cio c onference curriculum workshop pre-session october 27, 2015
TRANSCRIPT
CIO CONFERENCECurriculum Workshop Pre-Session
October 27, 2015
Welcome
Introductions
System Advisory Committee on Curriculum
Inventory Training
Working Lunch
Hot Topics
C-ID
ADT and SB440
PCAH
Legislation
System Advisory Committee on Curriculum (SACC)Kathleen Rose, Gavilan College
Why SACC was created
An Agency Review recommended that the CCCCO:
Create a Curriculum Advisory Committee
Improve Statewide Understanding of Curriculum Processes
Amend Ed Code and Title 5 to local Stand Alone Course Approval at the District/College level
HISTORY OF SACC The Curriculum Advisory Committee
met the summer and fall of 2004 and into 2005.
The committee set a goal to broaden the experience and dialogue of the curriculum approval process, without sacrificing timeliness or fairness.
The committee has agreed to operate as a state level advisory body.
The committee agreed that it would initially focus only upon credit course and program approval.
Program alignment and approval processes in noncredit were are being reviewed by practitioners in the field (funded with Perkins Leadership funds).
The Membership
6 representatives appointed by the State Academic Senate
4 representatives appointed by the Chief Instructional Officers
4 System Office Staff (Vice Chancellor, Dean and 2 Specialists from the Educational Services Division)
Membership should recognize the need for representation by vocational and noncredit faculty and administrators.
The committee will be chaired by Senate/CIO co-chairs
Guiding Principles
Ensuring quality, integrity, compliance, collaboration and transparency
Aligning approval of occupational & general education programs (credit and noncredit)
Emulating best practices Ensuring a consistent presence for faculty Providing a process that is responsive, creative,
flexible, timely and open to change Putting students first Promoting appropriate support and training Evaluating the committee and processes Ensuring continuity of membership through
staggered terms
Tasks & Duties (2005) Ratifying approval of new programs and courses mandated by
Title 5 to be submitted to the System Office for approval (beginning with credit courses only)
Providing a collaborative forum for curriculum issues that arise Serving as an advocate of the system Participating in revisions to the Program and Course Approval
Handbook Supporting faculty and staff development on curriculum
processes Providing assistance to local curriculum committees Assessing and evaluating local and regional processes to
ensure quality and timeliness Identifying best practices and advocating local implementation Addressing extant challenges in noncredit course/program
development and approval
PCAH UpdateErik Shearer, Napa Valley College
PCAH 6th Edition: On its way!
From one to three documents: PCAH, Submission Guidelines, Technical Document.
PCAH: Rooted in title 5, focused on interpretation of criteria and standards, designed to not require frequent updates.
Submission Guidelines: outlines process and requirements for CO submissions, refers to PCAH for criteria and standards, checklists, etc.
Technical Document: How-to guide for CO submission technology, Curriculum Inventory. Does not include criteria, standards, or requirements. User’s manual.
PCAH 6th Edition: Structure
Part 1: Introduction, authority, background, and general standards for curriculum development.
Very few changes from previous edition
Part 2: Credit Course Criteria and Standards.
Changes: criteria sections, consolidation of all course topics, credit hour definitions and standards.
Part 3: Credit Program Criteria and Standards
Changes: program award type for submissions, consolidation of criteria and standards sections.
Part 4: Non-credit Curriculum
Changes: consolidation of criteria and standards sections, complete overhaul.
PCAH 6th Edition: Structure
Other components:
Glossary and Index!
Appendices
Credit hour guidelines for local policy / practices development
At-a-glance Sections: Substantial vs. non-substantial submissions, submission timelines, statues and regulations.
PCAH 6th Edition: Timeline
Final draft on schedule for completion by December / January.
Legal review
Review and Comment from field?
Publication and distribution: by Summer 2016
Will push out components to the field sooner, if needed, as was done for Credit Hour.
