5.1 b
Program/Discipline: AG
Annual Program Review Update
Agriculture
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 1 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Annual Program Review Update
*Be sure to include information from all three campuses.
Program/Discipline: AG
Submitted by (names): Tim Baker
Contact Information (phone and email): 4348 tim-baker@redwoods.edu
Dean / V. P.: Anderson
Validation Date:
1. Program/Discipline Changes
Has there been any change in the status of your program or area since your last Annual Update? (Have you shifted departments?
Have new degrees or certificates been created by your program? Have activities in other programs impacted your area or program?
For example, a new nursing program could cause greater demand for life-science courses.)
Note: curricular changes should be addressed under 12 (Curriculum).
No (go to next question)
Yes (describe the changes below):
A new A.A. degree option was created in 2009 to provide a transfer pathway for Agriculture students. This is in addition to the 5
degrees and cerficates already in place in AG. Several new courses (or old inactivated courses) were developed to meet the tranfer
needs of this new pathway. The program also received a CALTrans/California Coastal Commission mitigation grant of $2,000,000
designated specifically for the Shively Farm. While this grant provides exceptional opportunities, the funds are severely restricted in
how they can be used, particularly the $500,000 designated for equipment and facilities. The additional funds establish an endowment
for a Farm Manager/Faculty member, a position currently held by Franz Rulofson. It has allowed for some expansion of Franz's
teaching role within the AG program.
Additionally, we conducted an outside review of AG (and FOR/NR) several years ago by the Statewide AG Advisory Committee (see
March '09 Comprehensive Review) that made several recommendations that the College has yet to provide adequate resources to
address. However, a major point of that review was to hire a full-time AG position to replace Bert Walker following his retirement
and the College has begun a search to fill that position (first search unsuccessful, second under way).
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 2 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Finally, a Comprehensive Program Review Document was completed in March of 2009, please refer to that document for additional
information that is not repeated in this document.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 3 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
2. Program/Discipline Trends
Review and analyze the Enrollment data (Table 2.01) provided by Institutional Research and answer the following questions:
Table 2.01 Enrollments
Number of students enrolled at census date
For the purposes of these charts here, course sections have been broken down by class start time. The definitions for each start time
are as follows:
 Early Morning
Before 10:00AM
 Prime Time
From 10:00AM to 2:30PM
 Late Afternoon
From 2:30PM to 5:30PM*/6:00PM
 Evening
5:30PM*/6:00PM and later
 Weekend
Saturday or Sunday classes
 TBA
No scheduled start time
* Evening is defined differently for semesters prior to Fall 2009
Each classification was weighted according to the following schedule:
 Weekend
 Evening
 Late Afternoon
 Early Morning
 Prime Time
If a section had start times that fell into more than one category, it would be placed in the higher weighted category. For example, if a
section met on a Saturday and started at 10:30AM, it would be considered a Weekend section.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 4 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Agriculture Fill Rate
Enrollment
Sections
FTES
WSCH
Total
TBA
Evening
Late Afternoon
Prime Time
Early Morning
Total
2008 - 2009
TBA
Evening
Late Afternoon
Prime Time
Early Morning
Total
2007 - 2008
TBA
Evening
Prime Time
Early Morning
Total
2006 - 2007
TBA
Evening
Late Afternoon
Prime Time
Early Morning
2005 - 2006
68% 70% 66% 66% 17% 57% 77% 61% 80% 20% 61% 75% 60% 27% 51% 31% 57% 63% 61% 33% 60% 39% 57%
97
154
81
67
28
427
75
132
67
16
290
58
183
8
43
8
300
72
259
10
45
32
418
5
7
4
3
8
27
4
7
3
3
17
3
10
1
3
1
18
5
16
1
3
5
30
14.49 25.23 15.5 7.8 4.63 67.65 11.94 27.06 7.98 2.26 49.24 9.87 31.28 1.12 6.4 0.82 49.49 10.47 45.36 1.41 5.38 4.94 67.55
306
504 342 162 648 1,962
288
630 162 270 1,350 198
846
72 162
54 1,332
306 1,224
72 162 378 2,142
a. Describe how changes in the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
There are multiple underlying changes that have impacted enrollment over the past several years. These include the lack of any fulltime faculty in AG at the Eureka campus and various scheduling impacts because of reliance on Associate faculty for the entire
staffing needs at Eureka. But the statistical significance of these changes are unclear, given the overall College enrollment patterns for
the last several years and the lack of long-term trend data. Some of the increase in 2008-2009 occurred because we offered sections of
several courses that had not been offered since 2005-2006 (which has comparable FTES). The limited ability to offer some courses on
an occasional schedule will contribute to the overall volatility of the data and limits meaningful interpretation. The TBA courses have
a low fill rate in part because of the nature of the courses (AG enterprise courses at the Shively farm).
