Chabot College
Academic Program Review Report
Year Two of
Program Review Cycle
Fire Technology
Submitted on February 28, 2013
William Robert (Bob) Buell, Jr.
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Section A: What Progress Have We Made? .............................. 1
Section B: What Changes Do We Suggest? ................................ 2
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History .........................................................................................3
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule .................................4
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections ..........................................5
C: Program Learning Outcomes....................................................................9
D: A Few Questions ...................................................................................11
E: New Initiatives ......................................................................................12
F1: New Faculty Requests ..........................................................................13
F2: Classified Staffing Requests ..................................................................14
F3: FTEF Requests ......................................................................................15
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests .................................................16
F5: Supplies and Services Requests ............................................................17
F6: Conference/Travel Requests ................................................................18
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests ........................................19
F8: Facilities Requests ................................................................................20
A. What Progress Have We Made?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence,
and enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm.
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks
you to reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used by
the PRBC and Budget Committee to assess progress toward achievement of our Strategic Plan
and to inform future budget decisions. It will also be used by the SLOAC and Basic Skills
committees as input to their priority-setting process. In your narrative of two or less pages,
address the following questions:





What were your year one Program Review goals?
Did you achieve those goals? Specifically describe your progress on the goals you set for
student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan achievement.
What are you most proud of?
What challenges did you face that may have prevented achieving your goals?
Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty
ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
1
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
Review the Strategic Plan goal and key strategies at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/StrategicPlan/SPforPR.pdf prior to completing your
narrative. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested) to
further detail your narrative. Limit your narrative to two pages, and be very specific about
what you hope to achieve, why, and how.
Given your experiences and student achievement results over the past year, what changes do
you suggest to your course/program improvement plan? What new initiatives might you begin to
support the achievement of our Strategic Plan goal? Do you have new ideas to improve student
learning? What are your specific, measurable goals? How will you achieve them? Would any of these
require collaboration with other disciplines or areas of the college? How will make that collaboration
occur?
2
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Audience: Budget Committee, PRBC, and Administrators
Purpose: This analysis describes your history of budget requests from the previous two years and
the impacts of funds received and needs that were not met. This history of documented need
can both support your narrative in Section A and provide additional information for Budget
Committee recommendations.
Instructions: Please provide the requested information, and fully explain the impact of the budget
decisions.
Category
2011-12
Budget
Requested
2011-12
Budget
Received
2012-13
Budget
Requested
2012-13
Budget
Received
Classified Staffing (# of positions)
Supplies & Services
Technology/Equipment
Other
TOTAL
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved student learning? When
you requested the funding, you provided a rationale. In this section, assess if the anticipated
positive impacts you projected have, in fact, been realized.
2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has student
learning been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively impacted?
3
Appendix B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
All courses must be assessed at least once every three years. Please complete this chart that
defines your assessment schedule.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE:
Spring
Fall
2013
2013
Courses:
Group 1:
FT 51, 53,
55
Group 2:
FT 50, 52,
54, 56, 89
Group 3:
FT 90ABC,
FT 91D
Group 4:
FT 91ABC,
95, 96
Full
Assmt
Spring
2014
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
& report
Full
Assmt
Fall
2014
Spring
2015
Fall
2015
Spring
2016
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
& report
4
Fall
2016
Spring
2017
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT50 – Fire Protection Organization
Spring 2011
2
2
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell & Steve Prziborowski
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Describe and explain the influence on a fire
protection organization from factors such as philosophy &
history of fire protection, fire loss analysis, public & private
organizations, labor-management relations, codes &
ordinances, management operations, fire service
resources, line & staff operations, fire behavior &
combustion, fire protection systems, incident management
systems, strategy & tactics, and cultural diversity.
(CLO) 2: Demonstrate knowledge, skills and abilities to
complete a career potential assessment for an entry-level
fire service position, including a civil service written
examination, a physical ability test and a structured oral
interview.
(CLO) 3: As both an individual and a member of a group
research team, develop the outline of a functional fire
department organization (including organizational charts)
within the parameters of a set list of resources and
organizational objectives.
(CLO) 4: Write an analysis essay based on an emergency
services related trade article, following proper format,
mechanics, organization, word usage and comprehensive
content parameters.
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
80% of class
58% of day class
score either 3 or and 100% of
4
evening class
scored either 3 or
4
80% of class
83% of day class
score either 3 or and 100% of
4
evening class
scored either 3 or
4
80% of class
50% of day class
score either 3 or and 100% of
4
evening class
scored either 3 or
4
80% of class
67% of day class
score either 3 or and 100% of
4
evening class
scored either 3 or
4
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
5
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Less success in the online hybrid course (day) as compared to the face-to-face (evening)
course offering.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
During the online hybrid day class, some of the students struggled with the online
components of the course. Some of the technology issues with Blackboard were a factor.
Also, since this is the first class in this CTE career track, some of the students who attend
are not sure if this is the path for them and tend to drop midway through the course. Of
the 5 students who finished the class in a 1 or 2 rating, many had delayed acquiring the
textbooks in the first couple of weeks in class, or did not have computer access readily
available at home, thus causing them to be less-prepared for success in this course. Many
students are not prepared for the rigors of this course.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students in both classes met this target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
This learning outcome is the most specific to training students for job entry testing. Of the
two students who did not score a 3 or 4, one did not complete all of the activities and the
other made no attempt to participate.
The activities required to perform this learning outcome are conducted on Saturdays as allday seminars. One of the sessions must be done on a Saturday morning as it is the only
day we can access the Alameda County Training Center for the FT 50 students to perform
the Physical Ability Test as there is no place on campus to achieve a comparable level of
training. Due to the Saturday scheduling, some students cannot attend due to work and
other conflicts.
6
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Half of the online-hybrid day students met the target for success; all of the evening
students assessed met the target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
For the success criteria to be met, students must fully participate in the entire process of
the project. This requires that students perform the first part of the project as an
individual, then bring their individual research together with the rest of their team to
complete a group research project. The most common reason that half of the onlinehybrid students received a score of 2 instead of 3 for this CLO is because they failed to
complete all of the individual components of this assignment. All of the students in the
evening face-to-face section submitted all components of this project.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Two-thirds of the online-hybrid day students and all of the evening face-to-face section
students met the target success criteria.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
This assignment is the most directly impacted by a student’s level of English competency.
Many students who do not score at least a 3 on this scale tend to have poor written
communication skills. The students who have met the success parameters for this CLO
also tend to meet the success parameters of CLO #1, as their reading and writing skills are
sufficient to help them comprehend the subject matter.
7
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
The course outline was revised to strongly recommend qualification for English 1A before
taking this course. Also, more online references to assist students with assignments have
been added to the Blackboard course sites. More time is spent to explain assignments and
project parameters. Students have been given access to assignments a week earlier than
before, and allotted more time to take exams. The FT 50 course will be the first to apply the
Quizdom interactive assessment tools during the latter half of Spring Semester to better
assess student comprehension during the class instruction.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
In the online/hybrid delivery format, students need basic instruction in the use of
Blackboard and how to manage their time to handle the assignments within the desired
performance period. Also, since the less successful students have the most financial
disadvantage, the Division should acquire a set of texts for the class to keep in the library
reference area while these students await their financial aid to acquire their texts.
Looking at the merits of the course, regardless of delivery format, students need to be
better prepared for the cognitive components of this technical trade career path. Students
need to complete the English placement test to determine if they have the English
competency to succeed in this course. The course outline has already been changed to
strongly recommend eligibility for English 1A.
