Annual Program Review Update
*Be sure to include information from all three campuses.
Program/Discipline: Philosophy
Date:
October 10, 2007 Amended November 14, 2007.
Preliminary Comments: The last meaningful program review of Philosophy was
done in 1996. I don’t know if any electronic version still exists, so I will submit a
hard copy with this update. The most notable improvement since that report was
written is the regular inclusion of PHIL 12, Logic in the schedule. At the time of
the former report, we had replaced the Logic sections with Critical Thinking
sections and did not have the staffing to cover them all. Logic has been successfully
reintroduced because we have had highly qualified associate faculty to staff the
Logic sections.
The 1996 report makes five recommendations. Here are the two which have not
been fulfilled:
3. The philosophy program should explore the possibility of offering a course
in Eastern Religions.
5. Because of the scarcity of associate faculty and in order to meet the need for
additional classes, the Policy Development Committee and the Academic Senate
should consider the appointment of an additional full-time faculty member in
the next hiring cycle.
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.
No.
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.
The 1996 report says “The three-year average load for philosophy courses is
523 compared to the District average of 453. (This was based on a formula
using total contact hours and FTEF.) The success rate (don’t know if this
equates to V1 or V2) was 60%, and the completion (retention?) rate was
72%. These numbers have risen slightly since the 1996 report as reflected in
the data which has been recently made available. There is a data gap of 9
years. Looking at the data for 2005-2007, and ignoring summer and winter
sessions, the averages are as follow:
Section fill—81%
% Retention—83%
Success V1—68%
The sections in summer and winter sessions are not wildly outside these
numbers and only represent a total of four sections compared to the 59 sections
from the regular semesters.
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.
No.
5. Does your discipline need additional support from Student Services beyond that
previously provided?
What we most need from Student Services is a consistent effort to place
students in courses where they have some reasonable probability of success.
The “right to fail” attitude can become very self-fulfilling in our courses if
allowed to be the guiding principle during registration. We have two courses
with formal prerequisites and those have been fairly well enforced the past
few semesters. The “Basic Skills Initiative” underway from the state will
likely produce the same potential for lowering our enrollments as did or own
efforts through “The Underprepared” project. As of Fall, 2007 we returned
to our previous pattern of allowing students testing into English 350 or lower,
to enroll in college level courses including Philosophy. While it is too early to
see numerical changes, the instructors have reported to me that there are
seemingly a large number of students enrolled who do not demonstrate the
necessary skill levels to succeed. Students who cannot read and write at the
college level should be strongly advised against taking any of the courses in
philosophy. One of the revisions to the course outlines just approved is the
inclusion of a recommended preparation of English 150. If the admissions
advisors will take this to heart, we should not have any students enrolled who
are working below college level.
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
Philosophy 63 TLU
% of Total
Teaching
Load by
Full-Time
Faculty
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by PartTime Faculty
Changes from
fall 2005
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment, etc.)
21%
79%
-20% and
+20%
There is only one
full time faculty
member in
Philosophy and
he is currently
serving as
Division Chair
for Humanities
and
Communications.
Faculty Load Distribution in the Program
Discipline
Name
(e.g., Math,
English,
Accounting)
Total
Teaching
Load for
spring 2007
term
Philosophy 59.5 TLU
% of Total
Teaching
Load by
Full-Time
Faculty
% of Total
Teaching Load
Taught by PartTime Faculty
Changes from
spring 2006
Explanations and
Additional
Information (e.g.,
retirement,
reassignment, etc.)
17%
83%
-20% and
+20%
There is only one
full time faculty
member in
Philosophy and
he is currently
serving as
Division Chair
for Humanities
and
Communications
Do you need more full-time faculty? Associate faculty? If yes, explain why and
be sure to include data sheets justifying the need.
We have gone from a stable pool of 7 associate faculty members at the
highest point several years ago to a current pool of 4. There is not a lot of
turnover. All the former teachers have opted to retire from their
responsibilities here. The longest serving member of our team has taught
part-time at CR since 1976. We are fortunate to have experienced, reliable
teachers, but we could certainly use some more. For the coming Spring
semester, we will not be able to staff all the sections requested for the Arcata
and Eureka Downtown Centers. If the one full-time faculty member returns
to a full teaching load in the Fall of 2008, the staffing situation will be
improved, and we may be able to offer additional sections.
