1
Annual Program Review Update
*Be sure to include information from all three campuses.
Program/Discipline: General Studies
Date: 10/13/07 (revised 11/14/07)
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 lifescience courses.) If not, skip to #2.
Note: curricular changes should be addressed under 12-14.
Since the inception of the “College Success Program,” what we now refer to as the
“General Studies” Program, over twenty-five years ago, the program’s core has
remained relatively constant while its focus and audience have shifted in response to
both the student and institutional needs. For example, when CR began offering the
“Freshman Year Experience” or “College Success” course over twenty years ago, it was
specifically for transfer-level students seeking strategies and tools for managing the life
skills, learning skills, and resources required of university-bound students (GS 1:
College Success). While the GS 1 transfer-level sections at one point grew to twelve
sections per semester, we soon recognized as an institution that we also needed to
address the needs of the Developmental or Basics Skills level students, acknowledging
that 79% of our incoming students were “underprepared” to begin college-level work.
We consequently developed and began offering GS 150, Learning Success, to Basic
Skills students.
Following the College’s research on The Underprepared in 2003, the trend in General
Studies not only responded to Basic Skills student needs, but also reflected the national
“Best Practice” trend of creating “learning communities” for developmental students
that paired a “Habits of the Mind/Learning Success” class with other Basic Skills
courses in English and math. In 2004 CR piloted its first “Semester of Success” (SOS)
learning community with cohorts of students enrolled concurrently in GS 150 (Learning
Success), English 350 (Reading and Writing Skills), and Math 372 (Arithmetic). The
outcomes reported in English exit/competency exams and the subsequent success rates
and retention rates for participating students exceeded any the College had previously
reported, and they tripled the national rate for Basic Skills students.
In 2006, with declining resources threatening our the efforts to date, we made the
decision to narrow the target audience even further by offering no transfer-level
courses and dedicating the majority of GS 150 sections (4) to student athletes and
EOPS-qualified students, leaving only one GS 150 section available to the general Basic
Skills population. Of the four sections of GS 150 currently offered, F07, only two EOPS
sections are linked to English 350, and we await outcomes data and financial directives
to inform our response for future terms.
2
A second significant trend in the General Studies Program addresses the needs of those
students whose assessment scores indicate the need for further improvement before
enrolling in the lowest English developmental English, English 350. Over the last two
decades, the College has responded to this population in a variety of ways, from offering
a separate Reading Program, to establishing pre-developmental English classes
(English 275 and 360), to contracting with Eureka Adult Education—all with mixed
outcomes. In 2004, with clarification from the Chancellor’s office and approximately
200 students assessing below English 350, we developed General Studies 360 (Basic
Academic Literacy) and General Studies 361 (Basic Skills for Life, Work, and College)
to respond to this ever-growing population. And in 2006, we made the decision that GS
360 should require specialized adult reading instruction and, therefore, moved GS 360
from General Studies to Reading 360 while continuing to link it with GS 361, continuing
the learning community for these students as well. This format and name change will
take effect Spring 2008.
Finally, as part of the 2007 general updating of course outlines college-wide (to be
discussed in more depth in #’s 12-14), we decided to de-activate a number of one-unit
transfer-level GS courses that have had very limited offering and enrollment over the
years (GS 2, GS 3, GS 4), along with an Academic Research course (GS 5) that had been
offered once and determined to lack both integration and relevance by both our
research librarian who taught it and our Speech teacher who piloted the linking.
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.
