Chabot College
Student Services
Program Review Report
2016 -2017
Year in the Cycle: 3
Program: Disabled Students Programs &
Services, (DSPS) Special Programs
Disabled Student Resources Center,
(DSRC)
Adapted Physical Education
Computer Application Systems
Learning Skills
Psychology-Counseling
Submitted on October 26, 2015
Contact: Kathleen R. Allen
FINAL 10/20/15
Table of Contents
___ Year 1
Section 1: Who We Are
Section 2: Where We Are Now
Section 3: The Difference We Hope to Make
___ Year 2
Section 1: What Progress Have We Made?
Section 2: What Changes Do We Suggest?
___ Year 3
Section 1: What Have We Accomplished?
Section 2: What’s Next?
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History
B1: Student Learning Outcomes/Services Area Outcomes Assessment Schedule
C: Program Learning Outcomes
D: A Few Questions
E: New and Ongoing Initiatives and Projects
E1: Equity and BSI Fund Requests
F1A: New Faculty Requests
F1B: Reassign Time Requests
F2A: Classified Staffing Requests
F2B: Student Assistant Requests
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests
F5: Supplies Requests
F6: Services/Contracts and Conference/Travel Requests
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests
F8: Facilities
YEAR THREE
Resource Request Spreadsheet Directions:
In addition to completing the narrative portion of program review, add all your requests to a single
Resource Request Spreadsheet:
a. Follow the link to the spreadsheet provided in Appendix F1A, save the spreadsheet where you
can continue to access it and add requested resources from each appendix to it as appropriate.
Once completed, submit to your Dean/Area Manager with this finalized Program Review
Narrative.
b. Requests should be made for augmented/ additional resources (more than what you are already
receiving). If you have questions about what constitutes an “additional/augmented” request,
please talk with your administrator who can tell you what maintenance resources you are
already receiving.
c. Prioritize your requests using the criteria on the spreadsheet. Your Administrator will compile a
master spreadsheet and prioritize for his or her entire area.
d. Submit resource requests on time so administrators can include requests in their prioritization
and discuss with their area at November division meetings.
1. What Have We Accomplished?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1, C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to writing your
narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence, and enrollment
data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2015.asp
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks you to
reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used to assess progress
toward achievement of our Strategic Plan and to inform future budget decisions. In your narrative of
two or less pages, address the following questions:
 What program improvement goals did you establish?
 Did you achieve the goals you established for the three years? Specifically describe your
progress on goals you set for student learning, program learning, equity, and Strategic Plan
achievement.
 What best practices have you developed? Those could include pedagogical methods, strategies
to address Basic Skills needs of our students, methods of working within your discipline, and
more.
 Are these best practices replicable in other disciplines or areas?
 What were your greatest challenges?
 Were there institutional barriers to success?
 Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty ratios,
SAO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
2. What’s Next?
This section may serve as the foundation for your next Program Review cycle, and will inform the
development of future strategic initiatives for the college. In your narrative of one page or less, address
the following questions. Please complete Appendices E (New and Ongoing Initiatives and Projects) and
F1-8 (Resources Requested) to support your narrative.
 What goals do you have for future program improvement?
 What ideas do you have to achieve those goals?

What must change about the institution to enable you to make greater progress in improving
student learning and overall student success?

What Have We Accomplished?
About DSPS:
Disabled Students Programs & Services, (DSPS) is made up of 5 program areas: Adaptive
Physical Education, Computer Application Systems, Learning Skills, Psychology-Counseling
and the Disabled Students Resource Center (DSRC). The first 4 program areas are academic
programs and the DSRC is the service area component of the program. The DSRC provides
academic accommodations which are legally mandated by the Rehabilitation Act of 1973: PL
504 & PL 508, Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and Title V to students with documented
physical, communicative, psychological and learning disabilities. DSPS currently serve over
1000 unduplicated students with documented disabilities. It is quite an accomplishment that
DSPS has maintained our program areas despite the severe budget crisis we endured several
years ago.
Program Accomplishments:
We are proud that even with the retirement of 2 Tenured Learning Disability Specialists, DSPS faculty
and staff diligently follow the required State assessment regulations to determine eligibility for learning
disability eligibility and provide mandated reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities. In
this way are assessments are creditable and accepted by other four year colleges, national board exams
and employers. As a result several California State University send their students for assessments to
Chabot College.
DSPS is most proud of the positive impact our course offerings have on the success of students with
disabilities. Most DSPS courses are consistently filled through the excellent course curriculum specifically
developed to teach DSPS students compensatory strategies, understanding their disabilities and
becoming aware of their strengths and weaknesses. As a result, students are successful in college level
courses in English, Mathematics and Computer Application Systems by providing them with a strong
foundation and teaching them to become critical thinkers. DSPS courses support students with
disabilities to become comfortable with their disabilities, utilizing academic reasonable accommodations
and asking for assistance when needed. The curriculum of DSPS courses are designed to develop the
whole person; build self-esteem, social skills, social cognition, Problem solving, and becoming
independent participants in their academic process. Thus, assisting students with disabilities to reach
their full potential and achieve their education goals.
This year we have reinstated several courses that we lost during the budget crisis: ENGL. 116 .72E and
ENGL 120 in the Spring semester. Our goal is still to enhance our course offerings to provide a strong
academic foundation for the increasing number of students with acquired brain injuries, Autism (It is
projected that 1 in 64 males will be diagnosed with Autism and entering college in the next 7 years),
developmental disabilities, Wounded Warriors, etc. These students would greatly benefit from a
cognitive learning course. Our hope is to offer this course in the Spring of 2017.
The DSRC has also maintained and enhanced our services and accommodations to meet the
increasing number of student requests, plus providing updated accommodation delivery services.
The support services the DSRC provides are academic, career, personal and crisis counseling. the
academic accommodations we provide (but not limited to) include: assistive technology (screen
reader, text to speech, screen enlargement and speech recognition programs), alternative testing,
sign language interpreters, real-time captioners, remote captioners, readers, scribes, shared note
takers, Braille transcription, tactile graphics enlarge print texts, e-text, close captioning of videos
and mobility cart services. Our students are greatly impacted by our program as demonstrated by
their success in achieving their educational goals of earning Certificates, AA/AS degrees,
transferring to four year colleges and personal enrichment, due to our course curriculum and the
academic accommodations we provide. Our students’ success is due to the collaborative efforts
of the DSPS staff, Student Services program areas, Academic Divisions and Administrators
throughout the campus.
Despite our hectic schedules the DSPS staff participates in shared governance by sitting on
AB86, COOL, Facility, Health & Safety, PRBC, SSSP, and Technology Committees. We
worked on Accreditation rewrites as well as sitting on Chancellor’s Office Advisory
Committees: High Tech Center Training Unit (HTCTU) and Alternate Text Production Center)
ATPC).
This year several of the staff attended California Association of Post-Secondary Educators & the
Disabled (CAPED) conference with DSPS funding. This Conference provided us with crucial
information pertaining to requirements that will go into effect in Fall 2016. These changes
pertain to the disability categories that receive funding and the number of contacts DSPS
students must have to be counted for funding.
Faculty & Classified Staffing Accomplishments Plus New Requests:
We accomplished our goal of hiring a full-time DSPS Counselor/Instructor, (who is in her
second year of the tenure process), a full-time Learning Disability Instructor (who is in her first
year of the tenure process and will earn her LD Certification by May 2016, thus making her a LD
Specialist), and our Counselor Assistant II is now a permanent employee having successfully
completed the probation period. One of our Learning Skills Instructional Assistants II who was
permanent part-time is now a full-time employee for DSPS. We have just hired our Counselor
Assistant I and we are awaiting her start date.
DSPS Director -During the Accreditation interviews with the Vice President of Student Services and the
Dean of Special Programs, they were surprised that DSPS still had a Counselor/Coordinator instead of a
Director. They mentioned that large DSPS programs like Chabot College are under Directors. Since the
DSPS Director would be an Administrator level position, they would be a 40 hour per week/12 month
employee able to supervise faculty and staff. Their responsibility would include overseeing the
complicated DSPS budget, all Student Assistant hirings, the daily operations of all DSPS program areas,
assist with DSPS course offerings, and complete the DSPS End of The Year Report. As a result the
program would be more consistently managed which would lead to a more stable DSPS program. The
current DSPS Counselor/Coordinator will be retiring at the end of May, 2016.
Learning Disability Specialist-In May of 2015 we lost a LD Specialist due to retirement; by
replacing this position DSPS will be able to maintain our Learning Skills course offerings for
students with learning disabilities. As shown above these courses are crucial to insure the success
of our students. With a full time Specialist the DSPS Learning Skills program will be once again
stable and able to provide them with continuity.
DSPS Counselor-The DSRC will be able to maintain our increasing counseling needs by
providing more academic counseling, personal counseling, career counseling, complete more
Student Education Plans, put through more academic accommodation forms, etc. WE also will
be in a better position to provide crisis counseling when this need arises. In this way we will be
in a position to maintain and enhance our DSPS PSCN course offerings to meet the needs of our
growing number of students with disabilities by assisting them with achieving their education
goals.
Assistive Technology Instructor – This hiring is necessary for DSPS, since we have not had a
full time instructor since December, 2009 due to a retirement. Our CAS courses are essential for
the success of students with disabilities, who enroll in the college having little or no computer
skills or knowledge of the benefits of using assistive technology to complete their course work.
