Chabot College
Program Review Report
2015 -2016
Year 3 of
Program Review Cycle
Geography
Submitted on Oct. 24, 2014
Contact: Don Plondke
Table of Contents
___ Year 3
Section A: What Have We Accomplished?
Section B: What’s Next?
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
C: Program Learning Outcomes
D: A Few Questions
E: New Initiatives
F1: New Faculty Requests
F2: Classified Staffing Requests
F3: FTEF Requests
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests
F5: Supplies and Services Requests
F6: Conference/Travel Requests
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests
F8: Facilities
___ YEAR THREE
A. What Have We Accomplished?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence, and
enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2013.cfm.
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks
you to reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used by
the PRBC and Budget Committee to assess progress toward achievement of our Strategic Plan
and to inform future budget decisions. It will also be used by the SLOAC and Basic Skills
committees as input to their priority-setting process. In your narrative of two or less pages,
address the following questions:







What program improvement goals did you establish?
Did you achieve the goals you established for the three years? Specifically describe your
progress on goals you set for student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan
achievement.
What best practices have you developed? Those could include pedagogical methods,
strategies to address Basic Skills needs of our students, methods of working within your
discipline, and more.
Are these best practices replicable in other disciplines or areas?
What were your greatest challenges?
Were there institutional barriers to success?
Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty
ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
Program goals established anddegrees of achievement
1. reinstate paid Instructional Assistant staff position
This continues to be our highest priority goal. Appendix F2 describes in detail the need and
rationale for reinstatement of funding for this critical position in order to maintain those
portions of our program that rely heavily on computer-based resources for delivery of course
content and interactive student learning. The Instructional Assistant/ Computer Lab Systems
Administrator role is essential particularly to our computer lab-based courses, GEOG 1L
(Introduction to Physical Geography Laboratory) and GEOG 20, GEOG 21, and GEOG 22
(Geographic Information Systems course sequence). This goal has not been achieved because of
institutional resistance.
2. improve student learning of essential geographic concepts
Over the last four academic years, Don Plondke has been implementing teaching strategies and
student engagement techniques of the Reading Apprenticeship program, attempting to elevate
students’ interest in, and ability to extract information from, geography texts. Assessment of the
techniques used toward improving students’ metacognitive awareness of how they approach
1
reading geography is planned to continue in GEOG 2 (Cultural Geography), was used in GEOG 3
(Economic Geography), and seems appropriate for experiment in other Geography courses.
Progress toward the goal of improved learning of geographic concepts is, for the discipline’s
programs as a whole, measured partly by examining trends in success rates across the
Geography curriculum.
GEOG 1 and GEOG 1L success rates
100
90
80
70
60
50
GEOG 1
40
GEOG 1L
30
20
10
0
Fall 11
Spr 12
Fall 12
Spr 13
Fall 13
Spr 14
Success rates in GEOG 1 (Intro to Physical Geography) are consistent, ranging between 68-77%
from Fall 2011through Spring 2014. Student success rates in Geography have shown an upward
trend over the last three academic years (see charts below). Generally, success rates in GEOG 1
are lower by 5-10 percentage points than rates for the other Geography courses. This is partly
attributable to the students’ sets of analytical skills that are challenged in a natural science
course (GEOG 1) vis à vis those on the social science side of geography. Methods of teaching
GEOG 1 are diverse among the 4 instructors who teach sections of the course. Very large class
sizes for GEOG 1 and inconsistent attendance by large proportions of students in these classes
also contribute to lower success rates. Success rates in Physical Geography Laboratory (GEOG
1L) and Geographic Information Systems (GEOG 20) are consistently very high. In GEOG 1L
particularly, success rates have exceed 90% every semester since Spring 2011. This consistency
likely is due to the pedagogical methods of course delivery. Student performance depends
primarily upon completion of weekly exercises that apply principles of physical geography to
map reading, spatial analysis problems, and observation of the environment. Students who
persist in weekly completion of the sequence of exercises are almost invariably successful in the
course. The same approach and scenario for student success applies to our courses in
Geographic Information Systems. Success rates in GEOG 20 ranged between 83 and 86% in the
three offerings of the course during calendar years 2011 and 2012. In Fall 2013, a small number
of students (4) enrolled in GEOG 21 (our second-level GIS course). The low 50% success rate in
this single offering of GEOG 21 reflects lack of consistent participation in course activities by 2
students who withdrew from the course.
2
The graph below shows success rate trends in GEOG 2, GEOG 5, and GEOG 12. It can be seen in
the graph that success rates in GEOG 5 (World Regional Geography) dropped somewhat in the
spring semesters when the course was offered online rather than in the classroom. In the
classroom setting, there is more opportunity for reinforcing essential concepts in regional
geography and emphasizing major attributes of world regions, including interactive mapping
exercises whereby the instructor can give more immediate feedback. Another major factor in
GEOG 5 is that withdrawal rates are higher for semesters in which the course is conducted
online. Success rates in GEOG 2 (Cultural Geography) have increased from 60-70% in academic
year 2010-2011 up to 80-87% during the 6 subsequent semesters between Fall2011 and Spring
2014. Hopefully, the implementation of some techniques from the Reading Apprenticeship
program and a greater emphasis placed on the basic vocabulary of geography are contributing
to improved student engagement with the texts and helping students retain more about
essential concepts.
Success rates in GEOG 12 (Geography of California) were consistently high and even rising
during the last 3 semesters (Fall 2011-Fall 2012) for students under the tutelage of our late
Professor Myron Gershenson. His long experience in teaching the course at Chabot and his
mature understanding of California’s geography made GEOG 12 a popular and successful course
over many years. The drop in student success to 80% and 65% in Spring 2013 and Fall 2014,
respectively, underscores the need for us to recruit a new adjunct instructor with some
expertise in this subject area (see Appendix F1).
success rates: GEOG 2, GEOG 5, GEOG 12
100
90
80
70
60
GEOG 2
50
GEOG 5
40
GEOG 12
30
20
10
0
Fall 11
Spr 12
Fall 12
3
Spr 13
Fall 13
Spr 14
For GEOG 8 (Introduction to Weather and Climate), we have a sample size of four
semesters offered between Spring 2010 and Spring 2014. The graph below shows a
highpoint in the success rate in Spring 2013 but a narrower range of 62-66% in the
other threesemesters. Spring 2014 was our first experiment in using the AMS Climate
Studies curriculum as course content (see discussion of Climate Studies inAppendix E).
The AMS Climate Studies course has many components in its delivered content that are
challenging to introductory-level students. Spring 2014 saw a higher withdrawal rate (25%)
than previously, in part because of the rigorous week-to-week assignments imbedded in
the course plan that exposes students to current state-of-the-art climate observation
technologies.
GEOG 8 success rate
90
80
70
60
50
GEOG 8
40
30
20
10
0
Spr 10
Spr 11
Spr 13
4
Spr 14
90
80
70
60
50
Geography success
40
Collegewide success
30
20
10
0
Fall
2011
Spring
2012
Fall
2012
Spring
2013
Fall
2013
Spring
2014
The chart directly above shows that Geography's overall success rates are consistently higher by
an average of +8.0 percentage points compared to the college's overall stable rate of about
69%during the last three academic years. Student success rates for Geography as a whole range
between 74% and 80% during these six semesters.
The cumulative WSCH/FTEF ratio for all Geography courses over the last three academic years
was 690.GEOG 1 generated the highest total WSCH/FTEF ratio (739) over this period, as the
chart below reveals.The lowest ratios were525, for both GEOG 20 and GEOG 8. The relatively
low ratio for the Introduction to GIS (GEOG 20) course reflects the fact that this is a specialized
software training course designed to develop the student’s skill set in map production and
spatial analysis. Enrollments in GEOG 20 have always been lower than those for the lecturebased Geography courses. Students need more one-on-one help in learning specialized software
tools, and so the smaller faculty/student ratios in GIS courses are beneficial. Enrollments in
GEOG 8 were relatively low, 38 and 32 students, respectively, in the last two classes of GEOG 8
offered in Spring 2013 and Spring 2014.
WSCH/FTEF by course, Fall '11 - Spr '14
525
GEOG 8
525
GEOG 20
705
1
GEOG 12
654
GEOG 5
713
GEOG 2
696
GEOG 1L
739
0
200
400
600
5
800
GEOG 1
3. subscribe to GIS/GPS software collaborative and innovate new ideas for teaching GIS
For academic year 2014-2015, we did receive funding enabling us to subscribe to the shared GIS
software license through the GIS Collaborative of the Foundation of California Community
Colleges (FCCC). This is an important accomplishment in supporting our GIS Certificate program
and the Geography A.A., for which Geography is grateful. The annual subscription provides us
with up-to-date ArcGIS software for our computer laboratory and access to online resources in
the fields of geospatial technologies.
In relation to this GIS teaching goal, we have not yet realized the objectives to: 1) re-instate the
paid Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator position; or 2) hire a new full-time
Geography faculty member. In Appendices F1 and F2 Geography reiterates our rationale for
requesting new full- and part-time faculty hires and for reinstating the classified staff position.
Our GIS program has the potential to not only train students for the growing job market in
geospatial technologies, but also to help the college and district acquire information about
prospective students, demographic data of the region, and tools for modeling enrollment and
job placement trends. GIS enables users to build geographically-indexed databases froma
diversity data sources, and to produce customized maps and charts. It can be a useful tool for
district researchers, chief business officers, planners, and facilities managers for development,
strategic communications, fundraising, enrollment modeling, and resource management.
4. maintain enrollment in Geography 1
We have succeeded in maintaining high enrollments in sections of our primary course, GEOG 1
(Introduction to Physical Geography) that consistently produces the highest WSCH/FTEF ratios
for our discipline and services hundreds of students each semester in fulfilling their GE
requirement in the Natural Sciences.
GEOG 1 enrollments
450
400
398
344
350
323
301
300
297
307
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
250
200
150
100
50
0
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
6
GEOG 1 enrollments declined 23% overall during the three-year program cycle. The drop partially
reflects the smaller class sizes that adjunct instructors have rightfully maintained in comparison to
overload numbers enrolled by full-time instructors in previous years. Ms. DesreAnderes, who retired at
the end of Spring 2011, was always willing to accommodate many more students per section of GEOG 1
than the cap of 44. Not all instructors are equally inclined to take on overload classes. Also a factor in
lower enrollments for Fall 2012 and Fall 2013 was the reduction from our normal 7 sections per
semester to 6 due to enrollment management decisions. We are grateful for the dedication and
contributions of our adjunct faculty in maintaining high enrollments and attracting students to our
classes through high quality teaching: Matt De Verdi, Maryam Younessi, Jane Dignon, Joe Hasty, and the
late Myron Gershenson.
All Geography enrollments 2011-2014
700
600
600
570
559
531
500
495
490
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
400
300
200
100
0
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
5. “close-the-loop” on all offered Geography courses
At the end of Year One in our program review cycle, Geography completed evaluation of, and
reflection on, learning outcomes assessment for all our offered Geography courses. By August, 2012
all "closing-the-loop" forms were submitted to the SLOA Committee, marking completion of the 3year course learning outcomes assessment cycle that extended from Fall 2009 to Spring 2012.
7
6. develop a joint Geography/Anthropology AA degree program
This program initiative has been tabled. We feel that the recently approved Environmental Studies
A. A. program likely is a more attractive degree option for students, and that is where we plan to
concentrate our new curriculum development efforts.
7. increase student access to GEOG 1
In Spring 2014 the Committee on Online Learning approved our proposal for a fully onlinedelivery
format for GEOG 1 (Introduction to Physical Geography). We implemented the course in this format
for the first time in Fall 2014. We anticipate that the trend of high demand for our “core” course will
continue. In fact, we expect to see increasing enrollment in GEOG 1 if college-wide enrollments rise.
The online version of GEOG 1 provides a means of accessing a larger population of students. We did
fulfill our plan to restore one face-to-face section of GEOG 1 that had been cut at the time of the
2012 budget crisis.
8. develop a new Geography water resources course
Other priorities have caused postponement of this goal. However, Geography plans to retain it in
our longer term vision. Research in environmental science in recent years has brought to the
forefront the issue of water supply sustainability as energy production escalates worldwide in
response to the globalization of technologies and economic development. The energy-water nexus
appears to be an increasingly important issue in environmental sustainability. The study of water
resources is integral to programs in all the environmental fields.
9. facilitate transfer pathways for Geography students
In July, 2013, Geography’s program proposal for the A.A.-T degree was approved by the State
Chancellor’s office. The purpose of this new degree program is to open another pathway for
students who may plan to transfer to a California State University campus to complete requirements
for a baccalaureate degree within a 4-year, 120 semester hours framework.All Geography courses in
the A.A.-T program have been approved for the corresponding C-ID designation by the State
Chancellor’s Office.
B. What’s Next?
This section may serve as the foundation for your next Program Review cycle, and will inform the
development of future strategic initiatives for the college. In your narrative of one page or less, address
the following questions. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested)
to further detail your narrative and to request resources.
8
Note: Chabot is in the process of creating our next Educational Master Plan, to last six years.
Educational Master Plans are generally large enough in scope to be flexible. They are used in
particular at the District Level to guide in facility and community planning.
Please take this moment to reflect on your program’s larger term vision(s) and goals (6 years),
and to incorporate them into Program Review under the section “The Difference We Hope to
Make” as a separate paragraph or otherwise. The drafters of the Educational Master Plan will
be mining Program Review for contributions to the plan, with a commitment to read what
programs have submitted. IR has offered to work with programs to determine future market
trends to be incorporated into this year’s program review in relation to long-term goals. Please
contact Carolyn Arnold for support. We will have other avenues to communicate with the
Educational Master Plan Consultants. This is simply one avenue.




