College of the Redwoods
Education Master Planning Committee Meeting
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Proposed Agenda
8:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m., Lakeview Room
8:00 a.m.
1.
Call to Order
2. Review notes from January 26, 2012 meeting
8:10 a.m.
3. Review of Program Review Master Executive Summaries
4. Review of Institutional Effectiveness Scorecard (Key Performance
Indicators)
8:30 a.m.
5. Ed Master Plan approach vis-à-vis ACCJC Recommendation #2
a. Alignment with Strategic Plan
b. Review elements in 2009-2020 plan
8:45 a.m.
6. Develop Education Master Plan Goals and Objectives
9:45 a.m.
7. Determine Next Steps
10:00 a.m.
8. Adjourn
College of the Redwoods
Education Master Planning Committee Meeting
Thursday, January 26, 2012
Minutes
Present: Utpal Goswami, Rachel Anderson, Geoff Cain, Ahn Fielding (phone), Pat Girczyc,
Michelle Haggerty, Angelina Hill, Jennifer Knight, Matt Malkus, Roxanne Metz, Julia Peterson,
Mike Peterson, Keith Snow-Flamer, Crislyn Parker-notes
Absent: Steve Brown, DaVita Fraser
1.
Meeting called to order at 8:05 a.m.
2.
Status Update re: Strategic Plan and Education Master Plan Timeline
 Committee will add an agenda item: Scope of the Ed Master Plan
 From previous meetings, and EMP meetings at the sites, themes have been identified
that are common throughout the district, as well as determining site specific needs.
Committee needs to develop strategies on how to create initiatives that are district wide
and site specific; not have different strategies for each specific area, but one initiative
that can be tweaked as needed for various student populations. Identify district needs
and tailor to specific sites.
 Strategic plan update: the draft model links various plans together; the Ed Master Plan
will be linked to the goals and objectives in the strategic plan. The strategic plan is
shaping up into themes that will become recommendations. The Ed Master Plan will
remain a draft until the strategic plan is finalized.
 One element in the strategic plan is a goal/statement about fiscal stability. If this is a
long term goal, will the Ed Master Plan play a significant role and how will it impact
technology planning.
 The college does not have a policy on building reserves or draw-down of reserves. The
education master plan may include a prioritization for excess reserves. (Noted this is
third CR has expanded sites and had to shut down). For example:
o From the Education Master Plan angle, each site should have strategies to deal
with different funding scenarios.
o Language in the Education Master Plan should include upgrading classrooms
and technology and include prioritization. Sentence could read: “the successful
educational experience of students is dependent on appropriate infrastructure
including technology and classrooms.” The EMP process must provide for
renewal/recycling and improvement of facilities and infrastructure.
 The Strategic plan already addresses fiscal responsibility, so all other planning
committees should include the same type of terminology and expand to target the
specific area of each planning committee.
 Clarification is needed in program review on how units will look at inefficiencies and
deal with them. Effectiveness needs to be a part of the evaluation of programs and
services.
 Utpal feels the commission would like to see a number as a target of efficiencies. This
discussion needs to be soon. Then we can let our efficiencies be guided by that number.
 Community considerations must be included, as well as addressing the growing
demographic of students who want alternate class time.
3.
Report on task force work
a. Student success (Keith Snow-Flamer, Michelle Haggerty, Matt Malkus, Angelina Hill):
Action items developed were developed based on three goals (see supporting document
titled Ed Master Plan Subcommittee Student Success, 1/25/12).
 Goal 1: Provide structured academic pathways. Identify needs and holes to make the
first year successful
 Goal 2: Focus basic skills education. The Enrollment Management Committee will
tackle this. It involves determining how we define basic skills success. Our courses need
evaluation and possibly innovation. Evaluation must be built into all plans, to ensure
what we offer is because it works, not because it is what we know. Suggestions included:
o Give thought to provide more resources to make sure our students get what
they need. Personalized counseling works well for some basic skills students.
o Contextualized courses; too many basic skills courses with high unit counts has
not been effective. Show connections in contextualized courses; may be a
student is already utilizing a concept and needs to realize it can be transferred
to another area.
o Explore different learning techniques – innovate.
o Show connections in contextualized courses.
o IPEST program in Washington brings a lot of these ideas together successfully.
 Goal 3: Promote the success of all members of the community equitably: A focus on
online courses for non-traditional students. Not all college offerings need to be transfer;
CTE and others, can be online and evening courses.
 Structured course sequences are considered to work better than non-structured for
degrees. Bullet identifying structured pathways, which will help the Enrollment
Management Committee tie TLUs by degree completion for planning. Another bullet:
Established pathways-design pathways, degree planning tools and advising to choose
right path. Ed code has certain requirements, but creative designing can be made to
allow for structure. Include an alternative when a guaranteed pathway is not available.
 The EMP should address changing demographics and diversity of our students (e.g.
socioeconomic diversity, learning styles, and cultural approach to education).