Computer Lab Specialist- This position is essential to assist students with disabilities while
working on their assignments with the correct use of computer hardware and software, keeping
track of the computers that require IT repair and software updates and the physical maintenance
of the computer stations in the DSRC Hi-Tech Lab and in the General Area.
Facility Requests:
At the beginning of the Fall, 2014 Semester we were given permission to use 2338/2340 on a
temporary basis to increase the number of alternative tests we could proctor at a given time. We
had gone from 8 testing stations to over 40. Unfortunately, at the beginning of fall 2015 these
rooms were given to another program; the DSRC was given rm. 501 in bldg. 500. We have only
been able to use this area once since the beginning of the semester because we need a classified
person in the room to proctor exams. It was necessary for us to close the DSRC Hi-Tech Lab for
testing. The students working on homework assignments using assistive technology had to stop
working. Many of our students request the use of assistive technology while taking test;
presently we still only have 3 assistive technology testing stations.
We are very concerned that if there were an emergency requiring the DSRC staff to evacuate the testing
area we may not safely evacuate the area in a timely manner. Also the area is not ADA compliant
depending on how many student are wheel chair users, etc. a result.
It is critical that we find a permanent testing area which can increase our assistive technology
availability during alternative testing. This can be accomplished by renovating the DSRC general
area or relocating the entire DSRC.
In the Summer of 2015, DSPS purchased 16 new scanners which enables the students to scan
their books at their stations during Kurzweil 3000/1000 Instruction, rather than wait until 1 of the
4 scanners previously in the center was available. We also purchased ergonomic office chairs
and electric tables to better provide accessible computer stations for students with disabilities.
The DSPS staff with the addition of new faculty are in the process of building a team approach
so we can continue to work together creating a strong unit to better support our students. The
DSPS team would not have made the achievements we have if it were not for the support of
Chabot College. The College has demonstrated its commitment to serve students with disabilities
and insure equity on the campus.
1. What’s Next?
We placed the Resource Requests to in the first part of our narrative, since it
demonstrates how our accomplishments and goals fit together.
If we achieve our request for a DSPS Director. The DSPS program will become a better
unified program. If we achieve our goal of hiring at least 2 of the 3 faculty positions, DSPS
will be in a better position for growth. We are not only referring to growth by the number
of faculty and staff in DSPS, but there is a large population of persons with disabilities in
the community. With more faculty and staff better community outreach can be achieved.
This can be accomplished by either visiting schools, agencies, centers or having them
come to us where we can conduct tours of the DSRC plus other areas throughout the
campus. The DSPS tours we conduct for high school students in Special Education
programs each Spring semester have been very successful, but these tours can be
extended to include more community programs.
It will be critical for DSPS to examine the success rate of evening students scoring in ENGL.
116; are they successful in their classes without having taken ENGL. 117, 118A or B, since
they are not offered in the evening. In previous DSPS Program Reviews our goal was to
offer an evening ENGL. 118A in the Fall and an ENGL. 118B in the Spring. We were
concerned that evening students were not being successful in ENGL. 101A or 102 without
the benefit of DSPS Learning Skills courses in the evening. So many DSPS students have
math difficulties, so it is great that we are continuing to offer ENGL. 119 in the evening.
The best way to reduce the DSPS course conflicts and over laps is to examine the option
of offering some of our DSPS courses as hybrid courses. If this were done, then it would
be important to offer CAS 103 to support students in their online portions of their hybrid
courses. In this way students would be able to receive support from the Hi-Tech Lab
Student Assistants.
Our hope is that our serious problems pertaining to alternative testing will have found a
solution; that provides a safe, compliant, distraction free environment area near the DSRC
for testing students with disabilities. Another option is to move the entire DSRC, allowing
our service areas to be in 1place. We believe that the DSPS Administrators in Student
Services understand, but we do not think the rest of the campus cares or understands.
The DSRC staff is very discouraged and the students are very concerned. We were told
that rooms 2338/40 were not attractive with mismatched tables and chairs, but the DSRC
staff were relieved and happy. The staff knew they were providing appropriate
alternative testing accommodations in a safe area where the staff could easily oversee the
testing process with Student Assistant proctor. The students were happy, since they
would be in an area with space and not crunched in the small area in the DSRC. Last year
was a great testing year and now we are back to where we were before.
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Audience: Budget Committee, PRBC, and Administrators
Purpose: This analysis describes your history of budget requests from the previous two years
and the impacts of funds received and needs that were not met. This history of documented
need can both support your narrative in Section A and provide additional information for Budget
Committee recommendations.
Instructions: Please provide the requested information, and fully explain the impact of the
budget decisions.
Category
Classified Staffing (# of positions)
Supplies & Services
Technology/Equipment
Other
TOTAL
2015-16
Budget
Requested
7.25
0
$23,328.36
0
$23,328.36
2015-16
Budget
Received
7.25
0
$3,395.00
0
$3,395.00
2016-17
Budget
Requested
9.25
$6,050.00
$11,810.00
0
$17,860.00
2016-17
Budget
Received
Unknown
0
Unknown
0
Unknown
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved student learning? Which
service or learning outcome were supported? Have the anticipated positive impacts been realized?
The CCTV purchased as an ADA accommodation for a DSPS staff member; he is now more efficient in
providing services for students with disabilities.
2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has student
learning or service been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively
impacted?
This year we were able to purchase the scanners with DSPS funding.
Unfortunately, the renovation of the DSRC’s testing area was not realized, nor did the DSRC move, so
the computers for the testing area were not purchased.
Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes and/or Service Area Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
Service Area Outcomes:
Audience:
Purpose:
Instructions:
How
Measured
SAO
SAO #1:
Students in DSPS will have met all 3
SSSP components
BANNER
report
generated
by IT
SAO #2:
DSPS students will have at least
four contacts to meet state
regulations
BANNER
report
generated
by IT
I.
Documentation
Results/Discussion
84% of DSPS students
met all SSSP areas.
The generated report
does not make note of
whether the 16% that do
not have all SSSP areas
met are exempt because
of their particular
disability or not.
100% compliance
(Where can assessments be
found? Provide link if possible)
BANNER report
generated by IT
BANNER report
generated by IT
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.
X Yes, 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:
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.
CAS 100
This Year’s Program
Review
*CTL forms must be
included with this PR.
SUBMITTED
CAS 101
SUBMITTED
CAS102
SUBMITTED
CAS 103
SUBMITTED
Engl 116
SUBMITTED
Engl 117
SUBMITTED
Engl 118A
SUBMITTED
Engl 118B
SUBMITTED
Engl 119
SUBMITTED
Engl 121
SUBMITTED
PSCN 20
SUBMITTED
PSCN 901
SUBMITTED
PSCN 902
SUBMITTED
PSCN 903
SUBMITTED
PSCN 904
SUBMITTED
Last Year’s Program
Review
2-Years Prior
*Note: These courses
must be assessed in
the next PR year.
Appendix B2 (1 of 15): “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
CAS 100
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Allison Golde and Kathleen Allen
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Students will be able to keyboard alphabetic characters by
touch.
(CLO) 2: STUDENTS WILL perform basic computer operations.
(CLO) 3: STUDENTS WILL demonstrate correct posture and finger
placement.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
75%
75%
75%
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
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?
Students will be able to keyboard alphabetic characters by touch by identifying, the home row keys by
demonstrating their knowledge of their keys through on hands assessments.
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?
I feel that many students are able to identify, explain, implement, recognize, through
adaptive keyboarding accommodations on a basic QWERTY keyboard, it is best to assess
these students through hands on learning and rate their achievements on a case-by-case
basis.
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?
My current scores reflect that the students are able to perform basic computer operations by becoming
familiar with the computer and its functions as well as the keyboard and finger placement, thus they are able
to develop confidence that results in success.
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?
Based on the date gathered, coupled with my teaching experiences, parlaying with
faculty, I see the importance and need for the repetition of the understanding that
comes with in class learning of the computer. Prior to this class, many students were
unable to recall, describe, show, and relate, to the computer. This class allows for
reinforcement of knowledge gained and gives me a greater sense of how little traditional
evaluations play in this class.
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?
The current scores demonstrate correct posture and finger placement. It is important to note that many
students must execute finger placement and posture much like a student of the Piano or display posture like
that of a horseback rider. Students start timidly, but as the semester progresses the charts justify the levels of
success that is achievable in the classroom setting (some start typing 2 wpm and end the class typing between
15 to 20 wpm).
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?
Data shows that repetition increases the student’s confidence level and as their
confidence grows so does their typing speed and accuracy, along with their confidence.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your
discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
1. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
We have adjusted for the students case-by-case needs and used a more user-friendly
computer program.
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?
Assessment’s reveal continued strengths in typing and through 24/7 availability students’
progress at their own speed, some faster, some slower, but everyone is a success.
3. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (2 of 15): “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
CAS 101
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Allison Golde& Kathleen R. Allen
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Students will be able to create and print a Word document.
.
(CLO) 2: Students will perform a spell and grammar check in Word.
(CLO) 3: Students will save, delete, and rename document files in
Word.
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
75% of the class
scored either 3
or 4
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
75%
75%
75%
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
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?
75% of the students scored a 3 or higher which matched exactly with my target.
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?
I feel that many students are able to create and print a Word document. The students
have difficulty not with the Word applications but the actual writing.
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?
My current scores reflect that the students are able to perform a spell and grammar check in Word, becoming
familiar with function, thus they are able to develop confidence that results in success.
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?