Those that can make it to the midterm with at least a 70% average on their quizzes will
usually do extremely well in the class overall. Unfortunately there is over ½ of the students
that begin the class are unable to maintain at least a 70% average to take the midterm.
The students who are motivated to begin testing for entry-level fire fighter jobs tend to
make the Saturday session activities a priority to both attend and complete. The current
Saturday seminar format for the delivery of these activities has proven to be the most
successful delivery and results in a participation level that exceeds the success criteria for
this learning outcome. No changes to the Saturday sessions are necessary.
The group project helps students to understand how and why a fire department
organization is formed and operated based on the available resources. This project also
requires students to draw upon the knowledge from the first seven weeks of the course and
apply it to the final design of the fictional fire department, thus helping to increase
comprehension of the subject matter. Encouraging students to show progress on the
individual performance assignments prior to the due date may help to ensure the work is
completed.
Since none of the Fire Technology instructors are qualified to teach English composition, the
course outline has already been changed to reflect the need for a student to be eligible for
8
English 1A as proven through assessment prior to taking this course. At this time, the
course outline states that this eligibility criteria is strongly recommended. It is currently our
practice to state the essay writing criteria and provide a detailed rubric for students to
review so that they understand how the assignment will be assessed. We will continue to
recommend that the English placement test is taken by students so they know their
eligibility level, and recommend to those below the strongly recommended eligibility
criteria to seek the needed basic skills training to increase their potential for success in this
program.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
9
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT51 – Fire Protection Organization
Spring 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell & John Torres
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: The student shall demonstrate an understanding
of Public Safety dispatch/alarm systems and identify ways
emergency calls come into the center, and reach the fire
fighter.
(CLO) 2: Identify the components of a management
system, and give examples of where they are used in the
fire service.
(CLO) 3: Describe the components of a fire ground size up
and explain where they would be used.
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
80% of class
84.6% of class
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
4
4
80% of class
88.9% of class
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
4
4
80% of class
93.5% of class
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
4
4
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
10
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students have met target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The current learning outcome appears to be achievable and on the mark. Although
expectations have been met, this process has identified area's of possible course
improvement.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students have met target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The current learning outcome appears to be achievable, and on the mark. Although
expectations have been met, this process has identified area's of possible course
improvement.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students have met target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Knowing this SLO is one of the most important of the semester, the time and effort appear
to be working, although there is room for improvement.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
11
This is the first assessment cycle of the FT 51 course.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
The students appear to be understanding the identified key subjects of the course,
albeit not 100%, a very high percentage are learning the information that will prepare
them for the FFI academy. It appears that the information regarding the dispatchers
and dispatch centers is being understood, though it would be helpful to have actual
radios as props and have lab time at a dispatch center.
Students appear to have understood, quite well, the concept of management systems
and the application in the fire service. It would be helpful to have better props to use
during the discussion on how the management systems apply to the fire service. E.g.:
Use of flashlights, turnout boots & helmets as props to show what might be purchased
in the fire service and how MBO would be applied.
The copies of radio traffic that are used as examples of reports of condition get very
positive feedback. More current examples of “reports on condition” are greatly needed.
Also, a better sound system in the classroom would help students to hear these radio
transmissions.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
12
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT52 – Fire Fighter Safety & Survival
Spring 2011
2
2
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell, Rich Brown & Rick
Hurtado
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
80% of class
59% of day face(CLO) 1: Describe and explain the roles, responsibilities,
score either 3 or to-face class and
and duties of a firefighter related to safety and survival
4
44% of evening
consistent with the National Fallen Firefighters 16
online-hybrid
Firefighter Life Safety Initiatives.
class scored
either 3 or 4
80% of class
62% of day face(CLO) 2: Demonstrate safety and survival techniques
score
either
3
or
to-face class and
using standard industry equipment to prevent injuries,
4
34% of evening
accidents, entrapments and fatalities to firefighters
online-hybrid
according to the State Fire Training guidelines for
class scored
Firefighter Survival manipulative skills.
either 3 or 4
80% of class
59% of day face(CLO) 3: Identify fire scene hazards and implement
score
either
3
or
to-face class and
appropriate safety and survival actions consistent with the
4
72% of evening
National Fallen Firefighters 16 Firefighter Life Safety
online-hybrid
Initiatives.
class scored
either 3 or 4
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
13
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The target success rate was not achieved in either section of the FT 52 course.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students were assembled into teams (called “companies”) to assist with team building
concepts of the fire service. The majority of the students in both course offerings scored
below 80% benchmark on the Scavenger Hunt Team Project.
There were some students on 50-ON1 teams that did not complete the community
service requirement (25 points) and the fire department visit requirement (25 points),
which makes up 38% of project. Also, only (1) student/team provide proof of a CPAT
card for extra credit. Additionally, there was inconsistent participation during some of
the weeks by students and/or teams on Discussion Board Exercises on Blackboard.
In the 50-001 section, 62% of the students embraced the importance of working as a
team and assisting each other while learning the importance of safety. The 16 fire safety
initiatives were reinforced weekly in class and during labs.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The target success rate was not achieved in either section of the FT 52 course.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The majority of the feedback from Instructors, Students, and Learning Assistants were
very positive relating to both of the 6 hour lab sessions that were offered off-campus at
the Alameda County Fire Department Training Facility. There were some students that
missed one or the other lab sessions, but the majority of the students did participate in
both. There is a huge need for the purchase of structural protective clothing (jackets,
helmets, eye protection, etc.) and dynamic safety tools (Thermal Imaging Camera, rapid
intervention tools, etc.) for the safety of students during the hands-on lab sessions.
14
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The target success rate was not achieved in either section of the FT 52 course.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The majority of students passed Exam 4 with 80% or better and understand the
importance of Firefighter Safety and Survival. Students who were motivated and applied
their skills and knowledge when opportunities were presented had the most engaged
discussions and recognition of scene hazards during the case study elements of the
courses. When tested, the majority in both course sections were able to demonstrate
comprehension, but they lacked confidence due to inexperience.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
This is the first assessment cycle of the FT 52 course.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
All students are participating at some level in the Scavenger Hunt Team Project and
Discussion Board Exercises. Most of the students in these course sections are preemployment and need constant examples provided by instructor experience to support
realization of the subject matter. Yet, there may be better retention if students are
provided more opportunity to see and handle the safety tools of the trade (protective
equipment, axes, saw, SCBA etc.), thereby providing better context to didactic instruction.
Instructors need to reinforce the importance of participation and being ready to contribute
through group research projects and being a viable team member. Coordination between
instructors and local fire departments may open opportunities for students to visit agency
locale for an overview of current industry-standard safety equipment presently in use.
More time needs to be available to students/instructor during and after scheduled class
sessions. A progress evaluation sheet needs to be developed to monitor student/team
progress on Scavenger Hunt Team Project. Instructor should require a pre-review analysis
of the Scavenger Hunt Team Project prior to the due date.
15
Instructor needs to reinforce the importance of weekly participation in the Discussion Board
Exercises on Firefighter Safety and Survival topics. Continue to offer those students/teams
extra credit for Discussion Board Exercise participation and commenting on another
students/teams posting. Also, clarification of the time commitment for class assignments
should be added to the course syllabus.
Positive feedback from Instructors, Students, and Learning Assistants. The majority of
students did participate in both lab sessions. Having both lab sessions off-campus provided
the students with a real life training environment.
When students were given the opportunity to experience firefighter safety skills, working
with actual tools while wearing fire fighting protective equipment and maintaining focus on
the task at hand, they embraced the learning and were more engaged. Survival techniques
were easier to teach and the students developed a greater understanding of the core
concepts of Safety & Survival.
