An evaluation team from the Higher Learning Commission is recommending that Pima Community College be removed from probation and placed it “on notice.” The College will be placed on notice because the array of “necessary changes to come into compliance” made by the College are too new to demonstrate sustained evidence of success.
The “on notice” designation requires close monitoring by the HLC to ensure that the changes “are effectively implemented in the long-term.”
In a report received by the College Dec. 16, the team writes the probation sanction imposed on Pima in April 2013 should be removed.
The team found that PCC, “may be at risk of non-compliance of continuing to meet the Commission’s Criteria for Accreditation if it does not aggressively follow through on changes it plans to make or has already made but has yet to demonstrate their efficacy in resolving the issues identified by the Commission.”
To determine if the College’s new policies and procedures are working, the team is recommending a follow-up visit take place no later than March 31, 2016.
Chancellor Lee Lambert welcomed the recommendation.
The College has lost a considerable portion of its students due to the controversy surrounding it, and its Governing Board’s refusal to accept its current role as a provider of education opportunities to students who have been denied them by the area’s largest failing school district.
Key Findings of the HLC’s Evaluation Team Report
Overall impressions:
“In the last year and a half, PCC has worked diligently and quickly to conduct a self-study, respond to the Commission’s concerns, and implement necessary changes to come into compliance, while at the same time continuing to serve the educational needs of the community.”
The HLC team “encountered an institution in flux with an array of newly developed and implemented policies, structures and processes – some adopted or implemented just weeks before the visit.”
“The culture and morale at PCC has improved since the fact-finding visit, with many individuals expressing a sense of ‘cautious optimism’ that the institution is moving in the right direction.”
The team “did feel confident that the institution had made significant progress in addressing its major challenges, in particular, those that led to probation. While the team and many of the institution’s constituents are optimistic that PCC is moving in the right direction, it is still a fragile process. Whether the changes made are effective and sustainable only time will tell.”
Community participation:
“The College has many supporters and vocal advocates in the community, including but not limited to individuals, private and public groups, businesses, and education providers. It also faces considerable scrutiny from some individuals and community advocacy groups. Yet, the significant level of attention it receives, both positive and negative, attest to the significant role PCC plays in the community. It is evident that PCC and the services it provides are important and vital to Tucson and Pima County.”
“The team reviewed a considerable number of third-party comments received by the Commission, both in advance and during the visit. Team members reviewed hundreds of pages of comments and complaints … (and) met with over forty individuals or small groups.”
“PCC made a good-faith effort to inform the public of the (team) visit and solicited third-party comments… It provided press releases to inform the community of the process. As a result, there was sufficient coverage in local media regarding the visit to keep the community informed.”
“Both positive and negative comments were noted and evaluated by the team … (but) not all issues identified in the comments and complaints, although important to the individual or group presenting the comment or complaint, were directly germane to the institutions’ compliance with the Criteria for Accreditation.”
“While the level of scrutiny of the institution by different community members and groups attest to the importance of PCC to the community, it may also hinder PCC from moving forward as it continues to consume time responding to complaints that could be more effectively devoted to implementing the necessary changes that will enable it to overcome the challenges of the past.”
Deficiencies:
“Many team members commented that unlike other visits, they often had to ‘dig’ for the evidence and expressed frustration on having to work harder to locate evidence that should have been readily available to the team.”
“PCC could have made more of an effort to offer a stronger link between the self-study report narrative and the available evidence. In addition, PCC should have had better organization of the documentation available, clearly connecting the evidence and documents to the Criteria.”
“…not enough time has elapsed to provide evidence of the necessary outcomes to determine the long-term viability and effectiveness (of the) changes. Failure to demonstrate the effectiveness of these changes and sustained progress in these areas can lead to future findings of non-compliance. Thus, the institution should be monitored closely to ensure that these changes are effectively implemented in the long-term, as well as evaluated on an on-going basis.”
“Since the majority of these changes involve new structures, functions, and processes, a focus visit will be necessary for verification and evaluation. The focus visit should expect to see strong patterns of evidence that the new/amended policies, procedures and structures are yielding documentable patterns of evidence that alleviate any concerns regarding past cited issues and the fulfillment of any Core Components; that an internal climate of inclusiveness and trust has been fully restored; and that the expressed concerns of any external groups expressed in the recent past to the HLC have been alleviated.”
The team is recommending a follow-up visit to determine if Pima can demonstrate:
– A well-defined, inclusive formal review process of the institution’s mission;
– Evidence of the work of the College Diversity Committee, including the development of strategies to enhance the recruiting, hiring and retention of minorities, women and other protected classes;
– Evidence of the effectiveness of newly adopted policies, processes and procedures;
– Evidence of a comprehensive assessment of Human Resources, including structure, staffing and key performance indicators;
– Implementation of a process for assessing the effectiveness of the new Office of Dispute Resolution, including a review of the number, type and status of complaints and grievances;
– Evidence that syllabi have specific learning goals;
– A process to coordinate and ensure consistency in the review of dual learning courses and dual training faculty training;
– Progress with the Developmental Education Task Force and Council;
– Evidence of the effectiveness of the assessment process for making changes to teaching and learning based on learning outcomes;
– Evidence that persistence, retention, and completion metrics are used for making changes in programs;
– Evidence of stability in leadership, including campus presidents, the hiring of key vacant positions; and
– Evidence of the implementation of the 2014-17 Strategic Plan, including completion of the campus plan.