure student success are well underway based on its
cluster plan. 2009 is the target year for moving all student services into one newly renovated
building.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 32

Standard Seven – Faculty and Staff
Recommendations and Response
7.1. The college should ensure that faculty and staff evaluation is consistent and timely, as
well as tied to the opportunity for staff development. Individuals who are responsible for
evaluations should be trained and the evaluation process should be consistently
implemented and monitored (Standards 7B.1, 7B.2, 7C.1, 7D1).
The guidelines for faculty and staff evaluations are clearly outlined in their respective bargaining
contracts.
Faculty Evaluation. For the most part, faculty evaluations occur on a consistent and timely basis
and are monitored by the dean in charge of a department.
Newly hired full-time faculty members are evaluated through a four-year probation process,
normally culminating in tenure at the end of the fourth year. An evaluation committee is formed
for each probationary hire. The committee is comprised of an academic dean, the department
chair, an Academic Senate representative, a tenured faculty member chosen by the evaluee, and a
tenured faculty member chosen by the department. The dean and Academic Senate
representative are non-voting members of the committee. This committee evaluates the
effectiveness of the faculty member based on classroom observations, student evaluations, and
other data that the department has agreed may be included in an evaluation. The committee
meets with the evaluee to review the process and set up time lines and future meeting dates. The
tenure review process is ongoing during the first four years of a new faculty member’s
employment (with the contract providing for a faculty mentor, and constant guidance from the
department chairperson, faculty and administration). The formal evaluation is conducted yearly
during that time. Whenever possible, the composition of the evaluation committee is unchanged
during the entire four-year process. This maintains consistency for the tenure-track faculty
member and allows the committee members to become familiar with the work habits of the
faculty member. The guidelines for achieving tenure are delineated in the faculty contract and
are available to all faculty members.
Evaluations are also conducted for all tenured faculty. At a minimum, they are conducted on a
three-year cycle during the entire employment of the faculty, and alternate between “basic” and
“comprehensive” evaluations. While the basic evaluation is conducted between the faculty
member and department chairperson, the comprehensive evaluation is conducted by a committee
comprised of the department chair, another tenured faculty member chosen by the department, a
tenured faculty member chosen by the evaluee, and the supervising dean, who is non-voting.
There is no requirement for data gathering during the basic evaluation unless requested by the
chair or faculty member being evaluated. Comprehensive evaluations are conducted by the
similar procedures as used in evaluations of probationary faculty. Suggestions for improvement
are made, and progress towards correcting past deficiencies is evaluated. Evaluation criteria
measure teaching effectiveness by requiring students and committee members to evaluate faculty
members on a number of standardized criteria.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 33

The overall goal of probationary and tenured faculty evaluations is to aid faculty members in
becoming more effective teachers. The evaluation process allows the faculty member under
review and the college to recognize performance improvements and to increase awareness of
current teaching strengths and weaknesses. Noted areas of growth may be addressed through the
many professional development activities offered on campus, faculty dialogue, or other methods
as required.
Faculty evaluations extend beyond the tenure process of the first four years. Adjunct faculty are
also evaluated every three years, with the evaluation provided by the department chairperson or
the chair’s designee. Adjunct faculty are subjected only to basic evaluations, although the
evaluee can request a comprehensive evaluation. Adjunct faculty are expected to receive their
initial evaluation by the end of their second semester of teaching. In the event of an
unsatisfactory evaluation by the chair or designee, an administrative review is initiated.
The office of Academic Affairs maintains records on faculty evaluations and is responsible for
ensuring that all probationary, tenured, and adjunct faculty are regularly evaluated as stipulated
in the faculty contract.
The Vice Presidents for Academic Affairs, Workforce Education, Student Services, and
Administrative Services and the deans receive training in evaluating faculty and staff. There is
no systematic approach to training for department chairs and supervisors other than a procedural
review from the vice presidents or deans in charge of the departments.
Staff Evaluation. With the implementation of the SAP Human Resources system, the district
has taken a number of steps to remedy the problem of staff evaluation and other problems
associated with Human Resources.
The Personnel Commission publishes the Classified Employee Handbook. The handbook
provides comprehensive information about employment policies, procedures, services, and
benefits. Sections on performance evaluation and training and educational opportunities are
included. The Personnel Commission has two service representatives; each is assigned to work
with a specific campus to talk with employees at any time via phone or through regularly
scheduled visits to the college to answer questions about their employment status and related
matters.
The criteria and timeline for the evaluation of classified staff is determined by the collective
bargaining agreement under which that employee works. The criteria for the evaluation of each
classification are listed on a classified evaluation form, which the employee’s direct supervisor
completes during the evaluation process. Evaluations are conducted yearly during the
employee’s month of birth. The District uses an automated system for tracking evaluation
compliance. A computer-generated e-mail reminds supervisors that an evaluation must be
completed one month prior to the evaluation deadline. Continuous notifications are sent to the
supervisor until the completed evaluation is logged into the system. The Single Point of Contact
(SPOC) forwards any delinquent evaluations to a higher supervisor to ensure complete
compliance.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 34