Develop or create several videos showing those manipulative skills being performed at each
lab session. Make these videos available on Blackboard for students to review prior to each
lab session.
Also, purchase state of the art fire fighting survival equipment for student use during safety
and survival training.
There is a good understanding and retention of Firefighter Safety and Survival information
by students. The two lab sessions were instrumental in student development with the
subject matter.
Develop a comprehensive review worksheet on Firefighter Safety and Survival material for
students to complete and use to study for Exam 4. Make this document available for
students on Blackboard site for FT 52 ON1.
Also, there is a need to develop training videos of right and wrong ways to accomplish
fireground tasks. Development of a summary that addresses common hazards, where to
look for them, and what to do when encountering them will help improve student
comprehension of the more complex concepts.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
16
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT53 – Fire Behavior & Combustion
Spring 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Jeff Zolfarelli & Bob Buell
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
75% of class
56% of class
(CLO) 1: Research a historic US fire as both an individual
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
and a group and apply this to at least three topics of this
4
4
course.
80% of class
19.2% of class
(CLO) 2: Describe the periodic table, bonding of the
score
either
3
or
scored either 3 or
elements to form matter, and the relationship between
4
matter and energy as it relates to the combustion process. 4
80%
of
class
96% of class
(CLO) 3: Describe the fire tetrahedron, and the laws of
heat theory as they apply to the spread of fire in structure score either 1, 2 scored either 1, 2
or 3
or 3
and wildland settings.
75% of class
90% of class
(CLO) 4: Describe methods of fire suppression
score
either
1,
2
scored either 1, 2
operations, identify appropriate modes of fire suppression,
or 3
or 3
apply these in scenario settings.
80%
of
class
90% of class
(CLO) 5: Describe the properties of extinguishing agents
score either 2, 3 scored either 2, 3
and how they relate to the classifications of fire, able to
or 4
or 4
discuss extinguishment applications.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
17
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Student performance was below the target performance level.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Strongly recommend that students meet English 1A or English 52A requirements. Many
students did not have the ability to write an essay in APA format.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Student performance was below the target performance level.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students are not able to grasp the principles of the chemistry and physics of this section
through lecture only. In the absence of requiring high school or college chemistry before
taking this class, students need to see actual demonstrations by the instructor to
comprehend the chemistry and hazardous material content of this course.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Only 16% scored a 3 this semester, but 96% scored between 1 and 3.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Some of the chemistry terminology is addressed in other pre-Academy courses, so many
students are familiar with the terms, but don’t completely understand them. If students
were better able to see these concepts through demonstration, they would improve their
comprehension.
18
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students have met target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
While this number is high, it lacks the ability for actual hands on and visual examination of
certain forms, appliances and applications for this section of the course.
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students have met target satisfactorily.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students who have taken FT 50, 51 and/or 52 show higher retention of this topic than
students who have not attended fire technology training prior to FT 53.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
This is the first assessment cycle of the FT 53 course.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
The assessment of CLO #1 revealed that most students have the ability to connect the case
study to the principles instructed. Also, the students have successfully demonstrated their
ability to work in teams. Unfortunately, this CLO assessment revealed a lower than
expected level in writing research papers, gathering research data and presenting this
data in APA format. There is a need to add a brief section to the lesson plan that reviews
proper APA format writing.
A review of student performance of CLO #2 shows that students with high school
chemistry, or a semester of college chemistry, tend to perform better in this course. Also,
students who perform well in this course have a stronger foundation for hazardous
19
materials emergency response principles. The need for use of a chemistry lab in which
simple demonstrations of the chemical and physical examples presented in the lecture
would greatly help and provide a better learning environment for the students. The
student would be able to see first hand what was taking place and not have to rely merely
on lecture and course reading. Fire Tech will partner with the Chemistry program to
determine possible opportunities that will meet this interest and need.
Since much of this content for CLO #3 is also covered in FT 50 and 52, students have
benefited from the repetition of basic concepts of fire. Also, students who have completed
a Fire Academy before taking FT 53 have a better grasp of many of the fire chemistry
principles.
Along with developing a partnership with the Chemistry Lab, the Blackboard platform will
be employed as a resource for the students to find links, videos from Edustream, and
additional pertinent content for outside study. Also, practice quizzes will be loaded onto
Blackboard for students to use to help them prepare for formative tests administered in
class.
A review of using the Blackboard system more extensively may be necessary for students
unfamiliar with Blackboard.
The assessment of CLO #4 revealed that the out-of-date audio-visual resources were not as
effective but still seemed to provide sufficient information for success. Purchasing
additional up-to-date videos, forms & appliances that address the Incident Command
System, Personal Accountability and Post Incident Analysis of Incidents would be more
relevant. Research is needed to explore possible computer-based simulator programs for
greater interactivity when applying strategic and tactical concepts to fire suppression and
rescue operations.
Since several other Fire Technology courses address different areas of basic fire
extinguishment principles, many students are well-prepared to discuss this topic from a
chemistry perspective. Additional equipment and examples would greatly increase the
understanding of students in this section. Examples would be portable fire extinguishers
of CO2, Purple K, Pressurized Water. A mock up of a Class 1, 2 and 3 Standpipe system
would also help.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
20
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT54 – Fire Prevention Technology
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Klaus Zalinskis and Bob Buell
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
90% of class
86% of class
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
4
4
(CLO) 1: Given lecture, videos, CFC, CBC, NFPA standards
and related reference material: Select an occupancy to
inspect and through a group project demonstrate ability to
conduct a proper fire inspection. Create a floor plan of an
assigned occupancy classification and indicate on that plan
fire code violations with the accurate code sections. Final
project includes a difficult situation with the RP and
successful resolution.
90% of class
53% of class
(CLO) 2: Given class lecture, class discussion, the CBC,
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
The CFC, NFPA standards and related reference material:
4
Demonstrate the ability to identify building limitations and 4
type of construction, purpose and location of fire rated
building components and their correlation to building
occupancy classifications.
90% of class
88% of class
(CLO) 3: Given lecture, the CBC, the CFC videos and
score either 3 or scored either 3 or
related reference material: Demonstrate the ability to
4
4
identify occupancy classifications and related exiting
requirements.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
21
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students nearly reached the target 90% success level.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students do well when provided with needed videos and reference material. Also, the
students were exposed to learning in many different ways increasing the success rate.
Hands on exercises are indispensable, coupled with current videos and reference
material.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
An increase of 37 percent is needed to reach the desired success rate.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Newly provided codes and standards for students should improve student capability to
see the bigger picture.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Students nearly reached the target 90% success level.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
To fully be successful, each student should have his/her own current edition California
Fire Code book to complete assignments outside of class. Currently, there are only 10
code books shared among 40 students, so use of these books is limited to in-class access.
22
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
4. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
This is the first assessment cycle of the FT 54 course.
5. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
Students respond well to a combination of hands on exercises and adequate reference
material. Stress that students take initiative and take advantage of tutoring that I offer.
Continue to keep videos and reference material up to date.
Exposure to step-by-step processes and reference tables that are presented in clear
fashion have been helpful to students. An increase in up-to-date reference material is also
helpful. To make full use of newly acquired videos and reference material. A drafting
room and tables would help to promote complicated group projects.
Students do well with a combination of actual hands on field exercises coupled with access
to current code reference material, lecture, and active class participation. Students need
larger drafting tables and space for successful group work. The current classroom has
desk chairs and is not conducive to the class assignments. Moving the class to a room with
tables and chairs could better accommodate the class activities, if drafting tables are not
practical or accessible. Also, more reference material for each individual, especially the
current fire code, would be very helpful for students to learn how to use these materials
on their own.
