Chabot College Administrative Services Program Review Report Year One of Program Review Cycle Office of Institutional Research Submitted on March 22, 2013 Carolyn Arnold Final Forms, 1/19/13 Table of Contents Section 1: Who We Are ............................................................. 1 Section 2: Where We Are Now .................................................. 2 Section 3: The Difference We Hope to Make .............................. 3 Required Appendices: A: Budget History .......................................................................................... 4 E: New Initiatives .......................................................................................... 5 F2: Classified Staffing Requests ..................................................................... 6 F5: Supplies and Services Requests ............................................................... 7 F6: Conference/Travel Requests ................................................................... 8 F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests ........................................... 9 F8: Facilities Requests ................................................................................ 10 2 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
1. Who We Are
Mission
The Office of Institutional Research (OIR) provides data that makes a difference! The mission of the OIR
is to produce meaningful information for the college community for the purposes of planning, evaluation,
accountability, and compliance. Research plays a crucial role in the cycle of planning, assessment and
improvement of the college by determining whether we are meeting our college goals for our students.
Responsibilities
The Office of Institutional Research (OIR) is responsible for collecting, organizing, producing, analyzing,
integrating and disseminating information on Chabot students, staff, programs, and the local community.
This research is used by the campus community for planning, evaluation, improvement, and
accountability. The OIR develops and maintains student and staff databases, updates public student
characteristics, success, and outcomes data, develops and maintains accountability measures and reports,
provides data for state and federal compliance reports, conducts periodic student and staff surveys such as
student satisfaction and accreditation surveys, provides grant development and evaluation research for
new and existing college and program-level grants, and assists faculty with course- and program-based
research. Through periodic environmental scans and targeted research presentations, OIR integrates
research into the strategic and program planning processes of the college.
Goals
The detailed annual OIR Research Agenda encompasses these four major overarching and ongoing goals:
1) Collect, compile, and maintain accurate student, staff, program, and community data;
2) Produce and analyze student, staff, program, and community research;
3) Integrate research into the college cycle of planning, assessment, and continuous improvement;
4) Disseminate student, staff, and program research and analyses to the campus and local community.
Support of other Units
The Office of Institutional Research is part of the President’s Office and the Coordinator of OIR reports
to the President. OIR works very closely with the Grant Development Office to provide research and data
for use in grant proposals and grant evaluations. The OIR supports all administrative, academic and
student services units by providing student, staff, enrollment, and survey data, analyses, and consultations
for program review and evaluation purposes. The OIR staff work with faculty, administrators, and staff in
clarifying, conducting, and interpreting research results. OIR staff infuse research and research
perspectives throughout the college by serving on PRBC and presenting relevant research at other
council, committee, division and program meetings. The OIR also supports the District Office by working
with the LPC Office of Research and Planning to provide consistent college-level data for the District.
Impact on Student Learning
The Office of Institutional Research supports student learning and success by monitoring student progress
and success for the college as a whole and for faculty, disciplines, programs, and committees, so that all
areas receive feedback about the effectiveness of their courses and programs for students.
Staffing
The OIR is staffed by a full-time faculty Coordinator, a part-time programmer (professional specialist),
and two student assistants. From 2000 to 2011, the OIR also had a full-time Research Analyst and a parttime temporary Clerk III, but both were lost in the budget cuts of 2011. Since Aug 2012, the professional
specialist programming position has been granted for only 3 months at a time on an emergency basis,
while a permanent half-time Research Analyst/programmer is waiting to be approved by the District.
Even with this half-time position, this amount of staffing is inadequate to meet college research needs.
2 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
2. Where We Are Now
As you enter a new Program Review cycle, reflect on your achievements over the last few years.
Our achievements are bittersweet. In 2009, we received a commendation from the Accreditation Visiting Team for
being so responsive to faculty research and strategic planning. Now, we struggle to achieve that with half the
professional staff that made it possible. Despite those losses, I am proud of how much research we have produced in
the last two years to answer important planning questions about basic skills students, bottlenecks, equity, and
identifying types of students to monitor progress. We have also been able to provide major grant evaluation research
for the Title III, Basic Skills, Hayward Promise Neighborhood, CCAMPIS, and FIPSE-TECS grants, as well as grant
development research for the Title V HSI grant.
