Student Development Program Review Executive Summary
The purpose of this executive summary is to:




provide an overview of the Student Development area program review template and process
guidelines and directions;
summarize the division’s action plans linked to assessment and the various institutional plans
describe the resource request scoring considerations the program review authors used to rank resource
requests; and
summarize the personnel, operational and planning budget requests.
This document contains the following elements: Overview of Student Development Program Review,
general summaries by program review element, and eight appendices detailing the 2011 -12 Program
Review Template and Program Review Guidelines/Directions (Appendices A and B), 2012-13 Summary
of Action Plans (Appendix C), the Resource Request Scoring Rubric (Appendix D) , detailed summaries
of the resource request rankings (Appendices E-G), and a summary of 2 year Learning Outcomes
Assessment plan (Appendix H).
Overview of Student Development Program Review
The Student Development division established the mission of providing high quality support services that
promote access to educational programs, foster academic success, and encourage personal and social
development of all learners. The division went further by establishing an overall goal/learning outcome
of supporting students to become self-directed learners.
As an organization committed to continuous programmatic improvement, Student Development
systematically assesses, acknowledges, and appropriately responds to new challenges, identifies potential
opportunities, and routinely strives to improve our programs and services. Additionally, the division
partners with students, faculty, and academic administrators to promote the academic purpose of the
college.
The program review and assessment process provides an opportunity for departments to develop mutually
supportive plans and learning outcomes, provides a powerful vehicle for answering accreditation calls for
increased accountability, and presents documentation of Student Development’s valuable contributions to
student learning and outcomes. The adoption and implementation of the program review guidelines is an
important step towards achieving Student Development’s organizational assessment objectives. Guiding
Principles are:



The Student Development Program Review process is a formative assessment tool designed to
enhance organizational performance.
The program review guidelines are informed by and serve to advance the unique mission, values, and
aspirations of College of the Redwoods Student Development.
The program review process reflects the values that have historically guided Student Development
assessment activities (e.g., respect for students, quality programs, effective use of institutional
resources).
Therefore the primary reason for conducting program reviews is to ensure the continuation of high quality
programs and services in Student Development and to ensure that our offerings are central to the role and
mission, planning priorities, and strategic goals of the College.
1 General Summaries of Program Review Elements
Summary of Section 2—Data Analysis
Analysis of the 2010-12 Staffing Indicators show a concern as the budget has continued to be reduced and
is currently are not sufficient for existing programs and services. As staff salaries and benefits continue to
go up each year, less funds are available for operational and student expenses. The increased time that
students must wait to receive services causes a more stressful environment for both staff and students.
Some of the other impacts to Student Development programs and services documented in program
reviews are as follows:






The Eureka Academic Support Center is not open on Fridays
The suspension of two important sports programs has had a negative impact on local high school
students and strained relationships with community organizations and businesses that support
athletics
DSPS staffing levels, headcount and student satisfaction ratings continue to decrease
Without adequate IT support, Enrollment Services areas are unable to meet student needs and the
program indicators are negatively impacted, i.e. MIS reports for some areas are still pending
Retirements at CRMC and KTIS of Student Services Specialists will impact the Enrollment
Services’ operations (Admissions, Records, Financial Aid)
Residential life is unable improve facilities used by students living in housing
The division has accepted the reality that the college’s fiscal situation is in crises and has actively
engaged in budget saving solutions. For example, in August of 2012 the Financial Aid and Admissions &
Records was reorganized into one department: Enrollment Services. This reorganization reduces costs
and allows for more cross-training by reclassifying employees Student Services Specialists (rather than
specific Admissions or Financial Aid specialists). We will be assessing the change and how to ensure the
reorganization can better meet student, department and district needs.
Summary of Section 3—Reflections of Assessment Activities
Student learning and program outcomes assessment for the Student Development division continued to
improve during the past year to make assessment work more meaningful, demonstrate its contribution to
student learning, and enable the College to use analysis of learning outcomes data in the institutional
planning and resource allocation process. Departments worked together to revitalize their two-year
assessment plans and develop shared outcomes and research design that responds to emerging needs and
trends identified by past assessment work and institutional plans as well as statewide initiatives related to
the Student Success Task Force. There was an increase in the use of research methods to measure the
learning that occurred as a result of student interaction with a program or service, instead of the more
traditional measure of student satisfaction that was typical in the past. In addition to these changes, the
division also engaged in dialogue sessions on a regular basis to share, reflect on and analyze assessment
work. These discussions helped to better define goals for student achievement, how to evaluating those
goals, and how the results can be used to improve student learning. As a result of recommendations from
the Assessment Summit, a long-term Student Development Assessment Group (SDAG) was formed in
May 2012 to assess the program review template, improve the connection between program review and
planning, and ensure the sustainability of assessment work for the division. SDAG continues to meet
weekly to serve as a resource for Student Development staff, review processes and procedures to make
recommendations related to assessment and help coordinate data collection and analysis.
2 Reported reflections of area student and program learning outcomes include:









Assessment has led to increased student contacts with counseling and advising staff by improving
the service delivery and the tracking of these services for Special Programs students.
Special Programs orientations were enhanced to include additional information about the
importance of career planning and goal setting.
There has been a renewed emphasis on the importance of students’ contractual obligation for
counseling contacts and the connection these contacts have with student success.
The eligibility and intake processes for EOPS students were modified to require students to apply
for financial aid and take their math and English placement tests before they could apply for
EOPS/CARE.
Efforts to educate student athletes about eligibility requirements and academic success resources
have been largely successful. These efforts have included the use of student athlete Attendance
Reports, Academic Progress Reports, Student Athlete Handbook, SEP completion with an
Academic Advisor in the first semester of enrollment and they have increased the level of
academic success by 5% since last year.
Residential Life found that additional improvement recommendations are needed on residential
assistant training with a focus on offering a variety of activities to entice a diverse group of
participants. The focus for the resident assistants should also be on community building to allow
better understanding of student interests.
Counseling found that the assessment results of SLO #1 and #3 in 2011, coupled with the GS-6
SLO assessment results, show the importance of requiring student education plans for student
success and progression. Inclusion of SEP completion has risen in importance to the institutional
level and references to the completions of SEPs have been included in the Strategic Plan,
Education Master Plan and the Enrollment Management Plan. A task force was created to
develop a common SEP form on the WebAdvisor platform and develop a process for successful
completion of the SEP in the first semester of a students’ educational journey.
The finding in SLO #4 led to inclusion of mandatory placement as an action in the three year
Enrollment Management Plan, revision of advising protocols to reflect the need for students to
enroll in math and English courses during their first semester, and revision of AP 5055
Enrollment Priorities to give students who complete the matriculation process a higher priority in
the enrollment process. DSPS’s assessments have led to the development of the new verification
form to improve accommodations for students with disabilities.
