College Of The Redwoods
Examination Of
Class Scheduling
April 2010
Scheduling Assessment Purpose
 Determine
The Effectiveness Of The
Class Scheduling Process
 Cancellations
 Efficiency
 Facility
Utilization
 Curriculum
Scheduling Assessment Process
 Phase
I
 Interviewed
Persons Relevant To The
Scheduling Process Across College Of The
Redwoods
 Examination Of Class Schedule Data
 Phase
II
 Installation
Of ClassTracks Software For
Continued Schedule Examination
 Training Of Key Personnel On Software
Scheduling Assessment Process
 Phase
III
 Presentation
 Phase
Of Class Schedule Information
IV
 Delivery
Of Detailed Reports For College
Scheduling Assessment Outcomes
 Effectiveness
Of The Class Scheduling
Development Process
 Efficiency By Location, Division, And
Discipline In Scheduling
 Maximizing Utilization Of Facilities
 Curriculum Scheduling
 Effectiveness
In Offering The Course Mix Each
Semester By Curriculum Area
Scheduling Assessment Process
 On-Site
Visit And Interviews With
Personnel At College Of The Redwoods
 December
 Final
1, 2009
Data Received From College
 February
26, 2010/ April 14, 2010
 ClassTracks
 February
 Scheduling
Software Preliminary Training
2 And 9, 2010
Data Analysis
 Report (April 2010)
Schedule Process
Schedule Process
 Academic
Calendar Set
 Each Department Has Similar But Unique
Processes For Developing Schedule
 Use
Past History
 “Know”
What Classes Fill First
 “Keep In Head” What Classes Are Offered Each
Fall Or Spring
 Only One Area Keeps A Two-Year Schedule Of
Classes And Evaluates Past Offerings With Data
Schedule Process
 Preliminary
 Full-Time
List Of Classes Developed
Faculty Input
 When
Faculty Are Available To Teach
 Input On Classes Preferred
 Adjunct
Faculty Input
 Consistent
Adjuncts In Some Areas And Their
Availability To Teach
 Availability Of Adjuncts To Schedule
 Classes Scheduled Without Faculty Assignments
 Area
Coordinators
Schedule Process
 Room
Search Begins
 “The
Scavenger Hunt”
 Some

Rooms Are Owned By Some Departments
These Are Scheduled First
 Some
Areas Have Basically No Space And Have
“Dibs” On Rooms

Schedule In These Rooms
 Administrative
Assistants Start Looking For Rooms
And Calling In Favors

 Some
Even Having To Go Look At Rooms
Sections Simply Not Assigned Rooms
Schedule Process
 Schedule
 Copies
Entered Into Computer System
Circulated For Review And Proofing
 Again,
And Again, And Again …
 Do
Not Appear To Have A Formal Process For
Changes During Review
 Adding
And Cancelling Classes
 Signatures For Changing, Adding, Etc.
Schedule Process
 Schedule
Ready For Publication
 Final
Proof
 Changes Still Being Made
 Post
To Web
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Classroom
Issues
 Perception
 Not
Of Space Issues At Eureka Campus
Enough Rooms At Key Fill Times
 Off-Site
Locations Actually Limited On
Classrooms
 More
 Rooms
Efficient In Scheduling
A Major Problem
 All
Rooms Not Created Equal
 Each Division Has Different Needs For Rooms

SMART Classroom Fights
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Classroom
 Room
Issues
Ownership
 Some
Departments “Own Rooms,” Others Have
“Dibs” On Rooms
 AOA’s Have Knowledge About Rooms But Are
Bypassed Or Have To Get On Phone And Find
Rooms
 No Clear Authority Over Who Has Final Room
Assignment
 Physical
 State
Room Inventory
Information May Not Be Correct
 No Easy Way To See Room Features
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Input
Into Scheduling Process
 Very
Little Data Used In Developing
Schedules
 “Know”
What Classes Fill First
 Difficult To Obtain
 Little Historical Data Available At Fingertips For
Analysis

Only One Department Actually Uses Data
 Concern
Over Apparent Disregard Of FTES
Targets In Scheduling
 California
Driven By FTES
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Input
Into Scheduling Process
 Little
To No Input From Key Student
Services Personnel
 Example:
Remedial And Developmental
Student Services Personnel Test And Know Numbers
 Disconnect Between Testing And Seats Offered
 Without Seats Students Cannot Enroll And Continue

