Program Planning and Assessment (PPA)
for Academic Programs
Comprehensive Review, Annual Review & Action Plan
Spring 2015
The purpose of Program Planning and Assessment at Hartnell College is to obtain an honest and authentic view of a program and to
assess its strengths, opportunities, needs, and connection to the mission and goals of the college. The process is based on the premise
that each academic program reviews assessment data and uses these data to plan for improvement. The results of these annual cycles
provide data for a periodic comprehensive review that shows evidence of improvement and outlines long-range goals.
The Program Planning and Assessment process improves and increases the flow of information about student learning, student success
and student behavior at Hartnell College. The result of the process also improves institutional effectiveness.
Program/Discipline
Date Completed (must be in final
form by 3/27/15)*
Biology
3/27/15
Date Submitted to Dean
3/27/15
*Please note that you should work with your colleagues and dean to ensure that this report is completed, revised as needed, in its
final form and submitted no later than the end of March.
List of Contributors, including Title/Position
Name
Alexander Edens
Rebecca Fields
Jeffery Hughey
Nancy Wheat
Ann Wright
Title/Position
Biology Instructor
Biology Instructor
Biology Instructor
Biology Instructor
Biology Instructor
Dean’s Comments (required):
As the faculty characterized, they are a highly efficient and very effective discipline that provides quality biology education to our
students. Additionally the biology discipline faculty members are highly connected to important college-wide initiatives, as well as
being active in scientific research, etc.
The faculty identified a low number of graduates in biology over 5 years (4-14 yearly); for context 95 students were identified as
biology majors in 2014/15. If these students are transferring this is not a highly concerning pattern based on current funding, but
proposals to change funding have been broadcast, and recent reports have indicated students who complete an AA first are more
successful after transfer. Perhaps the new Biology TMC will help naturally bridge this gap.
Biology has well-established curriculum update and learning outcome assessment cycles in place; they are to the point that they are
regularly closing the loop on previously identified issues. They are College leaders in these efforts.
Typed Name of Area Dean Shannon Bliss
Date
5/26/15
VPAA Comments (required for comprehensive reviews): Biology is a key component to the success of our students in this valley. It’s one of
the foundation classes students must take before they pursue degrees in a variety of disciplines. The new TMC will add to increased
opportunities for students.
Lori Kildal
_______________________
Typed Name of VPAA
7/2015
_________
Date
This PPA report is organized in 3 sections and 11 subsections as follows:
I.
II.
III.
Comprehensive Review – a. Overall Program Effectiveness, b. Instructional Staffing, c. CTE Programs – Labor Market &
Achievement, and d. Program Goals.
Annual Review – a. Course Data & Trends, b. Teaching Modality, c. Curriculum,
d. Outcomes, and e. Previously Scheduled Activities.
Annual Action Plan – a. New Activities and b. Resource Requests.
INSTRUCTIONS
 For programs/disciplines scheduled for comprehensive review in spring
2015, please complete Sections I, II, and III.
 For programs/disciplines scheduled for annual review, please complete
Sections II and III.
I.
COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW
Please complete this section for programs/disciplines scheduled for comprehensive review in spring 2015.
Go to Section II for programs/disciplines scheduled for annual review in spring 2015.
A. OVERALL PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS
1. Describe your program in terms of its overall effectiveness over the past several years.
Please consider the questions below in describing your program/discipline/area.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
How are students/employees served by the program?
What are the unique aspects of the program?
How does the program relate to the needs of the community?
How does the program interface/collaborate with other programs on campus?
What is working well in the program/discipline?
If there is a sequence of courses in your program, what process or framework is used to ensure alignment?
How is consistency maintained between/among multiple sections of a single course?
Has the program explored alternative scheduling approaches?
Do prerequisites, co-requisites and strongly recommended skills continue to meet program needs? Are there special
considerations regarding capabilities of incoming students?
What professional activities have faculty recently (last three years) participated in?
We believe that the biology department is one of the most effective and energetic departments on campus. Our instructors and laboratory
technicians work individually and as team members with student success as our highest priority.
According to COGNOS data, approximately 95 students identified as biology majors in this academic year (2014-15). Some are incoming
freshmen; analysis of some 950 data points indicates that others have been declared majors for at least five years. The COGNOS tool became
available within the last year, and affords us the opportunity to analyze a finding like this much more deeply, e.g.,
·
•How accurate are these declarations, and are they current?
·
• How has the implementation of the STEM grid affected success and completion of major requirements?
·
•Which is the sequence and timing (i.e., consecutive semesters or not) by which students are completing their courses?
·
• Why is the number of biology degrees such a small fraction of the apparent number of majors?
It is a college-wide goal to help students complete their educational sequence in a timely fashion, and attention has been focused college-wide
on efficacious course scheduling. Whatever our analysis ultimately tells us, it is clear that we serve a significant number of students.
Service to students: Along with other STEM faculty, biology faculty are heavily invested in grant-funded activity designed to expand students’
horizons. One of us (Jeff Hughey) has directed student research that has been presented at national meetings and published in peer-reviewed
journals. Biology faculty (Ann Wright and Alicia Steinhardt) have served as activity directors for several years and helped implement programs
such as the Science Academy, Summer Bridge, and the speaker series. Alex Edens and Ann Wright have been instructors in the SCI-124
internship preparation course. Nancy Wheat and Mary Touton have taught the biology component of the Science Academy since its inception.
