Chabot College
Academic Program Review Report
Year Two of
Program Review Cycle
Computer Science
Submitted: November 2013
Desmond Chun
Jonathan Traugott
Keith Mehl
Wanda Wong
Final Forms, 1/18/13
1
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
2
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 alsoreview your most recent success, equity, course sequence,
and enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.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 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.).
Introduction
Computer Science gives potential students:
1. transfer credited courses to a four year institution such as California State University
system or the University of California system
2. vocational training for students interested in additional job skills
Currently, there are three instructors assigned to this department. Course topics include:
1. Computer Literacy (CSCI 8)
2. Introduction to Computing (CSCI 7)
3. Microsoft’s Visual Studio.NET (CSCI 10 - Visual Basic.NET)
4. C++ (CSCI 14, 15, 20)
5. Java (CSCI 19A)
6. Assembly Language Programming (CSCI 21)
7. Introduction to UNIX (CSCI 41)
Success or effectiveness can be approximately determined in three ways:
 Number of students signing up for a course
 Number of transfer students being admitted to a four year institution
 Number of degrees (AA, AS, Certificates) being granted
Success Rates in Transfer sequence have improved due to new prerequisites for CSCI 14 (CSCI 7,
Math 54/55).
 For period Fall 11 through Fall 2012, overall success in CSCI 14 is 52%, an big improvement
over 2009-2010 where success rates were in the 33%-41% range.
 For students who took both Math 54/55 and CSCI 7, success in CSCI 14 is 69%
3
Success rates in CSCI 14 by Math and CSCI 7 prerequisites. Combined Fall 11 through Fall 12
CSCI 7
Math 54/55
CSCI 7 & Math combined
Neither
Overall
Success
50%
48%
69%
53%
52%
Non-success
25%
28%
22%
25%
24%
Withdrawal
25%
28%
8%
23%
24%
The relatively good outcomes in the Neither category probably reflect students who didn’t need to
take Math 55 because they placed into Math 20 or Math 1 (for example). The other rows indicate that
both CSCI 7 and Math 54/55 are effective prerequisites, particularly if combined, so we don’t plan to
change either prerequisite at this time.
The primary focus of Computer Science is its three course transfer program (CSCI 14, 15 and
20) and its graduation/transfer requirement support for other disciplines such as Engineering
(CSCI 14) or Business Administration (CSCI 8). Once a student transfers, tracking their success
through graduation or professional job placement becomes difficult due to privacy
considerations and lack of available data.
Relevant enrollment data from Fall 2012 and Spring 2013 indicate that all course offerings
were either full or had wait lists by January just before the start of the Spring Semester. That
is a positive indication of demand. Looking at the 2011 and 2012 CSCI enrollments, there
seems to be an uptick in concert with the improving job market (as of this writing, it is
nationwide 7.5% unemployment down from a high of 12+% during the 2008 recession).
CSCI is also required for such other majors as Physics and Engineering. Our CSCI 8 Computer
Literacy (equivalent to the CAS 50) is a requirement in other majors outside of Math &
Science (e.g. Medical Assisting and Business).
Based on historical it takes two CSCI 15 sections to confidently fill one CSCI 20 section. It takes
on average two or more CSCI 14 sections to fill confidently fill one CSCI 15. The CSCI 15 and 20
sections are dependent on the previous course enrollments. Most students who enroll in CSCI
20 tend to pass since they are in effect survivors.
An ideal situation would have at least three to four CSCI 14 sections per semester and at least
two CSCI 15 sections to feed a minimum of one CSCI 20. As discussed later, this can be
achieved through a combination of reallocating FTEF from non-transfer sequence courses
(e.g. CSCI 6, CSCI 10) and through additional FTEF allocation over the long term.
The corse sequence can be taken from Spring of Year One to Fall Year though Spring Year
Two. Fall of Year One could be used for any prerequisites such as CSCI 7 or Math 55.
