Chabot College
Program Review Report
2015-2016
Year Three of
Program Review Cycle
Astronomy
Submitted on 10/24/14
Scott Hildreth, Shannon Lee, Timothy Dave
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 1
Table of Contents
Section A: What Have We Accomplished?................................. 3
Section B: What’s Next? ........................................................... 5
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History .........................................................................................8
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule .................................9
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections .........................................10
C: Program Learning Outcomes..................................................................17
D: A Few Questions ....................................................................................19
E: New Initiatives .......................................................................................20
F3: FTEF Requests ......................................................................................22
F5: Supplies and Services Requests ............................................................23
F6: Conference/Travel Requests ................................................................24
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests ........................................25
F8: Facilities Requests ................................................................................26
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 2
A. What Have We Accomplished?
We had the following Program Improvement Goals for Year 1 of the Cycle for Astronomy; items
marked as BOLD were achieved:
0)
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Prepare for relocation of Astronomy lab to Building 1800 by start of Spring 2013.
Increase Planetarium Shows for the Public
Astronomy Curriculum Update by Fall 2012
Start Astronomy PLO review
Astronomy Lab Course Curriculum improvements
Continued Student Success Research Regional/Statewide
Textbook/Online system evaluation
Fundraising for the planetarium
We achieved four of our primary Program Review goals as projected, on time. The Astro lab
was relocated into 1800. In 2013, we offered 5 public shows that were well attended, and
hosted two special events. In 2014 thus far, we were not able to keep pace, but we did offer
special eclipse viewing and public shows, as well as special shows for campus personnel.
Adjunct faculty have – on their own time – offered public shows in Fall 2014 open to students
and their families and friends. We investigated equipment upgrades that would help us record
and present more public shows, and with the help of the Dean, purchased and installed that
equipment (in Fall 2014). In conjunction with Dr. Billy Smith, faculty emeritus, we continued to
develop shows that could be presented with minimal staffing requirements. Astro curriculum
was updated to reflect current requirements and textbooks. We added new Astro labs to the
curriculum, including “Using Solar Dynamics Data in the Classroom to do Actual Science”
developed by Chabot faculty (Hildreth, Lee, Dave) as part of a NASA Education Public Outreach
grant administered by Stanford University’s Solar Dynamics Observatory project. That multiweek lab was very favorably received by NASA reviewers and has now been made available
nationally for use by other colleges and schools.
Of the additional goals not shown in bold above, we made progress but cannot consider them
successfully completed. We discussed the Program-level outcomes at team meetings, and
continue to look at ways to improve the overall program, including looking at textbooks, online
HW systems, and additional pedagogical resources. Because of these discussions, we were able
to make a change for Fall 2014 to help our students acquire a custom version of our online
astronomy HW and learning system, and we will be investigating whether that indeed made a
positive difference in student retention, and/or student satisfaction.
Fundraising efforts for the facility continue, and with the help of the new Chabot College
Foundation we hope to add to our small endowment to allow for the purchase of shows that
would be attractive to the general public.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 3
In our first year review, we identified two institutional issuesas crucial to the success of our
overall program:
-
Finding a permanent location on campus for a small roof-top observatory; and
-
Arranging for laboratory technician support (in concert with physics) to help us
organize and maintain the lab courses.
We still have not made progress on either of these program needs, and they remain two of our
most significant challenges for the next review cycle. In addition, the continued requirements
for faculty to maintain the planetarium equipment and classroom is still a major challenge,
involving a significant time commitment of at least 5-10 hours a week over and above existing
collegial participation. This is our biggest continuing program/faculty challenge.
Two areas that we are continuing to work very hard upon are utilizing the Chabot College
Planetarium to its utmost, and tracking how it plays a positive role in student success, and
demonstrating cross-campus leadership with technology in teaching, utilizing new online
resources and tools to engage students even more effectively. We plan to make these
cornerstone goals for the next review cycle as well.
We recognize that the new planetarium is more expensive, in terms of maintenance costs but
even more in terms of time required by faculty to maintain it – currently at least 5 hours a
week, with additional time required during component or system failures, and for maintenance.
