Chabot College
Program Review Report
2015 -2016
Year 3 of
Program Review Cycle
Humanities, Philosophy
& Religious Studies
Submitted on October 30, 2014
Contact: Patricia Shannon
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
A. What Progress Have We Made?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative.
The majority of my effort during the past year has gone to being a player supporting the
transition to being a college that is increasingly data-driven and student-focused; helping the
college achieve its goals in strategic planning, integration, and student completion; ensuring
that my courses had CLOs and setting an assessment schedule, and updating all of the course
outlines of record (in compliance with Title V), and teaching a full load. I am proud of my
contributions to the college as a whole, but this work has been possible because of the strength
of our adjuncts and the generally strong courses we offer. I had also mapped out a plan to
begin working with liberal arts majors. I made no progress on this plan for two reasons. The
Title III Grant was extended for a sixth year (ended September 20, 2014 with a final report due
in December), which necessitated additional college-wide work, and the approval of a
sabbatical for Spring 2015. These two things made delaying the work appropriate.
I am proud of the adjuncts in my disciplines, who have shouldered the bulk of the teaching and
student contact, as they teach over 66% of the classes in these disciplines. I am grateful for the
work of adjuncts in completing assessment (which I know from previous experience they will
do), and their “stepping” up to take on additional load when it was offered to the division to
support the college in achieving its FTES goal.
Students are generally successful in our classes, and tend to persist and succeed in greater
numbers in other courses after taking courses in our disciplines. Our enrollments of underrepresented populations continue to grow, although we haven’t done anything in particular to
attract these students. With additional FTEF allocated, we were able to restore key breadth
offerings, and if we receive the additional FTEF requested, we will continue to restore key
breadth offerings.
1
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
I have nothing in particular to suggest in terms of the Educational Master Plan, other than the
critical need for a second full-time faculty member in some combination of the disciplines. Our
existing facilities are sufficient, and there is no particular growth or changing technology that
will substantially increase or decrease interest in the disciplines.
The most important change for the program is staffing and focus. If the college wants me to
continue the kind of college-wide work I do, attending the many meetings and responding to
numerous emails and requests for support or information, then a new hire is necessary. If the
college wants to develop a pathway for Liberal Arts students or TMC, for example to match the
newly approved philosophy TMC at Las Positas, then an additional faculty member is necessary.
If we do not hire, I will have to step back from the college-wide work I am currently involved in
to do the required work in my disciplines. My Program Review is late because I have spent
almost every free hour of the last three weeks in a meeting or preparing for my classes. I
cannot continue to do this.
When I actually started to plan what would happen to the schedule/course offerings during my
sabbatical, despite a rich pool of adjuncts, we would not have enough adjuncts and would need
to hire more or consider a sabbatical leave replacement, which I was told would not be
seriously considered. I know that nothing awful would happen. However, I would return and
the work of curriculum, discipline planning, assessment, and program review would all be
waiting for me. Such a backlog would defeat one of the major purposes of a sabbatical,
renewal and respite. Despite my decision not to take a sabbatical in Spring 2015, I do intend to
reapply. So, the need to hire a sabbatical leave replacement should be seriously considered,
not just for me, but for others who take sabbatical leave. I find the “HR doesn’t want to hire
sabbatical leave replacements or there isn’t time to hire” specious.
Looking not too much farther out, I will be 62 at the end of this academic year, and retirement
is looming. I don’t believe that the ideal situation is for someone to retire and then, and only
then, to hire a replacement, or not to hire someone at all, and the disciplines become
rudderless and without an advocate. Given the vibrancy and productivity of our courses, we
should hire someone now. With the additional FTEF I have asked for, 75% of our courses would
be taught by adjunct faculty, a very undesirable situation.
C. What’s Next?
Beginning in Spring 2015, I will begin the work I intended to do last year on a pathway/outreach
program intended to support the over 300 students who have declared humanities, philosophy,
or liberal arts/studies (humanities) as majors. This has been described in the new initiatives
appendix. I will gather information those students and where they are in their program as well
as research with those students about their needs. The challenge is develop a pathway
program to help students make timely progress through their majors/education goals, where
they are stymied, and what support they need. The data collection will begin in Spring 2015,
including working with student focus groups to identify the needs, with activities beginning in
2
Fall 2015. I intend to apply for pathways, equity, and SSSP funding to support various aspect of
the pathway. Again, this work will be difficult to do on an ongoing basis as the single full-time
anchor.