Currently, we have only two CSCI 14 sections per semester and one CSCI 15 alternating with
one CSCI 20. If a student starts late such as in spring on the “wrong” year (i.e. CSCI 20 taught
in Fall of that year, they have a year layover. Spring 2014 there will be a catch up CSCI 15
section to adjust for that with the set sequence of:
4
Fall 2013
Two sections CSCI 14, one section CSCI 15, one section CSCI 21
Spring 20114 Two sections CSCI 14, one section CSCI 15 (temporary to adjust), one section
CSCI 20
Fall 2014
Two sections CSCI 14, one section CSCI 20, one section CSCI 21
Spring 2015 Two sections CSCI 15, one section CSCI 15
Fall 2015
Two sections CSCI 14, one section CSCI 20, one section CSCI 21
Another long range future factor that may impact budgets is the current decision in
Sacramento to defund Adult Education and move it under the Community College system
impacting room availability, physical infrastructure and priority funding. Over the last decade,
we have lost personnel, courses and priority.
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
Review the Strategic Plan goal and key strategiesat
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/StrategicPlan/SPforPR.pdfprior 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?
Transfer Sequence



CSCI 14 is bottleneck to the transfer sequence (CSCI 14, 15, 20, 21). Recent enrollments in CSCI
14 have been > 20% over the cap of 35/section.
The trend drawn from 2004 through 2013 is solidly upwards and suggests a need for two
additional sections of CSCI 14 and one additional CSCI 15 (per year) by 2017. (See below.)
Additional sections of in the transfer sequence could be achieved through increased FTEF and
reducing sections of non-transfer sequence courses (e.g. CSCI 6 and CSCI 10).
CSCI 14 Enrollments
120
93
91
59
48
38
67 65
63 65
64
89
88
64
69
83 83
69
100
89
80
CSCI 14 Enrollments
60
Linear (CSCI 14 Enrollments)
5
40
20
0
In the modern world, computer science is increasingly integrated into other disciplines such
as engineering, physics and biology. Even in Mathematics, fundamental results may depend
on use of a computer (e.g. proof of the four color theorem). Therefore it’s fitting that CSCI
integrate material from other disciplines in our programming courses. Rather than assign a
generic programming assignment, we might for example give an assignment relating to
material in Physics 4A, Engineering 25 or Math 8. There are many such opportunities and for
the benefit of the discipline and the division we should explore them. Depending on the
student cohort there may be opportunities for synchronizing assignments between two
courses, or even, in some way, combining sections from different disciplines.
The big movement in both Sacramento and the larger academic arena is online education.
This venue is a less cost, higher availability and more student flexible then the traditional live
action scheduled class lecture/lab meetings. The four year institutions have already
implemented and are actively testing such venues. CSCI 8, CSCI 41 and several sections of
CSCI 14 have or are been given in either a solely online or hybrid (online and some live action
meetings) venue. Dropout rates and failures seem be slightly higher than their live action
counterparts but not all that severe. The big question is how effectively did that student learn
the material and objectives compared to their live action class counterpart. Publisher
materials, automatic test grading, video presentation, their own 24/7 Help desks, and other
computerized learning aids supporting up to hundreds of online students are beginning to
make online education a robust complement to on-campus instruction.
Most employers are now starting to place less emphasis on book learning and paper
diplomas. Certifications beyond that traditional diploma from a certified institution are in
some cases required. Corporate America has embraced the lean employment model relying
more on temporaries and contractors as opposed to full time employees. It is expertise and
the capability to use the tools to implement a unique solution that is now prized among
employers. That is something a massively enrolled, online, automated course simply cannot
do as opposed to that human element and flexibility.
6
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
1,000
0
0
1,000
2011-12
Budget
Received
0
1,000
0
0
1,000
2012-13
Budget
Requested
0
1,000
0
0
1,000
2012-13
Budget
Received
0
1000
0
0
1000
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.
Instructor efficiency (and morale) is a positive factor in student success. Without paper or toner,
personal preparation time is hampered. Cutting our minimal supply funding against “higher” priorities
does make a “statement” on the worth of a program.
