Chancellor Bruce Leslie concedes that in his opinion, all the rules were followed. Too bad facts trump opinion.
The accreditors asked that each college prepare a report by April 15 addressing questions such as how the new curriculum satisfied a core accreditation requirement that the school provide a general education component that ensures a “breadth of knowledge” and is based on “coherent rationale.”
They also asked for information on how the institution “places primary responsibility for curricular content and quality with its faculty” as well as “evidence of faculty approval of the change to the general education program at the institution, as well as institutional policies were followed.”
Claunch said she believes that the responses currently being prepared by the college presidents will convince the accreditors that the curriculum meets the core requirement. But she indicated that they may have a challenge making the case that faculty had adequate input on the schools’ new addition to the mandatory curriculum.
“The big issue,” she said, “and I agree with this as an issue, is the process by which this course was placed in the core and that the faculty were not a part of that process. The fact is, the process that goes through our curriculum committees did not happen. So is that okay or not?”
Accrediting body asking Alamo Colleges questions (subscription required)
Controversy over Alamo Colleges dropping its typical faculty approval process to make a core curriculum change has resurfaced with a request from the colleges’ accrediting body for information on it.