Total number of positions requested (please fill in number of positions requested):
☐
3
Summary of positions requested completed in Program Review Resource Request
Spreadsheet (please check box to left)
CHABOT COLLEGE
CRITERIA FOR FILLING CURRENT VACANCIES
OR
REQUESTING NEW FACULTY POSITIONS
Discipline ____MATH_____
Key facts from the below discussion:
• We have had 7 retirements over the past few years, and only have hired 3
in previous years, and then we have been granted 3 new hires in Fall ’15.
We have not recovered from the 7 retirements, yet with being in a growth
mode, the demands for new Math offerings keeps growing.
• Math’s FT/PT average is 47.60%. Chabot’s average is 55.00%. A total of 5
New Full Time Faculty Hires is needed to bring the Math subdivision
percentage to the level of Chabot’s average. Even with the three new hires,
Math is around 52%, still significantly below the Chabot average.
• Math’s fill rates have been at 110%.
• Our current WSCH/FTEF is 591.82.
• LPC and Chabot have approximately the same FTEF from full time faculty.
In Math alone, LPC offers 0.4 FTEF MORE than Chabot, and we are 40%
larger as a college!
• The many different math pathways serve all Chabot students.
1
• There is a strong DEMAND for more math courses, and yet the part-time
candidate pool is not very robust. We have been using unsustainable
methods for ensuring coverage in our offerings.
Criteria 1. Percent of full-time faculty in department.
Fall 2013 Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Spring 2015
Fall 2015
14.49
(53.0%)
11.28
(43.2%)
13.86
(49.7%)
12.55
(46.6%)
13.84
(46.4%)
FTEF
12.83
(Temporary)(B) (47.0%)
14.85
(56.8%)
14.05
(50.3%)
14.38
(55.4%)
16.00
(53.6%)
# Full Time
12
11
12
13
FTEF
(Contract) (A)
Criteria 2.
13
Name of Recently Retired Faculty
Date Retired
Joe Berland
Maurice Ngo
Shige Kajiwara
Milton Rube
Marcia Kolb
Indrani Chaurduri
Anita Wah
2011
2012
2012
2012
2014
2014
2015
Semester end departmental enrollment pattern for last three years.
Success Rate:
FTES:
Fall 2013
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
Spring
2015
50%
54%
50%
53%
526.72
503.37
516.83
514.31
Fall 2015
575.44
Briefly describe how a new hire will impact your success/retention rates.
It is hard to discuss the impact to success and retention rates when accessibility to the courses
2
has been so greatly impacted.
Last year we were faced with the same situation that we are experiencing right now, but this
year it has only intensified. Luckily we learned from our unsustainable stopgaps, and we were
able to be very creative to address the 23 unstaffed sections with 4 weeks prior to the start of
the Fall semester. 13 sections had to be pushed back to a late start course, despite exhaustive
efforts to hire part-time faculty during the summer. A few had to have a last minute change to
when the class could be taught, in day and/or times adversely affecting enrollment. Many
students had to drop because of time conflicts.
With new retirements in Math happening this past year, we are bound to encounter similar
situations. Hiring full-time faculty would provide us with additional stable resources to avert
cancelling class, which would definitely have a positive impact on success and retention rates.
Accessibility is paramount. When a student is unable to get into a Math class, many of them opt
to attend another college all together. Proper staffing is critical to attracting and keeping
students at Chabot. Also, hiring full-time faculty will curb the indirect downsizing caused by the
recent numerous retirements. Currently, we have 47% full time instructors, which is significantly
below the college-wide 55% of full time instructors. For Math to meet that Chabot
college-wide average of 55%, we would need an additional 5 new hires. That’s
not even getting us up to the state mandated 75%.
Math FTEF
Number of Revised Math Revised Math
Percentage
New Hires FTEF (FT&OL) FTEF (All)
(FT vs All)
1
2
3
4
5
14.85
15.85
16.85
17.85
18.85
30.07
31.07
32.07
33.07
34.07
Current Math Average:
47.60%
Current Chabot Average:
55.00%
49.4%
51.0%
52.5%
54.0%
55.3%
Considering that we are in a growth mode, managing the loss from retired full-time faculty and
“just getting by” is no longer an option. The efforts in obtaining additional part-time faculty
should be directed towards filling additional sections to meet those demands, instead of trying
to use them to backfill for the retirements.
In one of Carolyn Arnold’s reports, Enrollment Management Data, shows that our courses
have a 110% fill rate. This report shows that there is a high demand for Math courses that is
not being met on campus. We are nowhere near meeting the demands of our students in our
community. We need to have full-time faculty to meet that demand and increase enrollment in
the discipline, as well as the college as a whole.