What did you want to accomplish?
Overall, I wanted to continue to provide targeted research for faculty research and strategic planning. On top of a
full research agenda, I wanted to obtain our external transfer data, continue measuring our College-wide Learning
Goals (CWLG), make it easier to provide answers to routine requests, and make the IR research much more visible
and used by the college community.
What were your Service Area Outcomes (SAOs)?
According to our SAOs of staff satisfaction and number of research requests, we did well. Our satisfaction rating
was 97% on the recent Admin Services Survey. Our number of research/programming requests was 127 in all of
2011-12 and was 97 for just Fall 2012, so it will probably be higher this year. This is comparable to previous fully
staffed years, and indicates a high productivity despite the staffing losses. This research was high in quality as well,
as virtually all requests were strategic planning-related.
Describe how changes in resources provided to your office have impacted your achievements.
The ability of the IR Office to serve the college has been compromised due to the losses of the fulltime
classified Research Analyst and the temporary part time Clerk III. I trained a staff of 3 very part-time students who
work miracles but cannot make up for the expertise and person hours we lost. I have made up for some of it by
working way more than full-time on a regular basis for the last two years. Faculty research requests have dropped,
and important ongoing work such as monitoring the Nursing program, Distant Ed, tutoring, and the environmental
scan have been put off. A programming review research priority this Spring–the Administrative Services Survey–
offended classified professionals. This was a direct result of pushing myself to do something on top of everything
else and not being able to take the time to collect and provide the information in a more sensitive way. I have been
able to keep up with the research needs for college-level accountability, program review for all disciplines, PRBC,
and grant development and evaluation. However, I have done little else. There has been no time to obtain data to
track our four-year transfers, conduct more CWLG research, update staff data, automate procedures for routine
reports, or send out periodic announcements of new research so staff knows what is available.
What are you most proud of, and what do you want to continue to improve?
I am proud of how much meaningful research I have been able to produce with only 3 part-time students, especially
the just-in-time research that addresses college questions. My development of the PRBC educational goal student
groups was a breakthrough research strategy that will continue to provide ways to meaningfully understand groups
of students, target services to them, and monitor their progress. This has provided a crucial new way to measure
progress on our strategic plan and has been used as the basis for the forthcoming Title V Hispanic-Serving
Institutions grant.
Discuss important trends that will have a significant impact on your unit over the next three years.
Accountability brings increased scrutiny of our college-level measures, and a need for more within-college analysis to
determine how to improve them. The demand for more explanation and interpretation of data will increase. Computer
technology improvements should allow easier access to routine data for more users. While many of our state-wide
indicators have become automated, the need for interpretation and presentation remains. In addition, more grants bring
more evaluation and scrutiny of college programs.
What opportunities and challenges do your foresee in the next three years?
The need for more trusted college data at the program level to interpret and be able to respond to college-wide
accountability measures, as well as the need to provide more with less are both challenges and opportunities.
3 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
3. The Difference We Hope to Make What initiatives would you like to undertake to improve or strengthen your unit or to address demand for your services? A fully-staffed Office of Institutional Research is required to strengthen this unit and address
demand for our services. Going into an Accreditation self-study year with research that has been left
undone when demands for research substantially increase during this time compromises our accreditation.
Specifically, I would like to complete the current tasks plus the backload of undone tasks on the
OIR Research Agenda (see below), plus the additional accreditation research and writing requirements
during a self study year.
Overall, I would like to continue to fulfill the mission of the OIR – provide research to address
current college planning needs in a way that makes a difference. First, I will need to provide required
Accreditation research services and participation (usually heading a standard team) for the Accreditation
self-study. I will also continue to work with PRBC and Basic Skills and Grants leaders to identify major
obstacles to student success, services that help, and progress by students. I also want to automate
obtaining and displaying routine results and responding to routine requests. In addition, I would like to
make the IR research much more visible and used by the college community.
What initiatives are underway in your area, or could you begin, that would support the achievement of our new Strategic Plan goal and strategies and/or improve student learning? The recent research development and analysis of the new student educational groups directly
address the goal and strategy of measuring and monitoring how we make a difference for specific groups.
In addition, the latest research on equity and basic skills monitors our progress on those fronts.