To justify that cost, we are committed to use the facility in creative ways, and share it across
the campus whenever possible. We continue to ask whether using the planetarium compared
with traditional lecture halls seems to result in greater student success:
#
Success
%
#
Non-Success
%
Withdrawal
#
%
Total
#
Fall 2008- Spring 2010
( in lecture halls, while Bldg
1900 under construction)
685
54%
256
20%
329
26%
1270
Fall 2011 - Spring 2012
(Second full academic year)
300
61%
96
20%
95
19%
491
Fall 2012 - Spring 2013
(Third full academic year)
400
59%
122
18%
157
23%
680
Fall 2013 - Spring 2014
(Fourth full year)
302
55%
133
24%
113
21%
548
Chabot College
Campus - wide
66%
16%
17%
Source: http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data/A_CourseSuccess_Data/20112014/Science_&_Mathematics/ASTR_Overall_11-14.pdf
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 4
Clearly in the past year student success numbers declined in both semesters, and we are
concerned with the result. Whether the year was atypical, in terms of student study skills, or
whether other factors were at play, are questions we want to discuss in our team meetings.
We do know that we did not make changes to the curriculum, books, or planetarium usage in
the past year that might offer more easily identifiable possible factors.
In 2014-2015, we will have three new adjunct faculty teaching in the facility in Fall, and possibly
one or more continuing in Spring. We’ll be tracking their success and investigating their
perceptions of the facility vis-à-vis other colleges’ astronomy teaching facilities. We are also
continuing to reach out into the community of educators at SF State and around the country to
learn how the planetarium might be even better put to use to enhance student learning.
B. What’s Next?
What goals do you have for future program improvement?
Institutional:To further improve the Astronomy program at Chabot, we need to tackle the
institutional barriers presented by a complex classroom and lab environment that must be
maintained by faculty without additional support, and the lack of a rooftop observatory on a
campus with shrinking dark space suitable for doing any night-time observation. Both of these
can be solved – the first with a shared lab tech position along with Physics and Engineering, and
the second with either a go-ahead for the partially state-funded BCP renovation of Building
1600, or commitment towards another Bond for capital facilities improvement across the
campus. Neither of these will be easy nor achievable by faculty effort alone. Neither is a
short-term fix.
We also need to continue efforts to use the planetarium as a lever within our campus, and
across the community, by running more public shows – both on campus for students at Chabot
as well as local elementary and middle schools, and on evenings and weekends to bring the
public to our campus, and help contribute towards the college’s mission to serve our
community. To achieve this goal, we need the time to develop shows as well as funding to
purchase existing shows (which run $5K - $8K each).
Instructional: We also want to improve student success in our program, and work with
colleagues teaching other introductory GE science classes in Biology, Chemistry, Ecology,
Anthropology, and Geography to explore their successes and challenges with a similar student
audience. A comparison of student success, non-success, and withdrawal rates from other GE
science classes follows, and shows that Astronomy trails these other degree and transfersatisfying options. If we assume the students are similar, we need to recognize that a larger
non-success and withdrawal rate indicates the class might need a pre- or co-requisite
established, like English 1A, to ensure that students have the reading and critical thinking skills
necessary to tackle the incredibly challenging subject matter we must present.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 5
Comparison of Success Rates for Astronomy vs. Other GE-level Introductory Science Courses at Chabot
Bio 10
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Average
Chem 10
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Average
Ensc 10
Fall 2011
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Average
Anthro 1
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Average
Geog 1
Fall 2011
Spring 2012
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Average
Success
Number
65
69
65
74
72
92
17
23
14
17
20
20
%
52%
60%
58%
70%
68%
81%
65%
NonSuccess
Number
37
22
27
18
14
11
68%
72%
64%
68%
83%
71%
71%
3
2
3
4
3
8
18
22
24
30
27
62%
85%
80%
68%
63%
72%
309
216
257
250
288
263
326
265
270
260
258
272
%
30%
19%
24%
17%
13%
10%
19%
Withdrawal
Number
22
24
20
14
20
11
%
18%
21%
18%
13%
19%
10%
17%
%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
25
32
22
25
24
28
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
12%
6%
14%
16%
13%
29%
15%
5
7
5
4
1
4
2
4
8
10
14%
8%
13%
18%
23%
15%
7
2
2
6
6
24%
8%
7%
14%
14%
13%
29
26
30
44
43
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
70%
62%
75%
65%
73%
70%
69%
67
79
32
68
40
67
15%
23%
9%
18%
10%
18%
16%
67
53
54
69
67
46
15%
15%
16%
18%
17%
12%
16%
443
348
343
387
395
376
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
72%
68%
77%
71%
76%
77%
74%
87
68
37
71
39
52
19%
18%
11%
19%
12%
15%
16%
38
54
44
34
41
28
8%
14%
13%
9%
12%
8%
11%
451
387
351
365
338
352
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
100%
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
20%
22%
23%
16%
4%
Total
Number
124
115
112
106
106
114
17%
Page 6
What goals do you have for future program improvement? (cont.)
