ACCREDITATION IMPLEMENTATION OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

 

MEMBERSHIP COMPOSITION

 

The Accreditation Implementation Oversight Committee will consist of the following members:

 

Provost: Mark Silliman (Chair)

 

Chairs or Co-Chairs and Vice Chairs of the following 7 Accreditation

Implementation Committees:

 

Administrative Instability and Turnover:

Donald Thomson; Terry Richter & Cheryl Mokuau

Campus Council Constituency Roles and Governance:

Dale Hood; Terry Richter

Curriculum Revision and Review:

Bernadette Howard; Patricia Kennedy

Degrees and Certificates (Learning Outcomes & General Education Component):

Jake De Ste Croix & Candy Hochstein

Placement Testing Impacts:

Frank Sherry; Bernadette Howard

Program Reviews/Program Health Indicators:

Kathy Hill & Emily Uribe

Strategic Planning for Technology and Information/Learning Resources:

Michael Pecsok; Irwin Yamamoto

 

Accreditation Liaison Officer for the next Institutional Self Study tentatively scheduled for AY 2006-2007: Gail Levy

 

Institutional Research Analyst: Andrew Rossi

 

COMMITTEE FUNCTION

 

To help oversee and coordinate the work of the College's various Accreditation Implementation Committees (AICs) in:

(a)    implementing the formal recommendations made by the most recent accreditation visiting team (October 2000);

(b)    addressing their respective secondary charges; and

(c)    preparing their progress and final committee reports to the Provost.

 

The purpose of such oversight and coordination is to facilitate the work of the seven Accreditation Implementation Committees and their respective

Chairs, Co-Chairs, and Vice Chairs by:

 

1. Discussing, clarifying, and resolving common questions, problems, and     needs.

 

2. Providing mutual support to and serving as a sounding board and     collective resource for the leadership of the various AICs.

 

3. Agreeing on a common or uniform approach of fulfilling the secondary     charge to each AIC of address[ing] those concerns, action plans, and     directions for the future identified by the College in our own Institutional Self Study which apply or relate to the accreditation     recommendation and standards being reviewed by each respective AIC    (but which did not result in a formal team recommendation).    

 

 

4. Agreeing on a uniform or standardized format for the (AIC) progress reports and/or final committee reports to be submitted by each AIC to the Provost as to the Committee's principal findings, recommendations, and/or implementation actions taken on both the primary and secondary charges to the Committee.

 

Nota Bene: A standardized format should greatly assist the College when we compile and write both the required Interim Report (due to ACCJC by November 1, 2002) on the three follow-up accreditation recommendations* and the required Midterm Report (due to ACCJC by November 1, 2003) on all of the formal recommendations and our own, College-identified concerns.  (* being addressed by the first 3 AICs listed above.)

 

In this connection, the Accreditation Implementation Oversight Committee will need to carefully review the respective ACCJC guidelines on the nature, format, and content of Interim Reports and Midterm Reports.

 

5.    Discussing respective AIC timetables and plans of action in order to help facilitate timely progress by each AIC in relation to the College's overall Interim/Midterm Reports timeline, and to prepare such Reports for internal review and final approval by the Chancellor and the BOR Chair in advance of ACCJC deadlines.

 

6. Discussing and resolving other issues raised by Committee members. This may include issues related to policy and procedure recommendations made by the various AICs and the necessary follow-through and/or approvals required for such policy recommendations.