b. Describe how changes outside the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
Economic forces are undoubtedly contributing to some of the trends seen in enrollment but it's unclear how significant the impact is.
It may well be that an increase in area unemployment has led to an increase in indoor Cannabis grows that could have driven an
increase in horticulture class enrollment that enables students to become more proficient in these highly profitable setups but we lack
any meaninful data to attribute the increase to this.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 5 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Review and analyze the Enrollment data (Table 2.02) provided by Institutional Research and answer the following questions:
2.02 Course Success Rates
Percentage of students enrolled at census receiving a grade of A, B, C, or Credit
Agriculture
Agriculture
Total
AG-14
AG-15
AG-16
AG-17
AG-18
AG-19
AG-21
AG-22
AG-23
AG-25
AG-26
AG-27
AG-29
AG-3
AG-31
AG-35
AG-39
AG-40
AG-46
AG-63
AG-63L
AG-65
AG-65L
AG-66
Total
2004 - 2005
2005 - 2006
2006 - 2007
2007 - 2008
2008 - 2009
Success Total Enrolled Success Total Enrolled Success Total Enrolled Success Total Enrolled Success Total Enrolled
56%
16
77%
22
82%
22
37%
19
53%
15
63%
19
76%
17
62%
21
25%
16
82%
17
69%
26
86%
22
79%
14
53%
15
50%
28
60%
30
63%
32
64%
28
85%
27
80%
15
52%
25
94%
18
50%
8
64%
11
68%
25
70%
23
65%
23
67%
30
76%
17
63%
27
87%
31
65%
20
75%
12
68%
19
80%
45
67%
75
92%
49
85%
55
82%
76
69%
26
68%
22
71%
21
73%
22
65%
23
57%
21
59%
22
53%
15
93%
14
61%
23
67%
24
92%
13
81%
26
89%
27
100%
13
93%
15
74%
19
89%
18
75%
8
60%
10
1
92%
13
50%
2
100%
1
89%
9
69%
13
100%
8
100%
10
69%
45
64%
84
61%
51
56%
71
47%
74
69%
13
73%
51
100%
14
56%
9
79%
38
75%
8
88%
8
80%
10
100%
6
100%
8
75%
12
43%
14
33%
3
87%
15
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
73%
374
67%
488
75%
322
67%
335
72%
467
73%
374
67%
488
75%
322
67%
335
72%
467
a. Describe how changes in the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 6 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
The percentages listed above are volatile because of the modest enrollment (usually a single section) of each course. Overall trends
are comparable, if not slightly higher than science courses as a whole (50%-75%) but attribution of any of the percent value changes
to pedagogical strategies would be highly suspect given the probably large number of exogenous variables unaccounted for in such an
analysis.
