Joint Boards Articulation Commission

Meeting Summary Notes
June 11, 2003

Oregon Institute of Technology – Metro Center
Portland, OR

Members Present

Mary Kay Tetreault, Portland State University, Chair
Jim Arnold, Oregon University System
Craig Bell, Portland Community College
Dave Phillips, Clatsop Community College
Michele Sandlin, Oregon State University
Karen Sprague, University of Oregon
Glenda Tepper, Clackamas Community College
Elaine Yandle-Roth, Community Colleges and Workforce Development

Mary Kay Tetreault called the meeting to order at 10:20 a.m.

1. Introductions and Announcements

Members introduced themselves. Jim Arnold announced lunch arrangements to the group.

2. Minutes of the April 16, 2003, Meeting

The minutes of the April 2003 meeting were approved as submitted.

3. JBAC Membership Update

Arnold indicated that recruitment for the OUS positions is in progress. To date, an admissions officer/registrar and a student affairs officer have been identified and Vice Chancellor Clark is recruiting for the provost position. The Chancellor will make appointments sometime this summer. Elaine Yandle-Roth stated that individuals have been identified from the community colleges as possible new members, and include Ed Watson from Linn-Benton Community College and Craig Kolins from Portland Community College. Salam Noor from the Department of Education will now represent that agency on the JBAC.

4. Status of the AS/OT-Bus and AS/OT-CS

AS/OT-Bus. Yandle-Roth announced that a standard form has been developed by CCWD to facilitate the process for community colleges wishing to implement the new AS/OT-Bus. This form makes submitting a degree proposal for Board approval a very easy process. The June consent agenda for the Board of Education includes AS/OT-Bus program approval for both Clackamas Community College and Clatsop Community College. The degree proposals for Chemeketa Community College and Treasure Valley Community College are in process. Mt. Hood Community College is actively working on their proposal as well.

In response to a question about the general education portion of the degree, Arnold and Yandle-Roth reminded the group that this transfer degree comes with the same guarantees as the AA/OT, namely that credit is given for all lower-division general education requirements upon presentation of the degree for transfer.

With respect to the transcripting of the degree, members indicated that writing out the entire official name of the degree is the preference: Associate of Science/Oregon Transfer – Business (which may include the abbreviation, AS/OT-Bus).

AS/OT-CS. Yandle-Roth and Arnold attended a meeting of the Oregon Council of Computer Chairs (OCCC) at Linn-Benton Community College on April 25^th where the concept and possible development of a transfer degree in computer science was discussed. There seemed to be mixed opinions about the desirability of such a degree, but a subcommittee was appointed to explore the idea further. Arnold told the OCCC group that any work on the concept would absolutely need to have the involvement/endorsement of OUS programs right from the start if there were to be any chance for success. Yandle-Roth noted that there may not be the obvious need for a degree such as this, compared to the need and desirability of making transfer an easier process for those students pursuing a business degree. In response to a question about “lessons learned” from the AS/OT-Bus process that may apply to a new transfer degree, Arnold noted that the emergence of “champions” from both the OUS and community college sectors would likely be necessary for a degree proposal to gain any momentum at all. Further, any argument for the degree would need to be based on its utility for facilitating student transfer.

5. Report from the June 5th Student Transfer Committee (STC)

Dave Phillips reported on the recent meeting of the Student Transfer Committee, held on June 5^th. There was good attendance (with some members sending substitutes) and participation. Two members have left their positions in Oregon and are moving out of state, so membership issues with respect to the STC will need to be addressed before the fall meeting.

The STC reviewed the progress with the AS/OT-Bus, and Phillips indicated that the faculty at Clatsop Community College are very supportive and will soon be implementing the degree. Further, Phillips wants to explore the question of whether or not this degree is a “substantive change” for accreditation purposes and will be seeking an answer to that question in coming weeks.

With reference to the recent report on “fixing” the AA/OT, Phillips noted that large numbers of transfer students come to universities before they have earned an associate’s degree. A significant number of states have attempted to address this condition by the development of a transferable general education core curriculum within their respective states. Arnold has followed up the initial report, with a much more comprehensive report that looks solely at transferable general education core practices around the county. There has been much conversation about this topic already, and as a result of the STC conversation, Phillips agreed to bring the concept up with JBAC again to see if this is a course of action worth pursuing further. Tentatively, Phillips has agreed to take this issue up with the Council of Instructional Administrators in July, and Glenda Tepper will discuss with the Council of Student Services Administrators in August. Both will take more detailed information about what is happening nationally with regard to this issue – to see what interest and support there is in Oregon for pursuing this idea. Some comments made in discussing this issue included:

• Such a program would offer a “core” curriculum, likely in the 55 quarter-credit range. One group of students that may be advantaged would be those headed for professional programs at the baccalaureate level. At a small community college, students in this group may find themselves unable to take critical courses, and with a gen ed core program available, they could transfer sooner and still have the advantage of not having their core curriculum examined course-by-course at the receiving institution.
• At some point this concept would need to go to the OUS Academic Council for consideration. A cross-sector dialog on this issue is critical.
• It may be desirable to include disciplinary-based groups as well, such as the Oregon English and Writing Advisory Committee (OWEAC), and others.
• As an aside, Phillips noted that the conversation about SP111 and its inclusion in the AA/OT gen ed core has been deferred by the STC until the outcome of this conversation is known.
• Phillips was impressed by the material on the gen ed core available from the Illinois Articulation Initiative website regarding outcomes for general education requirement areas.
• Phillips made the recommendation that JBAC support further research and dialog about a transferable general education core to see what interest exists in pursuing the adoption of such a model. Such dialog would take place with the involvement of community college and university representatives, including faculty, and it would be desirable to include the private institutions as well.
• This model could be based on an agreed-upon statewide set of outcomes for general education.
• From one JBAC member’s perspective, comfort was expressed with an OUTCOMES model, but not a DISTRIBUTION model.
• Would the availability of a transferable gen ed core mean that students would then neglect pursuing an associate’s degree?
• Such a program would be put in place in order to students to have a completion point short of a degree. This would likely be of very big benefit to students.
• Are there data that speak to what happens when a program like this is implemented? Arnold replied that a limited amount of information is available; for example, the Illinois experience to date has been described in an August 2002 report to the Illinois Board of Higher Education. Additionally, Arnold has sought information from other states and received only an email reply from Arizona. An Arizona Board of Regents staff person reports that even though the Arizona General Education Core has been in place for a decade, only now is data starting to emerge that would shed any light on the phenomenon.
• How would this differ from the AA/OT? How would this actually work? Answer: in the most general terms, a block of credits in general education, once completed by a student and certified by the institution, would transfer as a block from a community college to a university without individual courses being examined (just as the gen ed component of the AA/OT transfers now). Other than that, no other details have been offered.
• Oregon University System institutions, in this kind of scenario, would have to come to an agreement “not to be picky about the details” of the general education curriculum (and use the trust built up over years of experience with the AA/OT).
• The community colleges, statewide, would tailor a general education core that would conform to a set of agreed-upon outcomes.
• Presumably, students could construct/complete a gen ed core curriculum from various colleges, and then transfer with a credential.
• A program such as this would be very attractive to those campuses participating in dual-enrollment programs.
• Again the question was raised, are we willing to “bless” this idea in terms of supporting further study and discussion? Is there enthusiasm for this? Are there recommendations?
• One member suggested support contingent upon the ideas: (1) there should be an emphasis on student outcomes; (2) that student transfer be a underlying rationale for developing such a program; and (3) that faculty control of the curriculum be recognized.
• Another member questioned the viability of this idea given that the Council of Instructional Administrators have not been able to come to terms with common requirements for the AA/OT from campus to campus.
• In response to how “student outcomes ”might be defined, there was the suggestion of some kind of “middle ground” that would not look PASS-like, but rather be more in line with the kinds of general outcomes put together by Lane Community College for their Arts & Letters requirements in the AA/OT.
• Don’t we really need some simple statement that expresses what it is that we’re talking about here? What IS this core? Is there a set of courses that defines it?
• Would this lead to a re-thinking of general education and how we all define it?
• This seems like a sufficiently straight-forward enough idea that we should continue to discuss it.

Action: The JBAC decided that continuing members should work on encouraging further discussion and refinement of this concept, recognizing that a transferable general education core curriculum would facilitate student transfer and successful completion of the baccalaureate degree. Further, members agreed that pursuit of this concept should, in no way, be disrespectful of campus culture or get in the way of the faculty’s role with respect to the curriculum. Phillips will continue this discussion with the Council of Instructional Administrators and Tepper will continue with the Council of Student Services Adminsitrators.

6. Legislative Updates

SB 525. Governor has signed into law. Establishes residency for tuition purposes at OUS institutions for any military person who has filed Oregon income taxes no later than 12 months before leaving active duty.

SB 10. Stalled in the House Education Committee after passage in the Senate. Would establish residency for tuition purposes for undocumented aliens who have resided in this state with a parent or legal guardian for at least three consecutive years while attending secondary school and received a high school diploma or equivalent.

SB 870. At this point, passed by both houses but not yet signed into law. Directs Eastern Oregon University, Blue Mountain Community College, and Treasure Valley Community College to conduct a feasibility study regarding the possible conversion to the semester system for those three campuses.

7. JBAC Workplan for 2003-04

The JBAC Workplan for 2002-03 was examined, and possible changes were suggested for the 2003-04 version of the plan. Suggestions included:

• Generating statistics regarding usage of the JBAC website,
• Monitoring/addressing the delivery of financial aid to students who simultaneously attend multiple institutions, and
• Considering the proposal for establishing a transferable statewide general education core curriculum.

A draft of the 2003-04 JBAC Workplan is available at www.ous.edu/aca/0304wrkpln.pdf.

8. Meeting Schedule and Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 12:35 p.m.

The next meeting will be held in October 2003. Date: TBA

Prepared by Jim Arnold
OUS Academic Affairs
June 13, 2003

http://www.ous.edu/aca/6-11-03.htm