C-ID FAQs for Articulation Officers
General/Overview
1. In a nutshell, can you give me a 3-sentence description of what C-ID is?
C-ID, the Course Identification Numbering System, is a supra-numbering system. At its foundation is the intersegmental development and vetting of descriptors to be used as the basis for articulation and to assign C-ID designations to courses that match descriptors.
2. How is this project different from or similar to LDTP?
It is different from LDTP in that it is voluntary and intersegmental. It is like LDTP in that articulation will be conferred upon courses that match a descriptor (like TCSU).
3. This sounds a bit like CAN. How is it similar? How does it differ?
It is similar to CAN in that, eventually, visible supra-numbers will be assigned to courses. It is different in that C-ID designations are only assigned to CCC courses and the assignment is made based on comparability to a robust descriptor, as opposed to the presence of articulation.
4. For how long is this project being funded?
This is now its 3rd year, with an expectation of at least an additional 4 years of funding.
5. We spent a lot of time on IMPAC, LDTP and CAN, all of which didn’t result in many tangible changes. Why should we invest time and energy in C-ID?
C-ID has moved forward informed by all these projects – it convenes faculty as IMPAC did, it is now integrating some elements of LDTP, and it will eventually answer the legislative mandate for “common course numbering” that CAN addressed. Every effort is being made to ensure that C-ID is not a burden and offers value-added. It is hoped that C-ID will serve many purposes and exist well-beyond the currently budgeted period.
Intersegmental Participation
6. The UC did not participate in CAN. How has UC responded to C-ID? What about the CSU Chancellor’s Office?
Both UC and CSU have been involved in C-ID since its inception. There is a need for greater outreach to UC AOs and faculty – which we are hoping to address in the near future. CSU has been actively involve in all elements of C-ID and has been working with C-ID to develop a plan for C-ID to “absorb” the TCSU descriptors. Representatives of all segments sit on the C-ID Advisory Committee.
7. What response have you received from AICCU to date? To the best of your knowledge, is anyone from AICCU communicating about C-ID to faculty at any independent institutions? If so, which ones?
We have had a representative from the independents on our Advisory Committee in the past and hope to in the future. And we hope to find an AICCU institution to serve as one of our implementation pilot colleges. Any assistance in identifying AICCU institutions that would like to be involved would be most appreciated.
8. Have the CSU and UC faculty agreed to use C-ID courses when articulating lower division major preparation agreements?
Until we have vetted and finalized descriptors, we can’t secure such commitments. But the concept has been discussed at ICAS and will continue to be a topic of conversation. CSU faculty have already endorsed the concept of articulation to a descriptor as a consequence of LDTP. C-ID offers something similar, but there are no mandates. It is hoped that this will make C-ID appealing.
Articulation Impact/Benefits
9. The community colleges already have excellent articulation with most CSUs and all UCs. How will C-ID increase articulation or support transfer?
Some of our transfer partners choose to geographically limit their articulation. C-ID would offer a simplified “one-to-many” means of increasing articulation. Any transfer institutions could readily articulate with all 110 CCC if they all opted into C-ID and the receiving institution indicated that C-ID’d courses would be articulated. This would facilitate establishing articulation within, and beyond, CA.
10. Will C-ID be used for community college to community college, CSU to CSU or UC to UC (e.g. lateral) transfer or for reverse transfers?
Our focus is on movement from CCC to receiving institutions, private and public - between community colleges and from CCCs to CSU, UC, and independents.
11. What are the responsibilities of community college articulation officers with C-ID? What about the responsibilities of articulation officers from independent, CSU and UC campuses?
All AOs would be asked to work with their faculty to ascertain willingness to articulate a C-ID descriptor, determining what requirement(s) a course matching a descriptor would fulfill. CCC AOs would be asked to submit courses for C-ID consideration. Course outlines of record would either be submitted through a one-step upload process, or by indicating that they can be obtained from OSCAR or other available online source.
12. This sounds like more work. How can we capitalize on some of the work that’s already been done with CAN and LDTP? Will C-ID “grandfather” previously approved LDTP courses if the descriptors are similar?
All descriptor development begins with what already exists – the foundational work of CAN and IMPAC has been instrumental in moving C-ID forward and we now look forward to working with LDTP. If an LDTP descriptor is accepted into C-ID without modification or with only small elements removed, courses that had the associated TCSU would be “grandfathered” into C-ID. As this process would involve a re-review of the descriptor, it is anticipated that the resulting articulation would be in place for 5 years. C-ID intends to follow a 5-year refresh/re-review cycle.
13. Is this mandatory? How will students be affected if we don’t participate?
It is not mandatory and it is hoped that the benefits will lead to increasing involvement over time. C-ID has proceeded with caution and has worked hard to anticipate challenges – it is hoped that the AO community will continue to facilitate C-ID’s forward movement. The CCC Student Senate has endorsed C-ID and we look forward to getting guidance from students as needed.
Course Descriptor Development Process
14. Can anyone provide input during the development of the C-ID descriptors? How will faculty be able to review the input by the other reviewers?
Yes, we want review by all interested parties. The interdisciplinary Faculty Discipline Review Group (FDRG) will review all comments and finalize the descriptors. Please find a brief overview of what an FDRG is (and does) at the end of the Q & A component of this document.
15. How will you assure that a broad representation of faculty provide input and not just the same people who always voice their opinions?
As we now have a clear message as to why someone should review the descriptors, we hope to be able to bring as many appropriate parties in to review as possible. We will do all that it is in our power to do – including holding online sessions to walk faculty and AOs through the process of reviewing. If you are interested in having a C-ID presentation in your area, please feel free to contact me – mpilati@riohondo.edu.
16. Who will determine which feedback will be incorporated into the descriptors? Who will make the final decision on the course descriptor? Will there be a vote? How often can the descriptors change?
As noted earlier, these determinations will be made by the FDRG. Descriptors will be on a 5-year ‘cycle’ but changes in the discipline could warrant an early review – processes will be developed for such requests to be made – as is essential to ensure the currency of the curriculum.
17. Can you tell us more about FDRGs? Will articulation officers participate?
All FDRGs have an AO.
18. Do you have a schedule of deadlines for descriptor reviews by discipline area? Will faculty have adequate notice and sufficient time to provide input? What will you do if you receive input from only one or two educational segments?
These are issues we are currently working on addressing and where we need your help. Please encourage your faculty to review the descriptors.
Course Submission and Review
19. How will courses be entered electronically for identification and review? Will OSCAR be used? If not, what is the process for submission?
Please see #11.
20. Who will be reviewing the C-ID courses? What if there are abuses to this trust? Intersegmental teams will be reviewing courses.
Quality control mechanisms will be built into all aspects of the C-ID process and problems dealt with when encountered.
21. How closely must courses be aligned to the descriptor in order to receive a C-ID number? 50%? 80%? 100%?
All elements delineated in the descriptor must be present. Again, quality controls will be incorporated into the process – if courses are failing due to an inadvertent failure to explicitly state that a course contains an element that is necessary and always taught (such as ethics in accounting or psychology) – the FDRG will determine how best to deal with the issue before proceeding.
22. How often (cycle) will C-ID courses be validated?
Every 5 years, or sooner, if needed.
23. Will C-ID numbers be listed in catalogs, much as the CAN numbers were?
Yes, eventually.
24. Where/how will this information be stored and available to students, faculty and counselors/academic advisers? Will C-ID courses be identified on ASSIST?
Initially all information will be available at the C-ID website. Eventually,
it is hoped that the information would be available in ASSIST – with
C-ID-based articulation populating ASSIST and C-ID designations appearing as
CAN does.