Instructional Program Review Update 2012/13 (fields will expand as you type) Section 1 ‐ Program Information 1.0 Name of Program: Hospitality, Restaurant & Culinary Date: 2/7/13 1.1 Program Review Authors: Jeff Cummings 1.2 Dean’s Signature: Jeff Cummings Date: 2/7/13 1.3 Individual Program Information # of Degrees # of Certificates 3 # of Courses 3 # of GE Courses 24 0 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: Provides career / technical education and training that leads to entry level employment 1.3.2 Program highlights/accomplishments: Program in being completely remodeled to provide a single degree and certificate that aligns with local high school programs, focuses on hospitality management, and eliminates the need for a culinary training facility. Section 2 ‐ Data Analysis 2.1 Enrollment & Fill Rate Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Enrollments & fill rates Enrollment X
Comment if checked: program enrollments are very low primarily due to the loss of program components such as the culinary facility and full time faculty. Only the more advanced courses are being offered to afford students an opportunity to complete. ☐ Fill Rate X
Comment if checked: We have not offered the introduction level classes and only the more advanced courses are being offered to afford students an ☐ opportunity to complete the program. 2.2 Success & Retention Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Success & Retention Success X☐ Comment if checked: Success rates are very near district averages though slightly below. I would attribute this to the lack of program continuity 31. HRC Program review.docx 4/24/2013 Page 1 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: Persistence is low only in the area of Culinary Arts and this is due to the loss of our ability to offer the culinary classes when the kitchen facility was closed. Other degree emphasis areas meet district averages even though numbers are very low. 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: Program numbers are very low and completions are near 0. This program has been revised several times and the lack of a complete program has made it extremely difficult for students to get the courses they need to complete. 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: This is a female dominated subject area and program thought non‐traditional enrollments are respectable. Ethnicity and age distributions are similar to district values. 2.6 Success & Retention Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp by group Select your program and click on ~ by Student Equity Group next to success & retention Comment: The success and retention of minority students in this program is well below the district average. I do not have any ideas as to what may be causing this but it does need to be a priority as we rebuild this program. 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: Persistence numbers are very low due to the instability and uncertainty of this program in recent years. 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: Low program enrollment has led to significantly low FTES/FTEF numbers. This is currently part time faculty only. 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: 31. HRC Program review.docx 4/24/2013 Page 2 North Coast Region
2012
1st Qtr
$21.27
$17.19
$20.31
$24.13
North Coast Region
2012
1st Qtr
$20.18
$17.24
$19.78
$22.94
** Local Targets of Opportunity and Chancellor's Office Industry sector priorities include Hospitality. Program completions are down due to programmatic issues such as loss of full time faculty and closing the commercial training kitchen without adequately addressing programmatic ramifications. This is a very high demand industry sector and identified as a Target of Opportunity. Thought the wage levels are not high these entry level jobs often do lead to career tracks locally. Employment data for a single element of this industry is not impressive but the cumlitave results do indicate strong growth and job potential. Overall, what has been the impact of the change in indicators on student achievement and learning: Due to overall low program number meaningful interpretation of the data is difficult. Provide narrative on the factors that may have contributed to the improvement or decline in the identified population: Program instability and a lack of entry level course offerings has not led to increase student success or interest. 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 y NA 0 30% N Y 3.0 How has assessment of course level SLO’s led to improvement in student learning (top three): SLO's align better with PLO's Associate faculty see the alignment of SLO's to PLO's by mapping Increased dialogue among associate faculty 3.1 How has assessment of program level outcomes led to degree/certificate improvement (top three): Not there yet 31. HRC Program review.docx 4/24/2013 Page 3 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 Revise program to include one degree and one certificate Final development and approval New management degree and certificate that aligns with high school curriculum and industry needs. 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 Relationship to Institutional Plans Offer new degree courses Ed Master Plan Action to be taken: 1.1
Provide structured
academic pathways.
Increase associate faculty cadre 3.2
Student learning will be
a visible priority in all
practices and
structures. Relationship to Assessment A concise and well‐
designed program will be much more effectively assessed Less concentrated associate faculty load will help complete assessment in a timely manner Expected Impact on Resources Needed Program/Student Learning Increased student success and None employment Better assessment will led to a None higher quality program and student experience 5.2 Provide any additional information, brief definitions, descriptions, comments, or explanations, if necessary. This program has had difficulty for several years. All indicators point to the potential for a veryt strong and successful program that will significantly benefit the North Coast. A full time faculty member will be needed in the near future to ensure program success Section 6 ‐ Resource Requests 31. HRC Program review.docx 4/24/2013 Page 4 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 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: Enrollments are low, currently offering advanced courses only to students completing; Success and retention noted as near district averages, but based on low enrollment. Completions are “near” zero‐PRC recommends a specific number be included here. Equity numbers vary; enrollment by group below district averages; persistence is low. There is no full time faculty. Labor market data suggests this program is likely a target of opportunity program. PRC recommendation to focus on hospitality and move forward, or partner with high schools on revised culinary aspect. S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities: No full‐time faculty is detrimental; course outlines are in need of updating; assessment reporting is not current; SLO assessment listed; no program level outcomes; unsatisfactory S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans: Previous plan for a degree revision was completed S.5. Planning: Included a realistic attempt to align program to institutional documents. The program needs revitalization S.6. Resource Requests: none PRCrecommendsreferringthisprogramtotheAP4021process.Commentinthereviewthat“instabilityofprogramlikelyleadstolackofenrollments,”is
supportedbylowacrosstheboarddata.Thisprogramshouldgothroughtherevitalizationprocessandseewhathappens‐sincethisisaprogramof
opportunity.
31. HRC Program review.docx 4/24/2013 Page 5