1 / 31

REPEATABILITY: CHANGES AND NEW POSSIBILITIES

REPEATABILITY: CHANGES AND NEW POSSIBILITIES. Julie Bruno, Sierra College David Morse, Long Beach City College Melynie Schiel, Copper Mountain College. Repeatability. Justifications offered in defense of repeatability Students need additional time and practice to develop skills.

robert
Download Presentation

REPEATABILITY: CHANGES AND NEW POSSIBILITIES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. REPEATABILITY: CHANGES AND NEW POSSIBILITIES Julie Bruno, Sierra College David Morse, Long Beach City College Melynie Schiel, Copper Mountain College

  2. Repeatability Justifications offered in defense of repeatability • Students need additional time and practice to develop skills. • Students may pass a course (receive a C grade) but not be proficient. • Students may become proficient in some aspects of a course but need more time for others. • Students need a large quantity and variety of performance experiences in order to be eligible for transfer.

  3. Repeatability Justifications offered in defense of repeatability • Students need multiple types of experiences (such as different performances) that cannot be separated into different courses. • Some students enter with very underdeveloped skills and need more time time reach proficiency. • New students benefit from working with more experienced or advanced students.

  4. Repeatability What are the objections to repeatability? • Students should not need to repeat a course once they have passed it. • The state should not have to pay for students to take the same course more than once. • Some students use repeatability as a cheap way to obtain services they would need to pay more for otherwise, such as PE classes in place of a health club.

  5. Repeatability What are the objections to repeatability? • Repeatability is often used for purposes of lifelong learning, which the Chancellor’s Office is discouraging. • Repeatability has been abused in many cases. If we followed the existing rules, there would be far fewer issues.

  6. Repeatability An Important Consideration: If the student has achieved the outcomes for a course, the student has passed. A grade of C is passing.

  7. Repeatability The Academic Senate’s Goal: Continue to provide the same quality and depth of experience for our students in the face of pressure from the Board of Governors for changes to repeatability regulations. • Wherever possible, achieve the same goals for transfer and degree seeking students currently met through repeatability by using different curricular and enrollment structures.

  8. Repeatability What approaches might be used in place of repeatability? • Leveled courses • Separate courses • Non-credit • Not-for-credit (Community Service) • In-Progress Grades • Create labs to allow more practice • Audits • Variable Units

  9. The Reality To a large degree, if not completely, repeatability is going to go away. We need to identify other options that will help us continue to serve students.

  10. Task Force Recommendations:Visual and Performing Arts • Continue repeatability for ensemble performance courses in music, theater and dance. Ensemble courses allowing repeatability will not be broken into separate levels. Leveled courses will not be eligible for repeatability. • Limit students to repeating a specific performance course a maximum of 3 times and to a total of 16 units of performance courses total per college. • Address community or extended participation needs through non-credit, audit, and community service classes by requesting appropriate changes to Ed Code. • Eliminate repeatability for all other visual and performing classes, including all classes in studio art and all non-performance classes in music, theater, and dance. Purposes currently served by repeatability in these areas can be accomplished through existing curricular options.

  11. Proposed Resolution:Visual and Performing Arts 9.10 F11 Amend and Endorse “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by striking the phrase “and students to a total of 16 units of performance courses” which places a non-curricular based limit on student course-taking; Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges endorse the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” and its recommendations as amended.

  12. Proposed Resolution:Visual and Performing Arts 9.06 F11 Amend “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by altering the first bullet point of the Visual and Performing Arts section to read, “Continue repeatability for ensemble performance and applied courses in music, and ensemble performance courses in theater and dance”; and Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by altering the second bullet point in the same section to read, “Limit students to repeating a specific course for a maximum of 3 years (whether measured in semesters or quarters)” thereby striking the phrase “and students to a total of 16 units of performance courses”.

  13. Proposed Resolution:Visual and Performing Arts 9.09 F11 Repeatability for Studio Art Courses Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” to define repeatability for studio art courses as one repeat.

  14. Proposed Amendment:Visual and Performing Arts 9.10.01 F11 Amend Resolution 9.10 F11 Add third resolve: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by striking the recommendation to “Eliminate repeatability for all other visual and performing classes, including all classes in studio art and all non-performance classes in music, theater, and dance”; and

  15. Proposed Amendment:Visual and Performing Arts 9.10.02 F11 Amend Resolution 9.10 F11 Amend first resolve: Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by striking the phrase “and students to a total of 16 units of performance courses” which places a non-curricular based limit on student course-taking to read “Limit students to repeating a specific performance course a maximum of 3 times and to a total of 16 units of performance courses per discipline per college.;

  16. REMINDER If we do not approve a proposal that limits repeatability to a degree that satisfies the Board of Governors and the Chancellor’s Office, our recommendations will likely be ignored and more restrictive changes will be adopted.

