2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Chabot College Administrative Offices Program Review Report 2016 -­‐2017 Year Three of Program Review Cycle: Appendices Office of Institutional Research (OIR) Submitted on October 26, 2015 Contact: Carolyn Arnold 10/26/15
page 1 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Table of Contents Previous document: Overview of Process and Offices __ X__ Year 3 Section 1: What Have We Accomplished? Section 2: What’s Next? This document: Required Appendices: A: Budget History B: Service Area Outcomes Assessment C: Office of Institutional Research 2014-­‐15 Research Accomplishments D: Office of Institutional Research 2015-­‐16 Research Agenda E: New and Ongoing Initiatives and Projects E1: Equity and BSI Fund Requests F2A: Classified Staffing Requests F5: Supplies and Services Requests F6: Conference/Travel Requests 10/26/15
page 2 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
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. 2014-­‐15 2014-­‐15 2015-­‐16 2015-­‐16 Category Budget Budget Budget Budget Requested Received Requested Received Faculty Hourly 0
$5,000
0
$5,000
Coordinator time in June-­‐July Classified Staffing (# of positions) 1.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
Full-time Research Analyst (40 hrs)
0.50
0
0.50
0
Part-time Temporary Clerk (20 hrs)
Student Assistants (2@ 15hrs )
$4,000
$2,085
$4,000
$2,085
Student Assistants (from Grants) $3,000
$3,000
$6,000
$6,000
Supplies & Services $ 825
$ 825
$825
$825
Office supplies/software maint.
Major query software, Hyperion
$12,000
$0
Backup query software, Tableau
$3,000
$0
Upgraded survey software, Teleform
$1,000 $7,744 $0
$0
Technology/Equipment Other TOTAL 0 $ 350 $9,177
0 $350 $19,005 $ 350
$26,177
$350
$14,261
10/26/15
page 3 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved your service area outcomes? 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. The most appreciated new funds that we received were for the upgrade of our survey software, Teleform. A variety of 2014-­‐15 funds were used for this $7,744 upgrade, but we didn’t get the software until this Fall, so it feels like a 2015-­‐16 purchase. This software allows us to design and
scan the student and staff surveys and to publish the surveys in house on regular paper. We have owned this software for over 10 years and have
never paid maintenance fees. The next upgrade of Windows was going to make our current version obsolete. We needed to pay for an upgrade
and maintenance fees before our version became un-useable. We did not receive it in time to use it for the Fall 15 student survey, so we stayed
with our old PC, but once the survey is done, we can install it on an upgraded PC and use the latest version of this software.
This will improve our Service Area Outcome #3: The use of IR data in program planning and evaluation will increase. More departments are
starting to want to survey their students for evaluation purposes, so this will streamline our survey design and production work and allow us to be
more responsive to these departments.
2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How have your service area outcomes or student learning outcomes been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively impacted? The funds that we most wanted and did not receive were the $12,000 (LPC would pay the same) to purchase Hyperion, the upgraded version of
our query software. We had the funds through Title III, and it was ITS that would not allow this purchase, so it was not a budget issue.
For that reason, we had a back-up request of $3,000 (Chabot only) for a more simple query and display software, Tableau, that most IR Offices are
starting to use instead of Excel. We have relied on Excel for 20 years to display and illustrate data tables, and we can keep doing that, but having
Tableau would shorten our time to produce visually beautiful displays of data, and would then allow the IR staff to spend more time leading the
college in discussing the data rather than just producing it.
So by not having it this year, we are still bogged down in creating data displays and able to spend less time working with faculty and staff to
evaluate programs as in Service Area Outcome #3: The use of IR data in program planning and evaluation will increase.
10/26/15
page 4 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix B: Service Area Outcomes Assessment Service Area Outcomes are written and assessed for some administrative offices, such as Institutional Research. SAO SAO #1: The OIR will complete
over 100
research/programming
requests each year. How Measured Using our
programming/research requests log,
we count the number
completed each
semester. When Measured They are counted at
the end of the year
from the logs. Results/Discussion In 2014-15, the OIR filled 76 (Fall) + 47 (Spring) = 123
programming requests, almost all conducted by the
Research Analyst. This was above the goal of 100 a year.
