Chabot College
Program Review Report
2014 -2015
Year Three of
Program Review Cycle
“You are in the same cycle as last year!”
Final Summary Report
Electronic Systems Technology/
Computer Networking Technology
Submitted on November 1, 2013
Contact: Wayne Phillips
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Section A: What Have We Accomplished?
Section B: What’s Next?
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
C: Program Learning Outcomes
D: A Few Questions
E: New Initiatives
F1: New Faculty Requests
F2: Classified Staffing Requests
F3: FTEF Requests
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests
F5: Supplies and Services Requests
F6: Conference/Travel Requests
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests
F8: Facilities
A. What Have We Accomplished?
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/Data2013.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 program improvement goals did you establish?
Our goal was to establish a new electronics program with curriculum designed to be
relevant to present-day electronics technology.
Did you achieve the goals you established for the three years? Specifically describe your
progress on goals you set for student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan
achievement.
Since the launch of the ESYS program, we have developed and delivered 18 new courses.
Two of the courses replaced two of the original offerings, as part of the effort to align our
courses with skills required by industry and sought by students.
What best practices have you developed? Those could include pedagogical methods,
strategies to address Basic Skills needs of our students, methods of working within your
discipline, and more.
The ESYS program has developed an innovative approach to delivering multiple courses
with minimal FTEF requirements. This approach enables the ESYS program to maintain
respectable productivity, multiple Fall and Spring entry points for new students, and
multiple certificate and degree pathways with minimal department size.
The key to this approach is to offer every course as a hybrid, online lecture and in-class lab.
The trending terminology for this is the “flipped” classroom. In-class instructor time is spent
supporting lab activities, answering questions, and providing “mini-lectures.” All of the
traditional lecture content is delivered online. The “flipped” classroom model permits us to
schedule two classes meeting concurrently in the same lab. The instructor “shifts gears” to
support two different groups of lab activities. The major benefits are providing greater
access for students by doubling the course offerings for the given FTEF and higher
productivity by producing WSCH for both courses.
1
Are these best practices replicable in other disciplines or areas?
The “flipped” classroom is applicable for many disciplines, assuming the faculty in a
discipline wants to develop the online lecture content. The pairing of courses is primarily for
small programs that would otherwise be limited in the number of courses offered or by low
enrollments.
What were your greatest challenges?
Development of curriculum for so many courses in so little time was an enormous
challenge. In some cases it was not possible to get required lab equipment installed in time
to offer courses on our original schedule.
Were there institutional barriers to success?
Barriers were minimal and manageable.
Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty
ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
Overall productivity, including the startup phase 2009-2010, was 389. We are continuing to
refine our scheduling, and productivity has shown continuous improvement year-to-year.
Success rates are excellent, with overall success over 80% for the last three semesters. Our
intro sections have the lowest success, which is to be expected, and our advanced sections
are typically in the 90-100% success range.
FT/PT faculty ratios are 67%/33%, but will shift as the Cisco Networking courses are moved
from CAS to ESYS, most likely resulting in an 81%/19% ratio.
Upon completion of our CLO assessments, we determined that we should continue to refine
our online curriculum and, to a lesser extent, our in-class lab activities.
2
B. What’s Next?
This section may serve as the foundation for your next Program Review cycle, and will inform the
development of future strategic initiatives for the college. In your narrative of one page or less, address
the following questions. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested)
to further detail your narrative and to request resources.
What goals do you have for future program improvement?
As we continue to refine our existing courses, we are exploring how to expand pathways
with new certificates. One pathway already in progress is the Certificate of Achievement in
Information and Communication Technology Support, based upon our existing A+
certification courses (ESYS 63A & B) and the Cisco CCNA courses, which are moving from
CAS to ESYS.
What ideas do you have to achieve those goals?
We are working with Las Positas Computer Networking Technology faculty on cooperative
efforts to coordinate course offerings and link online courses at both colleges.
What must change about the institution to enable you to make greater progress in
improving student learning and overall student success?
The administrative overhead burden placed on a single-person department take a
significant amount of time away from program development. When financially feasible,
release time for department heads should be restored.
What recommendations do you have to improve the Program Review process?
Stop the flex day marathons.
3
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
Classified Staffing (# of positions)
Supplies & Services
Technology/Equipment
Other
TOTAL
2012-13
Budget
Requested
1 (student)
$ 9,714
$ 16,500
2012-13
Budget
Received
1 (partial)
$ 9,436
$ 8,250
2013-14
Budget
Requested
1 (student)
$ 20,694
$ 27,000
2013-14
Budget
Received
1 (student)
$ 13,866
$ 27,000
$ 26,214
$ 17,686
$ 47,694
$ 40,866
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.
