ACCT Trustee Quarterly Fall 2015

Guided Pathways | Bachelor’s Degrees | Leading Transformative Change

FALL 2015

COMMUNITY COLLEGES of the

FUTURE Emerging models will help institutions develop leaders, shift culture, and ensure that more students succeed.

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE TRILLION BORROWING, REPAYMENT, AND DEFAULT AT IOWA’S COMMUNITY COLLEGES

Download the new report at www.acct.org/reports-white-papers

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

2014-2015 Chair Robin M. Smith Lansing Community College, MI

Chair-elect Roberto Zárate Alamo Colleges, TX

Vice Chair Bakari Lee Hudson County Community College, NJ

Secretary-Treasurer Emily Yim Edmonds Community College, WA

Immediate Past Chair LeRoy W. Mitchell Westchester Community College, NY

Central Regional Chair Diane Gallagher Highland Community College, IL

Northeast Regional Chair William E. Coleman, Jr. Mercer County Community College, NJ

Pacific Regional Chair Jane Strain Cochise College, AZ

Southern Regional Chair Randall Jackson Midlands Technical College, SC

Western Regional Chair Kent Miller Mid-Plains Community College Area, NE

Gerald Cook Johnson County Community College, KS Tamela Cullens South Florida State College, FL Stanley Edwards Halifax Community College, NC Dawn Erlandson Minnesota State Colleges & Universities, MN Mary Figueroa Riverside Community College District, CA Jim Harper Portland Community College, OR Connie Hornbeck Iowa Western Community College, IA Vernon Jung Moraine Park Technical College, WI Gregory Knott Parkland College, IL Norwood Ogé Louisiana Community and Technical College System, LA Clare Ollayos Elgin Community College, IL Hector Ortiz Harrisburg Area Community College, PA Robert Proctor, Diversity Committee Chair Lansing Community College, MI Dennis Troy Bladen Community College, NC Rafael Turner Mott Community College, MI

From the Chair Timeless and Timely Challenges NEARLY 40 YEARS AGO, IN THE FALL 1978 ISSUE of this magazine, Portland Community College President Amo De Bernardis asked some important questions that he predicted would be confronting our colleges in the decades to come.

These questions included: Is the community the campus — or does it extend beyond brick-andmortar facilities? Do we have an open door — or, as De Bernardis puts it, should we be “educational renewal centers — educational hospitals for many of the students who come to us?” What about our educational delivery system — all the way back in 1978, De Bernardis predicted that “television, radio, and the computer offer means by which the college can deliver education.” He was a visionary. De Bernardis also asked, perhaps most importantly, “do we believe in change?”

Do we believe in change? I do. After having spent years with ACCT, including the past year as chair of the ACCT Board of Directors, I can say that this association does as well. How can we not believe in something that is happening right before our eyes, affecting every aspect of how our colleges operate? We’re ever more sophisticated, ever more dedicated to making sure our students succeed, ever more diverse in the means by which we can and do educate students. The constitution of boards of trustees, too, is changing — there are more younger trustees than ever, and regardless of age, many more are technologically savvy. And if they’re not, the time to catch up is yesterday, because the transition to tech-supported everything is a change that has already occurred.

As we think about change and developing action plans for the future in this issue of Trustee Quarterly, I do want to highlight one aspect of our colleges that is not changing rapidly enough: helping young black men access, persist in, and complete college. It’s a challenge that has received a lot of lip service, but it’s time to act. If you read my story in the winter issue of Trustee Quarterly, then you know this is personal to me, and it’s a crisis throughout American higher education. I am proud that ACCT has addressed the issue over the past year in a number of ways, including a new partnership with M2C3, the Minority Male Community College Collaborative, a national research and practice center that partners with community colleges to support their capacity in advancing outcomes for men of color. If your college isn’t involved with M2C3, I urge you to learn more about the organization at http://interwork.sdsu.edu/sp/m2c3/. Also as part of this effort, ACCT recently hosted a Pulaski Technical College Student Success Initiative visit with the truly great civil rights icon Julian Bond, who tragically passed away recently. His message of encouragement to young community college students has an even more special poignancy now, and it is part of ACCT’s legacy.

Almost all the questions that Amo De Bernardis asked nearly 40 years ago still apply — they address timeless, important challenges. In the memory and honor of Julian Bond, let’s make sure that the term “missing minority male” is no longer a challenge in the future, but a distant memory.

ROBIN M. SMITH LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE, MICHIGAN

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

1

Trustee

QUA R T ERLY

The Voice of Community College Leaders

From the President & CEO

FALL 2015

Editorial Team EDITOR-IN-CHIEF J. Noah Brown

What’s New, and What Works

President & CEO

MANAGING EDITOR David Conner Communications & Publications Manager

EDITOR Mark Toner CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Jee Hang Lee Vice President of Public Policy and External Relations

Colleen Campbell Senior Policy Analyst

Narcisa Polonio Executive Vice President for Education, Research, and Board Leadership Services

Ira Michael Shepard ACCT Legal Counsel

Jennifer Stiddard Senior Public Policy Associate

EDITORIAL ASSOCIATES Karen Lomax Executive Assistant to the President and CEO

Indya Rogers Board and Publications Assistant

DESIGN & PRODUCTION www.moiremarketing.com – Washington, D.C. YOUR OPINION MATTERS CONTACT: David Conner (866) 895-ACCT (2228) dconner@acct.org

TRUSTEE QUARTERLY (ISSN 0271-9746) is published three or four times per year as a membership service of the Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT).

ACCT is a not-for-profit educational organization of governing boards of public and private community, technical, and junior colleges. Membership is also open to state coordinating boards, advisory boards, and state associations. The mission of ACCT is to foster greater understanding of and appreciation for community college boards; support boards in their efforts to develop public policies focusing on meeting community needs; help build board governance leadership and advocacy capacity through in-service education and training programs; and support boards through specialized services and programs.

Opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and values of the Association of Community College Trustees.

Non-members may subscribe to TRUSTEE QUARTERLY for $60.00 per year (plus postage for international subscriptions). Third-class postage paid at Washington, D.C.

1101 17th Street, NW, Suite 300 Washington DC 20036 (202) 775-4667 FAX: (202) 775-4455 E-mail: acctinfo@acct.org www.acct.org

1-866-895-ACCT (2228) FAX: 1-866-904-ACCT (2228) 2

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

WELCOME TO ONE OF THE MOST EXPANSIVE ISSUES in the history of Trustee Quarterly. This spring, we surveyed the magazine’s readers to find out what works and what would work better to meet the needs of trustees. Overall, reader satisfaction was very high, particularly in terms of the quality of the writing and design. At the same time, many of you asked for more federal policy analysis, practical lessons with specific takeaways for boards, case studies, and leadership development stories. I’m happy to say that this issue delivers in a big way.

With a focus on new community college models, the timing is perfect to introduce ACCT’s most ambitious publishing initiative to date — the Community College Futures book series, in partnership with Rowman & Littlefield Publishing. My conversation with series co-editor Richard L. Alfred and Richard Bland College President Debbie Sydow (p. 10) serves as a framework of sorts for the overall issue about “what’s new” in community colleges. Next, Thomas Bailey, director of Columbia University’s Community College Research Center, and co-authors Shanna Smith Jaggers and David Jenkins expand the conversation with insights from their critically acclaimed new book, Redesigning America’s Community Colleges: A Clearer Path to Student Success. The authors distill a massive amount of evidence to lay out a clear research-based case that a guided pathways approach is best suited to support student success. Judith Witherspoon from EdFinancial Services, Inc. explains how centralizing processing functions for student success services improves productivity and compliance through college staff — not outsourcing.

What better way to learn than by example? This issue features stories from four of our member colleges about new models they’ve adopted. On page 34, read how Ohio’s new College Credit Plus program expands the traditional dual-enrollment model by offering free college to high school students. Pennsylvania’s Community College of Beaver County discusses its High School Academy, which provides STEM-focused dual-enrollment opportunities concentrated in dynamic, in-demand career clusters. Shifting to postsecondary education, the next article discusses a unique partnership between Oregon Tech and Chemeketa Community College that brought a bachelor’s degree program in dental hygiene to the community college — and free care to its community. And on page 40, read about a pilot program at three Massachusetts community colleges that develops students’ financial management skills through student services, collective expertise, and new models.

It is also equally wise to learn from the experiences of others. Ellucian’s Marcia Daniel and Christi Segal talk on page 24 about their years of collaboration with community colleges and their boards. “When was the last time your board met with your college’s technological services partner?” they ask, emphasizing that tech companies can be seen either as vendors or as expert partners who can not only keep services up to date and efficient, but also prevent institutions from becoming “dinosaurs in a technological age.”

You’ll also find familiar elements in these pages — advocacy, Trustee Talk, legal issues affecting community colleges, and Interface for our professional board staff members, who are just as important as ever. I encourage you to read this issue cover to cover — and then take the quiz on page 52 to find out what you’ve learned.

J. NOAH BROWN ACCT PRESIDENT AND CEO

Contents

TRUSTEE QUARTERLY | FALL 2015

DEPARTMENTS 8

Advocacy Sharing Isn’t Always Caring Jee Hang Lee

30 Trustee Talk With ACCT Guidance for Challenging Issues in

16

Community College Governance

40

Narcisa A. Polonio

46 Legal

FEATURES

Legal Issues Impacting

10 Books that Build Futures — By J. Noah Brown

Ira Michael Shepard

New series takes a visionary look at the future of community colleges.

16 A Clearer Path to Student Success — By Thomas Bailey,

Community Colleges

IN EVERY ISSUE

Shanna Smith Jaggars, and Davis Jenkins A new book from the Community College Resource Center offers practical, research-based guide to improving outcomes.

19 The Center of Performance — By Judith Witherspoon

Centralizing campus operations can make the best of resources and improve student satisfaction.

21 Centralization as a Catalyst for Change at HCC — By Kenneth Ray Jr. A thorough review of processes highlighted a need for centralization and sparked systemwide change at Hillsborough Community College.

24 Evolve! — By David Conner

Expert partners can help colleges keep pace with technology.

28 2030: The Last Classroom in America — By Hank Dunn and Rick Smyre As educational leaders, trustees must help prepare their institutions for transformative change.

34 Give the Kids Some Credit — By Kevin Boys and Ryan McCall

1

From the Chair

2

From the President & CEO

4

News

22 Around the Regions 32 ACCT Lifetime Members 48 Searches 52 Pop Quiz 53 Interface 56 Advisor

Ohio expands the traditional dual enrollment model, but colleges must be aware of the costs.

36 Pathways and Partnerships — By Chris Reber and Melissa D. Denardo COVER ILLUSTRATION BY DAN PAGE COLLECTION

Community College of Beaver County creates a distinctive dual enrollment program for high school students.

38

A University-Community College Partnership to Smile About — By Ed Dodson The Oregon Tech-Chemeketa dental hygiene partnership brought a four-year program to the community college — and free care to its community.

40 Invest in College Success — By Pam Eddinger

A pilot at three Massachusetts community colleges develops students’ financial management skills.

42 The (New) Bachelor — By Narcisa A. Polonio and Norma Goldstein Baccalaureate degrees tailored for community colleges grow in popularity.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

3

More of What You Want from TQ This spring, more than 200 members completed a survey asking what works and what could work better about Trustee Quarterly — your ACCT membership magazine. Here’s what you told us:

NEWS 2015 ACCT Regional Awards Announced The ACCT Awards Committees are pleased to announce the 2015 ACCT Regional Awards recipients. Each Regional Awards recipient is automatically nominated for a national-level Association Award in the same category. The Association Awards will be announced during the 2015 ACCT Leadership Congress Awards Gala in San Diego, California, on Friday, October 16, 2015.

Satisfaction n 9 2.5 percent of respondents said Trustee Quarterly addresses their needs moderately well to extremely well. n 8 6 percent of respondents said that Trustee Quarterly is a somewhat to very important part of their overall ACCT membership. n T he overall quality of content, writing, and design all rated highly.

Trustee Leadership Award Recipients CENTRAL REGION:

Nadine Feighan, Cuyahoga Community College, Ohio

NORTHEAST REGION: Peter Schmidt, Warren County Community College, N.J. PACIFIC REGION:

Paul Gomez, Chaffey College, Calif.

SOUTHERN REGION: George Regan, Robeson Community College, N.C. WESTERN REGION:

John Davies, Northeast Community College, Neb.

Equity Award Recipients CENTRAL REGION:

Jackson College, Mich.

NORTHEAST REGION: Anne Arundel Community College, Md. SOUTHERN REGION: Halifax Community College, N.C. Southeast Community College, Neb.

Interests

WESTERN REGION:

n A pproximately 71 percent prefer the magazine in print, while 29 percent prefer an online reading experience.

Chief Executive Officer Award Recipients

n T he top three issues of interest to readers are:

SOUTHERN REGION: Ronnie Booth, Tri-County Technical College, S.C.

–B oard and trustee education and case studies

Faculty Member Award Recipients

–T rends (student success, new funding models, etc.)

NORTHEAST REGION: O. Pauline Chow, Harrisburg Area Community College, Pa.

–F ederal policy updates and analysis

CENTRAL REGION:

Linda Allen, Hawkeye Community College, Iowa

NORTHEAST REGION: Carl Haynes, Tompkins Cortland Community College, N.Y. PACIFIC REGION: WESTERN REGION:

CENTRAL REGION:

Linda Kaminski, Yakima Valley Community College, Wash.

Brenda Hellyer, San Jacinto College District, Texas

Erin Wilding-Martin, Parkland College, Ill.

PACIFIC REGION:

Ryann Leonard, Big Bend Community College, Wash.

SOUTHERN REGION:

Maureen Tremel, Seminole State College, Fla.

WESTERN REGION:

Suryakant Desai, Dallas County Community College District, Texas

Professional Board Staff Member Award Recipients

Future issues of Trustee Quarterly will take into account reader interests and place greater focus on trustee education, trends, and federal policy updates and analysis.

We would love to hear from you.

Send your thoughts about Trustee Quarterly to dconner@acct.org.

4

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

CENTRAL REGION:

Valerie Krueger, Moraine Park Technical College, Wis.

NORTHEAST REGION: Carol Sherman, Harford Community College, Md. PACIFIC REGION:

Beverly Bailey, Chabot-Las Positas Community College District, Calif.

SOUTHERN REGION: Cheryl Daley, Seminole State College, Fla. WESTERN REGION:

Pamela Payne, El Paso Community College, Texas

ACCT congratulates the 2015 ACCT Regional Award recipients for their outstanding work. Visit www.acct.org to learn more about the ACCT Awards program.

College Promise Campaign Toolkit The past year could be called “the year of keeping promises.”

In 1947, a special commission authored “Higher Education for American Democracy,” a report to U.S. President Harry S. Truman. The report called for “the extension of free public education through the first two years of college for all youth who can benefit from such education,” ultimately concluding that “the report urges establishment of community colleges; the expansion of adult education programs; and the distribution of Federal aid to education in such a manner that the poorer states can bring their education systems closer to the quality of wealthier states.”

Referencing the Truman Commission report in his Bellwether Award-winning 2013 book First in the World: Community Colleges and America’s Future, ACCT President and CEO J. Noah Brown wrote that “we need to revitalize the compact between government and community colleges…community colleges are ‘what is right with America.’ The rest is up to us.”

America heard the call for renewal in 2014, beginning with Tennessee Governor Bill Haslam introducing the Tennessee Promise plan to “provide two years of tuition-free attendance at a community or technical college in Tennessee.”

During his State of the Union Address in January 2015, President Barack Obama introduced a proposal called America’s College Promise “to make two years of community college free to all Americans who are willing to work hard toward graduation.” Inspired by these proposals, a new national nonpartisan College Promise Campaign launched to build a movement around the broader vision of debt-free college classes, greater investment in higher education, and student success.

While it is too early in the College Promise Campaign to project the outcome, ACCT lauds these plans to make community college education accessible — keeping a promise made nearly 60 years ago to invest in Americans — as education yields unparalleled dividends for our communities and our nation. This summer, ACCT in collaboration with AACC issued a toolkit for the College Promise Campaign, encouraging member trustees, presidents, students, and other community college advocates to support this groundbreaking, nonpartisan campaign that promises to advance our nation by advancing guaranteed education to all American students for two additional years.

Download the toolkit at www.acct.org.

LET THE LAW WORK FOR YOU Timing is everything when it comes to advocacy, but not everyone has time to pay attention to pending legislation day in and day out.

ACCT’s Latest Action in Washington (LAW) Alerts do the work for you.

Since 2008, nearly 1,600 people have signed up to receive ACCT’s LAW Alert emails — brief summaries of legislative actions emailed to subscribers as legislation happens, giving community college trustees, presidents, and other leaders and advocates time to contact their representatives and exert influence before it’s too late.

Please encourage your fellow trustees, presidents, and colleagues to stay up to date about legislation that affects their community colleges by joining the LAW E-Alert network. To join, simply email publicpolicy@ acct.org with “LAW Alert” in the subject of the email.

For more information about ACCT’s advocacy services, visit www.acct.org/advocacy.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

5

Model Standards of Good Practice for Trustee Boards In Support of Effective Community College Governance, the Board Believes: n

That it derives its authority from the community and that it must always act as an advocate on behalf of the entire community;

n

That it must clearly define and articulate its role;

n

That it is responsible for creating and maintaining a spirit of true cooperation and a mutually supportive relationship with its CEO;

n

That it always strives to differentiate between external and internal processes in the exercise of its authority;

n

That its trustee members should engage in a regular and ongoing process of in-service training and continuous improvement;

n

That its trustee members come to each meeting prepared and ready to debate issues fully and openly;

n

That its trustee members vote their conscience and support the decision or policy made;

n

That its behavior, and that of its members, exemplify ethical behavior and conduct that is above reproach;

n

That it endeavors to remain always accountable to the community;

n

That it honestly debates the issues affecting its community and speaks with one voice once a decision or policy is made.

Adopted by the ACCT Board of Directors, October 2000. *The term “board” refers to a community college board of trustees or appropriate governing authority.

6

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

NEWS A Closer Look at the Trillion New ACCT report profiles statewide student loan defaults.

By Colleen Campbell

Although community colleges are some of the most affordable and accessible postsecondary institutions in the country, there is growing concern over the cost of enrollment. These costs are not only related to tuition and fees — living expenses such as rent, food, and transportation can burden students and detract from their ability to enroll full-time or persist from semester to semester. Nationally, the cost of attendance at public two-year institutions is just over $16,000 — almost $11,000 more than the maximum federal Pell Grant. When students cannot afford to enroll on grants, savings, and work, they turn to federal loans.

While media reports have amplified the struggles of student borrowers, it is important that those challenges are taken within context. Loans provide an important source of financing to students who would otherwise not be able to enroll in postsecondary education. According to the College Board, 59 percent of associate degree recipients at public two-year institutions did not borrow; that number increases to 87 percent when examining students who enrolled for less than 12 months and did not complete a credential. Ultimately, borrowing is not the problem — default is. And default can be prevented using targeted, strategic outreach.

ACCT’s new report, A Closer Look at the Trillion, analyzes data from all 16 Iowa community colleges to identify trends in repayment and default. The results show that most borrowers who struggle to repay their loans are not those with the highest balances. Rather, students who borrowed less than $5,000 had the highest default rate.

Those who defaulted were less likely to have made satisfactory academic progress, to have completed more than 15 credits, or to have completed a credential. While federal policies have increased the payment options available to struggling borrowers, many students in Iowa failed to take advantage of postponement options, and almost

two-thirds of defaulters failed to make even one payment on their debt.