Nancy Wheat, Ann Wright, Mary Touton, and Isabel Ferraris have taught in the Summer Bridge program for several years.
Alex Edens and Rebecca Fields have advised the SIMA (Students Interested in Medicine Association) for several years and have survived
several conferences around the state. Alex Edens has also been Hartnell liaison to the ACCESS program for several years, helping to connect
students to an exciting and effective internship program at UCSC.
Service to other employees: Initial response to this question tends to emphasize efforts by individual faculty rather than the program as a whole.
Nancy Wheat has been part of the website development team, mastering Drupal and playing an important role in improving Hartnell’s Internet
presence. Ann Wright in particular has been heavily involved in union leadership, and she and Rebecca Fields were on the HCFA team that
negotiated the 2013-16 collective bargaining agreement. Dr. Wright has also been active with accreditation. She served on two site visit teams,
in October 2011 and March 2014. She also served as co-chair for Standard IV in the Hartnell self-evaluation of 2013. Both she and Dr. Fields
currently serve on the Accreditation Council, and Dr. Fields was recently elected as co-chair. Dr. Wright represents the MSE division on the
Academic Senate and the Curriculum Committee.
As a department, we interact with colleagues in various ways. Biology department members provided primary leadership in the STEM grid
effort (and were able to, primarily because of Joni Black’s superb consultation and record keeping regarding room usage). While we originally
thought we would generate a definitive plan that would, more or less, permanently set the schedule of STEM classes, it has turned out to be a
more dynamic and iterative process than we imagined. Enrollment data will be discussed elsewhere, but a fundamental finding was that creating
more access created more demand. This effort has also required very close consultation with the other science, math, and computer science
disciplines, regarding course sequencing as well as space.
Interaction with the community: Within the department, Joni Black has most of the continuity and leadership over the eleven years of Family
Science Day. This event was originally developed to showcase the renovated planetarium. While the event was in Merrill Hall, science faculty
and their students regularly hosted exhibits and activities. The notion of a showcase has been retained, but the focus of the showcase as
changed over time, to the Alisal campus, and to local culture, nutrition, and health. With the new building, perhaps the focus will return to the
main campus. Nonetheless, the event has become a mainstay on the community event calendar in May and, thanks primarily to Joni Black, the
biology department has had a consistent presence.
Biology faculty have played their part in participating in events bringing together K-12 and college faculty. The universal difficulty of finding
time, resources and committed (and distraction-free) leadership to bring good ideas to fruition applies here. A Salinas Valley STEM retreat is
scheduled for March 27, 2015, under the auspices of a DOE grant (CUSP). This effort is not led by biology faculty, but will include them.
By educating our students in rigorous classes, sponsoring their trips to conferences to learn about future educational opportunities, by
supporting their efforts to secure internships (including providing that experience directly, in the case of Dr. Hughey), and working
collaboratively to avoid delays in their progress due to lack of availability of classes, we are doing everything we can to help our students
succeed. We are on the threshold (literally) of a new building, with new facilities and opportunities, and possibly with new scheduling criteria
sometime in the future. We strive to bring our well-practiced analytical skills to make the transition as smooth as possible, but feel threatened
by the lack of funding for sufficient laboratory technical support. A major goal of this report is to make a successful case for funding this
critical need.
Collaboration with faculty colleagues: Biology faculty interact with other departments by teaching in their programs and serving on advisory
councils, among other contributions. Dr. Fields has taught physical anthropology for four consecutive semesters, filling an obvious need. Dr.
Wright teaches Food Microbiology in the food safety program. She has also been and on-and-off member of the advisory board for that
program, and was part of the task force that developed the proposal for the B.S. in food safety. Dr. Wright anticipates participating in the effort
to revise the curriculum for the current Food Safety program. Dr, Fields and Dr. Wright serve on the advisory council for the Respiratory Care
program; along with Dr. Edens, they regularly engage in discussion with the allied health faculty about student success in prerequisites as well
the terminal programs. Most recently, this collaboration was critical in developing an evidence-based prerequisite for anatomy (college-level
English) that also fits within the constraints of unit requirements for the nursing program.
Many of our courses are requirements or electives in additional programs, such as psychology, kinesiology, AOD (alcohol and other drugs), and
administration of justice. Some collaborations are in development, notably the STEMART lab, for which a facilities request is currently in the
final stages of the approval process. This proposal arose from a faculty inquiry group consisting of art, biology, and chemistry faculty, and
involves remodeling existing facilities to allow intensive collaboration between science and art students to enhance their understanding of both.
This concept has been implemented at major universities and has elicited broad support at Hartnell. Grant funds have been allocated for that
purpose.
Other collaborations are more aspirational at this point, but the agriculture program has expressed a need for botany and environmental science
in some of their program pathways. We recently developed a course, BIO-59, to train students as entry-level technicians in local agriculture
businesses, but such a course would also give intensive skills training to any student interested in an internship or further study in biology. This
course requires intensive technical support; now that a full-time technician is supporting the Alisal campus, it will be taught for the first time in
Spring 2016.
