Guest post by Dr George Wright
(This is Part 1 of a 3-part post on the systematic privatization of community colleges, paralleling efforts by Bush, Obama and Wall Street neoliberals to privatize US elementary and high schools.)
UPWA Action Alert!!!
United Public Workers for Action (www.upwa.info, http://www.upwa.info)
UPWA Editorial Board
Introduction
The specter of accreditation of Skyline Community College next year by the Accrediting Commission for Community Colleges and Junior Colleges (ACCJC) has opened up a window for understanding the future of community colleges in California. The accreditation process, which is mandated to occur every six years, requires that Skyline College follow a set of “standards.” If the college does not meet the ACCJC standards there is a threat of sanctions. There are three increasingly serious stages of sanctions: warning; probation, and show cause. If a college does not adhere to the recommendations of the Commission the college’s accreditation could be “terminated.” That decision would prevent the college from receiving federal and state funds for programs and students loans, transferring credits to a four-year campus, or issuing acceptable certificates for employment purposes. In the worse case scenario the college could be closed.
The concern over accreditation at Skyline College is heightened because in June, 2012 neighboring San Francisco City College (SFCC) was sanctioned at the penultimate step prior to termination (“show cause”) by the ACCJC. That determination created the ominous prospect of SFCC being forced to close this summer if it does not meet the Commission’s requirements. Moreover, to put Skyline’s situation into context, the ACCJC has sanctioned over 37 per cent of California’s 112 community colleges during the past decade. Currently, 25 percent of the community colleges in California are under sanction.
SkylineCollege and SLO’s
The Skyline College administration required that the faculty carry out some of the ACCJC standards. Perhaps the most revealing requirement are Student Learning Outcomes (SLO’s). SLO’s are statements which specify what knowledge and skills a student should possess (and demonstrate) at the end of a course, program, and/or degree. The faculty members were told that SLO’s will be used to provide data collection to measure student academic success. Implementing SLO’s requires that each department or program establish standardized SLO’s for each class that is taught under its purview. Once the SLO’s are formulated, instructors who teach each respective class are supposed to write up a test which serves as both a “pre-test” and “post-test.” Tests are then administered in each class at the beginning and end of the semester to assess whether students have learned the specific outcomes during the semester.
Despite the claim that SLO’s are about data collection, the danger with SLO’s is that their implementation can lead to a standardized curriculum. The implication of a standardized curriculum is that it undermines the instructor’s ability to evaluate the best way for students to learn in his or her classes. In fact, this evaluation process is part of the “art” of teaching; and what makes interaction with students important and special. Further-more, it orients the learning process to “teaching to the test,” thus undermining critical thinking, creativity, spontaneity and improvisation, academic freedom, and the instructor’s particular academic expertise or perspective. This problem is identical to how K-12 teachers throughout the country have had to deal with.
The ACCJC and Accreditation
The ACCJC is a one of six regional commissions in the United States that accredits community and junior colleges. This body is a sub-division of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC), which oversees university, community colleges, and K-12 accrediting commissions. The traditional function of an accrediting commission is to evaluate if: “the education earned at the institution is of value to the student who earned it; and employers, trade or professional related licensors, and other college and universities can accept a student’s credentials as legitimate.” Historically, the relationship between accrediting bodies and college has generally been professional and collegial.
The ACCJC is mandated to follow standards promoted by the United States Department of Education. The ACCJC is also under the authority of California Community College Board of Governors and California law (California Code Regulations 51016). Further, the ACCJC is a private body which receives funding from affiliated (public) colleges. Moreover, it deliberates without public oversight or accountability. Therefore, according to UPWA activist Steve Zeltzer, the ACCJC “wields enormous governmental-type power to close or fundamentally re-shape public institutions.”
Since Barbara Beno’s tenure as President of the ACCJC began in 2001, that commission has been extremely punitive in carrying out its mandate. For example, between 2003 and 2008, the five other regional accrediting commissions evaluated 756 colleges, while sanctioning only 14, or at a rate of .0185185 percent. Meanwhile, the ACCJC evaluated 174 colleges and sanctioned 112 schools in California and Hawaii, or at a rate of 64 percent. This means that the ACCJC issued 89 percent of the nation-wide sanctions on community and junior colleges. Moreover, between June, 2011 and June, 2012 the ACCJC issued 64 percent of the 75 nation-wide sanctions. (See: Marty Hittelman, ACCJC Gone Wild, January 21, 2013. Internet Source.)
Marty Hittelman, who is the former President of the California Federation of Teachers, elaborates, “The actual sanctions have had little to do with the quality of instruction received by students who attend. Instead of concentrating on the value of the college to students and the value of the credits earned, the ACCJC has taken a path that requires college to expend an incredible quantity of time and resources to satisfy the ACCJC that they are performing the excessive documenting, planning, and reviews of policy required by the Commission.” (See: Hittelman. Internet Source.)
To be continued.
Dr George Wright is Professor Emeritus from the Political Science Department at Chico State University. He currently teaches history at Skyline Community College in San Bruno. He’s active with the Bay Area’s United Public Workers for Action (www.upwa.info) and can be contacted at wrightg@smccd.edu
photo credit: Chris Devers via photopin cc
Reposted from Daily Censored
