Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12
Resolution of Concern 1: The following is from the Hartnell‘s report to the commission dated
October 9, 2007: ―The Board and the college understand the importance of the Commission‘s
Concerns. All stakeholders are fully committed to meeting all of the Commission‘s expectations
and timelines.‖ This report was accepted according to the Commissions letter from January 2008
moving the college from probation to warning status.
Ongoing Actions Related to Concern 1: Program evaluation, continuous process improvement,
and asking the question, ―Is Hartnell a better college today than it was last year?,‖ are evidence
of the college community‘s commitment to ongoing institutional self-assessment, planning, and
improvement processes. All reports to the commission have been sent on time, and the college
continues to comply with Commission requests, directives, decisions and policies. Drafting of
this Self Evaluation Report involved many faculty members, staff and administrators. Drafts
were vetted at Student Senate and Academic Senate meetings as well as by individual senators
and representatives of the classified staff. Transparency and collaboration are currently the
norm—a huge change from the climate in 2007.
Commission Concern 2
The Commission asks Hartnell College to demonstrate that it meets Eligibility Requirement 10
which requires that the institution "defines and publishes for each program the program’s
expected student learning and achievement outcomes. Through regular and systematic
assessment, it demonstrates that students who complete programs, no matter where or how they
are offered, achieve these outcomes.
Resolution of Concern 2: The April 2009 Evaluation Report stated, ―The college‘s discipline
faculty have developed student learning outcomes for courses, general education (core
competencies), and for degree and certificate programs. The SLOs for degree and certificate
programs and core competencies were published in the 2009-2010 Catalog and on the web
version of the catalog. Course SLOs are included in course outlines and increasingly on course
syllabi. The college has in place a variety of methods to assess SLOs at every level and has
completed assessments for two core competencies (institutional ILOs), communications and
information competency, as well as for a number of individual courses. The infrastructure is in
place to assess SLOs on a regular basis.‖ Their conclusion was that Concern 2 had been resolved.
Ongoing Actions Related to Concern 2: Student learning outcomes are defined for courses,
programs and the institution and assessment of those outcomes is occurring at all the various
levels. The course level SLO assessments are not only being done, they are discussed and shared
at discipline and division meetings with changes being made to improve student learning.
Faculty are aware that SLOs must appear on their syllabi, and a flex activity in 2011 focused on
the elements of an excellent syllabus. Program level outcomes were published in the 2009-2010
Catalog and in subsequent catalogs. A focus on program outcomes began in 2010 and has
continued. Disciplines have aligned course outcomes with their program outcomes and are in the
process of using data gathered at the course level to assess program outcomes. Institutional
outcomes (core competencies) continue to be assessed by the faculty serving on the SLO
Committee. Methods for assessing those outcomes have been reviewed and streamlined in order
to achieve sustainability. Assessment of the core competencies is ongoing. The assessment of
Page 54