REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)
Monday, February 29, 2012
NOTES
PRESENT
Rachel Anderson, Jeff Cummings, Anna Duffy, Kathy Goodlive, Sheila Hall,
Angelina Hill (phone), Allen Keppner, Pam Kessler, Mark Renner (phone), Dave
Gonsalves (phone), Anita Janis (phone) Keith Snow-Flamer, Bruce Wagner,
ALSO PRESENT
Jennifer Bailey, Melissa Ruiz (phone), Carol Mathews (phone)
ACTION
TLU ALLOCATION
CONCEPTUAL
FRAMEWORK
The revised TLU allocation conceptual framework was discussed at great length. It
was reiterated that the purpose of the framework was to enhance student progression
through our curriculum and reduce curricular bottlenecks and not to provide allocate
TLUs based on historical faculty staffing levels.
The framework includes recommended TLU allocations by site and calls for:
Establishing a sustainable level of course offerings that best meet student needs
based on the guidelines;
Implementing a one year moratorium on approval of additional GE and elective
courses; and
Developing a clear link between the TLU allocation model and curriculum
development.
After some discussion, the EMC agreed to move the framework forward for
implementation with the following understanding:
The model must be assessed annually;
The recommended course prioritizations by level reflect GE courses only.
Pam asked that the EMC discuss the TLUs allocated toward basic skills and all CTE
courses.
Dave noted that the number of TLU's allocated in the EMC model for next year (525
TLU's, based on the 9.4% worst case reduction) for Mendocino is not workable as it
does not allow for Mendocino to offer even a "bare bones" schedule. He further noted
that CRMC was cut to the lowest number of TLU's ever (559) and it is apparent (in
Dave’s perspective) that CRMC has "dipped below" what is necessary to create a
schedule that allows students to complete and transfer in a timely manner. Dave
proposed that the absolute minimum number of TLU's needed to keep CRMC a
"functioning campus" is 580. This does not include summer classes; inclusion of
summer offerings would require an additional 9-15 units.
1
EMC SELF
ASSESSMENT AND
PLANNING PROCESS
EVALUATION
The committee was asked to engage in a committee self assessment and participate in
the overall planning process evaluation. The IR office has created a self assessment
survey based on the Enrollment Management Committee’s evaluation rubric approved
last fall. This self assessment survey is open and members should respond prior to
March 9th http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/DHZW9J5.
The IEC is administering this survey relating to the Integrated Planning Model and
the standing committees that drive the planning process. The IEC administered this
survey last year to evaluate the effectiveness of the college's planning model and
processes. The survey is being administered through SurveyMonkey and will be open
from March 7, 2012 to March 21, 2012. Results will be analyzed in the aggregate and
responses will not be associated with any individual
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/planningcommittee2.
Evaluation Planning Summit: The IEC is encouraging all members of the integrated
planning committees and the Program Review Committee to participate in a planning
summit on Saturday, March 24th from noon-3:00pm at the Eureka Downtown site
room 111. Topics of the summit will include ascertaining the degree by which
planning actions are aligned with institutional goals and SLOs; to what degree did the
committees satisfy the themes developed from last year’s summit findings; dialoguing
about what worked and what didn’t work this year; and developing a list of
improvements/next steps for next year. Pat Girczyc and Mary Grace Barrick will
facilitate the dialogue.
Keith and Bruce will send out an email to committee members on March 1.
DISCUSSION
BUDGET UPDATE
The budget worksheet discussed at the recent BPC retreat was presented to the
committee. After some discussion, Keith suggested that the EMC co-chairs with the
VP of Administrative Services to gain clarity on the budget figures.
BPC TO EMC—
REVISED FTES
TARGETS
The BPC revised the EMC FTES/TLU projections from January to reflect an increase
of 51 FTES to our FTES target. The revised FTES target is 4,811—up from 4,760.
The additional 123 TLUs should be added to the recommended allocation framework.
RECOMMENDED TLU
DISTRIBUTION PLAN
There was consensus to recommend that the college allocate fifty percent of the
allotted TLUs to be used in Fall and 50% in Spring to meet the 4,811 FTES target.
The summer semester could be used to offer in enough courses to meet an increased
FTES target as a result of the passage of the November ballot measure.