There is hope, however, in these results. Borrowers who completed an associate degree were four times less likely to default than non-completers, and borrowers who earned more than 15 credits were almost three times less likely to default than borrowers who earned fewer than 15 credits. By implementing broad, campus-wide policies that encourage persistence and completion, institutions can improve the outcomes of all of their students, and especially their federal loan borrowers.

Institutions also have an opportunity to improve the economic mobility and post-enrollment opportunities for low-income students. The Iowa data showed that borrowers who also received Pell Grants had the highest default rates, but that those rates were drastically reduced when Pell students completed a credential. In fact, the default rate for Pell borrowers was three times lower for completers than for non-completers, and the default rate for Pell completers was even lower than the default rate for non-Pell students.

This report adds to a body of previous research that has found that student borrowers who fail to complete are more likely to default. While students must exhibit certain physical and social traits to persist and complete — such as perseverance, responsibility, organization, and academic preparedness — those traits are not inherent. Community colleges can help students improve their academic and intellectual capabilities through broad, campus-wide programs and smaller, targeted interventions. Using data to identify at-risk students can be a challenging practice to implement, but the investment can offer institutions significant rewards through improved student outcomes.

Institutions must also use data to manage default rates.

Financial aid administrators have access to reports that provide information on the repayment behavior of student borrowers, and these data should be used for targeted default management activities. Borrowers who exhibit signs of trouble — by being delinquent or using forbearance — should receive direct counseling from the institution. Prior to leaving the institution, all borrowers should receive some form of counseling on managing their debt, whether through online counseling, a first-year experience course, or hands-on seminars with financial aid staff.

These interventions require a coordinated effort across the institution to ensure at-risk borrowers receive the support they need. For example, if a borrower fails to make academic progress in one semester, that student should receive direct counseling from both an academic advisor and financial aid officer so they know their responsibilities and have a path to get back on track. Strategies can be tailored to specific institutional policies and procedures to ensure they are

integrated into the campus culture. Trustees can encourage these and other innovative strategies on their campuses to help ensure students remain on the path to success.

ACCT will offer a presentation of the full report at the 2015 Leadership Congress, and the association will continue to work with decisionmakers to ensure federal aid policies are beneficial to community colleges and their students.

To download an electronic copy of A Closer Look at the Trillion, go to www.acct.org/reports-white-papers.

Aspen Presidential Fellowship for Community College Excellence Announced

Over the next five years, hundreds of community college presidencies will open up. To prepare the next generation of exceptional leaders, the Aspen Presidential Fellowship for Community College Excellence will select 40 fellows annually to participate in an intensive executive program, delivered in collaboration with the Stanford Educational Leadership Initiative.

This one-year program engages fellows with national leaders through four on-campus residential seminars, structured mentoring, and applied learning projects to build their capacities to transform community colleges to achieve higher levels of student success.

To learn more, go to http://bit.ly/1KrCO1E.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

7

ADVOCACY

Sharing Isn’t Always Caring New ‘risk-sharing’ bills for student loan defaults could imperil community colleges.

By Jee Hang Lee

I

IN THE LAST ISSUE OF TRUSTEE Quarterly, I noted three key areas that the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, led by Chairman Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), is exploring.

One particular issue that continues to persistently gain bipartisan traction is around colleges having “skin in the game” or “risk sharing,” which is the notion that colleges should be liable for the actions of students in loan repayment or default.

With the collective federal student loan debt passing $1 trillion, the public remains concerned that student debt may be a barrier to economic prosperity.

In turn, policymakers are introducing policy items and legislation that would hold colleges responsible for the actions of their prior students. ACCT is very concerned about risk-sharing proposals before Congress and will continue to argue against these types of proposals, as they have the potential to penalize colleges for circumstances that often are beyond their control.

This April, Senator Jack Reed (D–R.I.) introduced S. 1102, the Protect Student Borrowers Act of 2015. S. 1102 creates a risk-sharing plan to hold institutions financially responsible based on their cohort default rates. Currently, institutions of higher education remain eligible to participate in federal Title IV programs based on their cohort default rates (CDRs) within the Direct Loan program.

Under the Reed bill, if a college has a 25 percent participation rate in the Direct Loan program, the college would be subject to financial penalties owed to the Department of Treasury based on the total volume of defaulted loans in each cohort year.

8

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

The colleges’ monetary penalties are based on default rates and divided by tier.

• Over 30 percent CDR: penalty is equal to 20 percent of the total loan volume in default (including interest and collection fees).

• 30-25 percent CDR: penalty is equal to 15 percent of the total loan volume in default (including interest and collection fees).

• 25-20 percent CDR: penalty is equal to 10 percent of the total loan

volume in default (including interest and collection fees).

• 20-15 percent CDR: penalty is equal to 5 percent of the total loan volume in default (including interest and collection fees).

If a college develops and implements an approved student loan management plan, it would be able to decrease its financial penalty under risk sharing.

The most recent national cohort default rate average for two-year public institutions, in fiscal year 2011,

MICHAEL AUSTIN

Risk-sharing Based on Default Rates

was 20.6 percent — meaning that the majority of community colleges would be subject to a risk sharing payment. With the lowest per-pupil funding allocation within public higher education, the financial impact of a risk sharing payment for community colleges would likely be devastating.

While the bill grants discretion to the Secretary of Education to waive or reduce risk sharing payments for certain institutions, there is no specific waiver for two-year public institutions.

Furthermore, S. 1102 includes a specific provision that prohibits colleges from denying admission or financial aid based on a perception that a student may be at risk for defaulting on a Direct Loan.

The funds collected under risksharing would be used by the Department of Education to engage in activities related to delinquency and default prevention or rehabilitation, with the remainder allocated to offset any future shortfalls in funding under the Federal Pell Grant program.

Risk-sharing Based on Repayment Rates S. 1939, the Student Protection and Success Act, was introduced by Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) in August.

The bill is aimed at tying institutional eligibility for Title IV student aid (including Pell Grants) to — and implementing financial penalties based on — cohort repayment rates on federal loans. Institutions that do not have enough prior students paying down their federal loans could lose Title IV eligibility for three years. The cutoff for eligibility can vary year to year, and is either tied to the previous

ACCT will continue to advocate on behalf of institutions on the important issue of “risk sharing” as Congress reauthorizes the Higher Education Act. year’s rate or the sector average.

However, in any given year it may not exceed 70 percent.

• First year after enactment: the cutoff cohort repayment rate is 45 percent.

• Subsequent years: the cutoff rate is the higher of these two numbers: 1) the previous fiscal year’s cutoff rate, or 2) 10 percentage points below the average cohort repayment rate. The average cohort repayment rate is determined separately for two- and fouryear institutions.

While the Title IV eligibility portion of the bill is similar to current law, the financial penalties are a new element.

The bill proposes using a formula to determine the amount owed based on the overall balance of Direct Loan volume in nonrepayment for a given year. Institutions with higher loan volumes and lower repayment rates will owe more than those with less borrowing and higher rates of repayment. The amount is calculated by looking at the overall volume for principal debt in nonrepayment for borrowers who have not made at least

a $1 reduction in their principal balance in the three consecutive fiscal years since their loans entered repayment. Exceptions are made for some students in deferment or mandatory forbearance. All institutions are subject to financial penalties or “shared risk,” and only those with all students in repayment or no Direct Loan borrowing will be exempt from financial penalties.

Default and Repayment Research ACCT will release a new research report that documents the borrowing and repayment behavior of community college students in Iowa during FY11 in late September (see p. 6). We hope this broad look at student borrowing will help policymakers and colleges as they examine this complicated issue. ACCT and The Institute for College Access and Success also released a 2014 report, Protecting Colleges and Students, that notes some activities that colleges have undertaken to decrease default rates and support students’ efforts to enter repayment.

ACCT will continue to advocate on behalf of institutions on the important issue of “risk sharing” as Congress reauthorizes the Higher Education Act. We encourage you to use ACCT’s online policy center to communicate with your members of Congress and follow federal legislative updates through the Latest Action in Washington (LAW) email alerts and the Capitol Connection e-newsletter. To join, email publicpolicy@acct.org.

ACCT Vice President for Public Policy and External Relations Jee Hang Lee can be reached by e-mail at jhlee@acct.org, or by phone at 202-775-4667.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

9

BOOKS that Build

FUTURES NEW SERIES TAKES A VISIONARY LOOK AT THE FUTURE OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES.

FROM THE SUDDEN AND OVERWHELMING NEED FOR LEADERSHIP TO REPLACE retiring Baby Boomer generation community college presidents to the advent of new technologies that allow for better collection and analysis of data that support the student success movement, it’s clear that the community colleges of the future will look — and be — different from those of the past. Recognizing the need for thoughtful new approaches, the Association of Community College Trustees and co-publishing partner Rowman & Littlefield this summer announced the Futures Series on Community Colleges. This important new book series brings together the experiences and forward thinking of today’s visionary community college leaders. ACCT President and CEO J. Noah Brown speaks with the Futures Series co-editors Richard L. Alfred and Debbie Sydow about the books — in short, why were certain ‘hot topics’ chosen, and what does the series want to accomplish?

10

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

“WE WANT SERIES BOOKS TO BE DIFFERENT — LIKE NOTHING READING AUDIENCES HAVE SEEN BEFORE — TO ENCOURAGE LEADERS TO THINK AND WORK DIFFERENTLY.”

J. Noah Brown: As co-editors of the Futures Series on Community Colleges, what are you hoping to accomplish with this series of books?

Richard L. Alfred and Debbie Sydow: Futures Series books are designed to challenge convention and make a difference in how community colleges are led and managed. They are developed from a leader and managerial perspective and are designed to critically examine issues that have not been adequately addressed in literature and research or managed in practice. As Series co-editors, our goal is to develop high-powered books on hot topics for community colleges. By ‘hot topics,’ we mean issues and challenges that are just beginning to appear on the radar screens of community colleges and those beyond the visual horizon of leaders. If we were to use a capsule description to depict the Series to reading audiences, it would be, “We are in the business of developing books that focus on change, transformation, and disruptive innovation and their implications — long- and shortterm — for community colleges.”

We want Series books to be different — like nothing reading audiences have seen before — to encourage leaders to think and work differently. Our books are expected to represent the very best thinking on a topic at the time of publication. Series books must be at the leading edge of community college thought and practice, or we will have fallen short of our goal.

Brown: How were the topics covered by the Series determined?

Alfred and Sydow: We rely on multiple inputs and sources of information to identify topics for Series books. Both of us have a penchant for risk that impels us to look for topics with two characteristics: they are new and untouched, and they are disruptive. We explore literature and ideas in a variety of fields including business, education, technology, and public policy.

We pay particular attention to industries that have undergone or are undergoing transformation to identify challenges cutting across organizations that will eventually make their way to community colleges.

Beyond our work as idea generators is the important role in topic identification and selection played by a 10-member national advisory panel made up of community college CEOs, graduate program professors, foundation officers, and ACCT leaders.

The panel meets twice a year to identify issues and challenges confronting community colleges that have not been adequately addressed in research or practice. Topics currently under development in Series books are largely a result of the work of

the series advisory panel. We also rely on topic suggestions from community college practitioners interested in seeing a topic addressed in print or possessing the expertise to author a book.

Series books are by and for practitioners — they are the true litmus test of quality and relevance.

Brown: What are the issues of greatest importance to community college boards and trustees?

Alfred and Sydow: At no time in the short history of community colleges have boards and trustees faced more challenges. Finding and retaining capable leaders is certainly at or near the top of the list for most boards, but close behind are challenges related to mission, enrollment, and resources. To name a few: shifting from an access to achievement mission, closing the gap between needed and available resources, maintaining enrollment and market share in the face of stiff competition, leading and managing change, building commitment to a culture of evidence, locating new sources of revenue, and rethinking governance.

These are the challenges that immediately come to mind.

There are others, of course, but perhaps the issue of greatest importance — the one that will drive or inhibit the future success of community colleges — is how boards work with leaders to address these challenges.

Community colleges are built on people. Marginal leaders reduce staff to marginal results. Finding and developing talented leaders is, and must be, the top priority for boards. We know that leaders are retiring or separating from institutions in significant numbers. We also know that the problem of succession is vastly more complicated than simply replacing those who are leaving.

The real challenge is how to develop leaders for the future.

The leadership pipeline — graduate education, on-the-job experience, mentoring, etc. — is not working as effectively as we would like. Boards will need to do their part in rebuilding the leadership pipeline as well as building new pipelines. This is not a matter of choice — it is a requisite for developing leaders who will optimally position community colleges to succeed in the uncharted waters of the future.

Brown: Your book, Developing Tomorrow’s Leaders: Context, Challenges and Capabilities, came out this summer. You present what you call “three tableaus” — one of leadership practice in the past, one illustrating the challenges leaders face today, and one looking forward into the future. How would you summarize — in one sentence for each — past, current, and future leadership approaches?

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

11

Alfred and Sydow: Using one sentence to describe an approach to leadership is a tall order. Long descriptions are much easier because a host of attributes describing leaders can be pooled together and the reader can pick and choose among them to come up with an approach to leadership. Having said this, we would describe past, current, and future leadership approaches as follows: • Yesterday: Leaders used a top-down management approach in small-scale, predictably resourced colleges in which forces inside and outside of institutions were largely known, and incremental change was sufficient to achieve acceptable performance • Today: Leaders work in complex, resource-austere organizations in a fast-changing landscape that requires a collaborative approach to management carried out with multiple constituencies to achieve the goals of the organization.

• Tomorrow: Leaders guiding institutions in uncharted waters will embrace risk and move beyond the known — critical skills will include a capability for out-ofthe-box thinking; an appreciation for and understanding of strategy; and a willingness to pursue, without guarantee of success, opportunities for innovation.

Brown: Looking toward the future, what are the top three skills that tomorrow’s community college leaders really need? Do these apply to both the governance leadership and executive leadership?

Alfred and Sydow: Again, the skillset required of leaders managing complex organizations in a turbulent landscape is wide-ranging and potentially limitless. A leadership skill or attribute essential in one operating context may not be essential in another depending on circumstances. As for universal skills — skills that are important in almost any operating context — we believe there are three: 1) creativity and a capacity for innovation, 2) ability to relate to diverse constituencies inside and outside the organization, and 3) a capacity for envisioning, building, and managing networks.

Networks will be the name of the game in the future for community colleges. The structure of the network a college is playing in will ultimately be more important than the structure of the college itself. Leaders who have a capacity to build and manage networks will do so on the basis of creativity (the ability to imagine what a high-performing network should look like, who should be part of it, and how it should work) and highly developed relational skills (the ability to anticipate and respond to the needs and expectations of network players).

Leadership and governance in networked colleges will be very different than governance in free-standing institutions.

We could talk about old power and new power in community 12

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

colleges and what this will mean for leadership in a different type of institution. That is a topic better left for another day — perhaps as part of a session at the ACCT Leadership Congress in San Diego.

Brown: And who are these leaders? Developing Tomorrow’s Leaders discusses the nation’s evolving demographics — how soon will cultural shifts affect the culture of community college leadership and the institutions themselves?

Alfred and Sydow: More than any other sector of higher education, community college demographics reflect the nation’s evolving demographics; therefore, cultural shifts are already impacting leaders and institutions. New student cohorts (e.g., millennials born between 1981 and the mid-1990s, and the i-generation, born after 1994) are placing dramatically different demands on current systems, particularly in the area of technology.

By 2050, we may not see the predicted 50/50 split in race and gender at the executive level of community college leadership, but staff throughout the organization will be significantly more diverse than they are today. That diversity will become a competitive edge for colleges in which success will increasingly depend on ideation and innovation in a networked environment. Colleges with broadly distributed leadership capacity will have the best chance of succeeding in a fast change environment. Most colleges have staff with a capacity to become change agents within their ranks, so implementing staff development programs designed to teach leadership fundamentals will help colleges build a capacity for transformation.

Whether internally cultivated or externally sourced, tomorrow’s leaders will embrace values and skillsets, and possess knowledge and experience, that were previously undervalued in community colleges. New leaders may not have the appearance or tangible attributes of leaders that were so characteristic of past and current leader generations.

It may be useful for boards to begin to use “opposite think” to identify desirable characteristics in leaders. It would go something like this: What characteristics of leaders past and present have we valued that did not work — attributes that did not pay off? What might be considered the opposite of these attributes, and would they be effective in a networked organization? For example, we have consistently valued “strong” leaders who make timely decisions and hold people accountable for results. This often takes the form of top-down management with minimal staff input. Would this approach to leadership work in networked organizations in which power, authority, and influence are distributed? What would be the opposite of top-down leadership, and how would it work in a networked organization?

Brown: As Baby Boomer generations are retiring from the workforce, higher education is seeing what some are calling a “leadership pipeline crisis.” How do you think younger-generation college presidents and trustees will operate as compared with older, more traditional leaders?

What lessons can the next generation glean from those who came before them? And what could traditionalminded leaders of today learn from younger, more technological approaches?

Alfred and Sydow: As Baby Boomers cycle out of the workforce, we would like to believe that a creative tension will exist between trustees and presidents who are generationally different from young employees, i.e., old power and new power.

Different worldviews and approaches will yield positive effects for an industry in great need of a jolt to its system. As described in a recent Harvard Business Review article, old power is a kind of currency — it is held by a few, is closed and inaccessible, and is leader-driven. It downloads in organizations. New power, by contrast, works more like a current — it is open and participatory and created and used by many. It uploads and distributes.

Think social media. It is almost certain that new-generation trustees and presidents whose lives have been lived to a greater degree online in an on-demand world of cyberspace will be more facile with technology and its many applications for delivering on the community college mission. At the same time, old power’s penchant for seizing a target and utilizing every available resource to get the job done would be a useful tool for new leaders reaching for closure.

Linguistic theory suggests that speaking multiple languages boosts neural pathways and mental acuity, so there’s definite value in getting generations to learn one other’s language. The next generation can learn the value and power of utilizing structure — customs and rules — from those who came before them. Tradition-minded leaders can learn the benefits of tapping into individual creativity and capacity for growth, and capitalizing on the desire of staff to participate in organizational strategic actions without being directed. Boards would be wise to seize this opportunity to drive knowledge and skill-sharing between generations within and throughout the college.

Brown: How can community college boards prepare for impending changes? What do they need to know or do that they may not already be learning or doing?

Alfred and Sydow: Although it will be a dramatic change for those who are accustomed to overseeing self-contained organizations where resources — tangible and intangible — are tightly controlled, boards need to understand that in a networked organization with multiple partners, investment must be focused on core strength, not dispersed to areas that add questionable value. Boards will need to become adept at tapping into expertise

for hire. They will also need to become adept at envisioning, building, and hiring talent to manage networks. This will have entirely different ramifications for the exercise of power and influence and will lead to a shift in the approach to governance.

Networked organizations distribute authority and power or they don’t work. Boards will need to look for and hire presidents who know how to distribute power while simultaneously motivating staff to pursue and achieve core purposes of the institution.

We would suggest that rather than grooming a single successor within a college, boards should consider grooming a stable of leaders primed to take over leadership positions at all levels. Not all those trained will advance in-house, but another institution, most likely a community college, will benefit from the investment in leadership development. Although boards may bristle at the idea of widespread employee grooming for fear of losing their investment, placement of former employees in new institutions builds the corps of leaders and strengthens the sector as a whole.