This table comes from research done by Sydney Fisher-Larsen in F05, documenting the
success, persistence and retention of students enrolled in GS 360/361 and GS 150 during
04/05, the year of the First Year Initiative (FYI):
First Year Initiative - Initial
Research
F04 enrollment #
students
F04
GS 360 only
34
GS 360/361 cohort
57
ENGL 350 only
204
ENG350/GS150
cohort
150
#
passed
% passed # F04
% F04
#
% Progressed
students
students Progressed in F05
enrolled
in F05
in F05
F05
21
62%
15
44% 3 (Eng 150)
14% (Eng
150)
40
70%
28
49% 8 (Eng 150)
20% (Eng
150)
115
56%
137
67%
18 (Eng
16% (Eng
1A)
1A)
99
66%
113
75%
24 (Eng
24% (Eng
1A)
1A)
3
And the next table comes from results compiled by Pam Kessler in S07 from
informal data collected by the English department:
Total # of F 06 GS 360 students enrolled in
English 350 S07
Students receiving a D/F/W or DR in
English 350 S07
F 06GS 360 students passing English 350
S07
F 06 GS 360 students failing English 350 S07
32
20
37% (12)
62% (20)
We believe a comparison of the figures in the above two tables documents the success of
our GS program offerings so far.
As referenced in question # 1 above, General Studies, perhaps more than any other
program in the College, has modified and evolved in direct response to the national
“Best Practices” research reported in our district’s Underprepared document (Spring
2003) and the state’s Basic Skills as a Foundation for Student Success in California
Community Colleges(BSI) published in March 2007. The program has also responded
to the changing needs of those taking CR’s assessment test (Accuplacer). With the state
defining “foundation skills” as “reading, writing, mathematics, learning skills, study
skills, and ESL,” our General Studies Program has been responding exclusively to three
of the six: reading, learning skills, and study skills. We also respond to two of the other
three BSI “foundation” skills of writing and ESL along with our English colleagues.
The enrollment in General Studies courses has also directly been impacted by various
administrative decisions concerning our enrollment decline during the last decade.
Whereas one administrative decision would indicate that General Study’s offerings
were imperative to building both foundation skills and enrollment, another would find
General Studies’ mission to be a luxury the College couldn’t afford. One semester we
would be told to offer one section of transfer-level GS only (for our entire offering), and
the following year we would be asked to develop curriculum and staff only for
developmental/basic skills students, preferably linked to other courses in English. In
2004, when we developed the GS 360 (Basic Academic Literacy) class, we were
responding to assessment scores for the nearly 200 students assessing below English
350. When we tracked these students’ success rates (completion of English 350), we
exceeded national standards three-fold—national rates being 8%; ours at 20%.
Though this year, 2007-08, we are beginning with a limited target audience for GS 150,
primarily EOPS and athletes, no doubt the College’s required response to the
Chancellor’s Basic Skills Initiative (BSI) will result in a subsequent growth in General
Studies’ GS 150 and GS 360/361 sections in the future. Our student population
continues to reflect the nation’s community college assessment scores of 70-80% being
underprepared to begin college level work. No doubt with renewed focus at the state
level, indeed tying funding to a reporting of Basic Skills initiatives, College of the
Redwoods will probably need to increase General Studies sections.
4
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. N/A
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.
In the last few years, the focus of resources has been on building the GS 360, now
Reading 360 (Adult Literacy), portion of the program with the purchase, installation,
and networking of twenty computers and the Lexia S.O.S (Strategies for Older Students)
reading software in room AT 102, the dedicated classroom for Reading 360 on the
Eureka campus. However, we anticipate that in response to the Chancellor’s Basic
Skills Initiative (BSI) that recommends, “Orientation, assessment, and placement are
mandatory for all new students,” the number of students needing instruction at this
level on the Eureka campus will increase, perhaps requiring an expansion of this
existing space, an updating of the SOS software, and the purchase of additional
instructional material (Skills Tutor).
Perhaps even more pressing for the program will be the need to offer significant
professional development for all regular staff district-wide as we engage in the statewide, district-wide dialogue required of all California community colleges responding to
the BSI. Fundamental to the Basic Skills Initiative is the guiding principle that the
challenge we face educating the 70-80% of our Basic Skills students is the responsibility
of all faculty and administration, not just those who teach English, ESL, math, and
learning skills/study skills. We will require, quite specifically, that more faculty across
disciplines be trained not only to teach the General Studies/Basic Skills classes but also
to integrate those skills and “Best Practices” strategies into their discipline-specific
curriculum. That will require targeted and on-going professional development.