b. Describe how changes outside the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
Review and analyze the Enrollment data (Table 2.03) provided by Institutional Research and answer the following questions:
Table 2.03 Course Retention Rate
Percentage of students enrolled at census receiving a grade other than W (Withdraw)
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 7 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Agriculture
Agriculture
Total
AG-14
AG-15
AG-16
AG-17
AG-18
AG-19
AG-21
AG-22
AG-23
AG-25
AG-26
AG-27
AG-29
AG-3
AG-31
AG-35
AG-39
AG-40
AG-46
AG-63
AG-63L
AG-65
AG-65L
AG-66
Total
2004 - 2005
2005 - 2006
2006 - 2007
2007 - 2008
2008 - 2009
Retained Total Enrolled Retained Total Enrolled Retained Total Enrolled Retained Total Enrolled Retained Total Enrolled
81%
16
95%
22
95%
22
63%
19
80%
15
89%
19
100%
17
100%
21
75%
16
88%
17
96%
26
91%
22
93%
14
80%
15
68%
28
80%
30
81%
32
89%
28
96%
27
93%
15
88%
25
100%
18
100%
8
100%
11
96%
25
91%
23
91%
23
77%
30
88%
17
89%
27
90%
31
90%
20
100%
12
89%
19
96%
45
81%
75
98%
49
95%
55
91%
76
85%
26
95%
22
81%
21
86%
22
83%
23
76%
21
82%
22
73%
15
100%
14
96%
23
79%
24
92%
13
92%
26
100%
27
100%
13
93%
15
95%
19
100%
18
88%
8
80%
10
1
92%
13
100%
2
100%
1
100%
9
85%
13
100%
8
100%
10
78%
45
86%
84
84%
51
83%
71
86%
74
69%
13
88%
51
100%
14
89%
9
92%
38
75%
8
88%
8
100%
10
100%
6
100%
8
100%
12
86%
14
33%
3
100%
15
100%
1
100%
1
100%
1
88%
374
86%
488
89%
322
89%
335
90%
467
88%
374
86%
488
89%
322
89%
335
90%
467
a. Describe how changes in the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
Retention rates are high within AG overall and probably trend higher than the CR courses on average because these courses by nature
only get students who are interested in the subject (as opposed to many GE courses). However attribution of these percentages to any
particular variable is unlikely given the diverse associate faculty and the volatile nature of percentages in single section classes..
b. Describe how changes outside the discipline or area are impacting the data shown in the table above.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 8 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
We have no information on how outside changes might be impacting these numbers.
Review and analyze the Enrollment data (Table 2.04) provided by Institutional Research and answer the following questions:
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 9 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Table 2.04 English and Mathematics Basic Skills Data for Course Success (F2005-F2008)
AG-14
AG-15
AG-16
AG-17
AG-18
AG-19
AG-21
AG-22
AG-23
AG-25
AG-26
AG-27
AG-29
AG-39
AG-46
AG-63
AG-63L
AG-65L
AG-66
Total
UNKNOWN
READ-360
ENGL-350
ENGL-150
ENGL-1A
PASSED 1A
Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled
39
62%
6
33%
14
64%
6
67%
13
85%
17
76%
1
0%
9
44%
2
100%
9
78%
28
82%
8
75%
9
56%
17
82%
36
58%
4
50%
22
64%
31
77%
24
75%
15
73%
1
100%
10
40%
13
69%
12
75%
5
80%
2
50%
3
67%
3
67%
34
65%
2
50%
11
73%
12
75%
15
67%
7
57%
4
50%
12
75%
9
78%
47
68%
2
100%
4
75%
33
73%
43
79%
77
91%
31
77%
10
20%
13
77%
8
75%
7
86%
37
68%
3
0%
18
39%
9
78%
14
64%
34
71%
3
33%
22
64%
13
85%
14
93%
7
71%
1
100%
3
100%
12
100%
4
75%
2
50%
1
0%
1
0%
2
100%
2
50%
6
50%
1
100%
2
100%
5
80%
7
100%
91
64%
1
100%
7
57%
40
43%
46
67%
40
63%
37
81%
5
80%
12
67%
11
55%
17
88%
4
25%
1
0%
3
33%
3
67%
3
33%
1
100%
478
68%
4
75%
49
45%
227
59%
240
75%
287
79%
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 10 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
AG-14
AG-15
AG-16
AG-17
AG-18
AG-19
AG-21
AG-22
AG-23
AG-25
AG-26
AG-27
AG-29
AG-39
AG-46
AG-63
AG-63L
AG-65L
AG-66
Total
TRANSFER-LVL
MATH-120
MATH-380
MATH-375
MATH-371
UNKNOWN
Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled Success Enrolled
71%
14
80%
5
60%
10
44%
9
100%
1
64%
39
100%
4
67%
3
50%
4
50%
8
74%
19
92%
13
0%
4
90%
10
60%
5
100%
1
79%
29
77%
30
67%
12
79%
19
56%
16
100%
2
58%
38
78%
9
75%
8
78%
9
38%
8
100%
1
63%
16
100%
1
100%
2
100%
1
0%
1
63%
8
67%
12
57%
7
62%
13
60%
10
100%
1
74%
31
63%
8
40%
5
86%
7
67%
6
83%
6
96%
72
75%
32
79%
38
56%
25
100%
1
71%
38
88%
8
50%
2
62%
13
71%
7
33%
3
72%
36
54%
13
100%
1
59%
17
27%
11
100%
1
68%
38
85%
13
50%
4
71%
21
88%
8
100%
2
68%
38
100%
4
100%
4
100%
5
100%
2
75%
12
100%
2
100%
1
0%
1
0%
1
33%
3
80%
5
83%
6
100%
1
78%
9
68%
31
59%
27
53%
34
56%
25
67%
6
62%
102
69%
13
83%
6
79%
14
67%
3
100%
3
77%
43
50%
4
100%
1
0%
1
50%
2
17%
6
100%
1
80%
256
66%
122
71%
223
55%
146
77%
26
68%
512
Given the data, what patterns can be identified in the success rate in individual courses based on the students' skill level? Identify any
important changes since the last review.
