Understanding Higher Education Accreditation for the HTM Field.

Adequacy in Faculty Standards in U.S. Regional Accreditation Commissions

Who should take college-level courses? impact findings from an evaluation of a multiple measures assessment strategy

According to the U.S. Census (2000), 42 percent of adults in the United States between the ages of 25 and 64 have no more than a high school education (authors’ calculations). Unfortunately, however, most new jobs and the vast majority of jobs that pay wages sufficient to support a family require at least some education beyond high school (Carnevale & Derochers, 2003), and low educational attainment is associated with high rates of unemployment and poverty. Community colleges are an important entry point to postsecondary education for adults with no previous college education or even a high school diploma. In Fall 2002, for example, adults between the ages of 25 and 64 represented 35 percent of fulltime equivalent (FTE) enrollments at two-year public colleges, compared with only 15 percent of FTE undergraduate enrollments at four-year public institutions (authors’ calculations, based on U.S. Department of Education, 2001). Moreover, more than two-thirds of the community college students who entered postsecondary education at age 25 or older were low income (authors’ calculations based on “Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study” [BPS:96/01], 2003) The potential of community colleges to serve as a “pathway” for lowskill adults to college and career-path employment, therefore, is evident. Across the nation, several major projects are underway whose goal is to develop policies and practices supportive of this role. Funded by national foundations, these initiatives include the Ford Foundation’s Bridges to Opportunity initiative and the National Governor’s Association’s Pathways to Advancement project, funded by Lumina Foundation for Education. Despite this interest, relatively little is known about the unique experiences and the educational and employment outcomes of adults who enter community college with limited education. We do know that their experiences and outcomes differ from those of traditional college-aged students. Compared with community college students who enrolled soon after high school (at ages 18-24), those who start later (at ages 25-64) are more likely to earn a certificate and less likely to earn an associate degree. The late starters are also far less likely to transfer to a four-year institution and earn a bachelor’s degree. Indeed, among students who entered a community college for the first time in 1995-96, 60% of older first-time students did not earn any credential or transfer to a baccalaureate program after six years, compared with 40 percent of younger, first-time students (authors’ calculations, based on BPS:96/01, 2003). This Brief summarizes findings from a new study that seeks to fill information gaps about older community college students. Researchers used student record information from the Washington State Community and Technical College System to examine the educational experience and attainment as well as the employment and earnings of a sample of adult students, five years after first enrolling. The students in the sample were age 25 or older with, at most, a high school education. The study was conducted by staff at the Washington State Board of Community and Technical Colleges (SBCTC), with assistance from the Community College Research Center, as part of Ford’s Bridges to Opportunity initiative. Its goal was to provide educators throughout Washington’s community and technical college system with a detailed profile of their low-skill adult students, who make up about one-third of the approximately 300,000 students served by the system annually. The study also sought to identify the critical points where adult students drop out or fail to advance to the next level in order to help SBCTC staff stimulate thinking among educators throughout the system about how to bridge those gaps and thereby facilitate student advancement.

Should Nursing Programs at Schools That Prohibit Same-sex Marriage be Accredited?

Development of an endoscopy technician training certificate program in a community college

Colleges and universities must be prepared to respond to events that could compromise the safety of any person in a classroom, residence hall, office, or any other campus facility as well as for any event that could jeopardize the continuation of use of any campus facility. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) states, “Higher education institutions ... are realizing that improving their campus’ resistance to disaster will not only protect their own lives and those of their students, it will also safeguard their campus’ instruction, research, and public service.” The US Department of Homeland Security, FEMA developed the overarching strategy, the National Response Framework (NRF), for emergency preparedness for “government executives, private-sector and nongovernmental organization leaders.” FEMA and the Department of Education (DOE) developed specific guidelines for emergency preparedness for colleges and universities. This study linked these guidelines to the five principles of the NRF. Most institutions have an emergency preparedness plan, but just how effective are these plans? Do community colleges, state, independent, and proprietary institutions differ in terms of their level of emergency preparedness? The target population for this study is colleges and universities in the United States. This quantitative study measured how aligned the emergency preparedness plans of these colleges and universities are to the recommendations of FEMA and the US DOE, Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools. The data suggest that much more needs to be done to bring college and university emergency plans into alignment with the government recommendations. Alignment with the government documents for this sample of US colleges and universities is extremely low for each principle of the NRF.