C-ID and ADT UpdateErik Shearer, Napa Valley College
Jackie Escajeda, State Chancellor’s Office
C-ID Updates
34 TMCs now available for local ADT development
Course Reviews: most disciplines up to date
Five year review: Speech Com, Psychology, Sociology: No major changes. 11 disciplines currently going through five-year review
New and Upcoming TMCs: Public Health Science (Release date pending) Child and Adolescent Development (Release date pending) Environmental Science (Under Development) Graphic Design (Under Development)
Area of Emphasis TMCs: Social Justice Studies (Release date pending) Global Studies (Release date pending)
C-ID Updates: CTE
Seven CTE disciplines previously convened and continuing work for 2015-16:
Agriculture, including potential curriculum development in: Pest Management – Certificate
Food Safety - Certificate
Enology – Multiple certificates
Floral Design – Certificate
Irrigation – Multiple certificates
Addiction Studies
Culinary Arts
Biotechnology
Emergency Medical Services
Commercial Music
Automotive Technology
C-ID Updates: CTE
Eight new CTE disciplines convening in 2015-16:
Health Occupations / Allied Health Prerequisites
Medical Assisting
Diagnostic Medical Sonography
Radiologic Technology
Respiratory Care / Therapy
Office Technology – Office Computer Applications and Business Information Worker
Small Business and Entrepreneurship
Welding Technology
Hospitality – Hotel Management TMC and Culinary Arts
More on the way soon!
C-ID: Five year Reviews
Administration of Justice
Physics
Early Childhood Education
Political Science
Geology
Studio Arts
History
Theater Arts
Kinesiology
Mathematics
Computer Science
C-ID: More Updates and Coming Attractions! AoE TMCs: two more this year. Areas under review.
Basic Skills Descriptors
More CTE Disciplines
New TMCs Under Development:
Model Curriculum: ISMC and CCCM
Personnel:
Erik Shearer – C-ID Curriculum Director
Robert Cabral – C-ID CTE Director
All C-ID Questions go to:
Associate Degree for Transfer
SB 440
To date, 58 community colleges have met the SB 440 requirement
26 colleges are 1 away from meeting the obligation
20 are 2 away from meeting the obligation
SB 440 Common Compliance Challenges
Keeping Computer Science and Music ADTs within the mandated 60-unit limit
Delays in the approval of courses in the C-ID process
Current Status
There are 32 Transfer Model Curriculums (TMCs)
As of October 21, 2015, there are 1,973 ADTs offered at a community college
Among these active ADTs, 644 were developed in disciplines where the colleges were not legally obligated to create them
Awarded ADT Degrees
Awards 2011-2012
Awards 2012-2013
Awards 2013-2014
Awards 2014-2015
Associate in Science for Transfer (A.S.-T) Degree
72 1,742 4,938 9,732
Associate in Arts for Transfer (A.A.-T) Degree
735 3,625 6,901 10,912
TOTAL 807 5,367 11,839 20,644
25
http://extranet.cccco.edu/Portals/1/AA/Credit/TMC%20All%20Campus%20Updates/2015/ADT_Status_Report_%209_30_15_System.pdf
Chancellor Office
Workforce Task Force Recommendations (Curriculum)Toni Parsons, San Diego Mesa College
26 Members
13 from within the community college system
4 faculty
3 CEO’s
3 VP’s
1 Dean (CCAOE rep)
1 Board of Trustees member
1 student
13 from business and industry and other constituents.
Taskforce Membership
Evaluate, strengthen, and revise the curriculum development process to ensure alignment from education to employment.
Evaluate, revise and resource the local, regional, and statewide CTE curriculum approval process to ensure timely, responsive, and streamlined curriculum approval.
Curriculum Recommendations
Improve program review, evaluation, and revision processes to ensure program relevance to students, business, and industry as reflected in labor market data.
Facilitate curricular portability across institutions.
Develop, identify and disseminate effective CTE practices.
Recommendations Cont. . .
Clarify practices and address issues of course repetition for CTE courses when course content evolves to meet changes in skill requirements.
Thoughts? Questions?
Cont. . .