6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
23
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT55 – Fire Protection Equipment
and Systems
Spring 2012
1
1
100%
Fall 2012
Klaus Zalinskis and Bob Buell
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Actual Scores**
Scores*
(eLumen data)
(CLO Goal)
90% of class
87% of the class
score either 3 or scored a 3 or 4 in
4
category one.
94% of the class
scored a 3 or 4 in
category 2.
60% of the class
scored 3 or 4 in
category 3.
90% of class
94% of the class
score either 3 or scored either a 3
4
or 4
(CLO) 1: Given applicable NFPA Standards, the California
Fire Code, The California Building Code, applicable
reference material, a campus map, measuring wheels,
preplan form, graph paper, engineers scale and fire
department access exercise: Demonstrate knowledge of
both proper and improper placement of fire
appurtenances, identify proper proximity to buildings, and
identify fire protection systems for specific occupancies.
Analyze the efficiency of specific layouts.
(CLO) 2: Given field trips to 1.A hazardous facility with
multiple fire protection items/systems and 2.A fire
protection training facility: Identify the different systems,
their applications and possible malfunctions due to lack of
compatibility, misuse or incorrect installation.
59% of the class
(CLO) 3: Given the applicable NFPA Standards, California 90% of class
score either 3 or scored either a 3
Building Code, California Fire Code, and related reference
4
or 4
material and commentary, lecture, videos and class
discussion : Identify various fire protection systems, their
applications and functions, components, testing
requirements, and hazards of incompatibility and improper
placement.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
24
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Scores increased from 45 to 87 percent from 2011 to 2012 in category one and from 30
to 59 percent in category three showing marked improvement. Success is maintained in
level two. Closer to goal in level one by 3 percentage points. Marked improvement
occurred in level 3 but 30 percent more is needed to reach the goal.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The new classroom 1613 with large tables and breakout rooms will improve the learning
environment. Students are responding to additional code books and videos provided.
The balance of in class lab/ workshop environment, and walking field trip quizzes
sharpen student interest and improve performance.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The target success rate has been achieved.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The walking field trip quiz engages the students and sharpens analytical skill. To
continue on course and increase challenge to students to analyze field conditions.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Success rate is off by 30 percent but improved from 30 to 59 percent from 2011 to 2012.
The marked improvement shows that the process is becoming more successful.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
25
Smaller class sizes are not possible but breakout rooms will allow for more small group
interaction. Also, a bigger emphasis on small group tutoring may be helpful.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
Actions taken have already included quality code source material and videos. An improved
class room with larger table and breakout rooms now available aid in strengthening
student concentration and enhance lab and workshop environment. New code and video
resources and real life interaction is working for students.
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
The strengths revealed are the multiple methods of teaching applied:
1. Lab/workshop process
2. Field trip and analysis
3. Lecture and traditional methods
4. Exposure to proper code materials and videos
5. One on one tutoring
The field trips coupled with an actual test maintain students’ interest students while
sharpening their powers of observation
Some students need to become more grounded and self-disciplined. Small group
interaction will help to identify students needing additional attention. Small group
tutoring will also increase learning capability. Some students are less comfortable in
large classroom environments.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
26
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT56 – Building Construction for
Fire Protection Organization
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Jim Passadore & Bob Buell
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
27
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
28
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
29
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
4. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
5. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
30
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT89 – Fire Academy Introduction
Fall 2011
2
2
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
31
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
F. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
32
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
33
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
7. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
8. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
9. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
34
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT90A – Fire Fighter 1 Certification
Preparation I (Basic)
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
35
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
G. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
H. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
36
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
37
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
10. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
11. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
12. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
38
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT90B – Fire Fighter 1 Certification
Preparation II (Intermediate)
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
39
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
I. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
J. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
40
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
41
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
13. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
14. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
15. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
42
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT90C – Fire Fighter 1 Certification
Preparation III (Advanced)
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
43
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
K. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
L. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
44
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
45
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
16. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
17. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
18. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
46
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT91A – CAL FIRE Wildland
Firefighter Basic Training
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell, Jeff Urnes & Ken Lewis
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
47
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
M. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
N. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
26. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
48
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
49
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
19. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
20. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
21. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
50
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT91B – Hazardous Materials First
Responder (Operations)
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell & John McPartland
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
51
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
O. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
27. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
28. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
P. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
30. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
52
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
53
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
22. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
23. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
24. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
54
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT91C – Incident Command System
I200
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell & John McPartland
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
55
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
Q. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
32. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
R. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
33. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
34. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
56
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
57
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
25. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
26. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
27. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
58
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT91D – Fire Fighter Survival - Skills
Spring 2012
1
1
100%
Fall 2012
Bob Buell & Derek Krause
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
59
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
S. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
35. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
36. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
T. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
37. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
38. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
60
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
61
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
28. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
29. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
30. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
62
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT95 – Fire Fighter Work Experience
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
63
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
U. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
39. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
40. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
V. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
41. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
42. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
64
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
65
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
31. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
32. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
33. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
66
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
FT96 – Fire Fighter Work Experience
Seminar
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Bob Buell &
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
67
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
W. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
43. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
44. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
X. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
45. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
46. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
68
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
69
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
34. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
35. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
36. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_________________________________________________________________
70
Appendix C: Program Learning Outcomes
Considering your feedback, findings, and/or information that has arisen from the course level
discussions, please reflect on each of your Program Level Outcomes.
Program: ________________________________________________
 PLO #1:

PLO #2:

PLO #3:

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Explain:
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned:
Program: ________________________________________________
 PLO #1:

PLO #2:

PLO #3:

PLO #4:
71
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Explain:
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned:
72
Appendix D: A Few Questions
Please answer the following questions with "yes" or "no". For any questions answered "no",
please provide an explanation. No explanation is required for "yes" answers :-)
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? If no, identify the
course outlines you will update in the next curriculum cycle. Ed Code requires all course
outlines to be updated every six years. Yes.
2. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog? No. Chabot Fire Technology Program is a California
Regional Training Center and must offer the FT 70 series of courses as budget and FTEF allow.
These courses must have a course outline on file for Chabot to offer should the FTEF permit.
During the past ten years, the Fire Technology Program has pared down the curriculum to the
minimum number of courses to meet our core mission. Should the opportunity allow, we
would hope to regrow the program to meet the 21st century challenges that the FT 70 series of
courses address.
3. Do all of your courses have the required number of CLOs completed, with corresponding
rubrics? If no, identify the CLO work you still need to complete, and your timeline for
completing that work this semester. All FT courses, with the exception of the 70 series, have
the required number of CLOs completed with corresponding rubrics. The 70 series of courses
are undergoing revision through State Fire Training and will have CLOs created once the
revised curricula are issued to the Regional Training Centers.
4. Have you assessed all of your courses and completed "closing the loop" forms for all of your
courses within the past three years? If no, identify which courses still require this work, and
your timeline for completing that work this semester. All courses currently offered by the Fire
Technology Program have been assessed and the corresponding “closing the loop” forms were
issued.
5. Have you developed and assessed PLOs for all of your programs? If no, identify programs which
still require this work, and your timeline to complete that work this semester. No, not all
programs have PLOs. Although the PLOs will be completed this summer, there is not a
mechanism for assessing PLOs without complete voluntary contribution of data from students.
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)? Yes. Students who pass the FT 89 (Introduction to Fire Technology)
have a strong probability of success in the Fire Academy (FT 90ABC) courses.