However, the entire OIR Research Agenda supports the Strategic plan in one way or another.
Identify specific, measurable goals and the resources needed to achieve them. Below is the research agenda of the OIR during an accreditation year. It requires a fully-staffed
Office of Institutional Research. Note: the blue color shows the research that was done or partially done in
2012-13. The red shows research that the OIR was not able to do in 2012-13, and/or was not needed. All
of these research tasks need to be completed in 2013-14, starting with the Accreditation Self Study.
Institutional Research Agenda 2013-14
ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY [NOT needed in 2012-13]
ACCREDITATION STANDARDS CHAIR AND/OR STEERING COMMITTEE
a. Provide leadership or consultation about institutional accountability standards
b. Provide baseline and ongoing updates of accountability measures
c. Organize and lead the writing of one of the standards.
FALL 13 and SPRING 14 SURVEYS
ON-CAMPUS STUDENTS [NOT needed in 2012-13]
a. Develop and conduct Fall 13 Accreditation year survey with standards committees
CHABOT STAFF [NOT needed in 2012-13]
b. Develop and conduct Accreditation year survey with standards committees
ONLINE STUDENTS [NOT done in 2012-13]
c. Conduct 2nd biennial satisfaction survey in online classes (work with COOL)
ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN [NOT done in 2012-13]
a. Provide latest environmental scan data for Accred. Self-Study and Ed. Master Plan
STRATEGIC PLANNING
ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN [NOT done in 2012-13]
b. Update, display, and present latest internal and external planning data for PRBC
4 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL [Partially done in 2012-13]
a. Refine new student educational goal groups that allow measurement of strategic plan goal.
b. Provide baseline and ongoing measures of student groups reaching their educational goal.
c. Conduct detailed analyses on the status, characteristics, or progress of each group.
STUDENT PATHWAYS ANALYSIS [NOT done in 2012-13]
a. Identify and clarify major student pathways or interest groups.
b. Identify capacity of each pathway/interest group based on student educational goals
c. Analyze student characteristics and outcomes in pathways/interest groups
PROGRAM REVIEW DATA and ANALYSIS [Done in 2012-13]
a. Produce latest course success tables for program review by late September
b. Produce latest selected course sequence tables for program review by late September
c. Update progress benchmarks for new student cohorts through Spring 2013
STUDENT LEARNING AND OTHER OUTCOMES [Partially done in 2012-13]
c. Identify and provide college-wide learning goals of current students using Fall 13 survey
d. Document plans and Chabot experiences of Spring 13 degree and certificate graduates
e. Document College-wide Learning Goals of Graduates and transfer students
BASIC SKILLS/TITLE III PROJECTS
BASIC SKILLS COMMITTEE RESEARCH [Partially done in 2012-13]
a. Update overall Basic Skills and Student Equity data
b. Identify new questions/produced new data needed by committee
TITLE III GRANT OUTCOMES – Final year reporting [Done in 2012-13]
a. Identify Spring 13 Title III/Basic Skills FIGs and track persistence into Fall 2013
b. Produce Title III success and engagement outcomes for Spring 13
c. Produce college-wide Title III outcomes for 2012-13
d. Identify Fall 2013 Title III/Basic Skills FIGs and Learning Assistant sections
e. Conduct & analyze student engagement survey for Fall 13
LEARNING CONNECTION RESEARCH [Partially done in 2012-13]
a. Analyze student engagement in sections with learning assistants [Done in 2012-13]
b. Analyze course success for tutored students [NOT done in 2012-13]
ASSESSMENT PLACEMENT TEST VALIDATION
MATH, ENGLISH, and CHEMISTRY TESTS [NOT done in 2012-13]
a. Conduct Math and English disproportionate impact study since cut score changes
b. Conduct re-validation study of Chemistry test
MANDATED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
State accountability system data (ARCC) [Done in 2012-13]
a. Conduct in-depth analyses of 2013 data
b. Prepare Presentation of ARCC 2013 data for Fall Board meeting
c. Review preliminary ARCC 2014 data in December
Federal Gainful Employment Act [Done in 2012-13]
a. Update program information on CTE programs on Chabot Degree/Certificates website.