Improve CTE student progress and outcomes. (Student Success)
Develop and broadly publicize industry-informed career pathways that prepare students for jobs needed within the regional labor market. (Student Success)
Consider options for meeting minimum qualifications to better integrate industry professionals who possess significant experience into CTE instructional programs. (CTE faculty)
Other Notable Recommendations
Strengthen communication, coordination, and decision-making between regional CTE efforts and the colleges to meet regional labor market needs. (Regional Coordination)
Clarify and modify, as appropriate, state regulations to allow colleges to regionalize course articulation along career pathways utilizing regional or state curriculum models. (Regional Coordination)
Still Notable
Establish a sustained funding source to increase community colleges’ capacity to create, adapt, and maintain quality CTE courses and programs that are responsive to regional labor market needs. (Funding)
Create a predictable, targeted and sustained funding stream that leverages multiple local, state, and federal CTE and workforce funds to support an infrastructure for collaboration at the local, state, and regional levels; establish regional funding of program start-up and innovation; and develop other coordination activities. (Funding)
But Wait . . . There’s More
Curriculum Nuts and Bolts
Title 5 and PCAH
COR Basics
Local Approval
Distance Education Separate Approval process and Regular and Substantial Contact
CTE Program Approval
Curriculum Inventory
Title 5 and PCAH Basics for CurriculumJohn Freitas, Los Angeles City College
Erik Shearer, Napa Valley College
Faculty Authority Laws and Regulations The Curriculum Committee Useful Resources
Academic Senates and Curriculum Committees – The Basics
Laws and Regulations
California Education Code (statute) Title 5 – Interprets Education Code into
regulations Program and Course Approval Handbook
(PCAH) – Establishes specific regulations and guidelines about for implementing Title 5
Chancellor’s Office Guidelines: Course Repetition and Requisites
Faculty Authority and Expertise
CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE FACULTY: Authority over the curriculum is codified in California Education Code and further refined in Title 5 Regulations
TITLE 5 REGULATIONS: Details the implementation of California Education Code
• §53200. Defines the academic senate and its purview
• §55002. Standards and Criteria for Courses and Classes details the Curriculum Committee oversight responsibilities
FACULTY: Professional experts as educators
California Education Code §70902
(b) (7): Establish procedures not inconsistent with minimum standards established by the board of governors to ensure faculty, staff, and students the opportunity to express their opinions at the campus level, to ensure that these opinions are given every reasonable consideration, to ensure the right to participate effectively in district and college governance, and to ensure the right of academic senates to assume primary responsibility for making recommendations in the areas of curriculum and academic standards.
Title 5 §53200
(b) “Academic senate,” … as the representative of the faculty, is to make recommendations to the administration of a college and to the governing board of a district with respect to academic and professional matters. For purposes of this Subchapter, reference to the term “academic senate” also constitutes reference to “faculty council” or “faculty senate.”
Title 5 §53200 – The “10+1”
TITLE 5 §53200, DEFINITIONS: Details the implementation of California Education Code, state the faculty authority for curriculum through §53200, definitions, where the academic senate and its purview are defined: The Academic Senate means an organization whose primary function is to make recommendations with respect to academic and professional matters. Academic and professional matters mean the following policy development matters:
(1) Curriculum, including establish prerequisites and placing courses within disciplines.
(2) Degree and certificate requirements.
(3) Grading policies.
(4) Educational program development.
(5) Standards or policies regarding student preparation and success.
All of the above involve curriculum!
Title 5 §53200 - The “10+1”
(6) College governance structures, as related to faculty roles.
(7) Faculty roles and involvement in accreditation processes, including self-study and annual reports.
(8) Policies for faculty professional development activities.
(9) Processes for program review.
(10) Processes for institutional planning and budget development, and
(11) Other academic and professional matters as mutually agreed upon between the governing board and the academic senate.
Curriculum Committee
Academic senates may delegate some or all responsibility for curriculum matters to a curriculum committee.
The curriculum committee has the primary responsibility for the development, review, renewal, and recommendation of curriculum to be approved by the Board of Trustees.
Practices utilized by curriculum committees throughout the California community college system vary widely.
