Annual Program Review Update
Program/Discipline: ___ANTH____________________
Date:
___09/21/07__________________
Trends and Relevant Data
1. Has there been any change in the status of your program or area? (Have you
shifted departments? Have new degrees or certificates been created by your
program? Have you added or deleted courses? Have activities in other programs
impacted your area or program? For example, a new nursing program could
cause greater demand for life-science courses.) If not, skip to #2.
Note: curricular changes should be addressed under 12-14.
ANTH 5, ANTH 6, and ANTH 100 were added since the fall of 1999
(when the current full-time anthropologist at the Eureka campus,
Justine Shaw, was hired) in an effort to diversify anthropology
offerings and make the classes more consistent with other colleges.
A class on primates was deleted, as it was too specialized for
introductory-level students and had not been taught in many years.
2. Have there been any significant changes in enrollment, retention, success rates, or
student demographics that impact your discipline? If so, please include data
sheets (Excel or Word format) showing these changes.
Eureka Campus and District Summary:
Although the data available (fall 2002 onward – see Table 1 and
Figures 1-5) don’t entirely reflect this, anthropology has seen
significant changes since 1999. From the fall of 1999 onward, all of
our courses (ANTH 1, ANTH 2, ANTH 3, and ANTH 4) were
significantly revised and ANTH 100, ANTH 5 and ANTH 6 were
added. On the Eureka campus, 8-9 sections of ANTH were regularly
scheduled. However, from 2003-4 onward, enrollments declined
and the number of sections was cut. One significant factor that
impacted our enrollments was that we were requiring a minimum of
English 150 in order to enroll in all of our courses, with the
exception of ANTH 100. Based upon feedback from anthropology
faculty, this markedly improved the quality of students’ reading
comprehension and writing skills by the time they entered the
college-level courses. However, it took some time for enrollment to
recover through more students having taken the English
requirement. The college-wide system to enforce this requirement,
not written into course outlines (which recommend English 150 as
preparation), was then removed. At the same time that
enrollments begin to increase again, the College’s financial crisis led
1
to fewer offerings, with numerous cancellations relatively early in
the registration process. Many students expressed frustration
about this situation.
During 2005-2006, when Shaw was on sabbatical, anthropology
offerings were further reduced in order to save money on faculty
salaries. This was offset somewhat by more sections being held at
the branch and virtual campuses. This did result in fuller classes
(Figure 3), although I believe that additional sections could have
also been offered and filled if they were scheduled at reasonable
times and locations. Upon Shaw’s return, an administrative
directive permitted only five sections per semester to be offered
through the Eureka campus during the fall and spring of 20062007. With two of these sections scheduled at the new Downtown
site in the spring of 2007, enrollments continued to decrease.
While the Downtown site is an excellent, up-to-date facility, the lack
of other offerings at the center forces full-time students to
commute between downtown and the main campus to fill their
schedules. As a result, initial enrollments were substantially lower
than they would have been on the main campus and attrition rates
were exceptionally high. An effort is being made to coordinate a
full GE-based schedule at the Downtown campus during the spring
of 2008, but anthropology is not currently among those classes
slated to be offered; if this plan is successful, anthropology could
again be scheduled at the site.
This fall of 2007, all the Eureka offerings are scheduled on the main
campus. This arrangement, combined with numerous changes by
the administration that have encouraged overall enrollment,
sections were all full (with the exception of ANTH 3H, open only to
Honors students) on their start dates. An additional late start
section of ANTH 3 that began two weeks into the semester was also
opened; this was full on its start date. The current plan for
anthropology is to continue to expand offerings at the Eureka
campus in the spring, offering seven sections, including one at the
Arcata site. With many students who take one anthropology course
returning to take other anthropology offerings and/ or telling their
friends about the subject, it is hoped that this positive trend will
persist.
Mendocino Campus:
Anthropology has been taught at the Mendocino campus twice in
the last five years; both times this offering was Anthropology 3. In
the spring of 2006, CR classes were offered as high school
enrichment with CR students also enrolled. As part of this program,
two sections of anthropology were taught off-site, one at Fort Bragg
High with 31 students and one at Mendocino High with 16. In the
spring of 2007, ANTH 3 was offered as a regular CR class with an
enrollment of 17. Students are enthusiastic about anthropology,
and we could up the numbers with some advertising to the broader
community (in Mendocino that would probably mean retired
people). We could offer Anthropology 3 ,4, 5, and 100, but physical
resources (as noted above) make offering Anthropology 1, 2, and 6
difficult.