 Interaction
With Students In Scheduling And
Advising Provides Input But No Avenue For
Forwarding That Input To Schedule Decision
Makers
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Cancellation
 Impacts
Issues
On Attainment
 Students
Concerned Classes Needed For Graduation
Cancelled Within 3rd Day Of Registration Or After
Classes Start
 Impacts
On Schedules
 AOA’s
Call And Inform Students Classes Are
Cancelled (Depends On Area)
 Student Services Has No Direct Authority On
Informing Students Of Cancellations

Students Have To Fill In Schedule
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Course
Availability
 Students
Report Not Being Able To Get Classes
Needed To Graduate Or Transfer
 Classes
Needed For Graduation Cancelled
 Required Class Fills Within Three Days Of
Registration Start And Another Class Not Opened
 Unsure What Semester “Required” Courses Will Be
Offered
 Programs Not Laid Out By Recommended Semester
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Curriculum
 Discussion
 One
Scheduling
Of Two-Year Schedule
Department Does That Now, Majority Do
Not
 Students
Cannot Get Through Curriculum
In A Reasonable Time
 Cannot
Plan A Student’s Degree Plan With The
Current System
 Cannot Assure A Student Of The Class Offerings
 Major Impact On Recruiters And Advisors
Issues Noted In Interviews
 General
Education Scheduling
 Concern
About Offering Too Many General
Education Courses And Dilution Of General
Education Course Enrollees
 Spread
Out Too Thin
 Many Options For General Education
Scheduling
Who Determines Best Gen Ed Options To Schedule?
 Which Ones Really Needed For Transfer Partners?

 Departments
Other
Schedule In Isolation Of Each
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Daily
Scheduling Issues
 Pass
Time
 Chancellor
Requires 10 Minute Pass Time
 College Has 5 Minute Pass Time Fall 2009 And
Spring 2010

M/ W Blocks Are 8:30-9:55am, 10:00-11:25am, 11:3012:55am, 1:00-2:25pm, 2:30-3:55pm, 4:00-5:25pm
 Nationally
10 To 15 Minute Pass Times
 Solving Issue - Fall 2010 Moving To 10 Minute Pass
Time

M/ W Blocks Are 8:30-9:55am, 10:05-11:30am, 11:401:05pm, 1:15-2:40pm, 2:50-4:15pm, 4:25-5:50pm
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Daily
Scheduling Issues
 Faculty
Scheduling
 Difficulty
Being Scheduled Evening And Then
Early Morning Next Day
 College
Hour
 Students
Meetings
Noted Need For A College Hour For
Issues Noted In Interviews
 More
Diverse Scheduling Needed
 Monday/
Wednesday/ Friday Classes Needed
 Miss
One Day Only Miss 1/3 Of Class Not Half
 Friday Dead
 Evening
 Can
Classes – After 6PM
Work Full-Time And Still Attend
 Weekend
Classes
 Adult
Students
 Faculty Now Teach On Weekend

Services Not Available To Support Weekend Classes
Issues Noted In Interviews
 More
Diverse Scheduling Needed
 Online
Classes
 Provide
More Options For Online
 Can Increase Load Without Attending
 Course
Dilution
 Concern
About Spreading Schedule Too Thin
Over Off-Sites
 Goals
 Who
For Sites
Is Responsible For Scheduling Off-Sites?
Issues Noted In Interviews
 Adjunct
Availability
 Concerns
Over Availability Of Qualified
Adjuncts
 Difficult To Find In Off-Sites
 Some Have Been Employed For Years
 Invite Some To Not Return
Fact Or Fiction
 Data
Analysis Will Examine These Issues
 Cancellation
Analysis
 Efficiency Analysis
 Utilization Analysis
 Curriculum Analysis
Data Used For Analysis
Data Requirements
 Fall
2006 To Spring 2010
 Detailed

