InstructionalProgramReviewUpdate2012/13
Section 1 ‐ Program Information 1.0 Name of Program: Registered Nursing Program (RN) Date: 12/16/2012 1.1 Program Review Authors: Connie Wolfsen, Roberta Farrar, Kady Dunleavy , Sally Urban 1.2 Dean’s Signature: Pat Girczyc Date: 2/8/13 1.3 Individual Program Information # of Degrees # of Certificates 2 # of Courses 1 # of GE Courses 7 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 a result of completing the program, students are prepared to begin their careers in healthcare which provides an essential service for members of any community. 1.3.2 Program highlights/accomplishments: The program graduates approximately 50 students annually. These students go on to become registered nurses in a variety of healthcare settings. The RN Program maintains Board of Registered Nursing accreditation receiving the maximum term allowed. 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 ☐ Comment if checked: Fill Rate ☐ Comment if checked: 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 1 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 ☐ Comment if checked: Retention ☐ Comment if checked: 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 persistence data for AS RN needs to be refined. Currently there is no differentiation between students who entered the college declaring “pre‐nursing” and those who actually enter the ASN program. Program faculty will pursue a process for adding a pre‐nursing major designation to the registration system. 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 persistence data for AS RN needs to be refined. Currently there is no differentiation between students who entered the college declaring “pre‐nursing” and those who actually enter the ASN program. Program faculty will pursue a process for adding a pre‐nursing major designation to the registration system. 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: All RN students are beyond BSI math and English requirements. Students are slightly older. We have a higher proportion of DSPS students than the district average. 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: Success and retention is higher for all RN student equity 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: This data is difficult to interpret because it conflates pre‐nursing and RN students. 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 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 2 Select your program and click on: Faculty (FT/PT) & FTES/FTEF Comment: This data does not accurately reflect the FT/PT status of the RN program. The ADN Program consists of lecture and clinical lab courses. The entire four semesters with the current increased enrollments requires 380 TLUs for staffing. In 2011‐
2012 there was an additional FT grant funded faculty so 5 FT faculty covered 225 TLUs and AF covered 155 TLUs. The FT:PT ratio was 6:4. For 2012‐2013 there is currently 4 FT faculty able to cover 180 TLUs. Associate faculty account for 200 TLUs The FT:PT ratio for 2012‐2013 is 4:5 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 A. California will likely need to maintain the present number of nursing graduates in order to meet long‐term health care needs based on the Forecasts of the California Board of Registered Nursing Nurse Workforce in California, November 10, 2011. According to labor market information from California EDD there are 55 annual job openings for RN s in Del Norte, Humboldt, Trinity & Mendocino counties. There is no longer an RN program at Humboldt State, so CR’s program is the only local educational opportunity. The closest ADN programs are at Mendocino College, Shasta College and College of the Siskiyou’s. Anecdotally, there is a decrease in hiring for new RN graduates locally and throughout the state. This downturn is predicted to be temporary and is occurring as a result of the federal and state economy and in anticipation of the changes in the federal healthcare restructuring. According to the California Institute of Nursing and Healthcare (www.CINHC.org) the need for nurses throughout the state will continue to increase despite the current downturn. California will likely need to maintain the present number of nursing graduates in order to meet long‐term health care needs. B. HSU graduated their last class of RN BSN students as of 12‐2012. There are no other RN training programs within 200 miles. C. Program completion rates are above the district average. National licensing exam pass rate (first time takers) for 7/2011‐6/2012 was at 84% . Data on employment has been collected though not yet released. Anecdotally, there were 30 graduates hired in local hospitals, 10 graduates who moved to other parts of the state or to other states. We continue to work with IR to refine the collection of this information.
