Pam Deegan, MiraCosta College
Renee Kilmer, Cabrillo College
Melinda Nish, Orange Coast College



The Successful Self Study
Renee Kilmer
How to Handle the Press and Community When
on Sanctions
Melinda Nish
How to Remove Sanctions from the College
Pam Deegan
THE SUCCESSFUL
STUDY

The self-study has at least one major thread
that ties together the different Standards.
 Butte: Planning and Budget Integration
 Cabrillo: SLOs and the Wheel of Assessment
 Santa Rosa: Program and Resource Planning Process
(PRPP)

Four themes dominated:
 Institutional Commitments
 Dialogue
 SLOs
 Evaluation, Planning and Improvement



“The college reexamined its institutional planning and decision making processes.
It created the Planning, Budgeting and Assessment (PBA) process and a new
strategic plan with five initiatives, both of which are evaluated using the
‘Balanced Scorecard.’ There is a new emphasis on effectiveness, codified in the
newly developed unit plans, program reviews, and faculty and student surveys.”
“The mission statement drives the college initiatives, which in turn is the
underpinning of the colleges many programs and services. These initiatives
reflect aspects of the mission statement, such as student learning, diverse
communities, increasing skill, and providing basic skills: college initiative “V”:
student learning outcomes are cited as the source of the SLO project, Project
Learn.”
“The college has invested a significant amount of time and effort in reviewing its
mission statement and validating that it defines its programs and the students it
serves. . . .The mission statement is central to institutional planning and decisionmaking . . . and is referenced in all major planning documents.”



“Dialogue at the college occurs in many venues and in all committees. . . . At the
meetings discussions occur on an going basis on the evaluation of the planning
process.”
“The team saw clear evidence that there is widespread institutional dialogue
about the importance of student learning outcomes. . . .The college is committed
to increasing dialogue and focusing on evidence-based dialogue to improve
institutional effectiveness.”
“It is clear that dialogue has been on-going detailed, and inclusive. All
constituent groups, including students, have been involved in discussing issues.
Dialogue has been central to the college’s ability to pull together staff, faculty
and students at all levels of the organization around common goals and
agreement on the strategies to help meet the needs of students.”



“The entire college should be complimented for the systematic, meticulous,
comprehensive integration of student leaning outcomes and the assessment of
student learning into the fabric of the institution. As reported in the self study,
this endeavor is a work in progress that has caught the attention of all campus
leadership groups. “
“Over the past five years SLOs have been the focal point of the college’s
planning and assessment efforts. They currently provide a central place in the
college’s vision of itself as a learning institution and its self-assessment of its
own effectiveness,” even though “the Assessment paradigms of the Student
Learning Outcomes are in their infancy, as the college acknowledges.”
“Project LEARN is the institution-wide assessment initiative that has
established the organizational structure for the student learning process. . . . In
addition, the Program and Resource Planning Process (PRPP) systematically
review ongoing assessment of SLOs.”



“The planning is well-integrated and focused appropriately on student learning
with a focus on making programmatic and structural changes based on evaluation
data. Through the college’s Evaluation, Planning and Improvement process,
resources are distributed in line with college-wide goals and priorities.”
“The new PRPP process links facilities planning with institutional program
planning through the use of measurable data to demonstrate program needs.”
“The college has a long history of data-based decision-making and planning that
serves the college well. Systems for goal setting, planning, resource allocation,
and evaluation appear to be functioning effectively. . . .The college has a wellestablished instructional program planning process by which programs and
courses are reviewed at least every 6 years. Results are integrated into
institution-wide planning and then to resource allocation.”


“The college, through consensus, defined shared governance as a college-wide
commitment to responsive decision-making processes. Through the College
Planning Council, the college asserts that this venue facilitates involvement of all
constituency groups in the planning and decision-making processes. Student
leadership indicated that they were provided with many opportunities to be
involved with the campus decision-making process.”
“Although it is felt that the college has an extensive and self-described
‘complex’ governance structure, it provides faculty and administrators a
substantive voice in institutional policies, planning and budget related to their
areas of responsibility and expertise. “




Months of pre-planning, identifying self-study
teams, and drafting timelines
Attendance at the ACCJC training 2 years
before team site visit
One year of planning, internal investigation,
compilation of documents and other evidence,
and drafting self-study
One year of final writing and internal review by
governance committees




Previous midterm report addressed all previous
team’s recommendations.
A majority of the recommendations had been fully
addressed by the midterm report.
Recommendations that not yet been completed by
the midterm report were completed by the team’s
visit.
Internal, self-identified recommendations had been
completed.

All required Substantive Change proposals had
been submitted to the Commission at least 6
months prior to the team visit.