The basic skills data related to Guidance 145 has led to the development of three new classes
more specifically focused on subject area. This will hopefully improve our delivery of academic
assistance in the face of reduced staffing. Each class will allow for more specific instruction in
the development of adaptive strategies for math, English and science.
Summary of Section 4—Evaluation of Previous Plans
Of the thirty seven actions identified in past program reviews, 31 have been completed. Six actions were
left incomplete as a result of limited and/or reduced staffing and budget resources.
Summary of Section 5—Plan for Future Improvements
Departments looked at their planning and assessment outcomes and key program indicators; reviewed
institutional planning objectives (strategic, education master, enrollment management, and annual plans);
and reviewed relevant state regulations to identify program plans to work on in 2012-13 for improvement.
Improvement plans include:
3 









Return of dedicated student development advisor to athletics.
Improve Financial Literacy skills of potential student borrowers.
Continue to educate students of the negative impact of withdrawing from a class:
Continue the use and the improvement of EVAL and the WebAdvisor based SEP.
Develop a First Year Experience program.
Require parents using the Child Development Center to provide a Program Evaluation or Student
Ed. Plan to verify a need for care.
Evaluate the quality of support given to DSPS students by comparing the persistence of DSPS
students as compared to the general student body.
Better incorporate assessment and planning into program review process.
Develop rubric to assess the impact of tutoring on student’s success and retention.
Orientation and counseling/advising sessions continue to be enhanced to emphasize the
importance of selecting an informed educational goal by the end of the first semester.
Summary of Section 6—Resource Requests
The Student Development leadership came to consensus on our resource request rankings according to a
rubric we’ve used for the past two years. The eight point scoring rubric included:
1. Relationship to Institutional Plans: Does the request have a connection to the Strategic Plan
goals, Educational and other Master Plan goals, and annual plan objectives?
2. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC): Does the request have a
connection to the ACCJC accreditation standards: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness,
Student Learning Programs and Services, Resources, and Leadership and Governance?
3. Regulatory Compliance: Does the request respond to a statute (i.e., law), regulation, or
administrative procedure from an external agency?
4. Current Need: Does the request meet a current need (not a “nice to have” situation)?
5. Future Need: Does the staffing request meet a future (2013-2016) need (not a “nice to have”
situation) that has not shown itself yet?
6. Improves Program: Will the request the support core functions, efficiency, and/or effectiveness
of the requestor’s program/department or is it a “nice to have”?
7. Involves Other Units: Will the request incorporate and benefit other College
programs/department or is it limited to the requestor alone?
8. District-wide Impact: Will the request have district-wide impact?
The top ten ranked requests by category include:
Personnel Requests
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Counseling/Advising
Enrollment Services
Counseling/Advising
DSPS
Enrollment Services
ASC
Athletics
Enrollment Services
DSPS
DSPS
General Counselor Eureka
Evaluator
FYE Program Instructional Costs
ISS-II Eureka
Veterans Assistant
Instructional Support Specialist part-time
Assistant Athletic Trainer
Student Services Specialist
DSPS Advisor- Full time
DSPS AOA II – Verification Technician
4 Operational Budget Requests
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Residential Life
CDC
ASC
ASC
CSSO
Enrollment Services
Athletics
Residential Life
Upward Bound
Upward Bound
ADA Compliance
Ongoing support from General Fund
Funds for Tutoring BSI
Funds for Tutoring District
Campus wide alert system
Dedicated computer lab/computers in new SS Bldg.
Website Improvements
Upper deck of Mendocino hall repair and resurface
Money for study guides and other academic resources
Broadband upgrade needed to support communication needs
Planning Budget Requests
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
DSPS
DSPS
Counseling/Advising
CSSO
CSSO
Counseling/Advising
DSPS
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
Accessible Software updates- JAWS,
Update ADA accessible computers and peripherals-district-wide
FYE Program Funding
Space for a Multicultural and Diversity Center
Large meeting space for ASCR
Orientation Student Ambassadors
Accessible Go-print Stations
Emergency Communication System
Asbestos Abatement
Electrical Upgrades
5 Appendix A
Student Development Division Annual Program Review Update 2012/13
Section 1 - Program Information
1.0 Name of Program:
1.1 Program Review Authors:
Date:
1.2 Program Director Signature:
Date:
1.3 Vice President Signature:
Date:
1.4 Program mission:
1.4.1 State briefly how the program mission supports the college mission:
1.4.2 Program goals:
1.4.3 Describe how the program goals support institutional planning and goals (Strategic Plan, Education Master Plan, Enrollment
Management Plan, etc.):
Section 2 - Data Analysis
2.0 Program Staffing/Budget Data and Indicators
(Past years)
Provide information to show changes over time (steady, increasing, decreasing, etc.). Insert additional rows as needed for your key performance
indicators (KPI’s), such as program services, functions, student contacts, etc.
2010/11
2011/12
Observations (steady/increasing/decreasing)
2.1 Staffing/Budget
FTE Faculty and Staff
FTE Additional Workforce
Personnel (Dollars)
Discretionary (Dollars)
Other
6 2.2 Program Indicators
TBD
TBD
TBD
2.3 Describe how these changes affect students and/or the program:
2.4 Provide any other relevant information, or recent changes, that affect the program:
Section 3 –Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities
3.0 Student Learning Outcomes & Program Outcomes Assessed in the Current Cycle
(2011/2012)
3.1 Summarize the conclusions drawn from the data and the experience of staff working to achieve the outcomes:
3.2 Summarize how assessments have led to improvement in Student Learning and Service Area Outcomes:
3.3 (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
4.2 (If applicable) Describe how funds provided in support of the plan(s) contributed to program improvement:
Section – 5 Planning
5.0 Plan for Future Improvements
(2012/2013)
7 Based on institutional plans, data analysis, student learning outcomes, program outcomes, the assessment of those outcomes, 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, timelines, supporting data or other justifications in the Resource
Request). (link to two year assessment plan)
5.1 Program Plans
Action to be taken:
Relationship to
Institutional Plans
Relationship to
Assessment
Expected Impact on
Student Learning or
Service Area Outcomes
Resources Needed
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.