The Legal Authority for Curriculum Committees is Established in Title 5 §55002
(a) Associate Degree Credit Course. An associate degree credit course is a course which has been designated as appropriate to the associate degree in accordance with the requirements of Section 55805.5, and which has been recommended by the college and/or district curriculum committee and approved by the district governing board as a collegiate course meeting the needs of the students eligible for admission.
(1) Curriculum Committee. The college and/or district curriculum committee recommending the course shall be established by the mutual agreement of the college and/or district administration and the academic senate. The committee shall be either a committee of the academic senate or a committee that includes faculty and is otherwise comprised in a way that is mutually agreeable to the college and/or district administration and the academic senate.
The Legal Authority for Curriculum Committees is Established in Title 5 §55002(a)(2) Standards for Approval. The college and/or district curriculum committee shall recommend approval of the course for associate degree credit if it meets the following standards…
(Similar language appears in paragraph (b) for nondegree-applicable credit courses and in paragraph (c) for noncredit courses.)
“But Title 5 doesn’t say that!”(But the PCAH does!)
PCAH = Program and Course Approval Handbook
Provides the detailed criteria for course and program approval by the Chancellor within parameters set in statute and regulation
Is approved by the Board of Governors
Has the force of law because it is required by regulation
“But Title 5 doesn’t say that!”(But the PCAH does!)
Title 5 §55000.5 requires there to be handbook, what is now called the Program and Course Approval Handbook (PCAH):
(a) The Chancellor shall prepare, distribute, and maintain a detailed handbook for use by community college districts. The handbook shall contain course approval criteria and procedures for securing course and program approvals.
(b) The Board of Governors hereby adopts and incorporates by reference into this section The California Community Colleges Program and Course Approval Handbook issued March 2003, as it may be revised from time to time, along with any addenda thereto. In the event of a conflict between the provisions of the Handbook and the provisions of this chapter, the provisions of this chapter shall control.
COR BasicsErik Shearer, Napa Valley College
Toni Parsons, San Diego Mesa College
The Course Outline of Record (COR)
Standards for COR components in §55002 of title 5.
Legal document that functions as “contract” among faculty, college, and student. (§55002(a)(4))
Describes the required minimum objectives, content, methods of instruction, methods of evaluation, etc.
End users of the document: faculty in the development of course syllabi, articulation officers, and other faculty.
Function of the COR
The COR establishes the content and rigor of a course and ensures consistency for students across all section offerings
Establishes and communicates minimum requirements for development of course syllabi
Serves as the basis for articulation agreements and course identification number (C-ID) approval, facilitating student transfer of credit
Building blocks for instructional programs (degrees and certs)
Typical Elements of a COR
Title 5 requirements in §55002 Title 5
Chancellor’s Office Data Elements http
://extranet.cccco.edu/Divisions/TechResearchInfoSys/MIS/DED.aspx
Publication standards in §55005
Other elements to support local review, articulation, accreditation compliance, and approval.
The COR: Required Components
COR Components Required for Credit Courses (§55002)
Unit Value
Contact hours for the course as a whole
Prerequisites, co-requisites or advisories on recommended preparation (If any)
Catalog description
Objectives
Content in terms of a specific body of knowledge.
The COR: Required Components (cont.)
Types or examples of required reading and writing assignments
Other outside-of-class assignments
Instructional methodology
Methods of evaluation for determining whether the stated objectives have been met by students.
Other Required, not in §55002:
TBA hours (TBA Memos)
Student Learning Outcomes (ACCJC)
The COR: Other Components
Other elements not required by law, but used in approval process:
Justification of need, feasibility, alignment with mission.
Inclusion of MIS data elements is encouraged.
Grading method: letter grade, pass / no pass, etc.
Distance education status / hybrid / mode of delivery
Open Entry / Open Exit status
GE Information / Transfer Status
Discipline assignment
Course repetition information
The COR: Other Components (cont.)
Sample or required textbooks. Resources: library, technology, facilities, instructional
equipment, instructional materials. Required or sample student materials. Student Fees Field trips or fieldwork Breakdown of contact and out-of-class hours, including
instructional categories, to validate unit value.
