PCC Instructional Responsiblities for Dual Credit

Rock Creek Campus, Building 3, Room 226 | dualcredit@pcc.edu | 971-722-7737 | Fax: 971-722-7805

Introduction

A great deal of the support for Dual Credit is carried out by the Dual Credit office, but there are
some elements of the Dual Credit system that require PCC Faculty and academic deans to play an active role. These responsibilities are summarized below.

Point of Contact

  • Division Deans will serve as the point of contact for the Dual Credit office to identify PCC faculty for establishing the articulation and conducing regular assessments.
  • When a high school proposes a Dual Credit course articulation, the Dual Credit office will contact the appropriate Division Dean (for multi-campus SACs, generally but not necessarily geographically determined).

Establishing the Articulation

Approval of High School Faculty:

  • The Division Dean evaluates the qualifications of the high school faculty and completes PCC's Instructor Approval Form.
    • High school Dual Credit faculty are approved according to the same criteria as on-campus faculty, which are published on the PCC Instructor Qualifications website.
    • Approval via Demonstrated Competency or Provision Approval is an option that requires evidence of demonstrated competency or appropriate conditions for provisional approval. When the criteria have not been published in the PCC Instructor Qualifications for that subject area, approval by the Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs is required.

Course Content, Alignment and Pedagogy for Dual Credit Articulated Courses:

  • The Division Dean identifies a PCC faculty to work with the high school Dual Credit faculty to ensure that the high school course aligns appropriately with the college course (content, outcomes, assessment, pedagogy). High school and PCC faculty meet to discuss consent, pedagogy and assessment review of the syllabus for the high school course.
    • The PCC faculty recommends a course for articulation (signing the articulation agreement), and agrees to provide consultation as needed to the high school Dual Credit faculty member throughout the first year of the articulation.
    • Compensation is available from the Dual Credit office for the initial alignment and two mid-year consultations. The standard is 10 hours at the Special Projects Rate.
  • The PCC faculty, Division Dean, and Dean of Instruction sign the articulation agreement to indicate recommendation to the Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs for approval.

Assessment of Articulated Courses:

  • Course Assessment is required at the end of the first year of articulation in order for the agreement to be renewed for a 3-year term. At least one assessment must be done prior to each 3-year renewal.
    • Course assessment may be conducted more frequently if the Division Dean deems this appropriate (e.g., concerns about instruction, changing requirements etc.)
  • The Division Dean will identify a PCC faculty member to conduct the course assessment.
    • Assessment of Dual Credit courses may be done by Deptarment Chairs or FT faculty or PT faculty. Compensation will be at the same rate as applies to on-campus assessment; 3 hours at the Special Project Rate processed through the Dual Credit Office.
  • Evaluation should include:
    • Site visit with classroom observation
    • Syllabus and materials review (there is a Dual Credit Course Assessment form for this)
    • Review of graded student work (not done as part of normal PCC course evaluations but important for Dual Credit to establish that college expectations are met by students who successfully complete the course).
    • Student evaluations:
      • This is not current practice, but expected in Oregon Dual Credit Standards -- piloting in some PCC Dual Credit classes in 2014-15
      • Consider who sees results (propose Dual Credit office and Division Dean)
      • Dual Credit office to develop Dual Credit specific questions
  • If the approval/evaluation of a course for on-campus delivery must be carried out by an “appropriate content expert”, then it is acceptable for this to be a standard applied to Dual Credit courses. However, if this is not required for approval/assessment in on-campus courses, it should not be applied to Dual Credit.
  • PCC is under no obligation to continue articulation beyond the contract (1-Year Initial, 3-Year Renewal) if the instruction is not meeting expectations.

Clarification of Subject Area Committee (SAC) Role in Dual Credit

Generally:

  • The SAC creates and recommends curriculum, which is approved by administration.
  • Once curriculum has been approved, it belongs to the college, and the college assumes responsibly for ensuring that the accreditation standard of “wherever offered and however delivered” is met.
  • Course outcomes, assessment, content, etc. are defined in the CCOGs, and are expected to be implemented by qualified FT or PT faculty according to these parameters.
  • If an entity (e.g., contracting college, or secondary school) is unable to meet the standards outlined in the CCOG, the course should not be offered.

SAC Role:

  • SACs may not prohibit application of Demonstrated Competency or Provisional Approval within a program or discipline.
  • If the SAC wished to identify courses that are not to be offered as Dual Credit, even when the high school faculty meets the qualifications and content/outcome/pedagogy aligned can be assured, they will need to explain their position. A high school wishing to offer the course should have an opportunity to address the concerns. The Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs is the ultimate decision-maker in such cases. Examples might include:
    • The high school is unable to provide an appropriate learning environment for the course. For example, a course requires significant experience with equipment, materials or technology that the high school cannot provide.
    • Topics that are a key part of the course could not be adequately addressed in a high school setting.
  • SACs or representative faculty cannot deny articulation based on enrollment concerns.
  • SACs or representative faculty cannot deny articulation based on assumptions that the students will be under-prepared for subsequent course work. Data with regards to this concern will be evaluated.

Approved by:

October 2014