For AG courses in general, it appears that greater Math and English comprehension result in greater success rates though this is highly
variable depending on the course. Again, these numbers show volatility because of the low numbers in each category. Several of the
courses listed are agriculture production courses which typically have more modest language and mathematics requirements.
How has the discipline/program responded to these patterns and how will the discipline/program respond in the next three years?
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 11 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Many of the transfer level courses should have an ENGL 150 minimum requirement for reliable chances of student success. However,
a good many of the AG course outlines have yet to be updated so some of these requirements are not yet enforceable.
3. Labor Market Review (for occupational programs)
Occupational programs must review their labor market data.
Provide a narrative that addresses the following issues
a. Documentation of lab market demand
b. Non-duplication of other training programs in the region.
c. Effectiveness as measured by the employment and completion success of its students.
a. AG is in a gray area with regards to both Occupational programs and transfer programs because of the wide variety of student goals.
While a number of students do pursue degrees and certificates for occupational needs, many others are either seeking transfer or
personal enrichment. Please see the Comprehensive Review from March 2009 for job market data. It is not included here because of
format limitations.
b. There are no other AG programs within the service area of CR.
c. We lack any tracking data to determine overall completion rates or employment.
4. Budget Resources
List your area’s budget for the following categories in the table below. Restricted funds have a sponsor/grantor/donor (federal,
state, local government, etc). The funds are restricted by the sponsor/grantor/donor. Everything else is unrestricted.
Category
Supply and printing budget
Equipment replacement and repair
budget
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 12 of 38
Unrestricted Funds
$2980
Restricted Funds
$200,000
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Professional Development
Work-study funding
Additional Budget Items
Is the funding for these areas adequate?
Yes
No
If not, describe the impact of unaddressed needs on your discipline or program.
Much of the funding needs for AG are met through outside grants or the Greenhouse plant sales. However, several courses are
woefully under-equipped for instructional supplies and equipment. The list included in the update is only a partial list of the
modernization needed within the AG program however, a comprehensive list won't be available until a full-time faculty is appointed
to oversee these needs. This is particularly true for courses like AG 17 Introduction to Soils, which was just re-written for a cleaner
articulation to HSU, and AG 18 Soil fertility. Both of these courses have relied on other areas (i.e. Geology and Chemistry), to meet
their annual supplies needs. In addition, grants through Forestry and Natural Resources have also purchased some equipment for the
AG courses because of the close ties between the curricula. The $200,000 in restricted funds is this academic year's allocation to
equipment purchases for the Shively Farm. The monies cannot be used for meeting general AG equipment and supply needs because
of the grant restrictions.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 13 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
5. Learning Resource Center Resources
Is the level of resources provided by the Library (Learning Resource Center) adequate?
Yes
No If No, Complete the following:
Library Needs Not Covered by Current Library Holdings1 Needed by the Unit over and above what is currently provided.
These needs will be communicated to the Library
List Library Needs for Academic Year
Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below. Please be as specific and as brief as possible. Place items on
list in order (rank) or importance.
1.
Reason:
2.
Reason:
3.
Reason:
4.
Reason:
5.
Reason:
6.
Reason:
1 If your SLO assessment results make clear that particular resources are needed to more effectively serve students please be sure to note that in the “reason” section of this form.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 14 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
6. Faculty
Table 6.01 – Faculty Load Distribution by semester
2005 - 2006
2006 - 2007
2007 - 2008
2008 - 2009
FTEF % of Total FTEF % of Total FTEF % of Total FTEF % of Total
Associate Faculty
1.2
48%
2
85% 2.13
96% 2.78
86%
Regular Staff/Non-Overld 1.09
52%
0
15% 0.07
4% 0.27
14%
Staff - unknown status
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
0
0%
Total
2.29
100%
2
100% 2.19
100% 3.05
100%
a. Describe the status of any approved, but unfilled full-time positions.