The majority of the funds provided equipment and supplies for the ESYS labs. The hands-on skills and
reinforcement of theoretical knowledge is critical for student success, and the new equipment and
supplies have been a huge asset.
A small amount (around 5%) of funds were used for instructor training. Costs were minimized by
fellowship grants and attending NSF-subsidized seminars. The training was critical for introducing new
courses, ESYS 63A and 63B.
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?
Partial funding of Home Technology Lab Stations in 12-13 resulted in increased costs to complete the
stations in 13-14 due to price increases and changes in the available equipment over the one-year
period. Failure to fund the Multisim/Ultiboard software upgrades for the ESYS lab results in students
using a new version at home, which creates files that are not downward compatible with the software in
the ESYS lab.
4
Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule
I.
Course-Level Student Learning Outcomes & Assessment Reporting
(CLO-Closing the Loop).
A. Check One of the Following:
No CLO-CTL forms were completed during this PR year. No Appendix B2 needs to
be submitted with this Year’s Program Review. Note: All courses must be assessed
once at least once every three years.
B. Calendar Instructions:
List all courses considered in this program review and indicate which year each course Closing
The Loop form was submitted in Program Review by marking submitted in the correct column.
Course
*List one course per line.
Add more rows as
needed.
ESYS 54, ESYS 55AB
ESYS 57AB, ESYS 60
ESYS 61 ESYS 62
ESYS 50, ESYS 51, ESYS 52
ESYS 56AB, ESYS 58,
ESYS 72ABCD
ESYS 63AB
This Year’s Program
Review
*CTL forms must be
included with this PR.
Last Year’s Program
Review
2-Years Prior
*Note: These courses
must be assessed in the
next PR year.
Submitted
Submitted
New courses
5
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?
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Program: _____
 PLO #1:

PLO #2:

PLO #3:

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
6
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
7
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? 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? YES
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 YES
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. ESYS 63AB and 72ABCD were assessed
this year. All other ESYS courses are scheduled for CTL next year.
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. The Computer
Networking Technology Certificate of Achievement in Information and Communication
Technology Support program is new, and will have PLOs developed by Fall 2013.
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)? ESYS courses with prerequisites have success rates around 90%. Enough
said.
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. Insufficient data to draw
conclusions.
8
Appendix E: Proposal for New Initiative
Cooperative Teaching and Scheduling for Chabot and Las Positas Computer Networking Technology Certificate
Programs
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?
This initiative will provide additional pathways for students seeking careers in the computer networking field. We enhance student learning by
leveraging the expertise of senior faculty at Chabot and Las Positas.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Offer courses for a certificate of achievement in Networking for Health Information at Chabot and Las Positas by cooperatively providing online
courses and on-campus support. We will leverage our resources by cross-listing online courses at both colleges, sharing load between faculties
at CC and LPC. This will generate WSCH for both colleges while effectively only requiring half of the FTEF at each college. The NetLab+ online lab
environment, started as a joint project last year, will provide online lab activities accessible from both colleges. The online experience will be
supported by existing on-campus CC and LPC lab facilities. A side benefit of this cooperative project will be that students at both campuses will
have greater exposure to the advanced certificate and degree offerings at CC and LPC, which may result in students pursuing additional
certificates and/or degrees.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Submit new course(s) and certificate proposal to curriculum
committees and both colleges
Schedule courses for Fall 2014 and Spring 2015
Deliver courses
Target
Completion
Date
Fall 2013
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
None
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
and Spring
0 to 0.2 FTEF for Fa14-Sp15
and Fa15-Sp16
See above
9
2015
Report on enrollments and certificates awarded
Fall 2016
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
CEMC allocation for FTEF (if needed)
(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: This project requires collaboration, coordination, and continued cooperation with LPC Computer Networking
Technology department.
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
10
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/Data2013.cfm.
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: ___
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
STAFFING REQUESTS (1000) FACULTY
Position
Description
Faculty (1000)
Program/Unit
Division/Area
Rationale for your proposal. Please use the enrollment management data. Data that will strengthen your rationale include FTES trends over
the last 5 years, FT/PT faculty ratios, recent retirements in your division, total number of full time and part-time faculty in the division, total
number of students served by your division, FTEF in your division, CLO and PLO assessment results and external accreditation demands.
2. 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.