Request
Check One
Amount
Recurring
Rationale
$
Cost
Y/N
Linkage
Planning Operational Personnel
Section 7- PRC Response by section (completed by PRC after reviewing the program review)
7.0 The response will be forwarded to the author and the supervising Director and Vice President:
S.1. Program Information:
S.2. Data Analysis:
S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities:
S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans:
S.5. Planning:
S.6. Resource Requests:
8 Appendix B—Student Development Program Review General Suggestions and
Directions
Be brief. Most of your programs’ evidence or documentation of your internal department or program
thinking or planning processes should be in your regular meeting minutes and other artifacts, such as
spreadsheets of data collected, survey instruments used, details of assessments, etc. Your Comprehensive
Program Review will pull together previous annual updates and provide more detail. This annual update
should primarily serve as a snapshot of progress for the previous year, current plans and actions, and a
preview of the next year. The form fields can expand to accommodate more text, however, when finished
it should be less than five pages.
Spell out all acronyms at first use, for example: “We use the Scheduling and Reporting System, (SARS)
to track usage rates …” Include brief descriptions as necessary for persons unfamiliar with your program,
for example: “In 2011, the library implemented Koha, a library software system that includes the catalog,
a web search interface, check-in & out, late notices and fines, patron database, etc.
Plan and schedule activities. The annual program review is just one station of the journey through the
academic year. Activities are ongoing, documentation is ongoing, surveys and assessments should be
planned in advance for best results. Each program should keep a calendar of program review and
assessment activities where all employees can see and access it. Your calendar can be customized to your
program. Last year’s annual update should inform this year’s processes; the comprehensive will review
all of the processes for the entire cycle. Accreditation team members do not want this to be a process of
just filling out a form. The form is just a convenient way to provide evidence of a continuous and
sustained process of quality improvement for everyone- accreditation team visitors, internal college
constituent groups, employees in the program being reviewed, students, community members.
Involve everyone. Accreditation expects that this process will involve all employees, and it is most
effective when it does. Each person’s work contributes differently to our collective pursuit of student
success. Branch campus or sites must be included, and any special circumstances or needs must be
incorporated. Involving everyone ensures any goals, outcomes, targets, assessment methods, etc., are
realistic and do-able, authentic and meaningful.
Suggestions for line items of the form:
1.0 Program Information: Mission, goals, link to college mission. Although you may find it necessary
to fine tune or revise your program’s mission statement every five years or so, the mission and goals
normally will not change from year to year. Also, college-wide strategic and other plans should not be
changing too frequently, so the text you enter into this section will be very similar year after year.
2.0 Data Analysis: Program Staffing/Budget Data & Indicators. Provide a data “snapshot” so
reviewers and readers are able to quickly see potential trends based on changes that have been observed.
Extensive narrative is not necessary.
Section 2.1 is for the program’s required Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s) and supporting data. The
data may be provided by the Business Office or collected by the program. Use the “other” line item for
any data trends specific to your program, in the category of Staffing/Budget, for example, you could
itemize your student worker data here. Add more rows if necessary.
9 Section 2.2 can be used for any additional KPI’s or other data that are unique to the program, however,
remember that 5 years’ continuous and consistent data will be required in the Comprehensive Review.
Rows can be added to the table to accommodate additional data elements. Columns can be added as more
annual data cumulates, up to the five year Comprehensive Review.
Section 2.3, describe any changes only if necessary to clarify specific circumstances for readers not
familiar with your program.
Section 2.4 is provided for any other additional information that might help clarify the program’s issues to
outside readers, or that is specific to that year cycle: new challenges, new legislation, unplanned events.
3.0 Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities. Consulting your assessment plan, each year you will
assess three or four SLOs and/or POs, depending on the size of your program and the variety of services
offered to students. You may collect the data in the previous year or semester, or in the current year or
semester, but here is where you document what was learned from the data. Use the prompts to answer
questions such as: What does your assessment data tell you? What did staff in the program learn from the
process? Were targets met? What were your successes or failures and why?
4.0 Evaluation of Previous Plans. Describe plans/actions identified in the last program review and their
current status. What measurable outcomes were achieved due to actions completed? Some departments
may choose to draw forward plans from several years ago; it depends on how you collect your data, the
number and workload of available staff, size and scope of the program and number of students served,
and what the normal work cycle is like throughout the year. You are not required to fill in all the rows,
but you can add rows as necessary.
Use Section 4.2 to link your assessments and improvement plans (program plans, work plans, action
plans, Quality Improvement Plans or QIPs) to funding and your budget. Were you able to find ways to
improve efficiency? Did some plans fail or succeed due to funding? Explain why and how.
5.0 Planning for Future Improvements. “Close the loop” by looking at your outcomes, your data, and
your assessments (the information provided in Sections 1-4 ) to determine if expectations or targets were
met, or not, and what can be done about it, to either continue the improvement, increase the
improvements, or reduce the losses before the next assessment cycle for those outcomes. This is where we
learn from experience, document what we learned, and how we plan to do better in future.
Section 5.1 Program Plans are where you can list what you plan to work on in the next cycle for
improvement. Based on student learning outcomes, program outcomes, the assessment of those outcomes,
and your critical reflections, or an institutional plan initiative describe the program’s Action Plan for the
2012/13 academic year. If more than one plan, add rows. Include necessary resources.
Section 5.2 is for clarification of program-specific needs, mandates, terminology, explanations, etc.
6.0 Resource Requests. Only a list of resources is needed here, but any resources requested should match
to program plan(s) described in Section 5. Requested amounts can be close estimates. What’s important is
to show a good rationale and linkage to your outcomes, targets, and goals.
7.0 PRC Response. The Program Review Committee will provide their response.
10 Terms and Definitions
ACCJC Standards & guidelines for evaluating institutions. Sets the standards that all programs must
meet so that collectively, the college as a whole maintains its accreditation. All student services programs
and functional areas should be familiar with the sections of the standards that apply, and be prepared to
build their cycles of continuous quality improvement on those standards. The ACCJC Guide to
Evaluating Institutions (For link, see “Supporting Documents” section below) is the manual for visiting
teams that specifies exactly what the expectations are, and what kind of documentation or evidence to
provide. This manual provides us with a practical guide to meet those expectations.
College Mission, Vision, Values. Responds to local needs and interests of the community. What the
college as a whole seeks to accomplish; future-oriented; aspirational; based on broad ideals and
fundamental principles. Answers the question, “Who are we and why are we here and what do we hope to
be in future?” (See http://www.redwoods.edu/about/mission.asp)
Strategic Plan goals, Educational and other Master Plan goals, and plan objectives. Targets that
must be met in order for the college to fulfill its mission and respond to challenges and identify
opportunities to maximize success. Answers the question, “What do we need to achieve in order to fulfill
our mission, given the current conditions and potential future conditions?” These planning documents
also include some objectives, the specific actions that will be taken in order to achieve the goals. Plan
objectives answer the question, “What do we need to DO in order to achieve our goals?” (See
http://inside.redwoods.edu/IPM/plans.asp)
Program mission. What your program seeks to accomplish; its definition, purpose, and function within
the college: responds to local and internal needs and interests; future-oriented; aspirational; based on
ideals and principles. Must support the college mission, goals, and objectives. Must be focused on student
success. Answers the question, “How does the program mission specifically help the college fulfill its
mission? How does this program help students achieve their goals?”