 Analytics: Collect information on what students are doing. Key for successful analytics
is input, and then analytics can be used along with the human touch – complementary.
 Math testing using technology to determine what students are doing, what they did
previously and how it can help them be successful.
 The Education Master Plan should address the need to track emerging fields and
emerging opportunities and determine if CR can respond to these emerging
opportunities.
b. Business Training Center- next agenda
c. Access to computers and computer literacy – next agenda
d. Cultural relevance/diversity – next agenda
e. Online or hybrid career training- next agenda
 Subcommittee task force report outs will be on the next agenda.
5. Discuss planning for 101 corridor sites
 These sites were created to provide services, and should we decide to shut down some of
them, we need to determine what the community expects from us and what services we


need to maintain. What we do at this time will be strategic and remain over a long
period of time; if we have to downsize what is essential to maintain. The key question to
be considered is that if some sites are closed, what services can be maintained, and what
can be reasonably done to address student needs?
Many students take advantage of the student services offered at the Eureka Downtown
site. Suggested we keep these essential services. Night classes are popular. This site
serves a different demographic population. Issue is not to eliminate all the 101 corridor,
but to address fiscal efficiency overall. Per Utpal, the Eureka Downtown lease is up and
had a lot of built-in costs. If we keep this site, we will negotiate a lower cost agreement
or we will not stay.
Distance does affect student decisions.
6.
Identify initiatives to be included in the education master plan update – next agenda
7.
Discuss Scope of EMP - next agenda
Meeting adjourned at 10:05am. Next meeting date to be determined.
College of the Redwoods
Program Review Committee
Executive Summary
Adopted April 30, 2010
Mission Statement The College of the Redwoods’ Program Review Committee leads and facilitates authentic
assessment as it relates to student success and planning at the institution for all subject and service areas.
The committee reviews Annual and Comprehensive Program Reviews that provide the strong foundation
upon which College of the Redwoods develops, identifies, states and documents quality improvement plans
and goals including providing the direction of prioritization of funding, and support needs as organized under
the strategic planning objectives. (Mission Statement Adopted November 6, 2009)
Objective: To provide an Executive Summary of all the Program Reviews submitted for the academic year of
2009-2010. The summary includes common themes found in Trends, Assessment, and Budget.
Executive Summary for Trends
Summary and Recommendations:
The district needs to create more formalized procedures for
tracking the completion and graduation rates of our students.
Pre-populated quantitative data tables (similar to the
instructional program reviews) are needed for all Student
Service and Administrative Program Reviews to help guide an
author’s narrative and make it easier for an author to
supplement and reinforce their qualitative narrative analysis.
The Program Review process for Administrative Services
needs to be reinstated.
Formalized training sessions are needed to help Program
Review authors meaningfully interpret the data on their
Program Review templates.
Additional Comments:
Individual departments and programs need to
work in concert with the Institutional Research
department to collect data by using surveys and
other instruments, the results of which will be
kept by both the IR department and the
departments/programs. A simple 3X5 card that
each graduate can fill out (with questions like
“what is your email address?” and “Did you learn
what you need to be successful?”) can start this
process in motion. More detailed surveys can also
be conducted by individual
departments/programs.
This quantitative data can include numbers of
students served, SARS log visits, students
retained, etc
Administrative Services needs to have established
Learning Outcomes, and they need access to
quantitative data in order to improve their
programs.
The Office of Institutional Research is willing to
conduct workshops for individual
departments/programs to help them learn how to
interpret and use enrollment, retention, success,
basic skills, and other data in order to improve
their programs/services.
Process:
PRC will forward completed Executive Summaries to program review authors.
Authors will have two weeks to provide feedback and corrections on errors of fact and/interpretation
PRC will forward Executive Summaries and authors response (if available) to the appropriate integrated
planning committee and the CPC.
Separate the on-line data from the face-to-face data in the
instructional Program Review templates
Create hyperlinks on the templates to “live
reports” so that Program Review authors can drill
into the data by location, time, delivery mode, etc.
The data set for Basic Skills in our current Program Review
template is too narrowly focused for assessing the needs of
our Basic Skills students.
We should be looking at General Studies and
Guidance data (and other multiple measures in
addition to English and Math) for determining the
most accurate approaches for serving these
students
An additional question is needed for all of the Program
Review templates along the lines of “What additional data
would you like to include and comment upon to help you
improve your program?”
Need to include District data and other college comparable
data to the Program Review documents. [what is an average
retention, persistence, success rate] [how does CR compare to
other colleges.]
Create the calendar for the Program Review
process before the process begins, and make it
readily available to the entire district.
The rubric for faculty/staff position prioritization
needs to be closely linked to the Program Review
forms; currently it is not.
Program Review authors need to have access to
the rubrics by which their reports will be
evaluated before the Program Reviews are
written.
