Chabot College Program Review Report 2015 ‐2016 Year One of Program Review Cycle ESYS Submitted on October 24, 2014 Contact: Wayne Phillips 1 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 50 Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 3 Number of sections assessed 3 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will describe and analyze the operation of basic electronic circuits using appropriate electronic terminology, theory, and mathematical relationships. (CLO) 2: The student will use test and measurement equipment to perform basic voltage, current, resistance, and timing measurements on electronic circuits. Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 35% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 31% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? 2 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS A. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much lower than the target, and much lower than past years. 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? Course content and faculty teaching the sections have not changed from past years. The sharp decline in student achievement may be due to a change in student demographics. As the economy has improved, the potential students with employable skills are at work instead of in class. B. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 1. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much lower than the target, and much lower than past years. 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? Course content and faculty teaching the sections have not changed from past years. The sharp decline in student achievement may be due to a change in student demographics. As the economy has improved, the potential students with employable skills are at work instead of in class. 3 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? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? Students will be more closely monitored for adequate progress during the course, and provided with opportunity for remedial work. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 4 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 51 Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 81% (CLO) 1: The student will use standard software applications to completing course (not document the construction and assembly of an
electronic system. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 2: completing The student will use standard tools to perform
course (not soldering, assembly, and fabrication tasks on
electronic assemblies and systems. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 5 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? Scores for the 13‐14 year on 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? This course focuses on hands‐on assembly skills, which easily engages even students that are not inclined to study outside the classroom. D. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 3. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much higher than the 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? This course focuses on hands‐on assembly skills, which easily engages even students that are not inclined to study outside the classroom. 6 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? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? When students are directly engaged with tasks that produce tangible results, interest, and as a result, learning outcomes improve. To the extent possible, content in other courses should link to tangible and relevant outcomes for the student. 6. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:_________________________________________________________________ 7 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 52 Semester assessment data gathered Spring ’14, Summer 14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 100% (CLO) 1: The student will connect and configure a mixed-signal completing course (not oscilloscope to measure complex analog and digital
signals. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 71% (CLO) 2: completing The student will identify and/or describe circuit and
course (not equipment elements and specifications that are
relevant to performing accurate measurements. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 8 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS E. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much higher than the target. 6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? Students in ESYS 52 have passed ESYS 50, and are motivated and capable of demonstrating hands‐on skills. F. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 5. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 6. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This again demonstrates the difference in engagement level between hands‐on skills training and study of required knowledge areas. 9 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 7. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 8. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? Students will be more closely monitored for adequate progress during the course, and provided with opportunity for remedial work. 9. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:_________________________________________________________________ 10 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 54 Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will identify op-amp circuit configurations
and calculate gain and impedances for the circuit. (CLO) 2: The student will identify the terminals and basic
internal construction of MOSFET transistors, and
describe the operation of MOSFET switching and
amplifier circuits. Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 40% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? 11 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS G. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much lower than the target, and much lower than past years. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. H. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 7. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were much higher than the target. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. 12 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 10. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 11. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? ESYS 54 scheduling will be reduced to being offered only once a year, with the goal of increasing class size to a meaningful cohort. 12. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:___Scheduling_________________________________________________ 13 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 55A Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will interpret manufacturers'' data sheets
and reference documentation and apply principles of
digital and microcontroller systems to describe the
operation of a given microcontroller system.