Rising quality assurance standards and levels of accountability in higher education have placed stress on my organization, a two-year community college located in Micronesia, a sub-region of Oceania, in the western Pacific Ocean, which has historically maintained a culture of reactivity to accreditation sanctions. As quality standards increase in rigor and accountability, the demands on employee engagement become ever greater. Today, accreditation requires every employee be engaged in cycles of sustainable continuous quality improvement, assessment of student learning, purposeful dialogue, and institutional effectiveness. US regional accreditation is vital to maintain fiscal integrity of the organization. If terminated, students lose access to Pell Grant, a US Department of Education Title IV funding initiative for low-income students in undergraduate programs of study. Pell Grant is the organization’s single most important revenue source, captured from students through tuition and fees. Because revenue sources are not diversified, loss of US regional accreditation, and subsequent loss of Pell Grant, would thus negatively impact organizational stability. This study examined transformational leadership as a potential means for enhancing employee engagement, thereby increasing organizational potential for responding to evolving accreditation standards. This mixed methods study explored the relationship between perceived transformational leadership and follower work engagement within my organization, described how leaders enhanced follower engagement, and investigated to what extent and in what ways the background, training, development, and experiences of organization leaders contributed to leadership skills and their ability to enhance follower engagement. A sequential mixed methods design was employed for which first quantitative data, and then qualitative data, were collected and analyzed. Quantitative data were used on a Micronesian higher education context to test transformational leadership theory that predicts transformational leadership is positively correlated with employee engagement, using the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ). Quantitative follower engagement data were collected using the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES). Qualitative data from semi-structured interviews were then analyzed to further explore leadership and its ability to enhance employee engagement for followers at this Micronesian higher education institution. This study does not substantiate the importance of transformational leadership for enhancing employee engagement, but instead shows transactional contingent reward is more important in this cultural and institutional context. The college leadership does not generally meet the expectations of the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire full range leadership model, yet college employees are significantly highly engaged. Additionally, analysis of the quantitative data obtained contributes to academic discussions on potential problems with the MLQ and UWES and show these constructs may not be ideal for measuring transformational leadership or engagement. Institutional recommendations for training current and future college leaders and for developing cross-sector partnerships are given. In addition, the wider implications for future research and practice are provided.

This paper describes a summit on Community Colleges in the Evolving STEM Education Landscape organized by a committee of the National Research Council (NRC) and the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) and held at the Carnegie Institution for Science on December 15, 2011. This summit followed a similar event organized by Dr. Jill Biden, spouse of the Vice President, and held at the White House in October 2010, which sought to bring national attention to the changing missions and purposes of community colleges in contemporary American society.1 The NRC/NAE event built on the White House summit, while focusing on the changing roles of community colleges in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) education. An in-depth summary of the summit was prepared by the NRC and NAE for publication in late Spring 2012 by the National Academies Press (NRC and National Academy of Engineering, 2012 ). This paper provides a synopsis of that report, which is available at www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13399, and emphasizes how we can use the report to improve STEM education for our students, but also how much progress still needs to be made to realize this ideal.

Iowa is one of the few states in the nation that is required by law to have a formalized process that accredits its community colleges. In February of 2005, the Iowa Department of Education’s (DE) Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Preparation began a comprehensive review of the state accreditation process for Iowa’s community colleges. This review was prompted by major changes in the criteria and processes of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools – Higher Learning Commission (NCA-HLC) which was effective in January of 2005. The purpose of this case study was to collect, document, and analyze the data used to revise the state accreditation process so it would align more effectively with the revisions of the NCA-HLC to include their new criteria, core components, patterns of evidence and the accreditation processes—Program to Evaluate Academic Quality (PEAQ) and Academic Quality Improvement Program (AQIP). In addition, the revision includes state standards that are mandated through state legislation. The themes that were identified in the research were supported by multiple perspectives of the sample, documentation and the literature. Major themes identified through the study were: (a) Accreditation is a process that assures a minimum threshold of quality in higher education; (b) AQIP is becoming the preferred NCA-HLC Accreditation process among Iowa community colleges; (c) DE accreditation process for Iowa’s community colleges should align more closely with the NCA-HLC processes and include both PEAQ and AQIP; and (d) state accreditation process adds value to Iowa’s community colleges. Minor themes identified through the study were: (a) state standards referenced in

Commentary: COVID-19 and the Vulnerability of Single Mothers in Institutions of Higher Education.

