Download Chief Academic Officers Meeting November 18, 2011 Changing

Chief Academic Officers Meeting
November 18, 2011
Changing SUN System Course
Recommendations from the SUN Workgroup
November 18, 2011
PARTICIPANTS
Judith Doerr (Cochise); Bill Fee (UA); Maria Hesse (ASU); Jake Hinton (Mohave); Ann Huber
(APASC); Janice Lawhorn (EAC); Lisa McIntyre (ASU); Rebecca McKay (APASC); Jennifer Malerich
(ASU); Mary Menzel-Germanson (CAC); Alecia Mooney (NAU); Nicole Morrow (NAU/phone); Karla
Phillips (CCC); Rose Rojas (MCCD); Michael Rourke (Mohave); Patti Schlosberg (Yavapai); Jennie Scott
(Pima/phone);Eric Soulsby (AWC); Kathy Wigal (ASU)
BACKGROUND
The SUN Workgroup was established by the SUN System Steering Committee at their June 2, 2011
meeting. Its charge was to “. . . consider the implications for changing SUN courses and to recommend
guidelines for doing so.” All public colleges and universities were encouraged to identify a
representative to participate in the workgroup.
The Workgroup met on September 21, 2011 and November 9, 2011. At the first meeting there was
discussion regarding the purpose for the SUN System, the current status and some concerns.
Additionally, suggestions were made on how to accommodate changes to SUN courses. However, prior
to presenting the suggestions as final recommendations, members were asked to answer a number of
questions to ensure that once agreed upon, the colleges and universities would be able to implement
these recommendations. The questions community colleges and universities were to address prior to
the November meeting are on Attachment A. Additional questions and concerns raised at the first
meeting, but not part of the initial charge, are listed on Attachment B.
A clear definition of a SUN course is critical prior to developing further recommendations on adding to
and maintaining the SUN System. It was recommended that the following be applied to the current
SUN Matrix of 69 courses. However, it was noted that based on establishing a definition, the current list
may need to be modified.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Recommendation I: Current technology will be enhanced to support changes to SUN courses:
1. Develop a SUN pre-notification/pre-approval process, utilizing ACETS, which will ensure
proposed changes to SUN courses are vetted prior to those changes being implemented.
2. Establish a SUN Alert System to notify the Director of Articulation and Transfer Services when
SUN pre-notification/ pre-approval forms are submitted, so the process can be monitored and
reviewed (currently in place).
Chief Academic Officers Meeting
November 18, 2011
Recommendation II: Community colleges changing SUN course content:
1. If a community college is considering changes to a SUN course, that institution will submit a SUN
pre-notification/pre-approval form through the ACETS SUN Alert System, to the three
universities to ensure that the changes do not result in the loss of the direct [SUN] equivalency.
2. If the universities accept the community college's SUN course changes, the other community
colleges will continue to accept that community college's course as a SUN course. [Some of the
community colleges want this process to include an opportunity for them to review the
proposed changes as well.]
Recommendation III: If the changes to a community college SUN course could result in the loss of the
SUN designation for at least one university:
1. The community college will be asked to reconsider the changes to that course; or
2. The community college will work with the faculty at the universities to resolve the issues
resulting in a potential lost equivalency and ensure that the additional modifications will not
result in lost equivalencies from the other universities; or
3. Remove that community college SUN course from the SUN matrix, since not all community
colleges are required to offer SUN courses. [Last resort and could be impacted by the definition
of a SUN course.]
Recommendation IV: Universities changing SUN course content:
1. If a university plans to change a SUN course, the ACETS pre-notification/pre-approval process
will be utilized to submit the changes to the other two universities. If all agree that the course
changes are not significant enough to change the SUN designation, that designation will be
retained.
2. If warranted, the community colleges will be notified and asked to resubmit their course
description/syllabus for review by the universities. This is current procedure when some
university courses are changed. (There was reluctance on the part of the community college
Workgroup participants, however, to guarantee that their faculty would agree to change their
SUN courses if the universities made substantive changes.)
Recommendation V: If the changes to a university SUN course results in the loss of the SUN
designation for at least one university:
If a university makes changes to a SUN course that suggests the loss of the SUN designation, the
university faculty will further discuss the changes to determine:
1. If the other two institutions will implement those changes, thus maintaining the SUN
designation; or
2. If a new course needs to be developed.
Recommendation VI: Timeline for making changes to SUN courses
Notification of SUN course changes needs to occur at least one year prior to the effective date of the
change. Therefore, the change needs to be negotiated in a timeframe to accommodate this one year
Chief Academic Officers Meeting
November 18, 2011
notification rule to ensure that institutions have adequate time to update catalogs and make degree
audit changes if necessary.
Recommendation VII: Accepting SUN courses not offered at the "receiving" community college.
If a community college does not offer a SUN course, it will accept SUN courses from other community
colleges as an elective or better course. [Many of the SUN courses are AGEC courses. Community
colleges, therefore, already accept other community college AGEC courses and apply them toward their
own AGEC in the respective designated “categories”.]
Recommendation VIII: Tribal College
Though outside the purview of this workgroup, members recommend that the APASC tribal colleges be
invited to participate in the SUN system if:
1. They have the technology to ensure the identification of SUN courses in their printed and online
documents; and
2. They are willing to comply with the standards already in place regarding the SUN System.
FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
 Establish a clear definition of a SUN course prior to making policies and developing processes for
adding courses to the SUN "course bank" and for refining the above recommendations. The
CAOs should determine how many community colleges need to have a SUN course in order for a
course to be added to, or remain on, the SUN list (for example: as courses are deleted from
institutional course banks, and therefore the SUN Matrix, at what point are there too few
institutions offering the SUN course to make it viable, or should that decision be base on the
percentage of students impacted?)
 All institutional faculty need to be aware that changing SUN courses is a long and collaborative
process.
 Both the pre-notification/pre-approval process through ACETS and discussions at ATF meetings
are valuable vehicles for communicating anticipated changes to SUN courses and both should be
utilized.
 The SUN web site needs to be modified to ensure that the message about SUN courses does not
suggest that they are the only courses that transfer. Feedback indicates that students are
inferring that only the SUN courses transfer.
 Develop a new “press release” for all SUN institutions (distribute to IAF members, faculty,
advisors, etc.) to ensure that the “SUN message” is consistent statewide, that can be sent to
students.
 Develop language in printed and online SUN materials distinguishing transferability and
applicability.