The whole college needs to become involved in
the dialog of student success—not only through
(or within) the processes of Program Review.
What do we do with inconsistent data or
variations in data when the population is too
small [how do we make meaningful comparisons
when only a few courses are prepopulated or
when courses are only offered every few years,
etc.]
Needing time to view real trends, we only have
three years of data or less
1.
Executive Summary for Budget
Summary and Recommendations:
Program Budget/Funding Sources:
Reliance on outside funding sources in vocational areas.
Additional Comments:
Need to take into account when grant funding is
depleted.
Process:
PRC will forward completed Executive Summaries to program review authors.
Authors will have two weeks to provide feedback and corrections on errors of fact and/interpretation
PRC will forward Executive Summaries and authors response (if available) to the appropriate integrated
planning committee and the CPC.
All areas noted that they do not have sufficient funding to
operate their departments/programs.
No contingency funds for instructional equipment and
furniture
Frustrated with installation of equipment
No funding for adequately serving the increasing number of
students.
Current budget is not linked to Quality Improvement Plans
Executive Summary for Assessment
Summary and Recommendations:
Need for a college-wide process to gather and assess
information from students directly, both those who graduate
and those who leave for other reasons, or from transfer
institutions and employers.
District-wide Integrated Planning needs to take
place so that district funds can be appropriately
and adequately allocated to support overall
Student Learning Outcomes, and Program-Level
outcomes.
Division and departmental budgets must be
restored for general equipment
replacement/repair and emergency equipment
replacement/repair. (This last year, these budgets
were taken away.)
Closer coordination is needed between the
divisions/departments and maintenance and
technology services.
District-wide Integrated Planning needs to take
place so that resources can be adequately and
appropriately aligned with total enrollment
numbers.
District-wide Integrated Planning needs to take
place so that resources can be adequately and
appropriately aligned with department/Division
Quality Improvement Plans.
Additional Comments:
Exit Surveys – Why are students not returning?
What are students doing years later? (Alumni
tracking)
Career placement and Employee satisfaction
surveys
Student satisfaction surveys
Better support for faculty, and associate faculty
Improve systems of communication and
coordination
Provision for clerical support
Development of Student Entry Surveys
Better identification of student goals so that we
can assess student satisfaction
Development of tracking system so that student
trends can be identified to determine goals.
Need for examples of holistically-normed assessment reports.
Need for faculty development opportunities related to
assessment theories and practices for both full and part-time
instructors. (Many of these will be directly addressed by the
addition of Assessment Director position)
Staff and faculty flex opportunities
Assessment Coordinator Training opportunities
Grant funding development
Faculty Senate allocation for faculty development
Process:
PRC will forward completed Executive Summaries to program review authors.
Authors will have two weeks to provide feedback and corrections on errors of fact and/interpretation
PRC will forward Executive Summaries and authors response (if available) to the appropriate integrated
planning committee and the CPC.
The Assessment Committee noted the need for
faculty and student services to improve their
connections between SLO and budget and
staff/faculty requests. This is a new process, but
there is room for improvement.
Faculty presentations: There was some concern
regarding the time line of completion – also there
was an overall statement of improvement.
It was noted that IR is contacting other IR offices
throughout the state of California to ask how they
are tracking and assessing student completers. In
addition, IR contacted both the Office of Dr.
Martha Kaplan in the US Dept. of Education and
the Office of Dr. George Boggs, American
Association of Community Colleges for
information nationwide on ways that community
colleges have found to be successful in this work.
Process:
PRC will forward completed Executive Summaries to program review authors.
Authors will have two weeks to provide feedback and corrections on errors of fact and/interpretation
PRC will forward Executive Summaries and authors response (if available) to the appropriate integrated
planning committee and the CPC.
College of the Redwoods Program Review Committee Executive Summary (Adopted April 30, 2010)
Mission Statement The College of the Redwoods’ Program Review Committee leads and facilitates
authentic assessment as it relates to student success and planning at the institution for all subject and
service areas. The committee reviews Annual and Comprehensive Program Reviews that provide the
strong foundation upon which College of the Redwoods develops, identifies, states and documents quality
improvement plans and goals including providing the direction of prioritization of funding, and support
needs as organized under the strategic planning objectives. (Mission Statement Adopted November 6,
2009)
Objective: To provide an Executive Summary of all the Program Reviews submitted for the academic
year of 2010-2011. The summary includes common themes found in Trends, Assessment, and Budget.
Trends: Summary and Recommendations
Additional Comments
• Concern regarding accuracy of data tables was noted.
• New IR Director will be directly
involved in identifying and correcting
problematic data.
