Instructional Program Review Template for Academic Year 2013‐2014 (fields will expand as you type) Please provide a concise response to all questions, and include relevant details in direct support of your responses. Bulleted lists may be used to clearly organize information. Section 1 ‐ Program Information 1.0 Name of Program: First Year Experience (FYE) GS 1, GS 6, and Guid 8 Date: November 25, 2013 1.1 Program Review Authors (include names and campus locations): Feedback requested from current GS and Guid 8 faculty and former First Year Experience (FYE) committee members. Sheila Hall, Vinnie Peloso, Justine Shaw, Margaret Campbell, Bill Allison, Juana Tabares, Jennifer Bailey, Brad Morgan, April Klingonsmith, David Arnold, Natalie Barbero, Bob Brown, Kintay Johnson, Pam Kessler, Ruth Moon, and Erin Wall – Eureka and Distance Education. Sally Roy, Deborah Gerth, Chrystal Helton, Caylor Cuevas – Del Norte. 1.2 Dean’s Signature: Date: 1.3 Individual Program Information # of Degrees offered: 0 # of Certificates offered: 0 1.3.1 State briefly how the program functions support the college mission: The First Year Experience program (FYE) is a student centered program that supports the college mission to aid first‐year degree‐seeking students in their transition to College of the Redwoods, to expose students to appropriate educational opportunities based on student success rates, and to integrate new students into the college community in order to enrich their first year experience. The FYE program supports SB 1456 Student Success Act of 2012, the bill that provides a policy framework that targets funding to the core matriculation services of orientation, assessment, counseling and advising, and development of education plans. The bill re‐names the Matriculation program as the Student Success and Support Program (SSSP). 1.3.2 State briefly program highlights/accomplishments: In 2012‐2013, the FYE steering committee developed a framework for the curricular and co‐curricular components of the FYE program. Improvements were made within the enrollment process: increased outreach efforts; assured consistent language was used in the catalog, website, video, and communication to students; strengthened the math and English placement process and revisions were made to Accuplacer background questions; and a re‐designed orientation was developed with emphasis on appropriate course scheduling, basic skills, and student educational planning. Core FYE courses (GS 1, GS 6, and GUID 8) were scheduled in Fall 2013 with 24 sections district‐wide. cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 1 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 Comment if checked: Enrollment ☐ The number of sections in 2012‐2013 (and prior years) is not comparable to the significant increase in 2013‐2014 as the FYE program was implemented. Comment if checked: Fill Rate ☐ Enrollment and fill rate for GS is higher than the district. Again, the number of sections offered for 2013 is significantly higher than in previous years. Students were directed to a “Semester of Success” package of classes during new student orientations (May – August 2013) that included math, English, and GS/Guid. 2.2 Program Majors 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: # of Majors Comment: N/A 2.3 Success & Retention Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Success & Retention Success ☒ Comment if checked: Success for General Studies in 2012‐2013 was 67% (increase from 59% in 2011‐2012). As a program, these courses compare favorably well to district averages, even though the program includes some of the most at‐risk students in the district. While success rates have been somewhat lower, retention is significantly higher overall. This data may imply that students are staying longer than average, and therefore gaining critical skills that will benefit them in the future, even if their immediate success may not always be apparent. Retention ☐ Comment if checked: 88% of students are retained in GS as compared to the district average of 87% 2.4 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 & Completion rates Comment: N/A Persistence and completion rates are not available datasets for General Studies and Guidance. 2.5 Completers Review and interpret data by clicking here or going to: cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 2 http://www.redwoods.edu/District/IR/Program_Select.asp Select your program and click on: Persistence & Completion rates Comment: N/A 2.6 Program Completers 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: # of Completers Comment: N/A Student Equity Group Data 2.7 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 below the Enrollments & fill rates Comment: Enrollment by gender, ethnicity, and age groups for General Studies and Guidance is comparable to the district‐wide data. There are a larger percentage of students enrolled in GS/Guid courses receiving DSPS services and placing at the Basic Skills English level as compared to the district. Data for the Mendocino location is not provided in this data set. There are higher percentages of students receiving DSPS services and in basic skills levels in General Studies and Guidance as compared to the district. Including DSPS Guidance courses in these data sets may contribute to those differences. Basic Skills students may be advised to take GS and Guid courses more often than their college‐ready peers. 