5. Does your discipline need additional support from Student Services beyond that
previously provided?
When the General Studies Program began, the College employed seven counselors, 50%
of whom taught College Success (transfer-level GS 1) as part of their loads. By the time
General Studies began focusing on Basic Skills/Developmental levels in 2003, we
employed three counselors, one of whom partnered with our first learning community
as a “designated” in-classroom counselor. Today the College has even fewer counselors,
and though EOPS has been able to hire one EOPS counselor (Melissa Higgins) and
assign one director/staff (Sheila Hall) to our current communities, this really only
addresses the needs of EOPS students assessing at English 350 levels, only a fraction of
5
those we are attempting to serve. Students assessing at the Reading 360 level currently
have no dedicated counselor, nor do regular or non EOPS/GS sections receive the level
of counseling/advising necessary due to inadequate counseling staffing. How the
district plans to respond to the BSI directing counseling support to be “substantial,
accessible, and integrated with academic courses/programs” remains to be seen, but
surely this discussion needs to happen for General Studies to plan for subsequent
semesters. In addition to counseling support, General Studies and the College as a
whole will require, it appears, additional staff to support the Basic Skills Initiative’s
mandatory “orientation, assessment, and placement.”
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 FullTime Faculty
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by PartTime Faculty
Changes from
fall 2005
General
Studies
140
43.5/140 =
31%
96/140 = 68%
F05 FT TLUs
= 63/152 =
41%
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment, etc.)
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 FullTime Faculty
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by PartTime Faculty
Changes from
spring 2006
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment, etc.)
General
Studies
96
34.5/96 =
36%
64/96 = 64%
S06 FT
TLUs =
63/116 =
54%
In 05/06, we had
a Full-Time
Temporary
Faculty position
which was not
renewed in 06/07.
Do you need more full-time faculty? Associate faculty? If yes, explain why and be sure to
include data sheets justifying the need.
Prior to 2004, faculty loads for the General Studies Program were comprised of : one
coordinator with part-time re-assignment for scheduling, recruitment of both reading and
learning success staff, professional development training, curriculum development, and
coordination among Student Services, English Department, and all other college-related
initiatives; 2-3 full-time faculty teaching 1-2 sections outside their primary disciplines; and
6
associate faculty as needed. In 2004 the College hired one Full-time faculty member
specifically to address the Adult Literacy/Success (GS 360-361) needs and associate faculty
primarily recruited from retired reading specialists. In Spring 2008 our FT GS faculty
member will assume responsibility for the new Reading 360 sections (typically 3-4 sections
per semester, though he’ll only be able to teach two of the 10.5 TLU sections) and the
articulation of Reading with English 350.
Aside from changes involving Reading staffing, both College Success (GS 1) and Learning
Success (GS 150) have from their inception operated on the principle that faculty from all
disciplines would be recruited, trained, and scheduled to teach learning and study skills so
that they have concrete, discipline-specific examples to share with students, and, more
importantly, when they returned to their primary teaching assignments they would then
integrate these learning strategies into their curriculum, thereby constantly infusing all
disciplines with the theories and strategies students require for success in all disciplines.
Now, as the faculty again shrinks in response to declining enrollments, many faculty are
retiring while junior faculty are reluctant to focus any energies outside their primary
teaching assignments. As a result and in response to BSI, CR will have to renew its
recruitment and incentives efforts to educate all faculty that the Basic Skills challenge must
be the responsibility of all. Therefore, although the General Studies Program does not seek
the appointment of General Studies-specific full-time faculty, we will have to renew our
efforts to recruit associate faculty with reading specialist training to staff half of our
Reading sections that our full-time faculty member can not cover.
One section of GS 150 is currently being offered at DN. It is taught by an associate faculty
member. Neither DN nor MC offers GS 360 or GS 361 because, traditionally, they have
never had enough students to justify a class. MC currently offers GS 2, but they agree it
needs revision as noted above. And, finally, KT, has offered GS 360 in the past, but they
lack a reading specialist to teach the class.
