Accreditation Committee Members

2007 Accreditation Self Study Timeline

Accreditation Standards "Match"

Administrative Offices

College Committees

Expanded Style Sheet

General Comments that apply throughout the standard reports

Selected Offices

Titles at College of San Mateo

Writing and Format of the Self Study

Writing and Format of the Self Study

The Introduction to the Accreditation Standards in the Accreditation Reference Handbook states: “The primary purpose of the ACCJA-accredited institution is to foster learning in its students.  An effective institution ensures that its resources and processes support student learning, continuously assesses that learning, and pursues institutional excellence and improvement.  An effective institution maintains an ongoing, self-reflective dialogue about its quality and improvement.  An institution-wide dialogue must be at the heart of the self-evaluation process for the college community to gain a comprehensive perspective of the institution.  Although the standards are presented in four parts, they work together to facilitate this dialogue on the institution’s effectiveness and on ways in which it may improve.  The self study provides the Commission with the institution’s assessment of itself as a whole.”

We will now continue the dialogue to complete the written self-study report.  ACCJC/WASC and the visiting team will have some expectations when they read the self-study report.  A team of peers who are not familiar with our institution will expect a concise, logical, and well-written document with sufficient description and analysis of the Standards, adequately supported with documentation.  They will expect to see dialogue within the institution and “a culture of evidence.”  We can’t just tell them; we must show them.  Therefore, the self study should deal thoroughly with all the requirements of the Standards in a way that allows the visiting team to evaluate the institution in relation to these Standards.  It should provide evidence of outcomes that demonstrate candidly how effective the institution really is.

Five Sections Addressing Every Standard and Substandard

Standard  (Write out the standard number, followed by the statement exactly as written in the Accreditation Standards.)

Descriptive Summary  (Describe what exists at the college at the present time.)

Assessment (Evaluate what has already been described in the descriptive summary.)

Plan for Improvement (Indicate what plans, if any, the college will follow to address the identified problems and issues. Don’t have a plan for something you didn’t describe and evaluate.  It is possible to say we don’t need a plan.)

Evidence (Fill in the evidence grid.)

Detailed Description of the Five Sections to Address Every Standard and Substandard

Standard #

Copy and italicize the text for this Standard exactly as written in the Accreditation Standards.  These are declarative statements of good practice in an institution.  The meaning of the Standard may not “jump out” at you.  Look at the Standard carefully and find the key words.

Nothing should be in the plan for improvement that does not flow from the assessment.

Descriptive Summary

The descriptive summary section should be factual and objective, describing what exists at the college at the present time.  This section should include no judgments, no opinions; it should state what exists. If necessary, define what you mean by words or phrases contained in the Standard.  Descriptions should be concise, not too lengthy.  Do not state the obvious; don’t use jargon.

To help you address the statement made in the Standard, please see the questions for the sections from the Guide to Evaluating Institutions.  These questions should not be used as a substitute for the written standard because other questions could be equally useful and valuable.  Instead, these questions were designed by the commission to guide “a thoughtful examination of institutional quality.”  Please see your Standard co-chairs or our CSM accreditation website for a list of these questions.

Make sure to mention in descriptive summary what you mention in assessment and plan for improvement.

Assessment

The assessment section is more important than the descriptive summary section because it is here that what has already been described is actually evaluated.  How well do these programs/services work?  Are they adequate in number and in effectiveness?

Resources and processes are important, but outcome is important too.  Focus on how well we are serving the students we have. 

Don’t use lack of money as an easy “out”; don’t overuse fiscal constraints.  Use objective language to reach a balanced tone.

It is all right to use opinions here, but whether evaluation is positive or negative, evidence must be supplied in the documentation to support the observations and analysis.

A few more helpful suggestions: Whenever you make a statement, ask how do you know this?  Include back-up information.

Phrases such as “some people feel that” and “many people believe” should be avoided; evidence—such as surveys, enrollment data, staff turnover, etc.—is more credible.  When applicable, cite specific studies.  Use survey information from John Sewart, citing actual percentages (e.g., “more than 70% of students surveyed…”).

Remember that programs and systems cannot be evaluated unless they have first been described in the descriptive summary section.

