COLLEGE OF SAN MATEO
PLANNING AGENDA
TO ADDRESS RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE INSTITUTIONAL SELF STUDY FOR
REAFFIRMATION OF ACCREDITATION, 2007
In Preparation for the October 15, 2010, Midterm Report to ACCJC
By October 15, 2010, College of San Mateo must submit a midterm report to the Accrediting
Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC), Western Association of Schools and
Colleges (WASC). The report will contain evidence of CSM’s continued implementation of the
recommendations received from ACCJC as a result of the site visit in fall 2007. In addition, the
midterm report needs to provide evidence that CSM is addressing its own plans for
improvement (planning agenda) identified in the 2007 self-study. The Accreditation Liaison
Officer, in consultation with the Accreditation Oversight Committee, the Institutional Planning
Committee (IPC), and the Office of Planning, Research, and Institutional Effectiveness (PRIE), is
guiding CSM’s response to its planning agenda.
The following plans were identified in the Institutional Self Study for Reaffirmation of
Accreditation, 2007. Indicated below is the standard which each plan addresses, the specific
plan identified in the 2007 self-study, and the person(s) and/or committee(s) responsible for
addressing the plan and reporting on the status of the plan to the Accreditation Liaison Officer
(Susan Estes).
Standard I.B.5: The institution uses documented assessment results to communicate matters
of quality assurance to appropriate constituencies.
Plan for Improvement
Include a feedback loop for the public in the CSM
website.
Seek additional ways to obtain quality assurance
feedback from the local community
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Director, Public Relations and Marketing
(Bev Madden)
Advisory Committees;
Instructional Deans;
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla McConnellTuite)
Standard I.B.7: The institution assesses its evaluation mechanisms through a systemic review
of their effectiveness in improving instructional programs, student support services, and
library and other learning support services.
Plan for Improvement
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Develop the capacity to systematically measure community PRIE (John Sewart and Milla
needs in ways that can usefully inform program review and McConnell-Tuite);
student learning outcomes evaluation processes
Vice Chancellor, Educational
throughout the college.
Services and Planning (Jing Luan);
Advisory Committees
Standard II.A.1.b: The institution utilizes delivery systems and modes of instruction
compatible with the objectives of the curriculum and appropriate to the current and future
needs of its students.
Plan for Improvement
Identify ways to strengthen distance learning,
Honors, and Global Studies programs.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Distance Education Committee (Martha
Tilmann, Chair);
IPC to identify appropriate deans;
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla McConnellTuite)
Standard II.A.2.b: The institution relies on faculty expertise and the assistance of advisory
committees when appropriate to identify competency levels and measurable student
learning outcomes for courses, certificates, programs including general and vocational
education, and degrees. The institution regularly assesses student progress towards achieving
those outcomes.
Plan for Improvement
Identify additional academic programs that would benefit from
consultation with advisory boards and encourage the
establishment of new advisory boards where appropriate.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Instructional Deans
Standard II.A.2.c: High-quality instruction and appropriate breadth, depth, rigor, sequencing,
time to completion, and synthesis of learning characterize all programs.
Plan for Improvement
Develop an evaluation instrument for distance learning
that parallels the existing evaluation instrument for
classroom teaching; this evaluation instrument will then
need to be negotiated to become part of the faculty
contract.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Vice Chancellor, Human
Resources and Employee
Relations (Harry Joel)
Standard II.A.3.b: A capability to be a productive individual and life long learner; skills include
oral and written communication, information competency, computer literacy, scientific and
quantitative reasoning, critical analysis/logical thinking, and the ability to acquire knowledge
through a variety of means.
Plan for Improvement
Review the current general education requirements and begin
a discussion of whether a computer literacy requirement
should be included and whether to directly address
information competency as a requirement.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Committee on Instruction
(Laura Demsetz, Chair)
Standard II.A.5: Students completing vocational and occupational certificates and degrees
demonstrate technical and professional competencies that meet employment and other
applicable standards and are prepared for external licensure and certification.
Plan for Improvement
Consider using employer surveys as a potential
source of data for assessment for vocational
programs, as appropriate.
Consider establishing advisory committees for all
vocational programs.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Appropriate Instructional Deans
(Charlene Frontiera and Kathy Ross);
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla McConnellTuite)
Appropriate Instructional Deans
(Charlene Frontiera and Kathy Ross)
Standard II.B.1: The institution assures the quality of student support services and
demonstrates that these services, regardless of location or means of delivery, support
student learning and enhance achievement of the mission of the institution.
Plan for Improvement
Identify ways to broaden the amount and depth of
program and service feedback received from students.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Student Services Administrators;
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla
McConnell-Tuite)
Standard II.B.4: The institution evaluates student support services to assure their adequacy in
meeting identified student needs. Evaluation of these services provides evidence that they
contribute to the achievement of student learning outcomes. The institution uses the results
of these evaluations as the basis for improvement.
Plan for Improvement
Seek ways to refine, develop, and improve direct methods of
assessing student learning in student services programs.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Student Services SLO Lead
(Eileen O’Brien)
Standard II.C.1.a: Relying on appropriate expertise of faculty, including librarians and other
learning support services professionals, the institution selects and maintains educational
equipment and materials to support student learning and enhance the achievement of the
mission of the institution.
Plan for Improvement
Review the adequacy of staffing and
materials budgets.
Update the Library Information
Technology Plan.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Staffing: Human Resources Committee (Sandra Stefani
Comerford, Chair);
Materials budget: Director, Library and Learning
Services (Lorrita Ford)
Technology Committee (Kevin Henson, Chair)
Standard II.C.1.b: The institution provides ongoing instruction for users of library and other
learning support services so that students are able to develop skills in information
competency.
