College of the Redwoods Program Review Committee Executive Summary Adopted November 6, 2009 Mission Statement The College of the Redwoods’ Program Review Committee leads and facilitates authentic assessment as it relates to student success and planning at the institution for all subject and service areas. The committee reviews Annual and Comprehensive Program Reviews that provide the strong foundation upon which College of the Redwoods develops, identifies, states and documents quality improvement plans and goals including providing the direction of prioritization of funding, and support needs as organized under the strategic planning objectives. Objective: To provide an evaluative Executive Summary of this program’s review for authors, the Integrated Planning Committees, and the District. Program Review Subject/Service Area: ___Liberal Arts: Humanities Program Review Authors: ___Hinman, Mayer, Potamianos __________________________________________________ Summary and Recommendations: Additional Comments: 1. Program strengths:
Discipline provides fundasmental trnsfer courses to 4-year colleges
2. Program challenges/obstacles:
Need for increased advising and student assistance
Need for full-time faculty (request for two on file)
JSTOR online journal database
Assessment and curriculum updates programmatically
The ability to identify program majors. Without
need for more DSPS counseling and matriculation services
that information, scheduling appropriate courses to
meet the needs of students is unknown.
3. Commendations
& Recommendations:
First time PLO’s have been developed and are clearly identified and
Authors reflect on success rates of courses that fall
measureable
beneath the norm
42 degrees conferred last year
Recommend district budget for replacing items such
as projector bulbs, or increasing department/division
operational budgets to allow for these expenditures
4. Program Budget/Funding Sources:
Basic needs for upgraded technology &
Lack of full-time faculty hurting division
maintenance and increased printing budget
Need for more DSPS counseling and matriculation services
Recommend separating Humanities and
Need recognized for a network printer
Communications operating budgets
5. Program Goals/Plans:
Faculty work together
Curriculum updates, scheduled for Spring/Fall, 2011
Planning Agenda:–
Better alignment with sister colleges – update articulation agreements for
humanities, languages, and communication courses with major transfer
institutions.
Sufficient full-time faculty
6. Program Outcomes Assessment (PLOs/SLOs):
42 degrees conferred 2010 in LA Humanities
Results of assessments not analyzed yet; baseline data;
Several classes needed updating
Recommendation of the writers was to conduct
First time PLO’s have been developed and are clearly identified and
regular training for PLO assessment during Flex
measureable; no assessment yet, baseline PLOs; course SLO’s are regularly
days making it easier for faculty from different
administered by individual departments
disciplines to work together
Process: Completed Executive Summary forms will be sent to program review authors. PRC will forward Executive Summaries to the appropriate integrated planning committees. 7. Student Success/Achievement/Basic Skills obstacles/challenges:
Engl 1a, 1b more important than math skills
Retention rates overall are normal. On-line is about 10% lower.
70-72% success rates. No explanation is provided for the several courses that
fall below the norm. (Japanese, Philosophy 12, English 60)
Overall, the program grew 39% over the four-year
period, compared to 23% growth for the District.”
Such high fill rates (81%) indicate that students are
being underserved in the Humanities
Process: Completed Executive Summary forms will be sent to program review authors. PRC will forward Executive Summaries to the appropriate integrated planning committees. College of the Redwoods Program Review Author’s Executive Summary Addendum Mission Statement: The College of the Redwoods’ Program Review Committee facilitates the process at the institution for all subject and service areas. The committee reviews Annual and Comprehensive Reports providing an opportunity to develop, identify, and state quality improvement plans and goals, as well as request priorities for funding, and support needs as organized under the strategic planning objectives. • Objective: This document provides the authors the means to respond the Executive Summary of the Program Review Committee. These comments will be included as addendums along with the PRC’s Executive Summary, and posted on the Program Review site at inside.redwoods.edu Annual Program Review Update Subject/Service Area: __Liberal Arts: Humanitites_________ Annual Program Review Update Authors: ___Hinman, Mayer, Potamianos, Thomas______________ Summary and Recommendations: Additional Comments: 1. Program strengths: 2. Program challenges/obstacles: 3. Commendations/Recommendations: 4. Program Budget/Funding Sources: 5. Program Goals/Plans: Four courses had success rates below the norm. Only one section of English 60 has been offered in four years, so it is difficult to draw conclusions based on the small number of students enrolled. The course will be offered again in Fall 2011, providing additional data. Japanese 1A and 1B have a very small but growing enrollment. The success rate is also slowly increasing. If that trend continues for anther year, the success rate will be in the normal range. Philosophy 12 is a course in formal symbolic logic. It meets the critical thinking requirement but appeals to a very different student than do the other two options of English 1B or Philosophy 1. Philosophy 12 should be “marketed” to math majors as they are more likely to do well in the course. 6. Program Outcomes Assessment (PLOs/SLOs): 7. Student Success/Achievement Basic Skills obstacles/challenges Process: PRC will forward completed Executive Summaries to program review authors. Authors will have two weeks to provide feedback and corrections on errors of fact and/interpretation PRC will forward Executive Summaries and authors response (if available) to the appropriate integrated planning committee and the CPC.