REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)
Eureka: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road, AD 201 (Board Room)
Monday, January 31, 2011
1:10 – 2:40 p.m.
AGENDA
1. Call To Order
2. Approve January 12, 2010 Meeting Minutes*
3. Action Items
3.1 Confirm membership, scope, and timetable of Summer Schedule Task Force for
100 calculated sections district-wide (Guiding principle G)*
3.2 Confirm membership, scope, timetable for FY 2011-12 Course Schedule Task
Force (Guiding principles A-F)*
3.3 AP 5055: Revision Next Steps*
3.4 Acceptance of EMC Plan for spring*
3.5 Direction for development of 2 year EM Plan
4 Discussion Items
4.2 Update on EMC Actions and the communication process
4.3 BPC – budget options partial list*
5 Reports
6 Announcements
7 Adjournment
(* denotes attachment)
Next Meeting:
February 7, 2011
1:10-2:40 p.m.
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Meeting of the Enrollment Management Committee (EMC)
Eureka: 7351 Tompkins Hill Road, AD 201 (Board Room)
Monday, January 12, 2011
1:00 p.m.
NOTES
PRESENT
Rachel Anderson, Jennifer Bailey, Zach DeLoach,
Anna Duffy, David Gonsalves (phone), Kathy Goodlive,
Utpal Goswami, Melissa Green, Barbara Jaffari, Anita Janis (phone),
Alan Keppner, Pam Kessler, Geisce Ly (phone), Mike Peterson,
Tiffany Schmitcke, Keith Snow-Flamer and Bruce Wagner.
MINUTES
The minutes from the December 13, 2010 meeting were approved as
presented.
ACTION ITEM
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
SUMMER
SCHEDULE
Keith reported that the current FTES projection is falling short of the
target of 5201. He proposed loading the preliminary summer schedule
into Datatel so that calculations can be made to determine FTES with
summer included.
Committee members expressed concern regarding the reoccurring
practice of delving into next year‟s budget to pay for summer. It was
also expressed that in order to get out of this cycle decisions must be
made regarding what student population to serve during summer, and
what courses to offer. In addition the following topics were discussed:
Who are the students served during summer
Limit course offerings for summer
Development of a two year schedule
How the budget was built this year and how it will be built
next
TLU allocations
Anticipated budget cuts
Next steps:
Bruce and Keith will contact the Deans requesting that the course
templates for summer be completed and returned as soon as possible.
Once the course templates are reviewed by the committee the
preliminary summer schedule will be loaded into Datatel. After spring
census is calculated FTES will be reviewed and a determination will
be made regarding the number sections that will be offered for
summer.
DISCUSSION
ITEMS
FALL FTES
PROJECTIONS
There was discussion regarding what the FTES trends have been over
the past few years. Different scenarios were discussed regarding
growth or maintaining current number and what the impact would be
to a particular site or campus. It was noted that it seems that the level
of FTES is returning to where it was 2 years ago. Concern was
expressed regarding the ramifications of generating FTES beyond
what will be funded and what will happen if growth cannot be
maintained. Committee members also voiced concern regarding:
How best to serve students?
How can we support additional sites in lean times?
Sustainability of current growth projections
Committee members considered the proposal of a “no growth”
scenario based on the current budget concerns. It was decided that
discussion needs to continue on this subject and a determination was
not made. This subject will be carried over to the next meeting
agenda.
COMMUNICATION
Keith asked how as a committee we should report out to the college
community. Something more needs to be done other than saying “read
the minutes.” He asked that thought be given to this so that a process
can be established.
LATE ADDS
There was concern regarding the late add cards. Kathy noted that
some changes are being made to the cards. Mike stated that if a faculty
member signs an add card he will sign it without question relying on
their judgment.
