Accreditation - Hartnell College!!

Institutional Self Evaluation – 12-05-12
provided resources. Interacting with this central committee are other committees such as
Program Planning and Assessment, and Technology, Human Resources and Facilities, but
also the Board of Trustees, the Student Senate, Classified Staff Senate, and the Academic
Senate. The process is inclusive. (I.B.1)
Input from Constituent Groups: The membership of shared governance committees at
Hartnell College is open to all constituencies, namely, faculty, staff and administrators. A
handbook was produced in 2008, and reviewed in 2011 to explain in detail the mechanisms
and membership of these committees. (I.B.1) In this document the spirit of shared
governance was expounded by the following statement: ―Every effort was made in
establishing the membership to avoid any ‗we-they‘ situations.‖ The intention is to engage all
parties and ensure broad representation, inclusive partnership and comprehensive discussion,
analysis and planning, ultimately leading to reforming the institution and guaranteeing
success.
Data Analysis, Planning and Decision Making: Planning is based on empirical data, and
the last large-scale data collection initiative was the 2008 Salinas Valley 2020 Vision report,
whose findings were presented to the entire college, and the analyses were used to formulate
the 2008-11 Educational and Facilities Master Plan. The process of developing the
Educational and Facilities Master Plan was started by retaining an outside specialist in
August 2007. Subsequently, an in-depth socio-economic analysis of the Salinas Valley (the
Hartnell Community College District) was used as the basis of the broad planning that was
manifested in the aforementioned plan.
Example—Basic Skills Initiative (BSI): BSI at Hartnell College was a broad-based
planning project that succeeded in bringing the data, analyses, experiences and opinions of
various constituencies within the college to plan ―A Blueprint for Student Success at Hartnell
College‖ (I.B.21). To achieve this effort, administrators, general education faculty and
counselors worked assiduously to develop a comprehensive plan that developed realistic
mechanisms to ensure that students succeed, and for the dismantling of institutional barriers
hindering such a success. For this purpose, the then BSI (later renamed Student Success)
Committee examined current practices in admissions, matriculation, orientation, and follow
up of students, and identified failure points, for which it suggested effective solutions.
Furthermore, this committee interviewed a large number of faculty, staff and administrators,
and included their responses and opinions in the planning process. Currently, efforts are
directed at integrating the outcome of the ―blueprint‖ with the planning and budgeting
processes. This committee made two significant recommendations in its report:
1. Develop a plan that will include annual research reports (retention, success,
and persistence rates) and periodic reports (student perception and
satisfaction) to evaluate the effectiveness of matriculation components,
instructional pathways, student instructional support, and student support
services. Through analysis of success and persistence rates of students enrolled
in ESL, English (reading and writing), and mathematics courses below the
transfer level, determine effectiveness of improvements that have been
implemented.
Page 77