CAL Grants SB270 reporting [NOT needed in 2012-13]
Integrated Postsecondary Education System (IPEDS) [Done in 2012-13]
a. Check and provide data for October 2012 deadline
b. Check and provide data for December 2012/Feb 2013 deadline
5 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
GRANT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION RESEARCH
Grant Development research [Done in 2012-13]
a. Develop or implement evaluation of Hispanic-serving Institution (HSI) Title V grant
b. Provide research analyses for any new grants in development
GRANT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION RESEARCH (CONTINUED)
Grant Assessment and Evaluation research
a. CCAMPIS: Provide final year tracking evaluation [Done in 2012-13]
b. Hayward Promise Neighborhood: Provide data and tracking [Done in 2012-13]
c. BRIDGES – provide cohorts of potential students. [Done in 2012-13]
d. MESA – Identify and track cohorts of students in program [Partially done in 2012-13]
e. Nursing grants – track nursing cohorts [NOT done in 2012-13]
OTHER MAJOR RESEARCH PROJECTS
Provide latest research results in useable formats to college/decision-makers
a. Provide Board Report on success & outcomes for both colleges [NOT done in 2012-13]
b. Provide latest Basic Skills Research – Assessment, Success, persistence [Partially done]
c. Upload all new research information onto IR website [Done in 2012-13]
d. Update staff on new research available. [NOT done in 2012-13]
Monitor Distance Learning [Partially done in 2012-13]
e. Monitor success and retention rates of distance education courses.
f. Determine 2013-14 DE courses in preparation for running success rates
g. Conduct analyses of online students [NOT done in 2012-13]
Conduct other ongoing and ad-hoc research and programming projects [Partially done 2012-13]
a. Conduct ad-hoc programming requests from programs, disciplines, staff.
Obtain and analyze Chabot student Transfer data routinely [NOT done in 2012-13]
a. Implement use of National Clearinghouse tranfer files
b. Continue use of state First Files
c. Identify ways to use Cal-PASS data and encourage UC/CSU partners to join
INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE
Maintain and Enhance Institutional Research Database [Partially done 2012-13]
a. Work with ITS to add needed data elements to the IR database:
i. Race-ethnicity changes; parent’s education, dislocated workers
b. Develop programs to use new data [NOT done in 2012-­‐13]
Maintain and Develop IR/Grants Staff/Professional Development [Partially done in 2012-13]
a. Re-hire Student assistants and programmer [Not needed in 2012-13]
b. Hire full or half-time replacement of Research Analyst [Not needed in 2012-13]
c. Coordinator attend Student Success/Research Conferences [Done in 2012-13]
Streamline IR Office/maintain IR business [Partially done in 2012-13]
a. Update and enhance IR website with latest data and reports
b. Continue to update IR data/definitions documentation for programming
c. Automate routine reports and requests [NOT done in 2012-­‐13]
COLLEGE RESPONSIBILITIES/COMMITTEES of COORDINATOR [DONE IN 2012-13]
Accreditation Standard Chair and Research Consultant
Planning, Review, and Budget Council (PRBC)
Chabot Enrollment Management Committee (CEMC)
Title III à Title V Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) Leadership Teams
Basic Skills Committee
OUTSIDE RESPONSIBILITIES of COORDINATOR [DONE IN 2012-13]
Board Member of Research and Planning Group (RP Group), Northern California representative
6 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
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, & fully explain the impact of the budget decisions. Category Classified Staffing (# of positions) Full-­‐time Research Analyst (40 hrs) *Part-­‐time Temporary Clerk (20 hrs) *Prof Spec Programmer (15-­‐20 hrs) *Student Assistants (2@ 12 hrs ) Supplies & Services (software) Technology/Equipment Other: Membership in RP Group TOTAL 2011-­‐12 Budget Requested 1.00 0.50 $6,000 $2,085 $882 0 $350 2011-­‐12 Budget Received 0 0.50 $6,000 $2,085 $882 0 $350 2012-­‐13 Budget Requested 0.50 0.50 $5,000 $2,085 $825 0 $350 2012-­‐13 Budget Received 0 0 $5,000* $2,085* $825 0 $350 *These funds were cut more in the years before 2011-12.
