By Deborah Helt
Every six years Santa Monica College undergoes an extensive evaluation for accreditation purposes. Every college and university in the United States is put through a similar process. This year marks the sixth year since SMC’s last evaluation, sending the school into a whirlwind of activity to impress evalua-tors and to find some unity in the midst of continuing tensions at the school.
The accreditation evaluation comes in the midst of a busy couple of months for administrators, who are dealing with the urgent challenge of re-growing the college’s student population to what it was three years ago. The school must find a way to produce 6,500 “full-time equivalent” students for the upcoming school year, or risk losing an estimated $13 million in state funding, making an already difficult recovery — following last year’s cuts — close to impossible.
It’s difficult to miss the loud and misleading banner adorning Drescher Hall on Pico Boulevard that screams “MOST CLASSES EVER, MOST FREE PARK- ING EVER, MOST FINANCIAL AID EVER.” With tuition raised last year and another one likely in the near future, how this can be true is a mystery. I must also note, as a transplant to this area from central Iowa — land of no parking problems, it’s a sad day when a school’s parking situation becomes a key factor in school attendance, but I digress.
Last week, the 12-member accreditation review committee spent a jam-packed three days at the school, evaluating classes, attending meetings held by student groups, checking to see if the new library was being utilized and talking with literally hundreds of faculty members and administrators. Their findings accompanied a self-study performed by SMC faculty and staff.
The preliminary report produced by the state-selected group of 10 administrators and two faculty members, (termed the accreditation team), was released last week. It reflected an extremely positive response to the school’s primary curriculum and student programs, calling the college “outstanding” with “comprehensive and vibrant” student services programs.
Under the segment marked “areas of suggested improvement,” the report cited a need for more “collegiality and mutual respect” and “clear, reliable, timely and transparent financial reports.”
“The self-study was a chance for different groups on campus to hash out what we saw that was going well and what was going badly... while not a complete catharsis, it provided a venue where outsiders could look at us and hear what we have to say,” said Lesley Kawaguchi, a history professor and member of the self-study committee.
According to the accreditation team, the key points of improvement for the school continue to revolve around filling the craters of distrust left in the wake of last year’s war over the decision to cut vocational programs in response to budget shortfalls, and the subsequent sense among much of the faculty and staff that their input is not incorporated in decision making on campus.
And the report clearly reflects a tone of moving on from the past.
Of the four main standards that comprised the accreditation project’s self-study and evaluation, the standard entitled “leadership and governance” was, predictably, the most hotly discussed.
“As far as we were concerned we had a good meeting, whether or not we were heard, that’s another question,” said math professor Mitra Moassessi.
Few of the findings in the initial report come as a surprise to campus constituencies. SMC has long been considered a hot-bed of talent, both in the sense of its hugely diverse and talented student body and its often astonishingly qualified faculty. I challenge anyone to find a higher proportion of Ph.D. holders from top universities in the faculty of any other community college anywhere.
The final review for accreditation comes out in June. According to an article by Johan Mengesha in SMC’s Corsair student newspaper, a program review committee has been created and members have been challenged to develop a system to evaluate so-called student learning outcomes — like what students are actually learning and to what degree. Formulating these standards will be another opportunity for the college community to improve its working relationship.
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on April 10, 2004. Read the original PDF.