Finally, the board’s role is increasingly valuable in ways that extend well beyond presidential selection. While board members often bring with them leadership experience from other sectors, most do not have formal training or experience in leading community colleges. ACCT has long been the gold standard for delivering training to help trustees perform their role. Boards should take advantage of this resource, particularly as it relates to understanding academic cultures and the unique contextual environment of community colleges. Decisions made by boards have far-reaching consequences. Beyond understanding the basics of the community college mission and structure, boards should possess knowledge and foresight into what the future will bring and how colleges can succeed in a vastly different operating environment.

Brown: And when selecting future executive college leaders — chancellors and presidents — what should they be looking for that will be necessary for tomorrow’s community college?

Alfred and Sydow: As discussed earlier, new power favors informal, networked approaches to decision making. At its core is a belief in the power of networks, not big organizations, to acquire resources and deliver service. Boards should seek to understand and work within this new reality. They should look for leaders who have the ability to manage complex organizations that work within a network. Tomorrow’s leaders will need to communicate effectively with different worker generations and multiple network partners in a period of transition between old power and new power.

Leadership training up-and-down and side-to-side in the organization will be a “must” for growing future talent.

Training might concentrate on skills for creating and leading transformation, predictive analytics and business intelligence, managing culture change, creating and operating networks, T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

13

and generating new revenue streams. Boards should look for leaders who know how to leverage relationships, build coalitions, and shape policy dialogue to achieve desired results.

In the book, we explore how governing boards might think differently about what leaders must know and be able to do.

We know that graduate degrees have historically been the collateral needed to make the cut for positions of executive leadership, and increasingly for mid-level positions. We’re curious about what it would take to move away from the idea of obtaining a graduate degree as a credential for leadership to developing and demonstrating competencies that are essential for leadership. Competency is fast becoming the new standard of learning at the undergraduate level, so why not apply the concept of competency to the training of leaders at the graduate level?

Boards should also give more time and attention to the idea of transitioning leaders to community colleges from outside of education. The transition can be made easier if prospective leaders have a grounding in the mission and philosophy of community colleges. Pulling these leaders into the community college sphere in advance through work on advisory or governing boards is one way to provide exposure to values and culture. Contextual experience of this type exposes prospective leaders to the academic culture and helps them learn ways of working within this culture while simultaneously changing it. Hard charging change agents are short-lived if they do not figure out effective ways to deal with academe’s entrenched resistance to change.

Brown: You refer to President Obama’s America’s College Promise proposal in the book, asking “who could have imagined even a decade ago that the Commander in Chief of the United States would put forth a proposal to make community college education free to all Americans as he did in 2015?” How does universal cost-free community college education fit within your vision of tomorrow’s community college? Are college promise proposals realistic? If not, what other value do they hold?

Alfred and Sydow: No matter how sweet the rhetoric, and how tempting it is to indulge in the fantasy of universal cost-free community college education, it’s unlikely that the federal government has the wherewithal and resources to deliver. Still, there’s value in the rhetoric and in the fantasy. In addition to keeping legislators and the public at large focused on the need to make higher education affordable, in the interest of realizing the societal and the economic benefits that accrue from a college degree, President Obama’s America’s College Promise proposal acknowledges and elevates the role of community colleges in the higher education industry. At a time when the majority of America’s colleges and universities are struggling to establish relevance, let alone financial sustainability, there 14

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

Ten Market Conditions Institutions and Leaders Will Soon Confront 1. Environmental forces will strengthen in intensity and impact.

2. Education-to-work linkages will be strengthened.

3. Rules of competition will change.

4. Community colleges will lose distinctiveness as a sector through merger and acquisition.

5. Boundaries between college and community will become more permeable.

6. Big data and analytics will reshape teaching, learning, and operational practice.

7. Networks will evolve as a business model.

8. New models of accountability and accreditation will emerge.

9. Private support will supplant traditional revenue streams as a basis for institutional operations.

10. Externally driven conceptions of performance will supplant institutional conceptions in the definition of institutional success.

From Developing Tomorrow’s Leaders: Context, Challenges, and Capabilities

is growing clarity about the fundamental role of community colleges in educating America’s citizens and preparing its workforce. The branding alone of this fundamental truth is invaluable.

J. Noah Brown is president and CEO of the Association of Community College Trustees and author of First in the World: Community Colleges and America’s Future. Richard L. Alfred is emeritus professor of higher education at the University of Michigan. He is co-editor of the Futures Series on Community Colleges and founding director of the Center for Community College Development. Debbie Sydow is president of Richard Bland College of the College of William and Mary and co-editor of the Futures Series on Community Colleges.

A Clearer Path to Student Success NEW BOOK FROM THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESOURCE CENTER OFFERS PRACTICAL, RESEARCH-BASED GUIDE TO IMPROVING OUTCOMES.

BY THOMAS BAILEY, SHANNA SMITH JAGGARS, AND DAVIS JENKINS

16

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

THE PRESSURE ON COMMUNITY COLLEGES TO improve student outcomes has never been more intense.

In our new book, Redesigning America’s Community Colleges: A Clearer Path to Student Success, we offer a research-based model for reform that has already begun to make a difference for students in a small but growing number of colleges. The model we describe, called “guided pathways,” involves an entire rethinking of how students move through community college.

Most community colleges today are organized around what we call a “cafeteria-style” or “self-service” model of education, in which a wide variety of courses and programs are offered at low cost to many kinds of students. The model arose from a well-intended national policy focus to increase college access and from a public financing system in which funding dollars are tied to the number of students colleges enroll. But a model geared toward increased college access and enrollments is not necessarily the best one to maximize student completion.

Under the cafeteria model, community college students face a bewildering array of options to consider.

Navigating college entails a series of high-stakes choices about what courses to take, what program to pursue, how and when to seek out academic support, whether to enroll full-time or part-time, whether to seek a certificate or an associate or bachelor’s degree, and whether and where to transfer. Most students make these choices largely on their own. The system offers broad flexibility, but it is also confusing and frustrating.

It works for self-motivated students who have clear goals and a network of family or peer support, but it is often disastrous for others.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

17

STATE POLICYMAKERS SHOULD RECOGNIZE THAT THE ECONOMIC RETURNS ON A COMMUNITY COLLEGE EDUCATION ARE ALREADY VERY HIGH. The cafeteria-style selection of courses also impacts how curriculum, instruction, and student supports are structured at community colleges. Courses within a program of study do not necessarily build upon one another; faculty often teach in isolation; and academic support and career services tend to be optional for students, detached from courses and from programs of study. Our research has convinced us that this “a la carte” organization of courses and services is a strong contributor to the low completion rates found at many community colleges.

Under the guided pathways approach, the primary institutional goal is to help students complete a high-quality program of study that prepares them for transfer as a junior in their major or that prepares them for employment in locally available jobs with family-supporting wages. And that is what students want as well. Seventy-nine percent of California community college students surveyed in 2013 agreed that having more connection and direction would help their progress.

To adopt a guided pathways approach, college academic leaders begin by determining what students need to know to transfer with junior standing in their target major or to secure good jobs in their field of study, and then they redesign programs to enable students to achieve those goals. The college’s intake services, first-year experience activities, and support services — including developmental education — are systematically focused on helping students explore career options and interests and choose and successfully enter a program of study. The requirements and expected learning outcomes for each program are unambiguously defined, communicated clearly to students, and aligned with requirements at students’ transfer destination institutions or with industry standards.

Under this approach, faculty map out default course sequences in their programs of study, which simplifies students’ choices without limiting their options since students can change (but need to consult an advisor before they do so). Faculty work closely with support services staff to ensure that students receive help when they struggle or veer off track. The overarching idea is that students are more likely to complete a degree in a timely fashion if they choose a program and develop an academic plan early on, have a clear road map of the courses they need to take to complete a credential and prepare for further education and employment, and receive guidance and support to help them stay on plan.

Under the guided pathways approach, incoming students who are unclear about their interests and career aims begin with a “meta-major” in a broad initial field of interest (such as business, health, or science) that allows students to get a realistic sense of the field while accruing college credits — but without locking them into a program of study before they are ready.

Developmental education is restructured so that instruction in foundational skills is contextualized and to the extent feasible integrated into critical gatekeeper courses in each student’s meta18

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

major (such as economics and management 101 for the business meta-major, or biology and anatomy and physiology for the allied health and nursing meta-major), as well as into math, English, and other general education courses.

Moving a college from the cafeteria model to the guided pathways model requires a great deal of sustained collaboration among faculty, advisors, and administrators. It is an ambitious undertaking that is difficult to carry out. Yet the model does offer the benefit of program coherence and alignment with student end goals — organizing principles that can integrate otherwise disconnected and self-limited attempts at improvement. Efforts to improve high school to college transitions, developmental education, student supports, pedagogy, and baccalaureate transfer thus become oriented toward a clearly defined purpose shared broadly by faculty and staff.

The guided pathways model takes direct aim at making community colleges more effective and more efficient. Yet while use of the model may lower costs per successful student outcome, it is also likely to increase a college’s per-student costs, in part because more students will persist and take more costly higher level courses, and in part because implementing the model involves some additional costs, for example, to increase advising and strengthen information systems for student tracking.

But this ought not serve as a disincentive. State policymakers, in particular, should recognize that the economic returns on a community college education are already very high, both for graduates, who enjoy strong earnings gains in the labor market, and for taxpayers, who receive a large return on their investment (through higher tax payments and lower use of social services among those who complete community college credentials).

Policymakers should therefore encourage colleges to use their scarce resources more efficiently, which will likely involve not cost cutting, but reallocation of existing resources and the provision of some additional resources to cover the costs needed to implement guided pathways. Early evidence from colleges that have begun to use the model suggests that the guided pathways approach can substantially increase the number of students who complete highquality community college credentials.

Thomas Bailey is the director of the Community College Research Center (CCRC) at Columbia University. Shanna Smith Jaggers is CCRC’s assistant director, and David Jenkins is CCRC’s senior research associate.

BY JUDITH WITHERSPOON

The

CENTER of

PERFORMANCE Centralizing campus operations can make the best of resources and improve student satisfaction.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

19

CENTRALIZED PROCESSING OPERATIONS IMPROVE CONSISTENCY. WHEN FUNCTIONS ARE DECENTRALIZED, POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MAY VARY.

COLLEGE LEADERS STRUGGLE WITH ISSUES OF RESOURCE allocation almost daily. With fluctuations in state support for community colleges and changes in funding formulas, administrators are looking for ways to operate more efficiently while improving service to students. The answer for many community college districts and systems may be the strategic centralization of certain student service and business office operations.

At first glance, the concept of improving operating efficiency while simultaneously improving service to students may seem like an impossibility; however, that is not the case. Colleges with multi-campus operations have the ability to reconfigure the day-to-day operations of select administrative units. Back office functions such as admissions processing, transcript evaluation, and federal aid processing, among others, are administrative functions that do not require face-to-face interaction with students and can easily be performed in a single, centralized location.

Centralized processing operations improve consistency. When functions are decentralized, policies and procedures may vary.

These differences may confuse students as they migrate from campus to campus or negatively impact an audit. For example, a campus financial aid office may be following U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) regulations but not college policies, which could be stricter. When audits occur, aid offices are reviewed based on institutional policies as well as USDOE regulations.

Higher education is heavily regulated, requiring administrators to spend considerable efforts in gathering, processing, and reporting data to the USDOE, Federal Student Aid, state agencies, etc. Regulations change, processes are modified, and administrators must react accordingly. Institutional control is paramount, and functions that are centralized are much easier to change and control. In a centralized environment, it is easier to modify or remove processes, identify and correct data errors, and monitor reporting compliance. For example, training materials can be standardized along with the training function itself. In a decentralized environment, there are no guarantees that procedures are trained as intended.

Centralization gives the college administration a mechanism for better institutional control.

First Steps Before any move is made to centralize functions, college districts or systems should move to standardize policies and procedures for the departments or divisions that are targeted for centralization. Building consensus for a single set of policies or procedures can be challenging, but it can also be a very positive exercise, allowing for true examination of 20

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

the “why” behind the policy and the value of continuing that policy. Is the policy or procedure in place because of tradition?

Does it serve to help or hinder the student?

The biggest challenge to centralization is often getting buy-in from staff members and campus-level administrators whose day-to-day duties may be affected by the change. Winning the hearts and minds of staff members can be accomplished by examining the core competencies of each employee and aligning duties to better fit the skill set and attributes of each. For example, it can be difficult to find employees that have all of the skill sets to be great at customer service while being technical enough to keep up with all of the changes that happen in the administration of federal student aid. Centralization allows the campuses to hire or retain the employees who excel at customer service while directing the technical experts who prefer processing and data-related duties to the central operations center. In the end, employees are able to focus on more of what they enjoy doing.

Centralization also serves to enhance productivity and decrease application turnaround times. When the technical employees are allowed to focus only on processing financial aid without having to stop for customer service, they improve both speed and accuracy. This increases productivity, reduces overtime, and heightens employee satisfaction.

Best of all, colleges see a marked improvement in student satisfaction. Students benefit from improved service levels and more qualitative interaction with staff. Students work with employees who enjoy face-to-face interaction. Common polices and standard deadlines reduce confusion and allow for improved student communication at the system or district level.

Students know what to expect, regardless of which campus they attend. With improved processing models, administrators are able to devote more time and attention to at-risk students, improving student outcomes.

With so much national attention on innovative ways to deliver course content, it may also be time for colleges to reimagine how student services divisions operate. District- and system-level centralization can have a very positive impact on efficiencies, institutional control and compliance, staff morale, student satisfaction and completion, as seen in the profile of Hillsborough Community College that follows.

Judith Witherspoon is senior vice president and national sales director at Edfinancial Services.

CENTRALIZATION as a CATALYST for CHANGE AT HCC

BY KENNETH RAY JR.

IN 2012, HILLSBOROUGH COMMUNITY College (HCC) commissioned a study focusing on the quality of students’ experience at the college’s five campuses.

At the time of the study, each college campus operated its own processing centers for financial aid, Admission, Records & Registration (AR&R), and veteran affairs.

The study revealed a need for improvement in the areas of communication and responsiveness, as well as the redesign of enrollment services units. This thorough review of the college’s processes highlighted a need for centralization and served as a catalyst for change. The HCC leadership team focused on: • I dentifying specific college functions to centralize •R eviewing and modifying staff positions and job descriptions • I dentifying a central location for all centralized student services functions • I dentifying technology and equipment needs •C reating better relationships between enrollment services, financial aid, institutional technology, and finance • Identifying channels of communications •D etermining staffing patterns needed for centralization and campus functions • I dentifying staff training/ development needs •D eveloping a process to reassign staff to the centralized enrollment processing center The overall goal was to improve the student experience through efficient and timely processing and enhanced customer service.

Phase 1: Financial Aid and Call Center Centralization began in 2011-12, initially focusing on financial aid and call center operations. The college established a single Student Services Central Processing Center, initially housing financial aid operations with capacity for additional staff in later phases.

Call center operations were centralized by using third-party vendors to handle most student inquiries. Higher level inquiries received at the call center were addressed by staff within the Student Services Central Processing Center. This change enhanced student experience and improved customer service.

Although the overall plan to improve the student experience is still ongoing, centralization of the financial aid, AR&R, and veteran affairs departments have generated extremely positive results.

Since 2013, the college has experienced a 47 percent increase in the number of students awarded financial aid by the first day of the fall semester. The college has also made tremendous gains in the number of students awarded financial aid throughout the summer.

Hillsborough Community College • • • • •

Located in Tampa, Florida President Ken Atwater 47,000 students Five campuses and three centers Seventh largest institution in Florida College System • $220 million annual budget • 2,500 employees • $1.1 billion economic impact to Hillsborough County

development services such as advising, career counseling, counseling, recruitment, and student activities relate and respond well to local community needs. Some campuses may have greater need for flexibility to enhance student development or educational support services, while others face different opportunities to support their community. It is essential Phase 2: Admission, to recognize the uniqueness of each Records & Registrar campus community. The socio-economic, and Veterans Affairs demographic, geographic, and cultural Centralization of the AR&R processing began challenges and opportunities of each campus service area are important factors in September 2014. Recent data indicates to consider when determining what a significant increase in the number of functions and services will benefit the processed applications. A comparison of mid-July data indicates that more than 1,000 college most through centralization.

In creating a harmonic balance between additional students have been admitted to decentralized and centralized services, the college in 2015, an 8 percent increase. academic and student development needs, The centralization of the veteran affairs operating efficiencies, and federal and department was significantly helpful in state compliance issues should be taken removing barriers that negatively affected into account. At Hillsborough Community the college’s compliance with Department College, we are making systemic and of Veteran Affairs (VA) regulations. The meaningful change reflective of student centralized VA certification process aided needs to improve institutional effectiveness the improvement of veteran students’ and to serve our community. experience with the department.

Exceptions to Every Rule While centralization streamlined back office processing, established standardization, and improved students’ experiences, it is important to emphasize that not every service of a multi-campus organization benefits from centralization. Student

Kenneth Ray Jr. is vice president for student services and student enrollment at Hillsborough Community College.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

21

Around Regions the

CENTRAL REGION The Illinois Community College System marked its 50th anniversary in July.

Commemoration of the signing of the Illinois Public Community College Act in 1965 kicked off a yearlong observance, including a gubernatorial proclamation declaring 2015-16 as the “Year of the Community College” in Illinois.

State-supported colleges and universities in Illinois are now tobacco-free zones, following passage of the Smoke-Free Campus Act, which went into effect this summer.

The Iowa Senate celebrated the 50th anniversary of legislation establishing Iowa’s community colleges.

Today, Iowa leads the nation in the percentage of students under 18 enrolled in the state’s community colleges through concurrent enrollment programs.

Muscatine Community College in Iowa will suspend its athletic program, which includes baseball and softball programs, following

22

the 2015-16 academic year.

School officials say they will shift resources to activities in which more students participate, which could include intramural sports, clubs, and community service projects.

The University of Missouri is offering a 10 percent discount on its online bachelor’s degree program for graduates of the state’s public community colleges.

NORTHEAST REGION

The Michigan legislature’s omnibus education budget includes a $23.1 million increase for the state’s community colleges.

Ivy Tech Community College in Indiana raised $23 million in fiscal 2014, making it the top community college in fundraising for the second year running.

SOUTHERN REGION

A Wisconsin legislative committee is considering the possibility of merging the state’s separate two-year systems, the University of Wisconsin System, which operates 13 associate degree-granting colleges and an online program, and the Wisconsin Technical College System, which includes 16 technical colleges that offer two-year technical diplomas and certificates.

Alabama’s K-12 board of education is working to develop a common definition of college readiness, under which students who meet high school graduation requirements and have a C average or better in key math and English programs would automatically enter community college without testing or remediation. If approved by the state’s K-12 and community college boards, the proposed definition could be in place as early as fall 2016.

St. Louis Community College in Missouri was awarded three grants totaling more than $650,000 by the U.S. Department of Education’s Student Support Services Program. The grants will provide financial resources to approximately 160 students.

SLCC students enrolled in at least one credit hour are also eligible to receive free passes for public transit.

Copiah-Lincoln Community College in Mississippi placed fourth in an international robotics competition. Team members held fundraisers and leveraged community resources such as swimming pools to develop their remotely-operated underwater vehicle (ROV) for the 2015 Marine Advanced Technology Education ROV Competition in Canada.