Program goals. As with the broader college goals, program goals are what the program wants to achieve.
Answers the question, “What do we need to achieve in order to provide for student success and to support
the college mission and goals?” Program goals are closely related to, and are often derived directly from,
the program mission statement.
Program & Student outcomes. Expected result of the actions taken, work, projects, or initiatives, that
were started or completed by the program within the time frame of the program review or update. An
outcome is the result of your program actions towards achieving your goals. Answers the question, “What
specifically do we expect this action plan to accomplish? What improvements do we hope to see?”
Outcomes should be SMART: specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and timely or time-bound.
Outcomes are student-centered; it’s what they will learn or do.
Program outcomes should demonstrate program improvement on key performance indicators. Answers
the question, “If we achieve the program objective, what will be the result or outcome for the program?”
Student outcomes should demonstrate improvement on student learning, behaviors, attitudes, activities;
what students think, know, or do. “Student learning outcomes are generic abilities that can be developed,
11 improved, and assessed.” (CR Assessment Handbook, p. B1, link to source provided below) Answers the
question, “If we achieve the program objective, what will students learn or do?” Outcomes lead to the
next phase, assessment & critical reflection, in that they lead to the question, “How do we prove we have
achieved our objective? What can we measure, and how can we measure it?”
Bloom’s Taxonomy can be helpful in articulating good student or program outcomes:
Assessment & critical reflection. Every outcome should be measurable by some criteria for quality.
Answers the questions, “How can we prove that students are now better able to accomplish, to learn, to
understand, to appreciate, to behave appropriately, etc.? How can we prove that the program’s services
are efficient, helpful, useful, accurate, etc.? What can we measure that will accurately show improvement
on these outcomes?” Assessment is the measurement part; critical reflection is when employees examine,
discuss, analyze the measurements and try to determine if the objectives were carried out, if the outcomes
were met, if the assessment itself was accurate or useful. Critical reflection answers the question, “So
what now? Did it work or not? If not, what might work better? If it did work, should we continue or can
we improve it even more?” This phase helps everyone recognize successes and learn from failures.
Comprehensive program reviews. Provides the detailed, comprehensive, and long-term overview of the
program, on a three or five year cycle; an in-depth recent history; can use extensive narratives but should
also rely on accurate and consistent data; data should be cumulated from the annual updates. The
comprehensive should reflect on all outcomes assessed over the time period, and can draw on data and
narratives provided in the annuals.
Annual program review updates. Provides a snapshot, brief update, of any recent changes or
challenges; provides documentation of what outcomes and assessments were accomplished in that year;
should only include brief narratives of things that others outside the program might not fully understand
without an explanation. The annual should reflect on outcomes assessed for the previous year, and list any
support required to make the improvements suggested by the outcomes. Should also provide short
descriptions of outcomes to be assessed in the upcoming year, and what expectations or targets for how
completion or success on those outcomes will be measured.
Assessment plan. Incorporates the annual and comprehensive reviews, considers the academic year
cycle, provides a reliable guide as to what will be assessed and when, depending on the workload and
other needs of the program. Assessment of student and program outcomes can be ‘calendared’ for
appropriate times in the academic year, and not all outcomes need to be assessed every year. A plan
allows for spreading out the assessment of outcomes over a span of several semesters.
Indicators, or Key Performance Indicators (KPI’s). Here’s the definition from the BRIC manual: “The
actual KPIs adopted should be ones that help determine how important or how in demand, efficient, and
effective the program, service, or operation is in meeting the mission of the college and promoting
institutional effectiveness. … [S]tandard data definitions and sources of data should be agreed upon
among program faculty and staff … [and] should include evidence of student learning, or … increased
student success … . (p. 7, source link provided below) If the program does not have clearly defined and
agreed-on KPI’s, that can be a program goal.
12 Quality Improvement Plan (QPI) aka Action Plan, program plan, work plan. Can be as simple as,
“improve our rate of return of documents to department A” or, “increase the number of students attending
orientations.” Involve all staff in identifying issues, problems, opportunities for improvements, and in
prioritizing them. Set out your objectives for next cycle, what you want to improve or new work to
accomplish. Some QIP’s may have multiple tasks, involve many staff, cross departments, etc., while
others may be just one person working on one project. All QIP’s should relate to at least one student or
program outcome. Your QIP’s can be drawn from your assessment plan and cycle if there is no data or
recent change that requires revision.
Program review, outcomes, assessments, & evaluation suggestions
Top to bottom approach: Start by looking at the big picture and then work down, getting more specific
to define the details on how to achieve the Mission/Goals. Move from broad and long term to more
specific and immediate: from Mission to Goals to Objectives to Outcomes (SLOs/PLOs) to Action Plans
to Assessments to Critical reflection and revision.
Bottom to top approach: Start by examining what you already do and what you already measure, what
data you already have, what you already are assessing. Define what those outcomes are, based on the data
you collect. What question does the data answer? Move from that specific and short term to broader and
more long term, deriving objectives and goals for what you already do and then linking it to your mission.
If you can’t link it, maybe you need to reconsider whether you need to do it or not, or if your mission
statement does not reflect what you do.
Of course, you can do both top to bottom, and bottom to top, at the same time. The idea is to get your
cycle established, determine what you will measure and when, and what you will do with your data. Then,
you can run the program cycle year after year with minor revisions based on the feedback loop.
Plan for the whole cycle: Each element does not stand alone; everything fits together in a cycle. Plan
ahead based on the academic year or the comprehensive program review cycle. Plan to accommodate
phases of the process, and the documentation, in your normal work cycle and program or department
meetings. Every department has ups and downs; times when one type of work activity is prevalent and
times when a different is prevalent. Customize your calendar cycle to your program, with input from all
staff, and even external constituents. Program review, setting outcomes, evaluating and assessing
outcomes, each of these is not a separate activity; they are all part of one cycle, with the same or similar
activities recurring regularly.
13 College Mission & Goals; planning cmtes
Feedback, Closing the Loop
Program Mission & planning goals
Assessment & Critical reflection or evaluation
Objectives for the year or cycle, action plans
Program & Student Outcomes
Documentation and Evidence: Forms exist for comprehensive program reviews and annual updates, and
assessment plans. Some of the feedback travels through the program review process via the parts of the
forms that go to the planning committees: Furniture & Equipment, Enrollment Management, Facilities, &
Technology. Maintain meeting notes, summary reports, presentations, workshop notes, or any other
products for posting to the “Artifacts” page. Use the Forums to discuss. Forms and Forums may change;
the key is to maintain continuity of the cycle and evidence of your program’s diligence and attention to it.
