Saddleback and Irvine Valley College Likely to Keep Accreditation
Posted by: tylerh | 08/17/2008 1:11 PM
Saddleback's and IVC's accreditation status has become an issue for this year's South OC Community College District (SOCCD) races. A degree from an unaccredited college is basically worthless, so any displeasure by the accreditation organization is newsworthy -- and the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges and Western Association of Schools and Colleges ( ACCJC/WASC) is displeased with IVC and Saddleback. Unsurprisingly, folks opposed to the re-election of SOCCCD Board members Tom Fuentes and David Lang are trying to raise the bogey man of IVC and Saddleback losing accreditation, as Compton College lost its accreditation in 2006.
The reality for IVC and Saddleback, however, is that de-accreditation is unlikely.
ACCJC/WASC has two basic complaints: (1) the "Student Learning Objectives" (SLOs) filed with the Federal Dept. of Education are inadequate; and (2) the Board of Trustees interferes too much in the day-to-day workings of the colleges.
The SLOs are a new bureaucratic requirement that exemplify W's Big Government Conservatism. I have not been able to find anyone on either side of this election who thinks that these SLOs have educational value. Moreover, ACCJC/WASC acknowledges that SOCCCD has been trying to comply. Therefore I find it wildly implausible that ACCJC/WASC would pull accreditation over this paper-pushing exercise.
The second issue, Board micromanagement, has a long, ugly history that started in the 90s with a very different Board and a very different faculty union. Quoting from the most recent letter from the ACCJC/WASC (pdf), the accreditors request that The Board of Trustees
Scary sounding stuff. However, the report from the most recent visit (pdf) of the accreditation team is decidedly upbeat:
This is not the tone of a committee that intends to administer the educational equivalent of the death penalty.
Indeed, any AACJC/WASC would-be executioners already have their hands full. In the past year, Fourteen California colleges have been placed on warning or probation. Neither IVC nor Saddleback are on the list.
Saddleback and IVC will file their next report with ACCJC/WASC three weeks before the election (Oct 15), so expect this issue to generate headlines. Conveniently for the challengers, ACCJC/WASC won't give their response until January, two months after the election.
Of course, predicting the future is a murky business. Roy Bauer, writing from the faculty perspective, has a different view on the accreditation issue.
SOCCD trustee Don Wagner and faculty member Roy Bauer both helped locate the source material for this post; key documents are available on the websites for Saddleback and IVC.
The reality for IVC and Saddleback, however, is that de-accreditation is unlikely.
ACCJC/WASC has two basic complaints: (1) the "Student Learning Objectives" (SLOs) filed with the Federal Dept. of Education are inadequate; and (2) the Board of Trustees interferes too much in the day-to-day workings of the colleges.
The SLOs are a new bureaucratic requirement that exemplify W's Big Government Conservatism. I have not been able to find anyone on either side of this election who thinks that these SLOs have educational value. Moreover, ACCJC/WASC acknowledges that SOCCCD has been trying to comply. Therefore I find it wildly implausible that ACCJC/WASC would pull accreditation over this paper-pushing exercise.
The second issue, Board micromanagement, has a long, ugly history that started in the 90s with a very different Board and a very different faculty union. Quoting from the most recent letter from the ACCJC/WASC (pdf), the accreditors request that The Board of Trustees
cease their involvement in college and district operations and delegate all non-policy issuesand
take measures to reduce the hostility, cynicism, despair, and fear that continue to plague the college.
Scary sounding stuff. However, the report from the most recent visit (pdf) of the accreditation team is decidedly upbeat:
In the last three years, the college and the district have made great strides in responding to the recommendations of the visiting teams...
The [accreditation] team is concerned that a fairly high degree of mistrust and finger pointing still exists on all sides, but especially in the faculty ranks when it concerns relations with the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor. It is not fair to blame the Board of Trustees and/or the Chancellor for everything that goes wrong or for every perceived procedural transgression. In the view of the team, the Board of Trustees and the Chancellor are making considerable efforts to communicate better, to follow process, and to respect the boundaries of constituent roles and responsibilities.
Overall, the team is gratified with the improvement that has been made..." (
This is not the tone of a committee that intends to administer the educational equivalent of the death penalty.
Indeed, any AACJC/WASC would-be executioners already have their hands full. In the past year, Fourteen California colleges have been placed on warning or probation. Neither IVC nor Saddleback are on the list.
Saddleback and IVC will file their next report with ACCJC/WASC three weeks before the election (Oct 15), so expect this issue to generate headlines. Conveniently for the challengers, ACCJC/WASC won't give their response until January, two months after the election.
Of course, predicting the future is a murky business. Roy Bauer, writing from the faculty perspective, has a different view on the accreditation issue.
SOCCD trustee Don Wagner and faculty member Roy Bauer both helped locate the source material for this post; key documents are available on the websites for Saddleback and IVC.
CATEGORY:
2008 Elections, Politics Behind the Orange Curtain
Mr. Ayer registered as a Republican to be electable in an interim election with no incumbents. He did...
I agree with the comments made in this post about SLO:"The SLOs are a new bureaucratic requirement that exemplify W's Big Government Conservatism."
I voted for W twice and I am disgusted by Ms. Spelling trying to impose SLO on colleges.
This is big brother telling teachers what to teach and what not to teach.
For example if Evolution is in the SLO the Prof. must test for it.
the team is gratified with the improvement that has been made.
It's true that there's been some improvement, but the relationship the board and the chancellor have with the staff is still horrible. Morale among staff members is extremely low.
If this were a K-12 district rather than a CCD there would be much greater public scrutiny and a recall might have been launched by now.
Yes, improvement has been made. But only because there was nowhere to go but up.
Dear Missy,
Welcome to Orange County. Where are you visiting from? Frisco? Massachusetts?
By the way, around these parts we don't launch recalls against conservative elected leaders like Tom Fuentes who stand up to liberal union bosses.
Enjoy your stay. Come back soon.
Tylerh ignores the primary reason for alarm regarding our colleges' accreditation: that, for once, the accrediting commission is enforcing its "two year rule" (owing to pressure from the DoE). That the district and colleges have improved matters in recent years is irrelevant. The accrediting commission did not tell the colleges to keep improving. It quite specifically told them to finally "resolve" all issues--or else.
Tylerh ignores this simple factoid: that one of the reasons that the two colleges of the district are in jeopardy in the first place is the conduct of trustee Tom Fuentes. The primary reason for jeopardy is board micromanagement. That's Fuentes. Fuentes has openly expressed contempt for that judgment (by the Accreds).
Nice move, Tom.
Fuentes' opponent in November is a conservative, Bob Bliss, who has been registered as a Republican since 1964. Unlike his opponent, Bliss has done nothing to jeopardize our colleges' accreditation.