Based on the data gathered, coupled with my teaching experiences, parlaying with
faculty, I see the importance and need for the repetition of the understanding that
comes with in class learning of the computer. Prior to this class, many students were
unable to recall, describe, show, and relate, to the computer. This class allows for
reinforcement of knowledge gained and gives me a greater sense of how little traditional
evaluations play in this class.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The actual score 75% matched my target exactly.
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?
Data shows that repetition increases the student’s confidence level, and as their
confidence grows so does their comfort level with making changes and renaming their
documents.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
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?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
4. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior
Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
We have adjusted for the students case-by-case needs and used a more user-friendly
computer program.
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?
Assessments reveal continued strengths in typing, and through 24/7 availability of the
software, students progress at their own speed, some faster, some slower, but everyone is
a success at learning how to create and manage Word documents.
6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (3 of 15): “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
CAS 102
Fall 2014
3
3
100%
Spring 2015
Kathleen R. Allen and Nathaniel
Rice
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Students will be able to use the appropriate assistive
technology based on their disability to access the internet.
(CLO) 2: students will be able to use the appropriate assistive
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
76%
70%
72%
70%0
72%
technology based on their disability to write their college papers.
(CLO) 3: Students will be able to use the appropriate assistive
technology based on their disability to correct their grammar and
spelling.
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
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?
The actual score of 76% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 70%.
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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They are using their designated
assistive technology to read and research on the internet.
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?
The actual score of 72% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 70%.
5. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They learned the concepts and
applications needed when using the assistive technology. As the students take more
writing courses they will become proficient with the use of the assistive technology.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course
level outcome?
The actual score of 72% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 70%.
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 students are achieving the desired outcome. As they become more confident with
this application, they will successfully use it to their benefit.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
2. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
3. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? To better meet the
course curriculum, it was necessary to change the SLOs for this course.
4. 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?
This course curriculum includes screen reader, scan/read, screen enlargement and speech
recognition programs. The students learn the software that meets their individual disability
needs. The students are required to use course materials from their other classes while they are
learning the technology. As a result the students learn the benefits of the assistive technology as
they study and read current course texts and assignments.
5. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (4 of 15): “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
CAS 103
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Kathleen R. Allen and Nathaniel
Rice
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1:
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
91%
CAS 103 - Students will demonstrate proficiency with the basic
functions of Their appropriate assistive technology:
keyboarding, word processing and Internet access as they
complete their academic work.
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
3. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
6. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 91% of students scoring a 3 or 4 far exceeds my target score of 70%.
7. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. This course is extremely beneficial to
DSPS students
4. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
8. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
8. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
None
9. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
The students are continuing to use the assistive technology available in the DSRC.
10.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?X
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_____
Appendix B2 (5 of 15): “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment
Reflections.
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
ENGL 116
Fall 2014
6
6
100%
Spring 2015
Jerry Egusa, Shirley Pejman
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Students will increase their understanding of their learning
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
80%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
92%
strengths and weaknesses..
(CLO) 2:
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
11.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
92% of students scored a 3 0r 4 which far exceeded our target score of 80%. target score of
12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students have increased their understanding of their learning strengths and weaknesses.
12.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
14. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
18. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
13. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
14. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
15.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_____
Appendix B2 (6 of 15): “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
ENGL 117
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Jerry Egusa
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
72%
(CLO) 2: An ability to visually recognize and pronounce new and
familiar words using a multisensory approach.
70%
72%
(CLO) 3: An ability to write a simple summary.
(CLO) 4: Increase reading comprehension
70%
70%
72%
72%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: An ability to articulate and demonstrate which reading and
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
compensatory strategies work for them.
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
19.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
16. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
72% of the students scored 3 or 4 which exceeds our target score of 70%.
17. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
72% of the students demonstrated the ability to articulate which reading and
compensatory strategies work for them.
20.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
72% of the students scored 3 or 4 which exceeded our target score of 70%.
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
72% of the students demonstrated an ability to visually recognize and pronounce new
and familiar words using a multisensory approach.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
72% of students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded our target score of 70%
24. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Y2% of the students demonstrated an ability to write a simple summary.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
72% of the students scored a 3 or 4which exceeded our target score of 70%
26. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
72% of the students demonstrated increased reading comprehension.
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
18. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
19. 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?
20.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_____
Appendix B2 (7 of 15): “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
ENGL 118A
Fall 2014
2
2
100%
Spring 2015
Jerry Egusa
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: Students will identify support details and transition words
while distinguishing the differences between major and minor details.
(CLO) 2: Students will increase their ability to identify the main idea
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
73%
70%
73%
70%
73%
of presented passages.
(CLO) 3: Students will increase their receptive and expressive
vocabulary skills.
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
27.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
73% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded our target score of 70%
22. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
73% demonstrated the ability to identify support details and transition words while
distinguishing the differences between major and minor details.
28.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
73% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded our target score of 70%. 7
30. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
3% of the students increased their ability to identify the main idea of presented
passages.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
73% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded our target score of 70%.
32. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
73% of the students increased their receptive and expressive vocabulary skills.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
33. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
34. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
23. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
24. 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?
25.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_____
Appendix B2 (8 of 15): “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
ENGL 118B
Fall 2014
1
1
100%
Spring 2015
Jerry Egusa
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: An ability to write a 500 word essay.
(CLO) 2: Improved ability to identify and apply grammar rules in their
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
70%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
87%
87%
70%
87%
own writing.
(CLO) 3: Increased confidence as a writer.
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
35.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
26. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
87% of the students scored a 3or 4 which far exceeded our target score of 70%.
27. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
87% of the students demonstrated an ability to write a 500 word essay.
36.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
37. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
87% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which far exceeded our target score of 70%.
38. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
87% of the students improved their ability to identify and apply grammar rules in their
own writing.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
39. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
87% of the students scored a 3or 4 which far exceeded our target score of 70%.
40. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
87% of the students increased their confidence as writers.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
41. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
42. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
28. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
29. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course-level and programmatic
strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline
determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
30.





Other:_____
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
Appendix B2 (9 of 15): “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
English 119
2014
3
3
100
Spring 2015
Jerry Egusa/Shirley Pejman
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
PART I: COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES – DATA RESULTS
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
82%
(CLO) 2: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO
PROBLEM SOLVE BASIC ARITHMATIC WORD
PROBLEMS.
70%
82%
(CLO) 3: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO
UTILIZE ASSITIVE TECHNOLOGY WHILE PERFORMING
MATHEMATICAL PROBLEMS.
70%
82%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR
QUANITATIVE REASONING AND APPLIED
MATHEMATICAL SKILLS.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
43. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
82% Students scored 3 or 4 and exceeded the expected outcome of 70%
32. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
82% of the students increased their quantitative reasoning skills.
44.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
45. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
82% of the students scored a 3 or 4 and exceeded the expected outcome of 70%.
46. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
82% of the students increased their ability to problem solve basic arithmetic word
problems.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
47. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
82% of the students scored 3 or 4 and exceeded the expected outcome of 70%.
48. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
82% of the students increased their ability to utilize assistive technology while
performing mathematical problems.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
49. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
50. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
33. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
34. 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?
35.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_________________________________________________________________
Appendix B2 (10 of 15): “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
ENGLISH 121
FALL 2014
1
1
1
100%
JERRY EGUSA
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
89%
(CLO) 2: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO
USE COMPENSATORY ARITHMATIC STRATEGIES.
70%
89%
(CLO) 3: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO
USE QUANTATATIVE BASED STUDY SKILLS
APPROPRIATE TO THEIR LEARNING NEEDS.
70%
89%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: STUDENTS WILL INCREASE THEIR ABILITY TO
APPLY SELF-ADVOCACY TECHNIQUES WITH
INSTRUCTORS AND STAFF.
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of
students that meet defined target based on the eLumen data collected in this assessment cycle?
PART II: COURSE- LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS
51. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
36. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
89% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded expected outcome of 70%.
37. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
89% of the students increased their ability to apply self-advocacy techniques with
instructor and staff.
52.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
53. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
89% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded expected outcome of 70%.
54. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
89% of the students increased their ability to use compensatory arithmetic strategies.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
55. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
89% of the students scored a 3 or 4 which exceeded expected outcome of 70%.
56. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
89% of the students increased their ability to use quantitative based study skills
appropriate to their learning needs.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
57. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
58. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS
38. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
39. 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?
40.






What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:_________________________________________________________________
Appendix B2 (11 of 15): “Closing the Loop” Course-Level Assessment
Reflections.
Course
PSCN 20
Semester assessment data gathered
Spring 2015
Number of sections offered in the semester
1
Number of sections assessed
1
Percentage of sections assessed
100%
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Fall 2015
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion Kathleen R. Allen
& Felicia Tripp
Form Instructions:
 Complete a separate Appendix B2 form for each Course-Level assessment reported in this
Program Review. These courses should be listed in Appendix B1: Student Learning Outcomes
Assessment Reporting Schedule.
 Part I: CLO Data Reporting. For each CLO, obtain Class Achievement data in aggregate for all
sections assessed in eLumen.
 Part II: CLO Reflections. Based on student success reported in Part I, reflect on the individual
CLO.
 Part III: Course Reflection. In reviewing all the CLOs and your findings, reflect on the course as a
whole.
Part I: Course-Level Outcomes – Data Results
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: PSCN 20 - Students will be able to identify what level of GPA
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
70%
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
78%
70%
74%
would place a student on Academic Probation
(CLO) 2: PSCN 20 - Students will be able to identify four resources on
campus that will assist them in becoming successful students.
(CLO) 3:
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
59.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
41. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome? The actual score of 78% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeded my
target score of 70%.
42. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The GPA lectures are being understood
by students; they either get it or they do not.
60.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
61. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 74% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 70%.
62. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They learned about the many resources
available for them on campus.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
63. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
64. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
65. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
66. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
43. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
44. 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?
45. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
Other:_____
Appendix B2 (12 of 15): “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
PSCN 901
Spring 2015
1
1
100%
Fall 2015
Kathleen R. Allen, Shirley Pejman &
Linda Phan
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75%
80%
(CLO) 2:
A student will become comfortable communicating
their needs to persons employed at state and
community agencies.
75%
80%
(CLO) 3: A student will obtain the skills to
effectively communicate with their family and
friends in an assertive manner.
75%
90%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: A student will become comfortable
advocating for the academic accommodations they are
eligible to utilize based on their disabilities with their
instructors.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
67.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
46. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome? The actual score of 80% of students
scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 75%.
47. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
It is evident that this course is developing the students confidence needed to achieve
their education goals by communicating their needs to instructors. . The students are
achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable when
communicating with their instructors. Students are benefiting from the advice and
comments from their class peers.
68.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
69. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 80% of students scoring 3 or 4 exceeds my target score of 75%.
70. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They achieve self-confidence and
personal growth in a group setting; they learn greatly from their peers. As a result
students are using community resources that are available to assist them personally and
academically.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
71. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 90% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeds my target score of 75%.
72. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their Family and friends. Students are benefiting from the
advice and comments from their class peers. Learning to be assertive with family &
friends enhances their feeling of security & stability in relation to their family and
friends’ relationships.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
73. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
74. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
48. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
49. 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?
50. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (13 of 15): “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
PSCN 902
Spring 2015
1
1
100%
Fall 2015
Kathleen R. Allen, Shirley Pejman &
Linda Phan
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75%
82%
(CLO) 2:
A student will become comfortable communicating
their needs to persons employed at state and
community agencies.
75%
82%
(CLO) 3: A student will obtain the skills to
effectively communicate with their family and
friends in an assertive manner.
75%
91%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: A student will become comfortable
advocating for the academic accommodations they are
eligible to utilize based on their disabilities with their
instructors.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
75.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
51. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome? The actual score of 82% of students
scoring 3 or 4 exceeded my target score of 75%.
52. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their instructors. Students are benefiting from the advice and
comments from their class peers. Thus they have an easier time requesting academic
accommodations.
76.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
77. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 82% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeds my target score of 75%.
78. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They achieve self-confidence and
personal growth in a group setting; they learn greatly from their peers. The course is
assisting the students with feeling comfortable when seeking services from community
agencies.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
79. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 91% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeded my target score of 75%.
80. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their Family and friends. Students are benefiting from the
advice and comments from their class peers. Many of these students are re-entry
students with family and children concerns. In the course they become more
comfortable communicating when dealing with situations presented by their extended
family that previously caused them stress; now they can handle it appropriately.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
81. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
82. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
53. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
54. 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?
55. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (14 of 15): “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
PSCN 903
Spring 2015
1
1
100%
Fall 2015
Kathleen R. Allen, Shirley Pejman &
Linda Phan
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75%
73%
(CLO) 2:
A student will become comfortable communicating
their needs to persons employed at state and
community agencies.
75%
73%
(CLO) 3: A student will obtain the skills to
effectively communicate with their family and
friends in an assertive manner.
75%
91%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: A student will become comfortable
advocating for the academic accommodations they are
eligible to utilize based on their disabilities with their
instructors.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
83.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
56. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome? The actual score of 73% of students
scoring 3 or 4 barely met my target score of 75%.
57. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
73% of the students are achieving the desired outcome. These students are feeling
comfortable when communicating with their instructors. Students are benefiting from
the advice and comments from their class peers. Several students’ skill level was lower,
as a result it will take them longer to build their confidence. We do feel that the CLO
needs to be changed. We will experiment with developing strategies to benefit some of
the students more effectively.
84.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
85. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 73% of students scoring 3 or 4 barely met my target score of 75%.
86. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
73% of the students are achieving the desired outcome. They achieve self-confidence
and personal growth in a group setting; they learn greatly from their peers. It will take
the remaining students a longer time to meet this goal. The CLO does not need to be
changed; but different strategies need to be developed to support the students.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
87. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 91% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeded my target score of 75%.
88. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their Family and friends. Students are benefiting from the
advice and comments from their class peers. This CLO is definitely working well. The
students are becoming more assertive.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
89. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
90. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
58. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
59. 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?
60. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix B2 (15 of 15): “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
PSCN 904
Spring 2015
1
1
100%
Fall 2015
Kathleen R. Allen, Shirley Pejman &
Linda Phan
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
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
75%
89%
(CLO) 2:
A student will become comfortable communicating
their needs to persons employed at state and
community agencies.
75%
89%
(CLO) 3: A student will obtain the skills to
effectively communicate with their family and
friends in an assertive manner.
75%
89%
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
(CLO) 1: A student will become comfortable
advocating for the academic accommodations they are
eligible to utilize based on their disabilities with their
instructors.
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
CONSIDER THE COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE
NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE)
Defined Target
Scores*
(CLO Goal)
Actual Scores**
(eLumen data)
(CLO) 4:
 If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table.
* Defined Target Scores: What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this
CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4)
**Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen
data collected in this assessment cycle?
Part II: Course- level Outcome Reflections
91.
COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1:
61. How do your current scores match with your above target for student
success in this course level outcome? The actual score of 89% of students
scoring 3 or 4 exceeded my target score of 75%.
62. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their instructors. Students are benefiting from the advice and
comments from their class peers. As a result they are requesting accommodations from
their instructors.
92.COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2:
93. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 89% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeds my target score of 75%.
94. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. They achieve self-confidence and
personal growth in a group setting; they learn greatly from their peers. Now they have
the confidence to request assistance from community agencies.
C. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3:
95. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
The actual score of 89% of students scoring 3 or 4 far exceeded my target score of 75%.
96. 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 students are achieving the desired outcome. The students are feeling comfortable
when communicating with their Family and friends. Students are benefiting from the
advice and comments from their class peers. This CLO is working well; the students’
family and friend relationships are more stable and healthy.
D. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 4:
97. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this
course level outcome?
98. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and
your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
E. COURSE-LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 5: ADD IF NEEDED.
Part III: Course Reflections and Future Plans
63. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the
prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions?
64. 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?
65. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:_____
Appendix C: Program Learning Outcomes
Considering your feedback, findings, and/or information that has arisen from the course level
discussions, please reflect on each of your Program Level Outcomes.
Program: Disabled Students Programs & Services (DSPS)

PLO #1:
Interpret and apply compensatory learning strategies based on their individual learning style.
Engl. 116, 117, 120, 121
CAS 102

PLO #2:
Demonstrate a Competency with increasing vocabulary skills, ability to identify main idea and
supported ideas in passages, computation of math problems and in computer keyboarding.
CAS 100 and 103,
English 118A and 119

PLO #3:
The ability to write a 500 word essay, create and edit Microsoft word documents, use assistive
technology to complete their research and course assignments, request and utilize academic
accommodations according to their individual needs to enhance their college success
CAS 101,
English 118A, 118B and 119,
PSCN 20 and DSRC

PLO #4:
Demonstrate an ability to communicate effectively for student success based on their individual
needs.
PSCN 20, 901, 902, 903 & 904,
English 120, 121 and DSRC
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
How can we provide academic accommodations to evening students?
It is essential we continue to offer ENGL 116 & 119 in the evening. It will be necessary to
replace the second LD Specialist in order to achieve this goal.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:
Since DSPS Program courses are consistently filled, students are successfully meeting these
outcomes. We have an increasing number of students who are becoming more aware of their
individual needs and requesting accommodations through the DSRC. Therefore DSPS students
are passing higher level English and Math courses and completing their educational goals of
earning Certificates, AA/AS degrees and transferring to 4 year colleges.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of
students completing your program?
Make certain that our course offerings have very little conflicts and/or overlaps with each other, thus
allowing more students to enroll in the classes. This is essential since most of the courses are entry
level courses.
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. Write n/a if the
question does not apply to your area.
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years?
a. 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)
a. n/a
3. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those courses
remain in our college catalog?
a. yes
4. Do all of your courses have the required number of CLOs completed, with corresponding
rubrics? If no, identify the CLO work you still need to complete, and your timeline for completing
that work this semester
a. yes
5. Have you assessed all of your courses and completed "closing the loop" forms for all of your
courses within the past three years? If no, identify which courses still require this work, and your
timeline for completing that work this semester.
a. yes
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.
a. yes
7. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?
a. yes
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.
a. yes
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.
How does your project address the college's Strategic Plan goal, significantly improve student learning or
service, and/or address disproportionate impact?
The DSRC critically requires an additional dedicated area specifically used for testing, with 20
work stations which include 10 computers equipped with software and hardware installed with
assistive technology. In order to serve our students with their increasing requests for use of
Kurzweil 3000, 1000, Dragon Premium and JAWS during their tests, more testing space and
more computer stations are imperative. We have long out grown our Testing Lab with room
for 8 students which includes 3 computer stations. Due to the limited testing space with
assistive technology, it is necessary for students to be tested in our small High Tech Center
and in the DSRC general area. Both of these areas are not Title V, PL 504, and ADA
compliant because they are not distraction free environments since classes are in session at the
same time. We are very concerned for the safety of our students taking tests in our Testing Lab
is such a small area during an emergency, it would be extremely difficult to evacuate students
safely from the area. Also, if a student has a seizure or falls in the small Testing Lab, they
could be injured or injure other students. Each semester the DSRC provides alternative testing
for close to 2000 tests, with increasingly greater numbers of students requesting the use of
assistive technology.
