Meeting Summary Notes
June 27, 1997
Linn-Benton Community College
Jon Carnahan, Chair, Linn-Benton Community College
Jim Arnold, OSSHE Academic Affairs
Jim Buch, University of Oregon
Patsy Chester, Linn-Benton Community College
Martha Anne Dow, Oregon Institute of Technology (by phone)
Pat Loughary, Blue Mountain Community College
Dave Phillips, Clatsop Community College
Betty Youngblood, Western Oregon University
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Office of Community College Services
Alan Contreras, Oregon Community College Association
Linda Gettmann, Portland Community College
Michele Sandlin, Oregon State University
The meeting was called to order by Jon Carnahan at 10:05 a.m.
1. Meeting Summary Notes of April 14, 1997
The summary notes were approved as submitted.
2. Report of the Transfer Committee Task Force on AA/OT
Elaine Yandle-Roth reported that the letter clarifying and re-stating the intents/purposes/practices of the AA/OT has been mailed. Carnahan took responsibility for deleting reference in the letter to the degree's relationship to OSSHE admissions (an earlier draft had stated that possession of the AA/OT does not guarantee OSSHE admission, but that is not "official" policy; the choice was made years ago to not address this issue in the AA/OT itself and we should not try to do that now without considerably more discussion). Carnahan suggested he would like to ultimately see that AA/OT students are guaranteed OSSHE admission. Jim Buch supported the idea that the admissions topic should be examined in depth.
Given the contents of the letter, Carnahan questioned one of the OSSHE institution's position on the acceptance of professional-technical credits as part of the AA/OT. Reportedly, this campus is still discussing their policy, but that some "unwrapping" of the transfer degree does take place. Carnahan wanted to make clear that the dictates of the AA/OT take precedence over individual campus policies and that is what he hoped was communicated with the recent letter.
Jim Arnold reported that an OSSHE registrar had contacted him after the letter had been mailed out. The practice of this campus had been to not necessarily grant junior standing for registration purposes, but that will now be accommodated if this is accepted policy and practice. One JBAC member stated that this issue is also tied to AA/OT "unwrapping" since those possessing this degree should transfer with 90 credits (junior standing). Only if the degree is unwrapped would class standing at registration become an issue.
With respect to the other recommendations from the AA/OT Task Force, a list was mailed to all members prior to today's meeting. These can be brought forward and incorporated into the overall JBAC workplan, if appropriate.
The issue of "sequences" in the AA/OT was raised. Some community colleges still require sequenced courses as a requirement for their version of the transfer degree while others do not. This topic was discussed recently at a meeting of community college administrators, where strongly held beliefs on this matter were expressed. The pervasive opinion was that the inclusion of sequences should remain an individual community college determination. For the most part, OSSHE institutions do not require sequences as part of their general education requirements, thereby encouraging "breadth." The argument in favor of sequences is for "depth."
The suggestion was made that it might be time to start talking about an A.S. transfer degree and that such a discussion might naturally lead to a reexamination of the sequence requirements.
Carnahan expressed his desire for a list of all JBAC subgroups and their memberships. Arnold reminded the group that the JBAC membership and the Student Transfer Committee membership lists are on the JBAC website (www.osshe.edu/aca/jbac.html).
3. Report of OSSHE Solution Team and OSSHE/CC Faculty Conference
Martha Anne Dow distributed a draft outline of the report of the OSSHE Solution Team on Access/Transfer/Community Colleges. At the last meeting of the Solution Team (in April), the issues (listed in the outline) were prioritized. Many items overlap with the JBAC workplan. Tentatively, the Solution Team report to the Board will be made in September. No other meetings of the group are scheduled at this time. Dow reported that she asked Chancellor Cox if the work of the Solution Team could continue and the response was positive.
There are areas where additional data are needed in order for the work of the group to proceed. Elaine Yandle-Roth reported that data are needed in the area of credit for prior learning and Dow suggested that an inventory of OSSHE/CC partnerships is needed so that we can accurately report on the scope of what's going on. Carnahan suggested that the JBAC appoint the OSSHE Solution Team as its own solution team.
Dow also distributed a report on the OSSHE/CC faculty conference, held in Eugene in May. This was a very successful event that enabled faculty members from both sectors to come together and talk about the latest developments with the proficiency systems. The displays of student work were particularly interesting and informative. Dow reported that faculty at her institution were desirous of continuing the dialog that they started there. We need to identify next steps and build on that work.
4. Legislative Update
Yandle-Roth reported on recent developments in the legislature. SB 919 calls for the continued development of PASS, experimentation with accelerated baccalaureate degree models, and the development of policies and procedures to ensure maximum credit transfer between community colleges and higher education institutions. HB 2387 has been signed into law and calls for the development of a plan for credit transfer (clearly a task for JBAC)--which must be approved by the legislature. If the plan is not approved, or if the legislature merely takes no action, then an alternate procedure for credit transfer approval is specified.