What goals do you have for future program improvement?
What ideas do you have to achieve those goals?
What must change about the institution to enable you to make greater progress in
improving student learning and overall student success?
What are your longer term vision(s) and goals for your program? (Educational Master
Plan)
The immediate future
Without two critical human resources, the Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator and a new fulltime Geography Instructor, the Geography program at Chabot will have to shrink. The scope of our
programs: Geography A. A., Geography A. A.-T, Certificate of Proficiency in Geographic Information
Systems (GIS), and the Environmental Studies A. A., is too large for one full-time faculty member to
manage administratively, and our courses cannot be offered in a timely manner such that students can
succeed in completing our programs. The institution can help in sustaining Geography’s contribution by
reinstating the Instructional Assistant position outlined in AppendixF2 and prioritizing faculty hiring for
Geography as discussed in Appendix F1.
The Difference We Hope to Make
RAISING OUR AWARENESS OF CLIMATE CHANGE AND SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENTS
In an effort to intensify student interest in the urgent world issue of climate change and global warming,
Chabot Geography applied in 2013, and was accepted, for participation in a new nationwide course
implementation effort sponsored by the American Meteorological Society (AMS), Second Nature, and
the National Science Foundation. As a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI), Chabot qualifies to participate
in this project, designed to introduce sustainability-focused curricula. The name of the program is the
AMS Climate Studies Diversity Project. Chabot is also a signatory to the American College & University
Presidents' Climate Commitment. The instructors of Geography at Chabot persist in the objective to
elevate awareness of environmental change and the problems of environmental sustainability in the
face of a growing world population and trends in globalization.
9
Through participation in a 5-day climate science and course implementation workshop in May, 2013,
Chabot Geography faculty member Don Plondke acquired training in climate science pedagogy, and in
course implementation and management for a collegial community impacted by diversity issues. The
training has enabled us to deliver the AMS Climate Studies course in a one-semester pilot at Chabot
(Spring 2014), enabling students to access all the specialized course materials provided by AMS.
In October, 2014 we proposed the new course, GEOG 13, Climate Studies, to the Chabot Curriculum
Committee. Approval of this course will be a major milestone reached in achieving the goal to bring
issues about our changing climate to the forefront. The implementation of GEOG 13 will assure
institutionalization of our connections to the nationwide network of organizations working at the
forefront of research and technologies in the study of Earth’s climate (also, see Appendix E).
Long-term Vision/goals
WATER RESOURCES EDUCATION
The ongoing California drought, as well as the urgency of climate change issues, has highlighted the
issue of water supply sustainability. Energy production is escalating worldwide in response to the
globalization of technologies and economic development. Production of energy requires tremendous
volumes of water. The energy-water nexus appears to be an increasingly important issue in
environmental sustainability. Solving water resources problems appears a likely priority of government
and industry in the 21st century. Geography faculty would like to lead a campus-wide effort to develop
courses related to water resources management within the context of our new Environmental Studies
program.
DESIGN OF A PHYSICAL GEOGRAPHY LABORATORY FACILITY
In Chabot’s long-term vision, Geography would like to propose a new campus facilities project to design
and construct a physical geography laboratory equipped with instrumentation and supplies to support
teaching and learning of Earth's natural processes in a controlled modeling environment. We envision a
dedicated laboratory space for students to conduct experiments, testing, and modeling of
biogeochemical processes. This laboratory could also be used effectively for teaching in the
Environmental Studies and Environmental Sciences programs. Collaboration with interested faculty in
the AHSS and Science & MathematicsDivisions would be essential in the design phase of this project.
While we do have an up-to-date and well-equipped and maintained computer laboratory for Geography
and other disciplines in the Social Sciences (Room 507), we lack laboratory space and supplies necessary
to demonstrate natural processes and provide students with hands-on training in scientific laboratory
techniques that are integral to research in physical geography. The proposed lab would likely be
designed to include:
(1) water and natural gas outlets, sinks, microscopes, and storage space
(2) soils analysis equipment to perform mechanical and chemical experiments, including items
such as drying ovens, refrigerator, graduated cylinders, centrifuges, scales, particle-size
analysis sieves, flasks, thermometers, etc.
(3) laboratory space for biodegradable and recyclable materials testing, and water quality
testing
(4) seismographic equipment and weather observation instrumentation
10
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
2013-14
Budget
Requested
1
$988
$0
2013-14
Budget
Received
0
$0
$0
2014-15
Budget
Requested
1
$2930
$0
2014-15
Budget
Received
0
$3732
$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.
Upon receiving funding in Fall, 2014, we acquired printer supplies that enable printing of foundational
exercises and handouts for all our GEOG courses. Monies received allowed the instructor and computer
laboratory administrator to acquire laser and jetink cartridges for reproduction of essential map and
digital image instructional exercises used for Geography labs and GIS that are much more realistic and
informative for the students when produced in color. $2000 of the amount Geography received for
2014-2015 is allocated for annual renewal of our ArcGIS software license for our GIS courses.
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?
Classified Staffing request:Appendix F2 details the rationale for our ongoing yearly request for
reinstatement of funding for our current Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator. For a period of a
dozen years prior to the cutting off of funding for this position, our exceptionally talented and dedicated
assistant was employed by the Social Science Division 18-20 hours per week in a part-time classified staff
position. In academic year 2010-2011, the college cut his allocation to a total of 400 hours for the year
(about 12 hours per week). Since the fall semester of 2011, he has not been paid at all, as District HR
and Chabot Administrative Services have rejected our submitted PARs without explanation, apparently
due to budget cuts. The ONLY REASON why the Social Science Computer Laboratory Room 507 is THE
MOST RELIABLY FUNCTIONALAND EFFICIENT computer laboratory on campus for many classes across
division boundaries is that our UNPAID Systems Administrator continues to provide highly professional
technical and instructional support service to the lab out of his sense of loyalty to the college and our
programs, and out of the goodness of his own heart. The impact of not receiving this essential funding is
that the semester-by-semester successful use of Lab 507 that is critical in the delivery of GEOG 1L, GEOG
20, GEOG 21, PSY 5, MCOM 20, and other courses, is jeopardized. The lab is also used regularly by
Chabot committees (e.g. Curriculum and PRBC) for software training of faculty and staff (such as that
provided in 2011-2012 for CurricUNET), and for periodic online testing for Math and the Nursing
11
Program. Without the system administrative services that Mr. Brian Beard provides, this lab could not
be used. Another direct impact of the lack of funding on student learning specifically is our Learning
Assistant/Systems Administrator’s invaluable work insuring that Physical Geography Lab students and
Geographic Information Systems (GIS) students can successfully operate the PC workstations and utilize
our discipline-specific software for learning. Geography has been able to generate some of the highest
WSCH/FTEF “productivity” statistics in no small measure due to the reliability and performance
enhancement characteristics of our lab that Mr. Beard assures. Geography’s ability to educate our
students using contemporary tools to illustrate the technologies of GIS, GPS, the internet, and remote
sensing depends on reliable maintenance of the hardware and software resources in Lab 507.
12
Appendix B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 1
Spring 2014
7
4
57%
Spring 2015
Don Plondke, Jane Dignon,
Maryam Younessi, Matt De
Verdi
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined Target
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ Scores*
by course)
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: critically differentiate regional
similarities and contrasts in climate types,
landform styles, and biomes
(CLO) 2: assess the usefulness of the
technologies of geographic information
systems and remote sensing in observing
and modeling physical processes
13
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
70% lvl 3-4
75% lvl 3-4
“competent” or >77% lvl 2 or
“accomplished” higher;
50% lvl 3-4,
75% lvl 2 or
higher
62% lvl 3-4,
77% lvl 2 or
higher
(CLO) 3: identify techniques in
observation that could be used to
recognize and/or classify a roadside
landform and rocktype
50% lvl 2 or
higher
77% lvl 2-4
(CLO) 4: describe the individual’s role in
his/her natural environment
75% lvl 3-4
74% lvl 3-4,
~80% lvl 2 or
higher
 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?
14
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?
Scores exceed target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
This is an introductory natural science course and large proportion of
students have some deficiencies in English language preparation,
affecting comprehension of scientific vocabulary. Students need to
spend more time with text book and its abundant online resources.
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?
Scores exceed targets.
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?
Frequent presentation of GIS and remote sensing applications
examples increases students awareness of, and appreciation for, the
significance of these technologies in today’s geographic research and
environmental monitoring
15
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?
Scores exceed target.
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
About 78% of students indicated that their observational skills
showed improvement.
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?
Scores slightly below target, but 1 percentage point.
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?
New editions of textbooks that have expanded sections on humaninduced environmental change, as well as human mitigation and
adaptation to changes may be helpful in elevating students’
awareness of their role in the natural environment. Though difficult
to quantify, instructors see a growing sense of concern for
environmental stewardship in students who complete this course.
E. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 5: Add if needed.
16
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?
Some instructors in Geography 1 have added field trip activities to increase
student interaction with ecosystems and the physical realities of our region (e.g.
earthquake hazard). In fall, 2014 we successfully launched our first section of
this course fully online, increasing accessibility to students and drawing upon
online learning resources.
We reinstated a 7th section of Geography 1 to the fall semester schedule and, in
summer 2014, for the first time, offered 3 sections of the course.
Alternative textbooks were used in some semesters by one or more faculty,
diverting from using the long-established text we’ve used for several years,
Elemental Geosystems by R.W. Christopherson. We also implemented for
student use portions of publishers’ digital and online learning resources (e.g.
MasteringGeography by Pearson, WileyPLUS).
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?
strengths: Our course structure emphasizes the human-environment
interactions with deliberate attempt made to show the role of individuals and
modern society in modifying natural systems. Our instructors use in the
classroom many excellent images from a diverse set of available resources to
illustrate earth processes. Faculty use up-to-date examples and data to
emphasize the ever-advancing technologies in geography.
proposed actions: We plan to increase accessibility of the course through online
delivery and summer scheduling. We are also acquiring more teaching and
learning resources through our program review process (e.g. new maps, rock &
mineral sets, updated printers, publisher and in-house online resources).
17
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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 1L
FALL 2014
1
1
100%
SPRING 2015
Don Plondke
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.
18
 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
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: identify improved skills in observing 80% scoring
the world
level 3-4
(CLO) 2: critically differentiate regional
similarities and contrasts in climate types,
landform styles, and biomes