Last academic year, we had the use of 2338 & 2340, this was great support for our students; it
was close to the DSRC and we were able to provide 40 students testing accommodations at a
single sitting. We hired a student assistant to proctor the exams as the staff easily went back
and forth between 2300 and 2400. Unfortunately, we lost this area; we were given rm. 501
which does not easily work for us. Building 500 is across the campus, forcing a staff member
to proctor the tests; this is not easily done due to the staff’s hectic schedules. As a result we
have only used this room 1 time during the semester. Thus we are still in a bad testing
situation.
It is necessary for the DSRC to be renovated to meet our increasing testing needs, or relocate
the entire DSRC.
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”)
With an increased Testing Lab, more students will be provided with appropriate mandated
alternative testing accommodations with the use of assistive technology in a distraction free
environment. Also, we can insure The safety of students taking tests during an emergency or
an accident. Students taking classes in the Hi-Tech Center will feel more comfortable raising
questions during class if no students are testing. Thus students with disabilities will have equal
access to an education and become more successful in their classes and achieve their
educational goals of earning Certificates, AA/AS degrees and transferring to four-year
colleges.
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).
SAO #1:
More students with a disability will be taking their EPT & MPT in an ADA compliant and
safe environment.
SAO #2:
DSPS
Without a new testing area, DSPS students will not use alternative testing, rather taking their tests
in the classroom, where they will not be successful. As a result, DSPS will lose contacts, and
students will take a longer time to achieve their goals, due to repeating classes, or they will drop
out of college completely.
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Target
Completion
Date
To achieve increased testing access, it is critical that the DSRC TBD/ASAP
be renovated, or the entire DSRC program be moved en masse
to another area. It is imperative that the testing area be
enhanced to include 10 new computer testing stations, with
their associated assistive technology (Kurzweil 1000 and 3000,
MAGic, Dragon Naturally Speaking Premium, CCTVs, etc.)
Activity (brief description)
Required Budget
(Split out personnel, supplies,
other categories)
Budget is dependent on
how the DSRC can be
renovated to meet our
growing needs, or where
the DSRC would be
relocated
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
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)
X Other, explain
Current DSRC Full time Classified Staff will work on these projects. Their workload will
become more efficient and less stressful with the equipment and alterations to the DSRC or
relocate the entire DSRC, thus improving services for students with disabilities on the campus.
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
X Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
(obtained by/from):
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
X Yes, explain: The renovation of the existing DSRC to enhance the testing lab or
relocate the entire DSRC is required to fulfill this project.
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
X
Yes, explain: At this time we do not know what plan will be utilized.
Depending on the renovation or relocation that is decided upon, it will be determined if
subcontractors or partners are necessary.
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
X No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
Appendix E1: Equity and Basic Skills Initiative Fund Requests:
Project Name: STEPS “Student Tutors for Equitable Personal Success”
Contact Name: Kathleen R. Allen
Division/Discipline/Program/Office: Special Programs/ DSPS/DSRC/bldg. 2400
Contact info: (email, campus phone, and cell phone) kallen@chabotcollege.edu ext: 6803:
510.299.3164
Check the student success indicator(s) your project will address
__ ACCESS: Enroll more of a population group to match their representation in community.
X COURSE COMPLETION: Increase success rates in identified courses.
_X 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.
X DEGREE AND CERTIFICATE COMPLETION:
Increase percent of degrees/certificates among degree/certificate-seeking students.
X 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
_X_ 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:
Course
ESL/Basic
Completion / Skills Success
Success Rates
Males
Foster Youth
Students with
disabilities
Low-income
Veterans
Goal D2: Cert Goal E:
Completion
Transfer
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
American Indian or
Alaska Native
Asian
Black or African
American
Goal D1:
Degree
Completion
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Filipino
X
Hispanic or Latino
X
Hawaiian or Pacific
Islander
White
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
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)
Many student with disabilities require individualized tutoring in courses from all instructional areas.
We have collaboration with the adult schools in the area, and these students need tutoring beyond
what is available through the regular channels. The fact that DSPS funding is not useable for tutoring,
and yet this is a vital need, creates a void that equity funding could fill. Without this funding, our
students do not have as good a chance for equitable success.
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?
_X_ Yes
_X_ No
Since we cannot use DSPS funding for this service, it is crucial for DSPS student success that we get the
funding through college equity funding
2) Does your immediate administrator support this project?
__ No _X_ 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?
All of DSPS staff have for many years been trying to determine how we could provide individualized
tutoring for our students because there has always been a need. The restrictions of our funding have
limited us from making it a reality thus far.
PROJECT GOALS, ACTIVITIES, BUDGET, OUTCOMES, AND EVALUATION
GOAL
What does your project hope to achieve overall?
The successful completion of courses, thus limiting the number of repeated courses per student . This
will increase the overall persistence of students with disabilities across semesters. Finally, the end
result will be increased completion of degrees, certificates, and transfers, in a timely manner. Thus,
greater academic and career equity will be achieved.
DOCUMENTING NEED AND SOLUTION
Please provide data to support the need for your project and the solution you propose.
The DSPS counselors spend a good amount of their time advising students struggling in their classes,
many of whom end up dropping the class and/or having to repeat their classes, especially core
classes. Unfortunately, since many DSPS students require individualized tutoring beyond what is
provided on campus, these students often end up failing or dropping out.
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.
1- Provide individualized core-class tutoring for students with disabilities, based on the advisement of
their DSPS counselor.
2- We can begin implementing tutoring as soon as funding is available, as students who would benefit
from this service have already been identified, as well as potential tutors.
3 - DSPS staff
BUDGET
Provide a budget that shows how the funds will be spent to support the activities.
A budget of $33,600 would provide funding for 10 tutors to provide 20 hours or individualized tutoring
each week. This would allow 50 DSPS students to receive 4 hours of individualized tutoring each
week, although the final number might vary depending on whether each student needs more or less
than the projected 4 hours, depending on their classes and their needs. A projected 50 students
represent approximately 5% of the total population of DSPS students.
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?
How will you identify the students who are affected (are they part of a class, a program, or a service, or
will you need to track them individually)?
1 – On the short term, if students pass the class they are being tutored in, we will know the tutoring is
working. Long term effects on degrees, certificates, and transfers cannot be seen for several
semesters.
2 – The outcome we hope to see is 70% of the students receiving tutoring completing their course in
which the tutoring is being received.
3 – Students receiving tutoring will be based upon the recommendation of their counselor.
Appendix F1A: Full-Time Faculty Request(s) [Acct. Category 1000]
Audience: Faculty Prioritization Committee and Administrators
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time faculty
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request,
including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three years, student
success and retention data, and any other pertinent information. Data is available at:
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/programreview/Data2015.asp
Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. You can
find the template for the spreadsheet here:
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/studservicesprogramreview.asp. Add your requests to your
spreadsheet under the 1000a tab and check the box below once they’ve been added.
Total number of positions requested (please fill in number of positions requested):
☒
3
Summary of positions requested completed in Program Review Resource Request
Spreadsheet (please check box to left)
CHABOT COLLEGE
CRITERIA FOR FILLING CURRENT VACANCIES
OR
REQUESTING NEW FACULTY POSITIONS
Discipline _DSPS/Special Programs__
DSPS Learning Skills Classes
Data for request 1 of 3, Learning Disability (LD) Specialist
LD Specialist, Criteria 1.
Percent of full-time faculty in department.
Fall 2012 Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
FTEF
(Contract)
2.25
2.0
1.88
1.88
1.04
FTEF
(Temporary)
.20
.33
.44
.32
1.28
# of Contract
Faculty
2
2
1
1
1
Name of Recently Retired Faculty (in last 3 yrs)
Date Retired
Jerry Egusa
5/15
Monica Munger
5/13
LD Specialist, Criteria 2.
years.
Semester end departmental enrollment pattern for last three
Spring
2013
Fall 2013
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
206/277
188/255
201/269
136/210
171/198
23.71
23.81
21.82
18.36
20.05
Success Rate:
Fall 2012
FTES:
Briefly describe how a new hire will impact your success/retention rates.
As indicated through the data our numbers went down
In the semester after our first retiree. As the result of the retirement of our LD Specialist in
2015it was necessary for a DSPS counselor teach all 6 sections of our ENGL 116. As a result the
counselor had to reduce her critically needed counseling hours.
With 2 full time LD Specialists the program will once again become strong and stable to meet
the individual needs of our students.
2b. Librarian and Counselor faculty ratio. Divide head count by the number of full
time faculty. For example, 8000 students divided by 3 full time faculty, 1:2666
Fall 2012
LD Specialist, Criteria 3.
WSCH
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Meets established class size.
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013 Spring 2014
Fall 2014
711
718
656
552
608
23.81
30.16
21.82
30.06
18.36
30.07
20.05
30.32
FTES:
23.71
WSCH/FTES 29.99
If there are any external factors that limit class sizes, please explain.
DSPS Learning Skills classes are capped at 20, except for ENGL 116 which is at
15. The class size is crucial because the classes are taught to meet the individual
needs of the students.
LD Specialist, Criteria 4. Current instructional gaps and program service needs. List the
courses to fill the gaps, if applicable.
It was necessary for DSPS Learning Skills to cancel several courses: ENGL. 119 in the
evening, and ENGL 120.Also we changed the time offerings of several courses which
conflicted with other DSPS PSCN and CAS courses, which these classes low enrolled.