• Success rates for on-line courses (for every discipline) are
clearly lower than for face-to-face courses. This is an
institution-wide issue that needs careful analysis and remedy as • What do we do with inconsistent data
or variations in data when the
we move forward with expanding our on-line offerings.
population is too small [how do we
make meaningful comparisons when
• A more comprehensive and formalized process to collect
only a few courses are pre-populated
degree and certificate completion rates, transfer rates, and a
or when courses are only offered
follow-up system for our graduates, including graduate and
every few years, etc.] (Note: this was
employer survey data, needs to be implemented for all
also identified in last year’s executive
programs district-wide. (This was noted in the 2010 Master
summary).
Executive Summary.) Some programs are starting to collect
this data, but a standardized system that features the
coordinated efforts of both individual programs and the
Institutional Research Department needs to be designed.
Additional staffing in the IR department will likely be needed
to accomplish this.
• More quantitative data and data analysis is needed for the
Student Services and Administrative Services Program Review
reports. Longitudinal data such as “numbers of students (or
other constituents) served” should be included alongside the
narrative analysis in these reports. More consistency of format
between the Instructional, Student Services, and
Administrative Services Program Review templates is needed
for more thorough analysis of available data. Tracking and
analysis of this type of data has started in some Student
Services and Administrative Services departments, but more
needs to be done.
• The Trends analyses that are currently being generated by the
PRC need to move through established Integrated Planning
channels so they can inform other committee work on campus,
and inform district-wide institutional planning.
• A mechanism for responding to (and following up on) PRC Trends analyses and recommendations needs to be implemented for individual Programs and Program Review authors. We know that Programs have access to the PRC Trends analysis, but how do we know whether (and in what ways) Programs are responding to these analyses and recommendations? An added follow up section within the annual template along the lines of “How have you responded to last year’s PRC recommendations?” might help to capture this information. A written follow‐up response addressing the recommendations (and how they might be implemented) could be another remedy for this issue. • Several programs have been “flagged” by the PRC using very
• PRC would like direction where/to
specific rubrics: 1) enrollment, 2) need, 3) fulltime faculty
whom these concerns should be
support, 4) cost/FTES ratio, 5) ability to maintain appropriate
directed. The PRC recognizes its roll
equipment and/or facilities.
in assessment evaluation, but is not a
recommending body.
• Some programs provided only limited information from
• Del Norte and Mendocino need to be
Centers.
more involved in the process of
program review. One example in the
case of program assessment for
bookstore operations there was no
information from either site.
• Many programs reviews included the need for professional
development training (especially in the area of technology
services).
• There was clear improvement in the use of labor market data,
however there are still deficiencies and improvement on data
interpretation should be encouraged.
• Generally the CR’s data shows fairly high retention for classes. • Retention and success data may not
However, success rates vary.
be accurately representing student
trends. Students that stop attending
classes (following census) are counted
in retention, but obviously fail the
class, therefore negatively affecting
student success. Recommendation is
for more specific data that will
identify students with “last attended
dates” other than the final meeting.
This should more accurately assess
student “success,” and more
accurately represent “true” retention.
• Several programs have expressed concern regarding dwindling
student support services (DSPS, Crisis Counselor, Academic
Counseling, Matriculation officer).
• Several programs would benefit from
improved articulation with other
schools.
Budget: Summary and Recommendations
Additional Comments
• Concern over long term obligations of grant-funded positions; • Inclusion of a review of long term as well as programs that are primarily supported by grant
financial obligations of grant funds. This is a concern for the committee due to district
funded programs prior to program sustainability. No district funds have been identified through
approval. Secure funding of long the program review process to replace the monies generated by
term programs should be part of various grants to sustain programs and/or personnel once
the planning process, especially outside funding has ended. In the past, this procedure has been
programs that require specialized done outside of the planning process.
equipment and maintenance that are not supported by the grant. • Furthermore, additional concerns regarding the sustainability of facilities and equipment purchased by DIEM and Measure Q funds. This too has been done outside the planning process in previous years and needs to become part of the current planning process.
• Many (most) programs are short staff and/or faculty. With the • Budget issues are an obvious concern,
loss of positions that are not replaced, the workload issues are
but if personnel cannot be replaced,
directly impacting productivity and morale.
serious consideration of workload
obligations must be addressed. Goals
addressed in the program reviews
may not all be accomplished.
• Several programs identified equipment and facilities concerns
• Facilities and Budget Planning
that could be safety issues.
committees will receive program
review summaries for consideration in
the prioritization process.
• Several programs identified concerns regarding equipment
• Consider cost of insurance for
replacement and/or maintenance costs.
expensive, program dependent
equipment.
• Funds are inadequate for the following:
* It was noted that many of the findings
• new technology and routine updates district-wide.
were also identified in the 2009/2010
• maintaining facilities and equipment repairs district-wide.
academic year as well.
• equipment replacement and updates district-wide.
• departmental expendable items (printing, light-bulbs, paper)
• departmental nonexpendable items (i.e. library resources).
• faculty and staff development district wide.
• Currently, funding requests for non-expendable and capital
items requested in the Program Review documents are not
linked to the assessment and quality improvement plans
identified by the program.