Due to a combination of expertise and demand, individual biology faculty have tended to sort as “lead” faculty in particular subspecialties (Dr.
Edens in physiology and molecular biology; Ms. Wheat in zoology, general biology, ecology, and environmental biology; Dr. Hughey in
botany and marine science; Dr. Fields in anatomy, physiology, human biology- and physical anthropology; Dr. Wright in microbiology,
molecular biology, and physiology). As trained biologists, all of us completed a core sequence, but then spent many years in specialized
coursework and seminars, research, and scientific careers to hone that expertise. We also recognize that the diversity of our own experience
better enables us to meet the needs of students who take biology courses. There are distinct tracks. The allied health track is most
circumscribed, with anatomy, physiology, and microbiology- but, even within that group, different levels of rigor are required. Biology majors
follow a track of three core courses (discussed elsewhere), and our other courses meet a variety of needs- including further exploration of the
core concepts investigated in the major course sequence.
Some classes are taught exclusively by expert faculty, while others are taught by more than one, typically due to demand or schedule. (Parttime faculty also tend to have specialized areas of expertise and, to maximize consistency, we match the instructor to the class.) Generally,
when faculty teach a combined lecture and laboratory, they prefer to teach all the sections, whenever possible, to preserve continuity. In any
case, we interact regularly when teaching a common class. When curriculum is updated for courses, input is sought from all faculty who teach
it. To conserve budget and technician time, multiple lab sections are aligned according to consensus among affected faculty. Often, the
technicians provide the lines of communication when faculty schedules do not permit direct communication. As for course assessments, we
have not implemented common assessment tools, but discuss strategies before and after the fact.
The above discussion helps illuminate the unique aspects of this program: biology has been described as the study of the “unity and diversity of
life.” We see that programmatically as we describe the interconnectedness of biology with other programs. (We also think that the lack of
obvious connectedness between programs, and the inability of students to apply skills from one area of study to another, is a problem that is not
unique to biology! The STEMART proposal is one way to address that.) The biology major sequence itself is different in some ways from the
math and science sequences in that one course does not obviously build on another. The areas of inquiry are related, but different. Studying
communities and organisms involves different skills than studying molecules. One course does not serve in an obvious way as a gateway to
another. We are addressing the challenges of providing opportunities to take the courses, but perhaps need to take a closer look at
recommending sequences.
Alternative scheduling: As for alternative scheduling, we have a long-established practice of offering a complete set of prenursing classes in
day and evening time slots- when resources allow. Indeed, we used to have a full-time technician who worked into the evening and on
Saturdays to support these courses. This scheduling continues, although the lack of communication is problematic at times. We offer generaleducation in both day and evening. We offer three lecture-only classes online, with BIO-42 available year-round for many years. We have
approved anatomy and anatomy/physiology for hybrid instruction through the Curriculum Committee, but have not yet offered either in that
modality. As for major classes, we have been preoccupied more with avoiding conflict with other major classes than finding alternate times
and modalities to offer classes. Since we will have one more laboratory in the new building than we currently have, we potentially have more
space for new course offerings, but must have the technical support, equipment, and supplies to realize that growth.
Biology faculty have been preoccupied with prerequisites for some time, as indicated in the last PPA. Drs. Fields and Wright took advantage of
the COGNOS research tools and conducted an extensive analysis of student success in BIO-5, the human anatomy class. This class is the
gateway class to the prenursing program, has a declining success rate, and no prerequisites. The results will be discussed elsewhere, but it was
clear from the analysis that students who had prior success in a biology, English, or math class had a greater chance of passing anatomy. In
consultation with the faculty in the nursing program, we recommended a prerequisite of ENG-1A for this course, and it was approved in
December 2014. We are considering a similar prerequisite for the major courses, and have identified this analysis as one of our goals.
Besides the implementation of prerequisites that might increase student success, we are also actively testing innovations when the classes are
actually underway.
Innovations in instruction: One aspect of our department that has contributed to its success is the use of the latest advances in teaching
technology. Some of the teaching technologies that are used in our department include:
• Companion websites for our textbooks. These are websites where students can answer review questions,
watch supplementary media presentations, and take timed quizzes that count toward the student’s grade.
• Adoption of free (open source) electronic versions of textbooks.
• Use of individual student computers for lecture and laboratory instruction. For example, in anatomy courses, the students
use computers to perform virtual dissections of human cadavers.
• Use of wireless systems for increasing student interaction and engagement in lecture. For example, one instructor uses the
TopHat system, which allows students to use their smart phones, tablets, and laptops to answer instructional questions during
the lecture. The system tabulates the results instantly and displays the student results on the classroom computer screen. The
results allow the instructor to gauge the level of student comprehension and to make any necessary adjustments in the
lecture.
• Podcasting and screencasting of lectures. The lecture videos are posted on iTunes and YouTube, and serve a resource for the
students to review the materials presented in lecture.
Professional activities: Some of the key professional activities and publications of our faculty members are listed below, by faculty member:
Dr. Jeffery R. Hughey (Publications):
(†= undergraduate student doing research)
Hughey, J.R. and S. Uwai. Madrono 62: 73–74. Noteworthy Collections– California. 2015.