However, it consisted of many major requests that involved
many sub-requests, so this is an undercount of the number
of tasks involved. We need a better to keep track of the
amount of programming that we do. There were also
countless requests for already existing research. In these
cases, either a link or a file is sent by the Coordinator or the
Research Analyst.
SAO #2: The Coordinator will
make presentations
several times per
semester (6/yr), and send
out email
announcements once a
month(10/yr) or more to
make research more
visible and used by the
campus. The number of
presentations and
emails sent to the
college community
informing them of IR
data results and/or
availability will be
counted. They are counted at
the end of the year. In 2014-15, the Coordinator gave 13 presentations at
Chabot, over twice as many as the goal of 6. In addition,
the Research Analyst gave one presentation, on African
Americans, to the Daraja program, bringing the number of
presentations to 14, which made research that much more
visible to the college community.
The Coordinator sent out 12 college Emails highlighting
research and reminding the staff about the available IR
research on the web. This was also more than the goal of
10.
The Coordinator also gave one presentation on the
educational goal groups to an RP Group training program.
While the total numbers surpassed the overall goals of this
SAO, they still could be higher to inform more of the
college community about research and engage them more in
current research questions. Presentations by the Research
Analyst could be an addition to this SAO.
10/26/15
page 5 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
SAO #3: The use of IR data in
program planning and
evaluation will increase.
The Accreditation
staff survey every 6
years.
This survey was
conducted in Spring
2014.
We will be proposing
a mid-accreditation
cycle staff survey for
Spring 2017 to
measure progress on
various accreditationrelated issues since
the 2015 accreditation
visit. Questions about
the use of IR data will
be included.
The next one will be
in Spring 2017.
In 2015-16, we are
going to develop an
OIR evaluation survey
for our users, so we
can measure
satisfaction and
improve services.
An ongoing
evaluation survey will
ask for either point of
contact feedback, or
periodic feedback
SAO #4: The OIR will increase or
maintain a high level of
satisfaction with the
service and products of
the OIR.
. In Spring 2013, a staff satisfaction survey was conducted
about administrative offices. It showed that 51% used the
OIR (exactly the same as in the Spring 2014 survey above),
and of those who used it, 97% were satisfied. Although we
probably cannot increase this satisfaction rate, we hope to
maintain it.
10/26/15
The Faculty/Staff Accreditation survey, which is only
conducted every six years, was conducted in Spring 2014,
and continues to be the latest source of this feedback.
Several questions about the use of IR data showed that more
staff felt that IR data is being provided and used for the
evaluation of courses and programs than in years past.
Eighty-five percent of the staff feel that the IRO provides
data for college and program evaluation (up from 76% in
2008) and 51% of staff now use IRO data in the planning
and evaluation of their courses or programs (up from 38%
in 2008). Overall, in the design, development, and
evaluation of programs and services, 62% of staff feel that
institutional research results are used, up from 53% in 2008,
45% in 2001, and only 37% in 1995. These results show
that the OIR continues to facilitate a culture of inquiry and
data-driven decisions at Chabot.