Problem. Many historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) are experiencing major challenges in meeting accreditation requirements. Without good accreditation status they are in jeopardy of losing student enrollment and facing closure. Concern about accreditation has become a growing topic of interest within the African American higher education community. This study explored the topic by looking at some of the historical origins of the accreditation movement in HBCUs. It uses various experiences of two higher education organizations to detail some of the original challenges and the impact on HBCUs from regional accreditation. It focuses on HBCUs through the time period 1920-1940. This time period was selected as it is considered a crucial time for two premier colleges selected for this study. Tuskegee Institute and Atlanta University modeled the industrial and classical curriculum, respectively. These two curriculum models were the most common models utilized in HBCUs. Understanding the role that accreditation may have played on HBCUs and their curricula, particularly teacher education programs, is critical when one considers the far-reaching influence African American teachers had on their community. Analyzing the interaction of the regional accreditation organization, the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS), and the approval processes of these schools highlights the forces shaping these schools, these teachers, and later their community. The role of accreditation in this process, primarily regional accreditation, will be specifically detailed. Method. This study used a problem-oriented historical approach to research. It formulated a question generally prompted by reading secondary sources in a historiography, then evaluated primary sources in order to draw conclusions for this initial reading. While the purpose, statement, and objectives emerged from an extensive review of the literature, the historical method was utilized and the research stayed close to primary and secondary data sources related specifically to HBCUs and higher education. Results. The accreditation process was a catalyst for curricula changes in the teacher education programs at Tuskegee Institute. Furthermore, social, economic, political, and racial hegemonic forces were apparent in these curricula changes at the institution. The impetus for curriculum changes at Atlanta University ranged from meeting student and African American community needs to remaining current with national educational trends. Although governmental, state, and private organizations urged HBCUs toward the vocational curriculum, regional accreditors such as the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) did not endorse a particular curriculum model. Conclusions. First, accreditation standards influenced the Tuskegee Institute’s teacher education curriculum. Second, Tuskegee employed the accreditation movement to strengthen the academic curriculum of the teacher education program which allowed them to avoid pejorative repercussions by not strictly adhering to the Tuskegee-Hampton curriculum model, an education that combined cultural uplift with moral and manual training. Third, accreditation did not influence schools to adopt any particular curriculum model. Fourth, economic, social, and political realities provided an impetus for the adoption and maintenance of the Tuskegee-Hampton curriculum model. Significant federal, state, and private funding directly impacted the teacher education program at Tuskegee. Finally, social motivations such as the needs of the African American community and norms of educational practices influenced teacher education curriculum changes at Atlanta University.

On May 4, 1977, the United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare promulgated regulations implementing Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (45 CFR Part 84 (effective date June 3, 1977)). When HEW was split in two, the United States Department of Education reissued the 504 regulations (34 CFR Part 104). Now, 47 years later, ED has announced that it will update the Section 504 regulations.

Course Shopping in Urban Community Colleges: An Analysis of Student Drop and Add Activities

