Learning Connection and Library Overview 2011-12
Program Review Summary
Written by Marcia Corcoran, Dean of Language Arts
Part A – Trends: Describe the broad trends you see within your division/area. Cite specific internal or external
data when necessary. Please include any trends you see in technology and staff development/training needs.
Assessment: The library has completed writing and assessing Student Learning Outcomes in their Library
Skills courses and in orientation and has created an assessment schedule. We now need to close the loop,
reflecting on how results might be used for improvement. We used two Flex Days to work on Service Area
Outcomes, and one outcome was assessed in Fall 2010. We changed the process for checking out reserve
and circulating materials based on discussion of services.
The Learning Connection has assessed and closed the loop on 66% of its courses. Additionally, we have
collected assessment data, including qualitative data, such as tutor surveys, Learning Assistant surveys,
instructor surveys, student surveys (including student engagement surveys)—all validate the quality of our tutor
training, increased success and persistence of students who have received tutoring, and increased student
engagement in courses with Learning Assistants. ELumen data still needs to be entered. We have written
Service Area Outcomes, and are designing and administering a questionnaire during Spring 11. We plan to
close the SAO assessment loop in time for results to be used for next year’s planning cycle.
The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) has Service Area Outcomes and is evaluating these through
surveys. We also interested in how Faculty Inquiry impacts campus processes.
The Dean has convened a steering committee for accreditation recommendation number 3, to align library and
learning resource assessments and program reviews with planning and budget during Spring 2011. Subgroups
of the committee are meeting 8 times, and we have developed a tracking system and tentative schedule to
complete the cycle by Spring 2012.
Instructional Improvements: The library has created a Library Skills II course to offer students additional
instruction in information literacy. This supports library orientations tailored to meet the needs of specific
courses.
The Learning Connection sustains learning support programs across campus, including the Math Lab, Peer
Academic Tutoring Help (PATH, or tutoring across disciplines), Writing and Reading Across the Curriculum, the
Language Center, the World Language Lab, and the Communications Lab. Instructors are working together to
review data, work with adjuncts, and improve services to students in each of these areas.
Outreach: The library continues to offer book reads, “wine and weed” for faculty (collection
development activities), monthly themed books displays, “the library thing” (an online resource for monthly
displays), and “the blog.” In alignment with our newly approved library mission, vision, and values—creating a
safe and welcoming environment, at the heart of the institution—we have rearranged the library to provide more
comfortable lounge-type study areas, some group study areas, and tables near outlets so students can bring
their own laptops.
Online Access: In the library and the PATH area, we now have upgraded wireless connections so students
may use laptops. However, some students cannot afford laptops; thus, as we have seen in other libraries, we
would like to establish a laptop lending program.
Library access online has been improved by a new library homepage and website and the use of chat. Five
thousand e-books were recently purchased not only for reference but also for heavily used materials. The new
Library Skills II class will be offered in a hybrid format in the next year.
One of our librarians, through a sabbatical project, established tutorials for online users, which is widely used,
for example, students can follow Search Path to learn how to correctly cite resources to avoid plagiarism.
With the help of Title III, a Faculty Inquiry Group developed and piloted online tutoring, using California
Community College Confer, a computer, and a telephone, and we now have tutors who can assist students
online, though on a small scale. We plan to use what we have learned to expand the online tutoring option.
Online Tracking and Scheduling: We have optimized our use of SIRSI, the online library management system,
in order to collect and analyze data to learn more about our students’ needs and to make decisions about open
hours and collection development.
We have worked hard in the Learning Connection with Institutional Technology to modify our Student
Attendance Accounting System (SARS) to increase its accuracy in reporting, to ensure data might be imported
to be usable by Institutional Research, and to learn, pilot, and develop online scheduling of tutees with tutors.
Staff Development: The library’s core values include “operating at a high level of professionalism and service,”
and this includes appropriate professional development for librarians to keep up to date.