7. Complete the Staff Employment Grid below (please list full- and part-time staff
numbers in separate rows:
Staff Employed in the Program Division
Assignment
Full-time
Part-time staff
(e.g., Math,
(classified) staff (give number)
English)
(give number)
GS (shared staff 8 hr/wk,
with HComm
Administrative
division)
Office
Coordinator
30 hr/wk,
Clerical
Assistant
Gains over
Prior Year
38 hr/wk
Losses over
Prior Year (give
reason:
retirement,
reassignment,
health, etc.)
n/a
Do you need more full-time staff? Part-time staff? If yes, explain why and be sure to
include data sheets justifying the need.
7
In addition to the counseling faculty needs explained in #5 (Student Services
support), General Studies, in order to respond as directed to the Basic Skills
Initiative from the Chancellor’s office, will require additional assessment and
advising staff. This Fall 2007 we are dedicating one EOPS Associate Faculty
position and one Full Time classified staff to two sections of General Studies 150. If
the General Studies Program expands as anticipated with the levels of advised
assessment and placement recommended in the BSI, then Student Services classified
staff will also have to expand proportionately. What that means in numbers at this
point is not clear.
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.
One of the most pressing concerns regarding staffing has to do with the Adult
Literacy/Reading 360 levels. Currently we have over-extended our commitments from
retired Associate faculty reading specialists who agreed to help us build the foundation
for the adult reading program when we realized that 200 students were assessing at that
level. Beginning in Spring 2008 our third reading specialist will re-retire, and
fortunately we have one full-time faculty member able to move into this void, but when
our last two specialists re-retire, we will have no one qualified to teach over half of the
needed sections. Also of concern is the time required for these instructors to meet
regularly to assess outcomes and carefully articulate Reading 360 with English 350. We
believe it only fair that they be compensated for this “Best Practice” activity.
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.
Having a dedicated classroom (AT 102) for Reading 360 since Fall 2004 has definitely
been essential to the success of this class by providing a location for an extensive library
of high-interest, low-level reading material (currently over 500 volumes) as well as a
computer lab environment with enough PC’s (20) for each student to work on his/her
word processing, reading comprehension and/or computer literacy skills.
We strongly believe all three sections should be offered in the same location with
enough space to accommodate at least thirteen (half the designated class capacity)
networked computer stations and at least two large bookcases to house the Reading 360
library. Both of these features (computers and library are used extensively by the
students in Reading 360.
In addition, General Studies curriculum for all levels, not just the Reading sections,
8
includes introducing students to the technology required of them in college (Blackboard,
Web Advisor, their textbook CD’s, to name a few), classrooms where GS classes are
scheduled do need to have internet access and projection systems at a minimum.
Further, though we have one classroom dedicated to Reading sections, at some point we
may need to consider a separate Reading Lab, as we have for English Basic
Skills/Developmental classes (the Writing Center).
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.
See classroom specifications including equipment in #9 above.
Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
11. How has your area or program been engaged in student learning outcomes assessment?
a.
Summarize your results.
b.
What did your program learn from these results that enabled you to
improve teaching and learning in the discipline?
c.
How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess SLOs?
a) In S07, we updated the Student Learning Outcomes for Reading 360 (See Appendix A, p.
14) when the course name was changed from GS 360.
b) This update was preceded by an informal course revision in S06, when we worked in
conjunction with the English department to better articulate the GS 360 course objectives
with those of English 350 (the next course in the developmental English sequence),
resulting in GS 360 moving from a 60/40 composition/comprehension split to a 60/40
comprehension/composition split.
c) Part-time faculty worked closely with us in making this preliminary adjustment in the
GS 360 curriculum. We met numerous times and collaborated on the changes.
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.
Most significant in our curricular revisions was the decision and approval to move GS 360
(Basic Academic Literacy) into Reading, requiring faculty to have reading specializations to
teach the class. Secondly, we de-activated a number of one-unit transfer-level courses that
had not been widely offered (GS 2, 3, 4: Strategies for Classroom Success-Learning Skills,
Strategies for Classroom Success-Academic Planning, Strategies for Classroom Success-Life
Skills respectively), and in consultation with the research librarian de-activated a 3 unit
research class because its curriculum had been incorporated into the new 4 unit English 1A
9
course to address relevance and application issues discussed in question #1 above.
13. Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives planned for the
next year.
In consultation with our colleagues on other campuses, this next year we plan to develop a
late-start 1-2 unit Basic Skills-level General Studies class, probably GS 151 that will be
intended for and target students who drop challenging courses across the curriculum
within the first few weeks of each semester. Though it will not have the scope of GS 150
Learning Success, its scaled-back curriculum will cover both the learning skills and study
skills students require as foundation for college success.
14. Complete the grid below
Course
GS 1
GS 150
Reading 360
GS 361
Year Course Outline
Last Updated
S04
F05
S07
S04
Year Next Update
Expected
S09
F10
S12
S09
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?
As we noted in a number of our responses above, we believe General Studies to be one of
the primary responders to the Chancellor’s Basic Skills Initiative. To date, it is our
understanding that our college has accepted as much as a quarter of a million dollars
earmarked for the BSI, yet the required district-wide dialogue directed by the BSI “SelfAssessment” for effective practices in Basic Skills, particularly in the areas of
“Organizational and Administrative Practices,” “Program Components,” “Staff
Development,” and “Instructional Practices,” along with our accompanying “Estimate
Costs and Downstream Revenue” Excel Spreadsheet has yet to be developed. We
encourage the College to begin this dialogue soon, as it not only directs the future of
General Studies’ responsibility for “reading,” “writing,” “learning skills,” and “study
skills,” but it directs our interface with all other basic skills courses and ultimately all of
our colleagues assuming responsibility for developing Basic Skills.
We have also, above, cited numerous percentages culled from previous years’ efforts to
track the success, persistence, and retention of students enrolled in General Studies classes.
This data has proved invaluable to improving our program. As the College’s Institutional
Research department gets up and running under its new director, we would like to
continue tracking both the success of our students and our program, thus strengthening
10
our ability to make data-informed decisions.
Specifically, our plans are:
•
•
•
•
To request a district-wide dialogue regarding the Basic Skills Initiative (BSI).
To work with a BSI Steering Committee and Focus Groups to advance an
institution-wide BSI plan.
To engage Institutional Research (IR) in tracking student success, retention and
persistence as these relate to the GS program and the BSI.
To coordinate BSI plans with Student Services.
Instructional Program Review
APPENDIX A: Student Learning Outcomes
APPENDIX B: Forms for Annual Update Resource/Staffing Needs
APPENDIX C: Assessment’s Link with Strategic Planning
APPENDIX D: Glossary of Terms
11
Instructional Program Review—APPENDIX A: Course and Program
Outcome Assessment Initiatives
Student Outcomes Assessment at the course level
1.
The Course Outline of Record template requires that each outline contain a list of student
learning outcomes (SLOs) for the course, the core competencies that instructors expect students
to leave the course with. Since all SLOs for every course will eventually have to be assessed, the
Program Review Committee recommends that disciplines focus on comprehensive student
learning outcomes, so that the typical course will have no more than six SLOs, with fewer than
five entirely possible.
●
For courses meeting general education requirements, disciplines are
encouraged to link course SLOs with the institutional general education
(GE) SLOs as much as possible, since this will be a way for us to
assess GE outcomes at the same time we’re assessing the outcomes of
individual courses.
●
You will be asked by the template to link methods of evaluation and
methods of instruction with specific SLOs, which helps make the SLOs
“operational”—more easily measured.
Evaluate all courses meeting (or potentially meeting) general education requirements against
the institutional general education SLOs, using the Student Learning Outcomes for General
Education. This process should be done collaboratively.
●
CR has agreed on ____basic core student learning outcomes for its general
education program, and all courses meeting GE requirements will link to one (or more) of those
student learning outcomes. But we need evidence that they do. You’ll be asked to indicate
where a particular GE course SLO matches (even in general terms) to an institution-wide GE
SLO.