• Many departments and programs share discretionary budgets,
district wide. This has made it difficult for authors to
determine if their programs’ actual budget is adequate. The
recommendation is for the district to resolve this convoluted
process for clarity purposes.
Assessment: Summary and Recommendations
Additional Comments
• Need for a college-wide process to gather and assess
information from students directly, both those who graduate
and those who leave for other reasons, or from transfer
institutions and employers.
• Exit Surveys – Why are students not
returning? What are students doing
years later? (Alumni tracking)
• Career placement and Employee
satisfaction surveys.
• Student satisfaction surveys.
• Instructional Programs are making great strides in the
development and assessment of Program Level Outcomes.
Most have submitted a 5 year plan
• Some programs are still having difficulty with assessment.
• Improve process for Liberal Arts and General Education
comprehensive program reviews. The process is unnecessarily
burdensome. A more streamlined document needs to be
developed, and final decision as to what defines a Program and
courses that would be included in PLO assessments.
• An addition to PR templates: 1) Assessment planning
documents. 2) Faculty/Staff request forms, for prioritization
3) Inclusion of assessment results plans from the previous year.
• Assessment Coordinator will continue
to work with faculty to develop 5 year
assessment planning. By the end of
2011 all programs will have a plan
submitted and included in their
program review.
• For programs that were identified as
having less active or complete
assessment, arrange specific and
specialized training activities.
• Continue to work with Assessment
Coordinator to facilitate this process.
• Recommend more consistency in how
programs address basic skills students
in their program review
Institutional Effectiveness Scorecard
Student Success
We put students first, ensuring that student learning and advancement are pivotal to all we do.
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
Fall to Fall Persistence: Full-time
57%
53%
55%
Part-time
46%
43%
42%
ARCC Cohort
60%
56%
56%
61%
Retention
89%
89%
89%
85%
Basic Skills Improvement: English
49%
44%
51%
59%
60%
54%
52%
48%
53%
55%
Course Success
69%
68%
69%
69%
Degree Completion (150%)
[374]
[418]
[482]
Certificate Completion (150%)
[182]
[182]
[170]
Transfer to 4-year
[553]
[612]
[842]
Math
ARCC Cohort
Access
Trends
Actual Desired
We value all members of our community and strive to create a diverse, nurturing, honest, and open environment.
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
Headcount
10,195
10,762
9,600
FTES
5,592
5,967
5,386
Basic Skills Students Served
1,806
1,907
1,774
High School Yield
28%
31%
27%
Trends
Actual Desired
23%
CR Experience
We strive to create a supportive, problem-solving culture, and we recognize the proven usefulness of an
interest-based approach (IBA) for achieving trust, cooperation and effective problem solving.
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
Student Satisfaction: Instruction
5.83
5.59
Support Services
5.38
5.26
Graduate Satisfaction
Employee Satisfaction
4.32
Trends
Actual Desired
Institutional Effectiveness Scorecard
Community Outreach
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
Trends
Actual Desired
Community Education
Enrollments
Continuing Education offerings
Community Events Supported
84
Learning Enhancement
We are continuously engaged in assessment efforts that in academic and student services in an
effort to continuously improve student learning.
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
Trends
Actual Desired
Has learning outcomes:
Courses
Degrees/Certifications
General Education
Student Services
In assessment cycle:
Courses
Degrees/Certifications
General Education
Student Services
Institutional Productivity
2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010—2011 Benchmark
% Full (class sections)
66%
72%
79%
FTES/FTEF
28.15
28.56
30.39
Cost/FTES
$2123
$2061
$2097
Resident
5419
5799
5202
Non-resident
173
168
183
Reserves as % of unrestricted fund
FTES:
**Target
Trends
Actual Desired
Institutional Effectiveness Scorecard
Definitions
Student Success
Fall to Fall Persistence. Percentage of first-time students
who enroll in the fall term and who returned and enrolled
in the subsequent fall term. Full-Time – enrolled at first
term census in 12 or more units. Part-Time – enrolled at
first term census in fewer than twelve units. ARCC Cohort – enrolled at first term census in 6 or more units.
Includes CR students who enroll in any Community College in the CCC District, resulting in higher percentages.
Retention. The percentage of student enrolled on Census
Day who remained enrolled in that course through the
last day and received any grade other than a W. Benchmark provides the Statewide 2010 – 2011 retention rate
for the California Community Colleges.
Basic Skills Improvement. Students who successfully
completed the initial basic skills course (Reading, Writing or Mathematics) were followed across three academic
years (including the year and term of the initial course).
The outcome of interest was that group of students who
successfully completed a higher-level course in the same
discipline within three academic years of completing the
first basic skills course. Benchmark provides the 20102011 ARCC Basic Skills Improvement Indicators, which
aggregates Math and English.
Course Success. The percentage of students enrolled in a
course on Census Day who complete the course with a
successful grade (A, B, C, P, CR). Benchmark provides
the Statewide 2010 – 2011 success rate for the California
Community Colleges.
