Joint Boards Articulation Commission
Meeting Summary Notes
June 13, 2001
Phil Creighton, Eastern Oregon University, Chair
Jim Arnold, Oregon University System
Craig Bell, Portland Community College
Liz Goulard, Chemeketa Community College
Adrienne Hill, Southern Oregon University
Rick Levine, Rogue Community College
Sheldon Nord, Oregon Institute of Technology
Dave Phillips, Clatsop Community College
Mary Kay Tetreault, Portland State University
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Community Colleges and Workforce Development
Phil Creighton called the meeting to order at 10:04 a.m. There were no announcements or suggestions for the agenda.
1. Minutes of the April 18, 2001, Meeting
The minutes of the April 2001 meeting were approved as submitted.
2. Expanded Options Update
Yandle-Roth indicated that her most recent news on the Expanded Options bill (SB 783) was that it had been referred to Ways and Means and was languishing there. Levine said that movement this week had the proposed Expanded Options legislation stuffed into another bill (subsequently identified as HB 2004)--and that it had remained intact in its most recently amended form.
Goulard reviewed the work of her staff in helping to craft amendments to this legislation. Cheryl Falk and Mike Morgan of Chemeketa Community College were instrumental in the work of the legislative work group that helped to write this bill, addressing concerns about (1) the definition of "postsecondary courses," (2) the developmental education focus of the proposed legislation, and (3) the actual cost of the legislation, which is thought to possbibly exceed the limitations of the cap. One of the earlier concerns about the bill was that it might put other, existing, early options programs in jeopardy, but this concern seems to have been obviated in more recent language. In response to a question about the "cap", it was indicated that the formula for the cap is related to school size (enrollment).
Goulard indicated that she will be soon be meeting with the Oregon Community College Association (OCCA) about the status of this bill and she will send out an update to JBAC members once she gets more information. In the meantime, Goulard indicated it may be a busy summer trying to figure out how to implement the provisions of the legislation should it become law.
3. WR 214 and the AA/OT: Report from OWEAC
Earlier in the year, a communication from Linn-Benton Community College (LBCC) requesting that their WR 214 course be considered for inclusion in their AA/OT degree was forwarded to the JBAC from the Department of Community Colleges and Workforce Development. JBAC subsequently referred the matter to the Student Transfer Committee (STC) which, in turn, sought the advice of the Oregon English and Writing Advisory Committee (OWEAC). At the OWEAC spring meeting, held May 18th at Lane Community College, the WR 214 request was considered along with the proposed modifications in the requirements for the AA/OT suggested by the STC. Arnold reported on the information received back from OWEAC on these topics based on recent email from Jane Holman (of Portland Community College, OWEAC chair) and from a more recent phone conversation.
First, with respect to the inclusion of WR 214 in the AA/OT: OWEAC had strong reservations about this proposal, saying that only if the course were significantly redesigned would it be appropriate for inclusion as an approved writing course (it could, of course, be used as an elective). It is currently not the equivalent of WR 122 as it lacks the critical reading components and the focus on lengthy persuasive projects. WR 214 is not standardized across the state and neither the WR 214 course taught by LBCC nor the other campus' courses should be considered as appropriate substitutes for the already recommended writing courses for the AA/OT. As a group, OWEAC has now decided to produce a set of outcomes for WR 214 and BA 214 and to clarify the distinctions between the two courses. In sum, the recommendation is to not allow WR 214's inclusion in the AA/OT at this time.
Second, with respect to the proposed modifications to the AA/OT coming from the STC: OWEAC is not in favor of language changing the number of credits (that is, specifying either 8 or 9 credits rather than the 9 previously in the guidelines). And, they are not supportive of adding the proficiencies language to the requirement (i.e. "and/or other courses that meeting the proficiencies and outcomes of these courses"). It is OWEAC's position that, if anything, the change should go in the "other direction" (i.e., making the requirement more substantial rather than "diluting" it as the proposed language is thought to do). Writing courses should cover the entire first year, as far as OWEAC is concerned, given the skills that many (or most) of their students enter with. If the AA/OT writing requirement could be met with only 8 credits/2 courses, students, they believe, would be disadvantaged. In sum, OWEAC is not in favor of the proposed modifications for the writing requirement.
Phillips indicated that the STC and JBAC needs to continue to monitor the impact of the change from three to four credit courses. He expressed appreciation for the OWEAC feedback and said that the STC would be working on another version of the AA/OT guidelines at its fall meeting.
4. AA/OT and AS/OT Issues: Report from CIA and Academic Council
Phillips reported on the reaction of the Council of Instructional Administrators (CIA) to the proposed AA/OT modifications as well as the AS/OT in Business. He stated that there was general support for the directions on these issues as proposed by the JBAC. The AS/OT in Business was well received and encouraged as "a good thing to do." Of course, the chairs of the business departments have to now be included in this discussion as the logical next step to the process. The CIA also had some specific comments on the proposed modifications to the AA/OT and Arnold reviewed some of those remarks [which included the suggestions of changing the credit ranges (e.g, "8 to 9 credits") to a credit minimum (e.g, "a minimum of 8 credits"); specifying the definition of "college-level" and/or "college transfer"; and eliminating the specific computer science course requirement in the science/math/computer science distribution area]. Goulard reminded the group that proceeding with the AS/OT is going to be different than fashioning the original AA/OT, which had a legislative mandate. There is no such "mandate" this time around and must be approached quite differently.
