Phoenix College Home Student's Portal Portal for Faculty and Staff Portal for Alumni and Friends Portal for Employers and Partners Search
Phoenix College Home

HLC/NCA Accreditation at Phoenix College         


  

                   

Introduction

Newsletter                    

Resources

Committee Portal

Accreditation Timeline

Criterion Committees:
Criterion 1
Criterion 2
Criterion 3
Criterion 4
Criterion 5

 

 

 

  

NCA Criterion 2 Committee

Meeting Minutes

September 13, 2004

PresentLoman, Russ, Ronnie, Kurt, Jill, Bonnie, Mike P., Dennis, Jeanne, Gene, Betsy, Alverta, Terri

The meeting began with an introduction by Ann explaining why we are here and what we will be covering.  She explained that we will be examining the life of PC over the past ten years.  She used the quote “an unexamined life is not worth living” to explain this.   We will critically reflect how well PC is preparing for the future.  This reflection will then be written up.

The goals of the self-study are: 

  • Accreditation
  • Evaluation and improvement
    • Respond to concerns of the last self study (hand-outs of the 1996 self study and from the comments received regarding the self study)
    • Provide evidence that Criterion 2 is connected to the college mission and goals (hand-out of new criteria)
    • Evaluate, critically reflect and describe our evaluations based on evidence gathered
    • Make recommendation for improvement, can make recommendations for the future or recommendations for improvements needed now, before the site visit in 2006
  • Timeline (hand out of selections of the self-study design submitted to HLC)
    • Rough draft of self-study due May 2005
    • Distribute draft for comments August/September 2005
    • Submit final self-study report October 2005
    • Self-study visit April 2006

After giving an introduction and background information on the self-study Criterion 2 and what we are to do Ann presented an outline of the entire process divided into the following three steps:

  1. Summarize what Criterion 2 means to us, the process the committee took
  2. Show how Criterion 2 is or is not aligned to PC’s mission and goals
  3. Pick two to four best practices to use as evidence that Criterion 2’s core components are being met

Ann then discussed the four cross-cutting themes which should also be looked at by each criterion.  (hand-out of matrix and definition of themes).  The four themes are:

  1. Future oriented organization
  2. Learning focused organization
  3. Connected organization
  4. Distinctive organization

Next the group discussed the best way/necessary steps to get the materials/data collected to Betsy, the Criterion 2 writer.  The necessary steps are:

  1. To have a common understanding of what the components are and what the components are asking for.
  2. To formulate our opinions; are we doing/meeting the core components.
  3. If we are meeting the core components what evidence do we have that makes us say we are?  Here the group will focus on gathering evidence and collecting data, i.e. planning documents, processes, interviews, focus groups, surveys, environmental scans.
  4. Are our assumptions correct?  After analyzing the data collected is it evident that PC is prepared for the future?
    • If yes, can we use it as a best practice?
    • If no, what are the recommendations for improvement?

Some of the suggestions from the group were:

  • It is important that we are honest
  • To remember that we are supposed to be projecting into the future-look at what Phoenix will look like in the next ten years.

The group then went into a discussion regarding the question, to what extent is PC using the information gathered and the projections being made?  The recommendation was made that this information be used for our future, but we need to look at how much we use the information.  When looking at this information we need to evaluate what is important.  It would be useful to have annual evaluations to see if the data is still relevant. 

Ann then presented the first two core components and the group discussed what data would be necessary to evaluate or support each component.  The following are the two core components with the list that the group came up with: 

Core component 2A:  The organization realistically prepares for a future shaped by multiple, societal and economic trends.  

    • Curriculum courses
    • Program planning
    • Advisory committee, look at their reports/minutes, get a timeline of their establishment in the past ten years
    • District office reports (batelle-Dr. Solley’s office)
    • Service centers, departments such as strategic planning
    • ASU factors; law, nursing, etc. programs being established downtown
    • Light rail and the effect it will have on the student population. 
    • Facilities-future planning:  to what extent is PC shaped by the multiple economic social trends?
    • Future of technology on our campus
      • Impact of district office decisions:  Rio, CTC, On-line instruction
      • How are we planning for it?
      • Relationship to Bonds
      • Updating of software, i.e. childcare center
    • PCLC, what is their relationship/role in planning, i.e. new lot-was it part of long term planning?
    • Trend of alternative funding-economic trend of not relying on state monies.

If we look into all of these and see that people say they are using these resources then we can show that PC is meeting core component 2A. 

Core component 2B:  the organizations resource base supports its educational programs and its plans for maintaining and strengthening their quality in the future. 

  • Grants-what to do when monies run out, how is it incorporated into planning, is it good for the long run?  Planning tools, there needs to be a process.
    • PC is hiring a grant coordinator
  • Marketing/future planning
    • Economic and social change in demographics
    • Change in marketing plan “Go far, close to home”
    • How did they evaluate and assess if that change affected PC?  i.e. or did it cause an increase in enrollment?
  • We also need to look at what PC will do with the new Bond.

For our criterion it will be necessary to decide what data we want to collect out of all the brainstorming.  The meeting ended by deciding the dates for our future meetings.   Criterion 2 will meet Wednesday, September 29, Monday, October  11, Wednesday, October 27, 2004 at 3 PM in HC3.

Meeting adjourned. 

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   
   


      Maricopa Community Colleges Logo
   Updated: 11/3/04    Disclaimer.   Send comments about this website to webmanager.