page 6 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix C: Office of Institutional Research 2014-­‐15 Research Accomplishments Office of Institutional Research 2014-­‐15 Carolyn Arnold, Coordinator Jeremy Wilson, Research Analyst Marvin Teh, Student Research Assistant Hena Kairzadah, Student Research Assistant 2014-­‐15 Accomplishments The Institutional Research Office worked on several large projects and many small intense projects that made us very busy but not necessarily visible to the larger campus community this year. Our major projects are listed below, with details and links on the following pages. Most of our work related to these campus activities, which all required extensive research: ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY REPORT STUDENT EQUITY PLAN EDUCATIONAL MASTER PLAN PROGRAM REVIEW SUCCESS AND COURSE SEQUENCE DATA PROGRESS ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL BASIC SKILLS / TITLE III PROGRESS ASSESSMENT: CHEMISTRY TEST REVALIDATION; ENGLISH CUT SCORES & MULTIPLE MEASURES SURVEYS: GREAT DEBATE, TRANSFERS, DEGREE/CERTIFICATE GRADS, MATH & PHYSICS SLOS GRANT EVALUATION (DATA FOR 5 MAJOR ONGOING GRANTS) GRANT DEVELOPMENT (DATA FOR 4 MAJOR GRANTS SUBMITTED) In addition, we spent huge amounts of time identifying and preparing data and facilitating discussions about several federal and state mandated reports: FEDERAL GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT ACT STATE INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS INDICATORS ACJCC INSTITUTION-­‐SET STANDARDS And those were just the large projects! We also produced research for: 100 AD-­‐HOC RESEARCH AND PROGRAMMING REQUESTS 10/26/15
page 7 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
10 OR MORE SMALLER RESEARCH PROJECTS COUNTLESS “JUST-­‐IN-­‐TIME” REQUESTS FOR EXISTING DATA OR RESEARCH FROM COLLEGE STAFF We presented research at PRBC, CEMC, Basic Skills, Daraja, and other campus committees: 15 PRESENTATIONS All this was due to the efforts of Jeremy Wilson, myself, and our two Laser College student assistants. Many thanks to the dedicated classified professionals, faculty, administrators, and students who worked with us on projects, requested and used the research, and/or supported the IR Office this year. Carolyn Arnold, Ph. D. Coordinator, Institutional Research, Room 231, x6965 carnold@chabotcollege.edu Major Campus Projects ACCREDITATION SELF STUDY REPORT Provided the environmental scan and student and staff survey data for report STUDENT EQUITY PLAN Identified underrepresented groups on Equity Success Indicators EDUCATIONAL MASTER PLAN Provided the environmental scan for background chapters PROGRAM REVIEW SUCCESS AND COURSE SEQUENCE DATA Provided updated success and course sequence data PROGRESS ON THE STRATEGIC PLAN GOAL Analyzed and presented progress reports to PRBC and other committees BASIC SKILLS / TITLE III PROGRESS Reported on Title III Grant Objectives met and updated all Basic Skills data ASSESSMENT: CHEMISTRY TEST REVALIDATION; ENGLISH CUT SCORES & MULTIPLE MEASURES Worked with Chemistry Faculty on successful state re-­‐approval of Chemistry Test Worked with English and ESL Faculty to develop more accurate cut scores in English SURVEYS: GREAT DEBATE, TRANSFERS, DEGREE/CERTIFICATE GRADS, MATH & PHYSICS SLOS Conducted civic engagement surveys each semester for Great Debate & other students Surveyed transfer students at May 2015 Transfer Celebration Surveying AA/AS degree and certificate graduates at May 2015 Commencement Provided scannable surveys for Math and Physics SLO questions 10/26/15
page 8 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Grant evaluation and development A major portion of IR time goes towards evaluating and monitoring grants we have, as well as contributing research to developing grants. This year, IR time went to the following grants: GRANT EVALUATION (5 MAJOR ONGOING GRANTS) 1) Title III Strengthening Institutions Grant and state Basic Skills funding Provided research to maintain eligibility for Title III and Title V grants Provided summary of Title III Objectives reached and Basic Skills data 2) Hayward Promise Neighborhoods (HPN) Identified Chabot students from HPN neighborhoods and schools Provided success and achievement data of current cohorts 3) NIH Bridges to the Baccalaureate Identified students in science and math courses for internship and UCB