X hits on this document

152 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

10 / 52

(California Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages), California Department of Education standards, CMC3 (California Mathematics Council of Community Colleges) and AMATYC (American Mathematical Association of Two-Year Colleges) mathematics standards and others. In addition, a nationwide scan was conducted to look for course descriptors, exit competencies, or standards.

Professional organizations were queried for help, particularly where no existing standards or descriptions were available. A recent Academic Senate/Chancellor’s Office survey was used in order to determine what the most common number of course levels below transfer were in each discipline statewide. This background information provided an environmental scan of current conditions as the discipline faculty began their discussions.

Guidelines or Philosophy for the Use of the CB21 Rubrics

The first task was to develop some guidelines for use of the rubrics. As a group, the faculty developed the list that is shown below. It was not the intent of the Senate or the Chancellor’s Office to force curricular standards on any institution or to limit local curricular autonomy and program development. Instead, discipline faculty wrote the following guidelines to help them create the rubrics and to explain the process to faculty whose feedback would be sought after the rubrics were completed.

Guidelines or Philosophy for the Use of the CB21 Rubrics

1.

These DRAFT rubrics were the result of collegial input from 150 faculty in Math, English, ESL and Reading from across the state. The rubrics were created with the understanding that they would be vetted throughout the disciplines and discussed with the professional organizations associated with each discipline through April 2009. After fully vetting the rubrics, they will be considered for adoption at the Academic Senate Spring Plenary Session.

2.

The rubrics describe coding for basic skills levels. They DO NOT prescribe or standardize curriculum. They are not a comprehensive description of curricular activity in those courses, but rather describe a universal core of skills and abilities that the faculty could agree should be present at the end of each of those levels.

3.

The level descriptions ARE NOT comprehensive. There are many other outcomes or skills developed in the courses at individual college locations, but which are not necessarily represented statewide and therefore not included as a part of the rubric.

4.

The rubrics DO NOT dictate anything regarding the classification of the course as to transferability, degree applicability or even coding as a basic skills course or not.

5.

The rubrics ARE NOT the final authority. They are a referential guide representing what we have determined is common practice statewide; they do NOT dictate any course’s

Chapter 12                                                                                                                                 10

Document info
Document views152
Page views152
Page last viewedSun Dec 11 12:47:04 UTC 2016
Pages52
Paragraphs1133
Words12279

Comments