(CLO) 3: articulate spatial interactions
between atmosphere, ocean, and land
surface
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
46% scored lvl
3-4 80%
scored lvl 2 or
above
75-80%
24% scored lvl
scoring level 3-4
3-4
63% scored lvl
2 or above
50% scoring
level 3-4
(CLO) 4: evaluate the usefulness and value of
emerging technologies in observing physical
processes and human adaptation to the
natural environment
90% scored lvl
3-4
50% scoring 88% scored lvl
level 3-4
3-4
&
90% scored lvl
75% scoring 2 or above
level 2 or
above
 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?
19
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
This computer lab-based course is designed to enable student success
through completion of a series of week-to-week exercises applying
principles of physical geography. Experience with this exercise-based
pedagogy using internet and on-screen tutorial modules has led us to
expect about 80% of students to achieve a learning outcome level of 3
or 4 (“competent” or “accomplished”). Although 80% achieved level
2, only about half of those achieved level 3-4.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Weekly use of maps, interactive tutorials or website, and digital
remotely sensed images is a good pedagogical approach to improving
student skills in observing the world and analyzing relationships
between physical features. This CLO was assessed primarily from
student’s reading of topographic maps. The students would likely
benefit from more hands-on experience interpreting maps.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores were below expectations.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
20
The climate classification exercise used, for the most part, to assess
this outcome, is challenging. It does take considerable experience
working with maps and data to understand the numerous factors that
determine classification of regional climates, physiographic regions,
and biomes.
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores significantly surpassed expectations.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
The tutorials and exercises are directed toward specific sets of
processes or regimes of the physical environment; e.g. plate
tectonics, soils, weather maps, topographic maps. Not all can fairly
assess whether or not the student can see the interrelationships
between the major spheres of the earth system. Perhaps the CLO is
too broadly stated when compared to the objectives of the exercises.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores significantly exceeded targets.
4. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Technologies of remote sensing, GIS, and GPS are essential tools in
modern geography. Students benefit from frequent exposure to the
21
uses of these technologies in monitoring the environment. The
remote sensing tutorial used to assess this CLO is taken from online
resources of the Canadian Centre for Remote Sensing. Its use has
proven successful in familiarizing students with the components of
remote sensing systems. More time could be allocated in the lab to
exposing students to the technological breakthroughs in earth
systems monitoring.
E. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 5: Add if needed.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
4. What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
We have implemented the use of recently discovered new internet resources to
upgrade/update some of our exercises, particularly those for earth-sun
relationships; minerals, rocks, and soils; biomes (vegetation regimes related to
climate).
5. 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?
strengths: The exercise-based approach to teaching the application of physical
geography concepts uses contemporary technologies including the internet,
remotely sensed image data, and GIS. This computer lab approach has been
largely successful in achieving high rates of student success in the course. The
students' engagement with satellite imagery, maps, and animated tutorials on
student workstations develops their observational skills. It is most helpful when
students work with each other in the interpretation of mapped information. For
some lab exercises, faculty have updated online resources that provide better
information or more up-to-date data.
22
proposed actions:
1. Diversify the remote sensing applications lab exercises using online
resources.
2. Add a GPS exercise.
3. The assessments used to measure the CLOs are more focused on
particular topics in physical geography (tectonic plates, topographic
maps, weather maps, etc.) than the broadly stated learning
outcomes . We may want to consider re-writing the outcomes to
tailor them more directly to the categories of exercises we typically
assign the students.
6. 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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 2
SPRING 2015
1
1
100%
SPRING 2015
Don Plondke, Maryam
Younessi
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.
23
 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
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: list and/or classify the visible
60% lvl 3-4
components of the cultural landscape
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
81% lvl 3-4
(CLO) 2: identify significant patterns in the
spatial organization of society, including
interactions between humans, their cultural
attributes, and nature
60% lvl 3-4
51% lvl 3-4
(CLO) 3: explain the relationship of
sustainable environments to changing
patterns of population, food production,
increasing urbanization, and human-induced
environmental change
70% lvl 3-4
83% lvl 3-4
(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?
24
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
E. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded expectations
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Some essential concepts classified as part of the idea of 'cultural
landscape’ are difficult for first-time geography students to grasp.
Sometimes the textbook’s definitions do not align with those of the
instructor or with other ‘mainstream’ thinking in human geography. It
is important to achieve some common understanding in the class of
essential terminology. Perhaps a course glossary that can be modified
for each class would be helpful.
F. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores about 10 percentage points below expectations
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Some essential concepts related to the theme of 'spatial organization'
in geography are elusive for first-time geography students. A leading
example of this problem is students' observation and interpretation
of spatial distributions when looking at maps or graphics. Based on
review of questions used to assess this outcome, students show
greater strength in learning geographic facts than in grasping the
meaning of new geographic vocabulary.
25
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded the target
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
In one semester, it is difficult to cover all of the subfields of human
geography that are included in the content of textbooks. Because of
the current relevance of climate change and human-induced
environmental change issues, more course time probably should be
allocated to the topic of human geography’s perspectives on
sustainability issues.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
6. 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.
26
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
7. What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
The instructor implemented Reading Apprenticeship strategies to encourage
more active student engagement with the course textbook and basic geographic
literature. More frequent use of these classroom techniques has been
implemented as a result of the instructor’s involvement in Basic Skills
assessment.
Since the previous assessment cycle, we have added a third course-level
outcome for Geography 2, to assess student progress in visualizing the
relationships between population trends, environmental change, and
sustainability.
8. 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?
strengths: The instructor has implemented Reading Apprenticeship strategies to
encourage students to extract more course content directly from textual
material and to self-evaluate their reading skills and strategies.
proposed actions: Continue to experiment with techniques to help improve
students’ level of comprehension of geography texts and their willingness to
refer to the texts. Devote more classroom time and assignments to developing
students’ metacognitive skills and critical analysis of text material. Experiment
by changing the primary textbook semester-by-semester in order to evaluate, if
possible, the comparative level of student engagement. Assign more
supplemental reading material and, when appropriate, online resources.
Present more examples of concentration and pattern in geographic
distributions. Students need to devote more time viewing geographic
landscapes through images, maps, and real-world observations.
27
9. 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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 8
Spring 2013
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
28
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
(CLO) 1: Critically differentiate regional
similarities and contrasts in world climate
types
(CLO) 2: Assess the usefulness of the
technologies of Geographic Information
Systems and Remote Sensing in observing
climatic patterns and weather systems
(CLO) 3: Identify the major globallyapplicable physical processes affecting
environmental change
(CLO Goal)
50% score 34
75% score 2
or higher
50% score 34
75% score 2
or higher
data)
37% scored 34
63% scored 2
or higher
34% scored 34
61% scored 2
or higher
31% score 3- 37% scored 34
4
70% score 2 61% scored 2
or higher,
or higher
based on
normal dist.
(CLO) 4: Explain the global radiation balance 50% score 3- 37% scored 3and its influence on patterns of global
4
4
circulation in the atmosphere
75% score 2 63% scored 2
or higher
or higher
 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?
29
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
G. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fell 10-12 percentage points below the targets
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Many students seem to not gain a basic understanding of climatic
regions and their locational relationships with respect to latitude and
position on the landmasses. Earth-sun and season relationships as
they vary with latitude take significant time to cover.
H. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fell 14-16 percentage points below the targets
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Assessment of this outcome had a rather high level 0 (“no
achievement”) score because 21% of the students missed the
assessment or withdrew from the class.
The technologies used today in weather and climate observation,
forecasting, and modeling are integral to the study of atmospheric
science. More and more exposure to these technologies will increase
students' appreciation of their usefulness and realize why forecasting
of both short-term weather and long-term climate change is
30
improving in accuracy.
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fell very close to the targets
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Assessment of this outcome had a rather high level 0 (“no
achievement”) score because 21% of the students missed the
assessment or withdrew from the class. Students appear genuinely
interested in the topic of environmental change, particularly with
regard to forecast changes for the 21st century that likely will result
from global warming.
Sometimes the presentation of shocking data related to impacts from
global warming and other environmental trends drives home the
major point that human activities that contribute significantly to
change in natural systems.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fell 12-13 percentage points below the targets
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
CLO 4 was scored using the same assessment as used for CLO 1
31
because the 2 are closely related with questions for each on the same
test.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
10.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
Since these assessment data were collected, we have rewritten all the course
learning outcomes for Geography 8 to correspond more closely to the content
and objectives of the curricular model used in the course, effective Spring 2014:
AMS Climate Studies.
11.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?
strengths: Animated graphics included in lecture presentations helps students
grasp processes—e.g. El Niño, Earth-Sun relationships, dynamics of storms.
Weekly assignment to collect current weather data (a "weather journal")
through visual observation seemed to engage the students and aid in teaching
concepts such as seasonal temperature ranges, cloud types, and precipitation
measurement. Since the semester the assessment data was compiled, faculty
have incorporated the extensive resources of the Climate Studies course
designed by the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Chabot’s involvement
in the AMS’s Climate Diversity Project has enabled the instructor to restructure
Geography 8 to align with the week-to-week curriculum of the Climate Studies
course. Using these resources, Geography 8 has become a prototype course for
permanent institutionalization of Climate Studies at Chabot.
proposed actions: Continue to update students with data and forecasts reported