2.8 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 below success & retention Comment: The success of students in General Studies and Guidance is lower than the district‐wide percentage for both males and females: 63% success for females in GS/Guid as compared to 71% for females in the district, 62% success for males in GS/Guid as compared to 68% for males in the district. However, Retention is higher for GS/Guid students as compared to the district: 93% retention for females in GS/Guid as compared to 88% retention for females in the district, 91% retention for males as compared to 87% retention for males in the district. Generally, the same comparison (lower success, but higher retention compared to the district) is also true for age, ethnicity, DSPS, and Basic Skills placement. 2.9 Completers by group 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 ~ by Student Equity Group next to persistence Comment: cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 3 Skip this item. Data not provided. Faculty Information 2.10 Faculty 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: There is a larger percentage (70%) of part‐time faculty in GS and Guid as compared to the district (51.8%) for 2012‐2013. I am not aware of any full‐time faculty assigned to GS or non‐DSPS Guid for 2012‐2013, although the data reports 30%. With the exception of 2011‐2012, the program is below the District's already low FT/PT ratio. CTE/Occupational programs The following Labor Market section should be completed by all CTE/Occupational programs. Only CTE/Occupational programs need to complete this section (2.9). 2.11 Labor Market Data 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: Summary of Section 2 Overall, what did you learn from the data provided in this section? Be sure to indicate if your discoveries apply to the entire district, or if they vary by site. This General Studies and Guidance program category includes DSPS courses. For the future, it would be helpful to review course‐level data specific to the core FYE courses: GS 1, GS 6, and Guid 8. The District's average clearly shows that we're behind where we should be in hiring new and replacement FT faculty but, that aside, it may also reflect the "second class" nature of this program in the eyes of some in the district (one instructor has, at least, gotten this impression from a few FT colleagues). We should advocate for more FT faculty to rotate through teaching a GS section now and then. One instructor states, “it's made me so much more aware of services available to students, as well as the lack of knowledge about college culture in our entry‐level students, particularly those who are first‐generation college students. It's definitely informed my teaching. I have urged colleagues to consider teaching a section.” cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 4 Section 3 – Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities Curriculum & Assessment Data What courses, if any, are not on track with regard to a 2‐year assessment cycle? Explain if this is a consequence of how often the course is offered or other mitigating factors such as outcome updates that may have changed the assessment cycle. # of course SLO reports submitted during 2012‐2013. Reports submitted in 2012‐13 up to the Sept 15, 2013 deadline were included in 2012‐2013. # of degree/cert (PLO) reports submitted during 2012‐2013. Reports submitted in 2012‐13 up to the Sept 15, 2013 deadline were included in 2012‐2013. % of Course Outlines of Record up to date. Includes approvals through spring 2013. Explain any mitigating circumstances. Indicate if you have submitted updated Course Outlines of Record this fall. 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 Did the Program Advisory Committee Meet in the last year? Y/N Click here to view the Program Advisory Committee webpage None. GS 1, GS 6, and Guid 8 are all on track. GS 1 – 2 reports submitted GS 6 – 4 reports submitted Guid 8 – 4 reports submitted N/A 100% N/A 3.1 What changes have been made to the program based on assessment findings? You may include results from your closing the loop reports that map to your program. FYE program development is complete and has been implemented for fall 2013. All first‐time college students were (and continue to be for spring 2014 enrollment) strongly encouraged to enroll in General Studies (GS) courses, either GS‐ 1 “College Success” or GS‐6 “First Year Experience” to improve student support and engagement (linkage from SP.1.4; EP.1.2; EP.1.6). Assessment is ongoing. Some operational aspects of the program will transition to Counseling & Advising functions. This is the first year FYE has submitted a program review and more information will be available after the Fall 2013 implementation semester. 3.2 (Optional) Describe assessment findings/observations that may require further research or institutional support. It would be helpful to know how many students are taking these courses during their first semester, as compared to the entire new student cohort, and their subsequent success rates. Summary of Section 3 Provide any additional explanations for items described in section 3. cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 5 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. Action plans may encompass several years; an update on the current status, or whether the plan was discarded and why. Click here to view completed program reviews from last year. Actions Taken Current Status Impact of Action (describe all relevant data used to evaluate the impact) 4.2 (If applicable) Describe how funds provided in support of the plan(s) contributed to program improvement: Section – 5 Planning Click here to link to Institutional Planning Documents 5.1 Program Plans Based on data analysis, student learning outcomes and program indicators, assessment and review, and your critical reflections, describe the actions to be taken for the 2013‐2014 academic year. Use as many rows as you have actions, and add additional rows if you have more than 5 actions. Please number all rows that you add. Please be specific. This section and section 6 should include a detailed justification so that the resource prioritization committees understand your needs and their importance. * Not all actions in this program plan section may require resources, but all resource requests must be linked to this section. cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 6 5.1 Program Plans Action # 1 2 3 4 5 6 Action to be taken: Relationship to Institutional Plans Include the specific plan and action item relevant to your action to be taken. For example: Annual Plan 2013‐