Instructional: We want to continue to look at the role of online tools and learning systems in
the success of our students, and also what we can do to help reinforce with our students the
study skills requirements for their success in college in general. And we want to improve the
lab experience by offering more opportunities for real-time data gathering and analysis, along
the lines of the new SDO lab we developed.
What ideas do you have to achieve those goals?
To achieve the institutional goals, we need to actively work with the Facilities Committee to
ensure that the requirement for a rooftop observatory is not lost if the Building 1600 BCP
renovation is not awarded (or, if awarded by the state, not chosen to be matched by District
funds.) We need to push for increased funding for at least one show per year with the promise
that we could offer a public show per month if such new content was available. And we need
to push for creative staffing solutions to the ongoing lack of a lab tech position to help us with
the equipment. We should recognize that when reassignment time was available for the
planetarium (1-3 units per semester), we *were* able to offer school programs, and do more
with the facility. Restoration of that reassignment time, even 1-2 units per year, would be one
fast way to help us make progress on these goals.
To achieve the instructional goals, especially that of looking at student success across the
campus in comparable science classes, we need to make time to meet with colleagues teaching
the other GE courses, and compare notes, exams, learning outcomes, and resources. We also
will need to work on the program and student learning outcome projects, sharing the results
and investigating how online resources can and do make a positive difference in student
success at similar institutions in the Bay Area, across California, and around the country.
What is our long term vision for the program?
Technology in the planetarium field is changing rapidly, and we are already finding that the
1200 dpi resolution of our 2008-built system is antiquated and incapable of rendering image
quality that students and the public might expect, especially if they have HD-capable set at
home and new-display PCs and phones. NASA imagery is increasingly available in those higherquality formats, so our current system is holding us back significantly.
We would like to see an upgrade to the planetarium projector and control software, which is
estimated to cost $50 - $100K; with the upgrade, we could feature much more current videos
and instructional media that offer the promise of capturing our students’ – and our
community’s - attention and interest even more effectively.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 7
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Category
Classified
Staffing (# of
positions)
Supplies &
Services
2011-12
Budget
Requested
0
2011-12
Budget
Received
0
2012-13
Budget
Requested
0
2012-13
Budget
Received
0
2013-14
Budget
Requested
0
2013-14
Budget
Received
0
$1000
Supplies
$1000
Supplies
$1000
Supplies
($800 for (2)
planetarium
lamps)
$6300
Spitz
Projector
PMA
$9970
Crestron AV
PMA
$1000
Supplies
$1000
Supplies
$1000
Supplies
0
0
0
0
$1700
$1700
$2400
$2400
(4)
Additional
Planetarium
Lamps (from
Budget
Committee
(4)
Additional
Planetarium
Lamps (from
Budget
Committee
$18,700
$18,700
PMA for
Planetarium
& AV
systems
covered
under
original
BOND, and
was not
needed this
year
Technology/
Equipment
Other
TOTAL
0
1000
0
1000
$16,000
PMA’s
(6)
(6)
Additional
Additional
Planetarium Planetarium
Lamps (from Lamps (from
Budget
Budget
Committee
Committee
$18,700
$18,700
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.