Lindstrom, S.C., Gabrielson, P.W., Hughey, J.R., Macaya, E.C. and W.A. Nelson. Phycologia 54: 97–108. Sequencing of historic and
modern specimens reveals cryptic diversity in Nothogenia (Scinaiaceae, Rhodophyta). 2015.
Hughey, J.R., Gabrielson, P.W., Rohmer, L., †Tortolani, J., †Silva, M., Miller, K.A., Young, J.D., Martell, C. and †E. Ruediger.
Scientific Reports 4: 5113. Minimally destructive sampling of type specimens of Pyropia (Bangiales, Rhodophyta) recovers complete
plastid and mitochondrial genomes. 2014.
†Silva, M.Y. and J.R. Hughey. Mitochondrial DNA, doi:10.3109/19401736.2014.926524. Complete mitochondrial genome of the
holotype specimen of Wildemania schizophylla (Bangiales: Rhodophyta). Posted online on June 18, 2014.
Hughey, J.R., Paschou, P., Drineas, P., Mastropaolo, D., Lotakis, D.M., Navas, P.A., Michalodimitrakis, M., Stamatoyannopoulos, J.A.
and G. Stamatoyannopoulos. Nature Communications, doi:10.1038/ncomms2871. A European population in Minoan Bronze Age Crete.
2013.
Hughey, J.R. Madrono 60: 57–59. Noteworthy Collections– California. 2013.
†Fuller, T.L. and J.R. Hughey. Aquatic Invasions 8: 59–66. Molecular investigation of the invasive sponge Hymeniacidon sinapium (de
Laubenfels, 1930) in Elkhorn Slough, California. 2013.
Hughey, J.R. and P.W. Gabrielson. Botany 90: 191–203. Comment on “Acquiring DNA sequence data from dried archival red algae
(Florideophyceae) for the purpose of applying available names to contemporary genetic species: a critical assessment”. 2012.
Hughey, J.R., Du, M., and Li, Q., Michalodimitrakis, M. and G. Stamatoyannopoulos. Blood Cells, Molecules, and Diseases 48: 7–10.
A search for β thalassemia mutations in 4000 year old ancient DNAs of Minoan Cretans. 2012.
Dr. Jeffery R. Hughey (Professional Presentations and Workshops):
2012 UC Berkeley Jepson Herbarium, Berkeley, California
2013 DNA Workshop- Chungnam National University, Daejeon, South Korea
2013 Presentation- Chungnam National University, Daejeon, South Korea
2013 Presentation- Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangwondo, South Korea
2015 Presentation- USDA-ARS, Salinas, California
2015 Presentation- San Jose State University, San Jose, California
Dr. Nancy Wheat:
2013: Online teaching conference
2013: “An Introduction to Online Teaching” (Four week course)
2014: Drupal training
2014: Captivate training
2014: Online teaching conference
2014: “Assessments in Online Teaching” (Four week course)
2014: Technology presentation - TopHat
2015: Elumen training
2015: Student Success Conference – Drupal presentation
Dr. Rebecca Fields:
2012: Participation in FIG re: Improving use of Student Instructors
2013: Online teaching conference
2013: Reading Apprenticeship Workshop
2014: Using Technology in the Classroom Workshop
Dr. Alexander Edens:
2013: Reading Apprenticeship workshop (Hartnell)
2014: Synthetic Biology workshop (CSUMB)
2014: COGNOS software training workshop (Hartnell)
2014: Presented screencasting software at a Using Technology in the Classroom Workshop
Dr. Ann Wright (Publications):
Abstract: Gabriel Ramos 1, Isael Rubio, Ann Wright, Ryan J. Hayes, Carolee T. Bull
Sensitivity of various genotypes of Xanthomonas campestris pv. vitians to bacteriophages isolated from soil and water in lettuce
production fields. Submitted to American Phytopathological Society
Dr. Ann Wright (Workshops and other activities):
2012: Research in Dr. Carolee Bull’s lab (as volunteer); see above
2013: Reading Apprenticeship workshop(s) in Oakland and at Hartnell
2014: Synthetic Biology workshop (CSUMB)
2014: COGNOS software training workshop (Hartnell)
2014: Curriculum Institute (San Jose, through Academic Senate)
2014-5: FIG (faculty inquiry group) investigating the synthesis of science and art
B. INSTRUCTIONAL STAFFING
1. In the table below enter the number of sections offered and the number of full time and adjunct faculty in your
program/discipline by term over the past several years.
Term
Fall, 2012
Spring 2013
Summer 2013
Fall, 2013
Spring 2014
Summer 2014
Fall, 2014
Spring 2015
Full-time Faculty
No. of Active Sections
28
33
8
33
34
9
34
36
4
4
4
5
5
5
5
5
Adjunct Faculty
8
9
5
8
8
5
7
9
2. What staffing factors/challenges have influenced the effectiveness of the program?
The biology department has been an effective and successful part of Hartnell College. This is due, in large part, to the talented
instructors and laboratory technicians that contribute to our department’s success.
Since 2011, we have increased the number of full-time faculty from three to five. This has greatly increased our ability to provide stable
leadership and planning for the diverse needs of our department: major courses, allied health, and, potentially, to strengthen our field
biology courses (an identified interest at CSUMB). The breadth of training and experience of the full-time faculty serves these needs
well.