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved your Service Area Outcomes? 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. This office could not function at all without a dedicated programmer and 20 hours or more of research
assistance. The funds I did receive –—$5,000 for a professional expert programmer and $2,085 for
student assistants —have made it possible to fulfill major college research responsibilities such as federal
and state reporting, program review, PRBC, and grant evaluations and development research. This was
the rationale for maintaining these positions. However, the table above does not show the extent of the
under-funding—these amounts are decreases from previous years. At least $8,000 is needed for a
programmer, and $8,000 is needed for research assistants, so I have supplemented these funds with
grants, including FWS, Matriculation, Title III, HPN, Bridges and Nursing funds. None of the grants are
permanent, but they are sustaining these crucial positions along with the college funds.
Our Service Area Outcomes – the number of Programming/Research Requests completed —actually went
up this year to 97 in Fall 2012 vs. 127 for all of 2011-12. I credit the increased expertise of the
programmer and the student assistants, who continued from last year, as well as my almost complete
dedication to coordinating their work in a way that addressed the most important college needs and used
the growing expertise of this little band of students. Because I had a programmer who is an advanced
Computer Science student at CSUEB, we were able to do more complex programming and create the
PRBC student educational goal groups, which we are now using for everything. (see accomplishments)
Ironically, while I had adequate funds for a programmer and assistants due to grants, we were prohibited
from continuing the long-time positions of temporary Classified and professional specialists, so I have
turned to Student Assistants to do the research assistant work. While I love working with students, this
made the work much less professional and less consistent. The professional specialist position is being
continued temporarily on a 3-month to 3-month basis while we await District approval of a permanent
half-time programming position. This will stabilize this needed position, but will require a large increase
in funds for this position, from $8,000 to $30,000 plus benefits.
7 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
2. How has your investment improved your Service Area Outcomes? Assess the anticipated positive impacts you projected have, in fact, been realized. The supplies, software, and membership accounts, as predicted, have kept the office functioning at a
minimum level of paper, pens and print cartridges, online survey and survey analysis software, and
membership in the research organization that has provided access to much of the latest transfer and basic
skills data and research. These were adequate for this year, but will not be adequate during an accreditation
survey year of 2013-14, when more survey supplies are needed. 3. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has your ability to serve the college and our students been impacted, or safety compromised? As mentioned above, the funds received for the programmer professional specialist and temporary parttime clerk (research assistant) were not enough to fully fund these needed positions, but I was able to
supplement them with grants.
The office continued to function, but the effect of the decreased funds for the programmer was to become
more dependent on grants, and less able to provide consistent programming services over the long run.
The effect of losing the part-time Classified Clerk Research Assistant position is that I could not develop
the expertise of a student who could stay in the position after they finish Chabot. Consequently, the
students and programmer whom I have so carefully trained in these last 2 academic years will all be
graduating and/or transferring and I will have to train new students in all of these positions. While I enjoy
that, but it greatly delays and decreases the amount of new research that can be turned out by the office.
We were buffered this year by the grants and these students who continued from the previous year.
The IR Office has been most heavily impacted by losing the full-time Classified Research Analyst
position in Fall 11. The effects of that are many and continue.
Some major IR Office functions that no longer happen or are more limited due to this loss are:
1) providing customized research requests for faculty for program review, and the time to explain and
interpret the results
2) updating and producing our standard student characteristics and outcomes reports for the Board;
3) conducting careful programming based on years of experience and discovering anomalies in our
District and state data that leads to corrections that can change our state accountability measures.
4) conducting in-depth analyses for grant proposals that allowed us to go beyond our usual statistics to
focus on the target group of that grant, whether middle school students or low-income students at Chabot.
These analyses were crucial in winning several of our federal grants, such as TRIO and Title III.
5) becoming adept at obtaining and quickly using transfer data on our students to state and national 4-year
colleges. The data are available. The time to train in this process is not.
6) Conducting a thorough Environmental scan for PRBC. We are relying on last year’s data.