Overall, what has been the impact of the change in indicators on student achievement and learning: The RN Program is stable as the indicators of student achievement and learning have not significantly changed. Provide narrative on the factors that may have contributed to the improvement or decline in the identified population: 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 3 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 YES #1: Human Flourishing, #2: Clinical Reasoning and Judgment & #5: Applied Knowledge All of the nursing courses are current except for NURS 41 No No 3.0 How has assessment of course level SLO’s led to improvement in student learning (top three): 1. Revised clinical journals to be more reflective of student’s clinical reasoning and judgment. 2. Validated student learning of safety concepts per review of examination questions. 3. Reviewed clinical evaluation tools and determined revision was necessary to reflect NLN and QSEN standards. 3.1 How has assessment of program level outcomes led to degree/certificate improvement (top three): 1. Increased emphasis and consistency in concept mapping and nursing process. 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. Actions Current Status Outcomes Began curriculum revision/realignment to address changes in the industry, community Pending BRN visit and approval Major work is completed. Have implemented QSEN and updated to incorporate current 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 4 and professional standards (NLN & QSEN) trends in healthcare and nursing education. Will fully implement and complete when BRN approval is obtained. Data based decision making Working with IR to create data that accurately reflects program status. Much improved this year – combined RN and Mobility programs for a more comprehensive picture. RN and career mobility courses will be cross‐listed. 5 courses not updated This was an error Course outlines are now current (except NURS 41) Counseling services The college decided not to assign a dedicated counselor. Students were strongly encouraged to complete Ed Plans with individual counselors. We will re‐evaluate the outcome when the graduation evaluation is complete. At this point we will know who meets and does not meet graduation requirements. 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: Completion of Curriculum revision Relationship to Institutional Plans Currency Closing the loop on journaling Meeting accreditation standards 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Relationship to Assessment Need to update curriculum resulted from assessment work Moving forward to sustainability Expected Impact on Program/Student Learning Improved work readiness, focus on safety and quality standards Improved clinical reasoning and judgment Page 5 Resources Needed none none Work with the math department for developing a hybrid course to assist students with med math Mapping and alignment of program outcomes Mapping and alignment of program outcomes Update NURS 41 Currency Currency Counseling services evaluation & follow‐up as needed. Improve persistence and program success Improve persistence and program success Improved performance in drug calculations which directly relates to patient safety Used primarily for special program needs related to external accreditation requirements Improve persistence and program success none none none 5.2 Provide any additional information, brief definitions, descriptions, comments, or explanations, if necessary. We would like to continue working with other disciplines that are part of the RN degree, starting with math and English, to better align student outcomes. 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 Updated computers for AT 126, AT 103 & x 10,000 N Technological relevance AT 115. Tegrity subscription x 40,000 Y Technological relevance Supporting student learning, improved access across the district Instructional support services – ISS x 30,000 y Supporting student (skills lab, supply management, learning simulation) x 30,000 Y over time Supporting student Technology ,warranty support, and learning; Currency and replacement for simulators and effective instruction, equipment used by all HO program relevant teaching students in the lab. 18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 6 Full time tenure track faculty X 120,000 Y technology in labs and in CTE Aging of current faculty; FT to PT faculty ratio 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: S.1. Program Information: Satisfactory. S.2. Data Analysis: Satisfactory; all well above district averages. In the future, the PRC recommends commenting on equity and data by site location, e.g. the native American population. One exception, FTES/FTEF were lower this year and it was not addressed specifically. Good labor market data S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities: Outcomes and three PLOs were assessed, curriculum updated. Assessment reporting not complete. PRC recommends confirmation that there was no advisory committee meeting. Good job outlining improvements based on SLO assessment data. Only one PLO improvement noted. S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans: Previous plans and outcomes addressed. S.5. Planning: Some previous plans moved to current plans, but not directly related to institutional plans or assessment. S.6. Resource Requests: Resource requests not specifically/directly tied to plans. PRC requests more direct linkage to planning in the future. Programreviewmeetsexpectations.
18. cRN Program reivew 2011‐2012 final.docx 4/23/2013 Page 7