Section Information By Semester
Class Title, Division, Class Subject, Class Number, Site,
Class ID, Class Status, Room Description, Building Name,
Room Cap, Instructor, Meeting Days, Start Date, End
Date, Start Time, End Time, Credit Hours, Enrollment,
Enrollment Cap, Instructor Contact Hours, Component
Code, Instructor Class Description, Program Type, Credit/
Noncredit, Instructor Mode, Instructor Load, Instructor
ID, Section Revenue, Section Expense, Semester, Year,
Unique Course Identifier, Cross-Listed Courses, Cancel
Date, Class Enrollment Status
Data Requirements
 Fall
2006 To Spring 2010 Semesters
 Census
And End Of Semester Data
 Files Were Sent In csv Formats
 Room Capacities Were An Issue
 College
Corrected Some
 Used The State Report For Capacities For Some
 Still Not Totally Accurate
Data Requirements
 Fall
2006 To Spring 2010 Semesters
 Section
Data Loaded Into ClassTracks For
Analysis
 Provides
 Reports
Semester And Multi-Semester Reports
Will Be Made Available In Final
Report
 Location,
Division, And Discipline
Cancellation Analysis
(See Appendix A)
Cancellation Analysis
 Cancellations
 Impact
On Room Availability
 Impact On Students Building Schedules
 Impact On Enrollments
 Impact On Student Services Personnel
 Impact On Academic Services
Cancellation Analysis
 Examined
Cancellation Rates For Fall
2006 To Spring 2010
 Location
 Site
+ Off-Site For Location
 Division
 Discipline
 Course
 Section
Cancellation – College
100
Percent Sections Cancelled
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Most Colleges Fall In This Range
0
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
College Of The Redwoods
Cancellation By Site
100
Percent Sections Cancelled
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Most Colleges Fall In This Range
0
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
ARC
DN+DNOC
EDTN
EKA
EOC
KT
MC+MCO
MCKL
VC
Cancellation By Division
100
Percent Sections Cancelled
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Most Colleges Fall In This Range
0
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
ALSS
ATHPE
BTECH
HCMM
HOCC
MSE
PSC
SLSS
Cancellation By Division

Fall 2009
 SLSS
(35.6%)
 BTECH (19.1%)
 ALSS (12.7%)
 PSC (12.5%)
 HCMM (7.7%)
 MSE (7.1%)
 ATHPE (2.8%)
 HOCC (2.4%)

Fall 2008
 SLSS
(21.6%)
 MSE (19.0%)
 ATHPE (15.2%)
 BTECH (9.6%)
 HCMM (8.1%)
 PSC (7.7%)
 HOCC (2.8%)
 ALSS (2.6%)
Cancellation By Course
 Review
Cancellations By Course
 Number
Of Sections Offered Fall 2006 To
Spring 2010
 Number
Sections Active
 Number Sections Cancelled
 Percent
Sections Offered By Courses Active
And Cancelled
 Example
Cancellation By Course
Course Cancellations
FA 2005 To SPR 2010
39 Courses
Had 100% Of
Sections
Cancelled
Courses 100% Cancelled











AG 11: Sustainable Animal
Production
AJ 88B: Basic Academy Preparation
ART 20: Illustration
ART 47: Etching Techniques
ASTRO 99A: Current Issues in Astro
BT 63: Desktop Publishing
Application
BT 88: Experimental Crse in Bus
Tech
BUS 33: International Business
BUS 81A: Individual Income Tax
Law
BUS 81B: Corp Partn Income Tax
Law
BUS 82L: Volunteer Income Tax
Assist











CINE 8: Screenwriting
CR 119P: Reporting Procedures
Research
CR 119R: CSR-RPR Examination
review
DHET 166: Theory Op of Ag Equip
DHET 40: Ind Study Diesel Heavy
Equip
DM 75B: 2-D Animation II
DT 63: Mechanical Design Drafting
DT 81: 3-D Character Modeling
Anim
ECE 10LB4: Fld Plcmnt Schl-Age
Chld Care
ECE 15: School-Age Children In
Child Care
ENGL 10: Intro to Classical
Literature
Courses 100% Cancelled











ENGR 99: Selected Topics in
Engineering
FRNC 8A: Elem Conversational
French I
GEOL 130G: Coastal Geology
GEOL 99: Selected Topics in
Geology
GEOL 99B: Geology of Centerville
Scotia
GERM 11A: Begin Conversational
German I
GS 1: College Success
HRC 27: Do Not Use
JPN 8A: Elem Convers Japanese I
NAS 13: Native Cultures NW
California
NR 68: Introduction to ARCGIS






PE 14: Defensive Tactics
PE 43: Aquatic Fitness
PE 60: Fndtns of Recreational
Studies
PSYCH 20: Biological Psychology
RE 12: Real Estate Law
WT 67: Special Welding Laboratory
Cancellation By Section
 Review
Cancellations By Section And
Times By Course
 Sections
Offered Fall 2006 To Spring 2010
 Times
Of Sections Offered
 Percent Fill Rate

