Chabot College
Program Review Report
2015 -2016
Year 3 of
Program Review Cycle
Communication Studies
Submitted on:
Contact:
A. What Have We Accomplished?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to writing your narrative. You
should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence, and enrollment data at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
Communication Studies Courses
With 112 majors in our Communication Studies Department, we are proud of the direction our department is heading. In
___ we changed our department name from Speech Communication to Communication Studies due in part to our need to
identify what we do more accurately. We are continually motivated to teach public speaking skills but we also cover
theoretical subjects such as Interpersonal Communication, Intercultural Communication, Persuasion, and Group
Communication. And in Fall 2013 we added a new course, COMM 50 Introduction to Communication Studies. This long
awaited course covers the discipline as a whole for communication majors and for those students curious about the
subject. Registration has been so successful, we now offer it every semester. In the Spring of 2015 we are happy to
bring Gender Communication (COMM 12) to the schedule as well. We also created COMM 70, a tutor training course, in
order to provide space for an unlimited number of tutors to prepare to work in the Communication Lab. These courses, in
combination with Forensics, argumentation, and oral interpretation create a well-rounded discipline for our students.
Name Change
After the name change, we completed our research and moved into the School of Arts/Humanities (now with Social
Science division). This move has proved to be beneficial as we are already collaborating with faculty from mass
communication and various performance areas.
Vision Statement
In terms of identity, we are also working on a Vision Statement for our area. Our temporary version is “the
Communication Studies Department works to empower students and faculty to develop and evaluate verbal and
nonverbal messages, their meaning, purpose, advocacy, and context through rigorous and creative scholarship.”
Degrees / Majors / Certificates
In addition to our Speech AA degree, we now offer a Communication Studies AA-T. For some time we have been trying
to get an accurate count of majors within these two degrees and recently we found the number totaling over 112. The
number of majors was less than 6 only 5 years ago.We are now the 4th largest growing major according to latest
Institutional Research on student success. In addition to adding the AA-T we also now offer three communication
certificates: Rhetoric, Interpersonal Communication, and Forensics.
Maintaining Variety in Course Offerings
We have successfully navigated tough economic times although we still need support. Even though we are a discipline
with a “bottleneck,” we have had to make a number of tough cuts in the past. We have done this while maintaining the
integrity of the discipline as a whole, struggling to maintain diversity in our course offerings and avoid becoming a “speech
factory.” We appreciate the number of classes that have been added back into the schedule thus far but it’s not enough.
We believe access to our classes, specifically the Oral Communication requirement, is as good as it could be given the
current situation. For instance, we have added not only COMM 1, but also COMM 20 and 46, all meeting the Oral
Communication requirement, at the same time adding variety and options for students.
Enrollment& Success
Currently the Communication Studies Department averages over 100% enrollment and about 72% success (IR).
Students who use our Communication Lab succeed at a much higher rate than students who do not visit the lab. Overall
our student achievement results are fairly consistent with the school’s overall success rate. On a related note, we have
worked hard to maintain our student to teacher ratio in COMM 1. (More on this subject under “what’s next?”)
Great Debate
Last Fall we hosted our first annual “Great Debate.” We coordinated multiple disciplines on campus, community
members, and the Chabot Forensics team to offer a variety of presentations in downtown Hayward, culminating with a
debate about education. This gave students a first-hand look at how government operates and how public
speaking/argumentation/performance interact with policy. The second Great Debate on the topic of the Environment will
be held this December 2014.
Staying Current in our Discipline
All of our achievements speak to our goal to stay current in our field. Last Fall two of our full-time faculty were able to
attend the Student Success Conference in Burlingame CA. And this summer one of our full-time faculty members was
able to attend the FELI conference in Monterey CA. Staying current also includes keeping our course outlines up to date
and having conversations about textbook choices. Recently we decided, as a department, to maintain one short list of
acceptable textbook choices for COMM 1.