One unsuccessful search was conducted last Spring for a full-time position and we are currently conducting another search.
 b. If you are requesting a Full-Time Faculty position, fill out the current faculty position request form and attach it to
this document.
c. If your Associate Faculty needs are not being met, describe your efforts to recruit Associate faculty and/or describe
barriers or limitations that prevent retaining or recruiting Associate Faculty
Currently we have a fairly robust associate faculty group in AG with solid experience in the program. However, we may need to
recruit new associates to cover some of the new courses depending on the expertise and interest of the person filling the full-time
vacanc
7. Staff Resources
Complete the Classified Staff Employment Grid below (please list full- and part-time staff). This does not include faculty, managers,
or administration positions. If a staff position is shared with other areas/disciplines, estimate the fraction of their workload dedicated
to your area. (To add additional rows to this table, press Tab when the cursor is in the far right-hand cell)
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 15 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Staff Employed in the Program
Assignment (e.g., Math, Full-time (classified)
English)
staff (give number)
Part-time staff (give
number)
Gains over Prior Year
Losses over Prior Year
(give reason: retirement,
reassignment, health, etc.)
AG
1
0
0
Do you need more full-time of part-time classified staff?
Yes
No
If yes, fill out the current staff request form (to be provided by Administrative Services)
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 16 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
8. Facilities, and Classroom Technology
Are teaching facilities adequate for achieving the educational outcomes of this discipline/program?
Yes
No
If No was checked, complete a Facility Form for each instructional space that does not meet the needs of this discipline/program.
Additional facilities forms are available at the end of this document for each separate facility being addressed.
Facilities, and Classroom Technology Form
Program/Disciplines: AG Submitted by: Tim Baker
Year: 2009
List classroom or instructional space name/number: AT 108
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
Ventilation / room
ADA
Number of seats / work stations
Technology (computers, projectors, internet)
temp
access
Other (briefly describe): The room requires safety and lab upgrades. These include an eye-wash station, new chairs, soap
dispenser, and towel rack
Describe the specific action and cost to make this space adequate for your instructional needs: The classroom needs to be wired for
Internet access and a computer cart needs to be purchased
$1000
Eyewash fountain
1
$ 242.00 (installation not included)
Chairs
36
($ 69.05 ea)
Ergonomically-correct student chairs
$2,485.80
-must be durable, and with resistant surfaces for laboratory conditions
Hand Soap Dispensers
4 GOJO2745
Paper Towel Dispensers
4
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 17 of 38
($ 38.96 ea)
$ 155.84
No Cost (?)
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Vacuum Lines - these currently do not work and are required for lab demonstrations and student activities. Cost of repair is
unknown.
List the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room each semester, and the total number of students
enrolled in these sections.
Sections: 6
Students: 180/semester
Describe how these changes will improve student learning outcomes: Improved access to technology by instructors should increase
student success.
9. Equipment
Is the available equipment (other than classroom specific equipment described in the facilities section) adequate to achieve the
educational outcomes of your program/discipline?
Yes
No
If No was checked, complete an equipment form.
If No was checked, complete the following grid for each piece of equipment being requested for this area/discipline:
(To add additional rows to this table, press Tab when the cursor is in the far right-hand cell)
Equipment
4 - Jennings JScale JS 100XV. 100 g
capacity,
accurate to 0.01
g,
Price, include
tax and
shipping
Number of
students using
equipment each
semester
$48.50 /scale:
$194.00 total
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 18 of 38
48
Describe how the equipment
allows achievement of
program/discipline educational
outcomes
Both sets of requested scales will
allow student to apply
quantitative analyses to their
learning of soil science.
This will aid in the course SLOs:
Classify a soil profile into the
5/29/2016
5.1 b
correct series.
Describe the relationships
between organic matter content,
soils nutrients, and soil water.
4- Proscale
XC-2000.