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?
Currently, with the exception of Microsoft Office, all of the IDEs (Integrated Development Environment)
and compilers are all “freeware” with no licenses. Money is used for paper, toner cartridges and
miscellaneous expendable supplies used by the three primary instructors in this department to help
their learning and effectiveness.
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
Fall
2016
Spring
2017
Discuss
results
Report
Results
8
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
CSCI 10
Fall 2011
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
1
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
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
85%
80%
75%
75%
85%
Recognize the functionally and ease of windows based
user interface (IDE) for programs written in Visual
Basic.NET by selecting and understanding which of the
proper or available objects controls to embed on the Form
and to code the proper event that each of those objects
"detect" when the program is executing. Discuss the
advantages of a window based, event driven language vs.
an older "command line prompt language such as C or C++.
(CLO) 2:
Using and concept of loops (i.e. for and while). When is a
loop appropriate to the logic and which particular type of
loop is best to use in that situation.
(CLO) 3:
Use of graphics, sound, mouse and timer based capabilities
within a Visual Basic application
(CLO) 4:
9
 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?
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?
Windows based programming requires a higher degree of skill and knowledge since it is a
more complex application. Most students have an affinity to this newer programming
language and its capabilities vs. the more arcane older language’s grammar and syntax
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?
Since CSCI 6, CSCI 10 and CSCI 19A are not in the transfer core, they are in a strict sense
non-essential courses. This perspective is useful but we need to temper it with realworld considerations. In a work environment, job candidates often fail since that
situation or application tools do not match what was in the class room or textbook.
Different languages, their capabilities and syntax give that student the breath of a wider
world. Similarly in the transfer school, a student who has not been exposed to a variety
of programming languages is unable to pick up new ones quickly. For example if the
student transfers to San Jose State they may need to quickly pick up the Java programing
language. Without having taken some non C++ based course they will find the transition
difficult if not impossible.
So while it may be productive to reallocate some FTEF from non-transfer course to
transfer courses, it would be counterproductive to do so in excess or to simply regard the
non-transfer courses as expendable.
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?
About as expected. You tend to see a very good student or a student who is struggling.
Rarely do you find a real “average” in the middle type.
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?
10
It is the preparation, discipline, dedication and background of the general population.
The older, experienced ones who have been in industry tend to do far better than the
ones just out of high school. That is something out of our control. The better students
have gone directly to a four year institution and bypassed the CC system. The less
prepared seem to have no inkling of what is required or the personal cost and dedication
to be a Computer Science major. We need to do a better job of informing new students
about the commitments required to succeed as a Computer Science major.
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?
The students who use the current smart devices have an affinity and interests in this
capability as they can relate to it. Students wonder “how is this relevant” when offered the
old style command-line interface of C++. CSCI 6, CSCI 10 and CSCI 19A offer a more
contemporary graphical style of programming so they provide good complements to the
core transfer courses taught in C++.
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?
Students benefit from this type of 21st century application programming language. But
unless motivated to do so, many individuals do not explore for curiosity’s sake.
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?
N/A
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?
11
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
12
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?
In order to work within limited FTEF we are looking to Chabot Community Ed. to offer
courses of a more vocational nature. One such course will be offered this summer in
Android smart phone Programming.
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?
Reallocating some FTEF from the non-core courses to the transfer sequence. But just
shuffling courses is a long term solution. We hope additional FTEF will be available in coming
years to support growth of the program.
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:___None of the above_______________________________________
13
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: __Computer Science______________________________________________
 PLO #1:Transfer preparation: Prepare students for transfer to a four year college and successful
completion of upper division courses in Computer Science. This PLO primarily involves the course
sequence CSCI 7, CSCI 14, CSCI 15, CSCI 20, CSCI 21 and secondarily CSCI 10, CSCI 19A and CSCI 41.
Produce a transfer ready Computer Science major that has a very solid foundation to
succeed at the Junior and Senior level. This is manifested by the eLumen SLOs for each of
our courses.