●
As you revise course outlines, this is a good opportunity to adjust some
course SLOs so that they more explicitly match the overall GE
outcomes. (For example, Ed Code and IGETC requirements mandate that
GE courses have critical thinking and writing SLOs, and now is the
time to make them explicit.) This will permit PRC to assess overall GE
outcomes as your program assesses specific course SLOs.
None of our current GS offerings meet CR’s general education requirements.
2.
Do an assessment inventory and write a brief report about assessment efforts already
undertaken in your discipline. Start with what you are already doing, even if you’re not calling
12
it assessment.
Questions to consider:
●
What are the expected career/occupational outcomes for students in your
discipline (e.g., transfer, employment)?
Successful GS students are expected to transfer the learning skills and strategies learned to
their subsequent content area classes in order to maximize their performance in their
college coursework and beyond.
●
Where do faculty members already evaluate student work collaboratively?
Are there written criteria that guide this evaluation? Would such criteria
be useful if they don’t presently exist?
Since F04, the final writing competency for GS 360 (a paragraph) has been holistically and
collaboratively graded against a department approved rubric articulated with the English
department’s grading criteria. Also in GS 360, the final reading comprehension exam (the
DRP or Degrees of Reading Power) is the same as that used for English 350, and the cut
scores have been articulated with the expected competencies for those entering Eng 350.
●
Do faculty members ever report, formally or informally, about strengths
and weaknesses in student work? Does information about student learning
ever become a topic for discussion at discipline or department meetings?
Could it be?
GS 360/361 faculty regularly confer with each other about the strengths and weaknesses of
the students they share. Most of this takes place electronically by email. In addition, they
sometimes draw on the support of Counseling and Advising to track student attendance,
behavior, or performance issues.
GS 150 has also benefited by having a dedicated advisor assigned to those students enrolled
in the sections linked with English 350. Faculty and advisors meet every Friday to review
at-risk students and to develop strategies for shared assignments.
●
What changes has your department or discipline undertaken recently to
improve student learning? What beliefs or information led you to make
these changes?
In S05, after our first full semester teaching GS 360, we embarked upon revising the
curriculum for that class to address what we felt, at the time, were the students’ most
pressing needs. Prior to that, and initially, the GS 360 curriculum was divided 60/40 with
approxiamately 60% of the course devoted to teaching composition skills (writing) and
40% devoted to teaching reading comprehension skills. Upon reflection, and in
consultation with Pam Kessler, lead English 350 faculty member, we reversed the
curriculum of GS 360 to 60% reading comprehension and 40% composition. This change
13
reflects both the current pedagogy which emphasizes the primacy of reading ability for
student success and the existing curriculum focus of English 350 where reading skills are
also primary.
GS 150 courses are either linked directly to English 350 courses or they are closely
articulated to ensure readiness to the next level of reading and writing rigor.
●
What information regarding student success in your department or
discipline might already exist that might lead you to reconsider teaching
practices?
From the information (See tables on pp. 2 & 3) we have informally been gathering since
F04, we believe there to be a significant increase in student success rates for those students
enrolled in either both GS 360 and 361 or both GS 150 and English 350. This increase
leads us to believe that for this population of students, linked courses with strong support
from Student Services can prove to be highly effective and worth institutionalizing.
3.
Begin to develop and implement a comprehensive plan to assess course-level SLOs in
either of the ways described below, depending on the particular nature of your discipline:
a.
Option 1
If at least one course in the discipline is taught by a number of different
instructors, choose such a course and work collaboratively to assess
learning outcomes in the course. You may want to focus on a single SLO
in the initial effort or perhaps several related SLOs. Involve part-time
instructors in the process as much as possible. Focus on an assignment or
examination toward the end of the semester in which students can be
expected to demonstrate what they’ve gained from the course.
Depending on the discipline, you might develop a rubric by which to
assess learning in sample essays (or other kinds of student work) taken
from many different sections of the course, or—if your discipline
routinely employs objective tests as a way of evaluating students—you
may simply want to embed common questions in such tests and aggregate
results to see where students are having success or difficulty.
