With EC having been put on warning from the Accreditation Committee for minor offenses, administrators have until January to provide evidence of the required improvements.
“It is very serious,” Francisco Arce, vice-president of academic affairs said. “It’s due to stronger enforcement of the standards according to the rubrics the Accreditation Commission developed a little over a year ago. To expect us to understand that and assimilate it and implement it in a one-year period is not reasonable.”
There were nine recommendations made by the accreditation committee: the college should complete its process for tracking planning, a timeline should be published to determine how long the college will take to implement student learning outcomes, the college cirriculum must be reviewed consistently, the college must assure that online courses are consistent, student learning outcomes must be integrated in the faculty evaltuation process, a fiscal management plan must be developed, the college must develop a staffing plan, a facilities manager plan must be developed, the board of trustees must include in its code of ethics a clearly defined policy for dealing with behavior.
When the Accredition Committe finds such issues with a college, there are various ways in which they can handle the situation.
EC started its self-evaluation in 2006, where the Accreditation Committee found the college was not implementing improvements based on the data from the evaluation well enough.
“It’s a process-improvement issue. That’s essentially what they are directing us to do, is improve our process with regard to what we do with the information that comes out of program information and what we do with that data,” Ann Garten, director of community relations, said.
“EC has until April 1 to submit a report of how they plan on making the improvements to its program review and planning,” Arce said.
Then, the college will submit a second report, including a report on how they are implementing improvements by October of this year.
This is not uncommon, as other community colleges have been put on warning due to similar situations.
“This passed fall, there were 10 community colleges that went through their accreditation. Six of the 10 are on warning for the same things as EC,” Garten said.
Accreditation is a type of necessary checking system for private and public educational institutions.
“It’s a good process because it keeps you honest. It also helps you maintain quality and raise the quality in areas where maybe you’re not quite at standard,” Arce said. “The goal is for the college to be at standard in all areas.”
The reports are intended to address issues and present the college with questions and ideas which will fix areas that need improvement.
“The report presents some questions for us,” Dr. Thomas Fallo, president of EC, said. “Our accreditation is still intact, our courses are accredited and we will be accredited. We expect that by the next fall meeting of the comission that we will be off warning.”
EC administration did have a difference of opinion, as it believes EC should have been reaffirmed with conditions to improve program review and planning processes, Arce said.
“Our goal is to get off warning by June,” Arce said. “Then in October, we will present another report to the commission to be evaluated and then in January, when the committee meets again, they will decide whether or not we’ve made sufficient progress to justify the reaffirmation of accreditation.”