2014 Theme: Persistence; or List the specific action Goal 1: Student Success: to be taken in enough EP.1.6.2 Develop a plan for narrowing the achievement gap detail so that someone outside of your area can for underrepresented student populations. understand. Implement the FYE program Expected Impact on Program/Student Learning Describe the expected impact in a way that someone outside the program can understand. The impact should be measurable. This initiative supports Strategic Plan Goal 1, Education Master Plan Goal 1, and Enrollment Management Plan Goals 3, 4 and 5. The program will help students develop college skills and support them in basic skills classes, instill a feeling of school connectedness, foster an interest for lifelong learning, and develop a career direction. Include all assessment results that indicate that this action will yield the desired impact on the program. If the assessment has yet to be conducted, explain when and how it will be conducted. Retention, persistence, and degree completion rates will increase. Initial data will be available at the beginning of spring 2014. 5.2 Provide any additional information, brief definitions, descriptions, comments, or explanations, if necessary. Section 6 ‐ Resource Requests cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 7 Resources Needed (Y/N) Relationship to Assessment A yes here requires a corresponding request in the next section. 6.0 Planning Related, Operational, and Personnel Resource Requests. Requests must be accompanied by an action plan in the above section. Requests should include estimated costs. Submit a support ticket if you do not know the estimated costs. If you are requesting personnel resources, you must also include the “Request for Faculty or Staffing” forms, located at inside.redwoods.edu/program review. Submit one form for each request. Additional Instructions: 
Put down the full amount you are requesting in the “Amount” column. Put down the annual amount of any ongoing or recurring costs in the “Annual Recurring” column. For example, a personnel request for a permanent position might show an Amount of $30,000 and an Annual Recurring Cost of $30,000. A request for equipment might show an Amount of $5,000 and an Annual Recurring cost of $200. A professional development request might show an Amount of $800 and a recurring cost of $0. 
If you have a grant or some other source of funding, include in the “Request” column a brief description of the source of funds and the dollar amount that is expected to be covered by the other source and if the other source covers any of the annual recurring costs. 
Note in the “Request” column if this is a repeat request, and how many times you have submitted this request. The item number must match the corresponding action # from section 5. Add rows as necessary. Type of Request (Check One) Operational Personnel Professional Planning To be Development reviewed by Prioritization To be Committees To be To be reviewed by Action of the reviewed reviewed by the Request # Budget and grouped Faculty Professional Describe your request here in a way that someone $ use # Planning by Associate Prioritization Development outside the program can understand. Amount
above Committee Deans. Committee. Committee 1 Student Ambassadors – FYE Peer Mentors X Section 7‐Author Feedback Provide any constructive feedback about how this template or datasets could be improved. cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 8 $ 8,000 $ Annual Recurring Costs $ 8,000 Contact Person (Name, email, phone) Sheila Hall How much do you agree with the following statements? (mark your choice with an x )
Strongly Somewhat
Somewhat Strongly
Neutral
Agree
Agree
Disagree Disagree
This year’s program review was valuable
[]
[X]
[]
[]
[]
in planning for the ongoing improvement
of my program.
Analysis of the program review data was
useful in assessing my program.
[]
[X]
[]
[]
[]
Section 8‐ PRC Response by section (completed by PRC after reviewing the program review) 8.0 The response will be forwarded to the author and the supervising Director and Vice President: S.1. Program Information: Completed S.2. Data Analysis: Acceptable S.3. Critical Reflection of Assessment Activities: Acceptable and developing. Note: Library sciences are part of FYE; the guidance classes reporting are acceptable, but there is no mention of the library science classes). Goals are clear; course assessments are good. PRC recommends developing three program outcomes to include in the assessment tool and engage in program dialog. S.4. Evaluation of Previous Plans: N/A S.5. Planning: Acceptable and developing (first year program review) S.6. Resource Requests: Resource request were not directly tied to planning. cFYE review FINAL 11.25.13 .docx 3/12/2014 Page 9