Include anything that will aid in course articulation, facilitate the development of faculty syllabi, or that will provide consistent information to faculty and the administration about the total scope and needs for the course.
Common Questions on CORs
Assignments: types or examples, or both? Textbooks: required or examples? What about Academic Freedom? Why SLOs? Do we include out-of-class hours? Weekly hours? Total term hours? Hours per topic?
The COR: Good PracticesASCCC Resource Paper: http://www.asccc.org/papers/course-outline-record-curriculum-reference-guide
Key Concept – The Integrated COR: natural flow from objectives to content to methods of instruction to methods of evaluation. These elements should fit together into a seamless whole that describes all necessary components.
Consider and write to the audience for particular COR components.
Find balance in writing style to ensure that individual instructors are granted the freedom to approach course material through the lens of their particular expertise.
Remember that it is a legal document. If it says you do something or cover something, you must do or cover.
Develop writing standards and guidelines for faculty authors. Include writing tips for good content, objectives, etc.
The COR: MIS Data Elements
While these elements are not required ON the COR, they are required for CO submission and good practice suggests inclusion on the COR or attachment. In some cases, not including the element on the COR would be an odd choice (CB01, CB02).
DED # Data Element Name
CB01 Course Department and Number
CB02 Course Title
CB03 Course TOP Code
CB04 Course Credit Status
CB05 Course Transfer Status
CB06 Units of Credit – Maximum
CB07 Units of Credit – Minimum
CB08 Course Basic Skills Status
CB09 Course SAM Priority Code
CB10 Course Cooperative Work Experience Education Status
CB11 Course Classification Status
CB13 Course Special Class Status
CB21 Course Prior to Transfer Level
CB23 Funding Agency Category
CB24 Course Program Status
Local Approval BasicsErik Shearer, Napa Valley College
Toni Parsons, San Diego Mesa College
Lori Bennett, Moorpark College
Faculty Proposal Development
Considerations for this step: Rationale for proposal: why this revision, new course, degree, certificate?
Faculty authors should consider: need, appropriateness to mission, feasibility, articulation, C-ID alignment, etc. .
Course Curriculum: clear and guidelines for development of integrated Course Outlines of Record.
Program Curriculum: development of responses for narrative criteria.
While frequently product of single faculty, whole program / department should be involved.
This is stage to head off problems with discipline overlap, poorly conceived or written proposals, issues with mission appropriateness, etc.
Technical Review
Typical questions for Tech Review:
Is this compliant with all regulations?
Is the COR or program form and documentation complete?
Is this being proposed for the appropriate discipline?
Is the writing aligned with standards? (grammar, spelling, etc.)
Is there anything in the proposal that can be fixed prior to committee review?
A primary role of tech review is to address technical and compliance issues early in the process, prior to review by the whole committee.
Committee Review and Approval
Considerations for this step
Focus on big picture, avoid the editing-by-committee nightmare.
Curriculum committee has responsibility and authority to approve or not approve proposals. If it isn’t right, don’t approve it.
Collegial interaction and discussion is essential. Remember that new or even existing faculty can be intimidated by committee.
Balance trusting discipline expertise with ensuring good curriculum.
Develop and use written policies for how all types of proposals are handled, including multiple reviews, returning of proposals for edits, faculty attendance when their courses are up for action, etc.
Board Approval
Considerations for this step
Curriculum committee has regulatory authority to recommend curriculum directly to the Governing Board, though some colleges add additional step for Senate review.
Governing Board has final authority for curriculum approval. Approval date required for CO submission.
Best practices: monthly curriculum submissions.
Submission can happen through multiple routes, depending on local governance processes.
Chancellor’s Office Submission
CO review and approval focuses on issues of compliance, rather than content.
Courses New, Non-substantial Revision, Substantial Revision, Stand Alone etc. Can take anywhere from 24 hours to a few weeks for review or
approval. CO must issue a unique course control number prior to local offering.