Forensics
Our award winning Forensic Team continues to shine despite limited funding. Recently funding for Forensics has
improved and we have also received the desperately needed Assistant Coach. J add . . .
Communication Lab
Our CommLab is a support service for all students across campus. We continue to work to increase the open hours
because our number of student visits has increased to over 900 students per year. We are also now offering workshops
for groups and have tutors from all areas of the Communication discipline.
Media Kit
In order to better communicate all of our contributions to the campus we are working on a Media Kit. We have completed
flyers, bookmarks, and a commercial for the Comm Lab. We are working on a pamphlet and information packet for our
discipline, degrees, and certificates.
Communication Club
This semester our students have started a Communication Club. The Mission of the club is . Our hope is provide the
campus with a variety of activities surrounding the theme of communication, including guest speakers, movies, and
academic field trips.
Flex Days
In previous Program Reviews we have commented on the lack of value we found in Flex days. So we must note that
more recent Flex days have offered more opportunities to connect with other faculty and spend time in our own discipline
as well as review valuable topics related to our work. Flex days also help us to continue to work to stay in communication
with adjunct faculty, who teach ¾ of our classes.
Students & Alumni
Finally, we are most proud of our students and alumni. Each day we are witness to outstanding efforts by them to
overcome major fear and anxiety of public speaking; to try out new conflict management strategies; to appreciate spoken
word, storytelling, and dramatic readings; to relate to people with empathy; to become more mindful listeners; to share
vulnerable and personal information; and to develop communities within our classrooms. Former students come by to
share their success in other classes as a result of their COMM classes, promotions at work, and their continued
dedication to complete their educational goals. We are a relatively young major and now have students reaching graduate
school. It is amazing to hear their stories and we admire their perseverance. Fortunately, our Forensics alumni come by to
visit and mentor our team members. We are exploring how they might be inspirational to more of our current students.
B. What’s Next?
Our Degrees & Certificates
After much discussion and research, we have decided to remove our Speech A.A. degree. It brings confusion for
students and even faculty, it has not been reviewed / updated in some time, and most importantly the degree is not
necessary any longer. Ultimately it makes sense for us to consolidate and offer one Communication Studies AA-T
degree. We will continue to research possible changes to our CS degree and certificates to keep it up to date and
valuable.
More FTEF
Since we see the potential of the Communication Studies AA-T (remember, our number of majors has increased by
300%), and our major is growing exponentially across the nation (IR), and are experiencing a bottleneck, it is imperative to
increase our area’s FTEF to allow for growth. We can currently serve about 1500 students a year (with an average of
757 served each term). While some may suggest that we increase our class capacity, we understand and hold firm that
this will NOT enhance learning but dramatically decrease learning in our performance classes (COMM 1, 2, 6, 20, 46, 48).
Our courses require significant time allotted for student presentations/debates and necessary feedback and reflection.
We also require time for group projects, role plays, and other communicative training activities. If the capacity is
increased, students will have even less individual attention and instructor support in the development of their
communication skills. In a class where anxiety is already high, this could do enough harm to increase the drop-out rate.
Thus, increasing the “bottleneck.” In a larger view, in our 2009 Accreditation report, it notes that there were approximately
6300 students looking to transfer or receive an AA/AS. All of these students MUST take a COMM course. At this point,
we are able to serve about a ¼ of that number. We already have two “bottlenecked” requirements in our discipline: the
Oral Communication requirement and the Critical Thinking requirement. COMM 1, 20, and 46 fulfill the Oral
Communication requirement, while 20 and 46 fulfill both the Oral Communication and Critical Thinking requirement. Thus,
we have been asking for increases not only to COMM 1 but also to COMM 20 and 46. In Spring of 2014 one of the
COMM 46 classes became a CIN class, leaving us with even more need for increased FTEF.
Outreach
It is also vital to work on campus/community outreach, for things such as Great Debate, work in high schools, rotary
club, and updating the website.The current information on the website is horribly outdated and proves to be a definite
deterrent for our students.