SUBMITTED
lw
EMC Guiding Principles Next Fiscal Year (Opportunity/Student Success & FTES)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Target FTES is 4950 resident FTES
a. equal % cut in annualized FTES based on 2010-11 actual (5200)
Number of calculated sections funded is determined by site productivity
Selected adjustments permitted for instructional/schedule integrity
All new program/class initiatives (e.g. EMP driven) may be funded with excess reserves
101 Corridor is considered separate entity
Virtual campus will be a stand-alone division and function like the 101 Corridor as it relates to
TLU allocations
Focus evening courses to 101 Corridor Summer „11
EMC Guiding Principles Summer Schedule
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
100 calculated sections
Focus evening courses to 101 Corridor beginning Summer „11
High FTES generating classes
Online classes (increase online without stipends (use currently trained faculty))
Lab sciences
Mendo, Del Norte, KT parity
19-20% evening
no evenings in Eureka if possible
Two courses in Southern Humboldt if possible
Look to online for Mendo or Del Norte students as a possible substitute for low enrolled
traditional classes
Resident FTES Target
Projected FTES X10, F10, S11
5300
5011.48
Projected FTES from LVN 123 X11 section
27
5038.48
261.52
2.47
Difference in FTEs from Target vs. Projected
Avg FTES per summer section
Calculated Sections needed to make FTES Funded
Target
TLUs
Total Cost
Length of class
3 week class
4 week class
5 week class
6 week class
7 week class
8 week class
9 week class
10 week class
11 week class
12 week class
13 week class
106
476
$ 384,260
Start/End Date
Mon 6/27 - Thur 7/14
Mon 6/27 - Thur 7/21
Mon 6/27 - Thu 7/28
Mon 6/20 - Thur 7/28
Mon 6/20 - Thur 8/4
Mon 6/20 - Thur 8/11
Mon 6/20 - Thur 8/18
Mon 6/13 - Thur 8/18
Mon 6/6 - Thur 8/18
Mon 5/30 - Thur 8/18
Mon 5/23 - Thur 8/18
Census Date
Tues 6/28
Wed 6/29
Thur 6/30
Mon 6/27
Tues 6/28
Tues 6/28
Wed 6/29
Thur 6/23
Mon 6/27
Tues 6/14
Tues 6/7
Cost Split
33/67
25/75
20/80
33/67
29/71
25/75
18/82
30/70
36/64
42/58
46/54
REDWOODS COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT
Administrative Procedure
AP5055
ENROLLMENT PRIORITIES
Enrollment in courses and programs may be limited to students meeting properly established prerequisites
and co-requisites.
Enrollment may be limited due to the following:
health and safety considerations
facility limitations
faculty workload
availability of qualified instructors
funding limitations
regional planning
legal requirements
contractual requirements
When enrollment must be limited, priorities for determining who may enroll are:
limiting enrollment to first come, first served, or other non-evaluative selection techniques;
in the case of intercollegiate completion, honors courses, or public performance courses, allocating
available seats to those students judged most qualified;
limiting enrollment to any selection procedure expressly authorized by statute;
priority for registration for enrollment must be granted to any member or former member of the
Armed Forces of the United States for any academic term within two years of leaving active duty ;
limiting enrollment in one or more sections to students enrolled in one or more other courses,
provided that a reasonable percentage of all sections of the course do not have such restrictions.
Priority Registration days and times for any semester will be assigned as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Documented eligible students actively participating in Disabled Student Programs and Services
(DSPS) or in Extended Opportunity Programs and Services (EOPS);
Documented member or former member of the Armed Forces of the United States within two
years of leaving active duty;
ASCR Student Government Officers and ASCR Senate Board Members, continuing student
athletes, and Honors Program students;
In descending order, continuing students who have declared a major and:
a. completed 45 or more units at College of the Redwoods;
b. completed between 30 and 44.5 units at College of the Redwoods;
c. completed between 15 and 29.5 units at College of the Redwoods;
d. attempting or completed between 0.5 and 14.5 units at College of the Redwoods;
Continuing students without a declared major;
New and returning students;
Concurrently enrolled high school students.
References: Title 5 Sections 56232, 56026, 58106; Education Code Sections 66025.8, 76001
Enrollment Management Committee Planning Agenda 2010/11
Goal
1. Clarify role of EMC in integrated planning
process
2. Develop summer scheduling guidelines and
schedule
Activity
a. Understand and create
structures that support
feedback loop.
b. Pilot a recommendation to
track how it moves through
the process and assess the
link to budget and planning
as well as institutional
effectiveness.
a. IR provide analyses for
attendance patterns in
regards to student status
(new or continuing); are
these isolated enrollments.
b. Look at course success in
terms of degree of
acceleration.
c. Identify mandated courses
necessary for degree,
certificate, or transfer
completion during summer
(including basic skills).
d. Work towards a process that
does not borrow from one
year to pay for another.
e. Develop a summer schedule
that ensures meeting fiscal
year FTES targets and
maximizes flexibility in
course accounting.