Every institution should have a SUN liaison to whom notifications of changes will be directed.
Deletions to the SUN matrix should be made as institutional course banks are updated.
Chief Academic Officers Meeting
November 18, 2011
ATTACHMENT A
At the first meeting of the SUN Workgroup, community college representative were asked to answer the
following by the November meeting:
1. Does your institution use the CEG (“triangulation”) to determine courses equivalencies from
other AZ community colleges?
2. If a student has completed a SUN course that is not offered at your institution, will your
institution agree to accept it as an Elective or Better and apply it as an elective to a transfer
degree?
3. If a community college makes a change to the curriculum in a SUN course, and that course
retains the same university equivalencies in the CEG and therefore retains the SUN
designation, will the other community colleges agree to continue to accept that course as
the SUN course without curricular review?
4. If the three universities agree to make curricular changes to a SUN course which would
require community colleges to also make those changes to keep the same equivalencies,
and therefore the SUN designation, do you anticipate that your faculty would be willing to
make those changes?
At the first meeting of the SUN Workgroup, universities representatives were asked answer the
following questions by the November meeting:
1. If a university wants to make curricular changes to a SUN course, will the universities agree
to first discuss the proposed change with the other two universities to determine: 1) if the
universities would allow the course to keep the same equivalency, or 2) would agree to
make the same curricular changes in order to keep the equivalency and therefore the SUN
designation?
2. What is a reasonable timeframe for #1 to happen and also to allow the community colleges
to make curricular changes if needed? Will courses which cannot be changed by the Fall
semester be grandfathered in for a year?
3. Is it reasonable to request that any requested changes to SUN courses only happen in the
Fall semester, like Common Courses?
Chief Academic Officers Meeting
November 18, 2011
ATTACHMENT B
Additional Issues/Questions to Consider from September 21, 2011













Why are tribal colleges not included? They were not part of the legislation, but is there a plan to
add them?
Should we get rid of the requirement that SUN courses have an equivalent at all three
universities?
The language on the SUN home page, and other pages and marketing materials, may mislead
students. Students may think that only SUN courses will transfer, or that they’re always the best
courses to take regardless of how decided they are about their major and university. Need to
make sure advisors work closely with students to use all the appropriate tools, focusing on
degree plans for decided students.
How can we accommodate courses which have different credit values between institutions?
How can we accommodate courses with multiple equivalencies (e.g. separate vs. combined
lecture/lab science courses, honors courses, etc.)
What should we do with SUN courses such as CHM 2230, where the UA had an equivalency in
the CEG, but it’s really not the same course as the other schools?
Indicating that the transferability of SUN courses is multidirectional is of concern – SUN courses
are based on the CEG, but that was only designed to go one way [community colleges to
universities], but the SUN matrix goes in all directions.
What happens if an institution no longer offers a SUN course? Is the answer to that different for
community colleges and universities?
What is the intent of the SUN System? Is it just for transfer to universities and bachelor’s
degrees, or was it also meant for swirling students and those pursuing associate’s degrees?
By making the SUN System work we’ll be meeting the letter of the law, but are we really
meeting the underlying intent? We still have the problem of transferability versus applicability.
Is the “once a SUN course always a SUN course” concept viable?
How do we, or should we, incorporate SUN courses which have related AP, CLEP or IB
equivalencies?
How do ensure that courses transferred in from non Arizona public institutions don’t get the
SUN designation on transcripts and degree audits?