LD Specialist, Criteria 5. Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline meet
PRBC’s three tier criteria. These include:
 Tier 1: outside mandates (e.g. to ensure the licensure of the program.)
 Tier 2: program health, (e.g. addresses gaps in faculty expertise and creates
pathways, alleviates bottlenecks, helps units where faculty have made large
commitments outside the classroom to develop/implement initiatives that
support the strategic plan goal, and helps move an already successful initiative
forward.
 Tier 3: Student need/equity, (e.g. addresses unmet needs as measured by
unmet/backlogged advising needs, bottlenecks in GE areas and basic skills,
impacted majors in which students cannot begin or continue their pathway.)
Tier 1: An LD Specialist must have Certification from the CC Chancellor’s
Office, or they are unable to assess students for eligibility for LD services.
In DSPS Learning Skill courses students are instructed by this Specialist on
their strengths & weaknesses manifested by their disability and how to use
compensatory strategies to support them with learning. The students are
them better prepared to request their mandated accommodations.
Tier 2: DSPS LD Specialist have the important role of training other
faculty in all disciplines how students with disabilities learn best. Their
expertise is crucial for the college.
Tier 3: Without the expertise of a Learning Disability Specialist we would
not be able to offer the number of essential courses to meet the needs of our
students. The students would be at a great disadvantage; they would not be
successful in their college level courses. The LD Specialist is a direct link
connecting students with learning disabilities to college success. Thus the
students have equal access to an education.
LD Specialist, Criteria 6. Upon justification the college may be granted a faculty position
to start a new program or to enhance an existing one.
Is this a new program or is it designed to enhance an existing program? Please
explain.
The LD Specialist will enhance our existing DSPS Learning Skills program:
This position will insure that DSPS Learning Skills will maintain our course
offerings and be in a better position to enhance our offerings. The enhancement
may include cognitive learning courses to meet the needs of the students with
disabilities.
We would be in a better to examine our evening course offerings to better serve
evening students. Previously we offered ENGL 117 in the evening.
LD Specialist, Criteria 7.
CTE Program Impact.
LD Specialist, Criteria 8. Degree/Transfer Impact (if applicable)
List the Certificates and/or AA degrees that your discipline/program offers.
Provide information about the number of degrees awarded in the last three years.
Degree/Certificate
# Awarded
2012-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
AA requirement
GE transfer requirement
Declared major
LD Specialist, Criteria 9. Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline impact
other disciplines and programs. Be brief and specific. Use your program
review to complete this section.
DSPS Learning Skill courses provide students with disabilities the needed
foundation to be successful in English, Math, and all other disciplines, thus
supporting them in achieving their educational goals of earning AA/AS
degrees, Certificates and transferring to four year colleges.
LD Specialist, Criteria 10. Additional justification e.g. availability of part time faculty
(day/evening)
Please describe any additional criteria you wish to have considered in your
request.
It is extremely difficult to hire a part time LD Specialist with the required
Chancellor’s Certification. Our goal is to be in a better position to offer ENGL.
118A and 118B in the evening in addition to maintaining ENGL. 119. Currently
we are not in a position to consider this, since we are having difficulty
maintaining our day course offerings.
DSPS Data for request 2 of 3, DSPS Counselor
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 1.
Percent of full-time faculty in department.
Fall 2012 Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
FTEF
(Contract)
.54
.21
.21
.21
.21
FTEF
(Temporary)
0
.2
.33
.20
.33
# of Contract
Faculty
0
0
0
0
0
Name of Recently Retired Faculty (in last 3 yrs)
Date Retired
Shari Jacobsen
5/14
Kathleen Allen
5/16
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 2.
three years.
Success Rate:
FTES:
Semester end departmental enrollment pattern for last
Fall 2012
Spring
2013
Fall 2013
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
104/163
73/116
101/162
62/81
80/144
9.08
5.79
8.72
7.68
3.52
Briefly describe how a new hire will impact your success/retention rates.
DSPS currently serves 1000 students, it is required that each student meet with a
DSPS Counselor to receive services. It is necessary for DSPS to schedule 1 hour
counseling appointments in order to fill out all the required forms and determine
the student’s disability. This is where the expertise of a designated DSPS
Counselor is necessary to determine the educational limitation manifested by the
student’s disability and then determine with the student the mandated
accommodations they are eligible for. For many students this is an ongoing
process as the student enrolls in higher level courses. It is evident that this process
must be done by a DSPS Counselor and not a Counselor in General Counseling.
DSPS Counseling supports the student with their successful completion of
courses and earning degrees.
With 3 Full time DSPS Counselors we can better serve students; but each
counselor would have about 330 students to serve.
With an additional DSPS Counselor we can better maintain our PSCN course
offerings as well as augmenting them.
2b. Librarian and Counselor faculty ratio. Divide head count by the number of full
time faculty. For example, 8000 students divided by 3 full time faculty, 1:2666
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 3.
WSCH
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Meets established class size.
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013 Spring 2014
Fall 2014
275
174
265
114
233
5.79
30.05
8.72
30.39
7.68
14.84
3.52
66.19
FTES:
9.08
WSCH/FTES 30.29
If there are any external factors that limit class sizes, please explain.
As shown by the counseling time consuming process for students with
disabilities, PSCN 901-904 are critical courses. It is recommended that these have
a cap at 10. At times the instructor has enrolled 15 students but more is not
advisable.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 4.
Current instructional gaps and program service needs.
List the courses to fill the gaps, if applicable.
With an additional DSPS Counselor we would be in a better position to
offer DSPS students more PSCN courses: PSCN 10, 12, or 15.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 5.
Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline
meet PRBC’s three tier criteria. These include:
 Tier 1: outside mandates (e.g. to ensure the licensure of the program.)
 Tier 2: program health, (e.g. addresses gaps in faculty expertise and creates
pathways, alleviates bottlenecks, helps units where faculty have made large
commitments outside the classroom to develop/implement initiatives that
support the strategic plan goal, and helps move an already successful initiative
forward.
 Tier 3: Student need/equity, (e.g. addresses unmet needs as measured by
unmet/backlogged advising needs, bottlenecks in GE areas and basic skills,
impacted majors in which students cannot begin or continue their pathway.)
Tier 1: Students with disabilities are mandated by Federal Rehabilitation
Act-PL 504/508, ADA) and state laws (Title V) to receive the reasonable
accommodations they are eligible for upon their request. Without this
position the college will not be able to insure that all eligible students will be
seen by a DSPS Counselor, thus not being in a position to request their
mandated accommodations.
Tier 2: All disciplines and administration rely on the expertise of the DSPS
Counselor for disability related advise pertaining to a student’s needs and
understanding of the their disability. As a result with a DSPS Counselor,
the DSRC would be in a better position to address these needs; without this
position we would not be able to provide this critical need.
Tier 3: In order for students with disabilities to be successful in college, it is
crucial that they are provided with the opportunity to meet with a DSPS
Counselor. The Student with a disability will have their needs met by:
receiving their mandated accommodations, writing their SEP (with their
disability being considered), Selecting the appropriate courses (despite their
EPT or MPT scores, depending on their disabilities), registration (selecting
courses that meet their medication time needs), receiving academic,
personal and crisis counseling.
With the expertise of the DSPS Counselor a student with a disability will
have their mandated accommodations, and total academic and personal
counseling to support them with their college success by insuring they have
an equal opportunity to achieve their educational goals.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 6.
Upon justification the college may be granted a faculty
position to start a new program or to enhance an existing one.
Is this a new program or is it designed to enhance an existing program? Please
explain.
The DSPS Counselor position would enhance our existing program:
By increasing the number of DSPS counseling appointments. This would provide
the needed services for students who are unable to get schedule counseling
appointments, thus we will be able to serve more students with disabilities.
By providing more mandated accommodations for students with disabilities who
would have the opportunity to meet with a DSPS Counselor.
By allowing DSPS to enhance our successful Out Reach Program by providing
the opportunity for more counselor involvement; more structured presentations to
the perspective students.
By providing the DSPS Counselors to do more trainings on disability related
subjects. Thus, providing the Counselor/Coordinator or Director time to attend
Academic Services Division Meetings.
By providing the DSPS staff the time needed to have Disability Awareness Day,
“Hands Across Chabot-Dare To Be Aware”. This has been extremely difficult to
put this event on due to the limits to our counseling time available.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 7.
CTE Program Impact.
The DSPS Counselor provides the needed support for students with disabilities
to assist them with achieving their education goals of earning Certificates,
AA/AS degrees and transferring to four year colleges.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 8.
Degree/Transfer Impact (if applicable)
List the Certificates and/or AA degrees that your discipline/program offers.
Provide information about the number of degrees awarded in the last three years.
Degree/Certificate
# Awarded
2012-2012
AA requirement
GE transfer requirement
Declared major
PSCN 20
2012-2013
2013-2014
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 9.
Describe how courses and/or services in this discipline
impact other disciplines and programs. Be brief and specific. Use your
program review to complete this section.
The DSPS Counselor supports students with disability in all discipline areas
by determining the reasonable accommodations they are eligible for and
advising them to the appropriate classes. . As a result the students are more
successful in their classes, thus increasing the success rates of the divisions.
DSPS Counselor, Criteria 10.
Additional justification e.g. availability of part time
faculty (day/evening)
Please describe any additional criteria you wish to have considered in your
request.
Students with disabilities are better served by permanent full time DSPS
Counselors who are more available in the DSRC. In this way when the student
has a disability related issue in a class, it can be resolved with their counselor.