All annual DE reports were submitted to ACCJC
as part of the normal annual process in spring.
Any program with 50% of the degree available
online had already been approved by the
Commission through the Substantive Change
process.
HOW TO HANDLE
THE PRESS AND
COMMUNITY WHEN
ON SANCTIONS



Develop an INTERNAL message and an
EXTERNAL message as soon as possible,
preferably PRIOR to the ACCJC’s decision
Make sure your Public Information Officer is in
the loop and has direct access to the President
and the ALO
Get the message out immediately, do NOT try
the “keep them in the dark” strategy!





Honesty = transparency
Surgical strike rather than a long, detailed
story
Decisive and sincere
Authority = message comes from the top
Message needs to answer three questions:
1. Is the situation being managed?
2. Do they know what they are doing?
3. Are they doing the right thing?

Make it look and sound good




Make sure everyone has the message and that
they know how to convey the message to
students, parents, community members
Have a “crisis plan” and make sure you
communicate it
Make sure your plan is executed by a team of
individuals who have the authority to make
decisions quickly
Regular and consistent communications

Silence

Finger pointing

Denial



You’re still accredited !
You can harness the energy of the sanction so
as to improve processes and outcomes rather
become immobilized by the bad news
Celebrate each milestone you achieve in
executing your plan
HOW TO REMOVE
SANCTIONS FROM
THE COLLEGE
California Community Colleges that have been Placed on
Warning, Probation, Show Cause, or Termination – 2003-9
Remember, you aren’t alone out there !





Take charge of the information. You put it
out first. Be honest and transparent to the
college community.
Talk about the sanctions and how you plan to
deal with them.
Be positive in the communication
Don’t place blame.
Take charge as CIO (ALO ?), but work with
the President.


Develop a Plan working with the
recommendations from the visiting team as well
as your own planning agenda items.
Work with your President, Academic Senate
President, etc., to put together an action plan.
◦ Know your college climate
◦ Need more release time to make it work?

Stay in constant contact with the college
movers to anticipate problems and triage when
necessary.





Each Recommendation and action
List steps (in sequence) that ameliorate cause
of sanction
Attach dates to each step
List person/group responsible for each goal
Include contact person who is responsible for
bringing information to President’s Cabinet or
other body that will track information
Accreditation Updates
January 31, 2008
Recommendation – Student Learning Outcomes
2004 ACCJC #1: The team recommends that the college develop a plan to implement
the measurement of student learning outcomes at the course, program and
institutional levels. The plan should include tasks, timelines and responsible
individuals so that significant progress can be reported in the mid-term report.
(Standard II.A.I.a, II.A.I.c. II.A.2.a, II.A.2.b, II.A.2.e, 2.f, II.A.2.h, II.A.3, II.A.6,
II.A.6.a, II.C.I.b).
2007 (Special Visit) ACCJC #1: The team recommends that the following items of
evidence be in place at the time of the next comprehensive accreditation visit:
evidence that the process of establishing student learning outcomes at all course and
program levels has been completed; evidence that assessment of student learning
course and program outcomes is being conducted; evidence that students are
achieving stated learning outcomes; evidence that the assessment and evaluation
results are used for the improvement of student learning (Standards II.A.1.a;
II.A.1.c; II.A.2.e; II.A.2.f)
Action Plan
Timeline
Student Learning Outcomes at Course Level to be
accelerated from 10-year plan to 2-year plan
February 1, 2008
Calendar to be established by department that shows each
course offered, when SLO is to be written, when
assessment is to be started and completed, and when
courses are to be re-examined in light of assessment
information
February 5, 2008
All course-level SLOs to be written for credit and noncredit
courses
March 1, 2008
Assessments for identified courses
March 1, 2008
Responsible Party
Academic Senate
Office of Instruction

Cabinet Contact
Brad Byrom; Pam Deegan

Documentation



February 1, 2008 - Meeting held with executive team and president to
increase reassigned time for SLO coordinator for one semester.
February 1, 2008 - Meeting held with Academic Senate, SLO
coordinator, Office of Instruction to outline all items to be completed
prior to special visit of June, 2008.
◦ Outlined each element of what would be accomplished on what date. See attached
calendar. Additional manual of departmental dates for SLO development and
assessment cycle online with hard copy in Office of Instruction. Office of
Instruction to prepare documentation for special visit.
◦ Group decided to plan all-faculty “LEAP DAY’ SLO writing day organized by
Academic Senate and supported by the Office of Instruction. February 29, 2008


March 1, 2009 – 80% of course-level SLO completed, documentation in
Office of Instruction, SLO manual
March 1, 2009 – Documentation for program-level SLOs for General
Education and CTE areas compiled from Academic Senate records. On
file with Office of Instruction




Task individuals with duties
Review at important meeting weekly or
bimonthly
Ask for documentation for each item
Keep files
◦ For movement on issues
◦ Documentation for reports


You’ve got to work it
Don’t forget to celebrate
achievements!
QUESTIONS?