2000 g
capacity,
accurate to 0.1
g, battery
powered, 5 yr
warranty
Storage shed
8x7
(Mendocino
Campus)
$59.50/scale:
$238.00 total
$1200
48
24
(Ag 63 at the
Mendocino
Campus)
The same rationale applies to this
second set of scales. A total set of
8 scales will ensure that each
student can participate in these
“hands on” learning activities
Needed to house our fertilizers,
potting media, and tools at the
Mendocino Campus.
Note:
additional
equipment
needs are in the
Shively Farm
plan which is
available
separately.
Equipment Repair
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 19 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Does the equipment used for your discipline/program function adequately, and does your current budget adequately provide adequate
funds for equipment repair and maintenance? This does not include classroom specific equipment repair described in the facilities
section.
Yes
No
If No, provide the following information to justify a budget allotment request:
(To add additional rows to this table, press Tab when the cursor is in the far right-hand cell)
Equipment
requiring repair
Repair Cost /
Annual
maintenance
cost
Number of
students using
equipment each
semester
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 20 of 38
Describe how the equipment
allows achievement of
program/discipline educational
outcomes
5/29/2016
5.1 b
10. Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
Program and Course Learning Outcomes
Refer to the assessment analysis forms that track discipline meetings held to summarize and discuss SLO assessment. Use that information to
complete the following table for each SLO and/or PLO analyzed during the previous academic year. Additional tables are available at the end of
this document to summarize the results for each SLO and/or PLO analyzed.
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 21 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 22 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Indicate where learning outcome assessment forms (Course-Discipline, Course-Section) are archived (e.g, Division Office, Dean’s
Office). This is required to provide accreditation documentation of the District’s assessment activities.
We have yet to begun any comprehensive CLO or PLO assessment in AG because we still lack a full-time faculty in AG to coordinate
such an effort amongst a large group of associate faculty and many of the course outlines are out-of-date and lack explicit, measurable
learning outcomes. The Area Coordinator for AG has typically received no release time in the last 5 years to develop these
assessments. However, we intend to address the curriculum issue first before attempting to begin CLO/PLO assessment. Please see
the list in 11 for the current and out-of-date courses.
11. Curriculum Update
Identify curricular revisions and innovations undertaken
a.
in the last year.
AG is a long running program at College of the Redwoods with 5 degrees and certificates within the area. Additionally, because of
Administrative interest, we developed a new AG option for the A.A. Liberal Arts degree to provide transfer opportunities for area
students we were not currently serving. Additionally, we developed or updated the AG courses required for that degree option (AG 3,
7, 17, 23, 30, 51, and 52). However, this still leaves us with a large backlog of out-of-date courses because we have not had a fulltime faculty in the program for 4 years (which covers the start of the current 5-year cycle of course outline updates).
Please see the Comprehensive Review completed in March 2009 for additional information.
b.
planned for the coming year.
We will continue to address the large backlog of out of date course outlines that has accumulated because of the lack of a full-time AG
faculty for the past several years. We have planned a work session with the associate faculty to begin working on some of the courses
but have not yet firmed up which courses will be updates (aside from AG 18 and 66). We are unlikely to get all the courses updated in
the absence of a full-time faculty in the program and without significant College support.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 23 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
c. Complete the grid below. The course outline status report can be located at:
http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Reports/Curriculum/Curriculum_Course_Outlines.htm
(To add additional rows to this table, press Tab when the cursor is in the far right-hand cell)
Course
AG 3
AG 7
AG 14
AG 15
AG 16
AG 17
AG 18
AG 19
AG 21
AG 22
AG 23
AG 25
AG 26
AG 27
AG 29
AG 30
AG 39
AG 40
AG 46
AG 51
AG 52
AG 63
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 24 of 38
Year Course Outline Last Updated
2009
2009
1997
1989
1989
2009
1998
2007
1998
2001
2009
1989
1989
1998
2002
2009
2002
2008
2008
2009
2009
2007
Year Next Update Expected
2014
2014
2014
2012
2014
2014
2013
2013
2014
2014
2012
5/29/2016
5.1 b
AG 63L
AG 65
AG 65L
AG 66
2007
2003
2003
2004
2012
If the proposed course outlines updates from last year’s annual update (or comprehensive review) were not completed, please
explain why.