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

Connecticut has become the first state to create a student loan bill of rights, which creates an ombudsman’s office to regulate student loan services and educate students and parents about the loan process. Sixty-four percent of the state’s college students graduate with debt averaging over $30,000, state officials said.

Maine’s public four-year universities and community colleges signed an agreement to simplify the transfer process across all 14 institutions. The memorandum of understanding will allow students who complete up to 35 general education credits to transfer that credit block to any community college or university in the Maine system.

The University of Massachusetts Amherst received a $632,000 grant from the National Science Foundation to support engineering students transferring from community colleges. Intended to increase the number of low-income students, the program begins

this fall with an initial group of 22 transfer students from three community colleges.

Quinsigamond Community College in Massachusetts is part of a new $610 million, public-private partnership focused on integrated photonics technology. As part of the Manufacturing Innovation Institute for Integrated Photonics, the community college will build a new learning center for the program.

City College of New York was named one of the nation’s “best value” colleges and universities by the Princeton Review. CCNY was recognized for its low cost, career preparation services, and rigorous academic programs, including engineering and art.

Following a review of developmental education, Montgomery College in Maryland is piloting an alternative placement program that examines high school transcripts to determine whether incoming students must take remedial classes.

Seventeen of the 19 students in the initial cohort who bypassed remedial courses earned Cs or better in collegelevel math courses this spring, the college said.

Burlington County College in New Jersey has renamed itself Rowan College at Burlington County to reflect its partnership with the four-year institution. It also shuttered its Pemberton campus and is

expanding its Mount Laurel campus, saving more than $3 million in annual operating costs, officials said.

PACIFIC REGION Nine students from the University of Hawaii community college system assembled a payload launched into space

by NASA in August. The UH team was the only community college group represented among the seven higher education programs included in the project. Its payload will study ultraviolet energy and was funded by a two-year, $500,000 grant by NASA. As part of the new state budget, Washington legislators approved the first-ever tuition decrease of 5 percent for the state’s 380,000 community college students, representing a $50 savings per student per quarter.

Tacoma Community College in Washington will offer an applied baccalaureate degree in health information management.

Pending accreditation approval, the college will offer the degree in starting in fall 2016.

The University of California

introduced a new academic roadmap for students in the California Community College system to simplify the transfer process. Ninety percent of UC transfer students come from California community colleges, and the 21 planned pathways will cover two-thirds of all transfer applications.

Several California community colleges are launching programs at four state prisons this fall, following passage of a 2014 state law allowing community colleges to receive the same level of state funding for educating prisoners. The $2 million, 18-month pilot program includes advising and counseling along with courses. “We have decades of research telling us that post-secondary education in correctional facilities are the most effective education programs at reducing recidivism,” Julie Ajinkya, director of applied research for the Institute for Higher Education Policy in Washington, told the Los Angeles Times.

San Diego Mesa College in California accepted its first cohort of students for the SEEDS Scholar Program, which is intended to increase the number of Hispanic students in high-demand agricultural areas, including sustainability, global food security, and hunger. The STEM-focused program is funded by a $290,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

WESTERN REGION After Arizona’s budget eliminated all state funding for the Maricopa and Pima community college districts last year, lawmakers are beginning budget deliberations for 2016-17 by proposing zero funding for all of the state’s community colleges.

Maricopa Community Colleges in Arizona launched a new program to help children aging out of the foster system attend and complete college. The Bridging Success Initiative focuses on retention, degree completion, and transfer. Nationally, only 25 percent of foster care youth complete a certificate or two-year degree, while only 3 percent receive a fouryear degree.

Houston Community College, Texas Southmost College, Alamo Colleges, and El Centro College entered co-enrollment partnerships with Texas A&M University, allowing their students to enroll in the Texas A&M-Chevron Engineering Academy for the first two years of coursework in 16 engineering majors. The program is supported by a $5 million grant from Chevron.

Around the Regions provides an opportunity to share what’s happening in the states and around the regions. This section focuses on state legislative and budgetary issues, economic development, and finance. Please e-mail items from press releases or newsletters to ACCT at dconner@acct.org. Fax submissions to 202-223-1297.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

23

EVOLVE! EXPERT PARTNERS CAN HELP COLLEGES KEEP PACE WITH TECHNOLOGY.

BY DAVID CONNER

24

THE SKY DARKENS OMINOUSLY. EVERYONE ON TWO legs and four stands still. A neck cranes upward and…a flash. Out with the dinosaurs and in with the mammals.

We’ve seen this scene reenacted countless times in movies and on television; the creatures that came before us literally didn’t know what hit them — and we’ve adopted this phrase as a caution to be aware of what’s going on around us. Of course, we live in an unprecedented age during which information comes at us quickly and constantly and from all directions.

Sometimes we see the asteroid coming but feel powerless to stop it, especially when it comes to rapidly evolving technologies.

Marcia Daniel and Christi Segal have worked in the community college sector for a great number of years, helping colleges to implement strategic higher education software, services, and analytics to manage campus business faster, more easily, and more effectively. Daniel serves as associate vice president for client engagement at Ellucian, an ACCT Corporate Council member company of more than a decade, and Segal is Ellucian’s director of technology management consulting. They are at the heart of the rapidly evolving technology sphere and have seen colleges either thrive or suffer as a direct result of their relationships with higher education technology service providers.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

25

TECHNOLOGY CAN HELP BOARDS WITH THEIR OWN RESPONSIBILITIES — BUT ONLY WHEN SYSTEMS CAN SHARE INFORMATION WITH EACH OTHER.

“Look at the budget line item for technology — it’s a lot of money,” Segal says. “Colleges, including their boards, should use technology servicers as strategic partners and let us help you align the vision of where you’re going so that the technology can work for you and you’re investing it in the right way. Partners who are experts in the tech space should be engaged with the board because it’s a matter of technology governance. Both the institution overall and the institution’s technology require strategic plans, and they should both dovetail with the board’s vision and plans for the college.”

Daniel calculates that she has attended 367 community college board meetings throughout her administrative career in community colleges and her work with Ellucian. “Not one of those meetings,” she says, “had a strategic planning retreat with their technology vendor to tell us about where the institution was going, how it needed to grow, and what they could do as partners to achieve that growth.”

Through Daniel’s experience, it is evident that it’s unusual for boards to interact directly with tech providers — but should it be?

Boards are responsible for institutional oversight and governance, and traditionally, something as specific as technology may not have had a place on the board agenda. But in today’s world, technology is everything.

As an example of the primary importance of technology to any institution today, Daniel tells the story of when she was helping her niece apply to college. “I encouraged her to apply to my alma mater,” Daniel says. “So we go online, we start to apply, and the college doesn’t have an online application. I said, ‘that’s OK, I’ll call them tomorrow.’ She said, ‘no. If they don’t have an online application — everybody else does — they’re stuck back in history. I’m not interested in going there.’ She made that decision that quickly because that university didn’t have an online application. So if people are working longer hours, more jobs than ever before to keep a family running, and if an institution doesn’t have the technology to meet the needs of incoming and outgoing students, they’re going to lose students. It’s that simple.”

Segal had a similar experience when she was helping her own daughter apply to colleges last fall. “Within two minutes, if she couldn’t find what she was looking for, the college was off the list,” she says. “It’s that competitive, and the institution’s front door is its web presence.”

And the website is only the front door. Aside from the brick and mortar that makes the actual classrooms and office spaces on a campus, technology is the basis of most operations today.

Boards should be familiar with their college’s technology partners and understand what the college is really getting out of the partnership, with attention to the college’s mission and vision, but of equal importance, with attention to where the college will be in the next three to five years.

26

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

‘You Can’t Drive a Ford With Chevrolet Keys’ Technology can help boards with their own responsibilities — but only when systems can share information with each other.

“When we start arbitrarily making things fit — and that’s what we do when we see colleges that have multiple programs they are using in multiple offices, and none of those programs is talking to the others — they’re actually trying to drive a Ford with Chevrolet keys,” Daniel says. “It just isn’t going to work.

That’s when we talk about dashboards: we need to see who at an institution is responsible for job completion, for the numbers for registration, who is accountable for keeping the curriculum current, and each responsible individual, including the president and the board, needs dashboards for their responsibilities so that when they log on, they can see the dashboards and they know where their current data are coming from and how their numbers look.”

“In one of the more progressive boards I’ve worked with,” she continues, “all of the board members had iPads, and they all had a dashboard to track registration, graduation rates, and pertinent information that they needed to know.

When someone asked them what the college is working on — would it be offering any new programs anytime soon, for example — they had their dashboards and could answer every question. That board was exceptionally informed.”

How did the board overcome the learning curve?

“When the college gave the board members the iPads, the president’s assistant set up a meeting with each board member — because they were ranging in age from thirtysomething to 70-plus — and she gave each one an orientation and walked them through what they needed to know to begin using the iPad. Even the lowest-budget college could do it.”

Partners vs. Vendors Daniel and Segal say that college boards and presidents are overlooking a crucial piece of the puzzle when they view technology providers simply as vendors who sell them a product. In reality, they say, they are often-underused expert partners who can provide vitally important support and guidance.

“A wonderful board chair told me,” Daniel says, “that until the college started a closer relationship with Ellucian, it wasn’t uncommon to learn a week before the board meeting that they were going to have a $350,000 or more surprise requisition from the IT department. After we started working with the board to create a 24-month roadmap for improvement, he said, ‘we have not had one surprise since that happened.’ Sometimes, for example, a Microsoft

license will be up for renewal, and no one will have remembered to budget for that. Working with a calendar and a dashboard will eliminate those surprises.”

Daniel recommends inviting the college’s account executive or client partner to the board retreat — not only to brief the board on what technology exists and how it can be best used, but also so that the servicer can truly engage as a partner and understand where the college is going; they can then create a roadmap for the next two to five years. Doing this will maximize operations budgets, improve the quality of data being produced by the college, and prevent interruptions to ongoing progress by being able to anticipate the college’s real needs based on the board’s vision.

“We have institutions that say, ‘we have this expenditure, but we just don’t have the money in the budget this year,’ Daniel says. “That’s understandable — but when you consult with your technology partners, you’ll be able to know that you will need a particular program — let’s say a performance and analytics program to track your data — and then you can project the cost well in advance, not having to buy it in June when you need it in August.

That’s the importance of making a roadmap with your partner — let them know where you are going, and then work together to maximize your staff, employee time, and your budget.”

While the board’s involvement should not get into the weeds of implementing any technology, the board should be lending insights to the technology provider about the needs of the college community and the institution’s direction so that governance and technology are able to dovetail for a smooth, consistent evolution rather than being rocked by sudden and unpredicted — but predictable — changes.

What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You Ten or 15 years ago, it may not have been a serious mistake to leave technology partners out of the overall institutional planning process, but today the consequences of neglecting technology governance can be dire. What boards don’t know about technology trends — and what technology partners don’t know about the college’s direction — can hurt you. “Institutions can’t be run the way they were run a decade ago,” Daniel says. “There are new questions that need to be asked being formulated every day in higher ed. Regardless of an institution’s budget, it can’t do the job it needs to do without technology partners.”

David Conner is ACCT’s communications and publications manager. To reach him, email dconner@acct.org.

ON THE HORIZON We asked Daniel and Segal to tell us what tech trends need to be on the board’s radar.

• Quantifiable, reliable data. Using data no longer means just putting numbers in a report. Whether it’s IPEDS, VFA, or any other metric, colleges have to have reliable, sound data. This is more than a trend, and it’s coming quickly. In some areas, it’s already there — for example, financial aid offices operate very differently than they used to with the use of analytics.

• Cross-institutional collaboration — getting rid of silos that stand between departments. Departments within institutions — financial aid, recruiting, admissions, and others — need to work more closely together, along with academic professionals working with those areas in more holistic ways. Properly used technology can facilitate this process; used incorrectly, it can slow progress.

• Blended learning — adoption of the many different ways that today’s students learn. The board has a role in making sure the college is prepared with the tools it needs for student engagement.

• Mobility. People have to be able to access information with their phones, tablets, and computers. Because of decreased state support, it’s harder to build more classrooms to accommodate more students or to modernize older classrooms. All of this makes mobility even more important for an institution. This means evolving the technology platform beyond turning in assignments and grading to fully engaging students in a mobile forum. The college needs to consider mobility a serious investment for reasons mentioned above — in many cases, if a student can’t get what he or she needs online, s/he’ll simply go to another institution to meet those needs.

•H ardware versus cloudware. Institutions are confronting the question of whether to buy more hardware or to house information and systems on the cloud. The cloud can be a terrifying concept for many presidents and boards. Boards are having to adopt a whole new vocabulary to govern a college, and that can be intimidating when board members want to do the right thing but don’t have the background to understand terms such as “the cloud,” “mobile,” “mobile learning,” and “learning platforms.”

Daniel recalls one trustee who told her “I was a newspaper publisher for many years. When I retired, we were using IBM Selectric typewriters.”

“When we bring out a whole new vocabulary, some people, and particularly older generations who may not have used current technologies in their day-to-day working lives, have a tendency to shut down and say, ‘no, we aren’t going to do that’ because of the intimidation factor of new technologies,” Daniel says. “This can’t happen because there is no stopping the information age — so it’s necessary for boards to really think about tech service providers not as vendors who are paid to install software, but as partners who can explain not only what the software does, but why it is needed and how to make the best use of it.”

For more trends, Segal recommends the NMC Horizon Report: 2015 Higher Education Edition, published by The New Media Consortium and The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative.

Christi Segal can be contacted at Christi.Segal@ellucian.com.

Marcia Daniel can be reached at Marcia.Daniel@ellucian.com.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

27

2 30: The Last Classroom in America

BY HANK DUNN, ED.D, AND RICK SMYRE

AS EDUCATIONAL LEADERS, TRUSTEES MUST HELP PREPARE THEIR INSTITUTIONS FOR TRANSFORMATIVE CHANGE.

28

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

HIGHER EDUCATION IS IN A STATE OF FLUX. The world around us is changing faster than at any time in recorded history. We are entering a new historical period in which machines — advanced computers, robotics, and genomic technology — are overtaking jobs traditionally done by humans. Our society is transforming from hierarchies, standard answers, and predictability to interlocking networks, multiple answers, and the need to be comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty.

The question for us as educators is, are we changing as fast as business and the world, or falling further behind?

Institutions of higher education have historically been built for stability, not change. It is not unexpected that we have been slow to meet rapidly changing expectations about learning.

As we look around the country, institutions of higher learning are struggling with declining enrollment, declining revenues, and optimistic, but as yet not fully realized, student success results. We see institutions genuinely struggling to move the student success and completion needle. However, over time, those results reach a plateau or don’t move the needle as far or as fast as desired.

Perhaps that is because, like the ancients before us who believed that the sun revolved around the earth, we are bound by the confines of our educational beliefs. Therefore, we nibble around the edges of our current philosophies of education as opposed to transforming to a new model of engagement. If the world around us is transforming, then perhaps we need to transform, as opposed to reform, what we do.

As educational leaders, we must rethink what learning concepts, methods, and systems will be needed for a society and an economy in transition; where the advantages that humans have over radical technologies include the ability to provide the capacities for ideation, emerging pattern recognition, and complex communications.

While some colleges do strive to innovate, and some have done so, many continue outdated educational learning strategies thinking that if they just find the right tweak, miraculously better learning will occur. What is needed is no less than a complete reconceptualization of learning for a 21st century society that will be constantly changing, and increasingly interconnected and complex.

Emerging across the country are bold and innovative methods of approaching higher education known by various names, such as Transformational Learning and Future Forward College, which is occurring at Wake Tech Community College in North Carolina.

These efforts don’t nibble around the edges; they bite off the whole cookie. They are aimed at helping students learn differently, faster, and more relevantly.

How are these efforts different from longstanding methodologies? One good sign that transformational (disruptive) efforts are happening is that a new language has sprung up to explain its concepts. Do you remember before we used to “just Google it”? New language springs up to explain transformational ideas and functions.

In this new transformational effort, there are several innovative concepts that are slowly making their way into the collective conscious of higher education educators. Below are short definitions of each concept.

• Trans-disciplinary learning: connecting disparate ideas; teaching across divisional lines instead of learning in silos (think departments) • Complex adaptive systems: looking at nature to see how natural things are organized and using those theories (such as chaos, complexity, and ecology) to better organize and improve what we do today for better results tomorrow.

• Adaptive planning: an alternative to strategic planning, which assumed that the world changed slowly enough to deploy long-term plans. We need to plan for quick and responsive changes, which occur more often than the once-a-year annual strategic planning cycle.

• And/both parallel processes: as we plan for transformation, we will not be able to throw the baby out with the bathwater.

We need to build a newer, better system and slowly dissolve the old system.

• Identify weak signals: we need to recognize current

emerging signals that are precursors to strong emerging trends. We must teach to the future and not teach to the past.

•M aster capacity builders: the leadership ability to focus on building capacities for transformation and dealing with emerging issues not previously experienced. It is looking to the future as opposed to looking to the past.

•U nlearning and uplearning: learning to let go of old wisdoms that no longer apply, and to think and act at a higher level of complexity.

•U sing new tools more effectively and quickly, including “gamification,” virtual reality or augmented reality, and smartphones and personal connection devices.

•S elf-directed learning: we need to learn what we want, when we need it. Shift away from prescribed courses to ones that are hyper-individualized.

• I nterdependency: moving from independence to interdependence as the norm. Teaching students to understand context and look for connections in knowledge, and to look to the future for newly emerging concepts and ideas.

Change is difficult. True transformation requires passion and deep commitment. It comes at a price in terms of an institution’s time, energy, perceptions, and engagement. Change takes much effort in an already full day. Many organizations give lip service to change but would rather stay with the known rather than step into the unknown. Unfortunately, that option only allows that person or that organization to fall further and further behind.

Colleges of the future will need forward-thinking people to join in collaboration and be actively engaged in a new evolution of teaching and learning — people who care about higher education but who also understand that what we are doing is not working for a new society and economy whose patterns are just emerging.

We will need people who are able to connect disparate ideas, people, and processes in order to rethink and redesign higher education for a “world that is still coming into existence.”

During the evolution of all disruptive and transformational efforts, there have been those who fight it, and those who embrace it. However, the future goes to those who go boldly and courageously into it, looking to weave the best of the past into the bright prospects of a different kind of future.

The classroom of the future may not be a classroom at all.

It may well be a collection of activities that engage the learner from the inside out instead of from the outside in. Whatever emerges that aligns with the needs of a different kind of society and economy will not be just reforming and improving what already exists to make it more efficient. It will be a complete rethinking and redesign of what learning means and how learning occur. It will be a transformation.

Hank Dunn, Ed.D, is a consultant with CampusWorks. Rick Smyre is the president of Center for Communities of the Future and owner of Strategic Concepts, Inc. T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

29

ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT ISSUES AFFECTING BOARDS TODAY

TRUSTEE

TA L K

Guidance for challenging issues in community college governance.

BY NA RCIS A A . P OLONIO This issue of Trustee Talk continues our discussion of the potential of social upheaval in a community spilling over to the community college campus. To download previous issues of Trustee Talk, visit www.trustee-education.org/trustee-talk. To receive the monthly Trustee Talk newsletter by email, or to submit a question, contact ACCT Executive Vice President Narcisa A. Polonio at narcisa_polonio@acct.org.

Q: Should a trustee at a small community college be concerned about lessons learned from the community unrest in Ferguson, Missouri, and Baltimore, Maryland?

