December 16, 2016: ACCJC President Barbara Beno has been put on administrative leave by the ACCJC. No reasons for the action were given.
ACCJC Continues to lose in court
Spins by ACCJC President Beno
Overwhelming support for Task Force conclusions and recommendations
ACCJC Chair wrote a letter to the U.S. Department of Education defending ACCJC and exposing conspiracy between Beno and Chancellor Brice Harris.
ACCJC Continues to sanction at a rate greater than any other accrediting body. Will their assault on California's community college never stop?
ACCJC is under pressure from the Legislature to reform its act. The latest example is AB 1397.
ACCJC will be up for review by the U.S. Department of Education and NACIQI in December of 2015. Over forty people from across California are planning on testifying in opposition to ACCJC.
Legislative Analyst history and bill analysis regarding accreditation in California
CFT Case Continues
California Community College Chancellor’s Office
Task Force on Accreditation
Part IV: Findings & Recommendations
The following recommendations of the 2015 Task Force on Accreditation are informed by the practices, record, and structure of the other five regional accrediting bodies, which offer, in the view of the task force, a preferable overall format and process to the one currently employed by the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC). The recommendations are also informed by the difficult history of actions, process, and climate afforded by the ACCJC.
The task force finds that:
• The structure of accreditation in this region no longer meets the current and anticipated needs of the California Community Colleges.
• The ACCJC has consistently failed to meet the expectations outlined in section three of this report.
• On several occasions the ACCJC has promised changes and has offered reports detailing their efforts to address concerns, but these promises and reports have led to few significant improvements.
• The California Community College system and its member institutions have lost confidence in the ACCJC.
For these reasons, and to address chronic issues, to promote confidence in and respect for the accreditation process, and to position the regional accreditor for the future development of California’s community colleges, the task force recommends the following course of action to the Chancellor and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges:
1.The Chancellor’s Office should investigate all available avenues for establishing a new model for accreditation, including options such as the following:
a. Form a combined single accrediting commission with community colleges joining WASC Senior College and University Commission, in keeping with the prevalent model for regional accreditation.
b. Identify other regional accreditors that could serve the California Community Colleges.
2. The Chancellor’s Office should evaluate possible accrediting agents for the California Community Colleges in a thorough yet expeditious manner and, working through the system’s established consultation processes, bring a recommendation for action to the Board of Governors by Spring 2016.
3. Until a new accrediting agent for the system is identified, system constituencies should continue to work in a cooperative and proactive manner with the ACCJC to ensure the continuity of the accreditation process for all colleges within the system.
Part V: Concluding Statement of the Task Force
The central focus of accreditation processes should be on providing excellent teaching and learning opportunities and on academic integrity. The current accreditor for the California Community Colleges has failed to maintain such a focus. Over the past several years, numerous system constituencies have raised consistent concerns regarding various aspects of the accreditation process and the performance of the accrediting commission, especially in areas related to transparency, collegiality, and consistency. This task force finds little evidence that the accrediting commission has the ability or willingness to address these concerns.
In addition, developments such as associate degrees for transfer and the beginnings of a community college baccalaureate degree effort have led California community colleges to become more integrated with 4-year colleges and universities. For this reason, the community colleges system would benefit from a closer, more formalized collaboration with the other institutions of higher education in the region, including service on evaluation teams.
Further delay in resolving the issues with the accreditor will have adverse effects on our colleges, on our students, and on California’s economy and future and will prevent the timely development of the robust accreditation structure that other regions enjoy and that California lacks. The task force therefore urges the Chancellor and the Board of Governors to seek other accrediting options that would provide the collaborative and credible approach to accreditation that the California Community Colleges require and deserve.
CCSF Leadership finally speaks up for CCSF and calls for removal of ACCJC sanction and new evaluation. The ACCJC then sought to have the letter stricken from the case of The People vs. ACCJC.
Robert Bezemek files Amicus Curiae Brief for AFT Local 2121 (CCSF) in case of People vs. ACCJC on Feb. 3, 2015