The discussion of these items included the observation that "we have a lot of the pieces in place" to include in the plan which is called for. It should not be difficult for us to construct a convincing case. Carnahan stated that we can address issues in both bills and make recommendations to both Boards. The "ideal" scenario would be to go before the interim committee in the Fall of 1998 and have our plan already laid out--before the 1999 session. We can be proactive on these issues and re-prioritize the JBAC workplan, as necessary. We can first present our plan to the Joint Boards, then to the interim legislative committee.
The suggestion was made that Carnahan send a letter to the Joint Boards and institution presidents informing them that JBAC is working on these issues.
A related example of intersector cooperation was then discussed, namely the ONE (Oregon Network for Education) initiative. The website address for ONE is http://www.osshe.edu/one/, and pulls together distance education information together into one place. The web site home page is in the form of "store fronts" with a variety of information sources. Each of the educational sectors is represented and responsible for its own pages within the site (though the site resides on the OSSHE server at the present time). The question: where does the ONE group belong? Does it report to the Joint Boards, should it be attached to JBAC, or somewhere else? Perhaps the Joint Boards (through their working group) should be approached with the question of coordination among various groups with similar interests.
Alan Contreras reported on the contents of HB 2778. This bill is a "barrier reducing device" for students by addressing state need grant eligibility. If a student is enrolled in multiple institutions and the sum of the part-time credits add up to full-time, then the student is eligible for a state need grant. The bill also addressed the appropriation for grants, adding approximately one million (which is still a few million short of "full service" however). Some state lottery funds may be directed to this program, thereby benefitting more and more students eventually.
5. OSSHE/Community College Counselor/Advisor Meeting
Arnold announced that the date and place for the OSSHE/Community College meeting for advisors and counselors has been set. It will be held on November 14, 1997, on the OSU campus, and will be organized around the theme "Educating Oregon Together." A tentative schedule for the day was distributed, but some details are still being planned.
6. WGU's Proficiency-Based Associate's Degree
Yandle-Roth distributed a handout with latest developments related to the Western Governor's University. (From the WGU URL: http://wga-internet.westgov.org/smart/vu/news/April97.htm.) WGU has announced that four regional accrediting bodies have established a joint "Inter-Regional Accrediting Committee" to take up review of WGU efforts. WGU is also advocating for significant changes in the financial aid eligibility guidelines under the Higher Education Act of 1965, in order to qualify WGU students for aid. Progress is being made on the WGU proficiency-based associate's degree, and the proposed degree has been reviewed by forty faculty members from across the West. NCHEMS is under contract with WGU to assist in the establishment of competencies and to identify assessment tools. The proposed degree lines up will with Oregon's AA/OT, according to Yandle-Roth.
7. Developments with CIM/CAM
The JBAC has previously expressed concern (to the Joint Boards Working Group) about the quality of information being distributed on the school improvement efforts. The JBAC, therefore, has monitored some of the documents developed and formulated the "alignment principles" last year, which were forwarded for Joint Boards approval. Yandle-Roth distributed a copy of a memo from Tanya Gross, Department of Education, regarding the "communications strategy" of the department with respect to school improvement. Another (draft version of a) document entitled "Framework for Implementing K-12 School Transformation in Oregon" was distributed to JBAC members for review. JBAC members are invited to provide feedback on this report. Expect a major public relations "push" starting this fall (August, September, October).
8. JBAC Membership and Term Expiration Dates
Arnold distributed the latest version of the JBAC membership list and the expiration dates of members' terms of service. Only the "superintendent/principal" slot remains open at this time. All other appointments have been made for the 1997-98 year.
9. JBAC Workplan
Carnahan suggested that he, Arnold, and Yandle-Roth schedule a meeting to work on revisions to the workplan for the coming year. In September we can seek endorsement by the Joint Boards for our plan. (It may also be desirable to share the workplan with members of the House Education Committee.)
The April 15 draft of the workplan was briefly reviewed and the following observations made:
Under High Priority Items
Item A. A review of the AA/OT had taken place and the letter sent. Move to
Item B. Possibly bring up as discussion item at Joint Boards Working Group session regarding the expectation of the Joint Boards.
Items C and D. What does Solution Team recommend?
Item E. Articulation Hotline List, and list of transfer equivalency tables, have been updated and posted to the web. Move to Items Completed.
JBAC action regarding HB 2387 and SB 919 should be added to the workplan.
Admission of AA/OT students with "lower" GPAs (i.e., in the 2.0 range).
Organic chemistry and credit acceptance/transfer.
Professional-technical course numbering (a possible Solution Team issue)?
10. Next Meetings
The next meeting of the JBAC will be September 11, 1997, 10:00 a.m. to noon, in Portland. The likely site is the OIT Metro Center. Topics to be discussed include the JBAC report to the Joint Boards the following week.
The next meeting of the Student Transfer Committee will likely be in October (OCCA would like to be represented at this meeting).
The meeting was adjourned at 12:00 noon.
Prepared by Jim Arnold
Office of Academic Affairs/OSSHE
July 2, 1997
Revised: July 2, 1997