Astronomy Budget funds are used to maintain the planetarium and support the Astronomy Lab
program. We offered multiple lab sections serving GE students looking for science lab units required for
degree or transfer, and taught all lecture sections in the planetarium, as well as using the facility for
physics lectures and discussions. Students continue to share anecdotally as well as through surveys that
learning in the planetarium definitely provides greater stimulation and enjoyment, and we believe that
translates to improved student learning.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 8
With the funds received, we also were able to offer a few public planetarium shows for our community
during 2013-14, and free community viewing on special occasions. Bringing students and their families,
as well as the community, to Chabot also serves our college.
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?
Chabot’s new digital planetarium and AV system are much more capable than our old analog system,
and with that capability we must face the increase in co-requisite costs for maintenance. Our old
system maintenance agreement for the projector alone was $3500/year (in 2008-2009); the new digital
projector system bill is almost twice as much, and the new digital AV system maintenance is an
incredible $10K a year (from a current vendor, which we hope to stop using in 2013-2014).
We were grateful to receive additional funds in the past for the preventative maintenance agreements,
with help from the District (thanks to Jeannine Methe). Without those funds, we would not have had
support for the planetarium AV system repairs to two components, one of which was repaired twice and
finally replaced with a new unit. In the past year, we decided on a time-and-materials only budget for
service calls, rather than a PMA, and unfortunately one piece of equipment continued to fail. We had to
take it out of service, and consequently the planetarium cannot function completely as designed.
Service during the academic year continues to require significant time diagnosing problems and
attempting to create alternatives.
Our planetarium’s (6) AV lamps rather unexpectedly reached their ~1000-hour lifetime threshold all at
once, and had to be replaced en-masse. At more than $800 per set of two, they proved to be much
more costly than anticipated even with a small discount through our PMA provider.
The consequences of not being able to receive supply funds for the planetarium and lab class include:
-
Restricting teaching modalities by eliminating dual-projector displays, and multiple-image
displays;
-
Restricting lab experiences for students;
-
Under-utilizing the planetarium facility, and not using it for lectures and public shows; and,
-
Requiring lectures to be offered in another venue, and utilizing the planetarium only for
teaching of constellations or viewing of special-purpose movies.
We believe the planetarium’s attraction for the student body and the community, and its ability to
support relatively large lectures (45+ students at census) generating high WSCH/FTEF values, should
continue to justify allocating budget for its maintenance and operations. Because the new digital
systems are more expensive, and we have expanded our data projection capability 3-fold, we do need
more funds for lamps and equipment over what had been allocated in years past. Not receiving those
funds will mean not being able to use the planetarium to its fullest for the benefit of our students, and
our community.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 9
Appendix B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
All courses must be assessed at least once every three years. Please complete this chart that
defines your assessment schedule.
All Astronomy Courses have the proper number of CLOs (3 for the lecture classes, 1 for the lab
class). All Astronomy Courses were reviewed in 2011-2012.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE:
Fall
Spring
2012
2013
Courses:
Astro 30
Lab
Astro
10/20
Lectures
Full
Assmt
Fall
2013
Spring
2014
Fall
2014
Discuss
Report
results
Results
(already
in
progress)
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
& report
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Spring
2015
Fall
2015
Full
Assmt
Spring
2016
Fall
2017
Discuss
results
Report
Results
Full
Assmt
Discuss
results
&
report
Page 10
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
Astronomy 20
Spring 2013
2
2
100%
Fall 2013
Timothy Dave, Shannon Lee, Scott
Hildreth
Form Instructions:
Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Demonstrate an understanding of the reasons for seasons
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
50% score 3 or 4
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
36%
Demonstrates understanding of Galileos' Discoveries and
why each was important in overthrowing the geocentric
model. List of possible answers includes seeing Venus'
50% score 3 or 4
40%
phase and size changes, seeing Jupiter's 4 moons revolve
around Jupiter, seeing Craters and Mountains on the
Moon, Sunspots, Saturn's oblong face, distant (and prior,
invisible) stars in the Milky Way.