PLO #2:Programming Fluency: Logical thinking and standard methodology to determine a logical
solution or process. What factors in the assignment or task govern your use of various options
within the language? Cover the major standard capabilities in the programming language such as
arrays, looping, decision making structures, input/output, data file processing and manipulations,
memory pointers and sorting, for example. The PLO relates to all programming courses.Get the
students through the program as quickly and efficiently as possible and provide them
with as wide a range of languages as possible (i.e. UNIX environment, basic Microsoft
Windows, Microsoft Office Suite, C/C++, Python, Visual Basic, Java for example). We no
longer teach HTML or any web based capabilities in a web based world.
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
A student is transfer ready only if that have taken the core transfer sequence (CSCI 14, 15, 20,
21) AND been exposed to at least two other high level programming languages besides C++, for
example Java in CSCI 19A and Python in CSCI 7.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed: We produce a number of students that seem to do well in their transfer but
that is by word of mouth and cannot be proven due to privacy laws and lack of
information/data. Reports from CSUEB indicate that our students do quite well in the
Computer Science major.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned: Provide learning assistants for the lab component of classes.
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. CSCI 8 update is pending to reflect a new requirement
that ACCESS (or a database alternative) be officially assigned required student
assignments/exercises
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.YES
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.YES
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?YES (CSCI 14, 15, 20)
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.YES. According to
Institutional Research, successful Math and English have a major bearing and factor in success
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?
Activity (brief description)
Target
Required Budget (Split out
Completion personnel, supplies, other
Date
categories)
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 Committeeand 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. Discussanticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plangoal. 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: ____
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. N/A
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.
N/A
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.
N/A
17
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. N/A
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal.
N/A
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.
N/A
18
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/Data2012.cfm.
Currently, demand and wait list demands are balanced by the number of sections. An additional 0.5 FTEF for one
new CSCI 8 and one new CSCI 14 are requested. Business Administration has asked that we offer more CSCI 8
sections in support of their students’ graduation and degree requirements. An additional CSCI 14 would be
welcomed since this is a bottleneck course to the transfer sequence, as discussed earlier.
19
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: N/A
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. N/A
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.
All CSCI courses have a lab component where a learning assistant would be of benefit to the students. It
is simply not possible to help 35 students simultaneously debug their programs in one lab session. We
request 6-8 learning assistants per semester to assist primarily CSCI 7, CSCI 8 and transfer sequence
courses CSCI 14 and CSCI 15.
20
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
Microsoft Office
2012 Suite
(individual licenses)
Assorted Office
Supplies (flow pens,
white board erasers,
personal USBs, gel
pens
2012-13 Budget
Requested
Received
2013-14
Request
$189/license
Rationale
For use at home in support of
teaching CSCI 8, preparation work for
all other classes
Use in class during the academic year
$200
21
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
N/A
2013-14 Request
Rationale
$0
22
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
Microsoft Office
2012 Suite
(individual licenses)
2012-13 Budget
Requested
Received
2013-14
Request
$189/license
Rationale*
For use at home in support of
teaching CSCI 8, preparation work for
all other classes
* 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.
23
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): N/A
Building/Location: N/A
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
No specialized facilities requested. All current classes taught in the new 1800 Bldg
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
N/A
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
N/A
24
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
Tram VoKumamoto, Dean, Math & Sciences
Desmond K.H. Chun, Instructor, Computer Sciences
2013/2014 Program Review Addendum
11/07/2013
Nothing major has changed in the current Computer Science program. No need resources or personnel
are needed nor is any additional resources contemplated for use in the future. Any additional major
personnel needs (e.g. one of the current full time instructors is not available such as for a Load Banked
Leave) can be fulfilled by Wanda Wong in Business Administration.
The only minor changes of any note are:
 Addition of a required database assignment in CSCI 8 curriculum
 Deletion of the “General Computer Science AA/AS”, replacing it with the “Mathematics”
oriented AA/AS version for transfer
25