by international research groups who monitor changing environments.
Reference current world events and news sources that suggest the urgency of
addressing the topic of environmental change.
Add more animations, satellite images, and interactive tutorials from the rich
resources of The AMS Climate Studies course curriculum to illustrate
32
atmospheric phenomena toward the goal of raising the level of student
engagement.
Encourage students through assignments and class activities to explore the vast
resources on the internet (particularly those available from NOAA, NASA, and
the AMS), particularly those that address the global concern about human
influence on climate and environmental change.
12.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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment Reflections.
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
GEOG 10
Not offered since last CLO
assessment
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
Spring 2015
Don Plondke, Mireille
Giovanola
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.
33
 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
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: Assess how human activities,
See CTL
including the use of energy and natural
submitted in
resources, affect the natural environment,
Fall 2012
and how those activities have changed since
the period of the Industrial Revolution
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
(CLO) 2: Explain how the maintenance of
biodiversity influences the evolutionary
process and enhances ecosystem stability
(CLO) 3: Identify the major globallyapplicable physical processes affecting
environmental change
(CLO) 4: List the most significant observed
changes in the atmosphere, ocean, and
landmasses over the last 50 years
 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
N/A – not offered in this assessment cycle, but considered ‘active’
34
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
13.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
No changes, but faculty want to keep the course active so that it can be offered
in future semesters as a trial ‘prototype’ course for Environmental Studies.
14.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?
Geography 10 has not been offered since Spring 2012 when it was last assessed
and included in the last 3-year cycle. This “Closing-the-Loop” document serves
to emphasize that faculty want to keep this course active because it may be a
possible prototype core course for our new Environmental Studies A.A.
program. The original development of this course, Global Environmental
Problems, was motivated in part by our vision of the Environmental Studies
cross-disciplinary program as it unfolded in the Social Sciences Division.
proposed actions: Faculty involved in the Environmental Studies program will
reexamine the potential of Geography 10 as a core introductory course in
Environmental Studies that addresses a broad range of topics. Geography 10’s
course outline was developed based on an ‘earth systems model’ of examining
environmental processes and change. This approach may be valuable as an
introduction to the field of Environmental Studies.
It may take several semesters of teaching this course and assessing learning
outcomes to determine, with the insights of several faculty involved in the
Environmental Studies program, whether Geography 10 could serve as a
‘keystone’ course in the program.
15.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
35
 Other:__________________________________________________
_______________
Appendix B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 12
Spring 2013
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Jane Dignon, Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: Demonstrate place-name
30% scoring
recognition and essential skills in interpreting 3 or 4, and
and analyzing information from California
70% scoring
maps
2 or above,
based on an
expected
normal
36
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
56% scored 3
or 4, and 60%
scored 2 or
above
distribution
(CLO) 2: Identify significant spatial
relationships and patterns in California
society including interactions between
humans and their natural environment
30% scoring
3 or 4, and
70% scoring
2 or above,
based on an
expected
normal
distribution
(CLO) 3: Describe California’s contemporary 30% scoring
diverse population through analysis of
3 or 4, and
historic sequence occupance of Native
70% scoring
American and subsequent immigrant groups, 2 or above,
especially in terms of California’s economic
based on an
development history
expected
normal
distribution
(CLO) 4:
44% scored 3
or 4, and 60%
scored 2 or
above
72% scored 3
or 4, and 74%
scored 2 or
above
 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?
37
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
I. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores met expectations based on a normal distribution. 44% scored
below level 2, reflecting mostly that map assignments used for
assessment were not submitted by several students.
10.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Enrollment in this course was consistently high semester after
semester through Spring 2013, revealing its popularity and our faculty
member’s pertinence of teaching California geography at Chabot.
California map assignments are very useful for realizing this learning
outcome.
J. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded expectations based on a normal distribution
10.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Student success rates have exceeded expectations likely due to
encouragement by the instructor for students to do active field
investigations and visits to accessible California sites during the
semester. The field trip sites illustrate the important and interesting
spatial patterns in California history and contemporary society.
38
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded expectations based on a normal distribution
10.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
The historical geography approach in teaching California's cultural
and economic development appears effective, based on the success
rates. California is one of the best regional examples of the cultural
impress of successive populations who settle the landscape, and the
growing cultural diversity among the population.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
10.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.
39
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
16.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
Our devoted and long-standing Instructor for this course, Myron Gershenson,
tragically passed away during the semester of CLO assessment. So, a new
instructor has been assigned to teach this course and we have lacked sufficient
faculty resources to offer it every semester as we had done prior to 2013.
17.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?
strengths: The instructor exposes students to many thematic maps of California.
Geography 12 has been an exemplary course in teaching students map-reading
skills.
The instructor strived to keep data about California's demographics, economy,
and cultural development up-to-date so that students were aware of current
trends in California's geography. Our late devoted instructor used a
comprehensive historical approach that illuminated for students the complex
natural and cultural landscapes of California.
proposed actions: Due to tragic loss of our long-time instructor of this course,
Myron Gershenson, we need to hire a new adjunct instructor with strong
qualifications for teaching this course, and a willingness to maintain regularly
updated data on California spatial distributions.
Continue to acquire up-to-date demographic and economic data and illustrative
examples of changing patterns in California from government agencies and
other reliable sources.
40
18.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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 20
fall 2014
1
1
100%
spring 2015
Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined Target
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ Scores*
by course)
(CLO Goal)
41
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
(CLO) 1: Demonstrate a competent level of
proficiency in techniques of spatial overlay
of themes, design and production of map
layouts, and analysis of geocoded
database information
65% scoring lvl 77% scored 33-4
4
(“competentaccomplished”)
(CLO) 2: Recognize spatial relationships
between different types of map features:
points, lines, polygons, symbols, legends,
and scales; evaluate and express the
geographic underpinning of GIS, as
opposed to other graphical approaches to
mapping and locating phenomena
65% scoring lvl
3-4
79% scored 34
(CLO) 3: Identify appropriate uses of major 75-80% scoring 79% scored 3GIS display and data-type components:
lvl 3-4
4
data frames, tables, layouts, charts;
manipulate them productively, and use a
spreadsheet to prepare and format data
(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?
42
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
K. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
11.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded target.
12.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
This outcome is related to a set of fairly advanced GIS skills (the
spatial intersection of multi-thematic data).
Many students do not consistently practice “quality control” in the
GIS output of maps, graphics, and metadata. Without good
documentation of their data sources and procedures in completing a
small project, and inclusion of legends, their GIS products are not
necessarily useful to the end user.
L. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
11.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores exceeded target.
12.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Communication with students has indicated that they frequently do
not develop a satisfactory level of understanding and familiarity with
the terminology and definitions of GIS components. While the
exercises give students practice in using the functiona l tools and data
types of GIS, the "hands-on" pedagogical strategy does not
43
necessarily assure students' grasp of definitions, vocabulary, and data
modeling of GIS.
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
11.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores met the target range.
12.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 who persist in completing the exercises are nearly always
able to attain a competent level of proficiency in using basic GIS
functions.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
11.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
12.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.
44
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
19.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
Students have been given supplemental reading assignments in GIS and
handouts to highlight essential concepts and terminology, and to clarify what
are appropriate uses of the components of GIS.
New exercises have been developed to give students more practice in merging
thematic datasets and performing some numerical analysis on spatially
intersected themes. Essentially, new exercises and new steps in some existing
exercises challenged to a somewhat higher degree the students’ awareness of
GIS capabilities and gave them more experience in solving analytical problems.
Added additional video tutorials from the internet that explain GIS concepts and
demonstrate areas of practical application of the technology.
20.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?
strengths: The week-by-week exercise-based approach to developing the
student’s growing skill set in GIS software use appears to be producing high
rates of student success.
Experience in the classroom has revealed that hands-on GIS training promotes
development of useful and, hopefully, marketable skills, more so than do
alternative approaches that emphasize GIS theory and lecture-based
examination of GIS components and applications.
Revised exercises will be necessary because the GIS software has been
upgraded in our computer laboratory to ArcGIS 10.3. Heretofore, we have been
using version 9.3 for several years.
We have set as our number one priority to reinstate funding for our GIS
laboratory administrator and instructional assistant who is essential in
maintaining the operational quality of software and hardware in the lab.
45
21.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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 21
fall 2013
1
1
100%
spring 2015
Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
46
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
(CLO) 1: define and identify appropriate uses 75% scoring
of major GIS display formats and data types, 3-4
and demonstrate within a specific GIS
interface (e.g. ArcMap™) how to manipulate
them productively.
50% scored 4
(CLO) 2: define and produce cell-based grid
datasets of georeferenced data and use
spatial analysis operators to query, retrieve,
and classify continuous data.
60%
50% scored 4
(CLO) 3: formulate geoprocessing and spatial 60%
intersection analysis functions appropriate in
specific applications; perform and evaluate
the results of such processes (such as
buffering, overlay, reclassification, address
matching, and statistical analysis).
50% scored 4
(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?
47
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
M. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
13.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
GEOG 21 is a very low enrollment class because this is a GIS software