Table 1. Anthropology Historic Course Section Report Data
Term Total TLUs
2002F
47.85
2003S
28.13
2003X
9.00
2003F
35.25
2004W
9.00
2004S
37.13
2004X
4.50
2004F
32.85
2005W
9.00
2005S
36.00
2005X
4.50
2005F
22.50
2006S
31.50
2006F
27.00
2007S
36.00
2007F
27.00
Non-Eureka TLUs Total FTEs
4.50
25.20
0.00
20.38
0.00
3.29
0.00
25.31
0.00
3.70
0.00
22.49
0.00
1.24
0.00
24.31
0.00
2.98
4.50
20.00
0.00
1.13
0.00
15.43
9.00
19.86
0.00
18.61
9.00
20.90
0.00
Average Fill
%
59.6%
62.3%
43.0%
74.4%
50.5%
66.2%
34.3%
74.0%
37.5%
61.9%
31.4%
80.4%
72.8%
82.4%
69.1%
86.3%
Retention
%
88.5%
83.5%
94.1%
84.8%
89.6%
84.5%
100.0%
81.0%
92.9%
82.9%
90.9%
82.2%
87.3%
76.6%
77.6%
Table 2. Anthropology Day vs. Night Classes
TLUs
Day
Night
TLUs FT
TLUs - PT
Fill %
Retention%
Success
v1%
298.21
147.46
150.75
66.6%
85.3%
60.1%
99.00
49.50
49.50
65.9%
80.9%
54.3%
Overall Success Average for Spring 2007 (all CR classes) is 61.2%*
Overall Success Average for Night Spring 2007 (all CR classes) is 61.0%*
Overall Success Average for Day Spring 2007 (all CR classes) is 61.3%*
*excluding anomalous data (values of N/A, 0%, or courses for which retention,
success, and fill rates were all 100%)
Figure 1. Total ANTH TLUs Per Term
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
20
02
20 F
03
S
20
03
20 X
03
20 F
04
W
20
04
S
20
04
20 X
04
20 F
05
W
20
05
S
20
05
20 X
05
20 F
06
20 S
06
20 F
07
20 S
07
F
0.00
Figure 2. Total ANTH TLUs During Spring and Fall
Terms
60.00
50.00
40.00
30.00
20.00
10.00
20
02
F
20
03
S
20
03
F
20
04
S
20
04
20 F
05
S
20
05
F
20
06
S
20
06
20 F
07
S
20
07
F
0.00
Total TLUs
Figure 3. Average ANTH Fill and Retention Rates
Per Term
120.0%
100.0%
80.0%
Average Fill %
60.0%
Retention %
40.0%
20.0%
20
20 02F
0
20 3S
20 03X
20 03
0 F
20 4W
0
20 4S
0
20 4X
20 04
0 F
20 5W
0
20 5S
0
20 5X
20 05F
0
20 6S
20 06F
0
20 7S
07
F
0.0%
Figure 4. Total ANTH FTEs Per Term
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
10.00
5.00
20
0
20 2F
0
20 3S
0
20 3X
0
20 3F
04
20 W
0
20 4S
0
20 4X
20 04F
05
20 W
0
20 5S
0
20 5X
0
20 5F
06
20 S
0
20 6F
07
20 S
07
F
0.00
Total FTEs
Figure 5. Total ANTH FTEs During Spring and Fall
Terms
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
Total FTEs
10.00
5.00
20
02
F
20
03
S
20
03
F
20
04
S
20
04
F
20
05
S
20
05
F
20
06
S
20
06
F
20
07
S
20
07
F
0.00
3. Occupational programs must review the update of their labor-market data, some
of it provided by Institutional Research, to illustrate that their program:
a. Meets a documented labor market demand,
b. Does not represent duplication of other training programs (in the region), and
c. Is of demonstrated effectiveness as measured by the employment and
completion success of its students.
Other Resources
4. Do you have needs (professional development, library resources, and so forth) not
previously required by the discipline or not previously addressed in budget or
equipment considerations? Please describe.
Shaw has obtained PFE (now renamed PLE) funds two times to
purchase anthropology books for the library. However, the library
could use many more resources in order to allow anthropology
instructors to assign library research projects. Shaw regularly
attends 2-3 conferences a year and could certainly use more
assistance with the costs associated with those conferences.
