SAC, NVC, PAC respond to accrediting agency

Original post updated to include PAC’s response.

As we mentioned a few weeks ago, each college is still on the hook with the SACS accrediting agency over Chancellor Bruce Leslie’s rush to implement the EDUC 1300 Covey course in the Fall. Even though he eventually rescinded his decision, Chancellor Bruce Leslie’s reckless actions still put each college’s accreditation at risk. But don’t just take our word for it. Read what the SAC, NVC and PAC presidents wrote in response to SACS inquiries:

Here are the sections of each response which state that college procedures were NOT followed:

SAC: In December 2013, a decision was made in the interest of expediency to revise EDUC 1300 and put it into the core curriculum without going through the appropriate process. By February 2014, the SAC Executive Team communicated its concerns about not following process to the Chancellor and began working to take the course back through the proper curriculum approval process before the new core is implemented in Fall 2014. As of this writing, the SAC Curriculum Review committee is set to resume the proper process for reviewing courses by considering two questions before the end of April 2014: (1) Are the revisions to PSYC 1300/EDUC 1300 approved? and (2) Should EDUC 1300 be placed into the general education core? Fortunately, the Chancellor’s decision to retract EDUC 1300 from the core on April 8 provides a reprieve that now permits SAC to send the course through the proper review process.

NVC: As SACSCOC is aware, controversy arose at Northwest Vista and across the five Alamo Colleges when in December 2013, the Chancellor of the Alamo Colleges announced to the Presidents/Vice Chancellors Team his intent to change the core curriculum to require an EDUC 1300 Learning Frameworks course. That change would have resulted in the deletion of one of two humanities courses from the core curriculum and its replacement in the core with a course entitled Learning Frameworks and offered under an education rubric (EDUC1300). That decision did not follow the established curriculum change process. The faculty at Northwest Vista College were not consulted and did not approve the proposed changes. Following media attention and communication from SACSCOC, the Chancellor decided to rescind the proposed changes, leaving the core elements for the coming year as they now exist.

PAC: A Core Curriculum Proposal document was created for EDUC/PSYC 1300 and placed on the list of core proposals which is maintained on the Alamo Colleges Curriculum Council internal website. However, this proposal was  placed on the core proposal list on January 27, 2014 (Appendix B9), which was seven weeks after the Common Core Curriculum for 2014-2015 was originally submitted to the THECB. The core proposal was never reviewed by members of the Alamo Colleges Curriculum Council. The Alamo Common Core Curriculum proposal was submitted to the THECB on December 5, 2013 (Appendix B10) and was approved on March 5, 2014 (Appendix A3). The procedures in place for ensuring cross-college faculty and administrative approval of changes to the core curriculum did not occur in this one instance.

In light of this evidence, we want to know exactly what Chancellor Bruce Leslie sent to the THECB when he requested approval for the addition of EDUC 1300 to the core curriculum. Did he in fact state that the District followed the proper curriculum change procedures?

One comment

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s