training course at level 2 of a 3-level sequence. 2 out of 4 students
registered at census succeeded. 2 of the 4 dropped the course before
the ‘W’ date.
14.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Techniques for doing spatial analysis in GIS are more sophisticated
and complex than in the GEOG 20 class, so expectations for success
are a little lower. But CLO 1 focuses on basic “literacy” in GIS and
understanding of how GIS tools are used. Persistent students should
excel in this learning outcome.
N. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
13.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Small sample size due to low enrollment. The 2 students who did
complete the class exceeded minimum expectations in manipulating
and presenting continuous raster-based data.
14.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
More exposure to digital elevation models and satellite imagery
would help in understanding the usefulness of raster-based data.
48
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
13.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Small sample size due to low enrollment. The 2 students who did
complete the class exceeded minimum expectations in
georeferencing data and using spatial intersection operators.
14.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Assisting students in learning the functionality of spatial intersection
operations and managing dissimilar datasets requires a considerable
amount of time spent 1-on-1 with the student, so a small class size is
highly desirable.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
13.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
14.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
22.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
49
None. This is the first learning outcomes assessment of this course.
23.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?
The week-by-week GIS exercises build up the students proficiency in using the
software’s tools and introduce them to new skillsets. Active participation in
each class session is likely the key to success in the course and steady progress
in using GIS techniques.
We would like to encourage more students who successfully complete GEOG 20
to enroll in GEOG 21. But, offering this second-level course depends on
acquisition of funding for the computer lab administrator and addition of
faculty.
24.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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
50
GEOG 3
Fall 2013
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
Target
by course)
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
(CLO) 1: describe how contrasting
70% lvl 3-4
geographic and economic conditions
influence the spatial distribution of
specialized economic activities and the
availability of resources
Actual
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
33% lvl 3-4
66% lvl 2 or
higher
(CLO) 2: identify geographic factors
60% lvl 3-4
contributing to the widening gap in economic
wealth and power between more developed
and developing countries, and how regional
disparities are represented by core-periphery
relationships
23% lvl 3-4
58% lvl 2 or
higher
(CLO) 3: discuss major location theories for
primary, secondary and tertiary sectors of
the economy, and how globalizing
technologies and information systems have
modified traditional locational patterns
36% lvl 3-4
68% lvl 2 or
higher
(CLO) 4:
51
60% lvl 3-4
 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
O. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
15.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fall significantly below the target.
16.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Regional specialization of economic activity and the modern world’s
dependency on international trade are essential knowledge from the
scope of economic geography. It is hoped that achievement levels
would be highest for this outcome. A review of assessment results
revealed that some students lacked fundamental knowledge of the
capitalist economic system and the operations of free markets which
initially made it challenging to illustrate the reasons for regional
specialization and the growing importance of international exchange.
P. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
15.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fall significantly below the target.
52
16.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 recognize and show concern for the economic disparities
that exist between countries and among regions within countries, but
are often unfamiliar with the historical reasons for sharp contrasts in
levels of economic development around the world. Essential to
understanding why the disparities exist, for example, is awareness of
the limitations of the physical environment, cultural adaptation to
available resources, and the impact of colonialism and political
power. The historical background may merit more time in explaining
uneven development.
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
15.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores fall significantly below the target, but achievement levels were
generally higher for this outcome than for the first two.
16.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 fared better in grasping the principles of location theory and
were often able to express how modern society’s innovations in
technology and communication have modified the economic
landscape and complicated the geographies of economic activity.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
15.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
53
16.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
25.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
This assessment was compiled in Fall 2013 which was the first and only offering
of this course in many years at Chabot. Teaching the course was somewhat of
an experiment, reflecting a faculty desire to keep the course active.
26.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?
strengths: The course content did emphasize the influence of modern trends in
society that have impacted the classical models of economic geography that
seek to explain locational patterns. Accelerated globalization of the economy
and awareness of human-induced environmental change invite new
perspectives on patterns of economic behavior in space.
proposed action: This course, Geography 3 (Economic Geography) is an elective
in Geography’s program and in only 2 other programs: Anthropology and
International Studies. It has not been a “core” course in our curricula. Unless
more faculty are hired for our programs, it seems unlikely that this course will
be scheduled in the next few years.
A case could be made for adding a prerequisite to this course, either Economics
1 or Economics 2.
When this course is offered again, a suitable textbook and/or supplemental text
resources needs to be selected that supports the particular instructor’s
objectives and adequately covers contemporary thought and research in
54
economic geography. In the Fall 2013 offering, supplemental reading resources
were used, in part, because no affordable textbook seemed appropriate for an
introductory course on this topic.
27.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 B: “Closing the Loop” Course-Level 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
GEOG 5
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Don Plondke
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
Consider The Course-Level Outcomes
Defined
55
Actual
Individually (the Number of CLOs will differ
by course)
(CLO) 1: Identify significant spatial
relationships and patterns in society
including interactions between humans and
their natural environment
(CLO) 2: Critically discuss in greater detail
and illustrate, with examples, cultural
similarities and contrasts in a diversifying
world
(CLO) 3: Describe the prominent
characteristics of major world regions in
terms of relative locations, places, and
cultures
Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
30% score
lvl 3-4
70% score
lvl 2 or
higher
30% score
lvl 3-4
70% score
lvl 2 or
higher
30% score
lvl 3-4
70% score
lvl 2 or
higher
Scores**
(eLumen
data)
38% scored lvl
3-4
62% scored lvl
2 or higher
32% scored lvl
3-4
59% scored lvl
2 or higher
35% scored lvl
3-4
62% scored lvl
2 or higher
(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?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
Q. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
17.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores generally met targets. The target scores were estimated based
on a normal distribution.
18.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
56
CLO 1 is difficult to assess and probably too general a statement to
serve as a learning outcome. We will plan to rewrite this outcome to
be more explicit. Students grasp regional differences in cultural
traditions and attitudes, but often not the influence of these
differences on the visible landscape.
R. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
17.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores were a little lower than expectations. Only 59% attained an
achievement level of 2 or higher.
18.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
About 40% of students demonstrated only a "beginning" level of
achievement or no measurable achievement for this CLO. Faculty
would like to see achievement increase among students in identifying
the characteristics of globalization and the responses to it that vary
across cultures.
Among the students entering the course, there is a wide spectrum of
difference in life experience with both world and U.S. regions. Their
familiarity with regions beyond the Bay Area has an influence on the
rate at which they can visualize and articulate cultural and
environmental differences among regions of the world.
For clarification, edit this CLO. Replace "....diversifying" with
"...globalizing and culturally diversifying".
57
C. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
17.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
Scores nearly met the targets.
18.Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching
experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections
and insights do you have?
Our target achievement scores for this outcome need to be elevated.
At the end of the course, students should be able to identify the
major attributes of the physical and cultural landscape of each
studied region.
A large proportion of students have inadequate experience reading
and interpreting maps. Students’ lack of basic knowledge of world
locations and 20th century world history upon entering the course
slows down the process of teaching how physical environments,
cultural geographies, and geopolitics are changing.
D. Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
17.How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome?
18.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.
58
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
28.What changes were made to your course based on the previous
assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other
faculty discussions?
During some semesters, student groups have been assigned a particular world
region to research and present to the class in a seminar-type format. This
assignment has provided a means of promoting greater depth of inquiry into
environmental and social problems in certain parts of the world. Also, these
student groups that devote more time to focused study on a specific region
benefit from participation by those students that have insightful knowledge of
the region derived from personal history or family ties.
In the online spring semester offering of Geography 5, material from previous
semesters’ student presentations has been incorporated into the course
content. Often these presentations offer new and unique perspectives on the
geographic issues of the regions taken from the very diverse sets of resources
that the students sometime have.
29.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?
strengths: Environmental problems specifically identified in particular world
regions are emphasized. An overview of globally applicable environmental
change (e.g. climate change) issues is also presented which the students
respond to as a current topic of concern worldwide.
In some semesters, the instructor has assigned students to research, and to
make an oral presentation on, a world region or country of their choice. This
assignment has contributed to the addition of meaningful course content and
motivated students to examine particular regions in greater depth.
proposed actions: re-write course learning outcomes, particularly #1 and #2,
with more emphasis on students’ acquisition of knowledge of major physical
and cultural characteristics of world regions. An outcome on the topic of
globalization (CLO #2) could be reworded to reflect the importance of students’
familiarity with features and trends of globalizing processes in today’s world
59
and the cultural responses to them. Perhaps more emphasis in teaching should
be placed on the relationships between world regions and how they are
changing in a globalizing world. For example, students should be aware of how
interactions have changed between East Asia and North America in the last
century.
Use more map assignments to help students interpret patterns in the landscape
that illustrate cultural differences between world regions.
30.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:__________________________________________________
_______________
60
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: ___Geography A.A.______