2 New Hires
The most important need for the Communication Studies Department is 2 additional full-time faculty. As you can see from
our Program Review, we strive to serve students as best as we can. We simply cannot continue to work at our current
level with only 3 full-time faculty members. Our three faculty: continually increase the number of majors, lead the national
award winning Forensic team, continuously increase numbers of students visiting the Lab, work on Senate, develop
curriculum, attend PRBC & Student Equity Coordinating Council, coordinate the New Faculty Cohort, lead Staff
Development, participate as mentors, work on accreditation, collaborate with the Learning Connection, contribute to the
First Year Experience, and Service Learning. We also have reached out to the community in the Great Debate. And right
now we are all working on Program Review. But we cannot continue this pace with only 3 of us. Here is our argument as
set forth to Faculty Prioritization.
I. Chabot has a dire need for additional full-time faculty in the Communication Studies Department.
A. Most Pathways need COMM classes (such as CIN, BUS, STEM, Allied Health, Law and Democracy, and Prelaw).
a. Remember this reduces the number of classes for the general population.
b. We also need time to coordinate and plan for each Pathway theme.
B. COMM 1, COMM 20, and Comm. 46 satisfy a major GE requirement +previous budget cuts =students have
experienced “bottlenecks” for years.
a. We offer 12 unique courses & 1 Transfer degree, and 3 certificates
b. From Spring 11 to Summer 14, we averaged 36 sections per term and averaged 113% fill rate.
c. No empty classes in COMM.
C. We currently have 112 majors.
D. According to the Washington Post in October of 2014, A recent report confirms that the alumni of British private
schools still control politics and many top professions. One reason those people are so successful in public life is, …
they are also commonly very confident, fluent public speakers.They were not born that way. Their skills were
developed through their school experience of debate, discussion groups and engaging in dialogues with their
teachers. Although the term might not have been used, their education included oracy – skills in using spoken
language – as well as literacy and numeracy.For the sake of social equality, all schools should teach children the
public speaking skills they need for educational progress, for work and for full participation in democracy. Our
research is beginning to show that children who are taught these skills, perform better in maths, science and
reasoning tests.
a. All careers need communication skills. We serve the entire community.
(So the challenge is that our area serves the entire campus and community. But a challenge we can rise above. And the
solution will serve all students across campus.)
II. The(partial) solution is to provide the Comm Studies Dept with 2 new faculty members, a retirement replacement . .
.and a new hire.
A. In 2011, Patti Keeling retired (our guide and 25% of our FT faculty), leaving our area with only 3 full-time faculty
to complete all
a. program review,
B.
C.
D.
E.
b. coordinate with and observe adjuncts,
c. run an award winning forensics team,
d. run a Communication Lab that serves the entire campus,
e. stay involved in campus committees,
f. contribute to the accreditation process,
g. WSCA, NCA, National Comm Lab Conference, Student Success Conference
h. guide our majors to graduation,
i. teach/ update courses beyond public speaking.
(Keeling says) COMM has never had a growth position.
a. COMM Studies has been asking for a new hire in PR since 2004.
Hiring additional part-time faculty will not solve the problem.
a. Part-time faculty often spend less time in campus events and lack knowledge of specific program
advising.
b. Most of the previous challenges are not part of the adjunct workload.
c. State mandate concerning the ratio of full-time to part-time faculty.
i. Currently, our FT to PT ratio is 25% FT and 75% PT.
ii. Our fill ratios are over 100% and have been for several years.
iii. Our success rates are representative of the college as a whole.
Raising our class cap is not the solution.
a. We simply cannot allow this to happen in our performance classes.
The solution has to be replacing our retired faculty and adding 1 new hire.
Comm Lab & Forensics
We also need reassigned time to make Lab improvements. We plan to visit and learn from other Labs, attend WSCA and
National Communication Lab conferences, create a webpage and implement learning modules in the Lab. We also need
time to research a virtual Comm Lab and explore the possibility of on-line tutoring. Ultimately we hope to become a
Nationally Certified Lab.
