Instructional Program Review Update 2012/13 (fields will expand as you type) Section 1 ‐ Program Information 1.0 Name of Program: Physical Science Date: 18‐January‐2013 1.1 Program Review Authors: David Bazard, Erik Kramer, Jon Pedicino, Tony Sartori, Mark Renner 1.2 Dean’s Signature: Rachel Anderson Date: 2/8/13 1.3 Individual Program Information # of Degrees # of Certificates None # of Courses # of GE Courses 30 18 None The shaded cells below are to be populated by the Program Review Committee as needed. # of Full Time Faculty 2010‐2011 # of Part Time Faculty 2011‐12 2010‐2011 # of Staff FTE 2011‐12 2010‐2011 2011‐12 Personnel Budget 2010‐2011 Discretionary Budget 2011‐12 2010‐2011 2011‐12 1.3.1 State briefly how the program functions support the college mission: As defined, the physical science “program” provides physical science general education courses, preparatory courses for students intending to transfer to a four year institutions as science majors, and courses that are requirements and electives for the Associates of Liberal Arts Science and Science Exploration degrees, the Marine Science Technology degree and certificate, and the Natural History certificate. 1.3.2 Program highlights/accomplishments: The physical science program courses continue to provide high‐quality levels of instruction as determined through course and program assessments and anecdotally through conversations with science faculty at transfer institutions, and through conversations with students enrolled and graduated from four‐year programs. The LA Science Exploration AA degree, associated with Physical Sciences, has much higher persistence and completion percentages than the District as a whole. Section 2 ‐ Data Analysis 2.1 Enrollment & Fill Rate Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Enrollments & fill rates Enrollment X Comment if checked: Enrollment decline for the Physical Sciences (9%) is slightly less than for the District (10%), although a 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 1 slightly larger reduction in sections (9%) occurred in Physical Sciences than in the District (6%). All changes are less than 10%. Comment if checked: The Physical Science fill rate slightly higher than District: 89% (10‐11) and 86% (11‐12) for Physical Fill Rate X Sciences vs. 80% (10‐11) and 77% (11‐12) for the District 2.2 Success & Retention Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Success & Retention Success X Comment if checked: Physical Science course success is 64% (10‐11) and 68% (11‐12). The District is 68% (for both years). This appears to be a statistically insignificant difference. The difference between the two years is due to small changes in several disciplines. The lowest success rate (55%) is for online Chemistry. This is substantially below the District average for online success (63%). The lower success is attributed to the rigors of chemistry and that the online course is a preparatory course for students who did not have (or have not retained) high‐school level chemistry skills. The success rate for the online geology (67% and 64%) is slightly higher than the District average (63%). Retention X Comment if checked: Physical Science course retention is 87% and the District is 89% (for both years). This appears to be a statistically insignificant difference, and understandable given the rigor of some of the courses within the disciplines (Chemistry and Physics) and the retention for online courses. The lowest retention percentages are for the online Geology and Chemistry courses (74‐79%). These are lower than the District averages for online courses (84% and 85%). This is a function of the rigor of these online courses, which require applications of physics and/or chemistry principles as well as mathematical calculations. Efforts to advise students regarding the challenges of online instruction (taking a self assessment and an introduction to online learning preparatory course DE‐101) 2.3 Persistence Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Persistence X Comment: The two degrees associated with physical science have higher persistence percentages than the District. The Liberal Arts‐Science degree has a persistence of 39% (compared to 37% for District), and the Liberal Arts‐Science Exploration has a persistence of 56%. The Science Exploration persistence is considerably higher than the District average, but the reason is not clear. A larger cohort may help to determine if this trend is ongoing or the circumstances of this initial cohort. 2.4 Completions Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Completions & Transfers X Comment: The completion transfer rate for the Science Exploration students was considerably higher than that of the District. 88% of District students did not complete or transfer. However, only 54% of Science Exploration students did not complete or transfer. However, this is based on a small number of students (13 for 08‐11 cohort). The completion rate for the LA‐Science 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 2 option is lower than the District. Of the 54 LA‐Science students tracked, only 1 completed the degree and only 2 transferred. This requires some further analysis given the number of students who verbally discuss their educational goals with faculty. Do the student preparing to transfer in a science major change to Science Exploration or other majors? What happened to the 51 student who did not complete or transfer? Student Equity Group Data 2.5 Enrollments Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp by group Select your program and click on ~ by Student Equity Group next to Enrollments & fill rates Comment: The enrollment proportions of equity groups for the physical sciences are similar to those of the District. However, the physical sciences has a higher percentage of male students (51%) and a lower percentage of female student (49%) than the District averages (43% male, 57% female). The exception is online, where the physical science courses are similar to the District in enrolling a large majority of female students (75% for PS, 71% for District). 