Final Forms, 1/18/13

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
.
I didn’t set or achieve any goals—in fact, due to constraints on my time, I didn’t turn in Program
Review last year. The majority of my effort during the past year has gone to being a player supporting the transition to being a college that is increasingly data-driven and studentfocused, helping the college achieve its goals in student learning assessment, ensuring that my courses had CLOs and were assessed, and that my courses were updated in compliance with
Title V. These goals and requirements were met. I am proud of my contributions to the college as a whole, but this work has been possible because of the strength of our adjuncts and the generally strong courses (G.E. and major demand) we offer.
I am proud of the adjuncts in my disciplines, who have shouldered the bulk of the teaching and student contact, as they teach 66% of the classes in these disciplines. We took a deep blow to our depth and breadth of teaching two years ago, with the passing of John Parente. I am grateful for the work of adjuncts in completing assessment, and their “stepping” up to take on additional load when it was offered to the division to support the college in achieving its FTES goal. Students are generally successful in our classes, and tend to persist and succeed in greater numbers in other courses after taking courses in our disciplines. Our enrollments of under-represented populations continue to grow, although we haven’t done anything in particular to attract these students.
1

As submitted in spring 2013, based on data acquired during the Spring Flex Days, I intend to begin work on a pathway/outreach program intended to support the over 300 students who have declared humanities, philosophy, or liberal arts/studies (humanities) as majors. This has been described in the new initiatives appendix. This effort will necessitate research about those students and where they are in their program as well as research with those students about their needs. I will need to work collaboratively with other disciplines whose courses comprise significant requirements for the major. The point is to determine whether these students are making timely progress through their majors/education goals, where they are stymied, and what support they need. All of this will help shape a pathway/outreach effort intended to improve the number of students who complete their education goal in these majors in a timely way. I had intended to begin this work in Fall 2013, but due to the extension of the Title III grant and the necessity to continue administering those funds, I did not return to full-time teaching. The data collection will begin in Spring 2014, including working with student focus groups to identify the needs, with activities beginning in Fall 2014.
Based on an assessment of majors and programs conducted last spring, I need to adjust our course offerings to ensure that our majors have the breadth and depth they need. Several shifts were made to the 13-14 schedule, some to accommodate majors (PHIL65) and some to help with the bottlenecks around American Cultures (more sections of HUMN65 rather than other offerings). We will also be shifting our philosophy offerings to include PHIL^5, Theories of
Knowledge, another course that has not been offered recently. However, I would like to not lessen our capacity for non-majors, so I have requested additional FTEF, which I note was included in the Spring 2013 Flex days additions discussion. We need more FTEF to respond to the demand for our courses to satisfy G.E. requirements AND address needs for breadth and depth. Our fill-rate and wait-list data, which show very high levels of enrollment with full wait lists, document the need for additional sections. The continued loss of a second faculty member in these THREE disciplines is felt deeply, as all of the course, discipline, program, and college-wide work falls on one person. I wish to note, for the purposes of planning, with my return to the classroom also comes, the opportunity to take a sabbatical, and if approved, I will be out on sabbatical spring of 2015, leaving no one to undertake the support of the disciplines for that semester. At the very least, a sabbatical leave replacement should be hired.
Future work for 2014-15 and beyond will include the following. We need to evaluate the role of the “American Cultures” requirement. It appears to be creating bottlenecks for students, or at least the appearance of a bottleneck. I helped develop the methodology for applying for a course to meet the requirement, which is actually a UC degree requirement. I am unsure that meeting this requirement at the lower-division level supports our transfer or degree oriented students. More importantly, I learned that my colleague at Las Positas has implemented a TMC and new courses to support that major in philosophy. I am committed to developing a parallel
TMC and the necessary courses so that our programs can continue to be parallel.
2