In the last issue, we focused on the protests in Ferguson, Missouri, following the death of Michael Brown. This issue addresses community reactions to the death of Freddie Gray in a similar incident, including subsequent unrest in Baltimore.

While these events were isolated to their respective communities, all boards can share in the lessons learned. The first step is both individual trustee and collective board introspection — asking questions about the role of your college in serving all populations within the service area.

Some people may think the turmoil and unrest in Ferguson and Baltimore were urban phenomena that could not take place in smaller, suburban, or even rural communities. The unfortunate truth is that there is always the potential for disruption when we turn a blind eye on pockets of poverty, underemployment, and lack of opportunity within our own communities.

There is also the long-term economic and social impact when components of any community, neighborhood, or geographic area are relegated to the status of “the other side of the train track” or accepted as centers of poverty and crime. These communities often become virtually invisible. If we truly believe in the mission of our community and technical colleges to serve as beacons of hope and opportunities 30

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

for all citizens who want to avail themselves of higher education and workforce training, one would expect our colleges to go to extreme lengths to connect with these communities. Therefore, one key question for any trustee and board is: Are we connected in meaningful ways to our poorest communities?

Questions to Consider Ask whom the college is not serving.

In Baltimore, there are more than 27 institutions of higher education. With so many colleges, including two historically black colleges, one would think that the outreach of such plentiful higher education would extend to all communities within the city, yet the recent upheaval demonstrates a deep frustration in areas where poverty is concentrated. This is most relevant to community college boards because our special mission ties us to the community. Therefore, boards have to ask, whom are we not serving? Does the college go to those communities and neighborhoods where pockets of poverty are concentrated?

Does the board-approved budget reflect specific incentives and specific investments to reach these communities?

How do boards stimulate social change?

Although community colleges are available throughout the country, according to the National Center for Education Statistics and The Pell Institute report Moving Beyond Access: College Success for Low-Income, First Generation Students, the reality is

that 76 percent of low-income students do not enroll in educational programs after high school, and 89 percent of those who do enroll do not complete their fields of study or obtain college degrees. How can these disenfranchised individuals become a constituency of the college and assets to their communities? How do we engage with them?

If not us, who will?

Community college trustees play an important role through the policy and strategic directions they set for their colleges. In colleges where boards establish specific goals to improve developmental and workforce education, many find programs which address the most at-risk students, such as basic skills and remediation/developmental programs offered at times convenient to students and in multiple modes of delivery (online, evening, weekends, etc.), short-term and long-term workforce training programs, dual enrollment programs with high schools and universities, tutoring, and peer-topeer mentoring programs. Even so, these offerings may not be sufficient.

In reality, colleges have many initiatives, but we need to set the bar higher and be proactive. Boards need to examine the role their institutions have to channel community frustration from people in disadvantaged neighborhoods into productive collective action. Reviewing outreach efforts to identify which community-based organizations in these neighborhoods the college is aligned with could be telling. Are students from communities with the highest

dropout rates or crime rates attending the college? What specific college policies and practices draw disaffected individuals into the college?

How many students with significant socioeconomic disadvantages, often with little hope, come to our institution and actually stay to complete a degree or certificate? What does the evidence of our short-term and long-term initiatives tell us?

How BCCC Engaged With the Community and its Students At Baltimore City Community College, unity with the trustees allowed the president to act swiftly during the community unrest that followed Freddie Gray’s death. During this time, trustees stayed in contact with the college president, Gordon May, who consulted them about college decisions and campus activities. In up-to-the-minute contact with the mayor and city officials, and in consultation with the BCCC Board, May closed the campus for the protection of the students.

“Safety of the students and the security of the campus were our immediate concerns since the mall area where disruption erupted was walking distance from the college,” says Mary Owens Southall, chair of the BCCC board. “Having an emergency communication system, not just for the weather, and having a plan in place are critical. The president did what he was supposed to do.”

Upon reopening two days later, the College organized a college-wide “Voicing Our Pain” assembly attended by board members. The forum presented an opportunity for students, faculty, and community members to share their thoughts, devise solutions, and consider their roles as committed and responsible citizens of Baltimore. According to May, “Many came to the mic to speak their minds. It was a healing session.”

Students, faculty, and staff marched peacefully from the campus to a roadside event, BCCC Stand for Equity and Justice.

The march was well-received by the community and helped to diffuse latent tensions, leveraging the college’s ties to the community for a public display of solidarity.

Individual trustees’ community ties come into play during crises.

Trustees at BCCC have strong ties to the community. In his pastoral role, one

board member, Reverend S. Todd Yeary, worked with city officials, civic groups, community members, and others, including meeting with the NAACP, to engage with the disenfranchised communities that demonstrated their frustration during the upheaval. “I spent a lot of time in the community at the neighborhood where the evening protests took place,” Yeary says.

“What appears to be a singular incident becomes a spark of things that have been brewing for a long time.”

According to Yeary, the police incident was that spark, and he compared it to the Baltimore riots after Martin Luther King was assassinated. “Under the incident are longstanding intractable poverty, high rates of incarceration and police encounters, issues with bail, issues with the educational system — the same issues over time as in the 1968 Kerner Commission Report: high joblessness, difficulty getting skills, embedded poverty,” he says. “Those are the issues that the college should address.”

In his role as a community college trustee, Yeary’s concerns focus on learning and skills gaps and ways to build a pipeline from remediation to education to work for these communities. “There is a real-time current need for community colleges to look at the poverty numbers and focus on helping folks work themselves out of embedded despair,” Yeary says. “The community college has the skillset and the capacity to address those shortfalls that the typical academic setting cannot address.”

Fiduciary responsibility of the board To serve these communities, boards may enact their fiduciary responsibility for the economic well-being of the whole community and ask, Are college resources investing in those disaffected communities who may not feel comfortable in a higher education setting, and if so, are they making a difference?

As a board member, Yeary advocates for the flexibility within the community college structure — with room for creative thinking — to allow folks from the community to get on a pathway with a job at the end. “We need to incentivize the learners and forgive debt,” he says. “These are policy decisions.”

Yeary emphasized the need to listen to the impacted neighborhoods. “We need to hear their concerns to come up with solutions collectively, to help the families,

communities, and the city to heal. It’s more art than science and trial and error.”

BCCC board member Pamela Paulk, president of Johns Hopkins Medicine International, kept the college engaged with disaffected communities and partnered with BCCC and 50 other CEOs from local health systems and universities, community activists, members of local churches, and the police department (which supported the efforts) to hold an Ex-Offenders Hiring Breakfast meeting. Prior to the unrest, Paulk was involved in bringing many city residents like ex-offenders with barriers to employment back into the workforce because it was good for the individual, their family, the community, and business.

Concluding Thoughts Boards might consider these questions at their next meeting: What would happen if similar disruption were to break out in our community? What are the top three things our college is doing to engage our most isolated and socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods? What questions are we not yet asking to carry out our stewardship and fiduciary responsibilities to serve all parts of the community? What do members of these communities tell us? What processes do we have in place to solicit their comments and act according to their needs? How do we publicly acknowledge the college’s efforts to conduct outreach to these communities?

What policy decisions has the board made related to equitable outreach and inclusiveness, institutional security, and other matters that have been brought to the surface by the events of Ferguson and Baltimore?

ACCT completed a brief Discussion Guide to help facilitate this type of discussion. For the guide, go to www.trustee-education.org/en/trustee-talk.

Overall, community colleges do a great job providing services and being “opendoor” institutions, yet it never hurts to stop and reflect and ask tough questions.

We will all benefit as a society.

Narcisa A. Polonio, Ed.D. is executive vice president for education, research, and board leadership services at the Association of Community College Trustees.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

31

Richard N. Adams Kenneth R. Allbaugh Arthur C. Anthonisen Alwin Arce* Joan Athen Chuck Ayala James Ayers Steven J. Ballard Ken Bartlett Geoffrey L. Baum Jim Beasley Elmer Beckendorf Manuel Benavidez, Jr.* Thomas M. Bennett Marilyn Blocker E. Stewart Blume George Boggs Kitty Boyle Lewis S. Braxton Harold Brock* Robert Burch Ken Burke Donald Campbell Lois Carson Dennis Christensen Gene P. Ciafre Don Coffey Brian Conley Angelo Cortinas Paul J. Cunningham Carole Currey Clara Dasher Robert Davidson* John Dent Beatrice Doser* Denise Ducheny Isobel Dvorsky Dorothy Ehrhart-Morrison M. Dale Ensign Nino Falcone Mark Fazzini H. Ronald Feaver Dale Fitzner Phyllis Folarin Paul Fong John Forte* S. Dell Foxx Frank S. Gallagher Rebeca Garcia Robert E. Garrison* 32

FALL 2015

Jeanne M. Gavish Norma Jean Germond John Giardino Paul J. Gomez Maureen Grady Jane Gregory Jan Guy Gloria Guzman Diane Olmos Guzman David W. Hackett* Daniel Hall Joyce Hanes Fred Harcleroad* Thomas Harding Robert W. Harrell, Jr. Herald Harrington Raymond Hartstein John W. Hawley Jody T. Hendry William T. Hiering James D. Hittle* Troy Holliday Walter Howald Nancy M. Hubers Jo Ann Huerter Rosie Hussey Melanie L. Jackson B.A. Jensen* Joan Jenstead* Patricia Jones Worth Keene Bonnie B. Kelley Bruce Ketron Dick Klassen Kirby Kleffmann* Brenda Knight Sheila Korhammer Ruthann Kurose Robert Lawrence Hugh Lee* Morrison Lewis George Little Donald Loff Gloria Lopez James Lumber Judith Madonia Molly Beth Malcolm Thomas W. Malone Doreen Margolin* Marie Y. Martin

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

Montez C. Martin, Jr. Fred Mathews David Mathis Robert Matteucci Bennie Matthews Donald M. Mawhinney Robert G. McBride Robert McCray William McDaniel* Gene E. McDonald Carla McGee Jean M. McPheeters William H. Meardy Frank Mensel Michael Monteleone Della-May Moore David Murphy* Moudy Nabulsi Rich Nay Helen Newsome* Wayne Newton Ed Nicklaus Shirley Okerstrom Joann L. Ordinachev Kathleen Orringer Judy R. Parker di G. Pauly Debra Pearson James R. Perry George Potter Pattie Powell Naomi Pursel Raymond Reddrick Rebecca L. Redman Mehdi M. Ressallat Carl Robinson Elizabeth Rocklin Herbert Roney Nancy R. Rosasco Wanda Rosenbaugh Linda B. Rosenthal William O. Rowell* Armando Ruiz David Rutledge Steve Salazar Edward “Sandy” Sanders Lydia Santibanez Evonne Seron Schulze Anne V. Scott Virginia Scott

Peter E. Sercer, Sr. Jo Ann Sharp Vaughn A. Sherman C. Louis Shields Darrell Shumway Betti Singh W.L. “Levi” Smallwood James Smith Joshua L. Smith William J. Smith Lillie J. Solomon* Lynda Stanley Betty K. Steege Victor F. Stewart, Jr.* James Stribling* Pete Tafoya David H. Talley Esther D. Tang James B. Tatum Leslie Thonesen Charles Tice Dick Trammel Celia M. Turner* Linda Upmeyer Roberto Uranga David Viar Jim Voss Franklin Walker Barbara Wallace Linden A. Warfel William C . Warren Nancy Watkins Lauren A. Welch Denise Wellons-Glover Mary Beth Williams Ruby Jo Williams Ronald Winthers Jerry Wright John Wright M.W. “Bill” Wyckoff Brad W. Young J. Pete Zepeda* *Deceased

A Lifetime of Appreciation ACCT LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP Community college trustees give a lot of themselves — time, energy, wisdom — and ask for little or nothing in return. The gift of an ACCT Lifetime Membership is a way to thank trustees for everything they do, and to empower them to keep doing it for as long as they choose.

A lifetime membership is a perfect way to…

• Recognize outstanding trustees whose dedication to your college has made a difference and set an example.

• Thank outgoing members for their service.

• Remain involved with your peers and make a tax-deductible donation to your national association by purchasing a Lifetime Membership for yourself.

7 REASONS TO BESTOW A LIFETIME MEMBERSHIP

1

Giving outstanding and retiring board members a Lifetime Membership to ACCT is a way to thank them for their service, recognize them among their peers, and ensure their ongoing interest in your college.

2

Lifetime Members receive complimentary registration to all ACCT meetings, including the Annual Leadership Congress and the National Legislative Summit, after retiring from their local boards.

3 Lifetime Members receive all of ACCT’s award-winning publications, including Trustee Quarterly magazine and Advisor.

4 Lifetime Members are recognized publicly in Trustee Quarterly, on the ACCT Web site, and elsewhere.

Lifetime Membership program supports and promotes ACCT’s continuing trustee education and 5 The professional development.

6 Colleges that purchase Lifetime Memberships can deduct the expense from taxes to the fullest extent allowed by law.

7 It’s just a nice thing to do — and haven’t your most exceptional trustees earned it?

For more information and to submit an application, go to www.acct.org/membership/lifetime or contact ACCT’s Member Services at 202.775.4667 or acctinfo@acct.org.

GIVE THE KIDS

SOME CREDIT

OHIO’S NEW COLLEGE CREDIT PLUS PROGRAM EXPANDS THE TRADITIONAL DUAL-ENROLLMENT MODEL, BUT COLLEGES MUST BE AWARE OF THE COSTS. B Y K E V I N B O Y S A N D RYA N M C C A L L LIKE THEIR COUNTERPARTS IN MANY STATES, OHIO’S PUBLIC colleges and universities are working hard to better prepare their workforce by increasing college degree and post-secondary certification completion rates. College affordability continues to be in the forefront of public debate and is one of the critical roadblocks to both access to and completion of a college credential. President Obama’s recent proposal of free community college for those who qualify builds on the Tennessee free community college model. Another avenue, providing free college to students while still in high school, is the new College Credit Plus program now being implemented in Ohio.

College Credit Plus (CCP) is the latest iteration of dualenrollment options that have existed in Ohio for two decades.

CCP was developed to combat the large, and often confusing, number of options in which Ohio high school students could participate to earn college credit. Some models required students 34

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

or parents to pay, while others were funded through state subsidies. Complicating matters further, high schools could establish differing criteria for considering earned college credit, and postsecondary institutions could establish different criteria for acceptance into the early college programs. These issues led to confusion for students, parents, superintendents, counselors, teachers, and colleges. They also suppressed the number of students participating and often called into question the quality of the education received.

The development of CCP was guided by a committee consisting of stakeholders from secondary and postsecondary agencies and associations. Community colleges were represented by two presidents and a representative from the Ohio Association of Community Colleges, whose membership includes the trustees and presidents from each of the state’s 23 community colleges.

The recommendations of this stakeholder group served as the

COLLEGE CREDIT PLUS (CCP) IS THE LATEST ITERATION OF DUAL-ENROLLMENT OPTIONS THAT HAVE EXISTED IN OHIO FOR TWO DECADES. CCP WAS DEVELOPED TO COMBAT THE LARGE, AND OFTEN CONFUSING, NUMBER OF OPTIONS IN WHICH OHIO HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS COULD PARTICIPATE TO EARN COLLEGE CREDIT.

basis for legislation introduced and passed by Ohio’s General Assembly and signed into law by Governor John Kasich in the spring of 2014.

The new model immediately changed the playing field for institutions. It also provided greater access and clarity for high school students seeking to earn college credit. Unlike the previous programs, the CCP model mandates participation by all public schools, both secondary and postsecondary. Each high school is required to make available a 15- and 30-semesterhour pathway in partnership with a local college or university.

It requires participating private institutions to follow the same policies as public institutions. It prescribes the funding formula and offers a default tuition rate, although it provides wide latitude between a “soft” floor and a “hard” ceiling for the tuition rate charged to the secondary school. Other CCP requirements address how information is distributed to students and parents, course transfer, credentialing and professional development for high school faculty, and visits to the classes held on the high school campus.

As CCP begins this fall, Ohio’s community colleges have an opportunity to provide coursework to more high school students at no cost to the students, ultimately reducing the cost of a college education. Based on early numbers, many colleges have seen an increase in high school students seeking to participate in the CCP program. Southern State Community College, for example, served approximately 400 high school students through early college options in the 2014-15 academic year.

It has already received over 1,000 applications for the 2015-16 academic year. Although these early numbers are encouraging, participating colleges must be attentive to several of the new requirements in order to maximize participation, recover costs, and ensure the quality of the students’ experience with College Credit Plus.

One of the most pressing issues facing higher education institutions is the ability to credential high school faculty to teach college courses at the high school campus. The majority of secondary faculty lacks master’s degrees in their subject areas.

This challenge may initially reduce the number of students who wish to participate but choose to only attend classes at their high school. Trustees should become familiar with their college’s process for ensuring proper credentialing of faculty, as this has the potential to impact the institution’s accreditation status.

The drastic increase in the number of applicants may also strain participating colleges’ enrollment management functions.

The increase in applications, while exciting, also may create a processing backlog for admissions and registrar staff, resulting in slower processing of all other applications to the institution and the possible loss of traditional students. It may be necessary for colleges to add staff in the admissions and registrar areas or employ more automated systems to assist with this influx of applications. Trustees should ensure their approved budget provides adequate resources to handle the increased demand.

The CCP program elements for postsecondary institutions also require considerable human resources. Each high school student participating in the program must meet with a college advisor and be provided with information prior to the no-fault drop date during the term. College faculty or administration must make a visit to each classroom at least biannually to ensure the quality and rigor of the coursework. Participating colleges also must ensure that qualified secondary faculty members have an opportunity to participate in professional development. While these and other criteria will take additional resources, they are the cornerstone of ensuring the quality of the program.

Because of these challenges and requirements, community college trustees should become aware of all costs associated with CCP, particularly if they consider tuition rates lower than the legislation’s default tuition rate. Trustees should also ensure that revenues meet the newly required expenditures.

Even prior to full implementation, Ohio’s policy makers increasingly recognize CCP as an important strategy for reducing a student’s time to degree, reducing the overall cost of college to students, increasing completions, and engaging high school students who may not have otherwise pursued a college education. This June, Governor Kasich signed into law budget provisions that expand CCP to the summer term and provide grant funding to help teachers in financially needy districts earn graduate credit to become properly credentialed. Ohio is poised to see even greater growth.

Kevin Boys is president of Southern State Community College. Ryan McCall is vice president of academic affairs for Southern State Community College. For more information about SSCC’s College Credit Program, contact McCall at rmccall@sscc.edu.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

35

Pathways and Partnerships

CCBC CREATES A DISTINCTIVE DUAL ENROLLMENT PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS.

BY CHRIS REBER AND MELISSA D. DENARDO

COMMUNITY COLLEGE OF BEAVER COUNTY (CCBC) IS CHANGING THE LANDSCAPE OF HIGHER EDUCATION. With its unique approach to dual enrollment opportunities for thousands of students in local and regional high schools, CCBC has found a way to reach students earlier in their education, spark an interest in pursuing higher education and exploring career pathways in STEM-related fields, grow enrollment, and contribute to the economic vitality of its Western Pennsylvania community with a new pipeline of workers capable of meeting high-priority workforce needs.

To accomplish all of this, CCBC developed partnerships with 14 Beaver County high schools. Through the CCBC High School Academy, the college is developing a nationally distinctive program that aims to create career vision in students in grades 9 through 12, while providing them the opportunity to earn half or more of the required associate degree credits before high school graduation. This will allow them to complete more than a year of college while still in high school.