2.6 Success & Retention Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp by group Select your program and click on ~ by Student Equity Group next to success & retention Comment: The Success and Retention numbers are roughly the same for male (S: 64%, R:89%) and female students (S:64%, R:86%), and those numbers are very similar to the District averages. The success of African‐American (50%), DSPS (50%), and Basic Skills (combined English and Math) students (17%) is considerably lower than for other populations. The lower success of Basic Skills is understandable given the rigor of many science courses. However, it is interesting that students enrolled only in Basic Skills Math have the same success rate as the overall program rate (both 64%). The lower performance of Basic Skills English and English‐Math combined students should be (and to some degree is being) addressed through advising, recommended preparation in course descriptions, and course prerequisites. The low success and retention for DSPS students may be a function of physical limitations of lab spaces and other activities spaces. However, the data does not allow us to determine the type of disability and if physical disabilities represent a significant factor in this lower success. Our new science facilities (on Eureka campus) are ADA compliant and less restrictive, which would help if this is a significant factor. Another factor may be the conflict between learning disabilities and the rigor of the science courses. Better advising and preparation is required to improve those situations. Research into the experiences of DSPS students in physical science courses would be helpful in evaluating the specific circumstances of students in this group. The low success rate of African‐American students is problematic. Recognition of this situation is a starting place and should help physical science faculty recognize the importance of a welcoming and helpful environment. Physical science faculty will seek out opportunities associated with next year’s Annual Institutional Plan Objective of diversity training (see annual plan). Low retention rates of DSPS students are similar to the low success rates. This may be further evidence of barriers to a successful learning environment. 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 3 Curiously, the retention of both Basic Skills and African‐American students is similar to the retention by other students, although (as noted above) the success rates are significantly lower for these groups. This implies that we do better with retaining students in these groups. 2.7 Persistence Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp by group Select your program and click on ~ by Student Equity Group next to persistence Comment: The numbers of students from various equity groups in the cohorts (going back to 08) are so low for the degrees being used (Science and Science Exploration), that significant conclusions cannot be drawn from this data. Additional Indicators 2.8 Faculty Information Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Faculty (FT/PT) & FTES/FTEF Comment: The ratio of Full Time Equivalent Students to Full Time Equivalent faculty is about 31 to 1. This is similar to the District average of 29 to 1. The variation of physical science course formats (large‐class, small‐labs) causes a wide variation in these numbers (from 17:1 to 50:1). 2.9 Labor Market Data (CTE/Occupational programs only) Refer to the California Employment Development Division: http://www.edd.ca.gov/ www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov
Provide a narrative that addresses the following: a. Documentation of labor market demand b. Non‐duplication of other training programs in the region c. Effectiveness as measured by student employment and program completions. Narrative: Overall, what has been the impact of the change in indicators on student achievement and learning: Overall, the Physical Sciences data (and LA‐Science/Science Exploration data) show trends comparable with the District, with the following exceptions: 1. The completion transfer percent for the Science Exploration students was considerably higher than that of the District. 2. The two degrees associated with physical sciences (Science Exploration and Science) have higher persistence percentages than the District. The higher percentage of completion/transfer and persistence of students enrolled in the Science degrees (LA‐emphasis areas) may be, in part, because we established advising in the sciences prior to these degrees being established (Science Transfer Prep program goes back to 2007). 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 4 Consequently, faculty have been diligent in advising students about appropriate courses and sequences to ensure success. 3. The overall retention percentage for courses is similar to the District percentage, but the retention percentages for the online Geology and Chemistry courses (74‐79%) are lower than the District averages for online courses (84% and 85%). This appears to be the impact of the online environment where students may sign up for the courses without fully understanding the demands of this format. The faculty will work on a more thorough means of preparing and alerting students who sign up for these courses. This will include (but is not be restricted to) using resources provided through the District's DE program (DE‐101, self‐assessment) Provide narrative on the factors that may have contributed to the improvement or decline in the identified population: This is the first year we have been provided with equity data, so we can’t evaluate changes in the data. However, our analysis of this year's data led to one of the program plans listed in Section 5.1 (diversity training). We also intend to seek more details regarding DSPS student data to determine if physical space limitations