I.B.1: The institution demonstrates a sustained, substantive and collegial dialogue about student outcomes, student equity, academic quality, institutional effectiveness, and continuous improvement of student learning and achievement.

The changes made at the College to comply with this standard were guided by Recommendation 1 and 2.

Dialogue is essential to decision-making and institutional effectiveness. ASCC’s emphasis on dialogue is linked to three levels of structural planning encompassing dialogue at the department/program level, committee level, and institutional level.

The diagram below illustrates the planning levels and the functions of each level College constituents and decision-making groups contribute towards institutional planning and effectiveness.¹

Dialogue at the program/department level focuses on the quality of services provided by each department or program that is supervised by a manager or administrator. Program/department dialogue results to the improving of department or program services that pertain to instruction, student support services, or administrative services.

Committee level dialogue focuses on a more direct scope of responsibility. At the committee level, dialogue is central to data analysis, planning, and the developing of recommendations for decision-making regarding institutional effectiveness.

At the institutional level, dialogue is central to decision-making. Institutional level dialogue centers on the achieving of the College’s Mission encompassing dialogue at the program/department and committee levels for continuous improvements regarding institutional processes, priorities, policies, and mission effectiveness.

The ASCC emphasizes the importance of dialogue and published its first Participatory Governance Structural Manual to describe the principles of participatory governance and the structure for meaningful dialogue and collaboration by constituents and decision-making groups towards making sound decisions.²

The College has defined in the Participatory Governance Structural Manual the different roles of its constituents, and the level of dialogue that pertain to them. Constituent dialogue include:

• Board of Higher Education: The Board’s role in decision-making is to determine policies and to serve as the legal and fiduciary body for the American Samoa Community College. The Board of Higher Education’s ultimate responsibility is that the Mission of the College is fulfilled and that financial resources are allocated to the continuous improvement of the College’s educational programs and services.
• President: The President serves as the Chief Executive Officer of the College and as an ex-officio member to the Board. The President is the Board’s single official link to the operations of the College. The Board hires the President to administer the College and to issue rules, procedures, and guidelines necessary to implement the Board’s policies for governance of the College, consistent with all applicable laws. The Board will instruct and delegate to the President through written and verbal the implementation of its policies. The President may recommend policies or changes in policies to the Board. The President’s performance will be considered synonymous with the College’s performance as a whole. The President shall uphold moral standards befitting a person of the position.³
• Students: The role of students in decision-making is to provide recommendations to the President that have or will have a significant effect on them as well as the processes for developing those recommendations. Students are represented through the Student Government Association.
• The student representatives elect the President of the Student Government Association and officers.
• A student representative is also elected by the Student Government Association to serve a one-year term as a Trustee on the Board of Higher Education.
• Faculty: Full-time and adjunct faculty members may provide recommendations to the President that have or will have a significant effect on them as well as the process for developing those recommendations. Faculty and adjunct faculty are represented through the Faculty Senate.
• Faculty and adjunct faculty elect the Chairman of the Faculty Senate and Senators to serve as officers. Terms and conditions for officers are determined through the Senate’s by-laws.
• Administrators: The role of administrators in decision-making is determined by the responsibility and authority delegated to administrative positions as defined in their job descriptions. Administrators in general are expected to provide strong leadership in areas that include academic quality, planning, and operational routines appropriate to their functions.⁴ In addition, administrators are responsible for:
• Planning and implementing standing procedures aligned accordingly to their department/program mission and/or outcomes.
• Monitoring and assessing (Program Review) their outcomes, goals, objectives, activities, and department/program functions to determine department/program operational efficiency, including but not limited to governance and local policies and federal regulations that may apply. 
• Developing an annual preliminary budget for their operations based on data and analyses that will result in continuous improvements.
• Participating in the hiring processes for potential employees in accordance to expertise and qualifications.
• Supervising and evaluating the performance of their personnel to assure that established outcomes, goals, objectives, activities, and department/program functions are acceptably met.
• Providing consultation and technical expertise to internal and external stakeholders regarding department/program mission and outcomes.

Administrators’ recommendations regarding divisional operations follow the ASCC’s Organization Chart on communication protocol.

• Staff: Staff members may provide recommendations to the President that have or will have a significant effect on them as well as the process for developing those recommendations.⁵

The committee dialogue involves the types of decision-making groups that provide recommendations for institutional effectiveness, which include Governance Groups, Operational Groups, and Task Force Groups. Provided are descriptions of the types of decision-making groups, composition, purpose, and outcomes which dialogue is based. 

Governance Groups consists of members who are given the authority by the President to bring information from constituents into the dialogue on Mission effectiveness and quality assurance, and to also bring information from the governance group back to their constituents. The Governance Groups consist of the Leadership Triangle, Accreditation Steering Committee, and Institutional Planning Committee.⁶

Operational Groups consists of members who are given the authority to implement institutional functions to carry out Board policies and procedures. Operational Group members are designated based on the responsibilities in their job descriptions as assigned by the President. Operational Groups include the Curriculum Committee, Assessment Committee, and Data Committee.⁷

Task Force Groups are formed to create a venue for dialogue and work on topics that require timely and concentrated energy. These groups are charged by the President or a governance group to perform specific functions that benefit the entire College. Membership on task forces is either voluntary or by appointment. Task forces are not ongoing; when a specific project is completed, the task force is dissolved.⁸

The roles of constituents and decision-making groups are vital to institutional effectiveness and the dialogue that takes place leads to a collective understanding of the meaning of evidence, data, research, and how it is used in the evaluation of student learning.

1 - 2014 Presentation of Institutional Strategic Plan, Slide #13
2 - Participatory Governance Manual, p. 7
3 - Governance Policy Manual 3001