Associate faculty have also expressed interest in attending
conferences, but they are generally unable to do so because of a
lack of financial assistance.
5. Does your discipline need additional support from Student Services beyond that
previously provided?
no
Human Resource Needs
6. Complete the Faculty Employment Grids below (please list full- and part-time
faculty numbers in separate rows):
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g., Math,
English,
Accounting)
Total
Teaching
Load for
fall 2006
term
% of Total
Teaching
Load by
Full-Time
Faculty
% of Total
Teaching
Load Taught
by Part-Time
Faculty
Changes
from fall
2005
ANTH
27
83.3%
16.7%
4.5 TLUs
Explanations
and Additional
Information
(e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment,
etc.)
Shaw sabbatical 20052006
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g., Math,
English,
Accounting)
Total
Teaching
Load for
spring
2007
term
% of Total
Teaching
Load by
Full-Time
Faculty
% of Total
Teaching
Load Taught
by Part-Time
Faculty
Changes
from spring
2006
ANTH
36
75.0%
25.0%
4.5 TLUs
Explanations
and Additional
Information
(e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment,
etc.)
Shaw sabbatical 20052006
Do you need more full-time faculty? Associate faculty? If yes, explain why and
be sure to include data sheets justifying the need.
At present, the Eureka campus has enough full-time faculty and
associate faculty, even if the number of sections being offered
continues to increase to 2001-2002 levels of 9 sections on the Eureka
campus. In the past, the Mendocino and Del Norte campuses and the
KT site have expressed that it has been difficult to find anthropology
instructors meeting the minimum qualifications. This situation limited
or prevented anthropology offerings. The Del Norte campus has
recently identified a qualified Anthropology instructor and will be able
to offer anthropology classes on a more regular basis. For the last
three years, the Mendocino campus has had a full-time faculty
member capable of teaching in this discipline so that anthropology
classes could be offered on a regular basis without either finding an
adjunct or having a full-time faculty member for the discipline.
7. Complete the Staff Employment Grid below (please list full- and part-time staff
numbers in separate rows:
Staff Employed in the Program
Assignment
Full-time
Part-time
(e.g., Math,
(classified)
staff (give
English)
staff (give
number)
number)
Anthropology 0
0
Gains over
Prior Year
0
Losses over
Prior Year
(give reason:
retirement,
reassignment,
health, etc.)
0
Do you need more full-time staff? Part-time staff? If yes, explain why and be sure
to include data sheets justifying the need.
No, although it is critical that the Eureka campus science lab
assistants provide assistance for some of our ANTH 2 labs.
8. If necessary, to clarify your needs, please comment on current available staff and
distribution of FTE's for contract and part-time faculty. Describe strengths and
weaknesses of faculty/staff as appropriate to program's current status or future
development.
Facilities
9. Comment on facilities the program uses, their current adequacy, and any
immediate needs. Have your discipline’s facilities needs changed? If so, how?
Please provide a data-based justification for any request that requires new or
additional facilities construction, renovation, remodeling or repairs.
ANTH’s facilities needs have not changed since Shaw started in 1999,
and it has been a struggle to find adequate facilities over the years.
The long-time anthropology instructor prior to Shaw used exclusively a
lecture format without hands-on components or technology beyond the
chalkboard; this meant that nearly every classroom was suitable for
teaching anthropology. However, the classes of most instructors
teaching anthropology now utilize Power Points, hands-on work, video
clips, and/ or a variety of other technologies not currently supported
by most rooms at CR. When Shaw began in 1999 (Eureka Campus),
anthropology classes were scheduled in choir and speech classrooms
that were neither suited to the hands-on work required in physical
anthropology and archaeology classes nor the group discussions that
characterize classes such as folklore and cultural anthropology. At
present, anthropology is using classroom space in biology classrooms
(Biology has been kind enough to give us next priority after their
classes are scheduled), which are better suited to the needs of
anthropology classes, but are not ideal. In addition to more suitable
classrooms, a location in which all of the anthropology materials could
be stored would be very helpful. On the Eureka campus, materials are
currently divided between two cabinets in LS112, part of the geology
storeroom (PS110), and a plastic shed behind the Creative Arts
pottery kilns. Other CR campuses also lack a dedicated anthropology
room or storage facilities.