present a barrier to student achievement. Section 3 – Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities Curriculum & Assessment Data Are all courses on track for complete assessment of all outcomes in two years? Y/N What courses, if any, are not on track with regard to assessment? Explain. # of PLOs Assessed and Reported during the 2011‐2012 academic year. % of Course Outlines of Record updated If there is no plan for updating outdated curriculum, when will you inactivate? View curriculum status: click here or go to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Curriculum Status Assessment Reporting completed? Y/N Program Advisory Committee Met? Y/N 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 5 Yes None LA:Science‐ 5 PLO’s assessed LA:Science Exploration‐ 5 PLO’s assessed 80% (24 of 30). Status of seven out of date courses: Three Oceanography courses (10, 11, 12) are on the January 26 Curr Comm agenda, and two others (Geog 1 and Geol 15) are in process. One course (Astro 99) was misidentified in the curriculum data. Yes for 2011‐2012 NA 3.0 How has assessment of course level SLO’s led to improvement in student learning (top three): Chemistry instituted more discussion into the Chem 1A course after noting this as a recommendation in a previous assessment. The assessment results improved for the Summer 2012 Chem 1A course after implementing this change. Physics has noted less than expected results for assessments that require use of equipment. This is the basis for the resource requests listed below. Updating the equipment is anticipated to lead to improvement of several outcomes including, “Identify essential aspects of a physical problem and formulate a strategy for analysis” (course outcome #4 for Physics 4A). Geology (Physical Geology – Geol 1): Faculty were concerned that the traditional lab tests were heavily weighted toward classification and did not demonstrate critical thinking and understanding of the concepts underlying the classification. Assessment results were the basis of this discussion. Changes were implemented to emphasize concepts within lab exercises, and the students were informed that they would be responsible for conceptual questions on the lab exams. Faculty are pleased with the results. This approach is succeeding and the students are achieving the intended outcomes. 3.1 How has assessment of program level outcomes led to degree/certificate improvement (top three): Assessment of LA‐Science outcome #3 (Collect and analyze data, evaluate sources of error, and synthesize this information into clear and organized reports.) led to dialogue regarding the appropriateness of this outcome for the courses listed. The resulting dialogue was used as the basis for course mapping during the fall 2012 mapping session. Assessment of LA‐Science Exploration Outcomes has led to a discussion regarding the need for specific physical science and life science outcomes for this degree. The Science Faculty is currently engaged in discussions regarding the wording of new physical science, life science, and general outcomes for the degree. Mapping of LA‐ Science‐Exploration course outcomes to the degree outcomes led to a realization that several of the mathematics courses listed for the degree are not appropriate for the program outcomes. Consequently, the science faculty have proposed a modification to the program elective courses. 3.2 (Optional) Describe unusual assessment findings/observations that may require further research or institutional support: Section – 4 Evaluation of Previous Plans 4.1 Describe plans/actions identified in the last program review and their current status. What measurable outcomes were achieved due to actions completed. 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 6 Actions Current Status Outcomes The is the first year that Physical Science has been identified as a “program”. Consequently, there are no previous plans. 4.2 (If applicable) Describe how funds provided in support of the plan(s) contributed to program improvement: Section – 5 Planning 5.0 Program Plans (2012/2013) Based on data analysis, student learning outcomes and program indicators, assessment and review, and your critical reflections, describe the program’s Action Plan for the 2012/13 academic year. If more than one plan, add rows. Include necessary resources. (Only a list of resources is needed here. Provide detailed line item budgets, supporting data or other justifications in the Resource Request). 5.1 Program Plans Action to be taken: 1. Improve attainment of lab based outcomes in Physics by upgrading lab equipment. 2. Upgrade dated equipment in 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx Relationship to Institutional Plans Education Master Plan, Goal 3 – Practice Continuous Quality Improvement. Goal 4 – Maintain Technological Relevance. Ed. Master Plan, Goal 1‐
Ensure student success
Education Master Plan, 4/5/2013 Relationship to Assessment Assessments in physics 2A, 4A, and 4B all indicate lower attainment of lab outcomes relative to lecture outcomes. Expected Impact on Program/Student Learning Upgrading equipment for improvement of experiment outcomes as well as more transparent functionality should lead to increased performance on assessments. Physics lab equipment upgrades detailed below (Section 6). Assessments cited Equipment that is more up to Lab equipment Page 7 Resources Needed connection with the new buildings. This includes upgrades in Physics, Chemistry and Earth Sciences (specific equipment is listed in the Resource Request section (6.0) below. Goal 4 – Maintain Technological Relevance. Ed. Master Plan, Goal 1‐
Ensure student success
3. Acquire lab supplies to achieve Earth Science outcomes. Ed. Master Plan, Goal 1‐
Ensure student success
4. Physical Science Faculty will engage in campus diversity training, as provided through the professional development program. Annual Institutional Plan
“Action” I.D: Provide
comprehensive faculty and
staff diversity training (e.g.