Additionally, we have benefitted from an extremely dedicated team of adjunct instructors who set student success as their highest
priority. They voluntarily attend professional development workshops and experiment with using the latest teaching technology in the
classroom. Individual part-time instructors have taken administrative roles in grant activity, co-written lab manuals, and developed
online courses. Students benefit not only from their experience but logistically. We offer classes morning, evening, and online, and our
joint efforts allow us to be at Hartnell when the students need us. Until recently, we had technical support for evening and Saturday
faculty as well.
The major staffing challenge that our department currently faces is a need to expand the weekly hours of full time laboratory technician
support for our courses. The current staff of laboratory technicians is already working beyond contract hours to ensure that the students
receive a high quality and safe laboratory experience. It will be impossible for our department to grow without expanding the work hours
of our full time laboratory technicians.
C. CTE PROGRAMS – LABOR MARKET & ACHIEVEMENT
Please complete this section if the program is Career Technical Education
(CTE). Go to subsection D if the program is not CTE.
1. Describe the demonstrated effectiveness on the program over the past several years with levels and trends of
achievement data, including degree/certificate completions (awards) and employment statistics.
[Begin response here]
2. Describe the number of, activities of, and recommendations resulting from advisory committee meetings that
have occurred over the past two years. What information and/or data were presented that required or currently
require changes to be made to your program? Please attach copies of meeting minutes over the past two years
and a list of committee members and their respective industries/areas.
[Begin response here]
3. Does labor market data and/or the need for additional education indicate that changes should be made to
your program? Does the program (continue to) meet a labor market demand and/or fulfill an important step
toward higher/additional education?
[Begin response here]
D. PROGRAM GOALS
1. List and describe program/disciplinary goals for the next comprehensive review cycle. Be sure to
highlight innovative, unique, or other especially noteworthy aspects.
In considering your program’s future goals, please review Hartnell’s vision and mission statements.
VISION STATEMENT
Hartnell College will be nationally recognized for the success of our students by developing leaders who will contribute to
the social, cultural, and economic vitality of our region and the global community.
MISSION STATEMENT
Focusing on the needs of the Salinas Valley, Hartnell College provides educational opportunities for students to reach
academic goals in an environment committed to student learning, achievement and success.
The following are our program goals for the next comprehensive review cycle:
a) Diversify course offering (to support new and growing programs within our discipline).
b) Increase utilization of technology (on-line textbooks, companion websites to the textbook, more robust WiFi access, more computer
utilization in the laboratory and classroom, , more on-line/hybrid courses)
c) With the research tools available to us, evaluate the effects of the changes in sequencing, access, prerequisites (such as adding a
English 1A as a prerequisite), and curriculum changes implemented in the last several years, adapt as indicated, and share with
colleagues
d) Commit resources to investigate the efficacy of a cohort model for biology majors.
e) Increase integration of biology with other programs (agriculture, allied health, kinesiology, etc.).
f) Ensure that the transition to the new building is as smooth as possible (staffing, equipment, and technological support).
g) Work with the new HSI grant director to continue to support opportunities for students in internships and other educational
opportunities.
h) Work to integrate and evaluate initiatives such as the Science Academy, Summer Bridge, and the STEMART lab so that they
enhance student success.
i) Investigate pathways to CSUMB and develop those that seem appropriate for our students
II.
ANNUAL REVIEW
This section must be completed for ALL academic programs, including those scheduled for a
comprehensive review in spring 2015.
A. COURSE DATA & TRENDS
1.
Please evaluate the 3-year trend of enrollment and success of courses in your program/discipline. Identify
the courses you are choosing to examine this current year in the list below. You do NOT need to evaluate
trends for each course every year.
Course Number
Biology 6L
BIO 3
BIO-42
Course Name
Physiology Laboratory
General Botany
Human Biology
Does the course have any DE (online or
hybrid) sections?
No
No
Yes
Please use the data that have been provided. Analyze trends that you observe with respect to the data for the identified courses
and answer the following questions.
ENROLLMENT
2. Review the enrollment data. Describe and analyze any patterns or anomalies that you notice. What do you
make of these patterns or anomalies? What actions should be taken to ensure continuous improvement?
Physiology Laboratory (Bio 6L): The average enrollment per section was 27 students. This average is based on enrollment in the fall and
spring semesters in academic years 2011, 2012, and 2013. There are three sections of Biology 6L that are offered each fall and each spring
semester (one morning section, one afternoon section, and one evening section). The average combined enrollment in all three Biology 6L
sections was 80 students per semester. This enrollment was very steady during the three year analysis period. No semester’s enrollment
differed by more than 4 students from the average of 80 students per semester. The reason for the constancy in enrollment is that Biology 6L is
a high-demand course, it being a requirement for many allied health programs, including registered nursing programs, most radiation
technology programs, respiratory therapist programs, and many physical therapy programs. The high demand for the course, combined with a
maximum capacity of the Biology 6L laboratory room of 28 students, ensures that essentially every section that is offered fills to its maximum
capacity of 28 students. In fact, it is not uncommon for the instructors of the morning and afternoon sections to turn away 10 – 15 students per
section who are attempting to add the course after it has filled. One section of Biology 6L is offered every summer semester, but this summer
section is not sufficient to meet the overall student demand for the course. In regards to what action should be taken, there is an obvious need to
offer at least one more section of this course per semester. At the present time, however, the laboratory room is not available for any further
sections of Biology 6L because the laboratory is also shared with Biology 27 (Microbiology), which occupies the room when Biology 6L is not
occupying it. Furthermore, even if sufficient laboratory space were to become available, the current allotment of work hours for our laboratory
technicians is not sufficient to support any extra laboratory courses. It is our recommendation that, when more laboratory space becomes
available in the new science building, that more work hours will be made available to our laboratory technicians to allow the support of another
section of Biology 6L each semester.