I am continuing at adjust our course offerings to ensure that our majors have the breadth and
depth they need. PHIL65, PHIL70, RELS64, 65, and 70 have been put into the schedule. I am
also increasing the number of sections of HUMN65 to help with the bottlenecks around
American Cultures requirements. I also believe that work around a TMC in philosophy should
occur to match the program at Las Positas, but that will have to wait until Fall of 2016.
Our fill-rate and wait-list data, generally show high levels of enrollment with full wait lists, so
we could fill additional sections at high-demand times of day or online. The continued loss of a
second faculty member in these THREE disciplines is felt deeply, as all of the course, discipline,
program, and college-wide work falls on one person.
Due to a very high degree of involvement in college-wide work, I have not tracked the program
carefully, and during the latter part of this fall, I will have to work with adjuncts to complete
assessment of all of our courses (except RELS70, which was assessed in Spring 2014), and
evaluate the program. This must be completed and submitted before December 19, 2014.
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
NOTHING REQUESTED
Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes Assessment Reporting Schedule
As a consequence of being only person in the discipline and the high degree of involvement in
college-wide work, I have not tracked the program carefully, and during the latter part of this
fall, I will have to work with adjuncts to complete assessment of all of our courses (except
RELS70, which was assessed in Spring 2014), and evaluate the program. CLO forms will be
submitted on or before December 19, 2014.
I.
Course-Level Student Learning Outcomes & Assessment Reporting
(CLO-Closing the Loop).
A. Check One of the Following:
No CLO-CTL forms were completed during this PR year. No Appendix B2 needs to be
submitted with this Year’s Program Review. Note: All courses must be assessed once
at least once every three years.
xYes, CLO-CTL were completed for one or more courses during the current Year’s
Program Review. Complete Appendix B2 (CLO-CTL Form) for each course assessed this
year and include in this Program Review.
B. Calendar Instructions:
3
List all courses considered in this program review and indicate which year each course Closing
The Loop form was submitted in Program Review by marking submitted in the correct column.
Course
*List one course per line.
Add more rows as
needed.
PHIL50
This Year’s Program
Review
*CTL forms must be
included with this PR.
FALL 2014*
PHIL60
FALL2014*
PHIL 65
FALL2014
FALL 2014
HUMN50
HUMN65
FALL2014
HUMN68
FALL2014
RELS50
FALL2014
RELS64
FALL2014
*see note above in blue.
4
Last Year’s Program
Review
2-Years Prior
*Note: These courses
must be assessed in the
next PR year.
Appendix B2: “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
RELS70
Spring 2014
1
1
100%
2015
1
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
(CLO) 1:STUDENT HAS DEMONSTRATED AN UNDERSTAND OF
THE TWO TERMS “SPIRITUAL” AND “RELIGIOUS.”
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75%, score a 2.5
or above (C+)
(CLO) 2: STUDENT HAS EXAMINED WORKS REPRESENTING A
75%>2.5 (C+)
21 of 31 scored a
3 or 4 (8 students
scored a 2),
average exceeds
goal
75%>2.5 (C+)
21 of 29 scored a
3 or 4, 7 scored a
2, average
exceeds goal
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
WIDE RANGE OF REPRESENTATIONS OF A SIGNIFICANT RELIGIOUS
CONCEPT (E.G., PILGRIMAGE) IN ITS TRADITIONAL AND
CONTEMPORARY CONTEXTS.
(CLO) 3:STUDENT HAS DISCUSSED AND/OR WRITTEN ABOUT A
SIGNIFICANT RELIGIOUS TERM (E.G., PILGRIMAGE) USING
MULTIPLE SOURCES REPRESENTING A DIVERSITY OF
PERSPECTIVES.
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
5
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
23 of 27 scored 3
or 4, exceeds goal
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?
Exceed goal.
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?
Good work.
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?
Meets or exceeds goal.
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?
Good work.
6
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?
Meet or exceed goal.
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?
The third CLO (writing assignment) is the capstone assignment, in which students use
their understanding of spirituality and exposure to representations of religious concepts
to write about a specific spiritual practice or term. The majority of students 21 of 29
scored well on this assignment. That’s good.
