Chabot College
Academic Program Review Report
Year Two of
Program Review Cycle
Health Discipline
Submitted on: 10/30/2013
Contact: Begoña Cirera Perez
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Section A: What Progress Have We Made? .............................. 1
Section B: What Changes Do We Suggest? ................................ 2
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History .........................................................................................3
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule .................................4
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections ..........................................5
C: Program Learning Outcomes....................................................................9
D: A Few Questions ...................................................................................11
E: New Initiatives ......................................................................................12
F1: New Faculty Requests ..........................................................................13
F2: Classified Staffing Requests ..................................................................14
F3: FTEF Requests ......................................................................................15
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests .................................................16
F5: Supplies and Services Requests ............................................................17
F6: Conference/Travel Requests ................................................................18
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests ........................................19
F8: Facilities Requests ................................................................................20
A. What Progress Have We Made?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence,
and enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm.
In your narrative of two or less pages, address the following questions:





What were your year one Program Review goals?
Did you achieve those goals? Specifically describe your progress on the goals you set for
student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan achievement.
What are you most proud of?
What challenges did you face that may have prevented achieving your goals?
Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty
ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
1) Year One Program Review Goals (not listed in priority order):
 Continue to increase success and retention rates of African-Americans, Pacific Islanders,
Latinos and Native Americans in our classes.
 Decrease the number of withdrawal rates in our courses, specifically Nutrition 1
withdrawal rates, by emphasizing the importance of basic math skills as well as basic
chemistry knowledge before enrolling in the course.
 Ensure faculty, and courses are up to date with constantly changing health and nutrition
information. Health and nutritional sciences are dynamic and new findings are
constantly discovered. As a result, we need to stay current in order for our students to
learn the most current, reliable information on these fields.
 Carefully balance our mix of on-campus day, on-campus evening, online and
hybrid/online offerings. While online classes provide maximum access to classes, the
tradeoff is lower retention and diminished offerings for students who prefer on-campus
classes.
 Consider the possibility of offering weekend courses.
2) Did you achieve those goals?
GOAL 1) Continue to increase success and retention rates of African-Americans, Pacific
Islanders, Latinos and Native Americans in our classes. Achieved? YES!
Overall, there have been no changes on rates of success, non-success and withdrawal for all
discipline courses combined since last year’s program review. The percentages are also at par
with those of Chabot College students. See table below.
1
Combined rates for on-campus, online, and hybrid, Fall 2009 – Spring 2013*
Chabot College*
Health
Success
(%)
66
65
Non-success
(%)
16
18
Withdrawal
(%)
17
17
* Does not add up to 100%, but this is the data available online.
However, when looking at further detail, we can see that overall there has been a very modest increase
in success rates for African American and Pacific Islander (both increased 1% in success rates). Latino
had an increase success rate of 4% as compared to last year (now 5% above Chabot College average),
and Native American had a success rate increase of 13% as compared to last year (now 15% above
Chabot College’s average for this ethnic group).
Success rates by ethnicity, compared to Chabot Overall:
Ethnicity
African American
Asian
Filipino
Latino
Native American
Pacific Islander
White
Health (%)
57
79
73
70
79
64
78
Chabot (%)
52
75
69
65
64
61
74
GOAL 2) Decrease the number of withdrawal rates in our courses, specifically Nutrition 1
withdrawal rates, by emphasizing the importance of basic math skills as well as basic chemistry
knowledge before enrolling in the course. Achieved? For Nutrition: slight change on W rates (20
to 21 percent), however non-success rates have increased by four percent. Health 1 has
increased its Non-success rate by 4 percent, but has lowered their W rates by 4 percent. Health
4’s Non-success rates remained unchanged, however, the Withdrawal rates decreased 7
percent. Health 8’s Non-success rates remained unchanged, but Withdrawal rates decreased 4
percent.