Plan for Improvement
Implement Web 2.0 technologies to improve access to
information competency instruction for both on-campus
and distance education students.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Technology Committee (Kevin
Henson, Chair);
Distance Education Committee
(Martha Tilmann, Chair);
Director, Library and Learning
Services (Lorrita Ford)
Standard II.C.1.c: The institution provides students and personnel responsible for student
learning programs and services adequate access to the library and other learning support
services, regardless of their location or means of delivery.
Plan for Improvement
Investigate sources of funding to increase
library hours.
Investigate options for implementing electronic
reserves.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Director, Library and Learning Services
(Lorrita Ford)
Director, Library and Learning Services
(Lorrita Ford)
Standard II.C.1.d: The institution provides effective maintenance and security for its library
and other learning support services.
Plan for Improvement
Assess existing overhead and book-stacking
lighting.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Director, Library and Learning Services (Lorrita
Ford)
Standard II.C.2: The institution evaluates library and other learning support services to assure
their adequacy in meeting identified student needs. Evaluation of these services provides
evidence that they contribute to the achievement of student learning outcomes. The
institution uses the results of these evaluations as the basis for improvement.
Plan for Improvement
Investigate more fully the discrepancies
between faculty and students regarding the
adequacy of library resources.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Library Committee (Joyce Heyman, Chair);
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla McConnell-Tuite)
Standard III.A.1.c: Faculty and others directly responsible for student progress toward
achieving stated student learning outcomes have, as a component of their evaluation,
effectiveness in producing those learning outcomes.
Plan for Improvement
Work with Human Resources staff and collective
bargaining representatives to include SLOs as a
component of the evaluation process, as appropriate.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Vice Chancellor, Human Resources
and Employee Relations (Harry Joel);
Vice President of Instruction (Susan
Estes);
Vice President of Student Services
(Jennifer Hughes);
SLOAC Coordinator (Jeremy Ball)
Standard III.A.1.d: The institution upholds a written code of professional ethics for all of its
personnel.
Plan for Improvement
Work with college and district personnel to
develop a code of professional ethics for nonteaching personnel.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Vice Chancellor, Human Resources and
Employee Relations (Harry Joel)
Standard III.A.4.a: The institution creates and maintains appropriate programs, practices, and
services that support its diverse personnel.
Plan for Improvement
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Diversity in Action Group (Henry
Villareal, Chair)
Clarify the roles of the college’s Equal Opportunity
Advisory Committee and the district coordinator of
diversity training.
Standard III.A.5.b: With the assistance of the participants, the institution systematically
evaluates professional development programs and uses the results of these evaluations as
the basis for improvement.
Plan for Improvement
Develop a mechanism to evaluate and, if needed,
improve the college’s professional development
programs.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Human Resources Committee (Sandra
Stefani Comerford, Chair)
Standard III.B.2.a: Long-range capital plans support institutional improvement goals and
reflect projections of the total cost of ownership of new facilities and equipment.
Plan for Improvement
Develop a long-term educational master plan that is linked to
the college’s facilities master plan.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Done
Standard III.C.1: The institution assures that any technology support it provides is designed to
meet the needs of learning, teaching, college-wide communications, research, and
operational systems.
Plan for Improvement
Explore ways to assure adequate funding for
technology and related needs.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Technology Committee (Kevin
Henson, Chair)
Standard III.C.1.c: The institution systematically plans, acquires, maintains, and upgrades or
replaces technology infrastructure and equipment to meet institutional needs.
Plan for Improvement
Explore alternative funding sources for equipment and
technical support through partnerships or sponsorships with
foundations, corporations, or individuals.
Establish a budgetary commitment to ongoing funding for
the continued replacement of older technology.
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Technology Committee (Kevin
Henson, Chair);
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla
McConnell-Tuite)
Technology Committee (Kevin
Henson, Chair);
Budget Planning Committee
(Rick Ambrose, Chair)
Standard III.D.3: The institution systematically assesses the effective use of financial
resources and uses the results of the evaluation as the basis for improvement.
Plan for Improvement
Develop and implement annual program
reviews for the areas comprising institutional
support services.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
President’s Cabinet (Mike Claire, Susan Estes,
Jennifer Hughes, and Virgil Stanford);
PRIE (John Sewart and Milla McConnell-Tuite)
Standard IV.B.3.a: The district/system clearly delineates and communicates the operational
responsibilities and functions of the district/system from those of the colleges and
consistently adheres to this delineation in practice.
Plan for Improvement
Work with the district to publicize the location of
existing information about district roles,
responsibilities, and services.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Director, Community and Government
Relations (Barbara Christensen)
Standard IV.B.3.b: The district/system provides effective services that support the colleges in
their missions and functions.
Plan for Improvement
Use facilities program review data to support
and illustrate the need for additional staff.
Responsible Person(s)/Committee(s)
Vice Chancellor of Facilities Planning,
Maintenance, and Operations (Jose Nunez)
Standard IV.B.3.g: The district/system regularly evaluates district/system role delineation and
governance and decision-making structures and processes to assure their integrity and
effectiveness in assisting the colleges in meeting educational goals. The district/system
widely communicates the results of these evaluations and uses them as the basis for
improvement.
Plan for Improvement
Work with the district to assess the newly created
function map and evaluate its value as a tool to delineate
and communicate governing and decision-making
structures.
8/28/09, approved by the Accreditation Oversight Committee
Responsible
Person(s)/Committee(s)
Vice Chancellor, Educational
Services and Planning (Jing Luan)