We are in the progress of updating the Course Outlines for Ag with the plan indicated above. However, this is a large undertaking with
only a single full-time faculty (the Area Coordinator) who coordinates another program as well (FOR/NR) and teaches a full load of
classes. We are working with Associate faculty to make progress but this type of course update appears to be outside their contracts
and hence we are limited in how much can be accomplished.
12. Action Plans
List any action plans submitted since your last annual update. Describe the status of the plans. If they were approved, describe
how they have improved your area.
The action plan to update the AT 108 classroom with instructional technology has been completed albeit in a slightly different form
(different equipment than originally planned). Additional work is still needed (see facilities) but it has greatly improved delivery
options for instructional material.
13. Goals and Plans. Address either item a. or b. in the section below
a. If you have undergone a comprehensive review, attach your Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) and address progress made on the
plan and list any new plans that have been developed (using a new QIP form).
QIP Attached
Please note that the QIP was completed in March of 2009, hence little time has passed to accomplish any of the goals listed. Below is
the QIP from that document.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 25 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Quality Improvement Plan
Completing the Quality Improvement Plan (QIP)
The Quality Improvement Plan (QIP) is intended to assist the program in thinking and planning for a minimum of the next three years.
The purpose of the QIP is to provide a format for translating both the comprehensive review report recommendations into actions for
improving or maintaining the quality of the program; it is also a mechanism for administrators to determine input to the planning
process. Because this document will be used to inform planning processes, it is very important that all the requested information be
provided.
Complete a Quality Improvement Form for each of the numbered recommendations cited in the Recommendations section above.
You will need to complete a separate form for each recommendation.
Quality Improvement Form
Program: Agriculture
Year: Spring 2009
Submitted by: David Bazard and Tim Baker
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #1 Complete the updating of all Ag course outlines. This includes development of student
learning outcomes (SLOs) for each course.
Planned Implementation Date Ongoing
Estimated Completion Date 12/09
Action/Tasks Update course outlines
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Course Outlines Accepted and submitted by the Curriculum Committee and approved by
the Senate and Board of Trustees
Estimated Cost(s)
No cost, unless Associate Faculty are hired to write course outlines (which as been done for four outlines this
semester.
Who is responsible? Dean of Academic Affairs and Full-Time Ag Faculty
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 26 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Consequence if not funded No funding; but courses may not be allowed to be taught
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) Required for District Accreditation
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #2 - Develop a systematic means of assessing SLOs for each course and train faculty to
administer and record SLO assessment.
Planned Implementation Date Ongoing as course outlines are updated with measureable SLOs
Estimated Completion Date 5/10
Action/Tasks A specific plan for how SLOs will be measured (and which ones) for each course by the various instructors.
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Documented SLO assessment and documentation of use of results
Estimated Cost(s)
No cost
Who is responsible? Agriculture Faculty, Academic Affairs Dean
Consequence if not funded Loss of College Accreditation. Lack of documentation to assure students and community of
instructional quality
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) NA
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #3 - Define specific Program Learning Outcomes for each Degree and Certificate Offered.
Planned Implementation Date Beginning Fall 2009
Estimated Completion Date Fall 2009
Action/Tasks Develop specific Program Learning Outcomes for each degree and certificate offered
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Record of specific PLOs for each program
Estimated Cost(s)
None
Who is responsible? Full-Time Agriculture Faculty
Consequence if not funded NA
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) Required for School-wide Accreditation
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 27 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #4 - Complete the implementation of an Agriculture Area of Emphasis within the Liberal Arts
AA degree.
Planned Implementation Date Fall 2009
Estimated Completion Date Spring 2009
Action/Tasks Follow through on submitting Substantial Change Form to the AA degree
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Institution of an Agriculture Area of Emphasis within the AA Liberal Arts degree
Estimated Cost(s)
None
Who is responsible? Division Chair / Dean, Academic Affairs
Consequence if not funded Difficult to attract students who intend on transferring to a 4-year institution to major in an agriculture
field
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) NA
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #5 - Work with the Institutional Research Department and the Ag Advisory Committee to
develop graduate and employment surveys.
Planned Implementation Date Fall 2009
Estimated Completion Date Ongoing
Action/Tasks Develop student and Employer surveys
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Record of surveys
Estimated Cost(s)
Unknown – perhaps a cost for mailing
Who is responsible? Full-Time Agriculture Professor
Consequence if not funded None
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) NA
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 28 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Category
Descriptions
Recommendation Number and Title #6 - Work with Institutional Research Department to document the numbers of students enrolled
in each degree and certificate program.