Dialog: None of these activities should be done by one or two people in isolation of other staff.
Accreditation guidelines are very clear that this process of continuous quality improvement must, at every
phase, involve every employee at every level, with consideration taken for how each person’s work
affects student success and furthers the college mission. The ACCJC Guide (link below) spends four
pages on dialog, it’s importance, and how to engage in it. The BRIC guide says that “passionate,
thoughtful inquiry” must be discovered or recaptured. So, this must be an authentic and collaborative
process within each program and communicated appropriately to campus-wide to all constituent groups.
Additionally, some exciting benefits accrue from inter-departmental or cross-departmental or crossdisciplinary discussions. How does your program affect other programs? How do other programs affect
your program?
Supporting documents
ACCJC Guide to Evaluating Institutions
http://www.redwoods.edu/Accreditation/documents/GuidetoEvaluatingInstitutions.pdf
14 This guide describes exactly what is expected of us, and of the evaluation team, and what kinds
of evidence are acceptable. The introductory section on dialog and general themes of
accreditation, is pages 6-10. Student Support Services (IIB) section begins on page 33 and
continues through page 36, where Library and Learning Support (IIC) section begins, which runs
through to page 38. Each section quotes the standards, and then provides questions as prompts
for the evaluation team. Each student support service program should consider how they might
best answer these questions, and provide the necessary evidence, in their program reviewoutcomes-assessments-evaluation-feedback cycle. Sources of evidence follow for Standard IIB
& IIC on pages 42-45.
Accreditation Reference Handbook
http://www.redwoods.edu/Accreditation/Accred_Ref_Handbook.pdf
The official statement of the ACCJC standards, with other policy statements relevant to the work
of the commission. Standards IIB and IIC are included on pages 21-24. Pages 47-53 list and
explain the possible commission actions on institutions’ accreditation status. Also of interest to
some departments is the policy on distance learning, pages 67-68; and on diversity, page 69.
Inquiry Guide: Maximizing the program review process, BRIC Technical Assistance
Program.
http://redwoods.edu/assessment/documents/INQUIRYGUIDEMaximizingtheProgramReviewProcess.pdf
Everyone should read this entire document, it’s only 20 pages and provides solid explanations of
the purpose and function of program review, assessments, and key performance indicators. Pages
18-19 summarize the accreditation levels expected for awareness, development, proficiency, and
sustainability in program review and related processes.
College of the Redwoods Assessment Handbook.
http://redwoods.edu/assessment/documents/Assessmentsv5c_000.pdf
For a fuller understanding of assessments and how they fit into the program review cycle, read
the entire document. For targeted sections of value to support services, read the General
Philosophy, pages A1-A2; the details on the proficiency levels on pages A5-A7; Guidelines for
Assessment Activities, pages A9-A11; Tips for developing SLOs, pages B25-B26; Student
Support Services Assessment, pages D1-D5; and D7-D9. Although student support services have
fewer faculty than instructional divisions and programs, the accreditation documents and other
supporting documents and guidelines are very clear: program review and related processes are
primarily faculty-driven, and the primary focus is on student learning. So support services need
to consider how to prioritize faculty and student interests.
2011 Assessment FOR student learning, handbook: it’s all about helping students learn.
Columbus State Community College.
http://redwoods.edu/assessment/documents/CSCC_AssessmentHandbook.pdf
15 Program Review: Setting a Standard. Academic Senate for California Community Colleges.
http://www.asccc.org/sites/default/files/Program-review-spring09.pdf
These two documents primarily, almost solely, focus on instructional programs. However,
because they both provide extensive treatments of outcomes and assessments, they may be
helpful in providing deeper understanding for employees in student support services programs.
16 Appendix C—2012-13 Summary of Action Plans
Area
Athletics
Action to be taken:
Commit to reinstatement of baseball & men’s soccer for 2013/14
Athletics
Athletics
Enrollment Services
Enrollment Services
Enrollment Services
Return of dedicated Student Athlete Academic Advisor to the department
Implementation of Measure Q Projects
Continue work on Softdocs eForms
Improve Financial Literacy skills of potential student borrowers:
Continue to educate students of the negative impact of withdrawing from
a class
Students who participate in residential life activities will build better
connections with residents in the community
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
Parent and Student Orientation will include information regarding
Student Conduct and FERPA to increase completion of release of
information for parents
As a result of an academic advising session, students will understand the
components of a degree/certificate program necessary to reach their
educational goal as demonstrated by the collaborative development of an
education plan.
Counseling/Advising Create a more user-friendly Counseling and Advising website that clearly
delineates the matriculation process.
Counseling/Advising Continue the use and the improvement of EVAL and the WebAdvisor
based SEP.
Counseling/Advising Develop a First Year Experience program
 Form FYE framework development committee (Spring 2012)
 Develop Framework for FYE Program (Sept 2012)
 Develop budget/ costs for FYE (Sept 2012)
 Form FYE Steering commit (Fall 2012)
Counseling/Advising Develop student orientations for face-to-face and on-line students
Develop/ refine orientation format (Fall 2012)
Pilot new orientation format (Spring 2013)
Implement as required by BOG action taken (Fall 2013)
CDC
Teachers will focus on improving instruction in Language and Literacy to
improve instruction for children and lab experiences.
CDC
Master Teachers will continue to meet with lab students to ensure a
comprehensive training program is in place.
CDC
Parents utilizing the Child Development Center will be required to
provide a Program Evaluation or Student Ed. Plan to verify a need for
care.
17 DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
CSSO
CSSO
CSSO
CSSO
Upward Bound
Upward Bound
Upward Bound
Compare success of DSPS/BSI students who are concurrently enrolled in
BS level classes and Guidance 145 in terms of success in BS level
classes.
Evaluate the quality of support given to DSPS students by comparing the
persistence of DSPS students as compared to the general student body.
Evaluate special classes by comparing the persistence of DSPS students
enrolled in special classes to those DSPS students who do not enroll in
special classes.
Create Survey Monkey to evaluate the visibility and awareness of staff
and faculty related to DSPS and DSPS activities.
Create a DSPS Student Satisfaction Survey to evaluate our overall
effectiveness as well as the satisfaction of student regarding staffing
levels.
Reduce or temporarily eliminate temporary positions serving nonmandated services
Combine functions of the DSPS Technician job into other existing staff
duties
Resubmit a proposal for permanent faculty position of DSPS Faculty
Coordinator and LD Specialist
Enhance student success in basic skills classes by implementation of new
Guidance classes
Better incorporate assessment and planning into program review process
 Revise Template (Summer 2012)
 Create “division” summary with plans to the PRC
Continue to teach students to become partners in the learning process and
to make connections with appropriate faculty, staff and resources to
fulfill their goals and expand their opportunities by supporting the FYE,
refashioned Orientation program, and department operations.