Students Enrolled By Class Cap (Academic, Not Room
Cap)
 Cancellations
 Example
BT 158
Two Degree Impacts:
BT AS Office Professional
BUS Certificate Of Achievement, Medical Office Business Skills (Mendocino)
Cancellation Dates Fall 2009
Fall 2009 Cancellations By Date
01/06/10
10/01/09
09/22/09
09/17/09
09/10/09
08/31/09
August 27, 2009 First Day Of Classes
08/24/09
08/20/09
08/18/09
Dates
08/14/09
08/12/09
08/10/09
08/06/09
07/30/09
07/28/09
07/24/09
07/22/09
07/20/09
07/15/09
07/13/09
07/09/09
06/08/09
05/20/09
172 Total Sections Cancelled
05/05/09
03/26/09
0
5
10
15
20
25
Cancellation Dates Spring 2010
Spring 2010 Cancellation Dates
02/12/10
01/26/10
01/19/10
January 16, 2010 First Day Of Classes
01/12/10
01/07/10
12/30/09
12/17/09
Dates
12/15/09
11/24/09
11/17/09
11/12/09
11/09/09
11/05/09
11/03/09
10/22/09
10/09/09
10/06/09
10/01/09
136 Total Sections Cancelled
09/29/09
0
20
40
Sections
60
80
Recommendations
 Cancellation
Rate For Credit For College
Should Be Below 10%
 Stop Offering Cancelled Sections Next
Semester
 If
Single Section Of Course
 Wait
At Least A Semester
 If Cancelled Last Two Semesters, Wait A Year
 If
Multiple Sections Of Course
 Evaluate
Course Efficiency
Recommendations
 College
Will Provide Easy-To-Use Trend
Information For Scheduling
 Data
Has Been Limited
 Trend Data Needed On A By-Section Basis
During The Planning Process
Recommendations
 Develop
A Pre-Schedule Conference For
Input
 Early
In The Schedule Development Process,
Conduct A Scheduling Conference Between
Department Chairs And Student Services
Personnel
 Goal Is To Provide Input Into The Schedule
Development Process
 New
Etc.
Courses Needed, Priorities For Scheduling,
Recommendations
 Review
The Courses With High Cancellation
Rates (50%+)
 Utilize
The Course Status Report
 Review
Day Of Week And Time For Courses
 Cancellations
 Blocking

Impact Rooms
Rooms During Key Times
Large Percent Cancelled Were Between 8am And Noon
 Unless
Rooms Reassigned For Late Start, Lose
Utilization For Room And Buildings
Recommendations
 Cancellations
Impact Curriculum
 If
Course Is Continually Cancelled, Impacts
Students’ Ability To Complete Curriculum
 Adjust Curriculum

Some Courses May Need To Be Removed If They Are
Low Fill And Cancel Regularly
 Impacts
Efficiency
 Determine
If Fewer Sections Are Needed In
Upcoming Schedule
 Spreading Fewer Students In Classes
Efficiency Analysis
(See Appendix B)
Efficiency Analysis
 Examined
Sections Offered Across
Colleges Fall 2006 To Spring 2010
 Concentrated
On Fall And Spring
 Winter And Summer Data Is Available
 Goal
Is To Minimize Number Of Sections
While Increasing Enrollments In Each
Section
 Increasing
Efficiency
Efficiency Analysis
 Efficiency
 Number
Defined By Fill Rate
Of Students Divided By Class Cap
 Student
Enrollment Cap, Not Physical Room
Capacity
 Also
Has An Impact On Room Usage
 Class
Cap Substantially Lower Than Physical
Room Capacity
Efficiency Rates – College
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
Percent Seats Filled CENSUS
Average Course Size CENSUS
Efficiency Rates – College
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
Percent Seats Filled END
Average Course Size END
Efficiency Rates – College
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Most Colleges Fall In This Range
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
WI
SP
SU
FA
SP
2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 2010
Percent Seats Filled END
Average Course Size END
Percent Seats Filled CENSUS
Average Course Size CENSUS
Efficiency Rates By Site (Census)
100
90
Percent Seats Filled
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
FA 2009
ARC
DN+DNOC
EDTN
SP 2010
EKA
EOC
KT
MC+MCO
MCKL
VC
SH
*Some EOC And PSC SP 2010 Classes Not Yet Held
Efficiency Rates By Division (Census)
100
90
Percent Seats Filled
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
FA 2009
ALSS
ATHPE
BTECH
SP 2010
HCMM
HOCC
MSE
PSC
SLSS
Column 9
*PSC SP 2010 Classes Not Yet Held
Discipline Efficiency Fall 2009