In the Learning Connection, we are working to create an infrastructure of division liaisons who would help
organize the learning support needs specific to a discipline, which is currently implemented through the meeting
of the TUTR 1B (subject specific tutoring) instructors. Through their input, we have developed some
infrastructures to support all disciplines as well as innovative programs unique to some disciplines, for example,
the Learning Assistant program. Faculty attending conferences with Title III and Basic Skills funding bring
innovative ideas and programs to Chabot, such as ESL Career Technical Support classes, new models for
offering English support, study skills support courses (GNST) in the social science areas, and Reading
Apprenticeship (RA). RA training has impacted the teaching of more than 40 instructors, and training was
supplemented through the ongoing support of a RA Faculty Inquiry Group for all instructors who participated in
the initial training.
Through the Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL), we organized professional development for 2010-11
based on the theme of learning theory. Between Fall 08 and Fall 10, we sponsored, with grant funds, 27
Faculty Inquiry Groups (FIGs), investigating questions in all college divisions, and 10 projects offering direct
support to students or faculty training. For example, FIGs adapted a WRAC course for history and psychology,
piloted online tutoring, created alternative developmental math support, assessed reading, and offered basic
skills and ESL to Career Technical Education students.
The CTL created a lively website, with postings of FIG projects, a calendar of events, and a virtual library on
teaching and learning. We set up a Great Teachers Awards program, published a newsletter, and created a
book club. The CTL and Assessment office sponsored participation in conferences and conducted Flex Day
and symposia throughout the year on learning theory, pedagogy, and assessment.
The Learning Assessment Office continues to offer Flex activities, workshops, and one-on-one training for
Student Learning Outcomes and our assessment recording software, eLumen. Course level outcomes have
been written for most classes, with more than half having assessment schedules and nearly half having been
assessed. The focus this year has been on “closing the loop,” that is, reviewing the assessments to refine and
improve instruction. About half of program level outcomes are defined and matrixed to course level outcomes.
Three out of five college wide learning goals have been assessed in cross-disciplinary pilot groups.
Facilities Improvements: Library faculty and staff have visited 10 new community college libraries, as we
envision what a library of the 21st century might ideally offer and what kind of facility we would like to have at
Chabot. Learning Connection faculty have also visited some learning resource centers and centers for teaching
and learning. We see how teaching support is ideal for planning, assessing, and refining learning support.
Part B – Staffing Priorities: Prioritize the most urgent and immediate staffing requests that need to be fulfilled.
Priority 1: STUDENT ASSISTANTS: We are requesting $30,000 for learning assistants (in-class student
assistants with data to show high increase in student engagement for students in classes with learning
assistants) formerly paid by Title III that will not be available unless we find another source. We are additionally
requesting $30,000. for other tutoring services, which might include innovative programs such as Peer-LedTeam-Learning, Supplemental Instruction, or special programs (due to Disabled Students funding cuts). We
have long waitlists of students whom we cannot accommodate.
Priority 2: ADMINISTRATION: Organizational structures at most institutions includes a Dean of Library and
Learning Resources or Dean of Academic Services, and Chabot used to have a dedicated Library Dean;
however, over the past years, due to the budget, these responsibilities have been assigned to the Dean of
Language Arts and faculty coordinators. Three years ago, with funding from a Title III grant focused on
“improving basic skills to increase student success, persistence, and institutional effectiveness,” we have
piloted and documented innovative interventions which have met grant goals. The grant was also to develop
student learning outcomes and assessments at course, program, and college level and ensure planning was
data driven.
In order to sustain these programs and as part of the Title III plan for institutionalization, we requested last year
a Dean of Academic Services, reporting to the Vice President and supervising the Library, Learning Resources,
Center for Teaching and Learning, and other academic services such as student learning outcome and
assessment work and the program reviews. With Chabot’s statewide leadership toward the scholarship of
teaching and learning, including faculty development, qualitative research, and “making visible” student and
faculty work, the proposal also suggested a close relationship with the Office of Institutional Research—all
programs to be housed together in the future in Building 100.