Since part time DSPS Counselors are only available on certain days or evenings
the student may have to wait until their counselor is available or meet with
another DSPS Counselor that they are not familiar with. A Full time DSPS
Counselor insures stability for the students. At times we have had to advise a
student having difficulties with their accommodations to see a full time DSPS
Counselor to insure their mandated needs are met.
The DSPS Counselor position is necessary since a DSPS Counselor will be
retiring after the Spring 2016 semester.
DSPS Data for request 3 of 3, Assistive Technology (AT) Instructor
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 1.
department.
Percent of full-time faculty in
Fall 2012 Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
FTEF
(Contract)
.6
.6
.6
.6
.6
FTEF
(Temporary)
.56
.56
.56
.56
.56
# of Contract
Faculty
0
0
0
0
0
Name of Recently Retired Faculty (in last 3 yrs)
Date Retired
** Jane Berg
12/09
Kathleen R. Allen
5/16
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 2.
pattern for last three years.
Semester end departmental enrollment
Fall 2012
Spring
2013
Fall 2013
Spring
2014
Fall 2014
Success Rate:
95/130
74/106
82/123
63/96
65/105
FTES:
20.78
17.61
18.29
14.39
9.1
Briefly describe how a new hire will impact your success/retention rates.
DSPS CAS course offerings have been taught by a part time instructor and the
full time Counselor/Coordinator/Instructor; these courses greatly need a full time
Assistive Technology Instructor to teach all of the courses.
DSPS has not had this position since December, 2009. There are so many innovations and
equipment to assist students with disabilities, for example there are one handed keyboards, head
mice, etc. Without a full time instructor there is little time to attend conferences, trainings and
doing research. A full time DSPS Assistive Technology Instructor would be in a position to
provide consistent instruction for DSPS students by teaching them in all courses. Students with
disabilities will be better served with the expertise of a full time Assistive Technology Instructor,
thus being more successful in their CAS courses. Since many students need more individual
instruction.
2b. Librarian and Counselor faculty ratio. Divide head count by the number of full
time faculty. For example, 8000 students divided by 3 full time faculty, 1:2666
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 3.
WSCH
Spring 2014
Fall 2014
Meets established class size.
Fall 2012
Spring 2013
Fall 2013 Spring 2014
Fall 2014
623
529
549
442
436
17.61
30.04
18.29
30.02
14.39
30.72
9.1
47.91
FTES:
20.78
WSCH/FTES 29.98
If there are any external factor that limit class sizes, please explain.
CAS 100, 101, & 103 are capped at 24 students. CAS 102 is capped at 30
students. With the expertise of a full time Assistive Technology Instructor, DSPS
will be able to determine the appropriate class capacity for each course.
In Fall, 2015 we are experiencing low enrollment in these courses due to the
change in the time offerings of DSPS Learning Skills courses; causing conflicts
and over laps.
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 4.
Current instructional gaps and program
service needs. List the courses to fill the gaps, if applicable.
The DSPS Counselor/Coordinator began teaching CAS 102 and 103 so
DSPS would not loose these courses, since an Assistive Technology
Instructor could not be found to teach the courses and the Coordinator
had the expertise. We have been desperately trying to maintain these
courses.
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 5.
Describe how courses and/or services in
this discipline meet PRBC’s three tier criteria. These include:
 Tier 1: outside mandates (e.g. to ensure the licensure of the program.)


Tier 2: program health, (e.g. addresses gaps in faculty expertise and creates
pathways, alleviates bottlenecks, helps units where faculty have made large
commitments outside the classroom to develop/implement initiatives that
support the strategic plan goal, and helps move an already successful initiative
forward.
Tier 3: Student need/equity, (e.g. addresses unmet needs as measured by
unmet/backlogged advising needs, bottlenecks in GE areas and basic skills,
impacted majors in which students cannot begin or continue their pathway.)
Tier 1: The college is mandated to purchase expensive assistive technology
and equipment by State and Federal law. Unfortunately students with
disabilities do not have the knowledge of all the applications of the software
and hardware. Thus, it is essential that DSPS continues to offer these CAS
courses on a regular basis by hiring a Full time Assistive Technology
Instructor. In this way DSPS students will have the knowledge of the
assistive technology to assist them in successful completion of their courses.
Tier 2: The DSPS CAS courses were advocated for by the then CIS faculty
who expressed their limited expertise when instructing students with
physical and learning disabilities. Their concern also dealt with the
necessity for students with disabilities requiring more individualized
instruction at a slower pace. As a result of this need we developed the DSPS
CAS courses. It is essential to continue to offer DSPS CAS courses due to
the increasing number of “Wounded Warriors” entering college with the
loss of the use of their arms, and having traumatic brain injuries.
Tier 3: With the hiring of a full time Assistive Technology Instructor
students with a disability will have equal opportunities to achieve their
educational goals through the appropriate use of all the assistive technology
applications. Without this knowledge Students with disabilities will be at a
disadvantage.
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 6.
Upon justification the college may be
granted a faculty position to start a new program or to enhance an existing
one.
Is this a new program or is it designed to enhance an existing program? Please
explain.
With the hiring of an Assistive Technology Instructor our existing CAS program
will be greatly enhanced:
DSPS students will be taught by an instructor that has the expertise of the best
teaching techniques to support students with severe upper body limitations.
This Instructor will have the time to do research on the latest assistive technology
and equipment available to students with disabilities.
This Instructor will be provided the time to attend the conferences pertaining
specifically to technology for students with disabilities.
This Instructor will provide advice to other faculty and staff on campus when
questions or concerns arise.
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 7.
CTE Program Impact.
AT Instructor Criteria 8. Degree/Transfer Impact (if applicable)
List the Certificates and/or AA degrees that your discipline/program offers.
Provide information about the number of degrees awarded in the last three years.
Degree/Certificate
# Awarded
2012-2012
AA requirement
GE transfer requirement
Declared major
2012-2013
2013-2014
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 9.
Describe how courses and/or services in
this discipline impact other disciplines and programs. Be brief and specific.
Use your program review to complete this section.
As mentioned the DSPS CAS program was developed at the recommendation
of other college technology instructors who were having difficultly teaching
students with physical and learning disabilities because they did not have the
expertise. As a result, with the strong foundation of DSPS CAS courses,
Students have gone on to earn AA/AS degrees and Certificates in Computer
Application Systems.
Some of DSPS students have difficulty with online presentation of computer
courses; they have been provided with course substitutions for CAS 72A, B, &
C with CAS 100, “Adapted Keyboarding” or CAS 88A with CAS 101,
“Adapted Word”.
After taking the DSPS courses students have the technical knowledge required
to be successful in college level courses when doing papers and research.
Assistive Technology Instructor Criteria 10.
Additional justification e.g. availability of
part time faculty (day/evening)
Please describe any additional criteria you wish to have considered in your
request.
A full time Assistive Technology Instructor would provide stability to the
DSPS CAS program. There is always a concern when a program is
consistently taught by part time instructors that courses may be cancelled.
Many of our DSPS students entering Chabot College have little or no
computer skills. The majority of previous IEP students have no knowledge of
the assistive technology available to them and how it will benefit them in
college. This is very surprising since technology has become a way of life
today. We feel this is due in part to the economic standing of our students,
where the technology is too expensive. Also, their parents may use
technology. For these reasons, the continuation of these courses is
imperative, thus the hiring of a full time Assistive Technology Instructor will
continuity to the DSPS CAS program area.
This semester )Fall, 2015) some of DSPS CAS courses are low enrolled due to
the need to change the DSPS Learning Skills course times, which has caused
conflicts and over laps with CAS and PSCN courses. In the future ever effort
must be made to keep this at a minimum.
Appendix F1B: Reassign Time Request(s) [Acct. Category 1000]
Audience: Administrators
Purpose: Provide explanation and justification for work to be completed. (Note: positions require job
responsibility descriptions that are approved by the appropriate administrator(s).)
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request,
including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three years, student
success and retention data, and any other pertinent information. Data is available at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/programreview/Data2015.asp
Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. Add your
requests to your spreadsheet under the 1000b tab and check the box below once they’ve been added.
Total number of hours requested and the type of contact hour:
☐
none
Summary of hours requested completed in Program Review Resource Request Spreadsheet
(please check box to left)
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 parttime 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.
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/SPR/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):
2
☒
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)
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.
Rationale for proposed student assistant positions:
Categorical funded
But may need to be funded in part by College Effort.
The volume of students with disabilities served through the DSRC necessitates the use
of student assistants to help facilitate timely service and fulfillment of necessary
accommodations. Without said students, the DSRC would not be able to function.
(Classroom) Student Assistants are needed to assist DSPS faculty in their classes. Since the
curriculum is very individualized it is essential that student assistants are there to help maintain
this teaching approach.
(Hi-Tech) Student Assistants are scheduled to work each hour the Hi-tech Center is open to
assist students with disabilities with technical support while they are working on assignments,
accessing Blackboard, etc.
Student Assistants (Office) To ease the hectic atmosphere in the DSRC front area, it is
necessary that the DSRC hire students to work at the front desk. Many students come to the
front desk asking questions, seeking immediate assistance, needing to make appointments,
leaving messages, etc. The Office Student Assistants will have the opportunity to learn
appropriate front desk and phone etiquette with the DSRC Counselor Assistant I.
Student Assistants (Accommodations) Student Assistants work as scribes, readers, shared
note takers, support with speech interpretation, test proctors, etc.