Staff Development Opportunities. The college has an active Professional Development
Committee, led by the Professional Development Coordinator, which seeks to provide faculty
and staff with multiple opportunities to improve their abilities to meet the college mission,
enhance teaching, and improve student learning. The college has monthly workshops and the
Teaching and Learning Center to assist faculty and staff in skills development. The coordinator
posts all opportunities for professional development via e-mail, flyers, and on the Professional
Development website. The Teaching and Learning Center is staffed by a full-time lab manager.
The Center’s principal functions are to provide a drop-in lab for computer and software use and
Internet access by instructors, provide opportunity for consultation on distance learning and
technical issues, and support professional development activities, including video-based and
computer-based training. All classified staff are invited to participate in activities provided by the
Center.
In addition, many committees host workshops to help personnel improve efforts to increase
student learning and student success. The SLO Committee has hosted many workshops on the
development, implementation and use of SLOs to improve student learning. The college has also
developed a new faculty orientation which focuses on student learning and runs the duration of
the entire first semester of employment. A technology grant has been funded to assist faculty in
learning needed technology skills that can be used in the classroom. There is also available
training software to assist faculty in developing skills. The college also encourages personnel to
attend professional conferences and offers reimbursement for those attending these conferences.
Classified staff are also offered training in Microsoft Office Specialist (MOS) certification and
may receive pay increases for successfully completing training. Those wishing to further their
education may also be eligible for tuition reimbursement.
Faculty can fulfill the 32.5 hours of professional development requirement in a number of ways.
The professional development coordinator and the Professional Development Committee, in
collaboration with the Academic Senate and Academic Affairs, develop a full day of activities on
opening day of the fall semester for all full-time faculty, who are required by contract to attend.
Adjunct faculty are encouraged to attend. Opening day activities have been occurring since 2001.
The most recent one featured the theme of student success with a focus on basic skills.
On-campus professional activities are free. Annually, full-time faculty members are entitled to
$450 each in funding on a first-come/first-serve basis to attend conferences. Part-time faculty
members are entitled to pro-rated funding based on the number of their teaching hours per week.
Faculty can also receive tuition reimbursement for completed courses that are job related.
7.2 The college and district should work together to clearly delineate the functions of each in
the faculty hiring process (Standards 7A.2, 7A.3).
The functions of the college and the district in the faculty hiring process have been clearly
identified. In February 2001, the Board of Trustees adopted a decentralization approach to
recruitment and selection of faculty hiring. In response to this approach, the college developed
the Faculty Hiring Process and Procedures Handbook. The document was reviewed by the
visiting team in 2003. One issue in the college document that remains to be resolved between the
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 35

president and the Academic Senate is the Senate’s request that a faculty member be present when
the president interviews the recommended candidates for a position. In all other respects,
however, we are in agreement, and are following the policy strictly in all cases. It has been a
successful policy to date, particularly as it allows us to recruit more broadly, thus providing us
with a much larger and stronger pool of candidates.
By July 1, 2004, the district had the process in place for its role in faculty selection and hiring. In
May 2005, the district’s Office of Human Resources formalized the process in its Recruitment
and Selection Handbook. The manual describes the decentralization changes and includes all
related forms, policies, and procedures. All of the up-to-date Human Resource Guides for
recruitment, selection, and employment are posted on the district website and are accessible from
any computer.
The formation of the District Human Resources Council, composed of representatives from the
colleges and the district office, has led to increased input from the colleges in the creation and
implementation of hiring policies and position classifications.
Standard Nine - Financial Resources
Recommendation and Response
9.1 The district should strengthen budget accountability and expenditure controls to ensure
that each site exhibits fiscal integrity and sound management and accounting practices.
Moreover, the district should ensure that the allocation model is fair, consistently
implemented and well understood (Standards 9A.4, 9B.1, 9B.2, 10C.6).
In response to ACCJC concerns, in the spring of 2006, the district engaged a third- party
consultant to review the district’s budget allocation and funding mechanisms. Studies were
conducted to find out whether the model contained inherent disadvantages for the smaller
colleges in the district. Among the findings were that the district should move quickly to bring its
internal budget allocation formula into alignment with the provisions of SB 361, adjust the
allocation model to make assessments on a cost per FTES basis, and to consider a different way
of conducting assessments. In October 2006, then-chancellor Rocky Young established a DBC
budget allocation task force, comprised of stakeholder groups, including representatives of both
small and large colleges, to review the district’s allocation model.
The Budget Allocation Task Force thoroughly discussed the findings contained in the
independent studies, and in January 2007, issued its recommendations for a new budget
allocation model, which was adopted by the DBC on January 17, 2007. The new LACCD
allocation model parallels the state budget formula, distributing funds to the colleges on a credit
FTES basis with a two-tiered basis for noncredit. However, it does differ from the state formula
in one critical respect: it increases the foundation grant for the district’s four smaller colleges
(Harbor, Mission, Southwest, and West) by $500,000. This augmentation of the basic $3,000,000
foundation grant was made in acknowledgement of the additional administrative expenses
incurred by the smaller colleges.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 36