●
Keep careful records of these course-based assessment projects,
which should include sections on methodology, results, and analysis of
results.
●
Sometimes minutes of department meetings are useful appendices
to show how results are used to improve teaching and learning.
14
General Studies SLO’s:
Reading 360 (GS 360):
1. Demonstrate an increased vocabulary.
2. Demonstrate an increased level of reading comprehension.
3. Identify and summarize the main idea in a paragraph.
4. Organize supporting details.
5. Draw simple inferences.
6. Differentiate fact from opinion.
7. Identify and manipulate parts of speech.
8. Identify and coordinate subjects and verbs.
9. Write grammatically correct and expressive simple, compound, and complex
sentences.
10. Construct and write a variety of simple, grammatically correct paragraphs.
11. Demonstrate the ability to preview a variety of texts, locating main ideas and
pinpointing specific information.
12. Take clear and useful notes on lectures and textbooks.
13. Model basic familiarity with the fundamentals of computers as they assist
reading and writing.
Note: This class will culminate in a standardized reading comprehension exam (DRP)
and a holistically graded writing exam using the English Department's approved rubric to
determine whether students have demonstrated the necessary skills to enter English 350.
GS 361:
1. List campus and community resources to support their personal and academic
growth
2. Identify individual learning styles
3. Produce an IEP and a career exploration portfolio
4. Demonstrate effective note-taking, listening, and active reading strategies
5. Produce daily, weekly, and semester schedules and calendars
6. Identify physical, emotional and social needs and methods to address identified
needs
7. Develop SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite, Review) study skills
8. Develop concept maps, comparison charts, timelines, process diagrams, and
outlines
9. Recognize and develop strategies to minimize distractions
10. Demonstrate strategies for sensory, short-term and long-term memory
11. Create a study schedule and system for objective and essay exams
12. Utilize skills to reduce fears related to test taking
13. Demonstrate ability to locate main ideas, supporting details, and implications
15
from readings
14. Make predictions develop interpretations, and evaluate information
GS 150:
1. Differentiate between high school and college learning environments.
2. Employ persistence, commitment, and discipline strategies.
3. Devise and initiate a formal education plan.
4. Assess personal learning styles.
5. Define and demonstrate active learning and critical thinking with responses to
both oral and written assignments.
6. Identify and engage learning resources.
7. Demonstrate information literacy with exercises for finding, evaluating, and
using information.
8. Integrate memory and time-management techniques into learning.
9. Engage in active reading strategies.
10. Apply classroom management tools of taking notes, participating in group and
class discussions, and communicating well with instructors.
11. Manage test anxiety through imporved exam preparation and practiced
relaxation.
GS 1:
1. Identify learning style and critical thinking disposition through inventories.
2. Create an academic timeline and path.
3. Analyze complex written and spoken language from texts and class notes.
4. Anticipate direction in an argument.
5. Connect related ideas in diverse fields.
6. Engage in cooperative learning with academic integrity.
7. Exhibit intellectual curiosity in class participation and journal responses.
8. Deliver focused and coherent presentations.
9. Question with clearly framed and articulated ideas.
10. Demonstrate information literacy with the ability to find, evaluate, and use college
level material.