A newly proposed organizational chart was put forward at the Faculty Prioritization meeting in October 2010,
and we still stand by this request (see attached). By eliminating the Learning Connection Project Development
Coordinator (originally funded by Title III and already eliminated for 10-11), the Library Coordinator (already on
general fund), and the Title III Activity Coordinator, the general fund can absorb costs over the course of the
next 3 years, As shown in the chart, the plan includes some faculty coordination for the Learning
Connection/Tutoring programs, Center for Teaching and Learning, Learning Assessment, and Division Liaisons;
the newly proposed Academic Dean would be responsible for fostering high standards of instruction,
supervising faculty and staff, collaborating in planning and directing goals, evaluating programs, and seeking
additional funding from the community.
Priority 3: FACULTY: The Center for Teaching and Learning Coordinator (currently 15 CAH per semester or
.5 FTEF) and the Learning Assessment Coordinator (15 CAH), currently funded by Title III, need to move
toward institutionalization. For the 11-12 year, each position requests 6 CAH or .2 FTEF. The CTL Coordinator
coordinates all faculty development with a focus on teaching and learning; the Learning Assessment
Coordinator ensures that assessment of student learning moves forward and is used for improvement,
ensuring response to the accreditation requirement.
Priority 4: STAFF: We are requesting 20 additional hours for the Staff Assistant in the Learning Connection
due to the number of users (we are averaging 1750 students per semester over 50 disciplines). We currently
have 2 FTE for staff and need .5 more.
Priority 5: FACULTY: As mentioned above, we are also moving toward the model of Division Liaisons, and
we are requesting 1 CAH for each, for 7 disciplines, totaling 14 CAH for the year.
Priority 6: In the library as with the rest of the campus, the adjunct librarian budget has been dramatically
reduced, leaving summer hours at a maximum of 25 hours per week for 8 weeks. Evening hours have been cut
during the year, evening students will need to access services online and evening orientations may be
scheduled only by appointment.
Part C – Enrollment Management Priorities: Describe the changes or adjustments that need to be made to
enrollment management and FTEF allocations.
None requested. We have included the FTEF for Library Skills classes as part of the librarian’s regular load.
Part D – Supplies, Services and Equipment Priorities (4000, 5000 & 6000 categories): Please include your
spreadsheet indicating your priorities (i.e. Priority 1, 2 or 3).
Please see spreadsheet attached. The main concern is that $95,000 in library resource materials (databases,
periodicals, and audio-visual materials) have been moved out of the general fund to the bond; we need to
develop a plan to gradually move these funds back to the general fund for when bond money runs out.
In addition, we would like to pilot a laptop lending program, starting with 8 laptops for checkout to students in
the library.
In the Learning Connection, we are requesting staff development money ($5,000.00) for coordinators so they
can participate in statewide professional development activities, to continue to attend conferences to learn
about staff development and assessment and to present on Chabot’s programs.
Part E – Challenges and New Initiatives: Describe current challenges and most promising new initiatives in
your area.
Increasing Access through Electronic Resources:
As the library transitions to increasing electronic resources, the library will purchase more databases and ebooks. Though these models will need more research, librarian professional organizations are taking the lead
in establishing efficacy as well as looking for ways to reduce costs for community colleges, such as working
with vendors as an aggregate. We currently have 25 databases, but these are not comprehensive; for example
we do not have a history database. Our instructors would also benefit from having more online content tutorials.
We can work with Las Positas College and the district office as we increase the reliability of our online catalog,
upgrade SIRSI, and look for ways to share costs for the electronic databases and other vendors. We could use
a software program such as “room wizard” to schedule study rooms. We would like to have software to build
out our online presence.
Our library computers do not have all of the software students need for their courses, for example, math,
science, and world language software. We may need to explore different options so that materials are more
readily available for students using our library computers.
In the Learning Connection, we would like to expand our online tutoring program. We will need more
computers and phone lines and a space dedicated to the online tutors.
Outreach on Information Competency: We would like to develop more activities to bring the campus and
community to the library. We would also like to establish a library laptop check-out program to provide more
opportunities for disadvantaged students. In our library tours, we saw the success of these types of programs.
This might also entail an enhanced security system.
Though we have library liaisons to the divisions and learning communities, we would like to work more with
these groups on developing additional support for providing information competency skills to students.
Increasing library skills course offerings and workshop offerings, such as the “term paper” workshops may also
support our college wide learning goals and help students succeed in their courses across disciplines. We
would like a dedicated fund to support special events, such as author’s readings.