7. Does successful completion of College-level Math and/or English correlate positively with
success in your courses? If not, explain why you think this may be. Yes.
73
Appendix E: Proposal for New Initiatives (Complete for each new initiative)
Audience: Deans/Unit Administrators, PRBC, Foundation, Grants Committee, College Budget Committee
Purpose: A “New Initiative” is a new project or expansion of a current project that supports our Strategic
Plan. The project will require the support of additional and/or outside funding. The information you
provide will facilitate and focus the research and development process for finding both internal and
external funding.
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student
learning?
GOAL D: Vision, Leadership & Innovation / D5 – Provide safe, secure, and up-to-date facilities and technology.
Acquire the parcel in San Leandro adjacent to the Alameda County Training Facility (near San Leandro BART) as a
transit campus for Chabot, with classrooms and resources available for Fire Technology and other programs, and
develop a Joint Powers Agreement with Alameda County Fire for shared use of these classes and the fire training
center. Fire Academy, Driver/Operator and Fire Officer courses could transition to this new location off Chabot’s
campus, including a limited number of potential general education courses.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
A home for the Fire Academy that meets our training needs. Fire Technology courses have been offered since
1963. The first Fire Academy was in 1979 at the NIKE Site and San Leandro Training Center. During the previous
Educational Master Planning and Facilities Planning, the needs of the Fire Technology program were not
represented. Several years ago, the District sold the NIKE Site, but did not reinvest the funds from the sale into the
Fire Technology program, nor the Fire Academy (choosing instead to apply the revenue from the sale toward art
projects at both Chabot and Las Positas College campuses). The San Leandro Training Center may be sold for
residential development in the next few years when the economy improves (if the land adjacent to it is sold to a
developer), leaving the Fire Academy nowhere to go. Following the advice of former President Celia Barberena,
the Fire Technology Program needs to be self-sufficient. As programs on campus have grown, their facility needs
have been addressed. The same cannot be said for the Fire Academy and the Fire Technology Program as a whole.
Recent Facilities Meetings regarding the draft Facilities Master Plan proposes that the Fire Tower needs are
supported off campus.
Until this project has the approval to move forward, I cannot estimate some the information requested.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Target
Required Budget (Split out
Completion personnel, supplies, other
Date
categories)
Activity (brief description)
Address the facility needs in the updated Facilities Master Plan.
Pursue a Joint-Powers Agreement with Alameda County Fire
Department for a shared use facility.
Purchase the parcel of land adjacent to the Alameda County Fire
Training Center in San Leandro from Wells Fargo Bank with Measure
B Funds.
Design the classroom facility consistent with the Fire Technology,
Fire Academy and Fire Prevention Inspector program needs, along
with other potential off-campus programs.
74
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
(obtained by/from):
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain:
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
` No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
75
Appendix F1: Full-Time Faculty/Adjunct Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category
1000]
Audience: Faculty Prioritization Committee and Administrators
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time faculty
and adjuncts
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request,
including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three years, student
success and retention data , and any other pertinent information. Data is available at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm .
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: 1 FT / 3-4 PT
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Full-Time Position
Description
1. Fire/Law Enforcement Conditioning
See Rationale below.
Instructor
Part-Time Positions
2. Cal Fire Adjunct Instructors (1-2)
3. Hazardous Materials Course Evaluators
Description
See rationale below.
See rationale below.
3. Rationale for your proposal. Please use the enrollment management data. Additional data that will
strengthen your rationale include FTES trends over the last 5 years, persistence, FT/PT faculty ratios,
CLO and PLO assessment results and external accreditation demands.
Full-Time
Due to the increasing need for firefighter physical conditioning of pre-employment students in
the Fire Technology program, especially the Fire Academy, the Fire Science Conditioning
courses need to be offered more frequently. We have experienced two student injuries per
semester during the Fire Academy due to poor student fitness and undisclosed pre-existing
injuries. The same instructor for the firefighter physical conditioning program is an integral part
of the Fire Technology Introduction to Fire Academy course, teaching proper body mechanics
for lifting, carrying and handling equipment in a manner to prevent injury. Currently, the
qualified instructor is an adjunct working at maximum adjunct load, dividing instruction between
Fire and Law Enforcement physical conditioning courses. A full time public safety (fire and law
enforcement) conditioning instructor would be able to provide more instructional offerings of the
fire conditioning program, as well as the law enforcement program. The additional fire
conditioning time would be used to help our under represented students become more
physically prepared to meet the rigors of the job as taught in the Fire Academy, and prepare
these students to successfully complete the nationally recognized Candidate Physical Ability
Test (CPAT) used by most fire agencies as an entry requirement for Firefighter positions. Also,
the public safety conditioning instructor would attend key physical training sessions of the Fire
Academy to assess the strength, endurance, stamina and overall conditioning of Academy and
provide prescriptive training recommendations for students at risk of failure for manipulative
performance assessments, thus improving student success in this area. This is the fifth year of
requesting this position.
76
Adjunct
Due to a change in state certification requirements, the Wildland Firefighter Basic course (FT
91A) must have a current CAL FIRE Captain present during each class session in order to
certify the students in Basic Forest Firefighter operations. The current primary instructor for FT
91A does not meet this requirement. Students who complete this training will be qualified to
work on a California Department of Forestry & Fire Protection fire engine upon completion of the
training. The lecture and lab hours for the course will not change from what has been approved,
however, we will need to hire one or two CAL FIRE personnel as adjuncts to meet the mandate.
Professional Specialist – Fire Conditioning
If the full-time public safety conditioning instructor is not approved, then 128 hours of time will
need to be approved (at $87/hour) to hire a qualified fire and law enforcement physical
conditioning instructor to provide the needed skill development for the pre-Academy and current
Academy students to reduce injuries, increase safety training, and support the retention of
disadvantaged and under-represented students in the Fire Technology program.
SCBA Maintenance by Adjunct Instructor
The Fire Academy currently has self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) units worn by
students during their firefighter training. These units were donated to Chabot College from
Santa Clara County Fire Department. The units often need maintenance throughout the
duration of the Fire Academy so that student safety is not compromised. The current SCBA
instructor is qualified to performs the maintenance on 40 SCBA units each semester, at an
average of 30 minutes per unit. As a specialist in this area, this instructor would need
approximately 20 hours each semester to perform this work, plus an additional ten hours per
semester should there be significant repairs beyond the routine maintenance. The rate would
be $87 per hour for up to 40 hours total over two semesters. ($3480)
Hazardous Materials First Responder Operations Evaluators
The Fire Technology 91B – Hazardous Materials First Responder Operations course utilizes
three evaluators per semester, in addition to the primary adjunct instructor, for a five-hour
scenario component to assess how well the students apply the required firefighter competencies
relevant to : personal and scene safety, isolation of the hazard area, notification of proper
authorities, incident command, chemical identification and assessment, action planning,
protective clothing selection, containment and control actions, protective actions for the public,
decontamination methods, clean-up and disposal options, and proper incident documentation.
The cost per evaluator is $12/hour. The number of evaluators is based on 1 evaluator for every
10 students, with a maximum class size of 40 students. The projected cost per semester is
$180 (based on a full class) for a maximum total of $360 for both Fall and Spring semesters.
77
4. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and your student learning goals are
required. Indicate here any information from advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews
that is pertinent to the proposal.
The positions requested are essential for the Fire Technology program to support the goals,
strategies and objectives of the 2009-2012 Chabot College Strategic Plan.