11. Access supporting resources for academic success.
12. Interpret written and oral assignments.
16
GS 360 Writing Competency Rubric, adopted F04
Grading Criteria for GS 360 Paragraph
5 - Fully and thoughtfully addresses the topic
Clear topic sentence development
Paragraph smoothly and well developed
Nearly flawless mechanically
Variety of sentences
Logical plan of organization
4 - Fully addresses the topic
Clear topic sentence development
Coherence present, but not as smooth as 5
Paragraph well developed
Few punctuation, spelling, and usage errors with rare major sentence errors
Some sentence variety
Logical organization plan
3 - Addresses many aspects of the topic
Topic sentence clear, but not consistently developed
Coherence present, but inconsistent
Body of paragraph unevenly developed (at least one aspect of the topic is well developed with
adequate specific support - or all aspects have some adequate specific support)
Some punctuation, spelling and usage errors with a few major sentence errors
Little sentence variety
Adherence to organizational plan with some minor deviations
2 - Addresses some aspect of the topic
Topic sentence is not clear or clearly developed
Minimal coherence
Body sentences contain little specific support
Frequent punctuation, spelling, usage and major sentence errors
No sentence variety
Organizational plan confusing with distracting deviations
1 - Addresses some tangent of the topic
Topic sentence is not clear and illogical deviations in development
Little or no coherence
Body sentences are all general or are inappropriate to topic
Many punctuation, spelling, usage and major sentence errors
Organizational plan is not apparent
0 - Does not address topic
Program Outcomes Summary
Program Name: General Studies
Effectiveness
Performance Standard
Indicator
Measurement/Data
Source
Responsible
for collecting
data
I. Effectiveness
A. Quality of Education
Student
Satisfaction
Academic
Advancement
Instructor Satisfaction
Faculty Credentials
At least 85% of GS program students
will, upon course completion, indicate
they are satisfied with the quality of
their education.
At least 85% of successful GS 150
students and 40% of successful
Reading 360 students will pass the
majority of their classes in the
following semester.
At least 85% of the instructors for
classes taken in the subsequent
semester will indicate successful GS
students are prepared for success.
Exit and Alumni
Surveys
IR
Datatel results
IR
Instructor Survey
IR
100% of faculty must meet ed code or
WASC criteria.
Faculty personnel
file
Academic
Affairs
100% of faculty must meet external
accreditation standards
Faculty personnel
file
Program Coordinator
17
(year) (year) (year) (year)
18
Program Name: General Studies
Effectiveness
Indicator
Performance Standard
Measurement/Data
Source
Responsible (year) (year) (year) (year)
for collecting
data
B. Vitality
Annual unduplicated
headcount of Students
Each section meets its minimum
enrollment standards.
Census Headcount
Faculty Participation
At least 75% of faculty teaching GS
classes will attend one in-service
meeting within the academic year.
Program Coordinator
Student Retention
Adequate to ensure program
efficiency.
Fall to fall retention
data excluding transfers
and readmits
IR
Program Coordinator
IR
19
Program Name: General Studies
Effectiveness
Indicator
Performance Standard
Measurement/Data
Source
Responsible (year) (year) (year) (year)
for collecting
data
II. Efficiency
Program Coordinator
Annual Program Costs
Annual Program Report
Program Coordinator
Space Utilization
Annual Program Report
Program Coordinator
Average Section Size/Program
Enrollment
Annual Program Report
IR
Barbara Morrison
Date 10/29/07
Comment [CR1]: I’m not sure
how to fill out this table.
Instructional Program Review—Appendix B: Annual Update Forms
Annual Program Review Update
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Resources
1. A dedicated classroom for GS (Reading) 360 to accommodate twenty networked
computers and 500+ volumes of supplemental reading material.
20
Low
Moderate
List Resources Needed for Academic Year 07/08
High
Approved
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
21
Annual Program Review Update
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Faculty
1. Qualified associate faculty for GS 361
Low
Moderate
High
List Faculty Positions Needed for Academic Year 2008/2009
Not
Approved
Very
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)
Approved
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
22
Annual Program Review Update
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
This section to be filled out by the program at each campus
This section to be filled out by
Subcommittee
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Approval
Status
List Staff Positions Needed for Academic Year
Approved
Staff
1. One dedicated counselor/advisor for Reading 360.
Low
Moderate
High
Not
Approved
Very
High
Degree of Justification (as
substantiated by the
program review)
23
Annual Program Review Update
Campus/Program Needs Worksheet
Equipment
1. Update Lexia SOS software license.
2. Purchase SkillsTutor software.
Low
Moderate
Approximate
Cost
High
List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic Year
2008/2009
Not
Approved
Very
High
Please list/summarize the needs of your program on your campus below
Approved
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