Part of the impetus behind these types of partnerships are that high school graduation rates are declining, college costs are on the rise, and government financial assistance is shrinking, making it more difficult for students to access a post-secondary education, which in most cases is key to their future success.

36

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

CCBC is also developing new partnerships with other institutions of higher education in order to provide students, Beaver County, and the surrounding region with a wide array of extraordinary pathways that will lead from the academy to a CCBC associate degree, and then on to either four-year degrees through articulation agreements with partnering institutions or career placement within business and industry.

“Through our partnership approach, high school students will have an unprecedented set of opportunities to earn college credit at a very reasonable cost while learning more about future careers made possible with a CCBC degree,” noted CCBC President Chris Reber. “The Academies address high-priority workforce, economic development, and quality-of-life needs for our county and region. We have further developed partnerships with four-year and graduate institutions in order to build seamless educational and career pathways from high school through bachelor and graduate degrees, all in areas of workforce need.”

The first CCBC Academy, the Aviation Academy, enrolled its first class in January 2015. High school students in grades 10 through 12 from participating school districts experience CCBC’s four aviation educational pathways: professional pilot, air traffic control, aerospace management, and unmanned aerial vehicles.

As a dual-enrollment program, students spend half of the day at their high school, then the other half taking STEM courses taught by CCBC faculty members on campus. All of the career pathways associated with the Aviation Academy are in demand both today and projected for the future, and provide rewarding pay and benefits. In order to gain momentum for the Academy, leaders at CCBC met with and held open houses for high school students and their parents, high school administrators, and high school superintendents. The goal is to generate involvement in the Academy at every level.

In addition to aviation courses, students are enrolled in a College Success course and participate in co-curricular activities.

In its inaugural year, 27 students from nine Beaver County high schools attended the CCBC Aviation Academy. Five of the seven high school seniors who attended the Academy plan to return to an associate degree program this fall, and all 20 of the participating sophomore and junior high school students are returning for a second year in the program. Another 64 students from 16 high schools in Beaver County and outlying counties are expected to be members of the Year 2 cohort.

Melissa D. Denardo, provost and vice president of academic affairs, noted that CCBC will roll out additional academies every year for the next five years for high school students interested in health sciences; advanced manufacturing and engineering technology; law, public safety, corrections and security; performing arts; and online learning. All of these academies are focused on areas of programmatic strength at CCBC and workforce need throughout Western Pennsylvania and beyond. Thousands of students from throughout Western Pennsylvania are expected to

participate when all six planned academies are fully developed and operational, transforming the future regional workforce.

The CCBC High School Academies all share the same goals: •B uild partnerships with local and regional high schools and four-year colleges and universities; •E ncourage students to pursue higher education and have a jumpstart on a college degree; • I ntroduce high school students to the academic rigor required in college; •D evelop leadership skills and character in high school students; • S upply additional transfer students for CCBC’s partnering four-year institutions through articulation agreements; and, • Prepare a pipeline of students for in-demand career fields in Western Pennsylvania and beyond.

The next Academy, the CCBC Health Academy for high school students interested in careers in nursing, practical nursing, and radiologic technology, will begin in fall 2016.

The Health Academy will provide high school students opportunities to explore careers in this high-demand field, receive hands-on STEM instruction from college faculty members in labs and clinical environments, and acquire skills for effective leadership. Students who devote two years of study will have the opportunity to graduate from high school with up to 28 college credits completed in CCBC’s associate degree programs.

Students who successfully complete all of the coursework will be prepared to continue their studies toward an associate degree in nursing or radiologic technology as well as a diploma in practical nursing. Because CCBC has articulation agreements with Penn State University, Clarion University, and other institutions, students who wish to continue their education can move on to earn their bachelor’s degree in nursing.

Scholarship funds are available for students who meet certain requirements. A recent $1.5 million corporate gift to CCBC will provide the opportunity to continue to expand the academies and offer financial aid to the growing number of participating students.

“Through career pathways and community partnerships, we can now create more avenues for high-achieving students to develop character, experience passion for active learning, become acclimated to the college experience, and gain preparation for successful and satisfying careers important to the region’s and the nation’s economy,” said Reber.

Chris Reber is president of the Community College of Beaver County (CCBC). Melissa D. Denardo is provost and vice president of academic affairs for CCBC. T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

37

A University-Community College

Partnership to

Smile About

BY ED DODSON

The Oregon Tech-Chemeketa dental hygiene partnership brought a four-year program to the community college — and free care to its community.

MATT PRICE TOLD A SALEM STATESMAN-JOURNAL NEWSPAPER REPORTER HIS TEETH WERE so infected that “there hasn’t been a day I didn’t have pain.” Price attended a free dental clinic hosted at Chemeketa Community College in July 2014, where volunteer dentists replaced his infected teeth with a new set of dentures. “I feel better, and it’s all thanks to those guys,” he said. “It’s one of the most selfless things I have ever seen in my whole life.”

What Price didn’t see was all the work beginning eight years prior to his treatment that made his healing possible.

The partnership that culminated in offering a bachelor’s degree program in dental hygiene from Oregon Tech on Chemeketa Community College’s Salem campus had its beginnings in the summer of 2006. At that time, the Board of Education directed Chemeketa administrators to pursue partnerships with four-year universities. As a board member at the time, I recalled it as an all-out effort to make connections and smooth transitions for our students.

38

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

Meanwhile in Klamath Falls, Oregon Tech was looking for opportunities to expand its services beyond its remote southeast corner of the state. Discussions between the two schools began. At the time, Chemeketa was also weighing the option of partnering with another community college to teach dental hygiene as a hybrid online and in-class program. Given Chemeketa’s priority to pursue dual enrollment opportunities with universities, there was a clear preference for the Oregon Tech alternative — and one big problem. Chemeketa didn’t have an appropriate facility, and the solution was several years and $92 million away.

Chemeketa brought a construction bond levy to the voters of its district in May 2008. Part of the package was a health sciences complex that would provide space to host the Oregon Tech dental hygiene clinic. Voters approved the levy, and renewed conversations with Oregon Tech culminated in a partnership agreement that was announced that November.

Challenges of Formation Then the story that had been start and wait became a story of parallel paths — one path called instruction, the other called construction. Down the road, the two paths would intersect in a fully functioning and resourced dental hygiene program where Chemeketa dental assistant students and others could apply for admission. But in the early days, Chemeketa had to invest in building the clinic without sure knowledge that the instructional partnership would come together.

Critical meetings took place beginning in January 2010.

Teams of administrators took turns making the fivehour drive between Salem and Klamath Falls to iron out details like: • What prerequisite classes would be required?

• When would prerequisites need to be scheduled?

• How would the transition from being a Chemeketa student to an Oregon Tech student work?

• Who would staff the program?

• How much rent would be charged?

“We were working without any known models,” recalls Oregon Tech administrator Marla Edge.

Chemeketa vice president Jim Eustrom was also involved.

“What made it work,” he says, “was everyone’s commitment to working through the details and staying pleasant with each other.”

I saw us treating the challenges as opportunities.

Kay Carnegie, who was Chemeketa’s dean of health sciences at the time, recalled that “the key thing was Oregon Tech sending us their dental hygiene program chair, Jill Schultz, to move to Salem and lead the program.”

Schultz, who spent over two years in Salem hiring and supervising staff and getting the program off the ground, said the professional challenge was the most rewarding of her career. “I was excited to get to work every morning,”

she says. Schultz found Chemeketa faculty and staff from all parts of the college friendly and committed to the partnership.

“I think that all the people involved from the very beginning are the reason this is a successful program,” she says.

The formal operating agreement was signed in June 2011, at the same time that construction of the $39 million health sciences complex wrapped up. The building housed an 11,000 square foot dental hygiene clinic that included x-ray processing rooms, a dental lab, electronic classroom, and a reception area for community guests. What it didn’t include was about $150,000 of equipment needed to train students. That’s when the Chemeketa Foundation got involved.

Foundation staff rose to the challenge and launched a fast and effective fundraising campaign beginning that summer.

A retired dentist offered a generous lead gift and a challenge to match it with subsequent donations. The Marion Polk Dental Society rallied to the cause, and by December, 57 patrons had contributed $210,000. The clinic opened in spring 2012.

Giving Back Paula Hendrix, Oregon Tech’s current program administrator, reports that the dental hygiene program graduated its first full cycle of 19 students in the spring of 2014, followed by a second cycle of 19 graduates this year. “So far, 100 percent of our graduates have passed their board exams, and 100 percent of those who sought employment found jobs,” Hendrix says.

It took a community to make the partnership possible, and the ethos of the Chemeketa-Oregon Tech partnership includes giving back to the community. Students have ongoing opportunities to provide free or discounted treatment to teen parents, children, low-income seniors, disabled adults, migrant farm workers, and Chemeketa’s veteran students.

The most dramatic contribution may have been the Mission of Mercy dental clinic that provided Matt Price with his new dentures. Local healthcare organizations, businesses, and individuals sponsored the event, during which nearly 1,000 volunteers — including 93 students — provided 6,533 free dental procedures to 1,255 patients. The value of the donated care was estimated to be $738,299.

But who can put a price on a pain-free smile? Oregon Tech and Chemeketa are inspired to make dental health accessible to all, and together they will continue to find more ways for the energy of this collaboration to benefit students and the community.

Ed Dodson is chair of the Board of Education of Chemeketa Community College in Salem, Oregon.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

39

INVE T

BY PA M EDDINGER

in College Success

A PILOT PROGRAM AT THREE MASSACHUSETTS COMMUNITY COLLEGES DEVELOPS STUDENTS’ FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SKILLS.

COMMUNITY COLLEGES ACROSS THE U.S. ARE MAKING FINANCIAL CAPABILITY A priority. A lack of financial resources is a primary reason why students don’t complete college, with only a little under one-third receiving financial aid. When compared to students attending public four-year colleges, community college students are less likely to take out loans and tend to borrow less when they do, but are more likely to default on student loans. Rising cohort default rates impact both students and schools, threating the ongoing eligibility of colleges to participate in Title IV federal student aid programs.

Bunker Hill Community College in Massachusetts, like so many community colleges, is committed to accessibility and seeing that students successfully complete their programs.

With a focus on the large percentage of lower-income students in our population, we implemented the Single Stop USA initiative in 2012. It connects students to public financial resources and local community services to help them surmount economic barriers, continue their education, and move towards economic mobility. When we learned about an innovative private-public partnership focused on developing financial management skills, it seemed like an ideal opportunity to extend Single Stop and test other ways to help our students.

40

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

The Invest in College Success pilot program brings together three Massachusetts community colleges, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, and two non-profit organizations to provide services that help students to afford college, develop money management skills, and build financial capabilities. Launched in December 2014, the two-year program aims to increase the likelihood of students continuing their education and completing a college degree.

Five Student Services Invest in College Success offers students at each of the participating campuses five services based on their needs and preferences. The goal of the pilot is to learn which financial capability services students respond to in which combinations, and whether that engagement impacts re-enrollment.

The services include virtual advising, in-person and remote coaching, classes, and a financial aid program: • Virtual advising/reminders: Text messages are sent to high school students showing interest in one of the three participating community colleges to aid them with the tasks they must complete before they enroll in college.

• College affordability/basic financial coaching: On-campus and phone coaching is available to any student seeking help with education-related expenses and basic budgeting, such as FAFSA, SAP, loan management, and planning for and paying bills. Coaching may be prompted by texts or word of mouth. A coach is on campus at least two times a week.

• Advanced financial coaching: Three remote sessions provide students with more in-depth support for financial barriers such as public benefits, employment, and family financial issues that may impact their ability to complete their education. The service leverages the free confidential coaching sessions offered to all Massachusetts residents.

• Matched Savings Program: This program matches money that students save to meet unexpected college-related costs.

The program is open to up to a total of 100 students per year across the three college campuses who meet income and asset eligibility guidelines, as well as criteria each school sets for the minimum and/or maximum number of course credits.

• Financial education classes: A class for students who have enrolled in the Matched Savings Program, for which financial literacy education is required, as well as other students.

Collective Expertise A key aspect of the Invest in College Success pilot is the collaborative efforts of its private and public partners, leveraging the expertise and experience of each.

Federal Reserve Bank of Boston: One of the Federal Reserve System’s 12 regional banks, this organization was a catalyst for the pilot. The Fed will also evaluate the program’s outcomes.

Midas Collaborative: This Boston-based nonprofit helps low-income Massachusetts residents build financial assets and achieve economic stability. It provides the matched savings

program, advanced financial coaching, and overall project leadership with an operational grant through a U.S. Treasury Innovation Fund Grant. uAspire: This national nonprofit with a strong presence in Massachusetts focuses on ensuring students have the financial information and resources to manage college costs. It provides the virtual text advising and onsite college affordability support and financial coaching.

Bunker Hill, Northern Essex, and Springfield Technical Community Colleges: Collectively enrolling more than 38,000 students, these Massachusetts colleges provide dollar-to-dollar matches to the savings of each student in the Matched Savings Program, run financial education classes, support other services as resources allow, and conduct student outreach.

Sharing Outcomes, Creating New Models Prior to the pilot, the Fed convened community college leaders for discussions and conducted interviews across the country in 2013 and 2014. A Resource Handbook on Building Financial Capabilities of Community College Students, available on its website (www.bostonfed.org/education/financial-capabilities/), provides early learnings and case studies based on that research.

The Boston Fed will examine the outcomes and impacts of Invest in College Success, including a look at re-enrollment data and other metrics. Its report on year one is slated for this fall.

As the program evolves, we are learning as we go. For example, we had assumed that Pell Grant recipients for post-secondary education wouldn’t be eligible to receive funds from the Matched Savings Program. With close to 60 percent of our students receiving Pell funds, that would rule out a large group. But we soon found out from our partner Midas that Pell Grants can cover housing while in school and the Matched Savings Program can be used for supplies, so the grants could actually complement each other. Not only are Pell recipients eligible, they also provide an ideal pool of candidates for the Matched Savings Program because they likely meet the financial income criteria.

The Invest in College Success pilot is part of a wider trend toward new community college models. It is a model for providing supports that go beyond academics to help students develop tools and tap into resources that will help them thrive in school and the real world. By providing financial education and literacy with support from community organizations and the federal government, we as community colleges may improve the odds that students are well positioned to become successful economically.

Pam Eddinger is president of Bunker Hill Community College. Eddinger and Bunker Hill Community College Trustee Richard Walker will present on Invest for College Success at the 2015 ACCT Leadership Congress in San Diego, October 14-17.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

41

The

(New)

Bachelor

BY NARCISA A. POLONIO AND NORMA GOLDSTEIN

BACCALAUREATE DEGREES TAILORED FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGES GROW IN POPULARITY.

THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE BACCALAUREATE DEGREE IS rapidly increasing in popularity throughout the country in response to unmet industry needs, limited opportunities for students and workers due to geographic isolation, affordability issues, and state mandates to address specific state-based shortages. Applied baccalaureate degrees at community colleges attract working adults and traditional students for many reasons, among them providing career growth, proximity to home and family, flexible time offerings, ease of transfer for associate degree holders with no loss of credits, and cost effectiveness.

“Offering what the community needs has gone on for years,” said Beth Hagan, executive director of the Community College Baccalaureate Association (CCBA).

“Community colleges are headed in the same direction in meeting local workforce needs, using the degrees and programs to do that.”

Governing boards should be cognizant of this trend and its impact on community colleges, as well as have a familiarity with the differences between a traditional baccalaureate degree and community college baccalaureates.

They must also consider whether incorporating bachelor’s degree programs constitutes a fundamental shift in the mission of community colleges or an extension of the mission.

In this article, we provide a brief overview of the status and growth of community college baccalaureate programs throughout the country.

The Current Landscape As of June 2015, CCBA reports that 79 community colleges in 17 states confer approximately 400 baccalaureate degrees each year. As upper-level extensions of their own associate degree programs, community college bachelor’s degree programs typically cover market-driven technical fields. According to Hagan, states have been conferring bachelor’s degrees at community colleges for many years for multiple reasons, including local industry need, the nation’s health care crisis, teacher shortages, the need for professional credentialing, and the technological revolution. Other compelling reasons include reduced taxpayer costs and overcrowding at four-year colleges.

In addition, demand comes from more isolated geographical regions or rural areas where universities are not nearby and workforce preparation is needed.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

43

“Our system had an internal task force for a year, and the manufacturing and health care industries were hand-in-hand with the colleges to push for these baccalaureates. Community colleges are at the forefront of change and are addressing what the marketplace needs. We are meeting the demands of the workplace.” – Chancellor Brice Harris, California Community College System

Not Your Traditional Bachelor’s Community college baccalaureate degrees differ from traditional university degree offerings in the liberal arts and sciences because they are developed with a professional field in mind: energy, public safety, education, agriculture, business, and digital media, to name a few. In 2014, key findings from a Texas Rand Corporation Study about unmet workforce needs requiring a baccalaureate degree included nursing, information technology, fire sciences, production/operations technicians, and health information technology. The most common degrees are the Bachelor of Science in Nursing (BSN), Bachelor of Applied Science (BAS), and Bachelor of Science (BS) degrees.

New applied baccalaureate programs are developed as new technologies emerge in the workplace. Recently, Truckee Meadows Community College in Nevada started two new baccalaureates to accommodate the needs of Tesla Motors and other high-tech companies moving into the region. Florida’s Broward College and Polk State College now offer bachelor’s degrees in supply chain management and aerospace sciences, respectively. The Florida College System offers 175 applied baccalaureates at 24 colleges and reports that, in many cases, business and industry partners reach out to the college in their area to develop baccalaureate programs that fulfill a specific training need.

In California, An Expanded Role Proponents of community college baccalaureates see these applied degrees as an extension of meeting a core community college mission — workforce education. Brice Harris, chancellor of the California Community College System, explains that this expanded role for community colleges was part of implementing the state’s master plan for higher education. “As with California State University offering postgraduate degrees, it’s normal to have a transition in mission for an educational system as large as ours is,” Harris says.

Across the country, more community colleges and state legislatures are contemplating offering baccalaureate degrees, California being the most recent. Legislators there passed a law in 2014 that allocates resources for applied baccalaureates to be developed at 15 colleges in 12 different program areas with unmet workforce needs. “We see a real potential for these applied baccalaureate degrees over the next decade,” Harris says.

“If industry wants more credentials, we expect more colleges in 44

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

California to become engaged. We are a large state and might see dozens of thousands of students in these programs over the long haul.”

California plans degrees in high-demand programs such as dental hygiene, equine studies, agriculture, mortuary science, respiratory therapy, health information, automotive technology, and interactive design. According to Paul Feist, the California system’s vice chancellor for communications, “there is a huge public appetite for this. We took proposals from the colleges and tried to have both urban and rural areas represented.”

Accreditation Not a Stumbling Block In most states, conferring the baccalaureate at a community college requires state legislative approval and acceptance of a substantive change request by a regional accrediting agency. Citing the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Chancellor Harris indicated that several California colleges have their substantive change proposals into the commission, and others are working on them. “Like any other bleeding-edge innovation, getting approvals is fraught with challenges,” Harris says. “However, we expect all of the 15 colleges to meet their deadlines successfully and to have some baccalaureate offerings by fall 2016.”

It is always important to look at institutions and states where lessons have been learned from allowing community colleges to confer the baccalaureate credential. With the experience of 17 colleges conferring 35 applied baccalaureate degrees and nine more planned, Washington state offers many lessons learned for governing boards. An accreditation specialist from the Pacific Northwest and current CCBA board member, Ron Baker says that the approved applied bachelor’s degrees are focused on principles of accreditation particularly as they relate to rigor, library resources, adequately prepared faculty, and an appropriate level and amount of general education for skill development in an applied field.