General Botany (BIO 3)- This class is one of three biology majors courses (BIOs 1, 2, 3). It is required for the Hartnell College AS degree in
Biology and for transfer to the CSU and UC systems. General Botany is consistently oversubscribed and in high demand. The enrollment
numbers for the course from Spring 2012 to Fall 2014 are 34, 32, 32, 31, 32, 28 (course capacity = 27). To meet the growing need for General
Botany, the department is offering two sections of BIO 3 in the fall of 2015. The extra section should ensure that all students needing the
course for graduation or transfer are able to complete their requirements.
Human Biology (BIO 42): This is a lecture-only class and a general education elective, with a contract limit of 55 students. It is transferable as
an elective to CSU and UC. BIO-42 is the first biology online class that was offered at Hartnell, and has been offered online for at least two
semesters per year for the last five years. Since Fall 2011, BIO-42 is also taught at King City and, for the last two years, has been offered as a
required course in the CSIT-in-3 program (Spring 2014 and 2015). Therefore, BIO-42 has become the most versatile course offering in the
biology program in terms of access.
King City has neither the population density nor the facilities to accommodate form than about 35 students in a class, and the CSIT-in-3 section
is restricted to the cohort. Therefore, calculating an average course enrollment would be misleading. However, the class has been found to fit
many niches at Hartnell and always finds an audience.
SUCCESS
3. Review the success data. Describe and analyze any patterns or anomalies that you notice. What do you make
of these patterns or anomalies? What actions should be taken to ensure continuous improvement?
Physiology Laboratory (Bio 6L): The average success rate was 87%. This success rate is one of the highest among all the biology courses.
One of the major factors that contributes to this course’s high success rate are the numerous and rigorous prerequisite courses that students must
pass before enrolling in Biology 6L. These prerequisite courses include chemistry and human anatomy, along with physiology lecture as a corequisite for the course. The effect of these prerequisite and co-requisite courses is that the Biology 6L students have well developed study
skills and are of the highest caliber. The actions needed for continuous improvement of the already high success rate include continued analysis
of the course’s student learning outcome data, fine tuning experimental protocols, and the use of technology to increase student access to the
course content.
General Botany (BIO 3)- The retention percentages for this course from Spring 2012 to Fall 2014 are as follows: 91%, 84%, 75%, 68%, 84%,
and 75% (average retention = 79.5%). The average retention for all biology courses offered across this same time period is identical at 79.5%
(82%, 85%, 81%, 78%, 75%, and 76%). The biology program ensures engagement through the implementation of: 1) Supplemental
instructors; 2) Companion websites for textbooks; 3) Adoption of free, open source electronic versions of textbooks (in some classes); 4) Use of
individual student computers for lecture and laboratory instruction; 5) Use of wireless systems for increasing student interaction and
engagement in lectures; 6) Podcasting and screencasting of lectures; and 7) Traditional lecture and laboratory strategies such as field trips,
research experiences, and intense immersion into the subject of study via hands-on, lecture, and textbook assisted learning.
Human Biology (BIO 42): Using the COGNOS query studio, we analyzed success data in BIO-42 dating back to 2010. BIO-42 is a 3-unit,
lecture-only class for non-majors. Students take it for a variety of (self-reported) reasons, primarily as an elective to fulfill a requirement to
complete a course of study and/or to transfer. As a science class that does not include a laboratory, it is easier to schedule this class at venues
that lack laboratory facilities, and as a transferable course it fulfills multiple needs. For a time, BIO-42 was included in the “Fast Track” ADJ
program and was offered online at an accelerated 6-week schedule during fall semesters. It is also taught in the summer, usually as a DE course.
Since 2010, BIO-42 was offered at the main campus 10 times, as DE 17 times, at King City 9 times, and at Alisal 3 times. As of 2014, BIO-42
is part of the curriculum of the CSIT-in-3 program. The 2014 offering included members of that cohort and a few other students. Because the
resources offered to the CSIT students gave them a significant advantage compared to the other students (and also because the program is
predicated on a cohort model), it was decided subsequent sections would be restricted to students in the CSIT-in-3 program. That is the case in
Spring 2015.