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 staff
(e.g., Math,
(classified) staff (give number)
English)
(give number)
Gains over
Prior Year
Humanities
--
0
1
Losses over
Prior Year (give
reason:
retirement,
reassignment,
health, etc.)
25% reduction
Do you need more full-time staff? Part-time staff? If yes, explain why and be sure
to include data sheets justifying the need.
During the 2006-07 year the classified office support persons were returned
to the various division offices from the centralized location in the old library.
Maureen Scott did not return to Humanities and a replacement person was
hired. She only stayed until mid-year before resigning. The Humanities
office was not staffed during Spring semester 2007 and part of the Fall
semester 2007. A temporary, 30 hours/week position was approved to
provide office support in Humanities. Maureen Scott was also relocated to
Humanities, though her work assignment is to do Curriculum Committee
support work full time.
We need a permanent, full-time office support person for the Humanities
Division office. Under the terms of the new CRFO contract, each associate
faculty evaluation will require eight to ten hours of staff support time. The
Humanities division has thirty-five associate faculty members. This work
will be in addition to the well established workload that has justified full-time
support personnel in each division.
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.
In both the 1996 report and the current one, the growth of the sections and
corresponding enrollments in Philosophy is primarily limited by available
staff, though available classrooms is becoming more of an issue especially
during prime time slots.
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.
It could be argued that our needs have not changed because we continue to
use primarily one classroom, and it hasn’t changed, or been upgraded in any
significant way. The room has 12 tables with about 40 chairs. Our black
board (chalk board) was covered with a white board a few years ago. No
one ever stole the chalk and it was a lot cheaper than dry erase markers. So
now we can write in colors. We obviously cannot employ the more recent
teaching methodologies because our classroom (FM204) does not have a
computer. It does have an overhead projector and a TV with a VCR. We
could use a DVD player but we get by. There is no motivation for the
instructors to employ new technologies since the equipment is not available
in the classroom. Our courses are generally filled to capacity, so there isn’t
really an argument to present for technology as a way to increase
enrollments. An argument could be made for improving the quality of
instruction, but frankly until the college makes the installation and regular
maintenance of instructional technology equipment a high institutional
priority, I am going to encourage our Philosophy instructors to continue with
their high quality, “traditional” teaching methods.
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 answer to #10
Learning Outcomes Assessment Update
11. How has your area or program been engaged in student learning outcomes
assessment?
a.
Summarize your results.
New SLO’s have been written for all five courses in Philosophy.
To the extent possible this was a collaborative effort among all those
who teach a particular course. The final drafts were written by the
full-time faculty member with the exception of PHIL 12, Logic which
was prepared by the only associate faculty member who teaches the
course. While the spirit and content of the courses has not changed
appreciably with these revisions, the precision of the updated
objectives is a definite improvement.
b.
What did your program learn from these results that enabled you to
improve teaching and learning in the discipline?
Once all the updated course outlines have been approved by the
Curriculum Committee, I will distribute them to all the associate
faculty members. However, there is never a time when we are all on
the same campus at the same time, so we actually meet once a year at
my house for dinner. When the next Philosophy dinner comes
around in September, 2008 I’ll ask for feedback about any changes
observed to that point. These changes may be in the syllabi,
assignments and presentation, and/or may be performance changes on
the part of students. It can be the anecdotal compliment to next
year’s data report, and I’ll include it in our next Annual Review.
c.
How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess SLOs?
See answer to #12a
Curriculum Update
(Reminder: Send updated course outlines to the Curriculum Committee.)
Done. On Curriculum agenda Oct 12, 2007
12. Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives undertaken
in the last year.
13. Identify curricular revisions, program innovations, and new initiatives planned for
the next year.
N/A
14. Complete the grid below
Course
Phil 1 Critical
Thinking
Phil 10 Introduction
to Philosophy
Year Course Outline Year Next Update
Last Updated
Expected
2007
2009
2007
2009
Phil 12 Logic
2007
2009
Phil 15 Religions of
the World
2007
2010
Phil 20 Ethics
2007
2010
Goals and Plans
15. If you have recently undergone a comprehensive review, attach your Quality
Improvement Plan if applicable.
N/A
16. If you do not have a QIP, what goals and plans does your area have for the
coming year?
We always plan to keep the integrity of our courses high and to offer as many
sections as we can reasonably manage. If the one full-time faculty member
returns to a full teaching load in the Fall of 2008, the staffing situation will
be improved, and we may be able to offer additional sections.