College Council -- May 3, 2013

Quick Jump to Sections: Student Services Reorganization, Student Success Scorecard, Accreditation, Consultation Council, Next Meeting.

The first 90 minutes was a work session on professional development that included some key results from the recent SDCC survey and then discussion on what professional development means and how we move professional development to the next level at BC.

Student Services Reorganization

We received an update on the proposed organization chart for the Student Services area. The update was primarily where the funding for the new confidential management level positions will come from. Here is the latest update (when we get the graphical version of the layout, I'll include it in this report):

Student Success Scorecard

One recommendation from the statewide Student Success Task Force of last year was to re-work the Accountability Reporting for the Community Colleges (ARCC) data into a Student Success Scorecard. You can go to the Student Success Scorecard on the state chancellor's office website and select any college of interest as well as the overall statewide average scorecard from the drop-down menu. We went through the 5-year trend of the completion metric in the Bakersfield College scorecard noting the significant difference between the completion rates of those students who come to BC already college-ready vs. those who need remediation: low-70s percentage vs. upper-30s percentage, respectively. Our Institutional Research and Planning department has prepared reports of the 5-year trends in the various student success metrics from the scorecard and they are posted on the new committees website in a couple of places:

  1. In the College Council site in the Links section
  2. In the Strategic Planning site under the Student Success area. The Strategic Planning section is accessed from the very top black navigation bar by clicking on the "Bakersfield College" drop-down menu (has an upside down triangle next to it).

Since the state will be eventually funding us based on student success instead of access (i.e., completion rates instead of FTES on census date), we need to be very familiar with the scorecard. A couple of faculty members have already expressed to Sonya Christian their interest in delving into the numbers and becoming "data coaches" who would help others how to work with the data. The faculty members are Michael McNellis (philosophy dep't) and Pat Serpa (math dep't). If any others want to become data coaches, then please let Sonya know.


Here's the report from the Accreditation Steering Committee.

Follow-up Report: The Oversight Committee (ASC and ad hoc members Sonya Christian, Emmanuel Mourtzanos, Leah Carter, Jennifer Jett [editor], and Amber Chiang) is reviewing the first draft of the Follow-Up Report.   The review focuses on two key issues:  Does the draft respond to the ACCJC Recommendations and does it provide evidence to support the statements it makes?  The next draft will be presented to Academic Senate and College Council for review.

Program Review: As a result of working on the ACCJC Recommendations for the Follow-Up Report due October 15, the Program Review Committee is proposing changes in the Program Review process.  Two factors lead to the recommendation for change:

  1. The college needs to integrate assessments of student learning in the program review and link them to the budget allocation process.
  2. The college adopted Title 5 language to define a program ("an organized sequence of courses leading to a defined objective, a degree, a certificate, a diploma, a license, or transfer to another institution of higher education").

The second change means some areas which once had one Annual Program Review for multiple disciplines will now need to complete a program review for each degree and certificate they offer.  PRC recognizes that this change represents a shift in workload for some and also for the committee. 

Over the course of this semester, in an effort to incorporate the changes recommended by ACCJC as well as improve the integration of planning, student learning outcomes, and curriculum review in the program review process to ensure that these elements play an integral role in the budget allocation process, PRC has been researching how other California community colleges manage the program review process.  PRC is proposing a shift from annual program reviews to a regular cycle of full program reviews (every two or three years) with each program completing a briefer annual update.  Over the summer a work group of all constituency groups (administration, faculty, and staff) will develop a proposal and forms to bring to the first Academic Senate and College Council meetings in the fall. 
The PRC administrative co-chair, Manny Mourtzanos, will lead the summer work group.  The PRC faculty co-chair position is vacant at this time.  "Processes for program review" is item 9 on the "Recognition of Academic Senates 10 + 1 Title 5 Responsibilities—Board Policy Manual Section 6."

Consultation Council

Two items from Consulation Council (districtwide group with reps from all employee groups in the colleges and the chancellor):

  1. Proposed board policy revision to the minimum graduation requirements that removes the wellness requirement (health/PE) as a districtwide requirement in section 4D1 (select the link to bring it up the proposed change).
  2. Proposed changes in board policy to add section 4B3 establishing district procedures for "effective student contact" in online and hybrid courses (select the link to bring it up the proposed change). Porterville College has suggested some changes as well (see link).

Next meeting

Next College Council meeting will be May 17th from 8 to noon (or there abouts) on integration projects and development of our work plan for 2013-14.

Go to new BC College Council website -- old College Council website (until everything's moved)

Back to Sciences/Health-PE reports archive

Last updated: May 5, 2013

Document author: Nick Strobel