The full-time public safety conditioning instructor, in conjunction with the Fire Technology
Instructor / Coordinator, would be key to supporting Awareness & Access Objectives A2c
[increasing completion for underrepresented students] and A4c [evaluate accessibility of course
offerings and provide new configurations as needed] by modifying the structure and content of
the conditioning courses, along with the time and frequency of course offerings, to meet the
students’ needs to successfully prepare for and complete the physical training components of
fire and law enforcement manipulative performance requirements. In the area of fire
conditioning, this instructor is key to the Student Success objectives B1b [improve learning and
success rates] and B3e [alternative delivery methods] through the offering of courses that
integrate training components for active Fire Academy students along with pre-Academy
students, yet vary with skill development needs of the students who persist in the Fire Academy
sequence of courses. This position is also supports the Community Partnership objectives C2a
[off-site partnerships with … community-based organizations] and C3a [increase engagement of
student, faculty and classified professionals in the community] through the networking between
fire and law enforcement agencies and addressing their needs in the development of potential
candidates for employment through updated physical conditioning programs that meet local
jurisdiction interests.
The adjunct positions requested primarily support the Community Partnership goals C2a and
C3a, but more focused with CAL FIRE and US Forest Service (FT 91A).
In the event that the full-time public safety conditioning instructor cannot be funded, the
Professional Specialist would then need to be funded again for a third year. The same
objectives listed above could be met with the funding of this position.
Student safety is the primary purpose of the equipment repair performed by the SCBA
instructor. This is a critical function within the Fire Academy since the breathing apparatus is
used over an 11-week span of time each semester.
The Hazardous Materials First Responder certification course is essential for pre-employment
and current emergency service professionals, so the accurate assessment of student
competency in this course is crucial. Students who complete this course are authorized to
function at the “Operations” level at a hazardous materials event, so to protect the liability of the
college, we have qualified evaluators, independent of the instructor, to confirm that the students
have achieved the required competencies for this certification.
78
Appendix F2: Classified Staffing Request(s) including Student Assistants [Acct.
Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time and
part-time regular (permanent) classified professional positions (new, augmented and replacement
positions). Remember, student assistants are not to replace Classified Professional staff.
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal, safety, mandates, accreditation issues. Please cite
any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded, include and
designate the funding source of new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent
upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: ______
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. Equipment Technicians (2)
Currently have 1; 1 additional requested
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal.
Equipment Technician (Student Assistants) – 2 positions shared across 14 courses
Currently, there is one student assistant trained as an Equipment Technician to manage
equipment at the off-campus Fire Academy. Since student assistants are allotted a maximum of
20 hours per week to work, the current Equipment Technician does not have much available
time to help on campus. Currently, there is no one to manage the equipment used in the
following on campus courses: Fire Conditioning, Firefighter Safety and Survival, Introduction to
Fire Academy and Work Experience. Due to the increasing use of equipment by Fire
Technology students, a greater amount of the Fire Coordinator’s time is directed to tool
maintenance and equipment check-out/check-in. This, in turn, reduces the efficiency of the
program coordination so that student safety is not compromised. Even with the availability of
Learning Assistants to the Fire Technology program, the LA program has restrictions on the use
of LA’s, and many of the Equipment Technician functions cannot be performed by LA’s.
Therefore, a second student assistant is needed as an Equipment Technician for the oncampus courses.
4. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and program review are required. Indicate
here any information from advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews that is pertinent to
the proposal.
The Equipment Technician (student assistant) position is as essential to the Fire Technology program as
those who work in the tool room for Applied Technology programs such as Machine Tool, Welding and
Automotive Technology. When instructors have to stop class to obtain or fix equipment, learning stops.
These past two years, the Equipment Technician (student assistant), was vital in managing the
equipment and resource needs at the off campus Fire Academy. Unfortunately, since the Fire Academy
is conducted 9 miles north of the Chabot College campus, the student assistant could not take care of the
79
on campus needs while the Fire Academy was in session, so the Fire Coordinator filled that void. When
the Fire Coordinator is busy doing Equipment Technician work, other Department work must be delayed
to allow the Coordinator to serve the immediate needs of the students involved in the Fire Academy. A
second student assistant / equipment technician would free up the Fire Technology Coordinator from the
day-to-day equipment management and repair on campus, allowing for a more accessible person when
this aid is needed – not when the Coordinator is available.
80
Appendix F3: FTEF Requests
Audience: Administrators, CEMC, PRBC
Purpose: To recommend changes in FTEF allocations for subsequent academic year and guide Deans and
CEMC in the allocation of FTEF to disciplines. For more information, see Article 29 (CEMC) of the Faculty
Contract.
Instructions: In the area below, please list your requested changes in course offerings (and
corresponding request in FTEF) and provide your rationale for these changes. Be sure to analyze
enrollment trends and other relevant data at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm .
For 2013-2014, request maintaining correct FTEF for Summer (.27), Fall (3.95) and Spring (3.75).
81
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Learning Connection
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement student assistants (tutors,
learning assistants, lab assistants, supplemental instruction, etc.).
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal . Please cite any evidence or data to support your
request. If this position is categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of new
categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: 8 - Maintain current allotment
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. Learning Assistant (8)
Down from 13 LA’s
2.
3.
4.
3. Rationale for your proposal based on your program review conclusions. Include anticipated impact
on student learning outcomes and alignment with the strategic plan goal. Indicate if this request is
for the same, more, or fewer academic learning support positions.
Learning Assistants – 8 positions shared across 13 courses
The 8 Learning Assistants currently used in the Fire Technology Program help to reinforce the
manipulative performance techniques related to the Firefighting and Rescue skills as taught by the
primary and adjunct instructors. The Learning Assistants are part of a cadre of 8 LA's across 13 Fire
Technology and 2 Fire Conditioning courses that support certified training in Fire Fighter 1, Wildland
Basic Forest Firefighter, Fire Fighter Safety and Survival, and fire fighter basic skills development for
students training to apply for the State Fire Academy program. Learning Assistants are present during
presentation of new psychomotor skills instruction, and work with students during practice sessions in
preparation for manipulative performance examinations. The Learning Assistants help provide more
individualized attention for students with mechanical aptitude deficiencies by guiding them through the
operations and key points of the psychomotor training thereby learning skills correctly the first time, and
practicing correctly during training sessions. The effectiveness of the Learning Assistants are assessed in
two ways. First, the Learning Assistants are observed by the instructor, intermittently during lab sessions,
reinforcing the manipulative performance instructions for the firefighting and rescue skills during practice
sessions. Second, the Learning Assistants provide updates during the training sessions on the
performance of the students so that immediate diagnosis of problems and prescriptive training
recommendations are addressed immediately. Third, the students provide feedback on the effectiveness
of the Learning Assistant through anonymous survey. These positions have been funded by the Learning
Connection, but funding this past school year was allocated from Applied Technology.
Over the past eight semesters, the Learning Assistants have been playing a major role in student success
throughout the Fire Academy course sequence. The LA program has been so successful in helping
disadvantaged and underrepresented students succeed in the Fire Academy, that the LA use has
expanded to several pre-Academy courses to help more students prepare for the Fire Academy prior to
enrollment in the Academy. Even the Learning Connection has used the Fire Technology LA’s as
examples of successful integration of tutors in the classroom. The number of LA’s may appear large, but
averages just under one LA for every course.
82
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
Audience: Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for supplies and service, and to guide the Budget Committee in allocation of
funds.
Instructions: In the area below, please list both your current and requested budgets for categories 4000
and 5000 in priority order. Do NOT include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix
M6. Justify your request and explain in detail any requested funds beyond those you received this year.