Working with professional organizations and the campus, we plan to develop new instruments for measuring
information competency across disciplines.
We also need to establish outreach and services to satellite campuses. Perhaps we could set up
teleconferencing from instructors’ classrooms with a librarian for library orientations with online or remote users.
Facilities Development and Sustenance: Our vision is to make the Library and Learning Resource Center,
building 100, the hub, center, or heart of the campus, “conducive to learning, collaborating, and encouraging
life-long learning.” A cross-disciplinary faculty team, librarians, classified professionals, and administrators has
collaborated for years, and with the assistance of Steinberg architects has developed a schematic design for a
remodeled building 100, though with factors such as ADA compliance or earthquake retrofitting, changing
campus allocations toward this project, and the state’s design review, we are uncertain as to the scope and
feasibility of a remodel. Naturally, with the visits to the other library/resource centers, we would prefer an
entirely new building, in the same location, with adjacencies to student life and redesigned ways of delivering
food services, such as an internet library café. Our students would greatly benefit from being provided added
spaces for studying.
At the very minimum, we need to remodel the library for efficiency, with a redesigned instruction room to
accommodate at least 44 students, the typical class size; new circulation and reference desks; more
comfortable chairs and lounge areas; study rooms with technological options; more outlets for students using
laptops; redesigned periodical and audio-visual areas; new paint and furniture throughout the library. We would
additionally like an archive and history room, which might be funded by the community. With the diversity on
our campus, we would like to have more specialized collections to support our learning communities, women’s
studies, and other areas. For example, now that Chabot is an Hispanic-serving institution, one possibility to
explore is development of a Hispanic/Latino collection. If we want to support all students’ studying and
research, we need an inviting 21st century facility.
Additionally, the current design for the downstairs of building 100 has created proximity of like programs, all in
support of students and faculty. We have worked hard to centralize and streamline hiring, training, and pay for
tutors and other student assistants, as well as creating an infrastructure to support learning support in the
disciplines. We have outgrown our current facilities, and now we need a new place to sustain these programs.
Once the capital outlay is provided for labs in building 100 or in various areas, we need to ensure they have
resources necessary to sustain them, including computer software, supplies for printing costs and student
assistant support.
Student Learning/Service Area Outcomes Assessment: In order to meet the Accreditation Commission’s
Spring 2012 deadline, the library and Learning Connection must “develop and implement an outcomes
assessment process linking their respective planning for resources and evaluation to the evaluation of student
needs.” We need to continue working with the Office of Institutional Research to design assessment projects
related to student needs, to review data, and to use data in planning. We have added a bullet to the Program
Review template, asking faculty what their students’ learning support needs are, based on their own data
review. We will then follow up with those ideas. In the library, we will write more Service Area Outcomes and
assess those. In the Learning Connection, the data we’ve collected this year shows an increase in student
success and persistence for students receiving tutoring; this in turn needs to be taken into account as the
college allocates resources, and it has been presented in the section on staffing requests. For example, results
of the engagement survey for Fall 10 show increased engagement (asked questions more, participated in small
group discussions more often; worked harder; discussed class topics or assignments with other students more)
for students in sections with Learning Assistants, supporting our request for $30,000 from the general fund.
Faculty Inquiry as a Method of Professional Development Contributing to Student Success: Through the
program review process faculty come together to review data and to plan for new curriculum and student
support services; however, we have found that campuses such as Chabot who practice faculty inquiry can go in
greater depth to understand program review results or to further investigate a question of interest. Due to our
leadership in the statewide Faculty Inquiry Network, Basic Skills, and Title III, we have found the practice of
Faculty Inquiry highly successful in advancing teaching to improve learning, and we are interested in
institutionalizing these practices through integration into college processes.
Promising Student Success Initiatives: As initiatives are shown to increase student retention, success, and
persistence, we need to find ways to have college wide discussions about how to integrate these best practices.
Part F – Was there anything else that you feel needs to be included that was not already included?
With the research required by these and other areas, we recommend the hiring of additional support for
Institutional Research, such as a programmer.