Equipment
10. Have your discipline’s equipment needs changed? If so, how? Is equipment in
need of repair outside of your current budget? Please provide a data-based
justification for any request that requires a new or additional budget allotment.
As stated above, our equipment changes have driven the need for
different facilities. Anthropology could very much use “smart”
classrooms for all of its offerings. On the Eureka campus, the primary
anthropology classroom, scheduled around biology lab classes
(LS112), is not a “smart” classroom, so a laptop and projector (both
reputed to have been purchased by PFE funds in about 1997) must be
set up and taken down after each class. Additionally the room has no
Internet access and a TV/ DVD/ VCR cart must be brought from the PS
building when video clips are shown.
Faculty have been generally advised that this upgrade will take place
as Measure Q/ bond monies are spent on new buildings on the Eureka
campus. The Math, Science, and Engineering Division, which currently
houses the vast majority of the anthropology offerings on the CR
campus, was kind enough to invite Shaw to take part in the initial
plans to remodel PS and LS (Eureka campus). The remodeling was to
include a dedicated Anthropology classroom. Factuly have not heard
how, or if, an anthropology room will be included in plans for entirely
new structures.
The Del Norte and Mendocino campuses, and other CR sites, are
challenged by a lack of equipment. While some of the anthropology
classes can be taught without equipment beyond what is needed for an
instructor’s presentation, ANTH 1 (Physical Anthropology), ANTH 2
(Introduction to Archaeology), and ANTH 6 (Forensic Anthropology) do
require extensive equipment. This includes hominid casts, bones,
artifacts, scales, microscopes, excavation equipment, and samples for
analysis. As the Eureka campus is the only facility with these
materials, more materials, or a means to rapidly and safely transport
materials between campuses would be required to offer a full suite of
anthropology courses at the other campuses.
While Mendocino lacks the facilities for offering physical and
archaeology, the campus’s classrooms should all be "smart" by mid-fall
2007. Ideally, the multimedia technology will be very good.
Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
11. How has your area or program been engaged in student learning outcomes
assessment?
a.
Summarize your results.
As we have just completed the process of transferring our
courses to the newest curriculum documents to include student
learning outcomes, we have not yet addressed comprehensive
outcomes for the discipline. In general, anthropology SLOs emphasize
critical thinking and the effective communication of ideas and
arguments in written and oral formats. This involves expressing the
students’ own ideas, as well as the comprehension, and critical
examination, of written texts and videos. Since we have gone to
slightly smaller classes with more written essays and papers, the
quality of students’ writing has improved. All of our anthropology
classes also emphasize multicultural content, with written and oral
assessments stressing the consideration of new and alternative
perspectives and cultures.
Since we tend to teach more varied classes, with frequently only
one section of a given class being offered in a given semester on the
Eureka campus and 0-2 sections of ANTH being offered at each branch
campus each semester, an overall meeting to assess SLOs with all the
instructors teaching a given course is not a viable option (as English
does for English 1A, for example). Once we have completed our
curriculum revisions, we will consider various options, such as one or
more standard essay questions that might be used on the final in all
course offerings (examples might include “What are the four
subdisciplines of anthropology? What do they have in common and
how do they differ?” or “How do scientific approaches to anthropology
differ from non-scientific ones?). This would involve all current
anthropology faculty agreeing on one or more basic concepts that
students should get out of any anthropology course.
Another option that will be considered to measure SLOs is to
have students complete a given assignment or test at the beginning
and end of a course, as a means to measure how their understanding
of different concepts has changed. This is already being done in some
sections of anthropology, but the process would need to be more
standardized.
b.
What did your program learn from these results that enabled you to
improve teaching and learning in the discipline?
Using either of the above options would allow individual
instructors, and the area as a whole, to assess which types of teaching
strategies appeared to be more effective.
c.
How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess SLOs?
Associate faculty and branch campus faculty and administrators
have been asked for their input during the process of course outline
revisions, as well as in the writing of this document. After these are
completed, we will use a similar process to decide standard processes
to assess SLOs individually and/ or as a discipline. This process will
involve Shaw, as the area coordinator, using e-mail to circulate ideas
to all current anthropology faculty and the administrators of the Del
Norte and Mendocino campuses for their comments. “Reply to all” is
used to have a virtual conversation that fits into our schedules. If this
process becomes too cumbersome, we may utilize Blackboard to post
comments and updates.