opportunities 4) Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training (TAACCCT) Provided detailed data on students & courses in electronics , engineering, welding, auto 5) Career Pathways Trust (CPT) Grant Prepared to work with CTE Launchboard data platform to report outcomes GRANT DEVELOPMENT (4 MAJOR PENDING GRANTS) 1) TRIO ASPIRE 2) TRIO EXCEL (ESL) 3) TRIO STEM (MESA) TRIO data: Provided comparison data to show that programs like these work 4) Title V: Strengthening Institutions grant for Hispanic –Serving Institutions (HSI) Provided equity group data to identify student groups most in need of services 5) Centers for Excellence for Veterans Student Success Analyzed enrollment, success and completion of veterans on campus Selected Presentations 1) Nov 2014: To PRBC & Faculty Prioritization Which Student Groups are making Progress, and Why? www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/StuEdGoalGrpsProgressFirstYear_Nov2014.pdf 2) Jan 2015: To Daraja African American Students at Chabot College www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentCharacteristics/AfricanAmericansChabotCollege2015.01.15.pdf 10/26/15
page 9 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
3) Jan 2015: To CEMC English and Math needs of high unit and all other students www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/ENGL_NeedsbyAllUnitsFall2014.pdf www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/MATH_NeedsbyAllUnitsFall2014.pdf 4) Feb 2015: To College on Flex Day Title III Objectives Met! www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/TitleIIIObjsMet_Flex2015Feb12.pdf 5) March 2015: To Local High School Counselors Local High School Graduates at Chabot www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentCharacteristics/HighSchoolGradsatChabot_2015Mar20.pdf 6) May 2015: To Basic Skills Committee Latest Basic Skills data www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/BasicSkillsOverviewStatsCompiledF14.pdf 7) May 2015: To Board of Trustees Prepared for the President’s Report: Institutional Effectiveness Indicators & Goals www.chabotcollege.edu/about/IEIndicatorGoals.pdf 8) May 2015: To PRBC Progress on the Strategic Goal www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/StudentSuccess/StuEdGoalGrpsProgressFirstFall_May2015.pdf Bookmark the Institutional Research website! To have access to the latest research, bookmark the main page: www.chabotcollege.edu/IR/ If you can’t find what you’re looking for, contact us: Carolyn Arnold, Coordinator: carnold@chabotcollege.edu Jeremy Wilson, Research Analyst: jrwilson@chabotcollege.edu 10/26/15
page 10 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix D: Office of Institutional Research 2015-­‐16 Research Agenda Institutional Research Agenda
2015-16
Carolyn Arnold, Coordinator, Institutional Research
Jeremy Wilson, Research Analyst
ACCREDITATION VISIT Oct 5-9
**Prepare for team visit
Make sure website is updated
STRATEGIC PLANNING
**Provide program review success and EMC data (see what needs to be done by us)
**Review comments for last draft of Educational Master Plan
Look at performance measures to report
Continue to measure progress on Strategic Plan Goal, and by equity
Add Summer 15 data to all the cohorts (Priority but not first)
Show outcome status of latest cohorts at 1st Fall, 1st yr, etc.
FALL 2015 Student Survey – equity focus
**Announce/develop new questions, finalize survey, pick sample, Survey Oct 12-16
STUDENT EQUITY PLAN
Update Student Equity data to begin monitoring (add 14-15)
Monitor student equity projects (review evaluation plans)
Add past Striving Black Brothers data to Learning Communities we provide data for
ASSESSMENT PLACEMENT TEST VALIDATION
Research and/or revalidate MATH, ENGLISH, ESL and CHEMISTRY TESTS
**Do Chemistry Survey on week of Sept 28
**Study of Math Mult measures. Present to Math on Multiple measures instead of the test!
Review English/ESL/assessment status – set cut scores for mult measures for San Lorenzo
Success rates by assessment status for English, Math, ESL, Chemistry (Spring)
BASIC SKILLS PROJECTS
Learning Connection research
Meet w/Rachael/Jane success for tutored students, other activities, eval measures?
Monitor any FIGs and/or learning assistants
Co-chair BSC with Trish
10/26/15
page 11 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Monitor FYE both cohorts and other pathways (CPT?)
Update Basic Skills Data Pages (revisit whether it is useful
GRANT DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION RESEARCH
Provide research for new grants:
TRIO ETS
**BRIDGES: Due Sept 6th
Provide Grant Assessment and Evaluation research:
**Check schedule and requirements - CTE – Launchboard and CATEMA (?)
AB86 – CPT /880 Corridor Adult Ed planning – Data into Launchboard
**TAACCCT data and tracking each semester
Hayward Promise Neighborhood: Provide data tracking as needed (Surveys, EAP, etc.)
MESA/TRIO STEM – Identify and track cohorts of students in program - talk to Donna
**BRIDGES: identify potential new students ($$ for CAIR – by 9/11)
MANDATED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Analyze and (present) Student Success Scorecard) in February
Update Federal Gainful Employment Act data for October, disclosures in January
Update Integrated Postsecondary Education System (IPEDS) (Oct/Feb/June)
Check CAL Grants SB 70 reporting (check?)
OTHER MAJOR RESEARCH PROJECTS
**Conduct ad-hoc research and programming by request
Monitor Distance Learning success and retention
Obtain and analyze Chabot student Transfer data routinely (late Fall)
Dec: Conduct survey of students participating in Great Debate (Civic Engagement)
Veterans – deciding on the source of the numbers
DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH
Provide latest research results in useable formats to college/decision-makers
**Weekly Research Bytes: Update staff frequently on new research available.
Did you know…..facts about students for the Spectator
Report Board info on success & outcomes for both colleges (last one Jun 2014)
Publish something for them – discuss with LPC first, then Chancellor
Report on latest Basic Skills Research –Overview/highlights Assessment, Success, persistence
Upload all new research information onto IR website
Transition hard copy reports to one pagers
Student characteristics, including Ed Goal groups. Decide current and trend pages to keep.
10/26/15
page 12 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH INFRASTRUCTURE
Maintain and Enhance Institutional Research Database
Work with ITS to make sure we are getting accurate data elements into IR database
(**SSSP elements, Vets, Foster youth,)
**Getting Tableau or Hyperion – check budget status/ what meets our needs/ estimate
Discuss Argos findings
Update syntax and programs to use new data (ongoing)
Share programs, syntax, presentations with LPC (how to use that folder, what to share)
Create IR Satisfaction Survey of Customers
Maintain and Develop IR/Grants Staff/Professional Development
Identify seminar and conferences and funding for RA and Coordinator (CAIR, RP)
Check budget (HPN/SSSP/Bridges) and Hire and train new Student Assistant
COLLEGE/DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES/COMMITTEES of COORDINATOR
Planning, Review, and Budget Council (PRBC)
Chabot Enrollment Management Committee (CEMC)
Basic Skills Committee (Co-chair)
Equity Committee
Title V Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) Leadership Teams
STATEWIDE RESPONSIBILITIES of COORDINATOR
Board Member of Research and Planning Group (RP Group), No. California representative
Co-chair, Research and Planning Group (RP Group)Awards Committee
COLLEGE/DISTRICT RESPONSIBILITIES/COMMITTEES of RESEARCH ANALYST
Planning, Review, and Budget Council (PRBC)
Basic Skills Committee
Equity Committee
**Priority for Fall 2015
10/26/15
page 13 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix E: Proposal for New and Ongoing Initiatives and Projects (Complete for each initiative/project) Audience: Deans/Unit Administrators, PRBC, Foundation, Grants Committee, Equity, BSC, College Budget Committee Purpose: The project will require the support of additional and/or outside funding. Project Name: Extensive Evaluation of Equity Projects How does your project address the college's Strategic Plan goal, significantly improve student learning or service, and/or address disproportionate impact? This project proposes to conduct an extensive evaluation of the initiatives funded by the Chabot College Equity Plan. This would directly address any disproportionate impact in the College’s Strategic Plan Goal of increasing the number of students who achieve their educational goal, by providing feedback to our equity projects about whether or how they are reducing disproportionate impact and which or not. What is your specific goal and measurable outcome? (Note: Complete the Equity/BSI proposal in Appendix E1 if you would like to request these funds and indicate “see Equity/BSI proposal for detail”) Goal: Provide yearly evaluation data and meaningful analysis for each funded equity project. Measurable outcome: Produce extensive analysis of what worked and why for each funded equity project. Each of the 14 currently-­‐funded