7) The Research Analyst’s presence in the IR Office allowed the Coordinator to play major roles in
PRBC, CEMC, Basic Skills, the Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Committee, Faculty Senate, and
Accreditation, which brought research expertise and organization to these groups, making them more
effective. Due to the loss of the Research Analyst, the Coordinator has not been able to play a major role
in these groups, and in some cases is not at all involved. The ability of the IR Office to serve the college has been compromised. The most important research
requests have gotten done, but not the next most important things. This year, major research that was put
off was a survey of online students, the engagement survey in Spr 13, an update of the environmental
scan, and monitoring of the success and persistence of nursing and distant education students. The impact
on the Coordinator has been personal wear and tear from working much more than full-time during the
last two years— in order to provide some of the lost services as well as maintain the regular research
functions.
8 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
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? In every activity, the Office of Institutional Research (OIR) supports the strategic plan of increasing students completing their goals, by providing research for all college units for planning, program review, and evaluation of initiatives that help student success or learning. Other activities of the OIR provide or interpret federal and state accountability and compliance data for the college, without which the college would not be allowed to continue operating. What is your specific goal and measurable outcome? Complete the needed accreditation research and writing tasks during a self study year, plus carry out the current tasks plus the undone tasks on the OIR Research Agenda (see Section 3), What is your action plan to achieve your goal? Activity (brief description) Target Required Budget (Split out Completion personnel, supplies, other Date categories) May 31, Personnel: 2014 One FT Research Analyst One PT programmer One PT Clerk III and/or 2 student assistants. See OIR Research Agenda in Section 3. How will you manage the personnel needs? New Hires: Classified staff # of positions: 1 Full time, 2 part-­‐time, 2 student assistants 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: These positions need to be permanently funded. 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: New DOL grant provides $25,000/ yr for 4 years 9 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
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: _3_____ 2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions. Position Description 1. Research Analyst Full-­‐time Regular. Replacement for position lost to internal Transfer. AND 2. Research Analyst/BrioQuery Programmer OR 2. BrioQuery Programmer, Professional specialist AND 3. Clerk III, Research Assistant Half-­‐time regular. This would stabilize programming in IR Office. PT -­‐ 20 hours wk of specialized programming. Minimum needed to keep the IR office going. Half-­‐time regular. This would stabilize research assistance in the IR Office 2@ -­‐ 20 hours/wk of research assistance. Minimum needed to keep the IR office going. OR 3. Student Assistants 3. Rationale for your proposal. 1. Research Analyst – Full-time Regular Classified
This position was created in 2000 due to increased research demands for the college. Research demands
have increased since 2000, and remain high. This position is necessary to maintain the productivity of
the OIR in any year, and even more so during an Accreditation self-study year. See Budget History and
Impact for functions lost due to loss of this position, and see below.
2. 2. BrioQuery Programmer – Professional Expert (current) or Half-time regular Classified
A dedicated programmer is necessary for this office to develop the programming expertise to quickly
and accurately respond to research requests, ensure data accuracy, and create tools for others to answer
simple research questions. Over the years, it has proven most efficient for one person to develop
expertise in programming, because it takes so much focused effort. This allows the Coordinator to use
her expertise to identify the most important research requests and display, interpret, and present results.
3. 3. Research Assistant – Clerk III half-time regular classified or Student Assistants (current)
Research assistance is necessary to format surveys, clean and monitor survey returns, create readable
tables and graphs and website displays of data, and perform a variety of routine clerical tasks. Higher
level tasks can be performed if this were a regular position. If students are used for research assistants,
the level of work is much lower than with an experienced person. Less can be accomplished, but it is still
substantial.
10 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013 Updated 3/22/13
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. 1. Research Analyst – Full-time Regular Classified
This position has now been gone for almost 2 years, and the effects of research left undone is
building until it will compromise our accreditation readiness next year. In 2009, the Office of
Institutional Research was commended by the Accreditation Visiting Team for its research contributions
to strategic planning and its responsiveness to faculty and staff program review research requests. This
was possible because of the synergy of the skills of the Coordinator and the person in the Research
Analyst position. With this position, the OIR was able to contribute to a successful Accreditation process
by "creating and promoting a culture of evidence to guide the strategic planning process." This was based
on having the time and focus to produce accurate, relevant, and understandable institutional research.