Non-success, and withdrawal rates for Fall 2009 to Spring 2013:
Course
Non-success Rates
Withdrawal Rates
Health 1
14/18
18.5/14
Health 4
23/23
15/8
Health 8
29.5/30
23/19
24
13
15/19
20/21
Health 16*
Nutrition 1**
* Has not been offered since Fall 2010 (no new data available)
2
** It is worth noting that Nutrition 1 has gone through a significant change in the past few
years. In the Fall of 2009, following a recommendation from our articulation officer, Nutrition 1
was added to the GE area “E”. Although Nutrition 1 has no prerequisites, it has always had a
“Strongly Recommended” advisory of Chemistry 30A, due to its content. And, although this
course has always been open for enrollment to all students, before Fall 2009, the vast majority
of students who enrolled in this course were those in majors such as Nursing, Health Science,
Dental Hygiene, pre-med students, and other Allied Health Science majors. These students
generally followed the requisite advisory. Once Nutrition 1 was added to Area E of the GE list, a
shift of the type of students that were enrolling in the course shifted dramatically. While before
Fall 2009, students taking this course were >90% Allied Health majors, currently it is around
50% (evidence stems from in-class data collection). More importantly, LPC also noticed this
pattern, as the class in both colleges went through the same change. Additionally, LPC and
Chabot noticed a shift in Success vs. Non-Success rates of our students. Before Fall 2009, our
students had significantly higher success rates, which would align with the preparedness of
students majoring in Allied Health. After Fall 2009, as a result of adding the class to the G.E.
requirements, the success rates dropped, and hence, the higher numbers of non-success. Two
years later, in the Fall of 2011, after much communication with LPC, and while comparing our
data, both disciplines decided to make a curriculum change to bring success rates back to what
they used to be before Fall 2009. The changes included: 1) a class name change from
“Nutrition” to the “Science of Nutrition”; 2) the addition of “Strongly Recommended” to include
Math 65; 3) the removal of the word “basic” in the course description. These changes have
been active since Fall 2012; the data assessed here does not reflect such changes. However,
both LPC and Chabot Colleges are hoping that these changes will change the success rates of
our students enrolling in this class. Thus far, reviewing preliminary data for Fall 2012, the first
semester that this change was implemented, we have noticed a decrease in Non-success rate of
2 percent. It is a promising change. I personally believe that Counselors need to be educated on
these data, so that they can more accurately advise our students.
GOAL 3) Achieved? Yes! We constantly update our textbooks and consequently our teaching
materials.
GOAL 4) Achieved? With what we have been given (or rather taken away), yes! Our discipline
continues to reinvent itself by trying new approaches to serve a larger population, regardless of
the constant cuts that our division at large is always facing. Since last year, we have changed a
fully face-to-face Health 1 section onto hybrid, and as of Fall 2013 (although not for this year’s
review), for the very first time, we have substituted our evening Nutrition 1 section for a hybrid
Nutrition 1 section.
GOAL 5) Achieved? Unfortunately not. We have lost Adjunct Health Faculty due to constant
budgetary cuts. Our F/T faculty has bumped our P/T faculty, and as a result, we are barely
keeping up with sections offered for daytime students.
3
3) What are you most proud of?
a) The success rates of our students are higher than those of Chabot’s overall success rates,
regardless of ethnicity.
b) The success rates of our minority students are significantly higher than those of Chabot’s
minority students’ rates (see table “Success rates by ethnicity” above.
c) Our Withdrawals rates for Health 4 and 8 have decreased, while our Non-Success rates have
remained the same.
d) Chabot and LPC have worked jointly to bring significant changes to Nutrition 1, while keeping
the doors open for all students who wish to enroll, and bringing success rates to what they used
to be before curriculum changes occurred in the Fall of 2009.
e) Even though our faculty has to read and grade weekly essays, discussion boards, and papers,
we have managed to keep our classes highly productive, with at least 44 students per class.
f) Our discipline, regardless of budgetary cuts and not adding much cost on our district in terms
of staff, supplies, services and equipment, still has a tremendous impact on the amount of
students that we serve overall in this college. Our faculty commits themselves to serving more
students than what they are compensated for to allow for our campus to offer lower
productivity classes. I would like to take this opportunity to make a clarification, which should
not be ignored. The data, accessible to all that summarizes Capacity, Census, and WSCH is
misleading, and actually hurts our discipline, while it may help others. When looking at class
“Capacity”, our courses are considered “full” with 44 students (Health 1, 4, 8, Nutrition 1).