The task force also recommended that district-wide assessments be changed from a percentage of
college revenue over total district revenue to a cost per FTES basis, in order to make the system
more equitable. The task force further suggested that the district office budget allocation not be
set at a fixed percentage and that its budget be periodically reviewed.
The allocation of resources is one of the district’s most challenging tasks. However, revisions
made by the DBC to the allocation process in the past few years have created a more equitable
and efficient system. The recent revision allows for flexibility and encourages colleges to live
within their means. It also rewards colleges that practice sound enrollment management
strategies and that shepherd resources wisely.
The new model adopted by the DBC addresses the concerns regarding disparity in the treatment
of the smaller colleges, noted by the ACCJC. Despite these efforts however, as of fall 2008,
several district colleges continue to project potential budget shortfalls. These shortfalls are
expected to be mitigated by future growth funds as they become available. In addition, the
district is working with the colleges on enrollment management strategies for 2008-09 to bring
their budgets under control.
Standard Ten - Governance and Administration
Recommendation and Response
10.1 Based upon the work begun in developing a functional map, the district and college
should more specifically delineate operational responsibilities and functions, giving
particular attention to shared and overlapping areas. The district and college should also
establish a method and time frame for regular evaluation and revision of the delineation
based upon changing circumstances (Standards 10C.3, 10C.4, 10C.5).
Operating within the framework of a large multi-college district, it is an ongoing challenge to
delineate our roles. Decentralization is a work in progress that requires periodic review and
alterations. Regular review has been ongoing since the 1999-2000 academic year. Our district
has become partially decentralized, with some decisions made locally and others made by the
district. In curriculum, some characteristics of a course are determined by the college and some
by the district. Some aspects, such as hiring decisions, are totally decentralized.
Chancellor Drummond has made a commitment to redefining decentralization as it impacts the
district’s efficiency and effectiveness. One of the Board's goals for 2008 is to further clarify the
division of roles and responsibilities between the colleges and the district office. In response to
this Board priority, the chancellor has directed district senior staff to engage the colleges in an
ongoing dialogue to further clarify district/college relationships. The initial result of this effort is
the LACCD District/College Functional Map, which offers a concise description of the history
and current state of district/college relations and a detailed accounting of how district committees
and offices interface with their college constituencies. The Functional Map also includes an
extensive set of "functional flow charts" which present visual maps of the district and college
roles in 30 critical administrative processes, ranging from curriculum approval to the
establishment of specially funded programs.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 37

The Functional Map is currently being discussed by college Academic Senates and shared
governance councils across the district. Vice Chancellor Gary Colombo met with members of the
East Los Angeles College Shared Governance Council and Academic Senate executive board in
early December. In winter/spring 2009, it will be evaluated and further refined by the District
Academic Senate and be a focus of the Board of Trustees’ annual retreat. By spring, sections of
the Functional Map—including the listing of all district-wide councils and committees and the
functional flow charts—will be added as links on the District website for the use of faculty and
staff.
The college administration has developed a campus-wide organizational chart delineating
administrative and supervision oversight as well as for each campus division and department. In
addition, each Department Chair was provided an orientation and a Department Chair’s
Handbook for reference to clarify each department’s operational responsibilities and
considerations.
Responses to Previous Recommendations Page 38

