Instructional Program Review Update 2012/13 (fields will expand as you type) Section 1 ‐ Program Information 1.0 Name of Program: Drafting Technology Date: 1/18/13 1.1 Program Review Authors: Steve Brown 1.2 Dean’s Signature: Jeff
A. Cummings
Date: 1/24/13 1.3 Individual Program Information # of Degrees # of Certificates 3 # of Courses 3 # of GE Courses 8 – Drafting 0 2 – Industrial Technology 1 ‐ Engineering 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: The Drafting Technology (DT) degrees, certificates, and individual courses provide both career preparation and transfer opportunities for students. In addition to students who are seeking a degree or certificate in DT in order to gain entry into the profession, there are some incumbent workers who take DT courses to allow career advancement opportunities. Other students take course in the DT area in order to prepare for transfer to studies in engineering, architecture, and design. The DT program provides courses to support several other programs, including Construction Technology, Manufacturing Technology, Computer Information Systems, Digital Media, Historic Preservation and Restoration, and Electrician Certification. It is common for HSU students to take ENGR23 (same as DT23) because it’s articulated and meets their freshman design requirement at HSU as well as other universities. 1.3.2 Program highlights/accomplishments: 

The Drafting Technology program continues to stay current with contemporary industry trends in technology and employer needs. The program relies on input from its industry advisory committee, follow‐up surveys, participation in program accreditation through the Association for Technology, Management, and Applied Engineering (ATMAE), and professional development activities of its faculty. The DT program is current with all outcomes assessment requirements and curriculum updates. 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 1 





Funding through CTEA and Measure Q provided new computers and a server for the CAD lab during the past academic year. The computers and server were necessary to allow students to use the most current versions and applications of the drafting and design software. DT faculty Brown is working with Manufacturing Technology (MT) faculty to develop new opportunities for students in the area of industrial robotics. An experimental course was prepared and will be offered in Spring 2013. SB70 funds were used to purchase the robotics equipment and provide training for DT and MT faculty. The DT program participated in middle school and high school tours during the past year and provided a course for the Middle School Career Camp. Professor Brown, as a co‐principle investigator for an NSF grant, led a STEM guitar workshop during the summer of 2012 at CR. High school teachers from throughout the country converged on CR for a week of curriculum development and activities regarding the STEM aspects of a solid body electric guitar. Brown assisted with conducting additional workshop in Seattle WA, Ventura CA and Fort Smith AR. DT faculty Brown served as a team chair for an ATMAE accreditation visit to South Louisiana Community College. DT faculty participated in the pilot offering of the renewed Cooperative Work Experience program. 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: The program data for DT indicate a 15% drop in enrollment from the previous year (Drafting, Engineering, and Industrial Tech combined). In the 2011/2012 academic year, it was decided that the college would not produce a student built house as it had been doing for several decades. This resulted in a significant decline in new and continuing students in the CT Residential Construction program. Because the DT71 and DT73 Architectural Design courses as well as DT/ENGR23 courses are required for the Residential Construction program, there were correspondingly fewer students in those courses. Enrollment in DT71 was 25 (100% fill) last year and only 13 this year. Enrollment in DT/ENGR23 combined was 99 (99% fill) and only 81 this year. The overall DT enrollment number is not typical and, without any other known influences, the reduction in CT enrollment seems to be the primary factor. Fortunately, the college has resumed the production of a student built house this year and we anticipate a turnaround in enrollment. Fill Rate ☑ The fill rate and enrollment numbers for Industrial Technology are not an accurate representation of the efficiency of the DT program. The IT courses are required of DT students but are also used by other programs. Comment if checked: The fill rate for the overall DT program of 81% is well above the district average. The IT courses by themselves have a fill rate of 57%. However, it appears that the fill rates for IT46 are not reported accurately. The IT46 course is always offered combined with AG46 and should have a cap of half the overall IT46/AG46 cap. For instance, the 2010/11 rate shown in the table for IT46 of 37% should more accurately be stated as 11 out 15 or 73%. As stated above, the IT courses are used by other programs in addition to DT, so the lower number is not necessarily a valid indicator for DT. 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 2 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 ☑ Comment: The cohort is too small to make any generalizations. We need to encourage students to declare a major (part of program plan below) 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 ☑ Comment: There does not seem to be a pattern among the various DT program completions although most are better than the district average. Once again, students need to declare majors for the numbers to be valid. The number of students for the AS degree in Architecture seems to be incorrect and not in line with the other entries (a value of 39 when the rest are no more than 8?). It would be interesting to track these students over a 4 year period as well, especially those that are not full time students. 