FT 100.00%
MA 95.00%
WAT 95.00%
WT 93.00%
SPCH 92.10%
LVN 90.80%
AJ 90.40%
DA 89.50%
BIOL 88.50%
SNLAN 87.00%
CET 86.70%











HO 85.60%
GEOL 85.20%
AT 85.00%
FRNC 82.90%
CT 82.70%
ASTRO 82.50%
CHEM 81.80%
HIST 77.50%
PSYCH 77.20%
ART 77.10%
MATH 76.90%
Discipline Efficiency Fall 2009











BT 76.10%
ENGL 76.00%
SPAN 76.00%
HE 75.30%
OCEAN 75.30%
NURS 74.80%
FNR 73.60%
JPN 73.20%
CIS 73.10%
READ 73.00%
PHIL 72.60%











METEO 72.50%
ENVSC 71.60%
MT 71.10%
POLSC 70.60%
JOURN 70.00%
ECE 69.80%
DRAMA 68.30%
ANTH 67.20%
IT 65.70%
SOC 65.70%
ADCT 65.50%
Discipline Efficiency Fall 2009











CINE 64.90%
PE 64.90%
DM 64.60%
MUS 64.40%
LIBR 64.10%
PHYS 63.50%
GS 61.00%
GERM 60.70%
GEOG 60.20%
NAS 59.50%
HRC 58.10%











AG 55.40%
ECON 54.90%
BUS 54.80%
GUID 52.40%
RE 52.00%
DHET 46.40%
DT 46.30%
DANCE 45.50%
ENGR 37.60%
PHYSC 32.50%
CE 13.30%
ECON 1 – FA 2009
ECON 1 – FA 2009
ART 17 - Example Fall 2009
Art 17 – 8 Sections Active, 168 Students Enrolled EKA Campus
Max Students Of 30 Per Section
6 Sections Of 30 Will Accommodate Enrollment – Gain At Least One Room
BUS – Course Report Example
BUS 10 – Section Report Example
Issues To Address
 Two
Issues Impacting Efficiency
 One
Course, One Section Issue
 Courses With Multiple Sections
Number Of Sections Fall 2009
250
200
Efficiency 44%
150
100
Efficiency 63%
50
Efficiency 68%
Efficiency 69%
0
Fall 2009
Courses Offered With 1 Section
Courses Offered With 2 Sections
Courses Offered With 3 To 5 Sections
Courses Offered With 6 Or More Sections
Recommendations
 Two
Issues Impacting Efficiency
 One
Course, One Section Issue
 Courses
With Less Than 70% Fill Should Be
Offered Less Often – Not Every Semester

