03.01.2015 Views

City College of San Francisco - California Competes

City College of San Francisco - California Competes

City College of San Francisco - California Competes

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

THEME III<br />

I. Overview<br />

<strong>College</strong> dialogs at CCSF are many and occur at all levels <strong>of</strong> the organization and among all <strong>College</strong> constituencies.<br />

Meetings and discussions about institutional issues are pervasive, and the dialogs that occur<br />

are critical to institutional growth and change and address many sections <strong>of</strong> the WASC standards. Section<br />

II <strong>of</strong> this essay presents the institutional context—a description <strong>of</strong> the <strong>College</strong>’s Shared Governance System<br />

and brief descriptions <strong>of</strong> a sample <strong>of</strong> dialogs organized around four critical areas: (1) planning; (2) diversity<br />

and equity; (3) student success; and (4) teaching and learning. In reality there is <strong>of</strong>ten overlap between<br />

and among the dialogs that advance the programs and activities reflected by these broad areas. Section III<br />

provides fuller depictions <strong>of</strong> four representative and important case studies <strong>of</strong> dialogs originating from four<br />

different sources: students, faculty, administration, and campus/program sites. Section IV, “Conclusions<br />

and Future Directions,” comments on ways to improve the role <strong>of</strong> dialog across the District.<br />

The increase and ease <strong>of</strong> access to data, reports, and evidence have greatly informed and improved the<br />

quality and results <strong>of</strong> <strong>College</strong> dialogs. Thanks to the Office <strong>of</strong> Research, Planning and Grant’s development<br />

<strong>of</strong> the Decision Support System (DSS), any member <strong>of</strong> the <strong>College</strong> community can access a wealth <strong>of</strong> current<br />

and historical data and many reports that analyze student surveys and performance indicators. Other<br />

tools that facilitate dialog across the District are: email exchanges; listservs; <strong>City</strong> Currents, the <strong>College</strong>’s<br />

weekly newsletter; department/program newsletters; the various Shared Governance and other organizational<br />

committees and groups conducting regular meetings for the discussion <strong>of</strong> issues and plans; the<br />

Chancellor’s semi-annual presentations to the <strong>College</strong> community during FLEX days; the Chancellor’s<br />

Midsummer Report; and listening sessions for all stakeholder groups. Listening sessions have become a<br />

regular part <strong>of</strong> the review and analysis <strong>of</strong> major documents and initiatives. The <strong>College</strong> Shared Governance<br />

leaders responsible for developing a document or initiative engage in dialogs with interested members <strong>of</strong><br />

the community who attend these sessions. The listening sessions, scheduled at various sites throughout<br />

the District, are widely publicized and are open to all faculty, students, staff, trustees, and <strong>San</strong> <strong>Francisco</strong><br />

community residents. Three fairly recent examples were the listening sessions held prior to the final<br />

approval <strong>of</strong> the Strategic Plan 2003-2008; sessions conducted as part <strong>of</strong> the institution-wide review and<br />

evaluation <strong>of</strong> the <strong>College</strong>’s Shared Governance policies and procedures in 2004; and sessions scheduled<br />

at various locations in the District for reactions and comments to the current Self-Study report.<br />

The participants in the examples <strong>of</strong> dialogs selected for this essay have used some <strong>of</strong> the institutional<br />

data, as well as information and data they created by engaging in committee and group discussions with<br />

community members, advisory boards, students, faculty, and others. Most <strong>of</strong> these dialogs have focused<br />

on improving <strong>College</strong> services and operations to better support teaching and learning.<br />

II. Institutional Context<br />

The three-part <strong>College</strong> Shared Governance System (Collegial Governance System, <strong>College</strong> Advisory<br />

Systems, and Planning and Budgeting System) is the major conduit for formal institutional dialogs. It<br />

has been evaluated three times since its adoption and has been improved greatly over the years. The most<br />

recent and comprehensive evaluation contained several findings that relate to dialog. The online survey<br />

<strong>of</strong> 140 participants, <strong>of</strong> whom nearly two-thirds were full-time faculty and department chairs, found that<br />

78 percent <strong>of</strong> the respondents reported that their experience with governance committees encourages<br />

honesty among the participants and 91 percent said that their opinions were usually or always respected<br />

(Evaluation <strong>of</strong> Shared Governance, 2004, p.25).<br />

CITY COLLEGE OF SAN FRANCISCO<br />

281

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!