Costs and Implications to Consider Costing a fraction of public or private university degrees, bachelor’s degrees at a local community college address a region’s economic development needs and save students thousands of dollars, not a small factor given the skyrocketing costs of higher education. Nevertheless, it is extremely

important for any college contemplating offering baccalaureate degrees to consider the costs and implications of such expansion. In addition to the time and costs of meeting the dictates for regional accreditation and state approvals, as well as personnel and planning considerations, expenses could include the legal and implementation costs of changing the college logo and stationery, launching a public relations campaign for the local community and alumni, and increasing library resources, as well as updating college publications, websites, and media. Faculty credentials to offer these higher level degrees come under scrutiny, and new collective bargaining agreements need to be forged. Curriculums need to be developed, and for many highly technical baccalaureate programs, specialized equipment purchased and installed.

A major implication is that these changes include significant cultural shifts within the college.

Meeting Employer Needs Industry analysts currently predict a shortage of 11 million workers with the intellectual and technical skills to perform complex tasks.

One way in which states are addressing employer demands in their communities is by allowing local colleges to confer applied baccalaureate degrees. “Gone is the artificial barrier of a terminal degree at the end of two years. There is a real advantage to this model; students graduate highly prepared. Employers see the value of these degrees,” says Nancy Dick, director of workforce programs in Washington state. “Instead of importing our talent, we grow our own. There is a gap, and we need to provide this education. Workforce education’s time has come.”

Chancellor Harris says that industry supported the applied baccalaureates for California’s community colleges. “Our system had an internal task force for a year, and the manufacturing and health care industries were hand-in-hand with the colleges to push for these baccalaureates,“ Harris says. “Community colleges are at the forefront of change and are addressing what the marketplace needs. We are meeting the demands of the workplace.”

ACCT will follow up with another article in this series on the trends and policy implications of implementing community college applied baccalaureate programs with topics such as legislative restrictions, charges of “mission creep,” and competition with universities that college governing boards contemplating such a change for their institutions should consider.

ACCT Executive Vice president for Education, Research, and Board Leadership Services Narcisa A. Polonio can be reached at npolonio@acct.org or 202.775.4670. Norma Goldstein is an ACCT consultant for board leadership services.

States with high numbers of bachelor’s programs conferred at community colleges State

# Colleges

# Baccalaureate programs at ccs

Florida

24

175

Washington

17

35

California (planning stage)

15

12

Resources: For further reading on community college baccalaureate and applied baccalaureate programs: Alternative Pathways to the Baccalaureate: Do Community Colleges Offer a Viable Solution to the Nation’s Knowledge Deficit? edited by Nancy and Ronald Remington (2013: Stylus Publishing, VA).

Update on the Community College Baccalaureate: Evolving Trends and Issues, a higher education policy brief by Alene Russell, Senior State Policy Consultant for AASCU, October 2010.

Achieving the Baccalaureate Through the Community College by Deborah Floyd, chapter 6 of New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 135, Fall 2006, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).

The Applied Baccalaureate: What We Know, What We Learned, and What We Need to Know, Collin Ruud and Debra Bragg, Office of Community College Research and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, May 2011.

Development of the Applied Baccalaureate, Barbara K. Townsend, Debra D. Bragg, and Collin M. Ruud. 2009, Community College Journal of Research and Practice, Vol. 33, Issue 9, pp. 686-705.

Investigating Applied Baccalaureate Degree Pathways, Executive Summary, Technical Report, Julia Panke Makela, Collin M. Ruud, Stacy Bennett, and Debra D. Bragg, March 2012.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

45

LEGAL

Legal Issues Impacting Community Colleges Tenure decisions and disability rulings among recent developments.

By Ira Michael Shepard ACCT General Counsel

A

A NUMBER OF HIGH-PROFILE CASES decided by the United States Supreme Court and other appellate courts in recent months will have a significant impact on how community colleges treat professors and other employees.

U.S. Court of Appeals rules tenure track professor has no property interest in the “opportunity to satisfy tenure criteria” and dismisses due process claim. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit recently dismissed a fired tenure track professor’s claim of due process denial, holding that the professor has no property interest in the “opportunity

to satisfy tenure criteria” (Klingler v.

University of Southern Mississippi, 2015 BL 136255, 5th Cir., No. 14-60007, unpublished 5/11/15).

The professor, who was on an annual contract that had to be renewed each year, had argued that his termination denied him his right to satisfy tenure criteria. He also argued that he must be afforded due process before his constitutionally protected property interest is eliminated by his termination. The university had terminated the professor after he violated its ban on contacting students following accusations that he had

“I’m just calculating the probability of my getting tenure in this university.”

46

FALL 2015

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

made threatening comments toward a student who had criticized his classroom conduct.

In response, the university argued that the professor had no constitutionally protected property interest in the “opportunity to satisfy tenure criteria” and that his tenure track status differed from the termination of a tenured professor, which would have accorded due process rights. The court agreed with the university, dismissing the professor’s claim.

U.S. Supreme Court denies review of a claim that the Lilly Ledbetter Law applies to alleged discriminatory denial of tenure.

The Supreme Court denied a petition for review filed by a former Texas Tech University professor who argued that the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act, which extends the statute of limitations period for pay discrimination under Title VII, also applies to denial of tenure decisions (Niwayama v. Texas Tech University, US No. 14-955, cert denied, 3/30/15).

Under Ledbetter, a new cause of action arises with each new pay period in pay discrimination cases. However, the Supreme Court left undisturbed the decision of the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals that the plaintiff cannot pursue her sex, national origin, and race discrimination denial of tenure allegations because she did not file a charge with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission within 300 days of the university’s decision to deny her tenure.

The plaintiff continued working after being denied tenure, which resulted in lower pay that continued well after her denial. She argued that under Ledbetter, she had a new cause of action due to

the pay periods following her denial of tenure. She also argued that there was a split in the way the circuit courts handle Ledbetter and tenure decisions.

The Supreme Court denied review of the claim without issuing a decision explaining its reasoning. The denial affirms the court of appeals decision that Ledbetter does not extend the statute of limitations in a regular denial of tenure case.

U.S. Supreme Court holds that ADHD is not a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Supreme Court recently denied a plaintiff’s petition for review of a 9th Circuit Court of Appeals decision that vacated a favorable jury verdict that had granted the plaintiff over $750,000 in damages following his discharge (Weaving v. City of Hillsboro, US No. 14-766, cert denied, 3/2/15).

The plaintiff was hired as a police officer in 2006 and promoted to sergeant in 2009, a role in which he was a supervisor. He was placed on paid administrative leave while the department investigated a grievance that he was mistreating other officers and subordinates. After an investigation which included the plaintiff being interviewed by 28 other police officers, he was fired for creating and fostering a hostile work environment. The plaintiff had a history of ADHD as a child, and his doctor testified that his adult ADHD could explain some of his difficulties interacting with fellow officers.

The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s decision that a jury was wrong in concluding that adult ADHD is a disability covered by the ADA or its amendments expanding the definition of disability. The court affirmed that ADHD was not a covered disability because it did not substantially limit the plaintiff’s major life activities of communicating, interacting with others, or working.

Bipolar disorder not covered by Americans with Disabilities Act when not disclosed to employer.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit dismissed a plaintiff’s claim of ADA discrimination as a result of her discharge for rude and erratic behavior at work after returning from medical leave because she never disclosed her bipolar condition to her employer or asked for an accommodation (Walz v.

American Financial Inc., 2015 BL 61812, 8th Cir., No. 14-2495, 3/9/15).

The plaintiff had worked for her employer for more than 15 years and had received mostly positive reviews and evaluations. She began experiencing behavioral problems at work, which included acting out at meetings, becoming agitated, talking very rapidly, and sending emails which made no sense and on occasion were disrespectful to her supervisor.

When the plaintiff returned from medical leave to address her workplace behavior issues, she presented a doctor’s note indicating her condition had stabilized with medication but did not disclose the condition or ask for any accommodation. While her behavior became erratic, the court concluded that her bipolar disorder was not apparent to her employer.

The court also pointed out that the plaintiff and her doctor never disclosed her condition, and no request for accommodation was ever received.

As a result, the court concluded that the “plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge or failure to accommodate under the ADA.” U.S. Supreme Court holds that denial of “light duty” may violate the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. In a stunning reversal of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, the Supreme Court held that

denial of “light duty” to pregnant employees when granted to employees “similar in their ability to work or not to work” may violate the Pregnancy Disability Act (Young v. United Parcel Service, Inc., 2015 BL 81886, US No. 12-1226, 3/25/25). In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the UPS policy of granting “light duty” to employees disabled as a result of on-the-job situations and not granting it to pregnant employees may raise a disparate treatment claim.

In a decision written by Justice Stephen Breyer, the Supreme Court majority opinion held that a pregnant employee may raise a disparate treatment claim under the Supreme Court’s McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.

Green decision if the plaintiff can show that the employer’s policies placed a “significant burden” on pregnant workers, such as evidence that the employer “accommodates a large percentage of non-pregnant workers while failing to accommodate a large percentage of pregnant workers.”

The Supreme Court remanded the case back to the 4th Circuit with instructions that a jury must decide whether the plaintiff s claims that UPS’s conflicting polices on which disabled workers may be accommodated with light duty constitutes intentional discrimination against pregnant employees, which is prohibited by the Pregnancy Discrimination Act. The dissent ruling argued strenuously that the majority “badly muddles” disparate treatment and disparate impact claims.

Ira Michael Shepard is a partner with the law firm of Saul Ewing, LLP, in Washington, D.C., and ACCT’s general counsel.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

47

Presidential Searches The Board Leadership Services staff and consultants of the Association of Community College Trustees are pleased to have assisted in the search for the following community college chief executive officers.

Aims Community College, Colorado Dr. Leah Bornstein President Former President Coconino Community College, Arizona “We are extremely pleased that our presidential search through ACCT resulted in a perfect match for Aims College as well as for the surrounding community that Aims serves. We are certain that Dr. Bornstein will help to lead us along the path of strengthening educational programs for our students and their future employers. ACCT was clearly the right choice to facilitate our search.”

Blinn College, Texas Dr. Mary Hensley President Former Executive Vice President, College Operations Austin Community College District, Texas “Dr. Hensley brings years of community college experience, professionalism, and a track record of successful leadership to Blinn College. The full board is delighted to make this selection, and we can foresee a very bright future for Blinn College under her leadership. I am pleased that Dr. Hensley was the top choice. She is the right fit for Blinn College.”

—D ouglas Borchardt, Board President

— Dr. Walt Richter, Board President

Bellingham Technical College, Washington

Bossier Parish Community College, Louisiana Community and Technical College System

Dr. Kimberly Perry President

Dr. Douglas “Rick” Bateman Chancellor

Former President

Former Interim Director

Butte College, California

Northwest Louisiana Technical College, Louisiana Community and Technical College System

“We are extremely pleased with having found Dr. Kimberly Perry as Bellingham Technical College’s next president. Her understanding of BTC’s mission is evident in her support of the college’s continued work on three main themes: excellence; student success and access; and college visibility with strong community, business, and industry relations. We see that Dr. Perry embraces the college’s needs, mission, and vision and is the best choice to lead BTC.” — Jim Groves, Chair, Board of Trustees

Former Interim Chancellor Bossier Parish Community College, Louisiana Community and Technical College System “I would like to congratulate Dr. Bateman for his appointment as chancellor of Bossier Parish Community College. His continued service to education has provided him with the experience and leadership skills necessary to continue leading our efforts to deliver world-class academic and workforce training for Louisiana.”

—T im Hardy, First Vice Chair, LCTCS Board of Supervisors and Chair of the Search Committee

48

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

“Our search for BPCC’s chancellor provided an exceptional pool of finalists. We are confident that Dr. Bateman embodies the requisite skills and vision needed to lead BPCC into the next phase of its development and to provide solutions to the workforce needs of Louisiana.”

Foothill – De Anza Community College District, California

— Dr. Monty Sullivan, LCTCS President

Foothill College, California

“The board and I are extremely happy with the process and results of our most recent chancellor search for Bossier Parish Community College. The quality and depth of experience and knowledge of the interview pool was very impressive.”

— Woody Oge, Chair, LCTCS Board of Supervisors

Bronx Community College, City University of New York, New York Dr. Thomas Isekenegbe President Former President Cumberland County College, New Jersey “President Isekenegbe has an exemplary record of leadership and accomplishment at Cumberland County College and throughout a distinguished career that encompasses administration, teaching, scholarship, and community service.

He is deeply committed and focused on student success and completion and has developed and implemented effective strategies to enhance student achievement. We are confident that he will provide inspired leadership for Bronx Community College.”

— Benno Schmidt, Board of Trustees Chairperson, and James B. Milliken, Chancellor

Community College League of California Dr. Lawrence Galizio President and Chief Executive Officer Former President

Dr. Judy Miner Chancellor Former President “The board is pleased to appoint Judy Miner as the next chancellor for this great district. She is an energetic education champion with many years of service in community colleges. Her strong strategic vision of student equity and excellence, the respect she enjoys in the community, and her extensive state and national portfolio will take this district to the next level of leadership and accomplishment on behalf of students. We are excited to work with her in the role of chancellor.”

—P earl Cheng, Board President

Hocking College, Ohio Dr. Betty Young President Former Interim President Hocking College, Ohio “We are thrilled to select Dr. Betty Young as the new president of Hocking College. Hocking College has a long and storied history as a premier provider of a unique, personalized technical education, and Betty’s vision and energy are exactly what we need right now to continue to compete in the rapidly evolving two-year sector. We hired Dr. Young as an interim president during a tumultuous time for the college. It was her resilience in carrying out the difficult tasks we asked her to do during the interim period, coupled with her impeccable credentials, that caused her to rise above an extremely talented field during our exhaustive search. We look forward to a strong future at Hocking with Dr. Young at the helm.”

— Andrew Stone, Chair, Board of Trustees

Clatsop Community College, Oregon “Dr. Galizio brings a unique background of serving at the highest leadership role as president of a community college and in the political arena as an elected state official. The League will benefit from his experience.”

— Dr. Louise Jaffe, League Board Chair and Chancellor of Santa Monica Community College District

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

49

Hostos Community College, City University of New York, New York

West Shore Community College, Michigan

Dr. David Gomez President

Dr. Kenneth Urban President

Former Interim President

Former Interim President

Hostos Community College, City University of New York

Nicolet College, Wisconsin

“Dr. Gomez has proven himself to be an exemplary academic leader and administrator as well as a dedicated member of the CUNY community. As a Bronx resident, Interim President, and former Dean of Faculty at Hostos, he is thoroughly familiar with the college and the surrounding community and has been exceptionally supportive of its students, faculty, and staff.”

“With the arrival of Dr. Urban, we are ready to open a new chapter for West Shore Community College. The Board of Trustees is highly confident he has the experience and skills needed to move our college forward. Under his leadership, we know the college is well-positioned to do great things for our students and the communities we serve.”

— J ames R. Jensen, Chair, Board of Trustees

— Benno Schmidt, Board of Trustees Chairperson, and James B. Milliken, Chancellor

BOARD RETREATS Victoria College, Texas Dr. David Hinds President

ACCT would like to thank the following colleges which have taken advantage of our Board Retreat Services.

Former Senior Vice President: Instructional Affairs

Alamo Colleges, Texas

Allegany College of Maryland “We are excited to name Dr. Hinds as our next president, and we’re very appreciative of the search committee’s work as well as the input we received from students, faculty, staff, and the community during the presidential search forums. Dr. Hinds brings a collaborative leadership style, tremendous energy, and a commitment to the community college mission. We could not have achieved the results we did without the expert guidance and help of ACCT at every step in the process.”

— Ron Walker, Chair, Board of Trustees

Coconino Community College, Ariz.

Eastern Gateway Community College, Ohio Lee College, Texas Monroe County Community College, Mich.

Navarro College, Texas Ohlone College, Calif.

Solano Community College, Calif.

SUNY Broome, N.Y.

BOARD SELF-ASSESSMENTS AND PRESIDENTIAL EVALUATIONS ACCT would like to thank the following colleges which have taken advantage of our Board and/or President Evaluation Services.

Alamo Colleges, Texas Baltimore City Community College, Md. Community College of Philadelphia, Pa. Houston Community College, Texas Pima Community College, Ariz.

South Puget Sound, Ore.

50

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

Vice Presidential Searches ACCT’s Board Leadership Services is pleased to assist chancellors and presidents looking to identify a new member of the executive leadership team for the college or district. We are pleased to announce the completion of the following searches for provosts and vice presidents.

Bellevue College, Washington Gayle Colston Barge Vice President for Institutional Advancement Former Director of University Public Relations Central State University, Ohio “I am very excited Gayle is joining us, as she brings a great resume of diverse experience, a creative mind, and an optimistic perspective to Bellevue College leadership. Gayle is exactly what our college needs as we look to celebrate our 50th anniversary in 2016.”

—D r. David Rule, President

Rebecca Chawgo Executive Director, Foundation Former Director of Development Bellevue College, Washington “Rebecca’s extensive background in the public sector as a development leader provides a solid foundation for her new appointment as the Executive Director. We are confident that the Bellevue College Foundation will reach new heights under her innovative leadership.”

“We found in Ms. Donaldson the leadership, background, and expertise needed for organizational change management as it relates to our continuing investment in human resources, professional development of faculty and staff, enhancement of services, and the overall well-being of our employees, all of which are critically important to the ongoing success of the college. We are delighted to welcome Ms. Donaldson to Ocean County College.”

—D r. Jon Larson, President

Olympic College, Washington Dr. Cheryl Nuñez Vice President for Equity and Inclusion Former Interim Chief Judicial Officer Armstrong Atlantic State University, Georgia “I am pleased that Cheryl Nuñez has joined Olympic College as our first Vice President for Equity and Inclusion. She brings extensive experience developing and leading strategic diversity plans in higher education. We will look to Ms. Nuñez to lead our efforts to close the widening opportunity gap and create an inclusive environment where all can contribute to student success.”

— Dr. David Mitchell, President

—D r. David Rule, President, Bellevue College

Ocean County College, New Jersey Tracey Donaldson Assistant Vice President for Human Resources Former Executive Director, Human Resources/Equity Compliance Officer ucks County Community College, B New Jersey “Tracey’s background and experience are a great match for Ocean County College. She understands the community college culture and is poised to lead change and provide strategic leadership within the human resources department.. We are very excited to have Tracey join our leadership team and look forward to her contributing to the future success of Ocean County College.”

— S ara Winchester, Executive Vice President of Finance and Administration

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

FALL 2015

51

pop quiz

EXTRA CREDIT Reflect on what you’ve learned in this issue of Trustee Quarterly.

Which ones are most relevant to EACH ISSUE OF TRUSTEE QUARTERLY your campuses? is packed with information to help community college trustees better understand and conduct their critical “Evolve!” p. 24 governance role at their institutions. Take • Why do the authors argue that this short quiz to see what you learned, technology partners should participate in reflect on what it means to your board and board retreats and strategic planning? In your campus, and revisit key issues you may what ways does your own board work have missed. with the college’s technology providers?

“Pathways and Partnerships,” p. 36

“Books That Build Futures,” p. 10.