Examine Impact On Curriculum
 Courses
With Multiple Sections
 Courses
With Less Than 80% Examined For
Fewer Sections Needed
 Must Take Locations And Time Frames Into
Account
Recommendations
 Issues
Solved By Improving Efficiency
 Higher
Fill Rate, More Efficient
 Less Reliance On Adjuncts
 Cited
As A Major Issue
 Faculty
Availability For New Program
Development
 More Room Capacity
 Frees
Time
Up A Room, Potentially At A Key Fill
Recommendations
 Examine
Courses With Less Than 70%
Seats Filled
 Higher
Fill Rate, More Efficient
 One Section May Be Needed Rather Than
Two
 Savings
On Faculty Cost
 Can Reallocate Faculty To New Program
Offering Or Reduce Adjunct Cost
 Frees Up A Room, Potentially At A Key Fill
Time
Utilization Analysis
(See Appendix C)
Classroom Utilization
 Issue
To Address Is Whether The College
Is Completely Full With No Excess
Capacity
 Number
Of Seats Available Per Hour Versus
Students
 Limited
Room Capacity Information Available
 Number
Of Rooms Used And Hours Rooms
Used Per Week
 Fall
2006 To Spring 2010 Examined
Classroom Utilization All College
Percent Seats Filled By Day
Spring 2009
Fall 2008
Spring 2008
Fall 2007
Spring 2007
Fall 2006
Spring 2006
Fall 2005
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Calculated as students divided by room capacity – could not calculate since room capacities
were not included in the data
Room Usage
 Fall
2009
 Percent
Rooms Used Per Hour (Census)
 Eureka
 On-Campus
 Other
Only
Locations
 On-Campus
Only
Fall 2009 EKA (89 Rooms)
Time
06:00-07:00
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
0
0.0%
2
2.2%
3
3.4%
2
2.2%
2
2.2%
1
1.1%
0
0.0%
07:00-08:00
0
0.0%
3
3.4%
4
4.5%
2
2.2%
3
3.4%
1
1.1%
0
0.0%
08:00-09:00
1
1.1%
41
46.1%
38
42.7%
41
46.1%
36
40.4%
21
23.6%
5
5.6%
09:00-10:00
2
2.2%
47
52.8%
45
50.6%
47
52.8%
44
49.4%
32
36.0%
11
12.4%
10:00-11:00
2
2.2%
57
64.0%
59
66.3%
57
64.0%
58
65.2%
38
42.7%
14
15.7%
11:00-12:00
3
3.4%
61
68.5%
67
75.3%
61
68.5%
66
74.2%
36
40.4%
15
16.9%
12:00-13:00
2
2.2%
54
60.7%
58
65.2%
54
60.7%
56
62.9%
24
27.0%
16
18.0%
13:00-14:00
3
3.4%
54
60.7%
49
55.1%
56
62.9%
49
55.1%
27
30.3%
14
15.7%
14:00-15:00
3
3.4%
58
65.2%
55
61.8%
63
70.8%
57
64.0%
27
30.3%
14
15.7%
15:00-16:00
2
2.2%
46
51.7%
47
52.8%
50
56.2%
50
56.2%
23
25.8%
13
14.6%
16:00-17:00
2
2.2%
33
37.1%
34
38.2%
33
37.1%
36
40.4%
10
11.2%
8
9.0%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
31
34.8%
24
27.0%
29
32.6%
25
28.1%
3
3.4%
1
1.1%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
44
49.4%
48
53.9%
46
51.7%
46
51.7%
7
7.9%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
44
49.4%
49
55.1%
47
52.8%
47
52.8%
7
7.9%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
28
31.5%
33
37.1%
33
37.1%
31
34.8%
5
5.6%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
11
12.4%
15
16.9%
16
18.0%
15
16.9%
5
5.6%
1
1.1%
22:00-23:00
0
0.0%
1
1.1%
3
3.4%
1
1.1%
2
2.2%
1
1.1%
1
1.1%
23:00-24:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
1.1%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Fall 2009 ARC (5 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
1
20.0%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
09:00-10:00
0
0.0%
1
20.0%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
10:00-11:00
0
0.0%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
11:00-12:00
0
0.0%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
12:00-13:00
0
0.0%
1
20.0%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
0
0.0%
1
20.0%
13:00-14:00
0
0.0%
2
40.0%
4
80.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
14:00-15:00
0
0.0%
3
60.0%
4
80.0%
4
80.0%
4
80.0%
1
20.0%
0
0.0%
15:00-16:00
0
0.0%
3
60.0%
4
80.0%
4
80.0%
4
80.0%
1
20.0%
0
0.0%
16:00-17:00
0
0.0%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
1
20.0%
0
0.0%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
2
40.0%
1
20.0%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
4
80.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
4
80.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
3
60.0%
3
60.0%
2
40.0%
2
40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
1
20.0%
1
20.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Fall 2009 DN (13 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
06:00-07:00
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
2
15.4%
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
07:00-08:00
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
2
15.4%
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
8
61.5%
6
46.2%
8
61.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
0
0.0%
09:00-10:00
1
7.7%
9
69.2%
6
46.2%
9
69.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
1
7.7%
10:00-11:00
1
7.7%
9
69.2%
7
53.8%
8
61.5%
6
46.2%
4
30.8%
1
7.7%
11:00-12:00
1
7.7%
7
53.8%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
1
7.7%
12:00-13:00
1
7.7%
4
30.8%
3
23.1%
3
23.1%
3
23.1%
5
38.5%
1
7.7%
13:00-14:00
1
7.7%
8
61.5%
9
69.2%
9
69.2%
9
69.2%
4
30.8%
1
7.7%
14:00-15:00
1
7.7%
8
61.5%
10
76.9%
8
61.5%
10
76.9%
3
23.1%
1
7.7%
15:00-16:00
1
7.7%
9
69.2%
7
53.8%
10
76.9%
7
53.8%
3
23.1%
1
7.7%
16:00-17:00
1
7.7%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
8
61.5%
5
38.5%
3
23.1%
1
7.7%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
8
61.5%
8
61.5%
7
53.8%
6
46.2%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
9
69.2%
9
69.2%
8
61.5%
7
53.8%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
9
69.2%
7
53.8%
6
46.2%
7
53.8%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
7
53.8%
6
46.2%
4
30.8%
6
46.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
2
15.4%
2
15.4%
1
7.7%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Fall 2009 EDTN (6 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
0
0.0%
4
66.7%
09:00-10:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