Programs New, non-sub revision, substantive revision, etc. Degrees: ADT, CTE, AA / AS Non-CTE Certificates: Transfer, CTE, Other Program review and approval timelines are variable and dependent on
program type and length of queue at CO.
Implementation and Regular Review
Considerations for this step
For courses: can be offered and claimed for apportionment once control number is issued and course is advertised in catalog or supplement. (§55005)
For programs: can be offered once approved by the CO and advertised in catalog or supplement. Timing related to issues of catalog rights for students.
Total time to implementation can vary from weeks to more than a year, depending on the type of curriculum submission, complexity, and confounding factors in review process.
Curriculum must be reviewed regularly to ensure currency and appropriateness. Some reviews are required by regulations.
Other Considerations in Process
Find ways to streamline the process. Every review level increases the complexity and length of the process. Consider expedited approval processes for some curricula.
CTE Programs: additional step in the process for regional consortium review. Regional consortia can deny new CTE programs within their region.
Additional steps are possible: library review, articulation review, student learning outcomes review, distance education, GE review, Pre-req review, etc.
Roles in Development and Review Process
Faculty:
Responsible for the content of all curriculum.
Responsible for regularly evaluating and updating curriculum.
Responsible for understanding place of their discipline curriculum in relationship to other college programs.
Curriculum Committee:
Responsible for establishing the curriculum process as specified in regulations. Responsible for establishing standards and local practices for curriculum.
Responsible for review and recommending curriculum proposals to Governing Board
Roles in Development and Review Process
Articulation Officer
Responsible for keeping all us on the right path.
Responsible for submitting approved curriculum for articulation.
Responsible for providing articulation perspective during the development and review process.
Administrator(s):
Responsible for ensuring compliance with federal and state regulations for curriculum.
Responsible for communicating matters of compliance to faculty.
Responsible for maintaining a birds-eye view on curriculum and providing that perspective in the review process.
Working Together
Considerations to ensure smooth curricular process:
Collegiality, transparency, dialogue.
Respecting primacy of faculty in curriculum; consideration for administrative responsibilities to ensure feasibility, compliance, and mission appropriateness.
Written policies, processes, and handbook. Clear roles and responsibilities.
Clear timelines.
Clear standards and criteria for review and approval.
Processes for common disputes!
Distance EducationLori Bennett, Moorpark College
John Freitas, Los Angeles City College
Distance Education (traditional definition)The student and the instructor are separated by a distance.Distance Education
(USDE/Accreditors)
Instruction is conducted online with frequent faculty initiated contact between
student and instructor.
Correspondence Education
Materials are shared between the instructor and student electronically
or via mail; contact is typically initiated by the student and it is not regular or substantive; typically self-
paced.
HybridA blend of online and traditional
instruction
Web Enhanced
Online activities are included as
part of a traditional class. No class
time is replaced by online work.
Flipped Classroom
Traditional lecture content delivered online
while interaction, conversation and
problem-solving occur face-to-face
Traditional Education“Face-to-face”
“Brick and mortar”
Federal Regulation
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 34, Education §602. Distance education means:
Education that uses one or more of the technologies listed in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition to deliver instruction to students who are separated from the instructor and to support regular and substantive interaction between the students and the instructor, either synchronously or asynchronously. The technologies may include:
1. The internet;
2. One-way and two-way transmissions through open broadcast, closed circuit, cable, microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics, satellite, or wireless communications devices:
3. Audio conferencing: or
4. Video cassettes, DVDs, and CDROMs, if the cassettes, DVDs. or CD ROMs are used in a course in conjunction with any of the technologies listed in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this definition.
Title 5 Requirement
§ 55204. Instructor Contact.
In addition to the requirements of section 55002 and any locally established requirements applicable to all courses, district governing boards shall ensure that:
(a) Any portion of a course conducted through distance education includes regular effective contact between instructor and students, through group or individual meetings, orientation and review sessions, supplemental seminar or study sessions, field trips, library workshops, telephone contact, correspondence, voice mail, e-mail, or other activities. Regular effective contact is an academic and professional matter pursuant to sections 53200 et seq.