Please also look for opportunities to reduce spending, as funds are very limited.
Please note that all past Fire Technology Supply funding comes from Perkins VTEA sources.
SUPPLIES - 4000
2012-13 Budget
Project or Items
Requested Received
2013-14
Rationale
Requested
Request
$
$18,900
Wood Ladder Parts
500 Several components of the wood fire
for Repair
ladders have worn over time. This
supply item permits ordering the
correct manufactured rungs, tie rods
and carriage bolts to repair and
maintain ladders.
Fuel 2 fire engines
600 Request addresses combined costs of
diesel fuel and recommended
additives to extend life of diesel fuel
in tanks of two fire engines for 1 year.
ACME Extinguisher
1200
1200 To support live fire training on and off
campus, fire extinguishers must be
refilled after use. The cost covers
service and recharge of expelled fire
extinguishers over two semesters.
Alliance Gas 500 Cost reflects refill costs of propane in
Propane
BullEx Fire Trainer that is used on and
off campus for live fire training
Home Depot – Wood,
1000 Supplies needed to replace wood and
screws, sheetrock,
sheetrock that is destroyed during
paint, varnish,
simulated fire training. Paint, varnish,
lubricant
lubricant and other supplies from
hardware store are needed to
maintain basic tools used in student
firefighter training.
Smoke Fluid
400 Smoke fluid is used in a simulation
machine to provide smoke-style
conditions without live fire, allowing
instructors to work with student
firefighters in a safe environment for
preliminary fire and rescue training
before students are permitted to
perform live fire attack operations.
83
MotoMix
200 This is the fuel-oil mix used to refill
chain saws and rotary saws for
ventilation and forcible entry training.
500 To reduce the need to purchase
replacement fire hose each year, this
request addresses cost of
replacement hose coupling
components to repair damaged fire
hose as needed.
400 New self-contained breathing
apparatus (SCBA) cylinders need
protective covers so that valve
threads can be protected from
damage when not connected to the
SCBA pack.
800 Department of Transportation
required safety gear to wear over
structure fire gear when student
firefighters performing vehicle rescue
operations in highway zones
200 During training on and off campus,
protective face visors and chin straps
wear and may break. Replacement
parts are needed to extend life of
helmets currently used by Fire Tech
program.
500 Several rescue tool components need
replacement carabiners for student
firefighter rescue equipment systems
100 Currently using duct tape around
tools to hold them together due to
lack of equipment carry straps. Tape
has to be removed then reapplied.
Tape adhesive is stripping protective
coating to tool handles.
2000 The current library of fire training
reference manuals is over 15 years
old. This library includes 28 current
edition training manuals that would
be used as reference resources for
fire instructors teaching the revised
Fire Fighter 1 Training curricula.
200 Several rescue straps have worn out
over several years of continuous use.
Amount requested permits ordering
the needed spools of webbing that
can be cut to size using existing tools.
LN Curtis – Hose
Coupling Parts
Threadsaver
Protection Covers (72
20 Traffic Vests
Replacement Parts
for Helmets
Carabiners (20)
Irons shoulder straps
-2
IFSTA Library
Replacement
Webbing @ .40/ft
84
Replacement 8mm
cord @ .60/ft
200 Several rescue cords have worn out
over several years of continuous use.
Amount requested permits ordering
the needed spools of rescue cords
that can be cut to size using existing
tools, then tied in rescue slings.
7300 This DVD library replaces the VHS
tape library acquired over a decade
ago and matches the current
reference manuals.
1700 This DVD library addresses the
training curricula in several FT 70
series courses, replacing VHS tapes
that are over 25 years old.
500 These supplies are requested for the
firefighter protective clothing labeling
project to bar code all gear to make
issuing and returning of equipment
loaned to students more efficient.
100 Wildland firefighter training course
uses fusees for simulated live fire
training.
Essentials of Fire
Fighting DVD Library
Fire Officer 1 DVD
Garment Labels and
Print Supplies
Fusees
85
Please note that all past Fire Technology Services funding comes from Perkins VTEA sources.
SERVICES - 5000
2012-13 Budget
Project or Items
Requested Received
2013-14
Rationale
Requested
Request
$
$ 20,100
Tower Rental
5000 This is the contractually obligated
cost for use of the Alameda County
Training Facility in San Leandro for
Chabot Fire Academy use 26 weeks
per school year.
Regional Fire Training
2500 This cost reflects the maximum
Center Repossible cost of the State Fire Training
Accreditation and Site
Reaccreditation visit in Fall 2013 to
Visit by State Fire
maintain Chabot College
Training
authorization to deliver state fire
training certified curricula.
Central Towing
500
1000 This amount is requested to cover the
towing fees for delivery and removal
of four donated cars per semester for
auto extrication training
Maintenance and
5000 This amount is requested to perform
Repairs to Fire
service and maintenance to fire
Engines
engines by Fleet Mechanic.
Replacement parts (e.g. head light)
and supplies (replacement oil) would
be included
Wood Ladder Repair
500 Covers payment to repair technician
Service
for wood ladder repairs.
NFPA Codes
1300 The Fire Prevention Inspector and Fire
Subscription
Technology Associate Degree courses
reference use the National Fire Codes
as part of the curriculum
requirements. Need to upgrade
codes from 2011 edition to 2013.
BullEx - Service
1000 Fire trainer has not been serviced
since received nearly three years ago.
Cost reflects sending unit to repair
facility, replacement parts, and
shipping trainer back to Chabot.
Adaro Engine –
200 This amount covers minor repairs to
Service
chain saw and rescue rotary saw used
for forcible entry training in Academy.
Repairs to Protective
1000 There have been nor repair costs to
Clothing
student firefighter protective clothing
in several years. This cost will cover
the repairs to 10 to 15 sets of student
firefighter clothing.
86
California Fire Code
(20 @ 114)
2600 Only have 10 books to use in a 40person class. Need to acquire 20
more for more efficient use of class
projects in FT 54 (Fire Prevention
Technology), FT 55 (Fire Equipment &
Systems) and FT 56 (Building
Construction for Fire Protection).
87
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [ Acct. Category 5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and Staff Development
Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions: Please list specific conferences/training programs, including specific information on the
name of the conference and location. Note that the Staff Development Committee currently has no
budget, so this data is primarily intended to identify areas of need that could perhaps be fulfilled on
campus, and to establish a historical record of need. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals
and/or connection to the Strategic Plan goal.
Conference/Training
Program
2013-14 Request
Rationale
$
88
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
Audience: Budget Committee, Technology Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Budget Committee and to inform priorities of the Technology
Committee.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests. If you're requesting classroom
technology, see http://www.chabotcollege.edu/audiovisual/Chabot%20College%20Standard.pdf for the
brands/model numbers that are our current standards. If requesting multiple pieces of equipment,
please rank order those requests. Include shipping cost and taxes in your request.
Please note: Equipment requests are for equipment whose unit cost exceeds $200. Items which are
less expensive should be requested as supplies. Software licenses should also be requested as
supplies.
Please note that Fire Technology Equipment funding comes from Perkins VTEA or Measure B sources.
EQUIPMENT-6000
2012-13 Budget
Project or Items
Requested Received
2013-14
Rationale*
Requested
Request
$
$121,155
16 Gauge Steel Top
1400 Needed for moving the Hose Repair
Mobile Service
Machine (weighs over 400 pounds) in
Bench 1000 lb
the new Fire/Police training room in PE
Capacity, 2-door, 3
Complex. Too risky to have students
drawer #1AAF6
lift and move when machine is needed.