Plan for Improvement

The plan for improvement section is the most important. It will indicate what the college intends to do about the systems/programs that have been evaluated.  These are internal plans, recommendations the college makes to itself.  The visiting team will be interested in how the college addresses identified problems and issues.  Plans should always be realistic and feasible, something that can be achieved; in addition, progress toward them should be measurable.  The college should be able to follow upon these recommendations and measure its success in reaching its goals.  The effectiveness of the college may be measured by its progress in achieving its plans for improvement.

Plans should contain solutions with ways to implement them.  Give examples of how to carry out a plan.  Distinguish between the following types of plans:

• Plan that is actually in place and has been started.
• Plan that is already under consideration by other members of the campus community but has not yet been implemented.
• Plan that Standards Committee, after having gone through the self study, would like to suggest.  (“The college might investigate/consider the possibility of….”)

Another important element of the plan for improvement is that its place in the ongoing activities/governance/planning of the college should be clearly indicated.  “Hire additional staff” is an inadequate plan for improvement if the college has committees that set hiring priorities and budget issues that must be addressed.  Using phrases such as “Using the existing governance structure, study the need for hiring additional staff” may be more realistic.

Only those areas addressed in the descriptive summary and assessment sections can generate a plan for improvement.

Evidence

Describing good evidence, the Guide to Evaluating Institutions states, “Institutions report or store good evidence in many formats, and institutions engaged in self study or evaluative teams may find good evidence in a number of sources, including institutional data bases; documents such as faculty handbooks, catalogues, student handbooks, policy statements, program review documents, planning documents, minutes of important meetings, syllabi, course outlines, and institutional fact books; from survey results; from assessment of student work on examinations, class assignments, capstone projects, etc; from faculty grading rubrics and analyses of student learning outcomes; from special institutional research reports.”

The visiting team will only be receiving the actual self-study report, a current college catalog, and a current schedule of classes.  Because the self-study report requests that we provide evidence for all statements we make, you need to be very clear about what is in any supporting documents to which you refer; however, you do not need to actually quote from the documents, just reference them (use the exact title of the document) either in the text or in parentheses at the end of the sentence in which you refer to them.  Also, be sure that you submit a list of all documents referenced in your Standard at the end of your Standard section under Evidence—List of Referenced Documents. 

In the evidence section, please list all supporting evidence referenced in your report. Please fill out this template:

Back to top

Expanded Style Sheet

Style Sheet I (December 2005)
To maintain as much consistency as possible among the Standards sections, please follow these style guidelines:

• Be accurate.  (Nothing else matters if your facts aren’t correct.)
• For each standard and substandard, divide your response according to the following five headings: Standard, Descriptive Summary, Assessment, Plan for Improvement, and Evidence.  (Please underline them.)
• Be specific, definite, and concrete. (Remember the overall goal is clarity, accuracy, and readability.) Maintain an objective tone.
• Do not use jargon, buzzwords, bureaucratese; especially, do not use the word “utilize;” use “use.”
• Avoid jargon in your text.
• Do not use abbreviations or acronyms; use “College of San Mateo” throughout.  Do not use the article “the” before “College of San Mateo.”
• Use action/command verbs for the plan for improvement  (e.g., “Explore…,” “Establish…,” “Improve….”)
• Use active voice.
• Avoid “there” to begin sentences.
• Use Times New Roman 12 point.
• Use block paragraphs.  (Do not use indent or tab.)
• Keep the left margin justified and the right margin “ragged.”
• Single space within paragraphs; double space between paragraphs.
• Do not use underlining, bold, or italics (except for underlining headings).
• Do not use specific names of administrators, faculty, or staff but refer to them by their titles. (See titles, offices, and committees lists.)

• Do not write in the first person (“I,” “we”); use third person. (Instead of “we,” use “the college.”)

Style Sheet II  (August 2006)

• Titles are in lower case unless they are immediately in front of a name, and names of individuals are not written in the self study, except in unusual circumstances.

• Documents will be listed in the evidence section at the end of the standard (i.e., at the end of IA, IB, IIA, IIB, IIC, IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, IIID, IVA, IVB).  In the evidence section, please list all the documents and number them 1, 2, 3, etc. in the order that they appear in the narrative.  When in the narrative you are referencing a document listed in the evidence section, please use the reference format as follows: (Ref. 1).  If the reference number is placed at the end of a sentence, place the period to end the sentence after the parenthesis as follows (Ref. 1).

• In general, please reserve the use of parentheses only for indicating references, e.g., (Ref. 2).  Use i.e. instead.

• When quoting references, use the following format: (Ref. 24).  If citing more than two references, please use the following format: (Ref. 31, 32).