ACCJC Requirement
Distance education is defined, for the purpose of accreditation review as a formal interaction which uses one or more technologies to deliver instruction to students who are separated from the instructor and which supports regular and substantive interaction between the student and instructor…
http://www.accjc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Guide_to_Evaluating_DE_and_CE_2013.pdf
Curriculum Requirements
Separate Course Approval
Substantive Change Reports
Regular Effective Instructor Initiated Contact
Additional Topics Electronic Instructional Materials
Student Authentication
American with Disabilities Act Compliance
Authentic and Effective Assessment
Separate Course Approval
Title 5 §55206 requires that all courses offered as distance education (be they fully online or hybrid) must have separate approval process.
Separate online course review (DE addendum) must include verification of: Adherence to the COR Regular effective instructor initiated contact with
students Provision of online student services Accommodations for students with disabilities
Sources: Title 5 § 55206 “Separate Course Approval.” CCCCO, “Distance Education Guidelines,” (2008). Guideline for Title 5 section 55206, pp. 7-8. ASCCC, “Ensuring the Appropriate Use of Educational Technology: An Update for Local Academic
Senates,” (2008).
Regular Effective Instructor Initiated Contact with Students
Essential if any portion of a course is conducted online.
ACCJC requires policy.
Local Curriculum Committees may work with DE Committees and/or Senates to develop policy and guidelines.
Faculty review process ensures the guidelines are followed.
Sources:
Title 5 § 55204, “Instructor Contact.”
CCCCO, “Distance Education Guideline,” 2008. Guideline for Title 5 § 55204, pp. 6-7.
ACCJC, “Substantive Change Manual” (April 2015). 3.7.3 and 5.3.
ACCJC, “Guide to Evaluating Distance Education and Correspondence Education” (June 2013). II.A.1.a.
Does Your College Have a Regular and Effective Contact policy?
Develop a policy in consultation with Academic Senate—Curriculum Committee & DE Committee
Policies often contain:
Definition of REC (use Title 5 language)
Instructor initiated focus
Guidelines for frequency of contact
Syllabus information
Variety of methods that constitute “contact”
Need for contact to be ongoing and consistent throughout semester
Best practices for engaging with students
Sample REC Policies
Foothill College REC Policy: http://www.foothill.edu/fga/rec.php
Imperial Valley College REC Policy: http://www.imperial.edu/ivc/files/REC_Policy_DE_Committee_Final_04.09.14.pdf
Mt. San Antonio College REC Policy (AP 4105): http://www.mtsac.edu/instruction/learning/dlc/reports.html
Mt. San Jacinto College REC Policy: http://www.msjc.edu/CollegeInformation/Administration/Committees/CurriculumCommittee/Documents/Regular_Effective_Contactv5.pdf
Regular, Effective, Instructor Initiated Contact with Students
Email (most common form of interaction for 81% of faculty)
Discussion boards (76%)
Chat Rooms (16%)
CCC Confer Moodle Room (6%)
Face-to-face meetings (5%)
Mail (5%)
Essential if any portion of a course’s face-to-face instruction is replaced by online learning.
What kinds of contact occur? Phone calls Video Conferencing Social Networking Sites Fax Twitter Blogging Text messaging Class Facebook CCC Confer (Call, Meet, Teach, Office Hours)
Source: Survey of 113 DE coordinators published in CCCCO, “Distance Education Report,” (2013), pp. 15 & 50-51.
Regular, Effective, Instructor Initiated Contact with Students
Why is it so important?
Success and retention rates are lower for online courses. Students and researchers assert that increased communication with the instructor means students are more likely to stay in the course and succeed.
Retention (2011/12)
Success (2011/12)
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
TraditionalOnline
Source: CCCCO, “Distance Education Report,” (2013). p. 23.
Substantive Change Reports
Required by ACCJC when 50% or more of the units in a program, degree or certificate are offered through distance education.