Student Assistants are the back bone of our operations. We have constantly utilized Chabot
College students to assist with providing accommodations to students with disabilities.
*Student Assistants cannot be prioritized—they are a must.
Student Assistants: To rehire student assistants as receptionists, high-tech lab assistants, and
support service assistants is crucial to DSPS. It has been our philosophy to hire students with
disabilities in the DSPS program areas in order to fulfill needed work experience while
providing the required accommodations to students with disabilities. These students become
role models for our new incoming students.
How do the assessments that you performed to measure student learning outcomes (SLO’s) or service
area outcomes (SAO’s) support this request?
The DSPS Students Assistants directly help to meet the program’s SAOs by providing accommodations
to students which turn into contacts. During EPT and MPT exams students that require readers or
scribes, thus helping the program meet the assessment component of SSSP.
Office Students Assistants input the mobility service contacts.
DSPS Student Assistants work during the DSPS Orientation and the Hi-Tech Lab Student Assistants help
students with locating the college Online Orientation.
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):
TBD as needed to meet students requests for accommodations.
☒
Undetermined,
as needed
Summary of positions requested completed in Resource Request Spreadsheet ( please check
box to left)
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Learning Connection
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement student assistants (tutors, learning
assistants, lab assistants, supplemental instruction, etc.).
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student learning and
contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Please cite any evidence or data to support your request. If this position
is categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of new categorically-funded position where
continuation is contingent upon available funding.
Rationale for your proposal based on your program review conclusions. Include anticipated impact on student
learning outcomes and alignment with the strategic plan goal. Indicate if this request is for the same, more, or
fewer academic learning support positions.
How do the assessments that you preformed to measure student learning outcomes (SLO’s) or service area
outcomes (SAO’s) support this request?
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):
☐
Summary of positions requested completed in Program Review Resource Request
Spreadsheet (please check box to left)
93
none
Appendix F5: Supplies Requests [Acct. Category 4000]
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 additional/augmented funding requests for categories 4000. Do NOT
include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix F6. Justify your request and explain in detail
the need for any requested funds beyond those you received this year.
Request and Rationale:
1. 26 chairs: to replace aged and unsafe existing chairs
2. Mouse pads for better use of mice, as well as to serve as reminders for important dates
(these will be customizable mouse pads with interchangeable inserts)
3. Digital message board: A digital message board like those installed in several other
locations on campus is requested for the DSRC
How do the assessments that you performed to measure student learning outcomes (SLO’s) or service area
outcomes (SAO’s) support this request?
The DSRC is in need of 26 guest chairs for the entry area and in the general study area combined.
The current chairs are so rickety that they have fallen apart when a student goes to sit in them.
Also many of the current chairs have arms and many students are not able to sit in them. The
chairs are very stained from many years of use, as well as students occasionally becoming ill
around them, and as they are covered in cloth, they are unable to be fully cleaned.
If the current chairs were replaced, the staff would not worry when students sit in them. Also
students are reluctant to utilize the study area due to not being able to sit in them or are
concerned they will fall apart.
With new chairs, we will make certain that they are easily cleaned, sturdy, and of a larger size so
that students can use the general study area without fear.
Having a good place to study has a very positive correlation with academic success.
The mouse pads will assist students in using the computers as a specialized surface greatly
increases the usability of a mouse, thus helping them do their study, homework, and papers.
Frustration with non-effective mousing can cause great frustration for anyone, but especially for
students with disabilities.
A digital message board, like those installed in other locations on campus, will greatly assist the
DSRC students in getting information about what is going on around campus, thus giving them
greater access and participation in campus life, as well as quick access to any emergency
notifications that might be sent out via the message boards.
Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. Add your
requests to your spreadsheet under the 4000 tab and check the box below once they’ve been added.
94
☒
SUPPLIES tab (4000) completed in Program Review Resource Request Spreadsheet (please
check box to left)
95
Appendix F6: Contracts & Services, Conference & Travel Requests [Acct. Category
5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for contracts & services and conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and
Staff Development Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions: Please list contracts and services. For conferences/training programs, including specific
information on the name of the conference and location. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals
and/or connection to the Strategic Plan goal.
Rationale for Contracts and Services:
DSPS is mandated to provide reasonable academic accommodations for students that are Deaf/Hard of
Hearing.
As a result DSPS utilizes Independent Contractors to meet the need. The
contractors provide Sign Language Interpreters, Tactile Interpreters, Real Time
Captioners and Remote Captioners.
It is very difficult to determine the funding required since it is based upon students
requests, the number of classes the students are enrolled in and the type of
classes they are enrolled in.
As part of the DSPS allocation we are given DHH Funding; the college is required to
fund ¼% of the amount given and this funding is used to pay over the money
funded by the state. DSPS does not know how much funding they will receive each
year.
Rationale for Conferences and Travel:
California Association Of Post-Secondary Education and the Disabled, (CAPED)
Conference- This conference will be held in Monterey. Since the conference is
relatively close, the travel costs will be at a minimum. This conference provides
needed information pertaining on the State regulations and program
requirements which will be changing and put in effect in the Fall, 2016.
Cost: $12,000.00
New Directors Training for DSPS –Since the DSPS Counselor/Coordinator will be
retiring at the end of the Spring, 2016 semester, it is critical that the new Director
or Counselor/Coordinator attend. This training is usually held in Sacramento.
96
How do the assessments that you performed to measure student learning outcomes (SLO’s) or service area
outcomes (SAO’s) support these requests?
The CAPED Conference and The New Directors Training will explain how students with a disability fit in
the SSSP component areas. Also new regulations in relation to the number of contacts required to count
this student in the DSPS unduplicated DSPS Funding List.
The conference provides the requirements for assessing for eligibility of LD Services for LD Specialists,
provides tips on maintaining DSPS students’ retention and success rates in their classes, as well as
innovations in assistive technology.
Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. Add your
requests to your spreadsheet under the 5000 tab and check the box below once they’ve been added.
☒
TRAVEL/SERVICES tab (5000) completed in Program Review Resource Request Spreadsheet
(please check box to left)
97
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 follow the link here to make your request and summarize below
http://intranet.clpccd.cc.ca.us/technologyrequest/default.htm
Summary of request and rationale:
1. 10 new computer stations: With the renovation to the DSRC, for a larger, safer, ADAcompliant, non-distraction testing area the DSRC requires 10 computer stations (dependent
on DSRC remodel/relocation)
2. 5 Dual monitor stands and 10 22” computer monitors: For increased efficiency and
effectiveness in serving students, the staff and counselors request dual monitors for their
work stations. DSPS funding cannot be used for staff equipment.
3. One 24” monitor for Alternate Media Production work center: Work station currently has
one 24” monitor and one smaller monitor, which is not efficient or effective.
4. 10 ergonomic mice with forward/back buttons: For increased efficiency and effectiveness
in serving students, the staff and counselors request more efficient mice.
5. One 3D printer and related production plastic spools: To assist blind and low vision students
in classes with very visual elements of learning, a 3D printer is requested to be able to
create 3-dimensional models of cellular structures and related teaching examples that are
difficult to represent with two-dimensional Braille images.
Spreadsheet: To be considered, requests must be added to the Resource Request Spreadsheet. Add your
requests to your spreadsheet under the 6000 tab and check the box below once they’ve been added.
☒
EQUIPMENT tab (6000) completed in Program Review Resource Request Spreadsheet (please
check box to left)
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.
98
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Although some of the college's greatest needs involving new facilities cannot be met with the
limited amount of funding left from Measure B, smaller pressing needs can be addressed. Projects that can be
legally funded with bond dollars include the "repairing, constructing, acquiring, and equipping of classrooms,
labs, sites and facilities." In addition to approving the funding of projects, the FC participates in addressing
space needs on campus, catalogs repair concerns, and documents larger facilities needs that might be included
in future bond measures. 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): Renovation of the DSRC for an enlarged testing area or relocation of the
DSRC.
Building/Location: 2400
Type of Request
___ Space Need
_X_ Building Concern
___ Small Repair
_X_ Larger Facility Need
_X_ Large Repair
___ Other (grounds, signage…)
Description of the facility or grounds project. Please be as specific as possible.
(Project 1) In order to serve our students with their increasing requests for use of Kurzweil 3000,
1000, Dragon Premium and JAWS during their tests, more testing space and more computer stations
are imperative. We have long out grown our Testing Lab with room for 8 students which includes 3
computer stations. Due to the limited testing space with assistive technology, it is necessary for
students to be tested in our small High Tech Center and in the DSRC general area. Both of these
areas are not Title V, PL 504 and ADA compliant because they are not distraction free environments
since classes are in session at the same time. As mentioned previously our Testing Lab is not safe for
students with physical disabilities in case of an emergency evacuation would be extremely difficult.
Also, in case of a student having a seizure or falling they could be injured or injure other students due
to the small area. Therefore, the DSRC must be renovated or the entire DSRC be moved.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this request support and with whom are you
collaborating?
This project supports all disciplines and program areas across the college campus.
DSPS provides academic accommodations to students with disabilities enrolled in classes in all
divisions and programs across the campus. If the DSRC is unable to appropriately support students
with disabilities, the responsibility would fall to faculty, staff, and administrators throughout the
campus to provide the accommodations.
99
This pro
Briefly describe how your request supports the Strategic Plan Goal?
With an increased Testing Lab, more students will be provided with appropriate mandated alternative
testing accommodations in a distraction free environment. Thus students with disabilities will
become more successful in their classes and achieve their educational goals of earning Certificates,
AA/AS degrees and transferring to four-year colleges.
100