Critical Thinking - Assignment ASTR 20 - Demonstrate
50% score 3 or 4
40%
understanding of HR diagram
Critical Thinking - Assignment ASTR 20 - Demonstrate gain
in understanding of key concepts in Astronomy 20 through 50% score 3 or 4
35%
completion of 28-question multiple choice survey quiz
given at least once during the term.
 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?
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 11
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?
We are below the target goal for students demonstrating an understanding of seasons,
based on this CLO and when it is assessed in the class.
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?
We use a variety of metrics to assess this CLO, including Mastering Astronomy scores
based on an initial homework assignment. Students may not yet understand the
concept at the time of this assessment. We could consider giving this assessment later
in the term, or using a different metric, including essays in a midterm. Not all faculty use
this method, so comparing results might not be effective or reasonable.
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?
We are below the target goal for students demonstrating an understanding of Galileo’s
work, based on this CLO and when it is assessed in the class.
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?
We use a variety of metrics to assess this CLO, including Mastering Astronomy scores
based on an initial homework assignment. Students may not yet understand the
concept at the time of this assessment. We could consider giving this assessment later
in the term, or using a different metric, including essays in a midterm. Not all faculty use
this method, so comparing results might not be effective or reasonable.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 12
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?
We are below the target goal for students demonstrating an understanding of HR
diagrams, based on this CLO and when it is assessed in the class.
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?
We use a variety of metrics to assess this CLO, including Mastering Astronomy scores
based on an initial homework assignment. Students may not yet understand the
concept at the time of this assessment. We could consider giving this assessment later
in the term, or using a different metric, including essays in a midterm. Not all faculty use
this method, so comparing results might not be effective or reasonable.
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?
We are below the target goal for students demonstrating an overall understanding of the
key concepts in our class, based on this CLO and whether, how, and when it is assessed in
the class.
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?
We need to enable students to do this assessment both on paper and online to add more
data for the analysis. Currently it is deployed online only, at the end of the term, and we
are not getting 100% participation from students. We’ll give the assessment on paper,
and collect them for the final exam, in Spring, and see what happens.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 13
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?
1) We continue to use new visual resources in the planetarium to help students both learn
the concepts and apply them to current events.
2) We changed CLO’s after the first few years of trying more complex assessments and
finding the eLumen system unworkable.
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?
We are continuing to discuss what online tool sets make the most sense, and the most
positive difference, with our students. We will continue to investigate how to use those
online systems to help us track student success. In particular, we are continuing to
investigate using newer online homework/lecture/discussion portals that offer combined
assessment and interaction beyond what Blackboard can do, and different from the current
system in use, Mastering Astronomy, supported by the publisher of our primary textbooks.
We still struggle significantly with the CLO process, the difficulty in data entry and
inconsistency with the various reporting tools published online. We would like to make
much more fluid changes to our CLOs, but those entries don’t always seem to populate the
online system.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
X Pedagogical
X Resource based
X Change to CLO or rubric
X Change to assessment methods
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 14
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
Astronomy 30 LAB
Spring 2013
2
1
50%
Fall 2013
Timothy Dave, Shannon Lee, Scott
Hildreth
Form Instructions:
Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as
a whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
50% score 3 or 4
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
Demonstrate an understanding of the difference between
66%
precision and accuracy through a lab report or capstone
survey
Demonstrate an understanding of the nature of angular
size and resolution with telescopes through a lab activity,
write-up, project, or hands-on demonstration using a
50% score 3 or 4
66%
telescope
 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?
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 15
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?
We are above the target goal for students demonstrating an understanding of precision
and accuracy, based on this CLO and when it is assessed in the class.
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?
We will continue to stress the difference between the two concepts, and illustrate that
difference in every lab.
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?
We are above the target goal for students demonstrating an understanding of angular size,
resolution with telescopes, based on this CLO and when it is assessed in the class.
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?
We will continue to find new ways to work on, and practice with, the concepts of angular
size, angular resolution, and construction of telescopes to maximize that resolution.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 16
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?