equity projects would be evaluated using agreed-­‐upon tracking variables, depending on whether they were administrative processes, curriculum improvement, or direct student interventions, as well as other indicators of their impact on student engagement and success. These evaluations of the equity projects have already been initiated by talking to the lead staff, and setting up data collection and the analysis goals, and everyone was glad to have their project evaluated. However, we are realizing that we don’t have time for the in-­‐depth tracking and extensive analysis that we need to do. An extensive analysis means going beneath the surface outcome numbers to the reasons behind them, by drilling down in the data and discussing the results with each of the 14 project’s project staff and/or students, and identifying reasons for the results. What learning or service area outcomes does your project address? Where in your program review are these outcomes and the results of assessment discussed (note: if assessment was completed during a different year, please indicate which year). This addresses the OIR SAO # 3: The use of IR data in program planning and evaluation will increase.
While eighty-five percent of the staff feel that the OIR provides data for college and program evaluation (up from 76% in 2008), only 51% of staff
now use IRO data in the planning and evaluation of their courses or programs (up from 38% in 2008). Clearly, there is much room for improvement. By
providing intensive evaluation data, analysis, and discussions of the results of each of the equity initiatives, more staff will become involved in analyzing
the data and applying it to their equity program, class, or initiative.
In the OIR program review, the main challenges were found to be “Not having the staff to accomplish the Research Agenda”
and the “Growth of grant evaluations and other state and federal reporting requirements.”
. The equity plan is an additional evaluation that we need to do, will add greatly to the OIR staff workload, and it has the funds to support the work.
10/26/15
page 14 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
What is your action plan to achieve your goal? Activity (brief description) A1. Outline evaluation plans and indicators for each equity project A2. Produce mid-­‐year analysis for each project A3. Produce end of year results for each project Target Required Budget Completion (Split out personnel, supplies, other categories) Date 12/15/15 Part of PT Research Analyst: $3.5k-­‐$7K 3/28/16 Part of PT Research Analyst: $3.5k-­‐$7K 6/30/15 Part of PT Research Analyst: $3.5k-­‐$7K How will you manage the personnel needs? New Hires: Faculty # of positions Classified staff # of positions: 1 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 (obtained by/from):Equity Funds 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: Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project? No Yes, list potential funding sources: State Equity Funds, Title V HSI if we get it 10/26/15
page 15 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix E1: Equity and Basic Skills Initiative Fund Requests: Project Name: Equity Initiative Evaluations Contact Name: Carolyn Arnold Division/Discipline/Program/Office: President’s Office / Institutional Research Contact info: (email): carnold@chabotcollege.edu, campus phone: 723-­‐6965, cell phone: 510-­‐590-­‐1172 Check the student success indicator(s) your project will address _ ✔ _ ACCESS: Enroll more of a population group to match their representation in community. _ ✔ _ COURSE COMPLETION: Increase success rates in identified courses. _ ✔ _ ESL AND BASIC SKILLS COMPLETION: Increase success rates in ESL or Basic Skills courses, and Increase the completion of degree/transfer courses by ESL or Basic Skills students. _ ✔ _DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION: Increase percent of degrees/certificates among degree/certificate-­‐seeking students. _ ✔ _TRANSFER Increase percent of transfers to 4-­‐year colleges among transfer-­‐directed students. Check the type of project you are proposing ___ Curriculum/Program improvement ____ Outreach ___ Direct student intervention ____ Instructional Support ___ Faculty development _✔_ Research and Evaluation ___Other: ____ Coordination and Planning To determine whether your project can be funded by Equity funds: 1) Does your proposal address disproportionate impact for any of the following target student populations marked with an “X”? Please highlight the “X” that corresponds with your target populations. (Equity funds must address specific opportunity gaps identified below with an “X”) GOALS Goal A: Access Goal B: Goal C: Goal D1: Goal D2: Cert Goal E: Course ESL/Basic Degree Completion Transfer Completion / Skills Success Completion Success Rates Males X Foster Youth X 10/26/15
