Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12 B. Organization of the Self Evaluation Process PLANNING THE INSTITUTIONAL SELF EVALUATION In Fall 2010, the college began active planning for its Institutional Self Evaluation and the 2013 accreditation site visit. Charged with leading and managing the Self Evaluation process were the Vice President of Academic Affairs and Accreditation (VPAA, presently Stephanie Low), and later the Dean of Social and Behavioral Science and Accreditation (Dr. Brian Lofman, whose position subsequently became Dean of Instruction). The Dean‘s Office served as the center for accreditation activities and as the clearinghouse for questions and issues that arose. A Steering Committee was established comprising writing team co-chairs and other key individuals. Each writing team was designed to have representation from all constituent groups and was led by a faculty member (appointed by the Academic Senate) and an administrator (appointed by the superintendent/president) serving as co-chairs. The college established a documentation and workroom in the Student Center on the Main Campus, and staffed it with a part-time clerical assistant. This office serves the dual purpose of being the designated place where evidence is stored and filed, and providing the Steering Committee and writing teams with a dedicated meeting space for dialogue, research, writing, and editing. The Academic Senate has been vital to planning and participating in the Self Evaluation process. At its November 13, 2010, meeting, the senate began a conversation with the VPAA with respect to preparing for the Self Evaluation Report. The Senate subsequently appointed and otherwise approved all participating faculty members, including writing team co-chairs and members. The continual leadership of one faculty member, Cheryl O‘Donnell, is particularly notable, as she took on a leadership and coordination role that facilitated the joint work of administrators, faculty, and staff throughout the process. She has coordinated report submissions, compiled evolving drafts, and solicited input from the college community so that such feedback appropriately informs those responsible for document revision. ORGANIZATIONAL DESIGN FOR THE SELF EVALUATION Key structures for planning and executing Self Evaluation activities have included the Accreditation Steering Committee, the Accreditation Planning Team, and the writing teams. Accreditation Steering Committee: The Steering Committee is composed of institutional accreditation leaders and writing team co-chairs. Its function is to coordinate and oversee the process of preparing the Institutional Self Evaluation Report. The committee has been responsible for ensuring that all portions of the document are completed and that timelines are followed and deadlines are met. Team co-chairs coordinated writing team meetings, designated writing assignments, and gathered and edited written contributions from team members. Drafts of the Self Evaluation document were subsequently reviewed and edited by the Steering Committee, and/or delegated to one or more appropriate reviewers and editors. The Steering Committee votes to approve each comprehensive draft of the Self Evaluation document for distribution to The college community. The final version of the report requires approval by the Academic Senate and the Board of Trustees. The Steering Committee also Page 28
Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12 participates in planning and executing activities focused on educating and preparing the college, including all of its sites, constituents, and community stakeholders for the site visit. The Steering Committee has met biweekly and, as of October 2012, included the following voting and non-voting members: Voting Members Mitzi Alexander, Co-Chair, Standard IIB (Student Support Services) Writing Team Lindsey Bertomen, Co-Chair, Standard III (Resources) Writing Team Paulette Bumbalough, Co-Chair, Standard IV (Leadership and Governance) Writing Team Matt Coombs, Co-Chair, Standard III (Resources) Writing Team Mary Dominguez, Co-Chair, Standard IIB (Student Support Services) Writing Team Zahi Kanaan-Atallah, Co-Chair, Standard I (Institutional Mission and Effectiveness) Writing Team Carol Kimbrough, Co-Chair, Standard IIA (Instructional Programs) & IIC (Library and Learning Support Services) Writing Team Brian Lofman, Chair; Interim Dean, Instruction & Accreditation Liaison Officer Stephanie Low, Co-Chair, Standard IIA (Instructional Programs) & IIC (Library and Learning Support Services) Writing Team; Interim Vice President, Academic Affairs & Accreditation Cheryl O'Donnell, Accreditation Coordinator Daniel Petersen, Co-Chair, Standard I (Institutional Mission and Effectiveness) Writing Team Ann Wright, Co-Chair, Standard IV (Leadership and Governance) Writing Team Non-Voting Members Langston Johnson, Co-Chair, Introduction Writing Team Terri Pyer, One Voice Editor Nancy Schur, Co-Chair, Introduction Writing Team & Immediate Past President, Academic Senate Accreditation Planning Team: The Planning Team has engaged in planning, implementation, and coordination activities to ensure that the Self Evaluation proceeded productively and that all aspects of the Self Evaluation process were effectively managed. Team members organize and facilitate the work of the Steering Committee, prepare documentation to support committee decision-making, and assist in implementing decisions. The Planning Team has met weekly, biweekly or as required. As of October 2012, the team consisted of the following persons: Maria De Leon, Division Administrative Assistant, Office of Dean of Instruction Brian Lofman, Chair; Interim Dean, Instruction & Accreditation Liaison Officer Cheryl O'Donnell, Accreditation Coordinator Page 29
Page 1 and 2: H A R T N E L L C O M M U N I T Y C
Page 3 and 4: Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 29: Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 77 and 78: BSI Improvement (%) Institutional S
Page 81 and 82:
Institutional Self Evaluation - 12-
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
Page 143 and 144:
Page 145 and 146:
Page 147 and 148:
Page 149 and 150:
Page 151 and 152:
Page 153 and 154:
Page 155 and 156:
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169 and 170:
Page 171 and 172:
Page 173 and 174:
Page 175 and 176:
Page 177 and 178:
Page 179 and 180:
Page 181 and 182:
Page 183 and 184:
Page 185 and 186:
Page 187 and 188:
Page 189 and 190:
Page 191 and 192:
Page 193 and 194:
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
Page 225 and 226:
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Approximately $9.7 million or 21% o
Page 253 and 254:
The college meets this standard. Pl
Page 255 and 256:
levels that support the college’s
Page 257 and 258:
III.D.1.b Institutional planning re
Page 259 and 260:
Assumptions are reviewed during the
Page 261 and 262:
The institutional planning and asse
Page 263 and 264:
The audit report includes a managem
Page 265 and 266:
financial decision making process i
Page 267 and 268:
III.D.3.a The institution has suffi
Page 269 and 270:
and restricted funds; and to demons
Page 271 and 272:
Planning Agenda None. III.D.3.d The
Page 273 and 274:
III.D.3.g Contractual agreements wi
Page 275 and 276:
III.D.4 Financial resource planning
Page 277 and 278:
Standard III D: Evidence III.D.1 Ha
Page 279 and 280:
Page 281 and 282:
Page 283 and 284:
Page 285 and 286:
Page 287 and 288:
Page 289 and 290:
Page 291 and 292:
Page 293 and 294:
Page 295 and 296:
Page 297 and 298:
Page 299 and 300:
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
Page 307 and 308:
Page 309 and 310:
Page 311 and 312:
Page 313 and 314:
Page 315 and 316:
Page 317 and 318:
Page 319 and 320:
Page 321 and 322:
Page 323 and 324:
Page 325 and 326:
Page 327 and 328:
Page 329 and 330:
Page 331:
show all

Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

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

Delete template?

Save as template?