Key considerations include:
Regular effective contact policy
Use of General Education online might mean your degree meets this criteria
Academic freedom policy applies to DE and is monitored
HEOA student authentication requirements are met
Student privacy is protected
Sources:
ACCJC, “Substantive Change Manual” (April 2015). 3.7.3, 5.3, and 5.3.1.
ACCJC, “Policy on Distance Education and on Correspondence Education” (2012).
Additional Criteria to Consider
Technical support If students have computer issues or other technical issues,
how will the college provide assistance?
Learning services What sorts of online tutoring services are available for DE students?
Can DE students access library content online?
Student services Does your college provide online tutoring? What about counseling?
Methods of evaluation How will you address fraud or identity issues?
Is proctoring available?
Accessibility Is the digital content section 508 compliant?
Student Authentication
ACCJC – “Guide to Evaluating DE,” Standard II. A.7.b. requires: The use of mechanisms such as secure login and password and/or proctored
exams and/or other effective technologies. Regular review of the mechanisms to ensure effectiveness. Faculty be encouraged to promote student verification in the design of DE
courses. Student authentication to be included in staff training and development.
ACCJC – “Guide to Evaluating DE,” Standard II. C.1.d. requires: Authentication of students using student services.
Sources:• ACCJC, “Substantive Change Manual,” (2015). 3.7.3.• ACCJC, “Guide to Evaluating Distance Education and Correspondence Education,” (2013).
Standard II.A.7.b and II.C.1.d.• ACCJC, “Policy on Distance Education and on Correspondence Education,” (2012).
Colleges must ensure that the student who registers in the course is the same person who participates, completes, and receives credit for the course. This prevents cheating and financial aid fraud.
Student Authentication
Some other methods of authentication:• Live video conferencing
• Academic honesty pledges
• Frequent, effective Instructor contact
Methods of Student Authentica-tion in CCCs (2013 CCCCO DE
Report)
0%
40%
80%
120%
Secured Login and Password in CMSProctoring (78%)Writing style software for anti-plagiarism (54%)
Rehabilitation Act, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Compliance and Section 508 Guidelines
Online classes are subject to the same Rehabilitation Act and ADA requirements as face-to-face courses.
When a course that is offered online undergoes curriculum review, it must be reviewed for Section 508 compliance.
Affirmed during peer review of online faculty.
Sources:• Title 5 § 55200. Definition and Application.• CCCCO, “Distance Education Guidelines,” 2008. Guideline for Title 5 § 55200, p. 3-6.• CCCCO, “Distance Education Accessibility Guidelines,” 2011.
Do You Know…
if your college has a regular, effective, instructor-initiated contact policy for online classes?
if your college has a method for authenticating students in online courses?
if the instructors who teach online at your college are using authentic and effective assessment?
if the instructors at your college are making proper use of electronic instructional materials?
how your college ensures that online courses are ADA compliant?
if your college is submitting substantive change proposals and DE addendums as required?
Career Technical Education Program Approval Margie Fritch, Rio Hondo College
Lori Bennett, Moorpark College
Two-Year Review
Ed Code §78016
College/District local approval practices
Established program review elements
CTE Programs
Viability of CTE program in region
Workforce need (LMI data)
Student Completions
Student Success Measures – exams/licenses
Advisory Board recommendations
Student Employment in field
Regional Consortium Approval
State Submission
CTE “New” Program Approval
Conduct Needs Analysis
LMI data
Advisory Board input
Other
Program Plan
Curriculum
LMI data
Budget
Employment Outlook
Regional Consortium Approval
College Local Approval
State Approval
New Program (new TOP code)
New Option in an Existing Program
Industry Input and Roles
Advisory Board – KSAs and curriculum review
DSN – regional expert in industry sector Regional Consortium – program
approvals Curriculum Committee – local approval CCCCO – state approval per PCAH
guidelines
Curriculum Inventory BasicsStephanie Ricks-Albert, State Chancellor’s Office
Curriculum TrainingErik Shearer, Jackie Escajeda, Stephanie Ricks-Albert, Leslie LeBlanc, and Chantee Guiney