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: Female participation in Drafting/ Engineering remains low compared to the district (11% vs 57%). This will probably not change much but the program is doing all they can to encourage women to participate. Our brochures feature women, posters in the lab show women working in technological fields, and the promotional video for the program contains an interview with one of our women graduates. Also, the program advisory committee has regular participation by women. We keep trying! 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: Retention of female students is lower than the district average. (81% vs 88%). As stated in the Enrollments for Student Equity Groups section above, we are doing what we can to encourage women to participate. 2.7 Persistence Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 3 by group Select your program and click on ~ by Student Equity Group next to persistence Comment: No data reported. 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: When looking at just Drafting and Engineering, the FTES/FTEF ratio is 18. This number is lower than the district average for two reasons: first, all DT courses have a cap of 25 in the course outline of record and most courses are taught in a room that can accommodate only 20 students; second, the program has experienced what we expect to be a temporary drop in enrollment due to issue with the CT Residential Construction program stated previously. Last year Drafting and Engineering combined had a ratio of 24.36 when enrollments were more typical; a ratio on the higher end of most CTE programs. 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: There is a documented labor market demand for Drafting Technology program completers. California Employment Development Department (EDD) statistics for Humboldt County indicate considerable employment growth (approx 16%) in job classifications that could be filled by AS and BS graduates of Computer Aided Design programs. Jobs in the drafting and design fields pay well. For example, California EDD data show Architecture and Engineering Occupations median salary is $32.12; Architectural and Civil Drafters median salary is $21.53; and Mechanical Drafters median salary is $22.36. (http://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/cgi/career/) The DT program does not duplicate other training programs in the North Coast region, public or private. The program is part of a non‐
duplicative sequence of courses that begins in the region's high school and ROP programs and may continue to university level Industrial Technology, Architecture, and Engineering Technology programs. The DT program evaluates its effectiveness in a variety of ways, including Advisory committee input, ATMAE accreditation, and follow‐up surveys. The Drafting Technology Advisory Committee is comprised of local employers in the architectural, engineering, and design industries. The committee meets annually to review student learning outcomes, evaluate program curriculum, and update faculty on current industry trends and employment opportunities. Advisory committee minutes are on file in the CTE Division office. The DT program worked with CR Institutional Research staff to develop a graduate follow up survey as well as a student achievement 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 4 report as required by our ATMAE accreditation. Some evidence from these efforts shows:  In fall 2011, the average GPA of students in DT courses at CR was higher than the statewide community college average. In spring 2012, the average GPA of CR students was higher than the statewide average in all areas except Civil Drafting.  The average salary of graduates employed after earning an AS in Architectural Drafting was $43,300 per year. Graduates reported earning on average approximately $21,425 more after their degree than before. Too few Civil Design and Mechanical Drafting students responded to the survey to allow for meaningful interpretation. The 2012‐2013 Core Indicator Report * provided by the Chancellor’s Office for Drafting Technology at CR shows:  Core Indicator 1 – Technical Skill Attainment is at 100% (11.2% ABOVE state level)  Core indicator 2 – Completions is at 84.6% (3.7% ABOVE state level)  Core Indicator 3 – Persistence and transfer is at 88% (2.4% ABOVE state level)  Core Indicator 4 – Employment is at 77.8% (3.7% BELOW state level)  Core Indicator 5 – Non Traditional Participation is at 40% (21.3% ABOVE state level)  Core Indicator 6 – Non Traditional Completions is at 54.55% (35.4% ABOVE state level) *This report reflects students who have completed 12+ units in the 0953 (Drafting Technology) TOP Code Overall, what has been the impact of the change in indicators on student achievement and learning: Other than the enrollment issue described below, there has not been a significant change in indicators. Provide narrative on the factors that may have contributed to the improvement or decline in the identified population: In the 2011/2012 academic year, it was decided that the college would not produce a student built house as it had been doing for several decades. This resulted in a significant decline in new and continuing students in the CT Residential Construction program. Because the DT71, DT73, ENGR23, and DT23 courses are required for the Residential Construction program, there were correspondingly fewer students in those courses during the last year. Enrollment in DT71 and DT73 was at a historic low last year. We ran the courses, nonetheless, because several of the DT and CT students were in the middle of their programs and we would have caused them significant hardship. Therefore, the overall DT enrollment and fill rate numbers are not typical. Fortunately, the college has resumed the production of a student built house this year and we anticipate a turnaround. 