Bakersfield College has crossed the finish line into reaffirmed accreditation.
On Feb.13, BC President Bill Andrews got the good news in the form of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges Commission Report for the commission’s Jan. 10-12 official meeting.
The report states that BC is being granted the status of Reaffirmed Accreditation on the Basis of a Comprehensive Evaluation.
This is the final communiquÇ by the Commission in response to BC’s written 2006 Self Study report.
On Oct. 15, 2007, BC will issue a written Progress Report to the Commission. Upon receiving this Progress Report, the Commission will draft a response, which BC will receive at the January 2008 commission meeting in February 2008.
This report will include a prediction of the college’s status by the college’s next date for commission approval.
An evaluation team from Accrediting Commission came to BC from Oct. 23-26, 2006, and as of February 2007, the commission recommended that BC be awarded the status of Reaffirmation Accreditation with a Progress Report and Visit.
This official designation is founded upon the commission team’s judgment that a number of the team’s “recommendations” require swift addressing, and that the college’s progress must be officially written down by the team.
This particular level of reaffirmation of accreditation is two steps below the first level of straight reaffirmation of accreditation. At this first level, the college in question no longer needs further examination until the issuing of a midterm report.
There are 10 different levels of recommendation. The top level, Andrews says, is very rarely attained by any community or junior college.
“It’s almost impossible for any college to do everything,” Andrews said. According to Andrews, the standards by which community and junior colleges held up to have greatly upgraded and have become considerably more precise. It is much more typical for colleges to address documented recommendations, Andrews said. At the bottom of the ratings scale is the suggested termination of accreditation, which is founded on the team’s judgment that a college has strayed from accepted standards and policies; Los Angeles’ Compton College suffered such a termination of accreditation by the chosen accreditation team. March 4-8, Andrews himself will be part of an 11-team member accreditation group, which will examine Golden West College in Huntington Beach, CA. The accrediting commission, which has its home base in Navato, CA., includes chairs E. Jan Kehoe of Long Beach City College and Lurelean B. Gaines of East Los Angeles College, helped form a written lest of 6 major recommendations. At the top of the list, the team deemed that the District Strategic Plan should be used to direct the college’s strategic focus and educational master plan. The list states that the college adhere to the Kern Community College District Policy 7D by examining adjunct faculty by implementing appropriate “procedures” that help judge demonstrated ability. The list states that there must be an accepted documented code of ethics for employees. The list states a demand that KCCD draw up a frame of reference for the dispersal of funds. The team also recommends a routine employment of a fully developed self-evaluation procedure. Finally, the team’s recommends that KCCD define the duties of all offices and departments.
According BC’s Ed Knudson, vice president, student learning, the accreditation process is an “ongoing” one, and the formalities associated with accreditation are addressed every 6 years. Speaking of BC’s reaffirmed accreditation, Knudson quipped, “We done good.”
Andrews believes BC’s strength resulting in the reaffirmed status stems from BC’s consistent work excellence in “student learning outcomes.”
According to a letter issued by BC Professor Janet Fulks to BC faculty, Cerro Coso College, College of the Sequoias and Porterville College have been placed on a warning list by the accreditation commission.