150% Degree & Certificate Completion. The percentage of first-time, full-time degree-seeking students who
complete a degree or certificate in 150 percent of the normal program completion time.
Benchmark provides the Statewide 2010-2011 ….
3 Year Transfer Rate. The percentage of first-time, fulltime degree-seeking students who transfer to a 4-year
institution within 3 years of their first term.
Access
Headcount. The number of unique (unduplicated) students who are enrolled at Census. A single student who
enrolls in several courses is counted only once.
Full-time Equivalent Students. One FTES represents
the number of class (contact) hours participated by a full
-time student over the course of a year. One FTES represents 525 contact hours.
Basic Skills Students Served. The number of unique
(unduplicated) students who are enrolled in Basic Skills
English, Math, or ESL courses.
High School Yield. Percentage of graduates from a representative set of high schools in CR’s service areas who
enrolled at CR in the subsequent fall term. Benchmark
provides the percentage of all high school graduates in
California who enrolled at a California Community College. Data is from 2009, which is the most recent year
CR Experience
Student Satisfaction. The following questions from the
2009 administration of the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) were used. Ratings were given using a scale
where 1 = not at all satisfied, 4 = neutral, 7 = not at all
satisfied). Instruction question: The quality of instruction
I receive in most of my classes is excellent. Student Services question: Academic support services adequately
meet the needs of students. Benchmark provides the
2009 average satisfaction ratings from a National comparison group of Community Colleges provided by Noel
-Levitz.
Graduate Satisfaction. The following question from
the 2010-2011 Graduate Survey was used. Ratings were
given using a scale where 1 = very dissatisfied, 3 = neutral, 5 = very satisfied.
Institutional Effectiveness Scorecard
Definitions
Community Outreach
Institutional Productivity
Community Education Offerings.
% Full (class sections). Class enrollment divided by
class capacity. Commonly referred to as fill rate.
Continuing Education Offerings.
Community Events supported. The number of community events offered on the campus, tracked through process of acquiring a permit.
Learning Enhancement
Has learning outcomes. The percent of courses, degree/
cert programs, and student service areas with student
learning outcomes (SLOs) on record. General education
outcomes refer to those created by the Institution.
In assessment cycle. A course, degree/cert, or student
services area is considered in the assessment cycle if at
least one SLO assessment report has been submitted
during the assessment cycle. General education outcomes are systematically evaluated within GE courses,
but evidence is also gathered in relevant degree/cert programs.
Student-Faculty Ratio. Full-time equivalent students
divided by full-time equivalent faculty (FTES/FTEF).
Cost/FTES. Instructional cost per full-time equivalent
student. Based on cost per TLU.
Resident and Non-Resident FTES. California residency status is used to categorize full-time equivalent
resident and non-resident students.
DRAFT Strategic Plan Goals and Objectives for College of the Redwoods – 3/23/12 Goal 1 Focus on Learners: Developmental, Career Technical, and Transfer Education. College of the Redwoods will employ programs, services, and organizational structures to meet the needs of learners and ensure student success. Objectives
Desired Outcomes
Potential Action Plans and Initiatives
Indicators (and targets)
1.1 Match student
readiness with
educational
pathways.
Students will be effectively evaluated
and placed in appropriate programs of
study.
Develop processes and policies to increase participation in
math and English placement.
Assess online readiness for students who intend to take a
DE course for the first time.
The college will facilitate successful
achievement of intended learning
outcomes.
Programs and services will be
evaluated to ensure currency and
effectiveness.
Develop structures and assign responsibility to ensure
assessment of course, program and institutional outcomes.
Number of students participating in math and
English placement.
Number of first-time distance education
students completing online readiness
assessment.
Increase by 5% per year the number of
students completing career exploration
activities.
By 2017 all full-time students will have a
student education plan in place.
All programs will participate in assessment
annually.
Develop structures and assign responsibility to ensure
evaluation of program and service effectiveness.
All programs will participate in assessment and
program review annually
The college will increase the number
of degree and certificate completions.
The college will increase the number
of transfers to four-year colleges.
Students will be actively engaged and
institutionally supported.
The college embraces equity and
diversity with effective policies and
practices.
Align course offerings with aggregate data from Student
Educational Plans.
By 2017 the number of degrees, certificates,
and transfers will increase by 30%.
Improve First Year Experience Program.
Develop summer bridge and other shortened “classes” to
provide assistance in targeted content areas in math and
English.
Perceived student engagement (NSSE or SSI
baseline to be established 2012-13).
Student Equity Plan measures.
Participation of underrepresented groups will
increase by 2% per year.
Number of BPs and APs updated to
incorporate equity and diversity principles.
Maintain course retention rates ≥ 85%
By 2017, ARCC persistence rates will rise to
60%.
Number of students completing math and
English remediation within one year
(determine baseline, set targets).