5
83.3%
10:00-11:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
5
83.3%
11:00-12:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
5
83.3%
12:00-13:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
5
83.3%
13:00-14:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
4
66.7%
2
33.3%
4
66.7%
3
50.0%
4
66.7%
14:00-15:00
0
0.0%
3
50.0%
4
66.7%
3
50.0%
4
66.7%
4
66.7%
4
66.7%
15:00-16:00
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
4
66.7%
16:00-17:00
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
4
66.7%
1
16.7%
4
66.7%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
4
66.7%
2
33.3%
4
66.7%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
Fall 2009 KT (6 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
09:00-10:00
0
0.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
10:00-11:00
0
0.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
11:00-12:00
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
12:00-13:00
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
13:00-14:00
0
0.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
14:00-15:00
0
0.0%
4
66.7%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
3
50.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
15:00-16:00
0
0.0%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
3
50.0%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
16:00-17:00
0
0.0%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
4
66.7%
4
66.7%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
6 100.0%
4
66.7%
5
83.3%
4
66.7%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
6 100.0%
3
50.0%
6 100.0%
4
66.7%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
6 100.0%
1
16.7%
6 100.0%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
4
66.7%
2
33.3%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
1
16.7%
2
33.3%
2
33.3%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
22:00-23:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1
16.7%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Fall 2009 MCKL (5 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
09:00-10:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
10:00-11:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
11:00-12:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
12:00-13:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
13:00-14:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
14:00-15:00
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
15:00-16:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
16:00-17:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
1 20.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
3 60.0%
5 100.0%
3 60.0%
3 60.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
2 40.0%
5 100.0%
2 40.0%
3 60.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
1 20.0%
4 80.0%
1 20.0%
2 40.0%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
0
2 40.0%
0
0
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
Fall 2009 MC (13 Rooms)
Time
Rooms used per day per hour. Percent utilization is based on the number of classroom hours used each day.
Sunday
Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Saturday
Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util Rooms % Util
08:00-09:00
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
1
7.7%
0
0.0%
09:00-10:00
0
0.0%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
3
23.1%
8
61.5%
3
23.1%
10:00-11:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
7
53.8%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
8
61.5%
3
23.1%
11:00-12:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
7
53.8%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
8
61.5%
3
23.1%
12:00-13:00
0
0.0%
3
23.1%
6
46.2%
3
23.1%
4
30.8%
8
61.5%
3
23.1%
13:00-14:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
4
30.8%
3
23.1%
14:00-15:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
4
30.8%
3
23.1%
15:00-16:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
3
23.1%
16:00-17:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
5
38.5%
5
38.5%
4
30.8%
4
30.8%
2
15.4%
17:00-18:00
0
0.0%
3
23.1%
3
23.1%
3
23.1%
2
15.4%
1
7.7%
1
7.7%
18:00-19:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
8
61.5%
7
53.8%
7
53.8%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
19:00-20:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
8
61.5%
7
53.8%
7
53.8%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
20:00-21:00
0
0.0%
6
46.2%
7
53.8%
7
53.8%
6
46.2%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
21:00-22:00
0
0.0%
3
23.1%
6
46.2%
4
30.8%
5
38.5%
0
0.0%
0
0.0%
Recommendations
 Designate
A Campus Scheduler
 Responsible
For Room Assignments
 Has
Final Authority For Assignments
 Reviews All Room Assignments And Locations
 Reviews Schedule For Errors
 Review
Of Space Utilization
 Physical Room Inventory
 Departments
Have Seniority For Rooms
But Not Ownership
Recommendation
 Scheduler
Works With Physical Facility
Department And State
 Correct
Room Capacities
 Impact On Potential Funding For Space
 Designate
Rooms For Meeting Length
 Different
Credit Courses Have To Meet In
Varying Time Blocks
 For
Example, Assign 4 Credit Classes To Specific
Rooms
 Minimizes
The Time Room Is Empty
Room Utilization By Section
500
450
82
400
64
350
300
250
200
324
150
100
50
0
Fall 2009
Room Capacity Greater Than Class Cap
Room Capacity Less Than Class Cap
Room Capacity = Class Cap
Recommendations
 Conduct
A Physical Room Capacity,
Merge Into Data, And Assess Class Caps
Versus Room Capacity
 Issue
To Address Is Whether The Rooms
Are Being Assigned Correctly
 Room
Ownership May Impact Maximizing
Utilization Of Room
Recommendations
 Example
 Class
Cap 20 In A Room That Physically Holds
35 People