Our Comm Lab also lacks up-to-date presentation aides for students to rehearse. We need a set-up as close to a
SMART classroom as possible; projector, screen, computer with internet access and Power Point, DVD player,
CD player, and document camera. This can be done in the remodel of Bldg 100.Currently the Lab has one laptop for
tutors to input necessary data for the Learning Connection and no equipment for students to prepare/rehearse
presentations. We need more laptops for students to research presentation topics, draft outlines, and create/rehearse
visual aids.
In addition, we need multiple laptop computers for the Forensics team. Technology has become indispensable for Debate,
as many students use it for research both in and out of rounds. Additionally, we use google docs as a team in order to
share files, teaching materials, and for one-on-one coaching.
WSCH
We still need a better way of ‘capturing WSCH’ with our forensics and lab students. This will demonstrate the amount of
time students in Communication Studies actually spend working/studying/rehearsing in our area.
Conclusion
We want to remain a vibrant, energetic, and community based department. We want to be ready to accommodate student
demand. We need support to accomplish this. We will not disappoint.
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Forensics:
egory
ssified Staffing (# of positions)
plies & Services
hnology/Equipment
er
TAL
2013-14 Budget
Requested
12,000
2013-14 Budget
Received
8,000
2014-15 Budget
Requested
12,000
2014-15 Budget
Received
12,000
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.
Quite simply put, Forensics changes lives; but not only the lives of the competitors, but the lives of nearly every Comm. Student on campus, and
potentially every student on campus. The Forensics team is extremely active within the College. Every semester the Forensics team puts on a
fund raiser known as the “Speak Up”, which serves nearly 250 people a year. Additionally, Forensics students are the primary judges for the
Intramural Speech Tournament. This is open to all students on campus and typically serves over 100 students, giving them more opportunity to
refine their communication skills in a fun and competitive environment. Forensics students are also a large part of the Communication lab, as
nearly half of the tutors are current or former Forensics students. Finally, Forensics students are an integral part of “The Great Debate”, an
interdisciplinary collaboration between the Community and the College where we build Community through Advocacy. Last year the Great
Debate hosted over 200 students and took over City Hall. Thus, the training, coaching, and experience Forensics students receive at tournaments
positively affects the campus exponentially.
I would quickly like to create a list of Forensics Students over the last 5 years and their accomplishments:
Jenna Hewitt: transfer to San Francisco State, Majoring in Communication Studies
Ben Pierson: Transfer to Occidental College, Majoring in Communication Studies
Leah Daoud: Transfer to Berkeley
Sarah Knight: Transfer to CSU, EB, Majoring in Communication Studies, starting a student run team
Bianca Contreras: Graduating from CSUEB next year
Jake Hewitt: Graduating from CSUEB next year
Kelsey Paiz: Graduate Student, Cal State University Long Beach
Brad Bettridge: Graduate, UC Berkeley, applying to Graduate Schools
Katie DiNatalie: Graduate, Linguistics, UC Berkeley. Working for Google’s Linguistics Department (you can thank her when your search terms pop
up great results).
Claudia Carvajal: Graduate, UC Berkeley. Applying to top tier Law Schools.
Fatima Ansary: Graduate, UC Davis. Applying to top tier Law Schools.
Jessica Hollie: Reporter, live streaming from Ferguson, Public Relations for Environmental Non-Profit.
Al Bungay: Graduate, San Francisco State, Graphic Designer (see, we’re creative too!)
Steven Mireles: Graduate, UC Berkeley, Lobbyist in Washington, D.C. (sorry about that).
JassminPoyoan: Graduate UC Berkeley, final year of Law School, one of only 30 recipients of the Soros First American scholarships.
Jason Ames: Hi!