Arnold reported that the Academic Council was also generally supportive of both proposals. He has two opportunities now (their April and June meetings) to discuss these issues with the OUS provosts and both have been encouraging. With respect to the AA/OT proposal, the specified computer science course seemed to be problematic for at least one provost, however. The provosts have been asked to submit written comments to Arnold who will then summarize that feedback for the JBAC. When asked specifically about the direction the JBAC and STC have taken on the AS/OT, the provosts encouraged the efforts and gave the signal to continue.
These degrees, including process recommendations, are possible agenda items for the joint Chief Academic Officer-Academic Council meeting tentatively scheduled for November 14, 2001, in Portland.
5. Report on the May 16th Oregon Distance Education Forum
As members will recall, the May JBAC meeting was cancelled due to a conflict with the Oregon Distance Education Forum, a statewide conference sponsored by the OUS Chancellor's Office. Yandle-Roth reported that event was quite successful with many OUS, community college and independent college representatives in attendance. Arnold indicated that highlights of the day included a presentation by Bruce Chaloux, Director of the Electronic Campus of the Southern Regional Education Board, as well as a panel discussion that included Sandra Elman, Executive Director of the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges, Shirley Clark, OUS Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs, and JBAC's own Mary Kay Tetreault. Chaloux's presentation included a discussion of the policy considerations jointly addressed by sixteen states as they undertake a regional approach to distance education. The afternoon sessions were devoted to a series of updates on distance education initiatives and strategies here in Oregon. Phillips reported a generally good experience of the day with the exception of some overly-long presentations in the afternoon. Arnold indicated that the conference packet for the day included some documents that had intersector implications in the distance education area. These documents have already been shared with OUS provosts and the community college CIA. Arnold will mail out a selection of these materials to JBAC members.
6. Passing the Gavel
In recognition of Levine's role of JBAC chair for the upcoming year, Creighton officially "passed the gavel" on to Levine at this point in the meeting.
7. JBAC Workplan for 2000-2001 and the Annual Report
Arnold reported that although the work of the JBAC subcommittees had not evolved exactly as planned for the year, the work and charge(s) of those groups were quite effectively addressed. For practically all of the workplan goals, significant progress has been made and that is readily demonstrated through a review of the meeting minutes. It will be relatively straightforward to organize an annual report of JBAC activities around the goal statements that had been outlined in the original workplan. Arnold will write the annual report over the summer months and present it at the first JBAC meeting of next year.
Goulard indicated that she had previously reported a desire to remove item #1 ("document progress on the JBAC's 'A Plan for Course and Credit Transfer...'") from the workplan, and Nord reiterated his previous suggestion to remove item #2 as well ("consider and adopt, as appropriate, the recommendations from the Student Services Action Team..."). Nord further indicated that item #7 ("...analyze and standardize the procedures for data sharing...") had been modified and expanded earlier in the year and that is reflected in the current draft of the workplan. The 2001-2002 workplan will also be on the agenda for the first meeting of next year. Levine, Arnold, and Yandle-Roth will meet this summer to make some suggestions for the group to consider in the fall.
8. JBAC Membership for 2001-2002
Arnold reported that of the three OUS positions expiring (OUS President, Student Affairs Officer, Admissions Officer), only one has been filled for the upcoming year. Michele Sandlin, Director of Admissions at Oregon State University will be joining JBAC next year. Arnold will continue to work with Vice Chancellor Clark and Chancellor Cox to appoint individuals to the remaining positions.
Yandle-Roth reported that Craig Bell and Dave Phillips have agreed to continue their service as community college representatives to the JBAC. Yandle-Roth will meet with the Comissioner soon to discuss these appointments and expects that they will be approved. Commissioner Preus-Braly's assistance will also be sought to solicit a nomination of a school superintendent from State Superintendent Bunn, a position which has gone unfilled in recent times.
9. Preferred Meeting Dates for 2001-2002
Arnold and Levine solicited group input on preferred meeting dates for the upcoming year (2001-2002), starting in September. Arnold noted that Wednesdays preceding OUS Board meetings had been the JBAC meeting date for the last two years. Wednesdays seemed to be acceptable for future dates according to members who expressed an opinion. Goulard suggested that another video conference be attempted to see if that can possibly work (the April 2001 attempt was only marginally successful). Some members expressed a reluctance for travel if meetings were only going to last an hour or two. Arnold suggested that a combination of in-person and virtual meetings be pursued, perhaps one in-person meeting per quarter, with the meetings in between either conference call or video-conference in format. That suggestion seemed to be met with general approval and Arnold will come up with a tentative calendar for 2001-2002 meetings based on this input. These suggested dates will be sent out at the same time as the notice of the web availability of these meeting minutes.
The first meeting of the new year will be Wednesday, October 10, 2001, at Chemeketa Community College: an in-person meeting to be held after the first meeting of the Student Transfer Committee of the year. The second meeting would be either November 7th or 14th. (Reminder: November 14th is the proposed date for the next joint meeting of the CAO-Academic Council in Portland.)
10. Thanks to Departing Members
Levine expressed his appreciation to Creighton, Nord, and Hill as they leave the JBAC and thanked them for their dedicated service to the group.
The meeting was adjourned at 10:55 a.m.
Prepared by Jim Arnold
OUS Academic Affairs
June 15, 2001