Continue to teach life skills that enhance self-reflection, self-direction
and self-sufficiency by supporting the FYE and refashioned Orientation
program.
Continue to offer high quality services, which are accessible, accurate,
understandable, clear and timely, to our students and prospective
students.
Redesign the College-Bound Action Plan to be more student-friendly,
understandable, and easily revised. Then create a survey to determine
how well students understand the information on their college-bound
action plans.
Create an electronic survey to be given to participants to determine if the
UB- sponsored college tour helped them to narrow down or decide on a
college.
Students who participate in the summer UB career class will be surveyed
to determine whether the career information helped them select or clarify
their career goals.
18 Upward Bound
ASC
ASC
ASC
ASC
Special Programs
Library
Library
Library
Library
Library
Add two more program indicators in 2012-13 to assess 1) Percentage of
UB participants that complete or update their College-Bound Actions
Plans each year and 2) Percentage of UB participants pursuing a
“rigorous” secondary curriculum of study.
Develop rubric to assess the impact of tutoring on student’s success and
retention.
Develop best practices in assuring that students are informed and
prepared to take placement tests at all locations.
Promote online tutoring to students at Mendocino and Del-Norte
Maintain Data Sheets to count access to various services.
Orientation and counseling/advising sessions continue to be enhanced to
emphasize the importance of selecting an informed educational goal by
the end of the first semester.
Provide access to Wireless Printing
Participate in the California Community Colleges Library/Learning
Resources Data Survey
Continue and expand bi-annual Library Satisfaction Survey to include
new demographic data; ethnicity, age and gender. Includes Del Norte and
Mendocino.
Continue with the Reference Services Assessment Plan. Includes Del
Norte and Mendocino.
Include Del Norte and Mendocino Program Review Discussions with
Eureka Library and Academic Support Center discussions.
19 Appendix D—Resource Request Scoring Rubric
1. Relationship to Institutional Plans: Does the request have a connection to the Strategic Plan
goals, Educational and other Master Plan goals, and annual plan objectives? A request would
significantly impact or influence the ultimate achievement of an outcome would have a high point
value (5 points). A request that has no or little connection or impact would be of a low point
value (0 points).
2. Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges (ACCJC): Does the request
have a connection to the ACCJC accreditation standards: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness,
Student Learning Programs and Services, Resources, and Leadership and Governance? A request
that would help this College significantly maintain accreditation or address identified areas of
accreditation concern would have a high nexus (5 points). A request that has no or little
connection or impact would be of a low nexus (0 points).
3. Regulatory Compliance: Does the request respond to a statute (i.e., law), regulation, or
administrative procedure from an external agency? A request that ensures that the College
complies with legal or policy requirement made of the College would have the highest need (5
points). A request that has no regulatory compliance would be rated low (0 points).
4. Current Need: Does the request meet a current need (not a “nice to have” situation)? If a
request does, the points awarded should be based on the degree of significance and pervasiveness
of the problem. If a request does not address a current need, it would be rated low (0 points).
5. Future Need: Does the staffing request meet a future (2013-2016) need (not a “nice to have”
situation) that has not shown itself yet? If a request does, the points awarded should be based on
the degree of significance and pervasiveness of the perceived problem. If a request does not
address a current need, it would be rated low (0 points).
6. Improves Program: Will the request the core functions, efficiency, and/or effectiveness of the
requestor’s program/department or is it a “nice to have”? A request that improves the requestor’s
service delivery and efficiency and effectiveness would rate high (5 points). One that fails to
demonstrate improvement of the requestor would be rated low (0 points).
7. Involves Other Units: Will the request incorporate and benefit other College
programs/department or is it limited to the requestor alone? The greater the involvement of other
units beyond the requestor’s the higher the rating (5 points).
8. District-wide Impact: Will the request have district-wide impact? The wider that impact of the
request if granted, the higher the rating (5 points) should be.
RELATIVE PLACEMENT SCORING INSTRUCTIONS
1. Using a scale of 5 points (highest) to 0 (lowest), rate each position by the 8 scoring
considerations. Total your raw scores for each position.
2. We will determine the relative placement of each position within each Type of position by
totaling the individual director’s relative placement scores for a particular position. Example:
For AMD position #1, Director A may give a relative placement score of “1”, Director B may
give a score of “4” and Director C may give a score of “3” for a combined relative placement of
“8”. However, for AMD position #2, the scoring was “2” + “3” + “2” for a total of “7”.
3. The lower the combined relative placement score of a requested position, the higher its order of
priority or rank order within its employee group. Using the example above, AMD #2 would have
a higher rank order than AMD #1.
20 Appendix E—2012-13 Summary of Personnel Rankings
Rank
Order
1
2
Area
Request
Counseling/Advising
Enrollment Services
General Counselor Eureka
Evaluator
$ 86,500.00
$ 55,832.00
3
Counseling/Advising
FYE Program Instructional Costs
$ 51,300.00
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
DSPS
Enrollment Services
ASC
Athletics
Enrollment Services
DSPS
DSPS
Athletics
Counseling/Advising
Athletics
ISS-II Eureka
Veterans Assistant
Instructional Support Specialist part-time
Assistant Athletic Trainer
Student Services Specialist
DSPS Advisor- Full time
DSPS AOA II – Verification Technician
Student Athlete Academic Advisor
Student Development Advisor Eureka
Full-Time Faculty/Coach
$ 38,366.00
$ 44,000.00
TBD
$ 60,000.00
$ 44,000.00
$ 47,028.00
$ 57,988.00
$ 60,000.00
$ 54,500.00
$ 90,000.00
14
15
16
17
18
19
Counseling/Advising
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
DSPS
Upward Bound
$ 86,500.00
$ 38,366.00
$ 9,430.00
$ 38,366.00
$ 6,582.00
$ 3,000.00
20
Library
General Counselor Del Norte
ISS-II Del Norte
DSPS Mobility Assistant (Van Driver)
ISS-II – Mendo
DSPS Assistant – APE (Mendo)
Faculty mentors for graduates of UB currently
attending CR (pilot program) in area/major of
interest
Library Technician (part-time)
21 Amount
$ 7,000.00
Appendix F—2012-13 Summary of Operational Budget Rankings
Rank Order
Area
Request
1
2
3
4
5
6
Residential Life
CDC
ASC
ASC
CSSO
Enrollment
Services
7
Upward Bound
8
Upward Bound
9
Upward Bound
10
11
Athletics
Residential Life
12
13
14
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
ADA Compliance
Ongoing support from General Fund
Funds for Tutoring BSI
Funds for Tutoring District
Alert Now
Dedicated computer lab/computers are
purchased, need identified space in new
SS Bldg.
