Mendocino College Instruction Office

STANDARD I.B. - Improving Institutional Effectiveness

CHAIR

Catherine Indermill
Full-time, Psychology/Health Faculty
Standards I.B. Committee Chair
707.468.3001 | cindermill@mendocino.edu

STANDARD IB COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Tom Gang
Head Football Coach, Athletics
Standards I.B. Committee Member
707.468.3141 | tgang@mendocino.edu

Anastasia Simpson-Logg
Admissions & Records Specialist II
Standards I.B. Committee Member
707.468.3102 | asimpson@mendocino.edu

Marcus Young
Full-time, Administration of Justice Faculty
Standards I.B. Committee Member
707.468.3131 | myoung@mendocino.edu

Geoff Navarro
Counselor
Standards I.B. Committee Member
707.468.3222 | gnavarro@mendocino.edu

Gary Garabato
Director of Athletics
Standards I.B. Committee Member
707.468.3165 | ggarabat@mendocino.edu

Elise Haas
Student
Standards I.B. Committee Member

Standard I.B. Committee Assignments

Standard IB Accreditation Team – Phase Two

As to our agreed upon plan in Phase One each of you have gathered various documents related to Standard IB: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness. It appears that almost all of the documents that we need to review, assess and evaluate for “effectiveness” have been gathered. We may discover, as we review these documents, that there are a few things we overlooked and others we may determine will be beneficial. We can address this during this initial review process and again as we complete our final written evaluation. I have attached - an almost complete - list of these documents and where they can be located (primarily web links).

Now it is time to begin Phase Two --- the review, assess and evaluate these documents to determine the following:

Which sub-standards do they fall under (B1. – B7)?
How well do they demonstrate the institutions effectiveness in this area?
What recommendations (if any) may be suggested to improve effectiveness?
Anything else?

Your job is to review the assigned materials and write a brief statement addressing the above questions. I will put a paper copy of various documents for each of you to work on in your campus mailbox (Elise, I’ll bring your things to class). Please do not lose these or write on them. I need to include them with our final evaluation. The attached list has links to where most can be found if you want a copy to “mark up”.

There are a few loose ends we need to work on:

First - I am still somewhat concerned with budget allocation information (or the lack there of) so I need some help with this, as it is a key point in most of the sub-standards Does anyone have time to help me with this?

Second - I do not see in my notes if anyone was assigned to gathering information about the effectiveness of our mechanisms that allow for review and evaluation (B7) of the various support services. Can we do it, as such?

Gary: Instructional Programs (I think Meridith, Rose, Mark (for the Centers) may be good initial contacts)

Geoff and Tom: Student Support Services (this should be MESA, DSPS, CAMP, Learning Center, etc) and Other Learning Support Services (I’m not too sure what this means J ). Maybe you guys can work together or split things up… I’m assuming there may be some overlap here.

Marcus: Library Services (talk with John K.)

Anastasia: Admission & Records (you can start with yourself J).

Third – A few other things that have come up:

Gary: were you able to find anything about a “Maintenance Study Report” of Facilities planning, Physical Resource planning committee etc? (I know there is a committee, but I didn’t find info about it – Sue and Jim X. are on the committee – maybe they can help). Maybe Tom can help with this.

Anastasia: did you find anything about new degrees and/or programs? I know there are some, but don’t know how far back we need to go. What do you think?

Geoff: are there any electronic copies of “early alerts” and/or other progress reports? Is there a written process for managing these? Is there any type of evaluation regarding the outcome of these (student success, dropped etc)?

We didn’t set a time for completing Phase Two, but I’m hoping we can get this done by 5/18/07.

Standard I.B. Committee Meetings & Documents

SIB Documents and Links

Standard I.B.: Improving Institutional Effectiveness

Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness
The institution demonstrates strong commitment to a mission that emphasizes achievement of student learning and to communicating the mission internally and externally. The institution uses analyses of quantitative and qualitative data and analysis in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, implementation, and re-evaluation to verify and improve the effectiveness by which the mission is accomplished.

B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness
The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support student learning, measures that learning, assesses how well learning is occurring, and makes changes to improve student learning. The institution also organizes its key processes and allocates its resources to effectively support student learning. The institution demonstrates its effectiveness by providing 1) evidence of the achievement of student learning outcomes and 2) evidence of institution and program performance. The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and improve student learning.

1. The institution maintains an ongoing, collegial, self-reflective dialogue about the continuous improvement of student learning and institutional processes.

2. The institution sets goals to improve its effectiveness consistent with its stated purposes. The institution articulates its goals and states the objectives derived from them in measurable terms so that the degree to which they are achieved can be determined and widely discussed. The institutional members understand these goals and work collaboratively toward their achievement.

3. The institution assesses progress toward achieving its stated goals and makes decisions regarding the improvement of institutional effectiveness in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, resource allocation, implementation, and re-evaluation. Evaluation is based on analyses of both quantitative and qualitative data.

4. The institution provides evidence that the planning process is broad-based, offers opportunities for input by appropriate constituencies, allocates necessary resources, and leads to improvement of institutional effectiveness.

5. The institution uses documented assessment results to communicate matters of quality assurance to appropriate constituencies.

6. The institution assures the effectiveness of its ongoing planning and resource allocation processes by systematically reviewing and modifying, as appropriate, all parts of the cycle, including institutional
and other research efforts.

7. The institution assesses its evaluation mechanisms through a systematic review of their effectiveness in improving instructional programs, student support services, and library and other learning support services.

Sharepoint Services of our Site

Mendocino College Instruction Office
MacMillan Hall, Room 1020 - 1000 Hensley Creek Road, Ukiah, CA 95482
707.468.3002 | fax 707.463.6529

Please direct questions or comments to: Instruction Office

Mendocino College Website