Children born in the early 1990s who were diagnosed with an ASD and received early intervention are now coming of age and entering college. The transition from a secondary special education environment to the less structured and more social post secondary environment of our nation’s colleges is particularly difficult for higher functioning students on the autism spectrum. Freedman has written a practical book identifying seven critical skill sets for success which are: self-awareness, environmental, self-advocacy, organizational, asking for help, self-care and social skill sets. Each skill set has its own chapter that is further subdivided into sub-skills or problem areas that a person with an ASD must be able to navigate successfully in college. What is particularly helpful is that each of these subsections is further subdivided into early preparation and later preparation steps. This allows the parents, educators and therapists working with younger children to develop building block steps to more complicated behaviors that the student with the ASD will need to master. Later chapters are directed toward deciding whether or not to go to college and how to make this decision. This decision is not simply a yes or no decision, but as Freedman aptly points out, there are many other dimensions to consider (e.g., commuter school vs. living away from home; 4-year college vs. a 2-year community or junior college; size of the college; staffing ratios, etc.). A young adult on the autism spectrum also needs to be familiar with basic laws protecting their rights in college settings (e.g. the Americans with Disabilities Act; Family Education Rights Privacy Act) as well as entitlements (Social Security Act; The Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973). Freedman covers this legislation in a clear and concise manner. Most readers forgo reading appendices and resource sections of books. However, Freedman provides valuable information in these often overlooked portions. She provides an overview chart that summarizes the seven critical skill sets along the dimensions of personal, daily living, academic and executive functioning lines. The resources section is also rich in information including government assistance, preparing for college web sites, transition planning resources, and scholarship sections among many other valuable sections. In future additions of this book, both in the resources and the legal sections, should be a paragraph on the latest amendments to the Higher Education Opportunities Act (2008) which will allow students with intellectual disabilities (broadly defined) to be able to complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) if the student is in a Comprehensive Transition Program (CTP) approved by the US Department of Education. The revised edition will need to define what an approved CTP is as well as how families completing the FAFSA form for students with intellectual disabilities will answer questions differently from neurotypical college students. Currently, students with intellectual disabilities are only eligible for grants and student work study programs if their CTP is approved by the US Department of Education. The second edition of this book should also revise its section on sexuality. Freedman offers excellent advice to young adults on the spectrum on how to avoid sexual violence and avoid having one’s romantic interest in a peer being perceived as stalking. However, Freedman’s advice is inadvertently heterosexist in its orientation. Young adults on the autism spectrum may not be aware of the societal E. VanBergeijk (&) New York Institute of Technology, Vocational Independence Program, 300 Carleton Avenue, Room 112 Independence Hall, Central Islip, NY 11722, USA e-mail: evanberg@nyit.edu

In 2007, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and the National Science Foundation (NSF) initiated a series of conversations with faculty members, administrators, and other stakeholders, seeking input on ways to improve undergraduate biology education to better prepare all students for the biology-related challenges of the twenty-first century (http://visionandchange.org/files/2010/03/VC-Prelimary-Reports-from-Conversations1.pdf). These were followed by a meeting (July 2009) to discuss the implications of information gathered during those conversations (http://visionandchange.org/files/2010/03/VC_report.pdf). Participants included faculty representing the diverse set of institutions that constitute higher education in this country: community colleges, four-year liberal arts institutions, state colleges and universities, and research-intensive universities. A document summarizing these findings is due to be released late this year or early in 2011. The deliberation and summation process emphasized the importance of community college contributions to undergraduate biology education and provided the impetus to undertake this article. As reported by President and CEO of the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC), George Boggs, “From relatively modest beginnings at the turn of the 20th century, community colleges now enroll 43% of all U.S. undergraduates” ( Boggs, 2010 ). This article is meant to: Help readers better understand the structure and mission of community colleges and their increasing importance in the higher education enterprise; Encourage greater cooperation between community colleges and other institutions of higher education and initiate dialogs among them to find ways of easing student transitions, and Increase awareness of funding opportunities to support innovative undergraduate biology educational approaches on community college campuses. COMMUNITY COLLEGES: INSTITUTIONS, FACULTY, AND STUDENTS Institutions There is a paucity of information concerning the teaching of biology at community colleges. This is not unexpected, considering that publication of scholarly work is not generally anticipated in the reward and/or tenure structure for community college faculty. Therefore, educational practices at these institutions are understudied when compared with their four-year college counterparts. The national picture for community colleges is also difficult to ascertain as these institutions are very diverse. For example, the foci of biology education on many community college campuses range from preparing students for transfer as majors to four-year institutions, to preparing students for careers in allied health positions, to preparing students for positions as technicians in areas such as biotechnology or environmental technology. Each community college responds individually to local needs. Local community response can differ substantially from campus to campus in community college systems. Community colleges typically offer programs leading to the associates of arts or sciences degree as well as a variety of vocational and technical programs offering both degrees and certificates not often found at a four-year school. These institutions also offer a wide range of continuing education courses, contract education courses that serve local industry, and community-focused activities. Some institutions have expanded their programs to include baccalaureates in applied fields, such as teacher education, and nursing ( Boggs, 2010 ), and some now offer postbaccalaureate programs such as certificates in biotechnology for students who already hold a four-year degree. Because these colleges are typically open-access and low cost they tend to serve a highly diverse cross-section of the population. Biology education at the community college is often divided into an “academic track” and a “workforce access track,” although there can be a great deal of overlap and synergy between the two. Faculty may teach courses that serve either the workforce or the academic programs. Not only is this an efficient use of staff, particularly in smaller institutions, but it also helps keep the entire life science–related faculty current with both industry practices and advances in the discipline.