HOWEVER, to ease the enrollment process of students, these numbers are often changed on
CLASSWEB to a Capacity of “55”, “75”, or even “100”. This is where the data, the way that it is
presented, is misleading, and unfair: if the “Capacity” of a Health 1 class is set to “75”, and the
Census is “75”, for example, the “%” capacity and “WSCH/FTEF” columns reflect misleading
numbers. Notice the following table:
At any given moment, an example of any of our classes in our discipline. Note: the Capacity
for our courses is set at 44:
Capacity
44
75
44
55
75
Census
44
75
78
65
71
%
100*
100*
177
118
95***
WSCH/FTEF
660
750
975**
975**
710***
* 100% capacity in the same class that has a census of 44, vs. a census of 75 enrolled students.
** Same WSCH/FTEF for a class with a census of 78 students, vs. one with 65 students.
4
*** Ninety-five percent capacity in a class with 71 students, and WSCH/FTEF of 710, when it has more
students enrolled than a class with 65 students.
Due to this data, I suggest that ALL Capacity is set to 44 for this discipline, and across campus data to
avoid misleading information and interpretation of data.
4) What challenges did you face that may have prevented achieving your goals?
As explained directly above, the way that the data is presented can be misleading and hurts our
discipline. Changing how the data for “Division/Subject/Course/Section Summary by Term” is presented
will provide us with more transparency, less confusion, and more accurate data summarizing the work
that our discipline performs for our students, community and college.
Since the retirement of our F/T faculty member, Jeanine Paz, and constant budgetary cuts occurring to
our division, the Health discipline has been facing major constraints to continue to keep the doors open
to as many students as possible.
Not having student tutors for our classes, especially Nutrition 1.
Not having library orientation for our classes. Due to the fact that our campus does not have a large
lecture room equipped to have library orientations, our students cannot be accommodated.
Not having sufficient counselors for students. A lot of our students drop classes for an array of personal
and financial issues. Counselors could prevent some of our students from dropping classes.
No data for summer courses are listed. We need this data to accurately analyze results.
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
Review the Strategic Plan goal and key strategies at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/StrategicPlan/SPforPR.pdf prior to completing your
narrative. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested) to
further detail your narrative. Limit your narrative to two pages, and be very specific about
what you hope to achieve, why, and how.
Given your experiences and student achievement results over the past year, what changes do
you suggest to your course/program improvement plan? What new initiatives might you begin to
support the achievement of our Strategic Plan goal? Do you have new ideas to improve student
learning? What are your specific, measurable goals? How will you achieve them? Would any of these
require collaboration with other disciplines or areas of the college? How will make that collaboration
occur?
As explained above (Page 3, under the note “**”), after comparing success data for Nutrition 1
with LPC, we have made curriculum changes to Nutr 1 that will 1) provide more information to
5
counselors about this course; 2) will clarify requirements to assure higher success in this class,
and 3) will ultimately increase success rates.
Not enrolling more than 50 students per class as to avoid bottlenecks. Our large classes cause
bottlenecks for when students need classes that can only enroll 24 students, as it is the case for
English/math courses. Since our budgetary constraints may not allow us to hire more faculty,
our high productivity courses should only enroll 50 students, as to decrease bottlenecks. Longterm, this may cause for the campus not to meet base, and lose state funding, and this would
cause for less students to be served, and less faculty hired or needed. However, I cannot see
other solutions to solve bottlenecks. It would be interesting to know the history of bottlenecks.
When did they start and why. This may help us figure out what may need changing. At the
moment, as of Fall 2013, our discipline has not been capable of lowering enrollment to avoid
bottlenecks. Furthermore, it does not appear as if enrollment will decrease in the Spring 2014,
and actually needs to increase to meet FTEFs for the campus. As a result, bottlenecks seem to
continue to be an inevitable aspect of our campus.
Show data for Summer courses, since these may make a difference in results. In addition,
change how data is represented so that a class with 44 enrolled students (100 % capacity) is not
confused with a class of 75 enrolled students, which is also represented as 100% capacity
(referring to CLASSWEB interpretation of class capacity).
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
2011-12
Budget
Requested
0
0
0
0
0
2011-12
Budget
Received
2012-13
Budget
Requested
0
0
0
0
0
2012-13
Budget
Received
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.
6
N/A
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?