Key Persons
EMC, IEC
Budget
NA
Timeline
Spring
2011
EMC, Deans,
and IR
$380,000
Spring
2011
Results
3. Reform the matriculation process and First
Year Initiative to maximize student success:
Placement preparation
Mandatory assessment
Use of multiple measures
Mandatory advising in enrollment cohorts
Mandatory orientation
Student Education Plan
a. Student services and English
and math faculty create plan
and implement placement
preparation and multiple
measures for all
matriculating students.
b. Pilot Early Assessment
Program.
c. Consider other CCC
placement measures for
utilization at CR.
d. Consider revision of credit
by exam policy.
e. Change assessment location
from high schools to college
campuses with advisor
availability after exam.
f. Increase intrusive advising
and guidance during
matriculation process to
ensure students move
through each stage and
enroll in courses that support
success.
g. Consider expansion of
learning community course
offerings and groups;
analyze data from current
program.
h. Consider revising
administrative policy for
priority registration for
students who successfully
VP Student
Services,
Dean Student
Dev., English
and math
faculty; IR
$5,000 for
increased
Accuplacer
assessments
Spring
2011
complete matriculation.
4. Consider recommendation on limiting the
number of units students may enroll in
a. Create task force to
investigate impact of unit
limitation policies at other
CA community colleges.
EMC
5. Set two year FTES Projections and analyze
FTES/section and efficiency rates
a. Consider impact on budget.
b. Work towards plan for not
borrowing from next year to
pay for this year‟s sections.
c. Consider sustainability of
current course offerings (fill
rates, services available,
staff ratios FT/PT faculty).
d. Perform trend analyses and
examination into courses
experiencing excessively
high fill rates.
e. Examine fill rates and
efficiencies by location
f. Examine Distance.
Education in terms of cost,
revenue generated, and
student success.
g. Examine whether the college
should shift focus to student
success.
h. Develop FTES targets that
balance state funding and
sustainability.
i. Consider development of
EMC
NA
Spring
2011
Spring
2011
2011-2012 scheduling
details based on target FTES
of 4950 resident and 232
nonresident FTES.
6. Review and revise TLU Allocation Process for
2011-2012
a. Receive feedback from
Deans.
b. Report on faculty not
replaced to be taken into
account for projections.
c. Consideration for starting
fresh – not using established
TLU numbers. Determine
what courses are offered
based on college mission.
d. Assume equal % cut by site
in annualized FTES based
on 2010-11 actual (5201
base)
8. Number of calculated
sections funded is
determined by site
productivity.
9. Selected adjustments
permitted for
instructional/schedule
integrity.
10. Work with BPC to
ensure funding for all
new program/class
initiatives (e.g. Ed
Master Plan driven)
through use of excess
Deans, area
coordinators,
EMC
Spring
2011
reserve funds.
11. 101 Corridor is
considered separate
entity.
12. Virtual campus will be a
stand-alone division and
function like the 101
Corridor as it relates to
TLU allocations.
7. Establish priorities for determining what
courses to offer
a. Consider Chancellor‟s
Office mandate to prioritize
transfer, vocational and
basic skills courses.
Per this mandate, evaluate
possible reduction of
avocational and repeatable
courses and/or placement to
community education.
EMC, IR
Spring
2011
VPSS, EMC
Spring
2011
b. Consider college mission
and vision.
c. Determine how best to
maximize access to what we
are able to offer towards
degree, certificate, transfer
and basic skills completion.
8. Evaluate and make recommendation for
enrollment priorities for branch campuses, sites
and centers
a. Examine and consider the
balance between access and
success.
b. Analyze on-line survey data
on student satisfaction and
9. Analyze basic skills completion and impact on
other courses and program development
needs.
c. Consider the relevancy,
financial impact and
influence on student success
of the distribution model
(use of instructional sites).
d. Analyze the enrollment
needs of current and
potential students being
served by other than the
main Eureka campus.
a. Basic Skills report on data.
b. Recommend use of reformed
matriculation process to
increase student success and
completion.
10. Review and revise waitlist and late
registration/add policy and process
a. Evaluate feasibility of
setting application deadlines.
b. Create process to support
faculty electronic adds.
c. Work towards process to
support faculty ability to add
and drop students more
efficiently and show link to
support student success.
