Introduction

Newsletter                    

Resources

Committee Portal

Accreditation Timeline

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

HLC Criterion 3 Meeting Notes

April 5, 2004

            The HLC Criterion 3 Subcommittee met April 5, 2004.  In attendance were Mike Mitchell, Chair;  Joy Fitzpatrick; Kristin Anderson; Lily Kang; John Arle; Liz O’Brien; Ofelia Canez; Brent Jamison; Pam Rogers; and Don Richardson. 

Mike began the meeting by reporting on the NCA Conference in Chicago. He stated that it was a better conference this year.  Evidently there is some confusion about whether or not the site teams will be using a matrix or grid to assess levels of implementation.  Mike believes that the report will be more abstract and freer, and he intends to discontinue the matrix he has been using.  However, Brent Jamison interpreted what he heard differently, so this needs clarification.  Brent says we still need the evidence at the course, program, and institutional level. 

            Committee members reviewed the two draft introduction paragraphs submitted by Don and generally agreed that the second comes closer to their desired statement of the culture of assessment; it does need to be edited, of course.  We need a summative statement for the introduction which includes core competencies. 

            Mike then assigned duties in accord with the materials needed to satisfy 3b.  He also posed the question, “Do we need to explain how the instructional councils work or is it sufficient to note that they are faculty driven?”  Of course, the faculty are qualified as the department chairs assure that we hire only qualified faculty.  The committee agreed that apparently listing what we are doing is sufficient; we do not need justification.

            Note for the future:  When we use examples of best practices, we should use those from traditional approaches and from non-traditional evaluations, and we should label them as such.

            John Arle to pursue materials on Ocotillo.  International teacher exchange—Liz O’Brien.  Reassigned time for professional development—Mike has asked for a report.  Question:  When Roman completed the AA Degree, did he do it on tuition waivers? 

            For effective teaching, we may need samples of completed FEPs, department chair visitations, and student evaluations.  The complete file on FEPs is in the DI office.

Mike has already compiled information on the DTA.  Pam to get information on NISOD.

Innovation of the Year—Mike Murphy—Kristin Anderson to follow up on this.  Publication and advertising, post cards—Lily Kang to check with Mike Murphy.

            Improved Pedagogy:  Learning communities—Ofelia Canez to check with Linda Offenberg.  The areas including tools and supplemental material, media, library, computer appear to overlap with criterion 4; thus, we can defer this for now.

            Day of learning—Arlene and Sandra—Staff Development Committee—Lily Kang to follow up.

            Openness to innovative practices to enhance learning—diversity infusion program, MCLI—Joy to follow up.

            Do we need to explain all of the diverse ways of content delivery?  Web CT?  OE/OE?  Dual enrollment?

            Innovative practices to enhance learning—LTD—John Arle to follow up.

            Faculty keeping abreast—research, library products, liaison, and services—Joy to follow up.  Training—LTD; Alicia Barnet—Lily to follow up.  (Also overlap with criterion 4.)

            Faculty members active in professional organizations relevant to their teaching—this is a survey question.  Money spent for departmental membership in professional organizations—Liz to ask the chairs.  Mike to ask Marian and any others.

            Following assigning the responsibilities, the committee brainstormed how Phoenix College satisfies the bullets under 3c “The Organization creates effective learning environments.”

• “Assessment results inform improvements in curriculum, pedagogy, instructional resources, and student services.”

Assessment results inform improvements

Assessment outcomes committees

Individual departments and programs do this (IPP)

Individual teachers for their class via:

            Student goals

            1” papers

How has strategic planning used assessment?

MCLI faculty usage survey

Information Literacy Assessment group

Retention studies

Library collection and services assessment

Title V

            Science/Math Center

ADA Room

            In Library/on campus; special desks, interpreters, note takers (Mitra’s office)

Re-entry

International office

Librarians online (Virtual Reference)

Writing Laboratory (Library lower level)

Remote access to library databases

Reserve shelf for MECHA in library

Honors classes/Classics Dept.

Physical environment of classroom

Student clubs

Developmental (O-level courses)

• “Advising systems focus on student learning, including the mastery of skills required for academic success.”

Classroom management student teaching—micrograde

Blackboard

ASSET testing

Assn. Of Dev. Ed. (Study Skills Survey)

Advising—contact Rene or Cheryl

Grants—Student Experience <CCSSE> Participating

CELSA

Test of Everyday Reasoning

CTE/Customizing Training Education

Online Student Support Services (SSS)

Hours of operation for SSS

Support staff and hours for online/hybrid/Web CT classes

Student Clubs—Kelly Loucy

CTE Contracting (Off-site)

Dual Enrollment

282 Vol. Service Hiring

Study Abroad—Faculty and Student Opportunities

Field Trips—Major and Minor; Phil Pepe, Ken Roberts, Annette Duran

• “The organization employs, when appropriate, new technologies that enhance effective learning environments for students.”

Creation and maintenance of computer labs—reading, math, science, English
Implementation of current technology instructional methods, Smartboard,

Blackboard, Cutting Edge

            Web CT

            Hybrid Classes

            Synchronized work stations in English laboratory

            E books (Net Library eBrary)

            Task Stream e portfolios/web based desktop

            Media enhanced rooms

            Media cameras, DVD, Laptops

• “The organization’s systems of quality assurance include regular review of whether its educational strategies, activities, processes, and technologies enhance student learning.”

Explanation of assessments (timelines, reports)

Who is in charge of review process—what is the timeline?

Student evaluations of courses

Student suggestion box in library

Annual department chair reports

Phoenix College official functions for request—how money is used to address

strategic goals or HLC

            The next meetings will be April 19^th at 1:30 and May 3^rd at 12:00 noon.  Mike invited everyone to partake of his homemade spaghetti sauce (both with and without meatballs) at the May 3^rd meeting.

            Respectfully,

            Don Richardson