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?
Had not been taught in previous cycle.
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?
None.
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
xOther:____None___________________________________________________________
__
7
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.
Will be submitted when all assessment data gathered by end of Fall 2014.
Program: ______
PLO #1:
PLO #2:
PLO #3:
PLO #4:
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
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? YES
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) YES
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, but as FTEF has been restored, the courses are being
put on the schedule. Some during 2014-15, and more are planned for 2015-16.
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 We have CLOs.
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.The list is provided in the CLO schedule
and the work will be complete by the end of FALL 2014. This requires careful work with
adjuncts, as they teach all of the sections of several courses.
8
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. Will be completed
when all course assessment data is in hand, prior to December 19, 2014.
7. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)? No course sequences.
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. Completion or concurrent
enrollment in any English class is helpful; however, students without English often complete
successfully.
9
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?
Increase the number of students completing education goal/major. Complete research about and with existing student population; develop
outreach/pathway program
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Identify and redress barriers to completion, specifically among students declaring general humanities, humanities, liberal AA/AS, philosophy,
liberal arts (humanities), and liberal studies (humanities) as their major. I will need help from Institutional Research in defining how many
students met their goals in the past two years (to set a benchmark), but the measurable outcome will be to increase that number after two
years, once the program begins (Fall 2015).
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Complete research about and with existing student
population; develop outreach/pathway program
Target
Completion
Date
May 2015
Implement outreach/pathway program, will know better what Aug 2015
funding sources could be used, once demographic analysis is
complete
Support students and track progress
Aug 2015May 2017
10
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
Support from IR,
Admissions and Records,
and Counseling
Support from Admissions
and Records, and
Counseling. Funding for
supplies, tutoring, etc.
Could be funded by CPT,
SSSP, or Equity
Ongoing support for
services and supplies
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
x
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 I want to do this work either with a new colleague in my disciplines or instead of the college-wide
work I am currently doing.
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
x
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project (obtained by/from):unknown
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
x
No
Yes, exp
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
x
No
Yes, exp
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
x
Yes, list potential funding sources: SSSP, CPT, and Equity are all potential funding sources.
11
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: __1_
PLEASE LIST IN RANK
ORDER
STAFFING REQUESTS (1000) FACULTY
Position
Description
Humanities/Religious Full-time
Studies
faculty
Faculty (1000)
Program/Unit
Division/Area
HUMN/PHIL/RELS
AHSS
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.
Our enrollments are consistently strong (generally close to or exceeding cap), and our productivity is high (baseline is over 500 FTEF. Our most
recent full-time hire, John Parente, gave up his full-time status a few years ago. Despite a position being put forward by the division and
validated by the Faculty Prioritization Committee that year, the position was not included in that year’s hires by the then-President. Since that
time, we have had no hires until last year. While I have requested a faculty member last year, I have (at the division level) balanced the
divisional needs with the strengths of our adjuncts, and valued other needs in the division higher than the needs of my discipline. In our current
environment, I believe it is time to move forward on a hire in these disciplines.
12
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.
Our courses fulfill one area of GE, in which students need three courses. It is important to have strong and varied offerings in this GE area to
serve students so that they can complete their educational goals in a reasonable time.
13
Appendix F2: Classified Staffing Request(s) including Student Assistants [Acct.
Category 2000]
NONE REQUESTED
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
HUMN65
PHIL70
RELS65
CURRENT
FTEF
(2014-15)
ADDITIONAL
FTEF
NEEDED
CURRENT
SECTIONS
ADDITIONAL
SECTIONS
NEEDED
CURRENT
STUDENT #
SERVED
ADDITIONAL
STUDENT #
SERVED
.4
0
0
.4
.2
.2
2
0
0
1
1
1
88
0
0
44
44
44
I also do not want to lose the FTEF due to cancellation of a class in Fall 2014. Sections of this course AT THIS TIME
hav historically filled, it is still unclear why this section did not fill. However, enrollments in other classes and
sections were strong, which suggests that demand for our courses is strong.
14
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
NONE REQUESTED
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
NONE REQUESTED
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [ Acct. Category 5000]
NONE REQUESTED
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
NONE REQUESTED
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
NONE REQUESTED
15