1) We added a new lab activity based on the Solar Dynamics Observatory Data.
2) We changed CLO’s after the first few years of trying more complex assessments and
finding the eLumen system problematic.
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?
Students are getting the ideas presented, as we stress their application in multiple labs
across the curriculum rather than in just one particular exercise on one night. Our new SDO
lab has been field tested in both sections in Fall 2012, Spring 2013, and Fall 2013, and given
again in Spring 2014. We will assess that new lab in the next round, as well as look at
changing or adding CLOs.
6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
X Pedagogical
X Resource based
X Change to CLO or rubric
X Change to assessment methods
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 17
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: Astronomy Lecture Courses for GE Physical Science Students
(Note – this is not a program per se, because students typically take only one lecture course, not a
sequence of courses. We have chosen to look at the “Program” as more general goals for student
learning in either lecture course, over and above specific concept-related CLOs)
PLO #1:
Students will be able to explain key principles of astronomy using applicable vocabulary; including
employing the scientific method to organize, prioritize, and problem solve. Astronomy (10, 20)
PLO #2:
Students will explain how and where the human species fits into the immense, complex and everchanging universe. Astronomy (10, 20)
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
We are investigating how to use multi-media resources and online course tools to address
these PLOs. One faculty member is “flipping” the classroom with extensive video clips made
available outside of lecture, delivered through a new online tool. One faculty member is
utilizing an online homework/media tool with lined YouTube clips to encourage student
application and extension.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
The planetarium as a visual theater with immersive 3D capabilities is a resource that still needs
to be utilized even more.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Actions planned: We want to solicit more funds to enable purchase of 3D movies for the Spitz
projector that will benefit our students by offering immersive visual learning experiences. We
will also continue to investigate new online content delivery systems.
Program: Astronomy 30 Lab Course for GE Physical Science Students
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 18
PLO #1: Students will be able to explain key principles of observational and theoretical
astronomyusing applicable vocabulary and relating them to hands-on laboratory activities;
including employing the scientific method to organize, prioritize, and problem solve.
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
We want to give our students even greater opportunities to do real science with real data,
rather than just do pre-planned activities that represent the process of science.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
We have connections with Stanford and NASA that are enabling the creation of new labs
utilizing real-time data and opportunities for students to create their own investigations.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
1) Continue to develop and publish the SDO lab activities.
2) Continue to investigate access and use of robotic telescopes.
3) Continue to push for a roof-top observatory location on campus so that students might do
actual data collection in the lab.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 19
Appendix D: A Few Questions
Please answer the following questions with "yes" or "no". For any questions answered "no",
please provide an explanation. No explanation is required for "yes" answers :-)
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? If no, identify the
course outlines you will update in the next curriculum cycle. Ed Code requires all course
outlines to be updated every six years.
YES. (Revised course outlines were submitted in Fall 2012 for all 3 courses; they do not as yet
show up in the current curriculum list).
2. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog?
YES
3. Do all of your courses have the required number of CLOs completed, with corresponding
rubrics? If no, identify the CLO work you still need to complete, and your timeline for
completing that work this semester.
YES (even though some of the campus reports seem to indicate otherwise, we have 4 CLO’s for
the 3-unit lecture classes, and 2 CLOS’s for the lab class.
4. Have you assessed all of your courses and completed "closing the loop" forms for all of your
courses within the past three years? If no, identify which courses still require this work, and
your timeline for completing that work this semester.
YES – but some of that data doesn’t appear saved online by eLumen. We need to re-enter it
or submit it again.
5. Have you developed and assessed PLOs for all of your programs? If no, identify programs which
still require this work, and your timeline to complete that work this semester.
YES
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?
N/A but we continue to find that students taking the lab class alongside the lecture do better
in the lecture class by ½ of a grade.
7. Does successful completion of College-level Math and/or English correlate positively with
success in your courses? If not, explain why you think this may be.
YES – and especially so with English in our lecture classes.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 20
Appendix E: Proposal for New Initiatives:
Learn About the Stars - and Science - at Chabot College!