(CLO) 2: The student will use standard test equipment, system
documentation, and software program listings to
measure and verify timing, inputs, and outputs of a
given basic microcontroller system. Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 93% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 93% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? 14 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS I. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The curriculum focuses on a “learn while doing” approach, which engages students. J. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 9. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 10. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The curriculum focuses on a “learn while doing” approach, which engages students. 15 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 13. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? Continue to focus on a hands‐on, learn‐while‐doing approach. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 16 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 55B Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will identify basic digital logic elements
and analyze the operation of digital logic circuits in
simulations and FPGA implementations (CLO) 2: The student will use standard test equipment, system
documentation, logic diagrams, and VHDL listings to
measure and verify timing, inputs, and outputs of a
given basic logic circuit implemented in an FPGA. Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 90% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? 17 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS K. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The curriculum focuses on a “learn while doing” approach, which engages students. L. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 11. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were far above target. 12. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The curriculum focuses on a “learn while doing” approach, which engages students. 18 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 16. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 17. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? Continue to focus on a hands‐on, learn‐while‐doing approach. 18. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:_________________________________________________________________ 19 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 56A Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 67% (CLO) 1: completing The student will describe the major components,
course (not operating parameters, benefits, and challenges of
alternative energy systems. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 2: completing The student will measure and calculate output power
course (not and efficiency of a power supply system. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 20 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS M. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. N. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 13. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. 21 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 19. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 20. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? ESYS 56A scheduling will be reduced to being offered only once a year, with the goal of increasing class size to a meaningful cohort. 21. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:___Scheduling__________________________________________________ 22 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 56B Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13 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 ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 71% (CLO) 1: completing The student will identify, compare, and contrast the
configuration and operation of buck, boost, and buck- course (not boost switch-mode power supplies scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 83% (CLO) 2: completing The student will measure, identify characteristic
course (not waveforms, and troubleshoot a switch-mode power
supply. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 23 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS O. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. P. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 15. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 16. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. 24 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 22. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 23. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? By only offering the prerequisite course, ESYS 56A, once a year, we hope to increase class size and create a more supportive cohort. 24. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:___ Scheduling __________________________________________________ 25 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 57A Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13 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 ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 100% (CLO) 1: The student will describe the functions and operations completing course (not of a process control system at the block level. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 2: completing The student will implement and troubleshoot a basic
course (not functional control system using ladder-logic
programming. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 26 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS Q. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. Most students in the cohort are working in the industry and are highly motivated to learn the course skills. R. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 17. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. Most students in the cohort are working in the industry and are highly motivated to learn the course skills. 27 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 25. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 26. Based on the current assessment and reflections, what course‐level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 27. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:_________________________________________________________________ 28 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 57B Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13 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 ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 100% (CLO) 1: completing The student will measure inputs and outputs, identify
logic states during operation, and troubleshoot a PLC- course (not controlled system. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 2: completing The student will measure, evaluate, and optimize the
course (not open- and closed-loop response of a PID control
system scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 29 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS S. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. Most students in the cohort are working in the industry and are highly motivated to learn the course skills. T. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 19. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 20. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. Most students in the cohort are working in the industry and are highly motivated to learn the course skills. 30 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? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 30. What is the nature of the planned actions (please check all that apply)?  Curricular  Pedagogical  Resource based  Change to CLO or rubric  Change to assessment methods  Other:_________________________________________________________________ 31 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 58 Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ’14, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 3 Number of sections assessed 3 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 63% (CLO) 1: completing Describe modulation techniques used in electronic
course (not communication. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 81% (CLO) 2: completing Use standard test equipment to troubleshoot and
course (not apply software tools in the analysis and design of
communication circuits. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 32 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS U. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. V. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 21. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? The sections had low enrollment, so the sample size is insufficient to provide the basis for reflection. Also, the low enrollment makes it more difficult for students to relate with their cohort, which can cause the student to lose interest in the course. 33 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 31. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 32. 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? ESYS 58 scheduling will be reduced to being offered only once a year, with the goal of increasing class size to a meaningful cohort. 33. 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:__ Scheduling ____________________________________________________ 34 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 60 Semester assessment data gathered Spring ’14, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students No data (CLO) 1: completing The student will analyze MOSFET and BJT class-A