Reallocate Room To Another Class
 This
Removes Up To 15 Seats Per Hour During
High Fill Times
 20 Seat Enrollment Cap In A Room Of 35
 10 Sections Can Remove 150 Seats Per Time Slot
Recommendations
 Movement
Has Been To Five-Day
Schedules
 MWF,
MW, TTh
 Explore Options For College – Friday Low
Utilization
Curriculum Analysis
(See Appendix D)
Curriculum Issues
 Completion
Issues
 Whether
All Courses Are Offered For
Degree Programs
 Day, Evening, Weekend Programming
 Input
Curriculum From Current Catalog
 Catalog
 Page
Lists Degrees Offered By Sites
40 And 41
 Examined
To Determine Whether Students
Could Have Completed In Last Four Year
Program Analysis
100
80
72
60
40
28
20
16
12
13
8
0
EKA
Total Academic Awards
DN
MC
Programs With Courses Missing Last Four Years
BUS Certificate – Desktop Publishing
BT 63, BT 162, BUS 152 Missing
Evening Maybe? Not Morning
Desktop Publishing – Fall 2009
Desktop Publishing – Spring 2010
Curriculum Issues
 37%
Of Programs Listed In Catalog Could
Not Be Completed In Last Four Years
 Curriculum
Needs To Be Examined And Either
Changed Or Courses Taught
 Timing
Of Courses
 Courses
In Major Area Are Offered All Over
Time Frames
 No
Real Planning Of When Degree Is Offered During
Day
 No Coordination Between Departments
Curriculum Issues
 Develop
Curriculum Sheets For Degrees
 Outline
Recommended Semesters Courses
Should Be Taken
 Curriculum Sheets Should Be Available
Online
Recommendations
 Plan
Schedule For Two Years
 Annual
Schedule Master
 Examine Curriculum Offerings
 Plan Curriculum
 Work With Student Services
 Communicate To Students
Recommendations
 Ensure
All Programming For Degrees
Will Be Offered In Reasonable Time
Frame
 Define All Programs Which Can Be
Offered Day, Evening Or Online
 Market
These Programs
 Develop Accelerated Classes For These
Programs
Curriculum Issues
 General
Education
 College
May Be Offering Too Many General
Education Courses
 Spreads
Enrollments Out Too Thin Across Too
Many Courses
Gen Ed C. Humanities – ENGL 18
ENGL 18
Gen Eds Offered By College
100
CSU Gen Eds A. Communication
CSU Gen Eds B. Scientific Inquiry
And Quanitative Reasoning
80
CSU Gen Eds C. Arts And
Humanities
CSU Gen Eds D. Social Sciences
60
49
40
30
33 35
28
31
35
CSU Gen Eds E. Lifelong
Learning
39
Gen Ed A. Natural Science
Gen Ed B. Social Science
20
6
5
6
5
0
Courses
Offered By College
Gen Ed C. Humanities
Gend Ed D. Language And
Rationality
Gen Eds – Liberal Arts
AOE Science Education 0
AOE Science
57
7
21
AOE Math 2 5
AOE Humanities And Communications 0
43
AOE Fine Arts 0
Core Courses
Additional Courses
30
AOE Business 0 9
7
AOE Behavioral And Social Science
43
AOE Agriculture 3 9
0
20
40
60
80
100
Recommendations
 Appoint
A Faculty Committee
 Examine
All General Education
Components Being Offered For CSU And
UC Transfer
 Options For Liberal Arts Area Of Emphasis
(AOE) Realistic Or Not?
Online Delivery
1,100
1061
1015
850
600
491
462
350
100
73
66
47
Fall 2009
Spring 2010
-150
Total Sections
Online Sections
Total Courses
Online Courses
46
Online Delivery
 Expect
Minimum Of 15% Of Sections
Online
 7%
In Fall 2009
 6.5% In Spring 2010
 Need To Expand The Number Of Online
Sections
 Define
Courses Needed For Online
Liberal Arts Degree
Recommendations
 Explore
Additional Alternative Delivery
Formats
 Internet
 iPod,
Courses
Internet Streaming
 Blended/
 Lecture
Hybrid Courses
And Online
Recommendations
 Explore
Additional Alternative Delivery
Formats
 Fast
Track/ Accelerated Program
 Accelerated
Program To Obtain A Degree, Not
Just Classes Offered
 Depending On The Program, Students Can
Complete A Degree By Attending One Class
Meeting Per Week Over An Approximate 2 To 21/2 Year Period
QUESTIONS?