Establishing grade-level appropriate planetarium shows for elementary and
middle-school students in the Chabot College Community.
Description: Fund the acquisition and delivery of 2-3 grade-level appropriate school shows for our fulldome planetarium that can be shown to students in grades 1-2, 3-5, and 6-9 from local schools in our
service area.
Background: Chabot College used to have the budget and reassignment time for faculty to develop and
delivery low-cost planetarium shows for local schools. Over time, that budget and time has been cut due
to necessity, leaving our planetarium less accessible to our community, and unable to help in the
development of interest in younger students in STEM disciplines. Developing grade-level specific shows,
and delivering them with quality, takes significant time, and acquisition of the full-dome features that
can be shown with our equipment is expensive. We cannot charge local schools for the costs of
developing those programs, and even charging a nominal fee per student ($2-5 each is typical), and
offering 1-2 shows a month, we could not recoup the costs over 10 years of shows.
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student
learning?
We recognize that, in the short term, offering school shows to local students will not directly increase
the number of students looking to meet their educational goals at Chabot. Nevertheless, offering public
planetarium shows for local schools increases the positive impact we offer in the community, and in the
long term, can lead to future enrollment interest. Even more important, though, is the idea of opening
up our campus to young students in our community also plants a seed that can eventually grow into the
desire and confidence for those same students to attend college, perhaps at Chabot itself. With so
many of our students coming from households where they are the first family member to attend
college, it is clear that anything we can do to help our community come to understand and appreciate
what a community college can offer is important work.
On a much smaller scale, we recognize that offering shows also may give us the chance to recruit
selected students interested in “internships” as planetarium and science educators, assisting us in the
development and delivery of the content.
We recognize that the current limited budget climate may not support this initiative at this time, but
want to put out for consideration and reflection that – if funding might be found, through foundation
support or other educational grants – the Chabot College Planetarium can play a very important role in
attracting students and the community to our campus, and further demonstrating our value in that
community as an educational institutions for all.
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 21
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
Find the funds to purchase, and deliver, grade-level appropriate full-dome shows for grades 3-5, 6-9,
and then 1-2. Advertise the shows with local schools, and test their response.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Activity (brief description)
Find funding for the first show
Develop initial show, advertise with local teachers in specific
grades, and deliver (~6 shows per term, 2 per month initially)
Recruit additional students interested in helping. Expand
adjunct faculty opportunities to lead the shows.
Find funding for additional shows
Create and deliver additional school shows
Target
Completion
Date
Spring
2015
Fall 2014 –
Fall 2015
Required Budget (Split out
personnel, supplies, other
categories)
~$8,000 for show costs
Spring
2015
Fall 2015Spring
2016
~$8,000 - $16,000
~$4,000 for personnel time
and materials costs
~$5000 for personnel time
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
X
Classified staff # of positions 1, part-time
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
X
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
X
Be completed (onetime only effort);
(Once purchased, the shows become the property of Chabot College, and can be reused for future years.)
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
X No
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
X Possibly, if we can find funding partners
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
X
Not at the present time
Chabot College Astronomy Department Year Three Program Review for 2015-2016
Page 22
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
Audience: Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for supplies and service, and to guide the Budget Committee in allocation of
funds.
Instructions: In the area below, please list both your current and requested budgets for categories 4000
and 5000 in priority order. Do NOT include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix
M6. Justify your request and explain in detail any requested funds beyond those you received this year.
Please also look for opportunities to reduce spending, as funds are very limited.
Project or Items
Requested
Astronomy Program,
Lab & Planetarium
Supplies (Markers,
lightbulbs, measuring
tape, videos, lasers,
pointers, toner,
paper, software, etc.)
2013-14 Budget
Requested Received
$1000
1000
2014-15
Request
$2500
Rationale
The planetarium is not a typical
classroom; lighting and other unique
electronic equipment is not supported
by standard campus classroom
accounts. The Canon projector used
for the star dome is by itself a $800
bulb.
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.