To calculate the success rate (using the COGNOS criteria), the numbers of students with grades of A, B, or C are compared to the enrollment at
first census. Thus, the numerator excludes students with grades of D, F, or W. The average success rates at the different venues is as follows:
Main campus: 71.0%
DE: 55.0%
King City: 64.6%
Alisal: before cohort: 76.45%
CSIT-in-3 cohort (n=1), 89.7%
The finding that the success rate is lower in DE than face-to-face courses is widely observed at Hartnell. With respect to BIO-42, it is difficult
to detect any trends. We suspect that the success rate is depleted by a failure to complete, rather than earning D’s and F’s, but this is conjecture
without analysis of individual students. We do see an average of 22 students retained in DE courses, compared to 41 in face-to-face classes on
the main campus. It should be noted, though, that enrollment in DE courses was capped at 40, rather than 55, before 2014.
The DE classes fill multiple needs: as part of the Fast Track program, as the only summer school offering of this elective for several years, and
for those who cannot attend a face-to-face class. Approximately one-third of students who succeeded in this class in the last six years took it
online.
Classes are smaller at King City (average 17 students retained), but those who persist succeed at a rate fairly comparable to the main campus
(64.6% vs 71.0% on the main campus). Since 2011, the class has been offered every fall and spring and retains at least 15 students each
semester. The class seems well established in King City.
We generally find that students who take this class are often inexperienced students who are not particularly well prepared for college-level
work. Whether DE or face-to-face, many students enroll in the belief that this is an easy class, and then abandon it when the work, and the test
grades, indicate otherwise. Their interest in the subject matter varies considerably also, and tends to correlate with performance.
As for the CSIT-in-3 cohort, we find that when students have the resources, time, and financial incentive to do well, they do. In addition, they
take all their classes together, and share common interests and motivation (not necessarily in human biology). Although more data are needed,
this finding indicates that the cohort model is very successful, and invites efforts to determine whether the forming of cohorts for major students
is desirable or feasible.
In many of the other sections of BIO-42, the students do not appear to know each other, and we encourage them to form acquaintances and
study together. Many different faculty teach BIO-42 and we all strive to help the students see the relevance of human health, heritability, and
our impact on the environment. We talk explicitly about how to study and succeed in the course. Ultimately, it is up to them.
DEGREES AND CERTIFICATES
4. Describe the demonstrated effectiveness of the program over the past several years with levels and trends of
achievement data, such as degree and certificate completions/awards.
The data that are available regarding effectiveness is the number of biology degrees conferred. For the following years the degrees awarded
are: 2009/2010- 4, 2010/2011-7, 2011/2012-4, 2012/2013-4, 2013/2014- 14. These numbers, because they are small, suggest that most of our
students are transferring to four-year institutions without graduating with AS degrees in Biology. We lack the evidence to support this
statement, but based on the increasing number of biology majors that complete our core set of classes each year, we estimate that the quantity of
students transferring without a biology degree is higher than that of the number of students graduating and transferring with the biology degree.
Both of the later are effective approaches to pursuing an undergraduate degree in biology.
B. TEACHING MODALITY
1. 1. Enter the number of Distance Education Courses, both fully online and hybrid sections, along with the number of
full-time and adjunct faculty.
Term
No. of DE/
Online
Sections
Spring 2015
Fall 2014
Summer 2014
Spring 2014
Fall 2013
Summer 2013
Spring 2013
Fall 2012
Spring 2012
2
2
1
2
2
1
2
2
2
No of
Hybrid
Sections
Fulltime
Faculty
Adjunct
Faculty
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2. Compare student
success in the DE teaching
environment with success in the face-to-face teaching environment in the same course. Are there differences?
To what do you ascribe the differences in your program?
Retention and success rates are lower for DE courses in Biology, at Hartnell and across California. In biology, at least, I believe these
differences can be attributed mainly to retention. Many students register for online courses with the belief that it will be easier. When they
discover there are weekly written assignments and proctored exams, they drop. Taking an online course involves more self-directed learning,
which is not a good fit for everyone. Several students have mentioned the difficulty in finding a way to get to proctored exams as the reason
they dropped environmental science. If we focus on success of students that remain registered in a course, the results look very different. In the
online biology classes, 85% of the students that remain registered pass the course compared to 79% for the face-to-face courses in biology. It
appears that if we can get them to stick with the course, they will do well.
.
3. Describe the process to change and improve student success in DE courses/sections in your program.
Taking an online course involves more self-directed learning, which is not a good fit for everyone. Frequent contact with the students to remind
them of due dates and upcoming exams can help the students stay on task. Knowing that there is a human instructor who cares about their
progress in class can help them stay focused. The more we can do to make the class feel like a community, the more likely the students are to
stay engaged.
4. Compare student retention in the DE teaching environment with retention in the face-to-face teaching
environment in the same course. Are there differences? To what do you ascribe the differences in your program?
See (2), above.
5. Describe the process to change and improve student retention in DE courses/sections in your program.
See (2), above.
6. Describe any other relevant factors regarding diverse teaching modalities and environments, such as specific
locations.
The most difficult part of online teaching is assessment of students. Proctored exams can eliminate the problem of student cheating, especially
with password-protected exams, but at the cost of flexibility to the students. Hartnell does not have a good system in place for proctoring
exams. The tutorial center does a great job of proctoring exams when they are open, but many students take online classes because of limited
availability during business hours. In Fall 2014, the tutorial center started offering some evening and Saturday hours. This has helped the
situation for local students. ProctorU offers an online option that would allow the students to take a proctored exam any time, 24/7. We
investigated the possibility of using this service here, but the DE committee is blocking progress due to the fees associated with the service.
