Mark Snowhite Chair, Crafton Hills College
Julie Adams, Academic Senate, Ex Officio member
Greg Gilbert, Copper Mountain College
Beverly Reilly, Rio Hondo College
Lynn Welch, San Joaquin Delta College
Sophie Rheinheimer, Las Positas College
Table of Contents
Abstract
Introduction
The Academic Senate Perspective on the 2002 Standards
A Broader Perspective on Faculty Involvement in Accreditation
Faculty Roles in Accreditation on Campus
The Faculty’s Role in Strengthening the Accreditation Process
Recommendations
References
Appendices
Abstract
The Academic Senate for California Community Colleges has a long standing tradition of encouraging faculty involvement in the self study process and in serving on accreditation teams and at the Commission. Though the Academic Senate takes exception with the 2002 Accreditation Standards, particularly their reliance on marketplace values, faculty roles in accreditation are essential to a healthy peer review process and founded in the Education Code and Title 5 Regulations. This paper identifies the many roles faculty must play in the self-study activities: determining how outcomes and objectives should be defined and evaluated; participating throughout the accreditation process from data gathering to responding to drafts; functioning as visiting team members; serving on the Commission, and finally, by responding to Commission actions and recommendations. Appendices include a brief history and overview of accreditation and a consideration of Academic Senate resolutions and resources related to accreditation. In sum, this paper stresses the faculty’s roles at the local level and how this experience serves as a precursor to contributing to accreditation efforts on other campuses and in representation on the Commission itself.
Introduction
The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) approved new accreditation standards in June 2002 and implemented them in Fall 2004, thus necessitating a revision of the Academic Senate’s paper on the faculty role in accreditation (2.02 F.04). This paper of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges is intended to provide readers with a brief description of the accrediting process as it relates to the California’s community colleges, with an emphasis on faculty involvement at the policy and implementation levels, on visiting teams and at the Commission. Previous Senate papers on this topic have been published in Spring 1984, Fall 1986, and Spring 1996. An Academic Senate paper, The 2002 Accreditation Standards: Implementation, was adopted Spring 2004 as a response to the 2002 standards and provides a philosophical and practical guide for the field. The present document follows in the tradition of Academic Senate papers on the faculty’s role in accreditation and confines most of its discussion to working with the 2002 Standards as provided for by Academic Senate papers, resolutions and guidelines.
An earlier incarnation of this paper, the 1986 edition, begins with a statement that embodies educators’ pride and professionalism:
“It is the right, duty, and responsibility of informed faculty to participate in every aspect of accreditation.
The statement goes on to say:
Workshops and discussion sessions on accreditation at recent conferences of the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges have revealed that many faculty members, even faculty presidents and elected representatives of their colleges to the statewide Academic Senate, are poorly informed about the processes by which their institutions are accredited. Very few have been actively involved in the preparation of their institutional self-study, and even fewer have served as members of accreditation teams.
Nearly two decades later, the above statement still requires no revision. Today’s Academic Senate continues to produce workshops, write papers, and visit numerous local senates to discuss accreditation standards. Yet, as in prior years, the majority of faculty have had little direct experience with the accreditation process, including serving on self-study teams, serving as a self-study chair or co-chair, or working directly with visiting teams. As a consequence, a relatively small number of faculty meet ACCJC’s criteria for selection for accrediting visiting teams, thereby limiting faculty perspectives in the accreditation process. The seemingly small pool of faculty from which the Commission repeatedly draws and the distance of some Commission members from their own local senates presents a challenge to us. In Fall 2004, the following resolution was adopted:
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges urge the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) to ensure that faculty comprise a minimum of 25% of the site visiting teams; and
Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges reaffirm its support in the recruitment and training of faculty for accreditation site visits. (2.04 F04)
Clearly, the 1986 statement embodies a sustained tone of optimism, for in the formulation of that paper, including its list of eighteen Senate resolutions on the topic of accreditation, there exists an enduring investment of optimism, a belief that “informed faculty” will always “participate” and uphold the historical values of academic freedom and scholarship so foundational to our profession. Today, as in 1986, this paper acknowledges the contributions of earlier Academic Senate documents that uphold these traditions and their unbroken lineage. At the same time, it suggests how to incorporate responses to the 2002 Standards.