X X page 16 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Students with disabilities Low-­‐income X X X Veterans X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Black or African American Filipino Hispanic or Latino Hawaiian or Pacific Islander White 2) COLLABORATIVE PARTNERS In what ways does your project include collaboration between academic and student services and/or with the community? (Equity proposals that partner to reach target populations are prioritized over proposals that do not) This OIR project is an evaluation of all the equity projects, and OIR staff will be working with all the staff across campus in academic and student services who are part of the equity projects. To determine how your project fits into your discipline’s or program’s planning: 1) Is your project mentioned in your area’s latest program review (under New Initiatives)? _ ✔ _ Yes __ No 2) Does your immediate administrator support this project? __ No _ ✔ _ Yes 3) How have you shared this proposal with others in the relevant area, discipline, or division? When did this conversation take place and who was involved? We have started setting up the evaluations of the equity projects by talking to the lead staff, and setting up data collection and the analysis goals, and everyone was glad to have their project evaluated. However, we are realizing that we don’t have time for the in-­‐depth tracking and analysis that we need to do. 10/26/15
page 17 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
PROJECT GOALS, ACTIVITIES, BUDGET, OUTCOMES, AND EVALUATION GOAL What does your project hope to achieve overall? Goal: Provide yearly evaluation data and meaningful analysis for each funded equity project. Measurable outcome: Produce extensive analysis of what worked and why for each funded equity project. DOCUMENTING NEED AND SOLUTION Please provide data to support the need for your project and the solution you propose. The Equity Plan requires yearly evaluations. In March, 2015, the OIR Coordinator presented plans for evaluation of the equity projects. However, she has not had time to initiate the evaluations beyond initial conversations with the project leads. In the OIR program review, the main challenges were found to be “not having enough staff to accomplish the Research Agenda” and the “growth of grant evaluations and other state and federal reporting requirements.” The equity plan is one of the additional evaluations that we need to do, will add greatly to the OIR staff workload, and it has the funds to support the evaluations. ACTIVITIES Please list all the activities (A.1, A. 2, A.3, etc.) that you propose to do to reach your goal. List activities by target date in chronological order. Identify the responsible person/group for each activity, and who will be involved. Target Responsible person/Group Activity (brief description) Completion Who involved Date A1. Outline evaluation plans and indicators for each equity 12/15/15 OIR staff: project Carolyn Arnold A2. Produce mid-­‐year analysis for each project 3/28/16 OIR staff: Carolyn Arnold and Jeremy Wilson A3. Produce end of year results for each project 6/30/15 OIR staff: Carolyn Arnold and Jeremy Wilson BUDGET Provide a budget that shows how the funds will be spent to support the activities. 2015-­‐16: 50%-­‐100% of part-­‐time temporary Research Analyst: 7 months X $3,200/mo = $22,400 (or $11,200 if 50%) 2016-­‐17: 33%-­‐50% of a full-­‐time Research Analyst ($33k-­‐$50k of Salary and benefits) 10/26/15
page 18 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
EXPECTED OUTCOMES and EVALUATION How will you know whether or not you have achieved your goal? What measurable outcomes are you hoping to achieve for the student success indicator and target population you chose? Measurable outcome: Produce extensive analysis of what worked and why for each funded equity project. For each project, there will be a written mid-­‐year analysis after Fall 2015 is completed, and a year-­‐end analysis after Spring 2016 is completed, based on data from the OIR and discussions with the staff and maybe students. Measures will be the quantitative student equity indicators, as well as qualitative indicators such as surveys on engagement and other non-­‐cognitive areas. 10/26/15
page 19 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix F2A: Classified Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category 2000] Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Classified Prioritization Committee 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 complete a separate Classified Professionals Staffing Request form for each position requested and attach form(s) as an appendix to your Program Review. Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet AND a separate Classified Professionals Staffing Request form must be completed for each position requested. You can find the template for the spreadsheet here: http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/adminservicesprogramreview.asp Add your requests to your spreadsheet under the 2000a tab and check the box below once they’ve been added. Please click here to find the link to the Classified Professional Staffing Request form: http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/ASPR/2016-­‐