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. 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Y DT30 was cancelled for spring 2013, however the course will be offered in Fall 2013. All outcomes will be assessed at Page 5 # 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 that time which will keep the assessment plan on track. DT Arch – 3 DT Mech ‐ 3 DT Civil ‐2 Drafting 100% Engineering 100% Industrial Technology 100% Y Y 3.0 How has assessment of course level SLO’s led to improvement in student learning (top three): 1. A new grading rubric for course portfolios has improved student understanding of portfolio structure and content resulting in improved portfolio grades. 2. Faculty implemented the concept of “pairs programming” in DT60 to increase collaborative exchanges between students. 3. Additional and varied opportunities have been implemented for students to work with drawing scale in both inch and metric drawings resulting in improved exam performance. 3.1 How has assessment of program level outcomes led to degree/certificate improvement (top three): 1. Implemented sketching in DT71 and DT73 to address concerns of the advisory committee and reinforce skills learned in DT23. 2. A new grading rubric for course portfolios has improved student understanding of portfolio structure and content. 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 Faculty attend software update training Professor Brown attended Autodesk University in Nov 2012. Faculty is confident in presenting and incorporating new software applications and concepts. Improve classroom/lab ventilation & heating in AT105 and AT107 Some work has been done, but more is needed to stabilize the temperature of the rooms. Still have days of excessive heat or We have seen an improvement but temperature regulation remains an issue. 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 6 cold in those rooms, especially early fall when the outside temperature is higher. Deactivate DT24 and DT81 Complete Inactive courses no longer reflected in data 4.2 (If applicable) Describe how funds provided in support of the plan(s) contributed to program improvement: Staff development was funded through CTEA. 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 Relationship to Institutional Plans Strategic Plan 1.2 Implement assessments per the submitted plan and close the loop Continuously assess and as necessary on last year’s evaluate programs assessments to provide effective educational programs and services for all learners. Reinforce relationships with local Strategic Plan 1.3 high schools ‐ school visits and Students will be hosting tours able to complete their desired educational goals. Collaborate with Math dept on a Strategic Plan 1.6 tech math course Support staff and faculty development and instructional innovation Action to be taken: 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Relationship to Assessment Actions adhere the submitted plan Expected Impact on Program/Student Learning Improved student learning in the Drafting Technology program Increased student demand will allow more varied course offerings None Students may choose take an applied math course with content relevant to their area of study that also meets graduation requirements None Page 7 Resources Needed None Prepare ATMAE self study Strategic Plan 1.2 Continuously assess and evaluate programs to provide effective educational programs and services for all learners. Seek professional development Strategic Plan 1.6 opportunities for relevant Support staff and technology training faculty development and instructional innovation & 4.3 CTE programs will have technology relevant to their disciplines Strategic Plan 1.3 Encourage students to declare Students will be Drafting major able to complete their desired educational goals. Strategic Plan 4.3 CTE Continue to enhance technology access for students in the CAD labs programs will have technology – 3D printing, computing relevant to their infrastructure, modeling tools disciplines such as laser or CNC router. The program will be prepared to host an ATMAE visiting team in Spring 2014. None Faculty will be well‐versed in the latest CAD software and curriculum will be updated to reflect contemporary industry. CTEA funding Data for program review and planning will more accurately reflect Drafting majors. None Students will learn using the most current and sophisticated technology available in the field. CTEA funding (also SB70 funds which have already been awarded but will be spent in 2013) 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. 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 8 Request General operational costs of program including printing, software upgrades, printer supplies, paper, and maintenance of the CAD labs. Planning Check One Operational Personnel X Amount $ 6,500 Recurring Cost Y/N Y Professional Development for faculty X 4,000 N Technology Infrastructure improvements & student access to technology in the CAD lab X 12,000 N Rationale Linkage General costs to support the learning environment. Note that software costs included in this budget support other programs that use the lab. Will request as part of CTEA application Will request as part of CTEA application 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: Well written analysis of the market research data. S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities: Satisfactory S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans: Satisfactory S.5. Planning: Satisfactory S.6. Resource Requests: Satisfactory 26. Drafting Tech Program Review.docx 4/23/2013 Page 9