DRAFT ENROLLMENT
MANAGEMENT PLAN
ADJOURNED
The meeting adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
2
Recommended TLU Allocation Framework
TLU allocations 2012-13
27-Feb-12
CR District by location
2011-12
2012-13 worst case
TLU
% of TOTAL
9.4% TLU reduction
TLU
6331
79.8
597
5734
Del Norte
793
10.0
74
731
Mendocino
579
7.3
54
534
Klamath-Trinity
231
2.9
23
212
748
7211
Eureka
TOTAL
7934
Reserve
98
2012-13 Eureka only
TLU
Academic transfer/GE
comments
2299
Basic Skills
568
Math and Writing Labs
217
CTE 1
213
CTE 2
1310
HERO
764
includes HO 15
Athletics
323
includes HE 1 and PE 66
SLSS
FNR, ECE, Addiction Studies
all other CTE, including Business 10, Economics, and Ag
43
on hold
0
TOTAL
5737
Academic transfer/GE
TLU
comments
CSU A
362
Speech 1,6,7; English 1A,1B; Philosophy 1,12
CSU B
726
Science; Math transfer
CSU C
773
Art, Cinema, Drama, Music; languages; other Philosophy; other English transfer
CSU D
370
Social Science except Psychology 11,33 and Sociology 3,33
CSU E
68
TOTAL
Psychology 11,33; Sociology 3,33
2299
Basic Skills
TLU
comments
Math
332
Math 301,302,303,372,376,380,101,115,120,194
English
194
English 350, 150
Reading
42
TOTAL
Reading 360
568
Math and Writing Labs
Math Lab
93
Writing Lab
124
TOTAL
217
3
Recommended Prioritization for GE Courses by Level
Level 1A (CR GE, CSU GE, IGETC, and Articulated major course)
Speech 1*
English 1A*
English 1B*
Math 15, 30, 50A (need 1)
Polsci 10*
Hist 8, 9
Note: * No alternatives that meet all the programs listed in the level 1A heading
Level 1B (CR GE, CSU GE, IGETC, and Articulated major course with alternatives or has articulated major
prep)
Speech 7
Phil 1, 12
AG 17**
Astro 10,
Astro 15A**
Chem 1A**
Chem 2**
GEOG 1
GEOL 1**
GEOL 15
Ocean 10
Ocean 11**
Physical Sci 10
Phys 10
AG 23**
BIOL 1**
BIOL 3**
BIOL 8**
ENVSC 10**
Art 1A, 1B, 4
Drama 24
Mus 1, 10, 12, 14
Eng 10, 17, 18, 20, 60 , 61
ENVSC 11
FRNC/GERM/SPAN 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B
Phil 10, 15
SNLAN 1A, 1B
Anth 1, 2, 3, 5
Econ 1, 10
NAS 1, 21
Journ 5
GEOG 2
Hist 4,5,7,8,9,12
Psych 1, 30
AJ 1
SOC 1,2,5
Psych 11
Note: ** Meets lab requirement
4
Level 2 (CR GE, CSU, GE, either not IGETC and/or articulated major)
Astro 11
Chem 10
ENVSC 12, 15
GEOL 10
METEO 1
OCEAN 12
BIOL 15, 20
Math 4, 5, 25
Art 2
CINE 1,2,3
ENG 9, 22, 47
HIst 21
ECON 20
BUS 10
SOC 9
HIST 11, 18, 20
POLSC 12
SOC 10
PE 66
PSYCH 23
SOC 33
Level 3
All course that are not GE and not articulated but meet AA, AS, and Certificates
Level 4
Electives only
Additional Recommendations
1.
2.
3.
4.
Establish a sustainable level of course offerings that best meet student needs based on the guidelines;
Implement a one year moratorium on approval of additional GE and elective courses; and
Develop a clear link between the TLU allocation model and curriculum development.
The framework must be assessed annually.
5
Revised BPC to EMC FTES
Scenario 1: FTES, Sections and TLUs (no growth in 12-13
year)
Current
2011-12
Resident FTES
3 Year Targets
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
4,811
4,811
4,907
5,005
246
258
271
285
2
2.30
2.30
2.30
5,059
5,069
5,178
5,290
77
77
77
Total Calculated Sections
1,718
1,753
1,788
Total TLUs needed
7,732
7,887
8,044
Total Fulltime Faculty TLUs
3,465
3,465
3,465
300
300
300
3,165
3,165
3,165
176
181
185
Associate Faculty Instructional TLUs
4,391
4,541
4,694
Total Instructional TLUs
7,732
7,887
8,044
703
703
703
1,015
1,049
1,084
Non-resident FTES
Non credit FTES
Total FTES
Fulltime Faculty
Total Fulltime Faculty Reassigned TLUs
Fulltime Faculty Instructional TLUs
Overload Instructional TLUs
Fulltime Faculty Calculated Sections
Associate Faculty and Overload Calculated
Sections
Scenario 2: FTES, Sections and TLUs (263 decrease in 201213))
Current
2011-12
Resident FTES
2012-13
4,548
4,639
4,732
246
258
271
285
2
2.30
2.30
2.30
5,059
4,806
4,910
5,017
77
77
77
Total Calculated Sections
1,624
1,657
1,690
Total TLUs needed
7,309
7,455
7,605
Total Fulltime Faculty TLUs
3,465
3,465
3,465
300
300
300
3,165
3,165
3,165
176
181
185
Associate Faculty Instructional TLUs
3,968
4,109
4,255
Total Instructional TLUs
7,309
7,455
7,605
703
703
703
921
953
987
Non credit FTES
Total FTES
Fulltime Faculty
Total Fulltime Faculty Reassigned TLUs
Fulltime Faculty Instructional TLUs
Overload Instructional TLUs
Fulltime Faculty Calculated Sections
Associate Faculty and Overload Calculated
Sections
6
51
82
18
3 Year Targets
2013-14
2014-15
4,811
Non-resident FTES
Change from
Original
2012-13
77
123
28
7