*************************************************************************************
Background: In 2011, Kelsey Paiz was on the National team. One of her events was Communication Analysis, where students take a
communication artifact and apply a communication theory to the artifact in order to discern the rhetorical implications and/or applications
of that artifact. She transferred to Sacramento State, where she graduated with a degree in Communication Studies. She is now a Graduate
Student in Communication at Long Beach State. I received this e-mail from her:
Hi Jason,
So I was just reading through my syllabus for one of my classes this semester, and there was a page called "Assignment Structure" that notes the
following:
1. Interesting Introduction (inclu. message or artifact being analyzed, research question and contribution to larger theory) 2. Describe Artifact 3. Describe
Method of Analysis (Unit of Analysis) 4. Report Findings 5. Conclusions
So basically what I'm saying is: Thank you.
3. Kelsey Paiz
e lectern, timers, index cards, markers, erasers, label maker were used immediately by students in the Comm Lab. They were able to rehearse their sp
money) The television provides students an opportunity to watch their speeches back for self-analysis. (Lottery funds, I think)
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?
did not receive the computers we asked for in the Comm Lab. Students cannot research nor prepare outlines for speeches. Instead tutors must desc
send students to other Labs on campus. Then the student returns with the research or outline later. Time consuming and students lack the guidanc
Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule
As we are currently in the middle of the semester, we believe it is inappropriate for us to assess students who are currently in the
middle of the semester. Additionally we are in a period of transition with closing the loop procedure, including the elimination of
eLumen. Thus, we believe that we cannot, in good conscience, “close the loop” in an effective and transparent manner.
I.
A.
Course-Level Student Learning Outcomes & Assessment Reporting (CLO-Closing the Loop).
Check One of the Following:
No CLO-CTL forms were completed during this PR year. No Appendix B2 needs to be submitted with this Year’s Program
Review. Note: All courses must be assessed once at least once every three years. Yes, CLO-CTL were completed for one or more courses during the current Year’s Program Review. Complete Appendix B2(CLOCTL 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
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment Reflections.
rse
mester assessment data gathered
mber of sections offered in the semester
mber of sections assessed
centage of sections assessed
mester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
2-Years Prior
*Note: These courses must
be assessed in the next PR
year.
ulty 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.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
sider The Course-Level Outcomes Individually (the Number of CLOs will efined Target Scores* ctual Scores** (eLumen
differ by course)
(
CLO Goal)
data)
O) 1:
O) 2:
O) 3:
O) 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?
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?
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. Course-Level Outcome (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?
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?
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. 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.
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?
As we are currently in the middle of the semester, we believe it is inappropriate for us to assess students who are currently in the
middle of the semester. Additionally we are in a period of transition with closing the loop procedure, including the elimination of
eLumen. Thus, we believe that we cannot, in good conscience, “close the loop” in an effective and transparent manner
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?
As we are currently in the middle of the semester, we believe it is inappropriate for us to assess students who are currently in the
middle of the semester. Additionally we are in a period of transition with closing the loop procedure, including the elimination of
eLumen. Thus, we believe that we cannot, in good conscience, “close the loop” in an effective and transparent manner.
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:_________________________________________________________________
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: _AA-T_____ • PLO #1: Pursue and evaluate knowledge through the skills of inquiry, research and critical thinking. • PLO #2: Demonstrate effective skills in written and spoken communication.
• 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?
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.
2.
3.
Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? yes
Have you deactivated all inactive courses? (courses that haven’t been taught in five years or won’t be taught in three
years should be deactivated) yes
Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those courses remain in our college
catalog? yes
4.
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 not sure
5.
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. no,
but this semester we are assessing COMM 2, 3, 10, 11, 20, 48, and 70 A/B in this round
6.
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.
7.
If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the subsequent course(s)? NA
8.
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.
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. 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: ___
STAFFING REQUESTS (1000) FACULTY
Faculty (1000)
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Position
Description
Faculty 1000
Full-time
faculty in
Communication
Studies
Department
(Retirement
replacement)
Full-time
faculty in
Communication
Studies
Department
(New Growth)
Faculty 1000
Program/Unit
Division/Area
SOTA
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.