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) 0
Supplies & Services 0
Technology/Equipment 0
2012-13
Budget
Requested
0
0
0
2012-13
Budget
Received
0
0
0
2013-14
Budget
Requested
0
0
0
2013-14
Budget
Received
Other
TOTAL
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
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.
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?
This form does not allow for history with regard to faculty prioritization. When John Parente resigned as a full-time instructor, we requested a replacement, both that year and the following year. During the year in which 17 faculty were hired, despite the recommendation of the Faculty Prioritization
Committee, shifts were made in the priority list, and THIS position “fell’ off the list. As a consequence, one faculty member continues to serve as the anchor for three disciplines. In addition to serving in college-wide activities, discipline work, including curriculum, assessment, and program review all fall to this faculty member. The majority of courses offered in the disciplines are taught by extremely qualified adjuncts. Assessment in particular is a problem. While some compensation is available, some adjuncts do not participate despite being requested to do so. Since a number of courses are only taught by adjuncts, this is a problem.
3

A.
Check One of the Following:
XX 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.
I am aware that all of our courses will need to be assessed next year; however, I will find this difficult to accomplish given the inadequacy of our technology
(eLumen) and the unevenness of adjunct response to requests to assess and report.
I will do my part, by creating CLOs and be requesting faculty to assess and report on their data, and then completing the assessment cycle, including program assessment. I need the college to do its part by ensuring that an adequate resource exists to warehouse the data, and ensuring that assessment is included
within adjunct work load/responsibilities.

Yes, CLO-CTL were completed for one or more courses during the current Year’s
Program Review. Complete Appendix B2 (CLO-CTL Form) for each course assessed
this year and include in this Program Review.
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.
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.
4

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
Form Instructions:

Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.

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.
P
I: C
-L
O
– D
R
C
N
ONSIDER T
UMBER OF
HE C
CLO
OURSE -L EVEL O UTCOMES
S WILL DIFFER BY COURSE
I NDIVIDUALLY
 )
( THE Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 1:
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(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?
5

P
II: C
-
O
R
A.
C
OURSE
-L
EVEL
O
UTCOME
(CLO) 1:
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?
B.
C
OURSE
-L
EVEL
O
UTCOME
(CLO) 2:
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?
6

C.
C OURSE -L EVEL O UTCOME (CLO) 3:
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?
D.
C OURSE -L EVEL O UTCOME (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.
C
OURSE
-L
EVEL
O
UTCOME
(CLO) 5: A
DD IF NEEDED
.
7

P
III: C
R
F
P
1.
What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
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?
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:_________________________________________________________________
8

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?
9

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?
10

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. Yes, all courses were revised during 2012-13.
2.
Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those courses remain in our college catalog? No. In response to FTEF cuts, we reduced our offerings to core student needs. The review of courses needed to complete majors indicates that we need to restore courses in all three disciplines, including HUMN72, PHIL65 and 70, and RELS64, 65, 70, and 72. Of these, RELS72 was added to the Spring 2014 schedule, and I am committed to
restoring at least one other course in each discipline for 20 14-15.
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, but I need to make revisions to the CLOS prior to the
next assessment (Spring 2014).
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. All current courses were assessed in the
last cycle. Courses will be assessed in either Spring 2014 or Fall 2015..
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. Based on learning of the number of “majors” requiring substantial work in the humanities (humanities, general humanities, liberal arts, philosophy, liberal arts, and liberal studies. I need to rethink our PLOs.
Given the interdisciplinary work, I will need to work with others, but I now have an incentive to
do so—over 300 students have declared these as majors.
6.
If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the subsequent course(s)? We do not have sequences.
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. The majority of our faculty has adjusted to teaching to a broad spectrum of student preparedness. They often teach “basic” college reading, writing, and thinking skills. However, students who are college-ready, are more likely to be successful as they have fewer barriers to completing classes successfully, e.g., they know how to read a text or write a paper.
11

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?
Increase the number of students completing education goal/major.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Identify and redress barriers to completion, specifically among students declaring general humanities, humanities, liberal AA/AS, philosophy, liberal arts (humanities), and liberal studies (humanities) as their major. I will need help from Institutional Research in defining how many students met their goals in the past two years (to set a benchmark), but the measurable outcome will be to increase that number by 10% by the end of the second year (spring 2016).
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Target
Completion
Date
Required Budget (Split out personnel, supplies, other categories)
Complete research about and with existing student population; develop outreach/pathway program
Implement outreach/pathway program
Support students and track progress
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
Spring
2016
Need support from
Institutional Research
Potentially, additional direct student support
Potentially, additional direct student support
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)
12

Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort) x Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project (obtained by/from):unknown
At this time, I do not know what services or support students need . Once the specifics are identified, then resources can be identified. I believe that most of the needs will be satisfied through existing infrastructure.
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation? x No Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No x Yes, explain: I will need to work other disciplines whose courses are included in these majors.
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
X No Yes, list potential funding sources:
13

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: ___
Position
Faculty
Description
Humanities/Religious
Studies
Faculty (1000)
Program/Unit
HUMN/PHIL/RELS
Division/Area
SOTA
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.
Each academic year, we have 30 or more sections across three disciplines. There is one full-timer to anchor the discipline, which means that
66% of the courses are taught by adjuncts. Sections are generally full to over-enrolled, and success and persistence numbers are high, overall and through CLO assessment. As restoration occurs, the FT/PT ratio will worsen. During the last “real” cycle of faculty prioritization, at the end of the second round of prioritization, this position was “mid” level, and given the number of positions hired (17), would have been filled if not for the Presidential decision to prioritize other single or no anchor discipline positions or new ventures above this position, despite the ranking of the committee.
14

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.
Keeping with college goal to improve students completing education goals within a timely way, and the emerging vision of using pathway/major outreach as the mechanism for doing so, it will be increasingly difficult for the existing anchor to fulfill the discipline requirements, participate in college infrastructure, and support students in the program. There is more work here than one person can do.
15

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: __0___
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Position Description
Classified Professional Staff (2000)
Program/Unit Division/Area
Postion Description
Student Assistants (2000)
Program/Unit
16
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area

2.
Rationale for your proposal.
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.
17

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.cfm
.
In order to improve the cycle of course offerings for majors without significantly impacting GE completion, I need additional FTEF. Recognizing that we have significantly more “majors” than were previously realized as well as serving “core” G.E. students, the majority of our sections should be foundation courses that meet the
Arts/Humanities G.E., preferably courses that also meet the American Cultures requirement. However, based on the number of majors, we also need to offer breadth/depth electives. Therefore, I request additional FTEF. With that FTEF, we will restore one section of an elective in each discipline, without students who need to complete their G.E. requirement. In 2013-14, I shifted FTEF to RELS70 in order to offer a section to ensure that majors could have sufficient breadth. I will continue to rotate a RELS course through the electives (RELS 64, 65, 70, and 72). I need to do the same for PHIL65 and HUMN72. Almost all of courses fulfill the same requirements; however, ideally students have taken one of the 50-level (survey/foundation) courses before taking other courses in the discipline. Thus, the additional FTEF will provide both more access to students completing GE requirements as well as majors. Therefore, I have completed the following table with the elective courses noted.
COURSE CURRENT
FTEF
(2013-14)
ADDITIONAL
FTEF
NEEDED
CURRENT
SECTIONS
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
HUMN72
PHIL565
RELS
64/65/72
0
0
0
.2
.2
.2
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
44
44
44
18

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: NONE
2.
If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
1.
Description
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.
19

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] NONE
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 Received
Description
2014-15
Request
Amount
Vend or Division/Unit Priority #1 Priority #2 Priority #3
20

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 requirements of local, requests required to sustain a program (if not acquired, program may be in peril) or to meet mandated state or federal regulations or those regulations of a accrediting body for a program.
Priority 2: Are needed requests that will enhance a program the requested academic year.
but are not so critical as to jeopardize the life of a program if not received in
Priority 3: Are requests that are benefit to the program.
enhancements, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional augmentations only
Description Amount Vendor Division/Unit Priority #1 Priority #2 Priority #3
21

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 Amount Vendor Division/Dept
Priority
#1
Priority
#2
Priority
#3 Notes
22

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.
For bulk items, 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 nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
that would be
Description Amount Vendor Division/Unit Priority #1 Priority #2 Priority #3
23

24

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):
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