course (not amplifier circuits to determine DC biasing, AC
voltages, and amplifier gain. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students No data (CLO) 2: completing The student will analyze RC, RL and RCL circuits to
course (not determine impedances, voltages, currents, and
frequency response. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 35 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS W. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Sample sizes were small, and students did not complete the online assessment for this SLO. 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? The low enrollment is due to the math prerequisite for this course. This course is required for the AS degree, but not the Certificates of Achievement. X. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 23. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Sample sizes were small, and students did not complete the online assessment for this SLO. 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? The low enrollment is due to the math prerequisite for this course. This course is required for the AS degree, but not the Certificates of Achievement. 36 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 34. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 35. 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? As we anticipate that this course will continue to be low enrollment, we will offer the course only once a year, and we will put greater attention on ensuring that the online activities and assessments are completed. 36. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 37 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 61 Semester assessment data gathered Spring ‘14 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 ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 100% (CLO) 1: completing The student will appreciate the effectiveness of
course (not working in a team. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 2: completing The student will plan, construct, document, track, and
course (not report a prototype electronics project in a team
environment. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 38 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS Y. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This is a capstone course, and students are highly motivated to complete the course to finish work on their degree. Z. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 25. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This is a capstone course, and students are highly motivated to complete the course to finish work on their degree. 39 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 37. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 38. 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? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 39. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 40 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 62 Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 91% (CLO) 1: completing The student will install, configure, troubleshoot, and
course (not operate a home theatre system and a home security
and surveillance system. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 85% (CLO) 2: completing The student will produce a configuration and
course (not operation manual for a home theater system and a
home security and surveillance system. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 41 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS AA.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 27. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 28. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. BB.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 27. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 28. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. 42 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 40. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 41. 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? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 42. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 43 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 63A / CNT 83A (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will identify the fundamental principles,
components, and procedures for servicing and
maintaining Personal Computer Systems, as identified
by the Comp-TIA A+ certification competencies (CLO) 2: The student will install, perform fundamental
configuration tasks, and demonstrate basic
troubleshooting on the hardware and software of a
Personal Computer System Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 94% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 94% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? 44 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS CC.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. DD.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 29. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. 45 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? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 45. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 46 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 63B / CNT 83B (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 2 Number of sections assessed 2 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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: The student will identify the advanced principles,
components, and procedures for servicing and
maintaining Personal Computer Systems, as identified
by the Comp-TIA A+ certification competencies (CLO) 2: The student will update, perform advanced
configuration tasks, and demonstrate advanced
troubleshooting on the hardware and software of a
Personal Computer System Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 100% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% completing course (not scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4  If more CLOs are listed for the course, add another row to the table. * Defined Target Scores:What scores in eLumen from your students would indicate success for this CLO? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4) **Actual scores: What is the actual percent of students that meet defined target based on the eLumen data collected in this assessment cycle? 47 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS EE. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. FF. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 31. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This is a course heavily weighted with hands‐on content, which boosts student engagement. 48 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 46. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 47. 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? No changes planned, as efforts can be better applied to other courses. 48. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 49 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 72A / CNT82A (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 4 Number of sections assessed 4 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 79% (CLO) 1: The student shall configure, test, and troubleshoot a small completing course (not business network. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 67% (CLO) 2: completing The student shall solve basic networking problems related course (not to home and small business. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 92% (CLO) 3: completing The student will report on the weekly lab activities and the course (not related challenges and/or discoveries. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 50 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS GG.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 33. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. HH.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 33. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. The assessment for this CLO is provided by Cisco, and is intended to be a rigorous evaluation of the student’s knowledge, in preparation for the CCNA certification exam. 51 II. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3: 35. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 36. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 52 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 49. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 50. 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 has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 51. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 53 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 72B / CNT82B (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ’14, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 5 Number of sections assessed 5 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 81% (CLO) 1: completing The student shall configure, test, and troubleshoot a course (not business network with Cisco hardware and IOS. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 63% (CLO) 2: completing The student shall solve networking problems involving course (not basic routing and switching. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 93% (CLO) 3: completing The student will report on the weekly lab activities and the course (not related challenges and/or discoveries. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 54 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS JJ. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 35. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 36. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. KK.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 37. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. The assessment for this CLO is provided by Cisco, and is intended to be a rigorous evaluation of the student’s knowledge, in preparation for the CCNA certification exam. 55 LL. COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3: 39. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 56 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 52. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 53. 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 has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 54. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 57 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 72C / CNT82C (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ’14, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 5 Number of sections assessed 5 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 78% (CLO) 1: completing The student shall configure, test, and troubleshoot a course (not network with advanced routing and switching. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 67% (CLO) 2: completing The student shall solve basic networking problems related course (not to advanced routing and switching. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 3: completing The student will report on the weekly lab activities and the course (not related challenges and/or discoveries. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 58 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS MM.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 37. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. NN.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 41. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. The assessment for this CLO is provided by Cisco, and is intended to be a rigorous evaluation of the student’s knowledge, in preparation for the CCNA certification exam. 59 OO.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 3: 43. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 44. Reflection: Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 60 PART III: COURSE REFLECTIONS AND FUTURE PLANS 55. What changes were made to your course based on the previous assessment cycle, the prior Closing the Loop reflections and other faculty discussions? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 56. 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 has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 57. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 61 Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Course‐Level Assessment Reflections. Course ESYS 72D / CNT82D (cross‐list) Semester assessment data gathered Fall ’13, Spring ’14, Summer ‘14 Number of sections offered in the semester 5 Number of sections assessed 5 Percentage of sections assessed 100% Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion Fall ‘14 Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion W. Phillips, D. Casini 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 Actual Scores** Defined Target (eLumen data) Scores* (CLO Goal) 80% of students 85% (CLO) 1: completing The student shall configure, test, and troubleshoot a course (not network with WAN and LAN segments. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 69% (CLO) 2: completing The student shall solve advanced networking problems course (not related to LAN and WAN design and configuration. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 4 80% of students 100% (CLO) 3: completing The student will report on the weekly lab activities and the course (not related challenges and/or discoveries. scoring NS or 0) at level 3 or 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? CONSIDER THE COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOMES INDIVIDUALLY (THE NUMBER OF CLOS WILL DIFFER BY COURSE) 62 PART II: COURSE‐ LEVEL OUTCOME REFLECTIONS PP.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 1: 39. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were on target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. QQ.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 45. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were below target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. The assessment for this CLO is provided by Cisco, and is intended to be a rigorous evaluation of the student’s knowledge, in preparation for the CCNA certification exam. 63 RR.
COURSE‐LEVEL OUTCOME (CLO) 2: 47. How do your current scores match with your above target for student success in this course level outcome? Scores for the 13‐14 year were above target. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. 64 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? No significant changes were made based on previous assessment cycle, since results were in line with the targets. 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? This course curriculum has been discontinued by Cisco, and we will be evaluating the new curriculum in CNT 62AB, starting Fall ’14. The assessment for this CLO is provided by Cisco, and is intended to be a rigorous evaluation of the student’s knowledge, in preparation for the CCNA certification exam. 60. 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:_________________________________________________________________ 65 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: Electronic Systems Technology / AS Degree  PLO #1: The program graduate will be able to specify, install, program, operate, troubleshoot, and modify electronics systems.

PLO #2: The program graduate will have effective oral and written communication skills.
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions? How do we motivate our students to address the communication and basic math skills with the same vigor that they have for the hands‐on electronic skills? What program‐level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? ESYS students excel at learning hands‐on skills required in the electronics industry. What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of students completing your program? Incorporate more contextualized math and communication skills in the introductory courses. Program: Electronic Systems Technology / Certificate of Achievement in Consumer Electronics Technology  PLO #1: The program graduate will be able to specify, install, program, operate, troubleshoot, and modify consumer electronics systems.

PLO #2: The program graduate will have effective oral and written communication skills.
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions? How do we motivate our students to address the communication and basic math skills with the same vigor that they have for the hands‐on electronic skills? 66 What program‐level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? ESYS students excel at learning hands‐on skills required in the electronics industry. What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of students completing your program? Incorporate more contextualized math and communication skills in the introductory courses. Program: Electronic Systems Technology / Certificate of Achievement in Consumer Electronics Technology  PLO #1: The program graduate will be able to specify, install, program, operate, troubleshoot, and modify electronics systems.

PLO #2: The program graduate will have effective oral and written communication skills.
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions? How do we motivate our students to address the communication and basic math skills with the same vigor that they have for the hands‐on electronic skills? What program‐level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed? ESYS students excel at learning hands‐on skills required in the electronics industry. What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of students completing your program? Incorporate more contextualized math and communication skills in the introductory courses. 67