Curriculum Update
(Reminder: Send updated course outlines to the Curriculum Committee.)
12. Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives undertaken
in the last year.
During the 2006-2007 academic year, ANTH 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 were
updated. ANTH 6, 100, and 99 were revised in the fall of 2007.
13. Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives planned for
the next year.
If our budget and enrollment improve, I would like to develop and
offer an ANTH 99 special topics class on the Modern Maya or modern
material culture.
14. Complete the grid below
Course
Year Course
Outline Last
Updated
Year Next
Update
Expected
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
ANTH
1
2
3
4
5
6
100
99
2006
2007
2007
2006
2007
2007
2007
2007
2011
2012
2012
2011
2012
2012
2012
2012 (or before
as new special
topics are
developed)
Goals and Plans
15. If you have recently undergone a comprehensive review, attach your Quality
Improvement Plan if applicable.
16. If you do not have a QIP, what goals and plans does your area have for the
coming year?
1) I plan to continue to try to increase our enrollments through
utilizing late start classes, selecting times and venues with
traditionally higher enrollments whenever possible, as well as
continuing to offer a variety of classes.
2) Student Learning Outcomes – Anthropology instructors will begin
assessing student learning outcomes for each course section. This
will be done using analogous tests and/ or assignments at the start
and end of the semester in order quantify comprehension of the
concepts central to each class. For ANTH 3 (Cultural Anthropology),
we will also design a test based on key SLOs that will be
administered at the start and end of the semester in order to
measure the degree to which these outcomes have been achieved.
Since ANTH 3 is the only anthropology class for which multiple
sections are scheduled every semester, this is the only
anthropology class for which we are proposing a single pan-district
means of measuring SLOs. We have already begun discussing the
format of this test and will work to refine it through the spring of
2008.
Instructional Program Review—Appendix B: Annual Update Forms
Annual Program Review Update
Eureka Campus
1. Library books and journal subscriptions ($2,000)
2. Funds to attend conferences (associate and full-time faculty) ($4,000)
3.
4.
14
Low
Moderate
List Resources Needed for Academic Year____2007/2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Degree of
Justification (as
Approval
substantiated by
Status
the program
review)
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Resources
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Eureka Campus
1. Computer and projector in LS112 (or other dedicated classroom)
$2,000
2. TV/DVD/ VCR in LS112 (or other dedicated classroom)
$1,200
3.
4.
5.
6.
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic
Year____2007-2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus -
Approved
Equipment
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Eureka Campus
1. Wiring Internet access in LS112 (or other dedicated classroom)
2. Centralized storage space for materials adjacent to classroom
3.
4.
5.
6.
$200 (?)
(in new Academic
Building plan)
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Facility Needs for Academic Year__2007-2008_________________
(Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities)
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Facilities
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Mendocino Campus
1. Contemporary ethnographic visual resources (DVDs, VHS, posters) ($2,000)
2. Ethnographic library books ($3,000)
3.
4.
Low
Moderate
List Resources Needed for Academic Year____2007/2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Degree of
Justification (as
Approval
substantiated by
Status
the program
review)
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Resources
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Mendocino Campus
1. No current needs. Once the remodel is complete, our equipment will
be excellent.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic
Year____2007-2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus -
Approved
Equipment
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Mendocino Campus
1. No current needs. Once the remodel is complete, our facilities will be
excellent.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Facility Needs for Academic Year__2007-2008_________________
(Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities)
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Facilities
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Del Norte Campus
1. Resource books for the Library ($3,000)
2.
3.
4.
Low
Moderate
List Resources Needed for Academic Year____2007/2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Degree of
Justification (as
Approval
substantiated by
Status
the program
review)
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Resources
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Del Norte Campus
1. No new equipment is needed for this program at the CRDN Campus.
We don’t intend on offering either Physical Anthro or Archaeology at
the CRDN Campus
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic
Year____2007-2008_______________
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus -
Approved
Equipment
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Annual Program Review Update
Del Norte Campus
1. CRDN has no facility needs for this program. We have just completed
a total classroom modernization project that places state of the art AV
equipment in all our classrooms.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Low
Approximate
Cost
Moderate
List Facility Needs for Academic Year__2007-2008_________________
(Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities)
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Not
Approved
Very
High
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Approval
Degree of
Status
Justification (as
substantiated by
the program
review)
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
Approved
Facilities
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet