Introduction - East Los Angeles College

More documents

Recommendations

Info

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
Page 1: east los angeles college Accreditat
Page 7: TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Coll
Page 11 and 12: INTRODUCTION College History East L
Page 13 and 14: open spring 2009 followed by a remo
Page 15 and 16: The college has an over-representat
Page 17 and 18: Vocational 31% 33% Transfer 21% 6%
Page 19 and 20: College Organizational Structure Ea
Page 21 and 22: Dean, Liberal Arts Karen Daar Dean,
Page 23 and 24: Dean, Career Technical Education La
Page 25 and 26: Administrative Services Mr. Robert
Page 27 and 28: LOS ANGELES COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTR
Page 29 and 30: By the District. The LACCD Office o
Page 31: ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY 2007-2008
Page 35 and 36: ELIGIBILITY REQUIREMENTS FOR ACCRED
Page 37 and 38: have the academic freedom to seek t
Page 39: 18. FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY. East
Page 43 and 44: RESPONSES TO THE 2003 VISITING TEAM
Page 45: Course assessments to date have inc
Page 49 and 50: Staff Development Opportunities. Th
Page 51 and 52: The task force also recommended tha
Page 54 and 55: ABSTRACT OF THE SELF STUDY As one r
Page 56: The major issues which emerged as a

Introduction - East Los Angeles College

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?