PLO #1: identify the set of improved skills in observing the world, and in analyzing
problems in space

PLO #2: interpret maps and mapped data utilizing basic map elements, including
scales, common coordinate systems, and map symbols

PLO #3: identify significant spatial relationships and patterns in society including
interactions between humans and their natural environment

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Frequent use of maps and remotely sensed images is the best approach to improving student skills in
observing the world and analyzing relationships between landscape features.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:The exercise-based approach to teaching the application of physical geography
concepts in lab-based courses using contemporary technologies (internet, remote sensing, GIS) has been
largely successful in achieving high rates of student success in the course. The students' engagement
with satellite imagery, maps, and animated tutorials on student workstations develops their
observational skills. It is most helpful when students work with each other in the interpretation of
mapped information.
In Spring 2014 Geography implemented a new pedagogical approach to teaching climate & climate
change science. We implemented in GEOG 8 the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS)Climate
Studies course. Chabot is now one of a select few minority-serving community colleges in the U.S. that
has inaugurated this AMS Climate StudiesDiversity Project
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Means to improve students' level of comprehension of the text and willingness to refer to it are needed.
Instructor is implementing Reading Apprenticeship strategies to help students gain insight into ways that
they read texts. Also, different textbooks have been adopted semester-to-semester since this
assessment data was collected to discern influence of the text on learning outcomes. More classroom
time in some courses is being allocated to interactive engagement with geography texts.
To elevate awareness on our campus and among U.S. students, we plan in Fall 2014 to ask Curriculum
Committee approval for permanent institutionalization of the AMS Climate Studiescourse as a new
course in our new Environmental Studies A.A. program. It promises to not only modernize the course
content for teaching atmospheric science at Chabot, but also to stimulate cross-disciplinary interest in
all aspects of the climate change issue: scientific, sociological, economic, and political.
61
Program: ___Certificate of Proficiency in Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

PLO #1: identify the set of improved skills in observing the world, and in analyzing problems
in space

PLO #2: interpret maps and mapped data utilizing basic map elements, including scales,
common coordinate systems, and symbology

PLO #3: demonstrate competency in techniques of spatial overlay of themes, design and
production of map layouts, graphical presentation of spatially distributed data, and analysis
of geocoded database information

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Experience in the classroom has revealed that GIS students progress in their development of skill in
manipulating GIS software tools and map features. The sequence of GIS exercises is designed to provide
for this development process. Students in GIS courses have shown some improvement in demonstrating
their ability to communicate in the language of GIS by providing them with supplemental resources (e.g.
a GIS glossary). Developing a familiarity with the terminology and definitions of GIS components is as
essential as learning to effectively use the tools.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
The exercise-based approach toward developing skills in GIS software usage appears to be producing
high rates of student success.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Due to lack of demand and paucity of staff resources, we have yet to see a student complete the
program.We seek to reinstate compensation for our Instructional Assistant position to assure real-time
software and hardware support and to enhance appropriate student use of instructional resources. We
continue to advocate for a new full-time Geography faculty position that is needed to continue and
extend our Geographic Information Systems program.
62
Program: ___Geography A.A.-T._______

PLO #1: identify the set of improved skills in observing the world, and in analyzing problems
in space

PLO #2: interpret maps and mapped data utilizing basic map elements, including scales,
common coordinate systems, and map symbols

PLO #3:document courses that have prepared the student for transfer to a campus of the
California State University system as a junior-year level Geography major

PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Frequent use of maps and remotely sensed images is the best approach to improving student skills in
observing the world and analyzing relationships between landscape features.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Geography did participate in academic year 2013-2014 in the Counseling Division’s “Transfer Basics”
program sponsored by the Career & Transfer Center. This effort sought to advertise our new A.A.-T
program and explain its logistics for transfer to prospective students.
The exercise-based approach to teaching the application of physical geography concepts in lab-based
courses using contemporary technologies (internet, remote sensing, GIS) has been largely successful in
achieving high rates of student success in the course. The students' engagement with satellite imagery,
maps, and animated tutorials on student workstations develops their observational skills. It is most
helpful when students work with each other in the interpretation of mapped information.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Means to improve students' level of comprehension of the text and willingness to refer to it are needed.
Full-time instructor has been implementing Reading Apprenticeship strategies to help students gain
insight into ways that they read texts. Also, different textbooks have been adopted semester-tosemester since this assessment data was collected to discern influence of the text on learning outcomes.
More classroom time in some courses is being allocated to interactive engagement with geography
texts.
To elevate awareness on our campus and among U.S. students, we plan in Fall 2014 to ask Curriculum
Committee approval for permanent institutionalization of the AMS Climate Studiescourse as a new
course in our new Environmental Studies A.A. program. It promises to not only modernize the course
content for teaching atmospheric science at Chabot, but also to stimulate cross-disciplinary interest in
all aspects of the climate change issue: scientific, sociological, economic, and political.
63
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?
No. need to update GEOG 5, 21, 22, 95, 96
2. 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)
No. GEOG 22, 95, and 96
3. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog?
No. GEOG 22, 95, and 96 are required courses only for the Certificate of Proficiency in
GIS program. They have not yet been offered due to lack of FTEF and very small
student demand.
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
Yes.
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. GEOG 3 was offered for the first time in many years in Fall, 2013 and assessment
data was compiled. Assessment data for GEOG 21 also was compiled in Fall 2013.
“Closing the loop” was last completed for GEOG 1, 2, and 20 in Spring 2011, so
assessmentis scheduled for those three courses in Fall 2014. Evaluation of the
assessment dataand “Closing the loop” is therefore planned for completion this
academic year for GEOG 1, 2, 3,20, and 21.
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.
Yes. See Appendix C.
7. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?
N/A
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.
Yes.
64
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?
The extension of this initiative promises to improve student learning of current issues related to climate change and its environmental impacts.
And by institutionalizing the Climate Studies course, we can enhance our new Environmental Studies program by providing students with access
to new, cutting-edge learning resources for studying the relationships between human activities and the state of Earth’s changing atmosphere.
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
With the support of the American Meteorological Society’s Climate Diversity Project, Chabot has joined a select group of Minority-Serving
institutions by piloting the AMS-designed Climate Studies course in Spring semester, 2014. Our next goal in this project is to establish the course
as a permanent course within our Geography and Environmental Studies programsand regularly update its learning resources in coordination
with AMS. The participating Chabot faculty member plans to attend the Spring 2015 Annual Meeting of the AMS to report on the progress made
in implementing the course at Chabot and to attend briefings on activities and updates in relation to the Climate Studies Diversity Project.
Chabot students over upcoming academic years will benefit from interaction with learning resources (mostly on the Internet) developed by
leading climate scientists and organizations such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration (NASA).
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Target
Required Budget (Split out
Completion personnel, supplies, other
Date
categories)
May, 2015
Propose and attain Curriculum Committee and State Approval
for the AMS Climate Studies course as GEOG 13 and part of our
Environmental Studies program
Attend AMS Annual Meeting in Phoenix, AZ and obtain
Feb, 2015
updated information on course content and implementation
Complete second offering of the Climate Studies course within May, 2015
the structure of GEOG 8, Spring 2015
65
see Appendix F6
Implement the AMS Climate Studies course as first offering of
new, permanent course at Chabot
Fall, 2015
$149 course license fee for
Academic year 2015-2016
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions 0.5(reinstatement of funding)
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
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: coordination with the AMS Climate Studies Project, Washington, DC
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
66
(obtained by/from):college
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/Data2013.cfm.
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: _2_
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
STAFFING REQUESTS (1000) FACULTY
Position
1. Full-time
Instructor of
Geography
2. Adjunct
Instructor of
Geography
Description
Qualified
instructor across
our curriculum in
physical GEOG,
GIS, AND
GEOLOGY
Qualified
instructor for
Geog. of Calif.
and physical
GEOG courses
Faculty (1000)
Program/Unit
Division/Area
GEOG AA-T, GEOG
AA, Certificate of
Proficiency in GIS,
Environmental Studies
AA
This position will serve BOTH the Arts,
Humanities, and Social Sciences Division
(areas: Geography, Environmental
Studies) AND the Science & Mathematics
Division (subject: Geology)
GEOG AA-T
GEOG AA
Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences
Division (area: Geography)
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.
67
The Geography Program at Chabot now encompasses 6 different courses that must be offered regularly (every semester or every
other semester) in order to enable completion of an A.A. or A.A.-T degree in a two-year pathway. Geography is not adequately
staffed to support the expanded programs that exist in our catalog but cannot be realistically implemented. The approval of our new
Geography A. A.-T degree program likely will attract more geography students. In order to attain a balance of course offerings that
enable student completion of a program in our discipline over a reasonable time period, Geography needs another full-time faculty
member. Former full-time InstructorDesreAnderes retired in 2011, and Don Plondke, the only current full-time Geography faculty
member, is maintaining full loads and often overloads of Geography classes, involving 5 “preps” most semesters.
Each semester, Geography generates WSCH/FTEF values between 600 and 800. Overall WSCH/FTEF for the last 3 academic years has
been 690 for Geography. Since 2010, our full-time/part-time ratio has dropped from 2/3 to 1/3 and FTEF allocation has dropped as
low as 2.15 (Fall 2012) when we had 531 Geography enrollments with a resulting WSCH/FTEF of 741.
One of our3 Geography programs at Chabot is the Certificate of Proficiency in Geographic Information Systems (GIS). This program is
a sequence of 5 courses (GEOG 20, 21, 22, 95, and 96). To date, we have been able realistically to offer only the introductory course
(GEOG 20) on a regular basis. We have lacked the faculty, students, and monetary resources to offer the second-level course (GEOG
21) more than twice in the last 5 years. Our resource limitations prevent us from actively recruiting interested and qualified students
for the certificate program. Geographic Information Systems technology and teaching is a labor-intensive effort involving acquisition
and licensing of software, installation and maintenance of the multi-modular software, and PC networking in the Social Sciences
Laboratory. In building 500, many weeks of work and ongoing maintenance will be required semester-by-semester to update, install,
test, and implement updated versions of ArcGIS software in the laboratory (room 507) in support of GIS and geography lab courses.
Adding to our urgent need for more Geography faculty is the state’s approval in 2013 of our new Environmental Studies A.A. degree
program. To promote and administer the program in the AHSS Division in coming years, more FTEF allocation will be needed to offer
the core (GEOG 1) and elective Geography course components of the Environmental Studies degree. Growth in the interdisciplinary
program will depend on close collaboration with other Social Science faculty, active student recruitment, and development of new
curricula.
An additional issue is that Chabot has not offered a Geology course since Spring semester, 2007. This is a significant shortcoming in
our college’s curricula. Geology is a major scientific discipline. Geology would, of course, be a discipline belonging under the Science
& Mathematics Division. It is the opinion of the Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences Division that we could re-establish introductory
Geology courses by hiring a full-time Geography Instructor who also holds qualifications to teach geology. This strategy would seem
68
particularly appropriate in light of the limited number of full-time faculty positions that can be prioritized within the confines of the
college’s budget. Through consultation with the college president, Academic Services vice president, and the deans of AHSS and
Science & Mathematics, we believe the hiring of a full-time Geography/Geology Instructor under Geography’s FTEF might be a costeffective strategy in solving both the problem of needing another full-time Geography Instructor and seeking to re-institute the
teaching of geology in our curriculum.
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.
Geography requests approval and funding of one new full-time Geography faculty position. Recruitment for this position should be
specifically directed to qualified geography instructors with significant experience in GIS/remote sensing technologies and
education. GIS and remotely sensed imaging are the primary methodological tools today in the geosciences. College graduates with
skills and experience using GIS and remote sensing techniques have an advantage in the highly competitive job market. Government,
business, and education have high demand for qualified GIS analysts. The use of GIS technologies extends far beyond the field of
geography to include all the science, social science, and business management disciplines. But we also need a new full-time faculty
member simply to continue offering the full set of courses need by our degree- or certificate-seeking students in our Geography
programs. The college can fill the gap that exists in our lack of a course offering in Geology by recruiting an instructor who is fully
qualified to teach Geology as well as Physical Geography and GIS. Such potential candidates should be available in the market place
because combining Geography with Geology is common in graduate degree programs in the Earth Sciences. Instructional staffing for
our Geography course offerings is critical to any effort to streamline student pathways that include Geography courses. Among the
highest priority initiatives in the 2012-2015 Strategic Plan are: "determine the capacity of each pathway" and "identify bottlenecks to
completion". The loss of one full-time position due to retirement has restricted further our ability of offer all the required courses
across our curriculum needed for a student to reach a measurable educational goal (a degree or certificate, or both). A new full-time
faculty member broadens the areas of expertise and brings a new set of experiences in the field of study, allowing more student
access to information and mentoring (2012-2015 Strategic Plan). The new faculty member would share in delivery of our core
courses and the GIS program, collaborate in, and bring fresh ideas to, the program planning process, and innovate new teaching
strategies. We could then clear potential bottlenecks and accelerate students' progress, produce more Chabot graduates with
marketable skills, and enable Geography to assist other Chabot units, both academic and administrative.
We also request approval and funding of at leastone new adjunct Geography faculty position. Tragically, inSpring 2013 we lost our
longtime adjunct instructor, Myron Gershenson, who faithfully taught our popular Geography of California (GEOG 12) course for
many years. Without more adjunct faculty, we cannot offer the full set of courses to support students who seek to complete
69
programs in a two-year timeframe. 6-7 sections of GEOG 1 can be filled every semester. GEOG 1 operated at a WSCH/FTEF level of
739 over the last 3 academic years. A prospective new adjunct faculty member should be qualified to teach GIS courses to prevent
collapse of the certificate program. Simultaneously, we need someone who can teach across the Geography curriculum so that we
can regularly offer GEOG 3, GEOG 10, and/or GEOG 12 that are elective courses in our A.A. and A.A.-T programs.
70
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: __1__
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) CLASSIFIED PROFESSIONALS
Position
1. Instructional
Assistant
Classified Professional Staff (2000)
Description
Program/Unit
Systems administrator for the
computer laboratory in
Geography A.A.
support of instructional
Geography A.A.-T.
hardware and software for
Certificate of Proficiency
GEOG 1L, 20, 21, 22
In GIS
STAFFING REQUESTS (2000) STUDENT ASSISTANTS
Postion
Description
Student Assistants (2000)
Program/Unit
71
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
Arts, Humanities, and Social
Sciences/Geography
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
Division/Area
2. Rationale for your proposal.
Geography’s Instructional Assistant has been, and continues to be, essential in fulfilling our discipline's continuing goal to “evaluate and support
the use of technology in courses based on relevancy to the workplace” (see Unit Plan Update, Part 2, March 2008). Our courses that include a
major computer lab component (GEOG 1L, 19, 20, 21, and 22) require highly skilled technical support and maintenance of a multi-tiered
architecture of software and hardware for teaching and learning of Geographic Information System (GIS) technologies. Our computer laboratory
for Social Science (room 507) was carefully designed under the Measure B Bond to nearly double the number of desktop workstations available
for student use and configure them to support a variety of computer-based courses. Frequent version updates and service-pack installations for
our software require a continuing and, in fact, growing need for expertise and system administration to assure operational quality of the lab. Use
of the lab resources is expanding, not only for Geography courses, but for other Social Science disciplines and cross-division programs that
benefit from use of our lab. Our one part-time Classified Staff Instructional Assistant and Systems Administrator has growing responsibilities for
assuring the operational quality and up-to-date maintenance of the lab’s software and hardware.
Geography requests reinstatement of funding for our current Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator (for Mr. Brian Beard), at the level
of 50% of full-time or 20 hours per week. In the academic year of 2010-2011, his employment was reduced to a total of 400 hours for the year
(or about 12 hours per week). In the last 3 academic years of 2011-2012, 2012-2013, and 2013-2014, he has not been paid at all, as District HR
has disallowed submitted PAR's due to budget cuts. We request that his allotment of compensated hours for the immediate academic year
2014-2015, and for years 2015-2016 and beyond, be reinstated to employ himfor about 720 total hours (or about 20 hours per week over 36
weeks). At present, his unfunded status disables our ability to meet the needs for maintenance of the computer laboratory that supports
instruction for a growing number of students enrolled in Geography’s and other discipline’s computer-based courses.
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.
This request is directly aligned with the strategies of Chabot’s 2012-2015 Strategic Plan which seeks to provide more support in helping students
achieve their educational goal. Desktop Geographic Information Systems (GIS) technologies and internet-based tutorial modules are critical
components in delivering instruction about applications of the constantly changing technological tools in geography and other disciplines. This
classified staff position for instructional and technical support also relates to Chabot’s strategies "to offer instructionmore efficiently" and "make
our classes more productive."
GIS, GPS, and remote sensing technologies that we integrate into our learning outcomes and methods of instruction help students develop many
72
skill sets that prepare them for jobs in every sector of the modern economy.
In addition, the current Accreditation Self-Evaluation Studyaddresses the under-staffing of campus computer laboratories as part of Standard 3AHuman Resources section of the report. A Planning Agenda item under Standard 3A calls for “a re-inventory of campus facilities and equipment
related to technology regularly used in instructional and Student Services areas to reassess the need for additional staffing, full-time and parttime, that will elevate the level of operability, reliability, and timely delivery of systems in these areas.”
Immediately below is a supplemental statement of the roles and responsibilities of our Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator for the
Social Sciences Division Laboratory (room 507).
Supplemental Statement for the 2015-2016 Academic Year
GeographyClassified Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category 2000]
The Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator in the Social Sciences Division Laboratory acts as:

the professionally trained systems administrator qualified to install, maintain, update, and trouble-shoot all components
of the multi-tiered ArcGIS system architecture;

Geographic Information Systems (GIS) project leader who communicates frequently with technical support personnel
at Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI—the leading world manufacturer of GIS software,
headquartered in Redlands, CA) and ESRI’s higher education specialists who work with our staff member to assure
the performance quality of GIS software and hardware and solve system problems in a cost-effective and timely
manner (inoperable GIS software in an instructional environment is useless);

GIS Instructional Assistant, trained in effective use of the software components, who can answer student’s questions,
communicate easily with novice PC and GIS users, and offer tips for productive use of the tools, especially those
pertaining to the GIS user interface;

The Instructional Assistant in the Social Science Lab for several other disciplines, interacting directly with students to
facilitate their access to tutorial modules, application programs, and to assure appropriate classroom use of these
resources;
73

Lab Network Administrator who assures the compatibility of a diverse set of PC-based tutorials, GIS software and
databases, and digital image processing programs, and who rearranges file directory structures to efficiently service
data cataloging needs for several classes with different goals in using computer applications and the internet;

Quality assurance liaison with Chabot’s Information Technology staff, monitoring network interfaces, assuring
compliance with security procedures and policies, and overseeing the upkeep and upgrading of all systems and
educational applications software.
Overview of the Social Sciences Computer Laboratory Environment:
Instructors using the laboratory, though usually very familiar with the functionality of specific software designed for student learning,
do not have a comprehensive view of system configuration and program module interactions that the Lab Systems Administrator has.
Instructors must devote their attention to the students’ understanding of the content of tutorials, exercises, and learning modules, and
to help students in acquiring useful sets of skills. The Instructional Assistant/Systems Administrator’s role is to assure consistent
quality of operation of hardware and software, and to trouble-shoot network and system problems that inevitably emerge in a
complex computing environment.
74
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
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
a) GEOG 12
b) GEOG 1L
0.2 / yr
0.45 / yr
0.2 / yr
0.15 / yr
1—spring
1—fall
32
109
44
44
c) GEOG 20
d) GEOG 22
e) GEOG 13
f) GEOG
95/96
0.2 / yr
0
0
0
0.2 / yr
0.2 / yr
0.2 / yr
0.15 / yr
1—fall
1—fall
2—spring
1—fall
0
0
0
1—spring
1
1
1 / yr of
GEOG 95 or
96
21
0
0
0
44
up to 44
44
unknown,
prob. 3-4
To support: 1) coverage of all Geography course offerings necessary to enable student completion of
requirements for our A.A. and A.A.-T degree programs in a timely fashion;
2) the GIS Certificate of Proficiency program (see college catalog); and 3) the upgrading of student
access to our GIS courses. Geography needs additional FTEF allocation to restore one section per year
each of GEOG 1L and GEOG 12 that were cut for various reasons since 2011. We also need the ability, in
some semesters, to schedule more than one GIS course to run concurrently. Our current FTEF does not
allow schedulingof the courses necessary for a student at Chabot to earn the GIS Certificate of
Proficiency. For example, we would like to accommodate both introductory-level GIS students enrolling
in GEOG 20 and more advanced GIS students who have completed GEOG 20 (or equivalent) and wish to
enroll in GEOG 21, the 2nd level GIS applications course. Our current academic year FTEF allocation
barely allows us to offer our annual range of courses that consistently reach or surpass enrollment
expectations. We are unable to staff our “core” courses that students need for GE requirements
fulfillment and for the Geography A.A. and A.A.-T programs (including GEOG 1, 1L, 2, 5, 8, and 12). We
have currently insufficient allocation to allow simultaneous offering of more than one GIS course (GEOG
20, 21, 22, 95, 96) in a semester without sacrificing one or more sections of “core” courses. We cannot
expect to award our first Certificate of Proficiency in GIS without additional FTEF allocation and the
hiring of another Geography full-time faculty member,as discussed in Appendix F1.
Geography requests 1.10 newFTEF allocation (as indicated by course in the table above) to:
a) allow offering of an additional section of GEOG 12 per year that was functionally lost by the untimely
75
death of instructor Myron Gershenson; b) restore a second fall section of GEOG 1L that was dropped in
Fall, 2011. The lack of seats available in the fall semester (only 44 available at present) in GEOG 1L is a
significant bottleneck for students seeking to fulfill the science lab component for GE transfer; c) enable
offering the popular Introduction to GIS (GEOG 20) course each semester instead of only once per year;
e) offer once per year the recently approved new course, GEOG 13—Climate Studies, that is discussed
above in Appendix E.
d) and f)Geography includes in itsrequest an yearly allocation of a minimum of 0.3 FTEF to enable
offering of at least one additional GIS applications course (GEOG 21, 22) and both GIS work experience
courses, which a student must take concurrently (GEOG 95 and 96), without sacrificing our “core”
course offerings that consistently have shown high enrollments.
As an example, with an additional 0.3 FTEF for Spring Semester 2016, we would anticipate a proposed
schedule that would include:
GEOG 20
3 units (0.2 FTEF)
GEOG 22
3 units (0.2 FTEF)
GEOG 95/96 1-3 units (0.1-0.15 FTEF)
GEOG 22 and GEOG 95/96 would be first-time course offerings that would fulfill a student’s
requirements for completion of the GIS Certificate of Proficiency.GEOG 20 is scheduled also for Fall
Semester 2015.
76
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: 0
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
2.
3.
4.
3. Rationale for your proposal based on your program review conclusions. Include anticipated impact on student learning outcomes and
alignment with the strategic plan goal. Indicate if this request is for the same, more, or fewer academic learning support positions.
77
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
needed totals in all areas Request
Requested
Description
$2,000
ESRI/ArcGIS Educational
Site License—Foundation
for CA Community Colleges
GIS Collaborative
$168
4 HP 78 Tricolor InkJet
print cartridges - 4 @ $42
$128
4HP 45Black Original Ink
print cartridge - 4@ $36
2015-16
Request
Received
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
Priority
#1
$2,000
FCCC
AHSS/Geog
X
$168
Staples
AHSS/Geog
X
$144
Staples
AHSS/Geog
X
Priority #2
$2,000
$168
$128
78
Priority #3
The request for annual renewal of the ESRI/ArcGIS Educational Site License is for a subscription to the GIS Collaborative of the
Foundation of California Community Colleges (FCCC). This funding is essential to maintain our Geography A.A. and GIS Certificate
programs.
The request for jetinkprint cartridges is essential for reproduction of map and digital image instructional exercises that are
distributed to students in Physical Geography labs and GIS courses. These exercises and handouts are much more realistic and
informative for the students when produced in color.
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 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.
augmentations only
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
79
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
Registration fee—American
Meteorological Society (AMS)
2015 Annual Meeting
(1 attendee)
Airfare from Oakland to
Phoenix, AZ for AMS 2015
Annual Meeting
Host Hotel for AMS 2015
Annual Meeting—4 nights @
$183 per night
Amount
$495
Vendor
AMS 2015 Annual
Meeting, Phoenix, AZ,
January 4-8, 2015
Priority Priority Priority
Division/Dept
#1
#2
#3
AHSS/Geog
X
$262
Southwest Airlines
AHSS/Geog
X
$732
Sheraton Phoenix
Downtown or Hyatt
Regency Phoenix
AHSS/Geog
X
AHSS/Geog
X
TOTAL COST—1 attendee
AMS 2015 Annual Meeting
$1489
80
Notes
Rationale: attendance at the
conference is important to
obtain updates on course
delivery components and
implementation strategies for
GEOG 8 and GEOG 13 that use
AMS-designed pedagogical tools.
Chabot, a Minority-serving
institution, is an accepted
participant in AMS’s Climate
Studies Diversity Project
Instructor’s participation in this
conference will support SLO of
GEOG 13: “apply the techniques,
tools, and instruments of
atmospheric science to the
observation, statistical
evaluation, portrayal, and
prediction of climatic variability.”
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 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.
Description
Amount
Vendor
Division/Unit
81
Priority #1
Priority #2
Priority #3
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?
82