11
12
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, and 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: _____
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS
Position
Classified Professional Staff (2000)
Description
Program/Unit
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) STUDENT ASSISTANTS
Postion
ESYS lab student assistant
Student Assistants (2000)
Description
Program/Unit
12-20 hrs/wk lab support for
Electronic Systems
evening classes
Technology
13
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
App Tech & Business
2. Rationale for your proposal.
The set-up, maintenance, and organization of the lab equipment and supplies places a large burden on faculty, and reduces the time the
instructor has to interact directly with the students during their lab activities. We had a lab assistant for a short time last semester, and the
benefits were evident.
3. 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.
4.
Hands-on skills training is a central element of the ESYS program, and the ESYS industry advisory committee has stressed the importance of these skills.
The additional support of a lab assistant provides a better organized, more efficient environment and directly results in improved student learning. A
student assistant has been a consistent request during each program review cycle, but it has been difficult to find a qualified student. As more students
progress through the ESYS programs there will be a larger pool of candidates for the position.
5.
14
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
athttp://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
COURSE
CNT 84
CNT 85
CURRENT
FTEF
(2013-14)
ADDITIONAL
FTEF
NEEDED
CURRENT
SECTIONS
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
0
0
.1
.1
0
0
1
1
0
0
36
36
15
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:
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
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.
16
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.
Supplies Requests [Acct. Category 4000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for supplies needed and an amount.
For items purchased in bulk, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
2. Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be in peril) or to meet mandated requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to jeopardize the life of a program if not
received in the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
needed totals in all areas
2013-14
Request
Requested
2014-15
Request
Received
Description
DreamSpark software subscription
NetLab+ support renewal
Printer Paper 4 cases @ $50
Toner cartridges 2 @ $225
Misc pens, markers, folders
Electronic components and tools
Amount
500
2,395
200
450
200
2000
Vendor
500
500.00
2364
2,395.00
Microsoft
NDG
Netlab
200
200.00
Staples
450
450.00
Staples
200
200.00
Staples
2000
2,000.00
Jameco
Division/Unit
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
17
Priority #1
X
X
X
X
X
X
Priority #2
Priority #3
Printed circuit boards, 100 @ $10
1000
1000
1,000.00
500
500.00
500
500.00
722
1,000.00
0
2,000.00
4430
9,500.00
0
12,500.0
0
PCBFab
Express
MCM
Electroni
cs
MP
Jones
500
Tools and electrical supplies
Electronic components and tools
Computer components
Lab Equipment Repair and
Calibration
500
1000
2000
8,749
NI-academic software license
Automation Studio software
upgrade
0
Amazon
Continent
al
Resource
s
National
Instrume
nts
Famic
Technolo
gies Inc.
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
Applied Tech &
Business
X
X
X
X
Applied Tech &
Business
X
Applied Tech &
Business
X
Applied Tech &
Business
X
Contracts and Services Requests [Acct. Category 5000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for each contract or service.
2. Travel costs should be broken out and then totaled (e.g., airfare, mileage, hotel, etc.)
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be in peril) or to meet mandated
requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to jeopardize the life of a program if not received in
the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional
benefit to the program.
augmentations only
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
18
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
19
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.
Description
Cisco Academy Conference
HI-TECH Conference
Amount
$ 200
Vendor
Cisco Systems
$ 1,000 HI-TECH
Priority Priority Priority
Division/Dept
#1
#2
#3
App Tech/
CNT
X
App Tech/
ESYS
X
20
Notes
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.
Instructions:
1. For each piece of equipment, there should be a separate line item for each piece and
an amount. 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.
2.
For bulk items, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are critical requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be
in peril) or to meet mandated requirements of local,
state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program but are not so critical as to
jeopardize the life of a program if not received in the requested academic year.
Priority 3: Are requests that are enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be
nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
Dell PowerEdge R720 Server
$ 8,500
Dell
App Tech & Business
21
Priority #1
X
Priority #2
Priority #3
22
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 reprioritizing 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): ESYS Lab Chairs and Stools
Building/Location:
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
Replace chairs and stools in lab classrooms 1602 and 1616 with adjustable-height stools and .
28 stools and 25 chairs in 1602
24 stools and 9 chairs in 1616
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
This supports the Electronics Systems Technology and the Engineering programs.
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to enhancing student learning?
The current chairs and stools are a mix of leftovers from other rooms. Most of the bench stools are solid metal, with a flat wooden
seat. Most of the chairs are very uncomfortable, and many have broken height adjustment, adding to an uncomfortable work
posture. ESYS labs are fours hours long, ENGR labs are three hours, which makes it difficult to sit and concentrate for that length of
time. The discomfort of the students distracts them from making the most effective use of their lab time.
23
24