  17. Task Force Recommendations:Career and Technical Education • Eliminate repeatability for CTE classes. Purposes currently served by repeatability in this area can be accomplished through existing curricular options. Allow students to petition to repeat courses or use other existing curricular structures for purposes of fulfilling licensure requirements. • Student need for retraining of job skills can be accommodated through lapse of time policies.

  18. Proposed Resolution:Career and Technical Education 9.08 F11 Career Technical Education Repeatability   Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” to allow career technical education courses to be repeated one time.

  19. REMINDER The more areas in which we can find alternatives to repeatability, the stronger our arguments will be for the areas in which we cannot find viable alternatives.

  20. Task Force Recommendations:Physical Education • Separate intercollegiate athletics from PE as much as possible. Use the separate TOP codes for the courses aimed at dance, PE, health, and athletics. Disciplines can continue to exist in any local division/department structure even when the courses are correctly coded according to the type of course that is offered. • Eliminate repeatability for PE classes, including non-performance dance courses. Purposes currently served by repeatability in this area can be accomplished through existing curricular options. Performance courses in dance would be repeatable only if they are listed under the TOP code for dance and would be subject to the repeatability limitations for performance ensemble courses. • Limit students to a total of 8 PE courses per college. • Address community participation needs through non-credit, audit, and community service classes by requesting appropriate changes to Ed Code.

  21. Proposed Resolution:Physical Education 9.10 F11 Amend and Endorse “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by striking the recommendation to “Limit students to a total of 8 PE courses”; and Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges endorse the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” and its recommendations as amended.

  22. Proposed ResolutionPhysical Education 9.03 F11 Add a Kinesiology Taxonomy of Programs (TOP) Code to the Curriculum Inventory Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges work with the System Advisory Curriculum Committee of the Chancellor’s Office to develop a TOP code for Kinesiology to identify lecture courses in degree and certificate programs in the discipline of Kinesiology that will not be counted against the proposed physical education eight-course limit.

  23. Proposed ResolutionPhysical Education 9.05 F11 Title 5 Changes to Physical Education Course Repeatability Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges oppose the LAO’s proposed restrictions on repeatability of physical education activity courses; and Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges work with the Chancellor’s Office to develop and recommend changes to Title 5 which would cap the percentage of a college’s total apportionment that could be generated by a single discipline.

  24. Proposed ResolutionPhysical Education 9.07 F11 Course Repeatability and Title 5 Changes Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recommend that physical education activity courses taught at each college be placed into “groups” to determine repeatability in order to align community college physical education curricula with CSU patterns; Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges recommend that these “groups” be defined as combative, cardiovascular fitness, stretching and relaxation, strength development, individual and dual sports, team sports, and recreation, with the caveat that each course may only appear in one group; and Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges work for a Title 5 change to allow students to take any course within the defined groups for credit and apportionment three times for any semester course and comparable number of takes for campus on a quarter system.

  25. REMINDER Change is coming. We can try to shape that change in ways that allow us to continue serving our students or we can allow worse changes to be imposed upon us.

  26. Task Force Recommendations:Intercollegiate Athletics • Allow repeatability for in-season intercollegiate athletic courses in accordance with COA and NCAA eligibility requirements. • Allow sport-specific off-season classes to be repeated twice subject to COA and NCAA eligibility requirements.

  27. Proposed Resolution:Intercollegiate Athletics 9.04 F 11 Amend “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” of Off-Season Conditioning Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” by striking the recommendation to “Allow sport-specific off-season classes to be repeated twice subject to COA and NCAA eligibility requirements”; and Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges amend the document “Recommendations Regarding Repeatability” to read, “Allow repeatability for intercollegiate athletics courses and off-season conditioning courses in accordance with CCCAA and NCAA eligibility requirements.”

  28. Task Force Recommendations:Adapted Physical Education • Only courses coded as adaptive PE courses may be repeatable. No limitation will be placed on repeatability for adaptive PE. As students transition out of adaptive PE courses and still need more help with increasing physical abilities, students will be able take regular PE courses.

  29. Task Force Recommendations:Other Repeatable Courses, Such As Forensics, Journalism, Creative Writing, etc. • Eliminate repeatability for classes in these areas. Purposes currently served by repeatability in these areas can be accomplished through existing curricular options. No statutory or regulatory changes are needed.

  30. REMINDER The Status Quo is not an option. If we do not develop a tenable position, we will leave the academic senate with no voice in shaping the Title 5 changes.

  31. Repeatability Further comments and questions?

More Related