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.
Appendix F2: Classified Staffing Request(s) including Student Assistants [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time and part-time regular (permanent) classified
professional positions(new, augmented and replacement positions).Remember, student assistants are not to replace Classified Professional staff.
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan
goal, safety, mandates, and accreditation issues. Please cite any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded,
include and designate the funding source of new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: _____
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS
Position
Classified Professional Staff (2000)
Description
Program/Unit
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) STUDENT ASSISTANTS
Postion
Description
Student Assistants (2000)
Program/Unit
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
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.
Appendix F3: FTEF Requests
Audience: Administrators, CEMC, PRBC
Purpose: To recommend changes in FTEF allocations for subsequent academic year and guide Deans and
CEMC in the allocation of FTEF to disciplines. For more information, see Article 29 (CEMC) of the Faculty
Contract.
Instructions: In the area below, please list your requested changes in course offerings (and
corresponding request in FTEF) and provide your rationale for these changes. Be sure to analyze
enrollment trends and other relevant data
athttp://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
COURSE
CURRENT
FTEF
(2014-15)
ADDITIONAL
FTEF
NEEDED
CURRENT
SECTIONS
22
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Learning Connection
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement student assistants (tutors, learning assistants, lab assistants,
supplemental instruction, etc.).
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan
goal. Please cite any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of
new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: 2-10
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
2.
3.
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.
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
Audience: Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for supplies and service, and to guide the Budget Committee in allocation of funds.
Instructions: In the area below, please list both your current and requested budgets for categories 4000 and 5000 in priority order. Do NOT
include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix M6. Justify your request and explain in detail any requested funds beyond
those you received this year. Please also look for opportunities to reduce spending, as funds are very limited.
Supplies Requests [Acct. Category 4000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for supplies needed and an amount.
For items purchased in bulk, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
2. Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are criticalrequests 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 requeststhat would be nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
2014-15
2015-16
Request
needed totals in all areas Request
Requested Received
Description
Amount
Staples Value
Tape dispenser&
16 rolls of tape
Westcott 8”
titanium bonded
Scissors (2 pk)
Vend
or
Division/Unit
28.79
total
Stapl
es
SOTA
10.49
total
Stapl
es
SOTA
24
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
X
X
Staplesgluesticks
(18 pk)
2 - Staples1
touch3 hole
punch(30 sheet
10.99
total
Stapl
es
SOTA
capacity)
24.99/ea
Stapl
es
SOTA
X
2 liter pump
PurellHand
sanitizer
Ready America
Site Safety kit “Site
24.99
total
Stapl
es
SOTA
X
219.99
Stapl
es
SOTA
X
Safety Kit is equipped for
someone who is
responsible for other
people, such as an office
manager, floor warden,
teacher or group leader”
X
Contracts and Services Requests [Acct. Category 5000]
Instructions:
1. There should be a separate line item for each contract or service.
2. Travel costs should be broken out and then totaled (e.g., airfare, mileage, hotel, etc.)
Priority 1: Are criticalrequests 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 w ill 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 enhancem ents, non-critical resource requests that would be nice to have and would bring additional
25
benefit to the program.
augm entations only
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
26
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [ Acct. Category 5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and Staff Development Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions:Please list specific conferences/training programs, including specific information on the name of the conference and location. Note
that the Staff Development Committee currently has no budget, so this data is primarily intended to identify areas of need that could perhaps be
fulfilled on campus, and to establish a historical record of need. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals and/or connection to the
Strategic Plan goal.
Description
Amount
Western States
Communication
Association Conference in
Spokane Feb 2015
$160/faculty
&
$70/student
must be
paid by Jan
31, 2015
Conference Theme –
Accentuate the Positive.
Overview - “As a social
practice, communication
serves many positive
functions and produces many
positive outcomes. Social
support buffers against
stress. Affectionate
communication generates a
variety of relational and
health benefits. Moreover,
communication can also
function to e-liminate the
negative. Communication
can help message receivers
Vendor
Priority Priority Priority
Division/Dept
#1
#2
#3
Veronica Martinez will be
sitting on a panel entitled
“Connection and
Recognition: The path to
positive tutor training.”