11. Develop an enrollment scorecard and utilize for
analyses of enrollment data
a. Define and agree on use of
efficiencies, retention,
persistence and completion
data for this purpose.
Basic Skills
Committee
and IR
Spring
2011
VPSS, Dean
Student
Development;
A&R
Director; IR;
EMC
Spring
2011
VPSS, IEC,
EMC
NA
Spring
2011
b. Consider other measures
such as fill rates, efficiency,
best use of instructional sites
and courses necessary for
degree, certificate, transfer,
and basic skills completion.
c. Work with IEC to adopt
enrollment scorecard as
indicators of institutional
effectiveness.
#
Recommendation/Action
Item
IR Status-101 Corridor Survey
Action Taken
Status
Forwarded to IR
Deployment of the survey has been delayed given the lack to an adequate
number of staff in Institutional Research. Dr. Goswami reported to the
college in a December 17 email that the process to fill the IR direction
position will be started.
EM Scorecard
Forwarded to
Cabinet for
approval.
Forwarded to the
IEC for review and
discussion.
Cabinet approved moving forward with populating the scorecard. IR is in
the process of gathering the data.
EM and Student Satisfaction
Survey Action Plans
Forwarded to
subcommittee of
the EMC to review
and revise the
action plans
IR is populating the data fields.
The scorecard has been forwarded to the IEC for review and discussion for
possible use as indicators of institutional effectiveness. The IEC may be
asked to validate possible targets.
The subcommittee's work will culminate in a set of achievable goals for
Spring semester, with a proposed budget, based on a realistic assessment of
the college as it is now for the EMC to consider in January.
Next steps are to: EMC review the task forces‟ work and revise the spring
plan if necessary and convene a task force to develop a two year EM Plan
for submission the EMC by April.
The college has made the commitment to redeploy a student satisfaction
action survey in April, 2012.
Multiple Measures
Forwarded to
subcommittee of
the EMC to review
Together, English and math faculty and student services managers have
made good progress on development of multiple measures for English and
math placement. The Academic Support Center web-site has been updated
and revise the
action plans
to include more up to date information on preparation for the Accuplacer
test and appointments available. Student services staff are also encouraging
students to be better prepared and emphasizing the importance of valid test
results.
English and math faculty and student services managers have worked
together on development of multiple measures for English and math
placement
The Academic Support Center web-site has been updated to include more
up to date information on preparation for the Accuplacer test and
appointments available.
The English and math faculty have provided English and math course level
descriptions and samples that will be utilized by advisors to assist students
who fall within zones between two different courses in choosing the course
they would have the best opportunity to be successful in.
Data from IR is being utilized to further analyze the relationship between
Accuplacer scores and course success in math for validity purposes and to
help inform improvements for the assessment procedures.
Waitlist procedure
Student Feedback Online Form
Forwarded to
Administration
Forwarded to IT
The matriculation flow process is being updated to ensure students are
informed about the importance of placement results and engage in adequate
preparation for the Accuplacer tests and the advising component informs
students about the difference between various levels of math and English
and utilizes intake questions in a consistent manner to determine the
potential for student success.
Approved and has been implemented for Spring 2011.
Co-chairs of the EMC worked with Maggie to develop the appropriate
for
implementation
questions, and has uploaded the form to the website and MyCR site.
When a student fills out the form, an email will be sent to Tiffany. She can
then forward that problem if necessary to the appropriate person.
Over the next few weeks, we can observe what kinds of problems are
reported, and we can discuss the form further at the next EMC meeting.
Any appropriate changes in the form recommended by the EMC can be
made at that time.
BP 5055 Review and Revision
Summer Enrollment
2010-11 FTES Target
BPC: Critical Issues/Areas of Focus Regarding Budget Development
Guiding Principles
1. Access/Student Success
a. Accessi. Anchor or not?
ii. Non-proportional cuts… favor sites?
b. Successi. Does student success get priority?
2. FTES Strategy
3. Minimize impact on high value-added employee functions
4. Do not assume “current practices” are the norm (e.g. workweek, processes,
locations, times of operation)
5. No change in contractual obligations (e.g. steps, benefits, classifications)
6. Decisions should be permanent and long term
7. Fifty percent and 75/25 requirements are not a factor
8. First dollars go to obtain FTES target
9. New initiatives can only be funded with excess reserves