Changed for Fall 2013: We have deleted the request for the Summer 2013 Astronomical Society
Conference – Faculty ended up paying for the conference through our own personal funds. We would
still like to attend the Spitz Summer Institute.
Conference/Training
Program
2014-15 Request
Spitz Summer Institute,
(Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania:
August 2015)
$525 for 5-day
session, plus
travel
Rationale
Our planetarium projector and software control
systems were provided by Spitz, an international
leader in planetarium equipment. To full develop
our system, and take advantage of its capabilities
for public shows as well as for integrated
curriculum, we need training. The Spitz Institute
provides hands-on training for planetarium
professionals looking to create course material,
and learn how to utilize existing equipment to
improve student learning.
24
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
Audience: Budget Committee, Technology Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Budget Committee and to inform priorities of the Technology
Committee.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests.If you're requesting classroom
technology, see http://www.chabotcollege.edu/audiovisual/Chabot%20College%20Standard.pdf for the
brands/model numbers that are our current standards. If requesting multiple pieces of equipment,
please rank order those requests. Include shipping cost and taxes in your request.
Please note: Equipment requests are for equipment whose unit cost exceeds $200. Items which are
less expensive should be requested as supplies. Software licenses should also be requested as
supplies.
Project or Items
Requested
Mac Mini Computer
System 2.3 Ghz
Quad Core 1 TB
system
Planetarium Data
Projector Bulbs
2013-14 Budget
Requested Received
$2400
$2400
2014-15
Request
$900
$600
Rationale*
($799 plus tax) This would replace our
current Mac Mini system (installed in 2010).
We found that the Panasonic Data
Projectors that had been installed had lamp
useful lives less than ½ of what was
anticipated because of how the installer
(Spinitar) and the contractor had designed
the system – so that even if a projector lamp
is not being used, but the system is still
powered on, the lamp life is decreased. This
means that the (6) lamps supporting the (3)
data projectors must be replaced more
often. We also found that less expensive
non-OEM bulbs did not work, and we were
forced to purchase new lamps.
We received additional funding in 2014 to
purchase 3 sets of bulbs, and request
enough to purchase one additional set as a
spare in case a projector goes out. Right
now we do not have a backup.
25
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities
Committee (FC) has begun the task of re-prioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current
needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet capital improvement
needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two
to be used as match if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that
will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined that although some of the college's greatest
needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many smaller
pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond
dollars include the "repairing, constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities."
Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests.If requesting more than one
facilities project, please rank order your requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name): Building 2000 Student Learning Center
Building/Location: Building 2000 (currently rooms 2003/2005)
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
If Building 2000 will not be torn down and replaced with another faculty office building, we would like
to use a portion of the available money to provide an attractive, open student learning space, mirroring
the very successful new spaces created in building 1800 with glass partitions and comfortable chairs
and tables. We propose that the interior wall presently opposite the Dean’s office be replaced with
glass, and the inside of the 2003/2005 area be carpeted, fitted with two large whiteboard walls (at the
East and West ends of the room, replacing the current chalkboards), equipped with a data projector
and instructor computer station, and furnished with chairs and tables similar to what are being used in
1800, along with a couch and easy chair arrangement.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
The Science/Math division has emphasized the STEM pathway with all of our scheduling, curriculum,
and collegial work; creating an attractive study space for our STEM majors outside the Dean’s office
would further demonstrate our commitment to these students, encouraging their collaboration and
social interaction outside of class. We could use the space for club meetings, student presentations,
team meetings, subdivision meetings, and other special events, and remaining hours leave the room
available for students to use for studying.
This room would directly benefit all STEM majors, as well as our MESA program students, NIH Bridges
students, Engineering Club, Biology Club, Physics Club, and Math Club students, and our faculty.
26
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
We believe that providing our STEM students with locations where they can study and talk together
will lead to improved retention and student success, as well as increased student satisfaction with
Chabot as an institution that cares whether its students are successful.
We have seen in just a little over 6 months of use that the study areas in 1800 are tremendously
successful. We believe offering another similar space in 2000 will be equally successful, and attract
students in Biology and Math who might otherwise not visit building 1800’s facilities.
27