• A point to clarify:  When writing responses to the accreditation statements, please address each separately, point by point.  For example, each statement, such as IIID1a, IIID1b, IIID1c, etc., will have a descriptive summary section, an assessment section, and a plan for improvement section.  If there is no plan for improvement, please write, “None needed at this time.”

• At the beginning of the assessment section, there should be a statement that says, “College of San Mateo meets this standard,” or “College of San Mateo partially meets this standard,” or  “College of San Mateo does not meet this standard.” This statement then is followed by a detailed assessment.

• Please refer to CSM in one of three ways: (1) College of San Mateo, (2) CSM, or (3) the college (lower case).
  Please refer to the district in one of three ways: (1) San Mateo County Community College District, (2) SMCCCD, or (3) the district (lower case).
  Please refer to divisions in one of two ways, for example (1) Social Science Division or (2) the division (lower case).
  Please refer to departments/programs in instruction in one of two ways, for example (1) Math Department or (2) the department (lower case).

Please refer to student government in one of two ways: (1) Associated Students of College of San Mateo or (2) ASCSM.
Please refer to programs/services in student services in one of two ways, for example (1) Child Development Center or (2) the center.
When referring to instruction or student services, please use lower case.

• If the plan for improvement section includes a plan for the district office, then CSM has to take responsibility on its own or in cooperation with Skyline or Canada for seeing that the plan gets done, so the plan needs to be phrased accordingly.

• Percentages are usually used when referring to the results of the surveys given to students, classified staff, and administrators and faculty.  Please embed these survey results in the paragraphs themselves rather than listing or bulleting the results.  For example, “According to the Fall 2005 Accreditation Survey (Ref. 31, 32), almost two thirds, 65.8 percent, of the faculty and administrators responding agreed that “strategic planning is used to identify needed areas of improvement and set goals for institutional change.”

• Always spell out the word percent.  Spell out numbers from one to nine.  Use digits for any number over nine. 

• Note:  Some time this fall you will have to respond to WASC’s previous 2001 recommendations to the standards.  When responding to a previous recommendation, write out the recommendation as written by WASC, and respond in a narrative to it.  Begin the narrative with a declarative statement, such as “The institution has done /has not done/has partially done/has considered it but decided not to follow this recommendation because it is no longer relevant….”

As a reminder:
The Descriptive Summary section describes what exists at the college at the present time.
The Assessment section evaluates what has already been described in the descriptive summary.  For this reason, survey results and other evidence should be referenced in this section.
The Plan for Improvement section indicates what plans, if any, the college will follow to address the identified problems and issues. Don’t have a plan for something you didn’t describe and evaluate. It is possible to write, “None needed at this time” if that is the logical outcome of the description and assessment.

Back to top

General comments that apply throughout the standard reports

Passive Voice
Please review your standard to eliminate passive voice as much as possible.  For example, please change a passive sentence like this one, “Evaluation of faculty is covered in Article 15 of AFT Contract 04-07” to an active sentence like this one, “Article 15 of AFT Contract 04-07 covers faculty evaluation.”

Accreditation surveys
Please use the results of the Accreditation-Related Student Survey, the Accreditation-Related Faculty/Administration Survey, and the Accreditation-Related Staff Survey in the assessment sections of the study. These results are evidence and should be used to support analysis.  John Sewart based these survey questions on the accreditation standards.  You can find these results in our Accreditation 2007 website accessed under Quick Links on the CSM homepage.

Descriptive summary versus assessment of each section of your standard. 
The descriptive summary just describes the current situation as it is now at CSM while the assessment section gives a judgment or evaluation of the current situation, citing evidence to support the judgment or evaluation.

Missing references
Whenever a judgment or evaluation is made, it needs to be supported with evidence.  So if you state that a policy exists or a procedure is done a certain way, you need to state where the accreditation team would see this in writing.  Be sure to add the reference, e.g., (Ref. 1) to the narrative.

Addressing the standard
The “Introduction to Accreditation Standards” lists all the standard statements that accreditation committees must address.  However, some of the statements—the general preambles and specific preambles—are printed in bold.  The general preambles are I, II, III, and IV.  The specific preambles are IA, IB, IIA, IIB, IIC, IIIA, IIIB, IIIC, IIID, IVA, and IVB.  You do not need to respond to these preambles.  You do need to respond to the subsections following these preambles, e.g., IA1a, etc.  The subsections’ narratives in the Descriptive Summary, Assessment, and Plan for Improvement, taken as a whole, should address the content of the general preamble and specific preambles.  Check to see that they do.