We want to bring one
Comm Lab tutor to the
conference.
3 night stay
at Red Lion
Inn (Feb
21-24) $139
per night
Southwest
Flight RT
$304.20 per
person =
$12255.40
TOTAL for
2 people
Notes
WSCA
SOTA
27
X
deal with threats, resolve
harmful conflicts, and
overthrow tyrannical leaders.
Accentuating the positive
also implies exploring ways
of interacting with publics
outside the academy. How
can we optimally
communicate the products of
our scholarship to those who
need it most (and access it
least)? How can we help
individuals from varied
cultural, sociological,
economic, family, and
personal backgrounds to
harness and enjoy the
benefits of communication?
Of course, the notions of
positive and negative (and
in-between) are contestable
and differ dramatically
across groups, individuals,
and theoretical frames. I urge
scholars to play with these
notions as we push our work
in new (and positive)
directions.
– Paul Mongeau, WSCA
President-Elect and 2015
Primary Program Planner
28
Room =
$270 total
Southwest
Flight =
Approx
$500 (not
listed as of
10-21-14)
National Comm Lab
Conference April 17-18 in
Washington DC
$770
TOTAL
NACC
SOTA
29
X
The National
Communication Lab
Conference covers a wide
range of topics unique to
running Labs on college
campuses. Currently we
are working on becoming a
Nationally Certified Lab
and attending the
conference will provide the
information necessary for
this process.
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
Audience: Budget Committee, Technology Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Budget Committee and to inform priorities of the Technology Committee.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests.If you're requesting classroom technology, see
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/audiovisual/Chabot%20College%20Standard.pdf for the brands/model numbers that are our current standards.
If requesting multiple pieces of equipment, please rank order those requests. Include shipping cost and taxes in your request.
Instructions:
1. For each piece of equipment, there should be a separate line item for each piece and
an amount. Please note: Equipment requests are for equipment whose unit cost exceeds $200.
Items which are less expensive should be requested as supplies. Software licenses should also be
requested as supplies.
2.
For bulk items, list the unit cost and provide the total in the "Amount" column.
Make sure you include the cost of tax and shipping for items purchased.
Priority 1: Are criticalrequests 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 w ill 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 enhancem ents, non-critical resource requests that would be
nice to have and would bring additional benefit to the program.
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
3 QUARK desks for the Comm
Lab
Can be used as a freestanding
desk/podium, or flip the top to
see the computer monitor. Can
be used sitting or standing.
Perfect for use in the Lab to write,
waiting
SMARTdesks
SOTA
30
Priority #1
Priority #2
X
Priority #3
research, or rehearse
presentations with visual aids.
It’s mobile and has a secure lock.
Epson DC-06 Document Camera
for use when students are
preparing presentation in the
Comm Lab and in COMM 70 as a
lecture aid when training the
tutors
357.99
Staples
SOAT
X
16.89
Staples
SOTA
X
129.00
Staples
SOTA
X
729.99 ea Staples
SOTA
Recycle binRubbermaid Recycling
Bin, Blue, 10 gal.
Refrigerator Keystone KSTRC26
2.4 cu. ft. Mini Refrigerator With
Wipe Off Board Front, Black/Blue
For Comm Lab tutors and
Forensic students to store food
when working long shifts.
3 Toshiba Satellite laptops, 17.3”,
8GB, windows 8.1for the Comm
Lab- for students across campus
to research speech topics,
prepare outlines, and rehearse
with visual aids.
31
X
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities Committee (FC) has begun the task of reprioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet
capital improvement needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two to be used as match
if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined
that although some of the college's greatest needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many
smaller pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond dollars include the "repairing,
constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities." Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests.If requesting more than one facilities project, please rank order your
requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name):
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?
32