Faculty development committee will allocate funds for
pedagogical improvements.
Number of faculty funded for instructional
improvement initiatives.
Provide career exploration activities to educate students
about possible careers and related training and education
opportunities.
Enable students to develop student education plans.
1.2 Continuously
assess and
evaluate programs
to provide effective
educational
programs and
services for all
learners.
1.3 Students will be
able to complete
their desired
educational goals.
1.4 Enhance student
support and
student
engagement (see
5.1).
The college will improve persistence
and retention rates.
1.5 Improve basic skills
success.
1.6 Support faculty
More students will complete any
necessary remediation within one
year of admission.
Faculty will employ innovative
Strengthen and augment services to enhance access and
success for underrepresented populations.
Update Board Policies (Chapter 5, Students and Chapter 7,
Human Resources).
Ensure all students go through matriculation process.
development and
instructional
innovation
teaching practices.
Sabbaticals will be awarded for plans to improve
pedagogy.
College will provide training and support for instructional
improvement and innovation.
Number of sabbaticals funded for instructional
improvement.
Number of faculty participating in college
training in instructional improvement.
Goal 2 Focus on Learners: Community Partnerships College of the Redwoods will provide, in partnership with the community, training and education to contribute to the economic vitality and lifelong learning needs of the community. Objectives
Desired Outcomes
Potential Action Plans and Initiatives
2.1 Provide workforce
development
training.
The Business Training Center will
provide industry-recognized
certifications in strong and emerging
industries.
2.2 Respond to
business and
industry short-term
training needs.
The Business Training Center will
collaborate with business and industry
partners to offer contract training and
scheduled workshops for incumbent
workers.
The college will create non-credit
programs to meet the lifelong learning
needs of the community.
Evaluate certifications needed to support local
incumbent workers and industries.
Develop trainings in areas where certified
employees are needed by local employers.
Develop a training calendar of workshops that meet
the training needs of business and industry.
2.3 Develop non-credit
programs.
Evaluate priorities for ESL, GED, short-term
vocational training, versus job readiness.
Collaborate with faculty to develop needed
curriculum.
Indicators (and targets)
Program revenue will grow by 10% per
year.
Number of contract training clients and
incumbent workers trained will grow by
10% per year.
Non-credit courses established.
Goal 3 Fiscal and Operational Sustainability
College of the Redwoods will pursue strategies that lead to fiscal and operational sustainability. Objectives
Desired Outcomes
Potential Action Plans and Initiatives
Indicators (and targets)
3.1 Reduce reliance on
apportionmentbased funding.
3.2 Improve college
operational
efficiencies.
Increased funding through a revived
foundation, grants and contracts, and
entrepreneurial ventures.
Improved operational efficiencies
through effective management of
human, physical, technical, and
financial resources.
Streamline grant development processes
Develop partnerships to support programs.
By 2017, 15% of the budget will be nonapportionment based revenue.
Establish benchmark for effective measures
Practice data-driven process reengineering to
increase efficiencies.
Maintain cost/FTES at the statewide
average.
Maintenance-related tickets.
Perceived processing bottlenecks.
3.3 Increase funding
available for
strategic initiatives
The college will tie resource allocation
to outcomes and planning.
3.4 Increase community
support for the
college.
3.5 Practice continuous
quality improvement
The College of the Redwoods
Foundation will raise money for
college use.
Services and related processes are
continuously evaluated for improved
effectiveness and efficiencies.
The College will create structures and
processes to ensure ACCJC
accreditation standards are
maintained.
The Budget Planning Committee will consider
alignment with strategic initiatives in the
development of funding priorities.
The college will save excess reserves for use in
strategic initiatives.
Hire a development director.
Dollars allocated in support of institutional
plans and in response to assessment and
program review
Fund balance percentage will be at the
statewide average.
Foundation assets will grow by $250,000
per year.
Units and departments will participate in all
assessment and program review related activities.
Quality improvement plans and reports
100% compliance with program review
and assessment.
Number of outstanding recommendations
from the ACCJC.
3.6 Practice continuous
adherence to
accreditation
standards.
Responsibility for adherence to accreditation
standards will be assigned to appropriate units and
individuals.
The college will evaluate adherence to the
standards at least once per year.
Goal 4 Technological Relevance College of the Redwoods will develop infrastructure, adopt best practices, and conduct data analysis to utilize current and emerging technologies to support the learning environment and enhance institutional effectiveness. Objectives
Desired Outcomes
Potential Action Plans and Initiatives
Indicators (and targets)
4.1 Improve technology
infrastructure to
support all college
operations
Day-to-day operations will be
supported effectively.
Current technology will be available to
support new initiatives.
The college will update aging information
technology infrastructure.
The college will deploy ubiquitous and secure
wireless through the district.
Upgrade video conferencing capabilities
Average internet speed available on CR
computers
Average networking speed
4.2 Improve
instructional labs to
support effective
teaching and
learning
Faculty will have appropriate tools
available
Students will have access to tools
they need.