3
In addition, with a new boom in the Technological sector, hiring candidates for part-time
instructors from our immediate area is becoming incredibly more difficult, as industry offers fulltime employment with benefits versus our offer of part-time. This extends beyond core math
but to all of the sciences—especially Math, Engineering, Chemistry, Physics, and Biology. Not
only is it difficult to find candidates, but many do not pass our standards for instruction. Since
the beginning of the year, we have hired approximately 30% of the interviewees, as many of the
candidates do not possess a minimum of teaching ability. If we were to “lower our minimum
standards,” students would be in classrooms with inferior instruction. Not only is this a
disservice for the student in that semester, but it would be compounded in subsequent classes
when the student begins the next semester without the necessary foundations to succeed.
But even beyond the basic headcount discussion, full-time faculty offer students consistency. In
addition to being on campus and accessible for a greater number of hours, full-time faculty teach
a variety of courses usually within a pathway. They can guide students through the process
semester over semester as the student navigates our sequential courses. This guidance and
mentorship extends beyond one-to-one interaction, it also allows for the faculty to assist in
initiatives outside the classroom, e.g., MESA, Math Club, etc. to supplement the students’
learning. Also a full-time faculty member can collaborate with our partners outside the Math
Subdivision, and even outside the Science and Math division to collaborate on serving majors
that have a strong math component. For example, we have our Business/Applied Math pathway
consisting of Math 33, 31, 15, and 16. Having a liaison between Math and Business would allow
for sharing of ideas on how to improve the courses—including adjusting course curriculum
through the curriculum process—to better serve the student’s major’s need.
Furthermore, by bringing new faculty into the subdivision we will have more people to work on
interdisciplinary initiatives that will have a focus on student success and retention.
2b. Librarian and Counselor faculty ratio. Divide head count by the number of full time faculty.
For example, 8000 students divided by 3 full time faculty, 1:2666
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Criteria 3. Meets established class size.
Fa 2013
Sp 2014
Fa 2014
Sp 2015
Fa 2015
WSCH
16,061
15,376
15,786
15,711
17,600
FTES:
526.72
503.37
516.83
514.31
575.44
FILL RATE:
111%
111%
106%
108%
110%
WSCH/FTES
30.49
30.55
30.54
30.55
30.59
4
WSCH/FTEF
587.84
588.33
565.64
583.51
591.82
If there are any external factors that limit class sizes, please explain.
Criteria 4.
Current instructional gaps and program service needs. List the courses to fill
the gaps, if applicable.
Based on the Program Learning Outcome (PLO) / Course Learning Outcome
(CLO) discussions (detailed in Mathematics’ Program Review) we have
identified areas in need of staffing attention. While ALL levels of math have a
mixture of instruction from both full-time and part-time faculty, we identified
three pathways in critical need of additional faculty—Statistics (53 and 43),
Business/Applied Math (31, 33, 15, 16), and the Developmental/Math
Foundations (103, 104, 65, and 55). The CLO results indicate that students are
struggling with the foundational topics from our Developmental Courses needed
to be successful in later courses.
Having additional full-time instruction will allow for offering students consistent
access to as they navigate through their respective pathway. This access is not
just limited to classroom hours, but include office and STEM lab hours. In
addition, many of our students prefer to follow—from one class to the next in the
pathway—one instructor that works best with their learning style.
Even our STEM pathway’s coverage is strained—albeit not as critical as the
above three. It may seem natural to “borrow” faculty from this pathway to assist
in the others, but that would essentially be just shifting the crisis of need between
the pathways. Our STEM pathway (37, 20, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8) is the longest of any
of our pathways, and one of the longest on the campus. This pathway feeds our
Physics, Chemistry, Computer Science, and Engineering programs. The faculty
members who work in this pathway have cultivated a successful bond with
students—one that extends over several semesters. With the recent retirements
of Chaudhuri, Kajiwara, and Kolb, who did instruct within this pathway in
addition to Wah for statistics, backfilling has gone to other full-time faculty and
increasingly to part-time faculty—who might have taught in any of the other
three pathways.
Criteria 5.
Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline meet PRBC’s three
tier criteria. These include Tier 1: outside mandates (e.g. to ensure the
licensure of the program.) Tier 2: program health, (e.g. addresses gaps in
5
faculty expertise and creates pathways, alleviates bottlenecks, helps units
where faculty have made large commitments outside the classroom to
develop/implement initiatives that support the strategic plan goal, and helps
move an already successful initiative forward.