17%20Classified%20Professionals%20Staffing%20Request%20Form.pdf This is a fillable PDF. Please save the form, fill it out, then save again and check the box below once you’ve done so. Submit your Classified Professionals Staffing Request form(s) along with your Program Review Narrative and Resource Request spreadsheet. Total number of positions requested (please fill in number of positions requested): þ þ 1 Separate Classified Professionals Staffing Request form completed and attached to Program Review for each position requested (please check box to left) Summary of positions requested completed in Program Review Resource Request Spreadsheet (please check box to left) 10/26/15
page 20 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
Appendix F2B: Student Assistant Requests [Acct. Category 2000] Audience: Administrators, PRBC Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for student assistant 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 these positions are categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of new categorically-­‐funded positions where continuation is contingent upon available funding. Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. Add your requests to your spreadsheet under the 2000b tab and check the box below once they’ve been added. Total number of positions requested (please fill in number of positions requested): 2 þ Summary of positions requested completed in Resource Request Spreadsheet (please check box to left) Rationale for proposed student assistant positions (please describe below): Student Research Assistants
Students provide important assistance to the professional OIR staff. They can enter data, format Excel pages,
mail merge letters, use survey software to produce and scan surveys, darken bubbles in surveys, and keep track
of surveys sent out and received. All of these tasks save the professional staff time to do higher level work.
1 to 2 students @ 15 hrs/wk of student-level research assistance. This is the minimum needed to keep the IR
office going by assisting both Coordinator and Analyst. When possible, one is FWS. Grants and other funds have
augmented the small unit budget, but grants are ending. 10/26/15
page 21 of 24
2016-17 Program Review Year Three: Office of Institutional Research (OIR): Appendices
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 proposed positions (please describe below): The OIR directly contributes to the Strategic Plan by monitoring whether the college is meeting the Strategic
Plan Goal. By using the newly-created “Student Educational Goal Groups” the OIR monitors the progress of
different types of students on their way to meeting their educational goal. Having an adequate staff makes it
possible to do such careful and detailed work and present compiled summaries to the campus.
All of the work that the OIR staff—Coordinator, Research Analyst, student assistants, and proposed
Research Analyst—do is related to the Strategic Plan in some way, because they are working on research
requests about strategic plan-related topics— student progress towards success or completion within student
characteristics—or addressing grant development or evaluation requests, which also relate to the same topics.
The Coordinator funnels and directs the research that addresses the most important college research questions to
the Research Analyst and student research assistants. Without the Analyst and research assistants, the
Coordinator would be conducting both routine programming and research tasks, as well as trying to identify,
shape, conduct, and interpret the research that the college needs. Research needs could not be clearly identified,
and even more research would go undone than is currently falling off the table. How do the assessments that you performed to measure student learning outcomes (SLO’s) or service area outcomes (SAO’s) support this request? Our Service Area Outcomes are to 1) produce more research, 2) disseminate more research,
3) have research used more by the staff, and 4) have high user satisfaction.
In order to accomplish all these, we need enough student assistants to do the routine work
of collecting data and producing data displays and doing other clerical support, in order to free
the Coordinator and Research Analyst to do higher level research.
10/26/15
page 22 of 24