Faculty and staff will effectively utilize
technology in teaching
The college will develop an instructional lab
improvement plan to include replacement at
appropriate intervals.
The technology plan will included a software
replacement component.
Provide training throughout the year on the
appropriate use of technology and to review
emerging technologies.
The college will develop replacement and upgrade
plans for relevant technologies in CTE areas and
incorporate it into the budget cycle.
4.3 CTE programs will
have technology
relevant to their
disciplines
4.4 Improve efficiency
through technology
(see objective3.2)
Students will have access to current
and emerging technology in the
classroom environment.
Faculty, staff, and students will
experience improved effectiveness
and efficiency when using college
technology.
Employ a process and structure to increase the
efficiency and reliability of technology systems.
4.5 Improve data
gathering and utilize
statistical analysis
to support
instructional,
student service, and
administrative
decision making.
The Institutional Research
Department will have an increased
capacity to support the institution’s
data needs.
The college will effectively use data
and analysis to improve teaching and
institutional outcomes.
Improve the utility of MIS data for reporting
purposes.
The college will implement a data warehouse and
reporting system.
Adopt a set of clearly defined data elements that
are consistently reported.
Participation of employees at all sites and
centers in college dialogue.
Student and faculty satisfaction
Assessment results related to
improvements/
Current versions of ADA software.
Number of employees participating in
training on utilization of technology in the
‘classroom.’
Student satisfaction with technology
Budget plans related to technology
replacement and upgrade cycle
System outages
Number of servers with disaster recovery
system in place.
Average age of computers and servers.
Unresolved technology tickets/number of
work orders/response time.
Assessment results.
Use of Institutional Research reporting
tools.
Goal 5 Enhance Institutional Profile College of the Redwoods will engage in activities and initiatives to elevate the college’s profile in the community. Objectives
Desired Outcomes
Potential Action Plans and Initiatives
Indicators (and targets)
5.1 Enhance support
for the college
community.
5.2 Support/increase
cultural activities at
the college
Provide services and support for
students and the community.
Support community activities consistent with the
college mission.
Community survey.
The college will support cultural
activities on campus.
Support cultural activities consistent with the
college mission.
5.3 Develop
partnerships for
utilization of the
available buildings
5.4. Create an alumni
association.
Business, industry, governmental, or
non-profit entities partner with the
college to use available buildings.
Investigate public-private ventures.
Investigate opportunities for a business incubator
in partnership with Humboldt State University
Events held at the college.
Students and community members who
participate in events at the college.
Revenue generated by cultural events.
Partnerships established.
Revenue generated from partnerships.
The college will have an active alumni
association.
5.5 Increase
communications
and outreach to the
community.
5.6 Develop a
governmental
relations function.
Residents in the community will
understand the college’s mission and
challenges.
Create a website for alumni.
Conduct graduation survey.
Create a database of alumni residing within the
college’s service area.
Senior administrators and trustees will participate
in community activities.
Federal, state, and local officials will
understand how regulatory issues
affect the college.
Present regular reports to the Board of Trustees on
government relations matters.
Trustee advocacy as appropriate.
5.7 Increase public
support for the
college.
The public will vote for state and local
measures that support the college
mission.
Produce a yearly update to the community.
Conduct an economic impact study.
Create an institutional fact book.
Alumni engagement.
Targeted media coverage to the
community.
Community perceptions of the college.
Outreach event participation.
Meetings with, and literature provided to
elected and appointed officials.
Staff, faculty, students, and trustees
participating on publicly-appointed bodies.
State and local bond dollars available to
the college.
Statewide and federal education initiatives
supported by voters in the college’s
district.
EMP Structure
Strategic Goal 1: Focus on learners: developmental, career technical and transfer
education
EMP Goal Ensure Student Success
Educational Pathways
Reduce Barriers to persistence
Improve Basic Skills
Completion and graduation initiative
Faculty Professional development
Strategic Goal 2; Focus on Learners: Community Partnerships
EMP Goal Develop Programs and Services to meet Community Needs
Survey Community Needs
Expand BTC operations
Develop non credit/community ed programs
Develop Partnerships and grants
Strategic Goal 3: Fiscal and Operational Sustainability
EMP Goal Practice Continuous Quality Improvement
Culture of assessment
Improve curriculum and programs
Data Based decision-making
Improve operational efficiency
Improve Program review
Strategic Goal 4: Technological Relevance
EMP Goal Support the Learning Environment through Appropriate Technology
Develop lab repair/upgrade plan
Develop technology replacement plan
Develop software acquisition plan
Enhance distance learning
Implement data warehouse and reporting software
Strategic Goal 5: Enhance Institutional profile
EMP Goal Increase Student Participation in Campus Activities
Implement programs to serve students outside of classroom
Implement service Learning
Improve Campus life activities