Planned Implementation Date Fall 2009
Estimated Completion Date Ongoing
Action/Tasks Develop a means of recording the number of students pursuing each agriculture degree and certificate
Measure of Success/Desired Outcome
Record of student enrollments in the programs
Estimated Cost(s)
None
Who is responsible? District, VP of Academic Affairs, Dean of Academic Affairs, Dean of Career and Technical Ed. Admissions
and Records Manager
Consequence if not funded None
External Accreditation Recommendations (if applicable) NA
b. If you do not have a QIP, refer to the goals and plans from your previous annual update.
For each goal and/or plan, comment on the current status of reaching that goal and/or completing the plan.
List any new goals and plans your area has for the coming year, and indicate how they are aligned with the goals/objectives in
CR’s Strategic Plan. (CR’s strategic plan is located on the web at http://inside.redwoods.edu/StrategicPlanning/strategicplan.asp).
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 29 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Additional Forms
Facilities and Classroom Technology Form
List classroom or instructional space name/number: CRMC 120
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
Ventilation / room temp
ADA access
Number of seats / work stations Technology (computers, projectors, internet)
Other (briefly describe): The room requires safety and lab upgrades. These include an eye-wash station, new chairs, soap
dispenser, and towel rack There is not enough space to run a lab if there is anyone with a wheelchair in the class . Currently in the
Ag 63 and Ag63L class there is a student in a wheelchair. Access is crowded and unsafe. The room was supposed to be upgraded
during the last bond election because of ADA, health , safety issues but it was put off . This room is also used by half of the
biology classes on campus.
Describe the specific action and cost to make this space adequate for your instructional needs:
7Eyewash fountain
1
$ 242.00 (installation not included)
Chairs
36
($ 69.05 ea)
Ergonomically-correct student chairs
$2,485.80
-must be durable, and with resistant surfaces for laboratory conditions
Expanding the size of the room by moving the west wall back.This cost was supposed to be borne by measure Q funds. It never
happened.
List the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room each semester, and the total number of students
enrolled in these sections.
Sections: 7
Students: 100
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 30 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Describe how these changes will improve student learning outcomes: Improved learning environment.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 31 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Facilities and Classroom Technology Form
List classroom or instructional space name/number:
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
Ventilation / room temp
ADA access
Number of seats / work stations
Technology (computers, projectors, internet)
Other (briefly describe):
Describe the specific action and cost to make this space adequate for your instructional needs:
List the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room each semester, and the total number of students
enrolled in these sections.
Sections:
Students:
Describe how these changes will improve student learning outcomes:
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 32 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Facilities and Classroom Technology Form
List classroom or instructional space name/number:
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
Ventilation / room temp
ADA access
Number of seats / work stations
Technology (computers, projectors, internet)
Other (briefly describe):
Describe the specific action and cost to make this space adequate for your instructional needs:
List the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room each semester, and the total number of students
enrolled in these sections.
Sections:
Students:
Describe how these changes will improve student learning outcomes:
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 33 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Facilities and Classroom Technology Form
List classroom or instructional space name/number:
Check if any of the following are not adequate:
Ventilation / room temp
ADA access
Number of seats / work stations
Technology (computers, projectors, internet)
Other (briefly describe):
Describe the specific action and cost to make this space adequate for your instructional needs:
List the average number of discipline/program sections scheduled in this room each semester, and the total number of students
enrolled in these sections.
Sections:
Students:
Describe how these changes will improve student learning outcomes:
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 34 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Program and Course Learning Outcomes
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 35 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Program and Course Learning Outcomes
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 36 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Program and Course Learning Outcomes
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 37 of 38
5/29/2016
5.1 b
Program and Course Learning Outcomes
Course SLO Measured:
Or PLO Measured :
Describe assessment
tool/ assignments
faculty/staff used to
measure the SLO or
PLO.
Summarize the overall
results of your
department, including
performance data if
applicable.
How will your
department address the
needs and issues that
were revealed by your
assessment?
List the TOP 3 TO 6
actions/changes
faculty judge will most
improve student learning
Provide a timeline for
implementation of your
top priorities.
Annual Program Review Template, Approved Spring 2009
Page 38 of 38
5/29/2016