Money for study guides and other
academic resources for graduates of UB
currently attending CR
Broadband upgrade needed to support the
efficiency of technology and
communication between Eureka and
Del Norte sites.
Book voucher money to give to UB
students who attend CR first semester
Website Improvements
Upper deck of Mendocino hall repair and
resurface
Roof and Rain gutters for Mendocino Hall
Lighting inside rooms
Bathrooms refurbish
15
16
17
18
19
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
Residential Life
Vanities , sinks and faucets
Carpet Replacement
Double pane windows
Computer room ventilation
Plumbing
$ 84,000.00
$160,000.00
$111,000.00
$ 2,500.00
$160,000.00
20
Residential Life
$ 30,000.00
21
Residential Life
22
23
24
25
Library
Library
Library
Library
Replace exterior lighting around the
Residence Halls
Video camera recording rooms need
ventilation fans installed
Replacement of Carpeting
Painting of interior of the LRC
Air conditioning for LRC 103
Funding source to improve book
collections where quality and quantity are
low.
22 Amount
unknown
$ 90,000.00
$ 30,000.00
$ 10,995.00
TBD
TBD
$
250.00
Unknown
$
1,000.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 24,000.00
$150,000.00
$ 16,000.00
$160,000.00
$ 15,000.00
Need bid
Need bid
Need bid
$ 8,500.00
Appendix G—2012-13 Summary of Planning Budget Rankings
Rank Order
Area
1
DSPS
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Request
Accessible Software updates- JAWS,
Zoom Text, Kurzweil 1000, Dragon,
Co-Writer
DSPS
Update ADA accessible computers and
peripherals-district-wide
Counseling/Advising FYE Program Funding
CSSO
Large meeting space for ASCR
CSSO
Space for a Multicultural and Diversity Center
Counseling/Advising Orientation Student Ambassadors
Residential Life
Emergency Communication System
Residential Life
Asbestos Abatement
Residential Life
Electrical Upgrades
Residential Life
Earthquake Retrofit
Residential Life
Heating system replacement
Residential Life
Blacktop repair around Residence Halls
Residential Life
Fire Control Sprinklers
DSPS
Accessible Go-print Stations
23 Amount
$ 29,800.00
$
97,200.00
$ 49,316.00
Unknown
Unknown
$ 8,000.00
$ 10,000.00
$ 600,000.00
$ 3 86,000.00
$1,000,000.00
$ 200,000.00
$ 100,000.00
$1,000,000.00
$
7,800.00
Appendix H—2012-13 Summary of 2 year Learning Outcomes Assessment
Department
How
Often
Term(s)
to be
Assessed
Outcome
#
Outcome
Type
2012-14 Outcome
Assessment
Method
Academic Support
Center
Once a
year
2013S
1
PO
Tutors will have
increased
knowledge of
instructional
support.
Athletics
Twice a 2012 F 1
year
2013 S
SLO
As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the components of
a
degree/certificate
program necessary
to reach their
educational goal.
Develop a tool
with IR that
will track the
success of
students who
receive
tutoring
services.
Adjust tutoring
practices based
on those
results. To be
implemented
at the
beginning of
Fall semester
2012.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
24 Athletics
Once a
Year
2013S
2014S
3
PLO
25 Student athletes
will demonstrate
an understanding
of minimum
eligibility
requirements.
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
Survey of
student
athletes
Athletics
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
2013F
2014S
4
PLO
Assess current
support program
to determine
effectiveness and
make
improvements if
necessary
Audit of
course
completion
and GPA for
the Fall 2012
and Spring
2013
semesters
Child Development
Center
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
2013F
2014S
1
SLO
Students utilizing
the CDC will be
knowledgeable
about their
educational
program
requirements.
Student
academic
progress and
SEP will be
monitored.
Child Development
Center
Once a
Year
2013S
2014S
2
PO
Teachers will
provide an
environment that
helps children
develop
emotionally and
learn to handle
challenging
behaviors.
Teachers will
complete inservice
trainings and
implement
new
techniques.
Child Development
Center
Once a
Year
2013S
2014S
3
Lab students will
observe teachers
using appropriate
teaching
techniques to
assist children
with challenging
behaviors.
Teachers will
complete inservice
trainings and
implement
new
techniques.
26 Child Development
Center
Once a
Year
2013S
2014S
4
Counseling/Advising
Twice a
year
2012 F
2013 S
1
SLO
27 ECE-7 students
will investigate
and apply
developmentally
appropraite
principles and
teaching strategies
to positively
influence all
young children's
development and
acquisition of
knowledge and
skills.
As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the components of
a
degree/certificate
program necessary
to reach their
educational goal.
Teachers will
complete inservice
trainings and
implement
new
techniques.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
Counseling/Advising
Once a
year
2012 F
3
SLO
Students will
select an informed
academic program
based on career
assessments.
Counseling/Advising
Once a
year
2013 S
4
PLO
Counselors and
advisors will be
knowledgeable
about best
practices for
advising basic
skills and at-risk
students (veterans,
students in
poverty, athletics,
DE, DSPS,
academically
disadvantaged,
EOPS).
28 Students who
take the Guid
8 class,
participate in
Career Café
will be
surveyed to
determine
whether the
career
information in
the Guid 8
class helped
them select or
clarify their
academic
program.
Staff
development
plan, staff
development
surveys,
training
evaluations
Counseling/Advising
Twice a
year
2013 F
2014 S
5
SLO
As a result of
attending an
advising
orientation
session,
matriculating
students will be
able to
comprehend
assessment results
and correlate
placement with
course selection.
DSPS
Once a
year
2013S
1
SLO
DSPS/BSI
students will
experience greater
success with basic
skills classes when
co-enrolled in
GUID 145, as
compared to
DSPS/BSI
students not
enrolled in GUID
145.
DSPS
Once a
year
2013S
2
PLO
Strategically
combine and
downsize
functions based on
fiscal constraint.
29 A Pre & Post
Assessment
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each “New
Student
Orientation.”
The
assessments
will be
distributed to
new student
matriculants in
June-August
2013.
Capture and
track success
rates for a
random
sample of
GUID 145
students in
basic skills
math and
English
courses
compared to a
random
sample of nonGUID 145
DSPS/BSI
students to
compare
against
2011/12 data.
Develop and
implement a
hiring plan to
replace the
permanent
ISS-II
positions lost
on Eureka,
DN, and
Mendocino
campuses due
to budget
restrictions.
DSPS
Once a
year
2013 S
3
SLO
DSPS students
will show a
greater level of
persistence as
compared to
general CR
population over
course of 20122013.
DSPS
Once a
year
2013 S
4
PLO
Evaluate special
courses as a means
of increasing the
persistence of
DSPS students.