ABSTRACT OF THE SELF STUDY
As one reads the self study for East Los Angeles College (ELAC), the focus the college has
placed on student success will be apparent. The college has successfully implemented strategic
planning and is using data-driven processes to determine programmatic needs. Student Learning
Outcomes are being developed in all units, and the college stands prepared to implement newly
revised plans in the areas of facilities, technology, and education, combined into an overall
strategic plan. Student success, particularly in the area of basic skills development, is an overarching
theme in day-to-day operations.
Standard One: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness. This standard describes the important
role the college mission statement plays in guiding planning and decision-making. The
statement, which was revised in 2007, is written in the catalog, class schedule, and on the college
Web site, as well as in planning and program review documents. The college has a commitment
to review the mission statement at least every six years. The standard further describes how the
college demonstrates effectiveness through an ongoing commitment to improving student
learning and institutional processes. The Program Review process is well established. Shared
governance committees oversee student learning, and implementation of the Student Learning
Outcomes cycle is a top campus priority.
The major issues which emerged as a result of the work on Standard I and warrant further
attention and resolution are
Student Learning Outcomes Assessments will be linked to the college’s established Core
Competencies.
With the leadership of a new Associate Dean for Student Success, the college will implement
its planning agenda for Student Success and Basic Skills.
Ties between Program Review and budget allocation will be formalized.
Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services. This extensive standard report deals
with instructional programs, student support services, and library and learning support services.
The college offers a variety of programs to meet the needs of the local community, workforce,
and community-based organizations. A renewed emphasis on basic skills has led to the
establishment of a Student Success Committee charged with making programmatic changes in
the delivery of basic skills instruction. Courses and programs are offered at a variety of outreach
sites as well as on the main campus and the South Gate and Rosemead centers. The college has
embarked on a concerted effort to incorporate Student Learning Outcomes into every unit on
campus. Student support services are designed to meet the widely varying needs of the college’s
student population, including traditional academic counseling as well as job placement, health
services, psychological counseling, child care, basic skills improvement, tutoring, services for
disabled students, and other specialized programming. Library and learning support services are
principally provided by the college libraries (on the main campus and at South Gate) and the
Learning Assistance Center (LAC). In addition, several departments and programs offer
information and learning resources specific to their specialty areas for students. Both libraries
and LAC have increased the availability of technology resources to students.
The major issues which emerged as a result of the work on Standard II and warrant further
attention and resolution are
Abstract of the Self-Study Page 41

The college will implement SLOs in all campus units and complete the assessment cycle.
The college will select and validate new computerized assessment placement instruments for
Mathematics, English, and ESL.
The college will provide comprehensive student services at the Rosemead Center.
The college will make counseling available to students online.
Standard III: Resources describes how the college has sought to integrate staffing, employee
evaluations, campus technology, facilities development, and budgeting into a comprehensive
system of campus-wide planning. The college’s Facilities, Technology, and Educational
planning committees have created a framework for meeting the college’s goals and established
the process for how physical, fiscal and human resources are used and allocated. Through these
shared governance committees, ELAC has ensured that staffing and the distributions of resources
have met the needs of the campus and its diverse student body. Some achievements include
significant improvements in technological services, including campus-wide wireless Internet,
expansions of online education and the development of an online Academic Computing
Environment (ACE). Through the use of bond measure funds the campus has been able to
dramatically and positively impact facilities improvements and will continue to keep the college
environment in a state of improvement for the next ten years. College fiscal responsibility has
allowed the college to maintain a significant balance with which to buffer the college in times of
economic uncertainty. ELAC plans to continue to improve the process of linking the distribution
of college resources to strategic planning, college needs, and program evaluations. In this manner
the college will continue to develop a cycle of planning and evaluation, ensure that student needs
are met and enhance student learning and outcomes.
The major issues which emerged as a result of the work on Standard III and warrant further
attention and resolution are
The establishment of a Human Resource Office on campus should be explored.
Deficiencies in faculty evaluation forms and process should be addressed through the
collective bargaining process.
The Academic Senate will revive its Ethics Committee.
The college will revise and improve the integration of financial and institutional planning.
Standard IV: Leadership and Governance. Since 1993, East Los Angeles College has
operated under a shared governance structure among college constituents including
administrators, faculty, and staff which has continuously evolved over the last 15 years. The East
Los Angeles College Shared Governance Council (ESGC) has become one of the college’s key
committees wherein all constituencies come together and voice their specific concerns.
Operating under a decentralized governance model for the past five years, East Los Angeles
College’s constituencies have taken their shared governance roles very seriously. With the
recognition that concrete data are needed to support the campus decision making process, the
college’s Research and Planning Office is now an integral component of all committee work.
The District’s Functional Map of October 2008 presents information regarding the structure of
the District’s administrative offices and their functional relationship to the colleges. This is an
important document meant to keep an ongoing dialogue among college leadership, District
administration, and the Board of Trustees, thus further strengthening the decentralization
process.
Abstract of the Self-Study Page 42

The major issues which emerged as a result of the work on Standard IV and warrant further
attention and resolution are
The college will educate all campus constituencies about its budget process.
A committee will be created to prioritize the college’s research agenda.
Faculty members will be more actively recruited to committee participation.
The Academic Senate and college President will work to resolve disagreements over the
faculty hiring policy.
Abstract of the Self-Study Page 43