20-foot wood wall
3200 One of the wood 20-foot single section
ladder, Alaco Ladder
wall ladders was on loan to the Chabot
company
Fire Academy. The ladder is due to be
returned to the host agency, so Chabot
Fire Academy will need a new 20-foot
wood ladder to maintain the current
Academy training schedule each year.
30 Helmet Shields
1700 Current 20 helmets and new 10
helmets need helmet shields that
identify wearer as Chabot College
Student Firefighter. Currently, there
are no identifiers on helmets.
10 Structure
2200 Need 10 more Ben Franklin 2 structure
Helmets
fire helmets for student firefighters in
Work Experience program.
2 Replacement
1400 120 volt exterior lamps needed for
Construction lights
outdoor training in poor exterior
lighting conditions. Must be capable of
running on 120 volt system.
32 Petzl Helmet
3800 For student safety, helmet headlamps
Headlamps
would be used during Fire Academy
when students need to train in the
dark twice a week throughout the
semester.
89
Auto Extrication Ram
Jammer
300 This auto extrication support tool
keeps the current hydraulic rams from
slipping out of car door frame when
students activate the e-Draulic Hurst
Ram tool.
275 This tool is used in auto extrication for
accessing the interior of the car
through the roof or door. Currently.
Borrowing from Fire Department if
available for loan.
10000 Need 10 more small, medium and
large structure fire coats for student
firefighters in Fire Academy and Work
Experience programs.
8000 Need 10 more small, medium and
large structure fire pants for student
firefighters in Fire Academy and Work
Experience programs.
700 This is for replacement blades needed
as current blades wear out from use of
72 students per school year.
10500 This is the 3rd year requesting this
rescue device. During Fire Fighter
Safety and Survival training, this tool is
used to locate downed firefighters.
Accessing tool for loan during training
is increasingly difficult since most fire
departments do not have surplus
thermal imaging cameras at this time.
2500 This request is to replace the final two
aluminum ladders used in the Fire
Academy.
600 Includes all of the teaching materials
for the new Fire Fighter 1 Academy
curriculum to comply with revised
State Fire Training requirements. This
resource kit covers materials taught in
seven Fire Tech courses (50, 51, 52,
90A, 90B, 90C & 91D).
700 Need to replace rescue safety rope
that was compromised through shock
loading.
1150 Need 10 more small, medium and
large wildland fire coats for student
firefighters in CAL FIRE Wildland
Academy and Work Experience
programs.
Milwaukee Sawzall
#6538-21
10 Structure Coats
10 Structure Pants
Rotary Saw Diamond
Blades
Thermal Imaging
Camera, Charger and
2 batteries
Replacement
Aluminum Ladders –
24-feet
Essentials of Fire
Fighting and Fire
Department
Operations 6th
Edition Instructor
Resource Kit
600 feet ½” Rescue
Rope, (400 – yellow,
200 white) @.97/ft
Wildland Coats (10)
90
Wildland Pants (10)
930 Need 10 more small, medium and
large wildland fire pants for student
firefighters in CAL FIRE Wildland
Academy and Work Experience
programs.
5000 Over half of the Fire Academy nozzles
for large hoselines do not work and are
used as “dummy nozzles.” The four
nozzles requested would be used
during the charged hoseline and live
fire training components of the Fire
Academy.
3500 Over half of the Fire Academy nozzles
for small hoselines do not work and
are used as “dummy nozzles.” The
four nozzles requested would be used
during the charged hoseline and live
fire training components of the Fire
Academy.
1800 Air chisel unit for auto extrication
training. Currently, borrowing air
chisel from local Fire Department if
available.
37000 This is the remaining replacement set
of cylinders for use with donated SCBA
packs.
4 - 2.5” Elkhart
Select-O-Matic Fog
Nozzles
4 Elkhart Select-OMatic Nozzles, 1.5”
thread, break apart
Ajax Air Hammer
Heavy Duty Rescue
Kit 811 RK
75 Interspiro
Carbon-Fiber
Wrapped Cylinders
@ 875 ea. [1/2
funded 2012-2013]
2 - Large SCBA
Storage Rack for 45
min. cylinders
72000
35000
3800 Angled shelving unit for holding SCBA
cylinders with valve protectors for
increased safety. Allows for air
circulation around cylinders so that
they dry completely. This unit will help
keep cylinders from being stacked on
floor and accidentally tripped on.
3200 Replacement intake valves for fire
engines.
2 – Aluminum Piston
Intake Valve 5” Storz
x 6# F NST
Hose Tester, 4 outlet
Unit
3500 Unit designed for testing Chabot
College fire hose to NFPA standard
pressure to ensure hose is safe to
continue using.
1000 The heat press applies the bar code
garment labels to the firefighter
protective clothing to make issuing and
returning of equipment loaned to
students more efficient.
Barcode Heat press
91
Circul-Air Corp Dual
Purpose Hose Dryer
13000 This drying cabinet permits rapid
drying of wet fire hose and wet
structure fire clothing. This permits
clothing and hose to dry effectively
prior to storage, and reduces mold and
mildew from forming on damp
equipment.
* Rationale should include discussion of impact on student learning, connection to our strategic plan
goal, impact on student enrollment, safety improvements, whether the equipment is new or
replacement, potential ongoing cost savings that the equipment may provide, ongoing costs of
equipment maintenance, associated training costs, and any other relevant information that you believe
the Budget Committee should consider.
92
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities
Committee (FC) has begun the task of re-prioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current
needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet capital improvement
needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two
to be used as match if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that
will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined that although some of the college's greatest
needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many smaller
pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond
dollars include the "repairing, constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities."
Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests. If requesting more than one
facilities project, please rank order your requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name): Fire Fighter Roof Training Props at PE Complex
Building/Location: 2900
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
Add two roof training props with lighting for students to place ladders against and climb upon.
Currently, students perform roof access techniques onto PE Complex roofs with fire ladders. The
intent of this request is to have the proper roof props placed atop the 1-story roof of Building 2900 so
that the ladders do not cause damage to the roof surface.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
Supports Fire Conditioning training and Fire Fighter 1 Academy ladder skills development throughout
the year.
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
Student retention is core concern at Chabot College. When it comes to training with Fire Ladders, students need
the practice carrying, raising, extending and placing these ladders to be successful in the Fire Academy. Due to
strength issues, some students need at least two or more semesters of the Fire Conditioning training to
competently meet the ladder training standards. The renovation of the PE complex did not take into account the
fact that the Fire Conditioning students throw these ladders to the roof of Building 2900 and access the roofs as
part of their training. The proposed roof props are intended to handle the rigors of ladder training while
protecting the roof of the structure. The additional lighting is needed for safety of students training at night.
93
Brief Title of Request (Project Name): Additional Computer Lab and Student Study Area
Building/Location: 1600
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
Add a study area to Building 1600, similar to upgraded improvements in Building 1800. Also, add an
additional state of the art computer lab in 1600 for online hybrid courses to use.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
Supports need for CTE students in Applied Technology courses to have an indoor study area similar to
Building 1800, especially Fire Tech students who need break out rooms to perform class activities.
Also, a state of the art computer lab where Applied Tech students can do course related assignments
would help with retention, due to students who lack personal computers due to financial hardships.
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
Student retention is a core concern at Chabot College. Several students who apply to the Fire Tech program do
not possess their own computers , so their ability to complete assignments is limited to the availability of
computers that have the software and resources necessary to support their assignments. Due to the limited
number of computer labs in 1600, Fire Tech instructors run into conflicts of time and access before or after some
Fire Tech classes to provide these affected students the opportunity to complete assignments when the library
computer lab is not open.
94