DSPS
Once
every 2
years
2014 S
5
PLO
Increase visibility
and awareness of
programs/services
across district and
community.
Enrollment Services
Once a
year
2013S
1
SLO
Students will
utilize e-forms
which will allow
for more efficient
processing of
admissions &
records and
financial aid
records.
30 Collect the
persistence
data for DSPS
students
during the year
and compare it
to the general
CR student
persistence
rate during the
same period.
Compare the
persistence
rates of a
DSPS students
enrolled in
special classes
to those who
are not
enrolled
during the
2012-2013
academic year.
Create
beginning of
year and end
of year survey
for campus
employees
indicating
level of
knowledge
regarding
DSPS.
Increased
participation in
DSPS
sponsored
events.
Tracking the
number of eforms
implemented
and the
number of eforms
submitted by
students
Enrollment Services
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
2
SLO
Enrollment Services
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
3
SLO
Library
Once a
year
2013S
1
SLO
Library
Once a
year
2013S
2
PO
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2012F
1
PLO
31 As a result of
going through Life
Skills lessons,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
critical financial
literacy skills.
Students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the negative
impact of
withdrawing from
a class with regard
to financial aid
and repeatability
rules.
Students will have
increased
knowledge of
library support
services.
Staff will have
increased
knowledge on how
to utilized the
KOHA system.
Usage rates will
show increased
use per student
over time. Subject
content will match
the assignments,
courses, and
programs
Tracking the
average score
on each lesson
type; Tracking
the average
loan amounts
requested.
Fall 2011 to
Fall 2012
comparison;
Spring 2012 to
Spring 2013
comparison.
IR will
identify the
courses with
the historically
highest
number of
"Ws" per
course.
Work with IR
to develop
survey.
Project
completion
and staff
satisfaction.
Analysis of
usage data;
comparison of
subject content
with course
and program
content;
formal and
informal
faculty
feedback;
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2013S
2
PLO &
SLO
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2013F
3
PLO
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2012S/X
4
PLO
Circulation rates
will show an
increase over time.
There will be
more books and
other materials in
the collection in
the subjects
relevant to the
assignments,
courses, and
programs offered.
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2012F
5
SLO
At least 60% of
students attending
workshops will
report confidence
in conducting
searches and
retrieving relevant
material. Students
attending research
workshops will
attain success on
other measures at
a greater rate than
students who have
not attended
workshops.
32 Students will be
satisfied and
confident in using
library spaces and
resources; students
will find what they
need for courses
and assignments
Faculty will be
satisfied and
confident that
library resources
are meeting
students' research
and assignment
needs.
Bi-annual
student survey;
quick surveys
following
reference
interviews
Bi-annual
faculty survey;
other informal
faculty
feedback;
inclusion of
library in
curriculum
planning
process
Analysis of
usage rates
within call
number
(subject)
ranges that
match the
courses and
programs;
average and
oldest-tonewest
publication
date ranges;
number of
titles within
each range;
Sign in sheet
for tracking
students’
aggregate data
by student ID
number and
comparing to
success,
retention, and
completion;
in-class plusdelta; facultyfacilitated after
class plusdelta; biannual student
survey
Library/Reference
Services
Once
every
two
years
2014S
6
PLO
Students will
report resources
easy to access and
use, District-wide.
Data on number of
downloads will
show extent of
usage of guides
Residential Life
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
1
SLO
As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the components of
a
degree/certificate
program necessary
to reach their
educational goal.
33 Hit counts or
Google
analytics;
informal
feedback from
students;
librarian and
library staff
try-outs and
feedback;
librarian
assessment of
ease of use in
instruction
sessions
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
Residential Life
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
2
SLO
34 As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the transfer
requirements
necessary to reach
their educational
goal.
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
Residential Life
Once a
year
2013S
2014S
3
SLO
Residential Life
Once a
year
2013S
2014S
4
PLO
35 Students who
participate in
residential life
activities will
build better
connections with
residents in the
community
Parent and Student
Orientation will
include
information
regarding Student
Conduct and
FERPA to
increase
completion of
release of
information for
parents
Residential
Life
Satisfaction
Survey
Turned in
release of
information
forms signed
by students for
parents
Special Programs :
EOPS/CARE/CWS
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
1
SLO
36 As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the components of
a
degree/certificate
program necessary
to reach their
educational goal.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
Special Programs :
EOPS/CARE/CWS
Once a
year
2013 S
3
PLO
Special Programs :
EOPS/CARE/CWS
Twice a
year
2013F
2014S
4
SLO
Veterans Resource
Center
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
1
SLO
37 Counselors and
advisors will be
knowledgeable
about best
practices for
advising basic
skills and at-risk
students (veterans,
students in
poverty, athletics,
DE, DSPS,
academically
disadvantaged,
EOPS).
As a result of
attending an
advising
orientation
session,
matriculating
students will be
able to
comprehend
assessment results
and correlate
placement with
course selection.
As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the components of
a
degree/certificate
program necessary
to reach their
educational goal.
Staff
development
plan, staff
development
surveys,
training
evaluations
A Pre & Post
Assessment
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each “New
Student
Orientation.”
The
assessments
will be
distributed to
new student
matriculants in
June-August
2013.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
Veterans Resource
Center
Twice a
year
2012F
2013S
2
SLO
38 As a result of an
academic advising
session and
collaborative
development of a
Student
Educational Plan,
students will
demonstrate an
understanding of
the transfer
requirements
necessary to reach
their educational
goal.
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
needed in
order to
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
An end of
semester
electronic
survey
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each SEP
session with
the student
development
advisor or
counselor.
Survey will
include eight
to ten
questions
devised to
ascertain
students
knowledge of
information
needed in
order to
Veterans Resource
Center
Once a
year
2013 F
3
SLO
Veterans Resource
Center
Twice a
year
2013F
2014S
5
SLO
39 Student veterans
who attend the
New Student
Veteran
Orientation or
advising session
will learn the
process for
receiving Veterans
Administration
educational
benefits while
studying at CR
As a result of
attending an
advising
orientation
session,
matriculating
students will be
able to
comprehend
assessment results
and correlate
placement with
course selection.
achieve their
intended
educational
goal. Cohorts
will include
students
served by the
following
programs and
courses:
veterans,
athletics,
residential life,
EOPS, CARE,
CalWORKs,
CTE, GS-1,
GS-6 and
Guid-8.
Tracking the
number of
veterans
successfully
submitting all
forms required
to receive VA
educational
benefits to the
Veterans
Affairs
Services
Office.
A Pre & Post
Assessment
designed to
assess the
effectiveness
of material
covered in
each “New
Student
Orientation.”
The
assessments
will be
distributed to
new student
matriculants in
June-August
2013.