The research capacity to address strategic planning identified by the Accrediting Visit Team is now
threatened. Without this position, the Coordinator is not able to conduct all the research that the college
needs for the next accreditation visit—important surveys are not being conducted, such as the experiences
of online students, and major surveys are being bungled, such as the recent Administration Services
program review survey – because the Coordinator was under so much time pressure, she did not have
time to conduct the survey or distribute the results in a more thoughtful way, and many staff members
were offended. The environmental scan, needed by the PRBC and by Accreditation Self Study, was not
done this year. Major reports of the IR office are not being produced, such as yearly student outcomes
reports for the Board, or the Student Characteristics Report, which is used by many on campus. Careful
programming is not being conducted which in the past has discovered data errors that lead to changes in
state or college- level results. Grant proposals are going out with less in-depth analyses, and grant
evaluations strain all of the staff in the office. Going into a self-study with research that has been left
undone when the research demands substantially increase during a self study year will greatly decrease
the strength of the self-study.
4. 2. BrioQuery Programmer – Professional Expert (current) or Half-time regular Classified
5. 3. Research Assistant – Clerk III half-time regular classified or Student Assistants (current)
6.
All of the work that the programmer and the research assistants do is related to the Strategic Plan
in some way, because they are responding to research requests on student characteristics, success,
completion, or addressing grant development or evaluation requests.
The Coordinator funnels the research that addresses the most important college research questions to the
programmer and research assistants. Without the programmer and research assistants, the Coordinator
would be conducting both routine programming and research tasks, as well as trying to identify, shape,
conduct, and interpret the research that the college needs. Research needs could not be clearly identified,
and even more research would go undone than is currently falling off the table.
7.
11 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013
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. 2012-­‐13 Budget Project or Items Requested Received 2013-­‐14 Rationale Requested Request Supplies
$420
$420
$420
The OIR mainly requires laser paper
for surveys and research results,
printer cartridges for 3 printers, paper
clips, pens, pencils, and pads of paper
for research tasks. Since each
cartridge is almost $100, $420 is a
bare bones supplies budget.
SOFTWARE:
Software: license
$200
$200
$200
The required $200 annual
maintenance (SPSS)
maintenance on the SPSS software
allows the OIR to analyze survey data
and other self-generated data more
efficiently and thoroughly than any
other software.
Survey Software
$204
$204
$204
The $204 annual subscription to
(Survey Monkey)
Survey Monkey, an online survey
service, is allowing the OIR as well as
other committees to conduct quick
surveys as needed.
TOTAL
$404
SOFTWARE:
12 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013
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 2013-­‐14 Request Rationale Program Student Success Conference
$400
This conference is the premier conference for both
October 2013, San Francisco
faculty, staff, and researchers who are working on
student success. It is the place to showcase all we
have been doing in PRBC and Basic Skills and learn
from other colleges. Since it is local in 2013, this is
just the cost of the registration and transportation. I
hope to present on my work on measuring the
Strategic Plan as a way to also target students for
services.
Research and Planning Group $450
This RP Group conference is the main forum for
Annual Conference, April
Institutional Researchers from all CCC's to meet and
2014, probably in Pomona
share tips and new ideas for making research more
efficient and usable. Research is all about increasing
student success. This conference is necessary for
staying up to date with CCC Institutional Research
issues. The OIR Coordinator uses conference
information and contacts to enhance the services of
the OIR for the college. Usually it costs
$800/person, but since I am on the Board of the RP
Group this year, airfare and one night are paid so
only $450 is needed (registration and 2 nights).
Research and Planning Group $75
The RP Group has about 3 regional meetings per
Regional Meetings
year in the Bay Area, which entail transportation
(3X$25)
costs of at least $25/event per person. I will go to
these events no matter what, to meet with our local
peers and keep up on Institutional Research issues.
Often, we are not able to be reimbursed for that
travel.
13 Chabot College Office of Institutional Research: Program Review, Year One: March, 2013
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. 2012-­‐13 Budget Project or Items Requested Received 2013-­‐14 Rationale* Requested Request $ $ I am not requesting new ones because I Computers and 0 0 0 expect routine upgrades of current ones. Printers: I am not requesting new ones because I Computer Office 0 0 $600 expect routine upgrades of current ones. Software Coordinator office chair is broken and Desk Chair 0 0 $600 needs repair or a new one Coordinator office furniture are hand me Desk and cabinets 0 0 $2,000+ downs from the early 1990’s. If not moving to Bldg 100, I would like the new office configuration as if I were. * 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. 14