“2030: The Last Classroom in America,” p. 28

“A University-Community College Partnership to Smile About,” p. 38

•C an you identify at least one key sign that transformational change is taking place on your campus? What is it/are they, and how are they better meeting students’ needs?

•H ow did Chemeketa Community College and Oregon Tech work through the myriad details needed to create their joint dental hygiene program? How does your institution collaborate with partners to make the most of resources?

• The co-editors of the Futures Series on Community Colleges argue that boards should use “opposite think” when recruiting senior leaders. What do they mean, and what would “opposite think” look like at your own institution?

• The co-editors argue that community • What role can you as a trustee play to colleges must become “networked ensure that students learn differently, organizations.” In what ways is this more quickly, and more relevantly on approach different from the past, and your campus? what are examples of new networking strategies that have—or could—serve your “Trustee Talk With ACCT,” p. 30 institution well?

• What is at stake for community colleges when community tensions rise, and what questions can trustees ask to “A Clearer Path to Student Success,” ensure that your college is serving p. 16 underserved populations?

• While the benefits of guided pathways are clear for students with specific career goals, what pathways do experts from the • What existing relationships can colleges leverage during times of crisis, and to Community College Research Center say what extent has your college developed could be created for incoming students such relationships? unsure of their interests?

•W hat potential pathways that reflect labor market demand exist in your region?

“Give the Kids Some Credit,” p. 34

•N ame one of the greatest staffing challenges for institutions seeking to implement dual-enrollment programs “The Center of Performance,” p. 19 on local high school campuses.

• What steps must a multi-campus institution What needs to happen to circumvent take before preparing to centralize key these challenges? functions? How could you build consensus for such changes in your system?

• How can trustees help ensure that dualenrollment programs do not impact • Can you name examples of services traditional college students? that do not benefit from centralization?

52

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

•H ow did the Community College of Beaver County integrate career pathways into dual enrollment programs?

• I n what ways does your college encourage high school students to consider future careers?

“Invest in College Success,” p. 40 •W hat partners did Bunker Hill Community College leverage to provide financial support services to its students? What potential partners in your region could help support students in new ways?

“The (New) Bachelor,” p. 42 •W hat are the differences between traditional and community college bachelor degrees, and how do those translate into local or regional employment needs? Are there skill gaps in your college’s service area that could be served by a specialized bachelor’s program?

•W hat are some of the expected — and unexpected — challenges and expenses community colleges must face if they consider adding baccalaureate programs, and which ones would be a particular challenge that would add time or expense to creating such a program at your institution?

NET WORK NEWS FALL 2015

INTERFACE

A PUBLICATION OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROFESSIONAL BOARD STAFF NETWORK IN COOPERATION WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUSTEES

PROFESSIONAL BOARD STAFF MEMBER 2014-2015 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

What a great year!

OFFICERS

IT IS HARD TO BELIEVE THAT MY YEAR AS PRESIDENT OF

Mechell Downey, President Administrative Assistant to the President Seminole State College, Oklahoma m.downey@sscok.edu Christina Heskett, Vice President Executive Assistant to the President Hillsborough Community College, Florida cheskett@hccfl.edu Alonia Sharps, Secretary Chief of Staff Prince George’s Community College, Maryland sharpsac@pgcc.edu Debbie Novak, Immediate Past President Assistant to the College President Colorado Mountain College, Colorado dnovak@coloradomtn.edu

MEMBERS-AT-LARGE Heather Lanham Executive Assistant to the President Edison Community College, Ohio hlanham@edisonohio.edu Carla Patee Executive Assistant to the President and Clerk for the Board Dodge City Community College, Kansas cpatee@dc3.edu Sherri Bowen Director, Office of the President Forsyth Technical Community College, North Carolina sbowen@forsythtech.edu Margaret Lamb Executive Assistant to the Chancellor San Diego Community College District, California mlamb@sdccd.edu Jane Thomas Executive Associate to the President and Secretary to the Board of Trustees Chesapeake College, Maryland jthomas@chesapeake.edu

the Professional Board Staff Network is over. I was overwhelmed when I was installed as the new president of PBSN last October, but my executive committee and all the members have made this past year a very memorable experience. I have made so many new friends and networking connections during my time as president, and I look forward to meeting many more. In October, the gavel will be passed to Vice President Tina Heskett from Hillsborough Community College in Florida. I have gotten to know Tina very well over the last few years, and she will be an awesome president. She has a flair for getting things done and a personality that will win your heart.

As Secretary of Education Arne Duncan stated as he recently outlined the new vision for higher education at the University of Maryland Baltimore County, “We must shift incentives at every level to focus on student success, not just access. When students win, everyone wins. But when they lose, every part of the system should share responsibility.” The theme for this year’s ACCT Leadership Congress in San Diego, California, “High Expectations: The New Community College Model,” seems to fit Mr. Duncan’s statement. We are all in this together to help our students achieve their academic and career goals. This Congress will be an informative and exciting event. Please attend our “Meet & Greet” at the Harbor House at 7 p.m. on October 14 and the professional development workshop at 2 p.m. on October 15. We have an incredible lineup of speakers and roundtable discussions. I learn something new every year at this event.

Please take something back from the Congress to your institution to help make your job easier or better.

At the business meeting on Friday, October 16 at 9:30 a.m., a new slate of officers and members-at-large will be elected. Please think about attending this meeting, be involved, and consider becoming a part of our executive committee. The commitment is small, but the reward is great. When your college becomes a member of ACCT, you become a member of the PBSN. This is your network. Call us. Email us. Like our Facebook page, “ACCT Professional Board Staff Network.” We are here for you.

Lastly, I would like to thank my executive committee for all their hard work: Tina, Alonia, Carla, Margaret, Jane, Heather, Debbie, and Sherri. I couldn’t have done it without you. I would also like to say a special “thank you” to past president Terri Grimes for all her support and wisdom.

It has been my great honor to serve as the president of this wonderful group.

MECHELL DOWNEY SEMINOLE STATE COLLEGE, OKLAHOMA T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

53

NET WORK NEWS FALL 2015

INTERFACE

A PUBLICATION OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROFESSIONAL BOARD STAFF NETWORK IN COOPERATION WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUSTEES

The Traveling Trustee

By Christina M. Heskett, Hillsborough Community College, Florida

AS PROFESSIONAL BOARD STAFF MEMBERS, WE WEAR MANY hats, but perhaps one of the most challenging is that of travel agent. In fact, a recent poll revealed that 75 percent of board travel is prepared by the board secretary. Between annual conferences, retreats, and other educational training opportunities, it is easy to overwhelm a trustee with questions about their pending travel — Who will attend? What airline do they prefer? Window or aisle seat? Early or late flight? And the list goes on. While booking travel for many different people with varying preferences can be a dizzying experience, worry not. I invite you to step through the looking glass for some tips on how to smoothly and quickly navigate the time-consuming

PBSN MEET & GREET Wednesday, October 14—7:00 P.M. Harbor House, San Diego Immediately following the Opening General Session, the Professional Board

process of preparing travel to ensure your trustees have a successful trip.

“Begin at the beginning.” While a whopping 89 percent of board staff continues to store trustee information on paper, which can be misplaced (or worse), storing information electronically provides a secure location that can be safely accessed from almost anywhere.

Begin by creating a separate contact database in Microsoft Outlook or a similar program specifically for trustees. Here you can store trustees’ personal information, such as names as they appear on their driver’s licenses, driver’s license numbers, birthdates, known traveler numbers, seat preferences, numbers

PBSN PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT WORKSHOP Thursday, October 15—2:00 P.M. Manchester Grand HyaƩ This year’s workshop kicks off with a fun‐ lled icebreaker, followed by guest speaker

Hotel Del Coronado, Coronado Island

Staff Network Execu�ve Commi�ee will

Donna Miller, North

host its annual Meet & Greet at Harbor

Orange County

House, located at 831 W. Harbor Drive,

Community College

just a short walk from the hotel. Join

Trustee, who will

Friday, October 16 — 9:30 A.M.

your colleagues for some delicious eats

present on “Diplomacy

Manchester Grand HyaƩ

in the Workplace.” A�er

But wait—There’s more! This is your

and drinks, mix and mingle, and relax

PBSN BUSINESS MEETING

from the day’s travel to “America’s

a short break, the workshop resumes for

opportunity to make a difference and

Finest City.” This is a great networking

Round Table discussions on trustee

help shape the future of the PBSN!

manuals, travel, presiden�al search/

Elec�ons for open posi�ons on the

contracts, security issues, board training,

PBSN Execu�ve Commi�ee will take

balancing work and personal life, Open

place at the business mee�ng along

Mee�ngs Act/Sunshine Law, and best

with the ‘passing of the gavel’ to the

prac�ces.

incoming president. If you are an ac�ve

opportunity so we encourage everyone to a�end!

PBSN member who has a�ended at least one business mee�ng in the last two years, you are eligible to run for a seat on the board. We will also take this �me to recognize those nominated Manchester Grand Hyatt, San Diego

54

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

for ACCT Professional Board Staff Icebreaker: “Are you a Working Girl or a 9 to 5er?”

Member of the Year.

NET WORK NEWS FALL 2015

INTERFACE

A PUBLICATION OF THE COMMUNITY COLLEGE PROFESSIONAL BOARD STAFF NETWORK IN COOPERATION WITH THE ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRUSTEES

for hotel and airline reward programs, meal preferences, and all standard information relating to travel. This database also can be used to store additional information such as shirt sizes, cap and gown sizes, and spouses’ names. Scanned documents can also be stored in the database, such as a tax exemption certificate or a copy of a passport. Information can then be easily copied from Outlook and pasted into Internet travel sites, which will also ensure the accuracy of the data being entered. Once this database is compiled, moving forward with travel should be fairly routine.

“First things first.” Why send multiple emails or make several calls to trustees when a quick poll of the board can give you all the answers you seek? Google Forms (www.google.com/forms) is a great solution to the madness of trip preparation, and best of all, it’s free! Forms can be easily customized to the event and a number of questions can be asked such as planning/not planning to attend, departure/return dates, flight options, meal options, and more. Google Forms is located in ‘the cloud’ and provides a digital summary of the selections made. Trustees can also view these results, which will reveal the selections made by their colleagues. One caveat: While Google Forms and similar cloud-based programs are ideal for polling and related activities, be careful never to post sensitive or private information as security cannot be guaranteed on non-proprietary cloud-based programs.

“I’m late, I’m late!” Don’t procrastinate! Hotel rooms at national-level conferences fill up fast, and staying at the conference hotel is the preferred choice for many, if not all, trustees. Reserving early will help reduce the financial impact of many out-of-pocket expenses for trustees such as cab fares, rental cars, and hotel parking fees. Once a trustee confirms he or she will attend an event, complete the registration and secure the hotel reservation. If you are not planning to travel with the board but will be paying for their accommodations with a college credit card, be sure to request and complete the hotel’s credit card authorization form, which often can be downloaded from the hotel’s official website. With the exception of incidentals, this alleviates most of the financial burden placed on the trustee while traveling.

“If you don’t know where you’re going, any road can take you there.” With airline mergers, fluctuating ticket prices, luggage fees, long lines at airport security, carry-on limitations and flight delays, getting there often requires a trip down the proverbial rabbit hole. Time-saving websites such as Orbitz, Expedia, and Travelocity can help you quickly find out which airlines fly to your destination and

what the current fares are. Booking too early or too late can often result in higher prices — so when should you book?

According to USA Today, most airlines offer lower ticket prices on Mondays, Tuesdays, or Wednesdays. A search of flights to the upcoming ACCT Congress returned fares ranging from $235 to $597. Researching fares and remaining ever-vigilant will keep travel expenses low and ensure the trustees get their preferred airlines, flights, and seat locations.

The final step to preparing board travel is to compile all of the documents into a trip packet: Trip summary, flight itinerary, registration receipt, event/meal tickets, invitations, the agenda, et al. Whether preparing the packet electronically or on paper matters not, so long as everything is included. At Hillsborough Community College, the trustees can access all travel documents electronically through their Diligent Board Books software; paper copies are provided upon request.

When asked about the completeness of travel packets, Board Chair MarDee Buchman said, “HCC always delivers a stellar performance in handling our travel; I like how my schedule is spelled out from start to finish.”

But wait — you don’t need expensive software to achieve this same feat; the same can be done using Adobe Acrobat. Once all documents are ready, combine them in Acrobat and add hyperlinks to each section for easy navigation. From there, the travel packet can be sent via email or even uploaded to a college’s website portal for trustees to access from anywhere. The end result? No more misplaced documents!

While the board can rest easy in the knowledge that everything possible has been done to ensure a positive travel experience, we must remain flexible to changes. The world of travel is constantly evolving, and as travel agents to the board, we too must evolve. We can also provide flight check-in, remind hotels of special requests, provide weather updates and emergency contact information for trip changes, gather reviews for local restaurants, or even make recommendations on local attractions the trustee may wish to take in after the conference. A visit to the world-famous San Diego Zoo, a tour of the U.S.S. Midway Museum, or even just watching the sunset from Coronado Island can all be experienced while in San Diego for the 2015 ACCT Congress during periods of free time.

Now that you are armed with some new approaches to board travel, we’d like to hear your creative ideas and shortcuts for streamlining the travel process. Send your comments to cheskett@hccfl.edu, and we’ll provide an update of travel tips. We look forward to seeing everyone in San Diego.

T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY F A L L 2 0 1 5

55

advisor Election of Board and Diversity Committee Members Elections for ACCT Regional Directors and Diversity Committee Members will be held at the Regional Caucuses and Meetings on Thursday, October 15, from 2-3:30 p.m. during the ACCT Leadership Congress in San Diego, California. Elections for Directorsat-large will be held on Friday, October 16, during the ACCT Senate Meeting.

2015 Candidates for the ACCT Board of Directors REGIONAL DIRECTOR

DIRECTOR-AT-LARGE

(1) Three-Year Term in Each Region

(3) Three-Year Terms (1) One-Year Partial Term

The following is the slate of nominees received as of July 1, 2015: Central Region – William Kelley* Harper College, IL Northeast Region – Debra Borden* Frederick Community College, MD Pacific Region – Emily Yim* Edmonds Community College, WA Southern Region – Randall Jackson* Midlands Technical College, SC Western Region – Gerald Cook* Johnson County Community College, KS *Received support of their respective Nominating Committees.

Note: Nominations will be accepted from the floor for all elections.

The following is the slate of nominees received as of July 1, 2015.

Stephan Castellanos San Joaquin Delta Community College, CA Stanley Edwards* Halifax Community College, NC Dawn Erlandson Minnesota State Colleges & Universities, MN Bernie Rhinerson San Diego Community College District, CA Mary Kay Thayer Monroe County Community College, MI Rafael Turner* Mott Community College, MI

2015 Candidates for the ACCT Diversity Committee

Elections of Regional Nominating Committee Members Regional nominating committee elections will take place during the 2015 ACCT Leadership Congress Regional Caucuses and Meetings on Thursday, October 15. Based on the ACCT Regional Nominating Committee structure, each committee consists of five members elected for two-year staggered term. No more than one member shall be from the same state.

The following seats need to be filled for the 2015-2016 term: CENTRAL REGION Three (3) seats will be available to members from the following states: Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, and Ohio.

Tammie DeVooght Blaney (WI) and David Harby (IL) will continue to serve in 2016.

NORTHEAST REGION One (1) seat will be available to members from the following states: Delaware and Pennsylvania.

Laura Bohm (NY), Diane Dixon-Proctor (MD), James Ridley (MA), and Maria Yvette Torres (NJ) will continue to serve through 2016.

PACIFIC REGION Four (4) seats will be available to members from the following states/territories: Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Utah, Washington, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Republic of Palau, and British Columbia.

(1) Two-Year Term in Each Region The following is the slate of nominees:

Michael Pasquale Yuba Community College District, CA

Tony McCown (OR) will continue to serve through 2016.

CENTRAL REGION Jay Nardini* Hawkeye Community College, IA

Tessa James Scheller Clatsop Community College, OR

SOUTHERN REGION Three (3) seats will be available to members from the following states/territories: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina Virginia, West Virginia, Bermuda, and British Virgin Islands.

NORTHEAST REGION Warren Hayman* The Community College of Baltimore County, MD PACIFIC REGION Judy Chen Haggerty Mt. San Antonio College, CA John Marquez Contra Costa Community College District, CA

56

F A L L 2 0 1 5 T R U S T E E Q U A RT E R LY

SOUTHERN REGION No Declared Candidates WESTERN REGION Jimmy Sandoval Mesalands community College, NM Carlton Underwood* Central Wyoming College, WY

Robert Brown (LA), Susan Hunt (MS), Robert J. Reid (SC), and Carolyn Williams (FL) will continue to serve through 2016.

Candidates with an asterisk received the support of their respective Regional Nominating Committees.

WESTERN REGION Two (2) seats (will be available to members from the following states: Colorado, Kansas, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Oklahoma.

Note: Nominations will be accepted from the floor for all elections.

Robert Browder (TX), Roger Garcia (NE), and Jim Vogt (WY) will continue to serve in 2016.

ACCT PUBLICATIONS To order any ACCT publication, please fill out the form below and email it to acctinfo@acct.org or mail your order to ACCT Publications (contact information below). Please include both a billing and shipping address and a purchase order, if necessary.

As a membership benefit, book orders from ACCT members are fulfilled immediately in good faith of payment. An invoice will be sent within 2-3 weeks of your order. ACCT requires pre-payment from non-member colleges.

TITLE

PRICE

QUANTITY

Tribal Colleges and Universities Governing Boards: Structure and Composition

$10 $12

member* non-member*

Public Community College Governing Boards: Structure and Composition

$10 $12

member* non-member*

History of the Association of Community College Trustees: 1972 – 2012

$40 $45

member* non-member*

Making Good on the Promise of the Open Door: Effective Governance and Leadership to Improve Student Equity, Success, and Completion (2011)

$30 $42

member* non-member*

The Trustee’s Role in Effective Advocacy: What Trustees Need to Know About Exercising Their Voices and Influence on Behalf of Community Colleges (2009)

$24 $28

member* non-member*

The Board Chair: A Guide for Leading Community College Boards

$15 $20

member* non-member*

Trusteeship in Community Colleges: A Guide to Effective Governance

$30 $40

member* non-member*

Community College Trustees: Leading on Behalf of Their Communities

$30 $40

member* non-member*

TOTAL

*Please check whether you are a member or non-member

Please include $3 postage and handling fee for each publication (maximum $15)

POSTAGE $ TOTAL $ Total enclosed $ Name: College: Address: ACCT MEMBERS Use any of these methods to order: Email: acctinfo@acct.org Call: 202.470.4379 Fax: 202.223.1297 Or mail order form to the address below.

(Note: ACCT members are not required to send payment at the time of order.)

ACCT NON-MEMBERS Send order form and check or money order to: Attn: Publications, Association of Community College Trustees, Dept. 6061, Washington, DC 20042-6061

City, State, ZIP: Phone/Email: Mail to (if different): Name: College: Address: City, State, ZIP: Phone/Email:

or bill:

www.acct.org 1101 17th Street NW

Suite 300

Washington, D.C. 20036 202.775.4667 866.895.2228

REGIST ER AT WWW.ACCT.O R G | Q U E S T IO N S ? 8 6 6 - 8 9 5 - 2 2 2 8

COMMUNITY COLLEGE

2016

NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SUMMIT

February 8 – 11, 2016 Marriott Wardman Park Hotel Washington, D.C.

Sponsored by

in collaboration with