Back to top

Titles at College of San Mateo

Because we will not be using specific names of administrators, faculty, or staff but rather their titles, this list should be helpful.
Modification to titles: Titles are in lower case unless they are immediately in front of a name and names of individuals are not written in the self study, except in unusual circumstances.

Administration

Deans

Academic Coordinators / Specialists

Faculty

Student Representatives

Back to top

Commendium of College Committees 2005-06

AB 1725 Staff Development
Academic Senate Governing Council
Academic Review
Academic Standards
Accessibility/Americans with Disabilities Act
Associated Students Senate
Budget Subcommittee - College Council
Classified Staff Planning
College Assessment Committee
College Auxiliary Services Advisory Committee
College Council
Committee on Instruction – Academic Senate
Disciplinary Advisory Committee
Diversity in Action Group (DIAG)
Enrollment Management
Instructional Administrators
Library/Learning Center Committee - Academic Senate
Management Council
President’s Cabinet
Professional Development
Safety Committee
Strategic Planning – College Council
Student Development Committee – Academic Senate
Student Services Administrators
Student Services Leads
Technology Advisory Committee
Trustees’ Fund for Program Improvement

Back to top

Selected Offices

Admissions and Records
Assessment Center
Career Development Center
Career Services
Child Development Center
College Security Office
Cooperative Work Experience
Counseling/Advising Center
CSM Connects
Disabled Student Program and Services (DSP&S)
EOPS/CARE
Financial Aid
Health Center
International Students Office
Multicultural Center
Office of Articulation and Research
Office of Counseling/Advising and Matriculation
(Note: please refer to either counselors or academic advisors, as appropriate.)
Office of Instruction
Office of Student Services
Operations
President’s Office
Psychological Services
Public Relations and Marketing Communications
Scholarship Office
Student Activities Office
Student Employment
Transfer Center

Back to top

Administrative Offices

President’s Office

Operations

Public Relations and Marketing Communications

Office of Instruction

Office of Student Services

Child Development Center

College Security Office

Student Activities Office

Office of Admissions and Records

Financial Aid

International Students’ Office

Office of Articulation and Research

Health Center

Office of Counseling/Advising and Matriculation (Note: pleaser refer to academic counselors as counselors/advisors)

Career Services Center

Counseling/Advising Center

Disabled Student Program and Services (DSP&S)

EOPS/Multicultural Center

Psychological Services

Transfer Center

Back to top

Accreditation Standards “Match”

2002 Standards (current)			1996 Standards (former)
Standard I:  Mission
A:  Mission	→		* Standard One:  Institutional Mission
B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness	→		*Standard Three:  Institutional Effectiveness Standard Two:  Institutional Integrity Standard Four:  Educational Programs
Standard II:  Student Learning Programs & Services
A.  Instructional Programs	→		*Standard Four:  Educational Programs Standard Two:  Institutional Integrity Standard Three:  Institutional Effectiveness Standard Seven:  Faculty & Staff Standard Ten:  Governance & Administration
B.  Student Support Services	→		*Standard Five:  Student Support & Development Standard Two:  Institutional Integrity Standard Three:  Institutional Effectiveness Standard Four:  Educational Programs Standard Seven:  Faculty & Staff
C. Library & Learning Support Services	→		*Standard Six:  Information & Learning ResourcesStandard Three:  Institutional Effectiveness
Standard III:  Resources
A.  Human Resources	→		*Standard Seven:  Faculty & Staff Standard Four:  Educational Programs Standard Six:  Information & Planning Resources Standard Nine:  Financial Resources Standard Ten:  Governance & Administration
B.  Physical Resources	→		*Standard Eight:  Physical Resources Standard Four:  Educational Programs Standard Six:  Information & Planning Resources
C.  Technology Resources	→		Standard Six:  Information & Learning Resources Standard Four:  Educational Programs
D.  Financial Resources	→		*Standard Nine:  Financial Resources
Standard IV:  Leadership & Governance
A.  Decision Making role & process	→		*Standard Ten:  Governance & Administration *Standard Two:  Institutional Integrity Standard Five:  Student Support & Development
B. Board and Administrative Organization	→		*Standard Ten:  Governance & Administration

    * Primary match

Back to top