N/A
7
Appendix B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
All courses must be assessed at least once every three years. Please complete this chart that
defines your assessment schedule.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE:
Spring
Fall
2013
2013
Courses:
Group 1:
Group 2:
Group 3:
Group 4:
Full
Assmt
Spring
2014
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
& report
Full
Assmt
Fall
2014
Spring
2015
Fall
2015
Spring
2016
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
& report
8
Fall
2016
Spring
2017
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
Health 1
Spring 2012
12
3
25%
Spring 2013
Ken Grace
Charlotte Lofft
Form Instructions:
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
>75%
85%
(CLO) 2: Student will implement a constructive
health behavior change.
>75%
95%
(CLO) 3: Student will be able to identify and describe
>75%
90%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Student will differentiate between
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
behaviors that enhance health and those that
are detrimental to health.
the six dimensions of health and well being.
N/A
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
9
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
A. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Current scores are above target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
We are above target on our student success, and it is well reflected in the data.
B. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Well above target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Our behavior change assignment has brought about real, tangible positive health changes
to our students. These changes are long lasting and are the type of change that cannot be
replaced with money, or degrees. We are proud of our collective work which has help us
develop an easy, hands-on approach that tackle many of our students’ detrimental health
behaviors slowly and efficiently.
10
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
Well above target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
We are happy to report well above average scores with this CLO. It is an eye-opener for
students, since it teaches them that health is not merely the absence of disease (physical
health), but a combination of physical, mental, spiritual, environmental, social, and
intellectual perspective. It truly helps students approach health in a holistic way.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
11
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
None (health courses). Nutrition course has had a curriculum change that will hopefully also
change the success of our students in this course. Hopefully, we will be able to see these
changes soon (implemented Fall 2012).
2. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
Continue as planned. Our numbers and success rates are above average, and PLO results
above 75%, with some above 90%.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other: Continue as planed. It is working. If it is working, don’t break it.
12
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: Health
 PLO #1: Students will differentiate between behaviors that enhance health and those that
are detrimental to health. – Students have done so very successfully.

PLO #2: Evaluate and formulate interrelationships of attitude and behavior as they relate
to sexual well-being. – Students have done so very successfully.

PLO #3: Based on dietary analysis, discuss strengths and weaknesses of personal diet.
VERY successful results!

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Explain: See below.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed: The assignments that we have developed are well coordinated with the
lectures. This type of teaching is working well for our students, and we will continue to offer
such assignments as they seem to be the most efficient to teach our students the most
important points of our discipline.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned: Continue as is. Hopefully our changes to Nutrition 1 (coordinated with LPC)
will have a positive impact on our discipline success rates.
Program: Health
 PLO #1: Students will develop a plan of action for a healthy behavior change.
13

PLO #2: Students evaluate and formulate physiological and psychological behaviors of
sexual health.

PLO #3: Students plan dietary changes necessary to improve personal diet.
 PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Explain: See below.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed: The assignments that we have developed are well coordinated with the
lectures. This type of teaching is working well for our students, and we will continue to offer
such assignments as they seem to be the most efficient to teach our students the most
important points of our discipline.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned: Continue as is.
14
Appendix D: A Few Questions
Please answer the following questions with "yes" or "no". For any questions answered "no",
please provide an explanation. No explanation is required for "yes" answers :-)
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? If no, identify the
course outlines you will update in the next curriculum cycle. Ed Code requires all course
outlines to be updated every six years.
2. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog?
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.
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.
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.
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?
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.
Answers:
1. YES!
2. All apart from Health 16. We are hoping to bring it back. This is an important class to help
students learn approaches to successfully lose weight.
3. YES!
4. YES!
5. YES!
6. No course sequences.
7. Obviously, if our students are not learning what they should be learning in High School, it makes
our community colleges an extension of high school. As a result classes that have any writing
assignments require that students have proper writing skills. Students enrolled in Health 1, 4, 8
seem to all benefit from having college level English. Nutrition 1 has not been assessed for
either (English or Math). It has been assessed for chemistry, however, although it is not
considered a “basic skill”.
15
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?