Tier 3: Student need/equity, (e.g. addresses unmet needs as measured by
unmet/backlogged advising needs, bottlenecks in GE areas and basic skills,
impacted majors in which students cannot begin or continue their pathway.)
We are not offering enough math courses, students are taking longer to complete; this
affects all three tiers. Not having sufficient math faculty and math courses impacts not
offering math to meet the needs of grants, programs, and our students’ need for access to
classes.
Over the past 6 years Math has lost 7 full-time instructors due to retirement, from a total of
18 in 2009. We have only been able to hire 3 replacements. We need to hire an additional 4
to match what we had in 2009, and that doesn’t even address any growth demands or grant
mandated math participation.
Also, if we had 4 new hires last year, instead of the 2 we did hire, we would have been in
essentially the same panic situation, as we hired two of the alternates as part time faculty
with a full time load.
In comparison, we offer approximately the same FTEF (Full time and Overload) as our sister college
LPC. It is interesting that LPC offers 0.4 FTEF in math MORE than Chabot. Yet we as a
campus are 40% larger!
FTEF (FT&OL)
FTEF All
Percentage
(FT vs All)
Total College
FTEF
Percent of
College
Math at Chabot
13.85
29.07
47.6%
282.47
10.3%
Math at LPC
13.46
29.47
45.7%
195.56
15.1%
% increase (Chabot /
LPC)
2.9%
-1.4%
4.3%
44.4%
-31.7%
If we cannot meet the demand of our students and the community, they will seek another college
to meet their academic goals; LPC, with their increased offerings, makes a tempting choice as an
alternative.
Criteria 6.
Upon justification the college may be granted a faculty position to start a new
program or to enhance an existing one.
6
Is this a new program or is it designed to enhance an existing program? Please explain.
Criteria 7.
CTE Program Impact.
Criteria 8.
Degree/Transfer Impact (if applicable)
List the Certificates and/or AA degrees that your discipline/program offers.
Provide information about the number of degrees awarded in the last three years.
Degree/Certificate
# Awarded
2012-2013
2013-2014
2014-2015
AA Degree
2
2
2
AS Degree
9
9
15
AS-T Degree
2
3
2
GE transfer requirement
Declared major
Criteria 9.
80
Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline impact other disciplines and
programs. Be brief and specific. Use your program review to complete this section.
All students need to complete their math requirement. Majors in Engineering,
Physics, Chemistry, Computer Science, Electronic Systems Technology,
Industrial Technology, Business, Nursing have a transfer level math class—
calculus, trigonometry, statistics, etc.—required for their program, which often
must be satisfied before transfer or application to the program.
Our statistics course also serve psychology students to broaden the number of
campus to which they can apply. Although both MTH 43 and PSY 5 meet the
transfer-level math requirement, only MTH 43 articulates with the psychology
major’s quantitative requirement across many university, such as CPSLO,
CSUEB, SFSU, SJSU, UCB, UCD, UCLA, and UCSC. Of the eight
universities listed above, PSY 5 only satisfies the psychology major’s
quantitative requirement at SFSU, SJSU, and UCSC, according to ASSIST. So
7
many psychology students choose to take MTH 43 instead.
According to the most recent (Fall 2010) listing of top majors, Nursing (#1,
1737 students), Business/Marketing (#2, 1697), Psychology (#6, 509), and
Accounting (#7, 498) all require MTH 43 for either the program at Chabot or
for the four-year degree. The students in these four majors comprise more than
a quarter (28%) of the total students.
Furthermore, we are being asked to offer Math resources or sections to support First
Year Experience, Career Pathways Trust, TAAACT, Hayward Promised Neighborhood,
PACE, MESA, STEM Equity (proposal), Statistics Equity (proposal), TRIO, HSN. We
need have the resources to go with those requests.
Criteria 10.
Additional justification e.g. availability of part time faculty (day/evening)
Please describe any additional criteria you wish to have considered in your request.
With 7 faculty members retiring from previous years and while hiring 3 full-time
instructors, our full-time resources have been stretched thin in many different ways.
We have been forced to “be creative” by using unsustainable workarounds to backfilling
for those losses.
We have been offering part-time employees a full load per the contract. This can only
be done twice in three years. Those that are willing to teach extra classes have been
scheduled this semester.
To simply maintain the Fall 2015 course load we will need to staff/backfill for: 1) losing
recently retired faculty members, 2) current part-time faculty contractually not being
allowed to take on an overload class, and 3) not offer math for any new initiatives.
Maintenance of offerings in Mathematics is not an option for a college in a growth
mode.
Fall 2015 started out quite bleak. In order to avoid some of the issues outlined in this
document, it is imperative that we hire new full-time Math Faculty.
8