Prerequisites Feedback, Discussion, and Vote

1
Prerequisites Feedback, Discussion, and Vote

• AGC Meeting
• October 10, 2006

2
For Today

• Briefly outline two models of prerequisite
  enforcement at other schools
• Briefly summarize feedback on proposals from past
  two weeks
• Briefly review committee recommendations
• Discussion and vote

3
Washtenaw CC Model of Prereq Enforcement

• Everyone takes placement test
• All courses rated for level of test score
  required
• No transcripts required, unless a waiver is
  requested
• System bars registration without prereq - no one
  registers two days before classes start
• Waiver/override process is electronic routed to
  counselors

4
Lansing CC Model of Prereq Enforcement

• Placement tests required (some exceptions)
• Many courses rated for level of competency needed
  to be successful (like Washtenaw)
• Prereqs (both competency levels and courses) are
  enforced
• Waiver/override process takes place in departments

5
Feedback from Past 2 Weeks

• No one opposed in principle to prerequisite
  enforcement
• Timeline for implementation is a concern many
  feel Winter 2007 is too soon to expand the number
  of courses whose prereqs will be enforced

6
Feedback contd.

• Reasons for timeline concerns
• No clear and consistent waiver process in place
• Special pops registration has already begun
• Unfair to begin prereq enforcement without
  adequate communication to students

7
Feedback contd.

• It is problematic to have different departments
  with different waiver processes and criteria
• There has been inadequate analysis of how many
  transfer and guest students may be seeking
  waivers in Winter

8
Feedback contd.

• Policy issues a concern particularly that we
  accept a C- for transfer, but some departments
  require a C for progression
• Inconsistency of implementation is another
  concern do we need to be consistent in all
  departments about what happens to students who do
  not meet prereqs?

9
Committee Recommendations

• 1 - Continue toward full implementation of
  prereq enforcement a unanimous recommendation.
• Note whether to expand the number of courses
  whose prereqs are enforced for Winter 2007 or for
  Fall 2007 was a topic of much discussion. Some
  wanted Winter some Fall. Not unanimous.

10
Recommendations contd.

• 2 Revise the CARP to include separate data
  fields for prereqs and for recommended
  courses/skills unanimous.
• 3 Establish an effective and efficient waiver
  process (Winter 2007 waivers to departments
  beyond ad hoc committee establishes more formal
  process) unanimous.

11
Recommendations contd.

• 4 Language of prereq enforcement Students
  who enroll in a course for which they have not
  met the prerequisite(s) may be removed from that
  course unanimous.
• 5 Empower Registrars and Deans Offices to
  make appropriate changes in College
  communications regarding prereq enforcement
  unanimous.

12
Recommendations contd.

• 6 Establish a Prerequisite Implementation
  Oversight Team (including at least an Asst. Dean,
  the Registrar, a Counselor, a DH/PD, and an IRP
  rep. unanimous.
• 7 Establish a committee to explore the
  purchase of a Document Management System
  unanimous.

13
Discussion and Vote