N/A
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Target
Required Budget (Split out
Completion personnel, supplies, other
Date
categories)
Activity (brief description)
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
(obtained by/from):
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain:
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
16
Appendix F1: Full-Time Faculty/Adjunct Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category
1000]
Audience: Faculty Prioritization Committee and Administrators
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time faculty
and adjuncts
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request,
including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three years, student
success and retention data , and any other pertinent information. Data is available at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm .
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: __1__
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. Adjunct Faculty
Nutrition Science faculty
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal. Please use the enrollment management data. Additional data that will
strengthen your rationale include FTES trends over the last 5 years, persistence, FT/PT faculty ratios,
CLO and PLO assessment results and external accreditation demands.
Presently we have over 600 students majoring in Life Science degrees. These students require Nutrition
1 to graduate. We only offer 4 sections of Nutrition 1 course per semester, and we cannot offer
additional sections without additional faculty. Our discipline (and college) needs more faculty that is
qualified to teach Nutrition Science (NUTR 1), so that more sections can be offered. In addition, we have
been asked by the Science & Math Division to add more sections of NUTR 1, since many of their
students need the class for their majors. We cannot add more sections without more qualified faculty.
As of now, we only have one faculty member qualified to teach this class. We would like to add two
more sections of Nutrition 1 to our regular schedule. Recruiting an adjunct faculty member is crucial to
fulfill this goal.
4. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and your student learning goals are
required. Indicate here any information from advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews
that is pertinent to the proposal.
On average, 266 students are enrolled in Nutrition 1 classes in any given semester. Recalling that 4
sections are offered every semester, this is an average of 66 students per class. These numbers have
been constant for the past 4 years. In addition, we have started to offer 1 section of Nutrition 1 during
the summer, and this section serves an additional 50 to 70 students annually. This number has been
consistent and contingent upon summer course availability on campus. However, the number of
students trying to add this class in any given semester (those who are trying to enroll but do not make it
to the Waitlist), is over 200 each semester. Adding more sections to our schedule is imperative, but we
need more faculty to do so. At the moment, a part-time faculty member would be very helpful in
17
fulfilling this goal at serving our community.
18
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: __0____
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal.
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.
19
Appendix F3: FTEF Requests
Audience: Administrators, CEMC, PRBC
Purpose: To recommend changes in FTEF allocations for subsequent academic year and guide Deans and
CEMC in the allocation of FTEF to disciplines. For more information, see Article 29 (CEMC) of the Faculty
Contract.
Instructions: In the area below, please list your requested changes in course offerings (and
corresponding request in FTEF) and provide your rationale for these changes. Be sure to analyze
enrollment trends and other relevant data at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.asp
We were hoping to receive 1 FTEF for the academic year 2013-2014, thus far, this has not happened. We are still
proposing to add two extra sections of Nutrition 1 to our Spring semester, and following semesters. We are also
proposing to add two sections of Health 1 as these have been cut in previous years. Both of these courses create
bottlenecks. Health 1 is required for graduation. We are requesting 1 FTEF to fulfill these requests.
20
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: _1____
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. Tutors
Nutrition 1 tutor
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.
Although our SLO results are above our expectations, we would prefer having lower withdrawal and
non-success rates. Every semester, students ask for nutrition tutors, and unfortunately, we do not have
a dedicated tutor for this class.
21
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.
Project or Items
Requested
0
2012-13 Budget
Requested Received
$
2013-14
Request
$
22
Rationale
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [ Acct. Category 5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and Staff Development
Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions: Please list specific conferences/training programs, including specific information on the
name of the conference and location. Note that the Staff Development Committee currently has no
budget, so this data is primarily intended to identify areas of need that could perhaps be fulfilled on
campus, and to establish a historical record of need. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals
and/or connection to the Strategic Plan goal.
Conference/Training
Program
0
2013-14 Request
Rationale
$
23
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.
Project or Items
Requested
0
2012-13 Budget
Requested Received
$0
0
2013-14
Request
$687.40
Rationale*
Teaching Visual Aids will be utilized by
health and nutrition faculty to enhance
learning and success rates.
* 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.
24
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities
Committee (FC) has begun the task of re-prioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current
needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet capital improvement
needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two
to be used as match if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that
will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined that although some of the college's greatest
needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many smaller
pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond
dollars include the "repairing, constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities."
Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests. If requesting more than one
facilities project, please rank order your requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name):
Building/Location:
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
25