pedagogy, behavior,
communications, and
hiring)
17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 above (for physics and geology classification) indicate need for improved equipment. Course and program outcomes for the sciences include ability to acquire and meaningfully evaluate data. This is only possible with functioning equipment. As cited above, the Earth Science program requires students to perform specimen classification and to understand the physical basis for this classification. These activities require specific lab supplies (hardness kits, acid testing, microscopic identification) Creating a welcoming environment is expected to help with success of underrepresented students and therefore date will make student learning in classes more relevant to current technology. Working equipment will afford students opportunity to practice skills that are required in professional settings and expected at transfer universities. upgrades could come out of funds associated with construction and furnishing of the new academic buildings (state bonds and local measure Q funds). Specific equipment listed in Section 6.0 Lab facilities and supplies consistent with current introductory science education practices will ensure current and future academic success for our students. Worn, obsolete, and lacking supplies will not allow us to provide a physical science lab experience consistent with college‐level expectation (by transfer institutions and national science education organizations such as the National Association of Geoscience Teachers) Increase success and retention of underrepresented students – particularly African‐American and DSPS students. Modest funding ($150.00) consistent with past Earth Science supply budgets is required to ensure we have the appropriate materials to teach Earth Science labs. (details listed in Section 6.0) Page 8 Appropriate Professional Development Workshops 5. Science Faculty will finalize writing of new Program Learning Outcomes for the LA Science Exploration Degree Educational Master Plan, Goal 1 – Ensure Student Success improve assessment scores. Having more specific program outcomes (physical and life science outcomes) will enable the faculty to determine if students are achieving concepts specific to each disciplinary area. The impact of revised PLOs will allow for more informed decisions regarding program changes related to students achieving these more specific outcomes No Resources Required. 5.2 Provide any additional information, brief definitions, descriptions, comments, or explanations, if necessary. Section 6 ‐ Resource Requests 6.0 Planning Related, Operational, and Personnel Resource Requests. Requests must be submitted with rationale, plan linkage and estimated costs. If requesting full‐time staff, or tenure‐track faculty, submit the appropriate form available at inside.redwoods.edu/ProgramReview Requests will follow the appropriate processes. Check One Amount Recurring Rationale Request $ Cost Y/N Linkage Planning Operational Personnel Physics – Digital photogates and accessory X 1600 N Relates to plan to increase photogates attainment of lab outcomes in physics through equipment upgrade (Plan #1 in Section 5.1). Photogates are the most commonly used device in experiments for physics 2A and 4A. Assessments in the last offering of 2A show lower attainment of lab 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 9 Physics – Air tracks and air sources. X $5000 No Physics – DC Power Supplies X $500 No 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 10 outcomes connected with this kind of equipment. The cost listed is for four setups. Relates to plan to increase attainment of lab outcomes in physics through equipment upgrade (Plan #1 in Section 5.1). Also, relates to plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Assessment of the Spring ’12 4A class strongly indicates the necessity for these. The cost listed is for four units. Relates to plan to increase attainment of lab outcomes in physics through equipment upgrade (Plan #1 in Section 5.1). Assessment in Physics 4B indicated lower attainments. Particularly that 2 power supplies had to be shared by 30 students was a significant impediment to learning related to the outcome assessed. Price listed would likely cover 4 units, though there are a variety to choose from that would Physics – New e/m system X $3500 No Physics – New Ripple Tank X $825 No Physics – Mechanical Wave Source and Sine Wave Generators X $1300 No Physics – Michelson Interferometer X $2200 No Physics – Electroscopes X $500 No Physics – Electrometer, Faraday Ice Pail, & Variable Capacitor X $650 No Chemistry – operational upgrades: (Operational if purchased individually) Flammable cabinets (3) @$1000 each Drying Ovens (2) @ $2000 each Organic Micro Lab Kits (24) @$600 each Organic Macro Lab Kits (24) @$600 each pH meters (15) @$700.00 each CBL units (15) @$150.00 each X $3000.00 $4000.00 $14,400.00 $14,400.00 $10,500.00 $2,250.00 No 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 11 work with varying prices. Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1). Listed price would cover four units. Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Listed price would cover four units Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1) Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1). Replacement of equipment is required for students to achieve lab‐related $1500.00 $1500.00 $1500.00 $8000.00 $10,000.00 $12,000.00 $1200.00 $900.00 $21,000.00 $12,000.00 CBL Temperature probe(15) @$100.00 ech
CBL pH probes (15) @$100.00 each CBL Voltmeter probe (15) @$100.00 each Centrifuge (4) @$2000.00 each Microgram balances (10) @$1000 each Heating mantel and Transformer (24) @$500 each Steam distillation apparatus (12) @$100.00 each Printer(3) @$300.00 each Spectronic 100 VIS Spectrometer (15) @$1400.00 each Heating/Stirring plates (24) @$500 each Chemistry – planning upgrades UV/Vis Spectrometer (1) High‐Pressure Liquid Chromatograph and Detector (1) Explosion Proof Refridgerators (2) @$5000 each Ice machine (1) 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx X X X X No $5000 $15,000 $10,000.00 $6000.00 4/5/2013 Page 12 outcomes. This is also related to Strategic and Educational Master Plan goals of “ensuring student success”. This is required for students to achieve student learning outcomes. Current equipment is 30‐40 years of age These items represent equipment traditionally housed in the chemistry stockroom that is used primarily for chemistry courses. However some of these items are also used in biology, physics, Earth science, and environmental science courses. Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1). Replacement of equipment is required for students to achieve lab‐related outcomes. This is also institutional plans cited above. Current equipment is 30‐40 years of age Earth Sciences Supplies – replacement of specimens, hardness kits, maps, microscope bulbs, and other general supplies (detailed list provided upon request). X $150 Yes Earth Sciences (Geology, Oceanography, Geography, Phys Science Environmental Science courses) Operational Upgrades 1. Four US ECLIPSE Digital
Balance Scales (500g x 0.1g):
@$21.50 each
X X $90.00 $1700.00 No No 2. Meiji CK3900 CCD video
camera and "C"-mount
adapter.
Section 7‐ Program Review Committee Response Do not type in this section. To be completed by the Program Review Committee following evaluation. 7.0 The response will be forwarded to the author and the supervising Director and Vice President: 17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 13 Replacement of Geology and Oceanography lab supplies is required for students to achieve lab‐
related outcomes. This is also related to Strategic and Educational Master Plan goals of “ensuring student success” Plan to modernize equipment in the new academic building (see Plan 2, Section 5.1). Scales have been borrowed from Chemistry in the past, but the new building arrangement will make this process difficult. Video camera allows
projection of images from
our one petrographic
microscope. This allows
a meaningful lab
regarding specimen
classification and
provides students with a
post-Victorian Earth
Science lab experience.
S.1. Program Information: Satisfactory. S.2. Data Analysis: Satisfactory. Program is generally at or above district averages; variances explained in narrative. Strong program. S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities: Outcomes on track, five PLOs assessed, curriculum on track, and assessment reporting completed. Narrative on improvements as a result of assessment indicated increased dialog, changes within courses, and the program that yielded satisfactory results. Very well done. S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans: None S.5. Planning: Most of the planning seemed related to the new building. Good links to institutional planning. S.6. Resource Requests: Resource requests also seemed tied to modernization of buildings; however, requests are detailed and all included estimated costs. It is likely funding already exists. ProgramreviewmeetsPRCexpectations.
17.c PhysSciProgRev1 21 13.docx 4/5/2013 Page 14