Having a simple option for taking exams would undoubtedly help to increase student retention, and success in online classes.
One likely cause of the high drop rate is that many students are unprepared for so much written work. If students were adequately prepared for
college with solid writing and math skills, we would certainly see an increase in retention and success in DE courses in biology, at Hartnell, and
across the state.
C. CURRICULUM
Complete the following tables pertaining to courses scheduled for review.
Courses scheduled
for review during AY
2014-15 as
previously specified
Faculty member(s)
responsible for
coordinating
(a) Was the course
reviewed and (b)
taken through the
curriculum process?
Date of approval
(or anticipated
approval) by
Curriculum
Committee
Bio 1
Bio 10
Bio 18
Bio 30
Bio 48L
Alex Edens
Jeffery Hughey
Rebecca Fields
Jeffery Hughey
Nancy Wheat
Yes, Yes
Yes, Yes
Yes,
Yes, Yes
Yes
10/16/14
2/19/15
In progress
2/19/15
In progress
Courses scheduled for
review during AY 201516
Bio 2
Bio 11
Bio 20
Bio 42
Faculty member(s)
responsible for
coordinating
Nancy Wheat
Alex Edens
Nancy Wheat
Alex Edens
Target semester and
year—Fa 2015 or Sp
2016
Sp 2016
Fa 2015
Sp 2016
Sp 2016
D. OUTCOMES
Use your Program Outcome Maps to assist you in this subsection. As you plan your course assessments, keep the higher level
program outcome in mind. While course level assessment serves the purpose of examining the teaching and learning for that
particular course, it also provides the data that will be viewed collectively for assessment of the associated program level
outcomes.
PROGRAM LEVEL OUTCOMES
1. Please complete the following tables.
List Program level outcome(s) scheduled for
assessment as previously specified
What changes have occurred in the
program/discipline as a result of dialogue?
PLO-1 Apply the scientific method to problem
A DLA on the scientific method was
solving, devising a research plan, and evaluation of developed and made available to students.
data and findings.
Laboratory exercises were revised to give
students more guidance and practice in
analyzing and explaining results.
Was the Program Outcome
Assessment Summary completed?
Yes, in 2010 and 2012 (in two
different courses). This will be
analyzed again in the academic year
2015-6.
PLO-2 Describe the structure and function of
biological molecules, cells and organelles, and
tissues and organ systems of plants and animals.
Instructors made concerted efforts to relate Yes, in 2010 and 2012. This will be
abstract concepts of structure and function to analyzed again in Spring 2015.
examples that students could readily relate to.
Laboratory exercises were revised to
emphasize this connection- in the
descriptions, and in the questions that the
students were expected to answer.
PLO-3 Apply the principles of heredity at the
molecular, cellular, and organismal levels.
No changes were deemed necessary, but a
Yes, in 2010. This will be analyzed
DLA was nonetheless developed and made again in the academic year 2015-6.
available to students on the Hartnell website
(although this is a bit tenuous with the
migration to Drupal)
PLO-4 Explain the mechanism and evidence of
evolution through natural selection.
Based on previous results, no changes were A summary was completed in
deemed necessary.
2012.The analysis will be
completed again in the 2015-6
academic year.
PLO-5: Apply taxonomic principles to the
classification of organisms.
Based on previous results, no changes were A summary was completed in 2013.
deemed necessary
PLO-6: Describe the flow of energy within
organisms and within ecosystems.
Students’ grasp of the topic was barely
adequate (in BIO-1). The instructor
developed laboratory exercises designed to
make the concepts of respiration and
photosynthesis more tangible. A DLA was
developed and posted as well.
List Program level outcome(s) scheduled for assessment in AY 15-16
PLO-1
PLO-3
PLO-4
Analysis was conducted in 2010,
and is scheduled to be repeated in
spring 2015.
Have your course level SLOs needed for this program
level outcome been assessed or scheduled for
assessment?
Yes
Yes
Yes
2. Describe how program level outcomes were specifically addressed by the program/discipline during the past year.
For example, were data gathered at the course level? Was there review and analysis of the data? How did the discipline faculty
engage in discussion? Were any interventions conducted? Are there any plans to make changes to certificate/degree programs or
improvements in teaching and student learning?
Biology faculty discuss these outcomes constantly, but not explicitly as “PLO-1, PLO-3,” or whichever outcome. In the PPA of last year, we
addressed uncertainty about whether PLO assessment was restricted to major courses (the “program”) or all of our courses. The biology
discipline includes the major sequence, the allied health preparatory courses, and the general education courses (many of which may be nascent
components of an environmental science program, and/or are prerequisites or electives in other programs). Although we have confined our PLO
analysis to major courses, we have mapped all of the SLOs in all of the courses to program-level outcomes. This reflects our commitment to the
idea that biology is a diverse discipline: our course offerings serve multiple needs.
The PLOs reflect concepts that are fundamental to all biology courses, and we discuss them as such. For example, when we see an indication
that students poorly understand the scientific method, we expand the discussion to other classes. Do we see this similar deficiency elsewhere?
Has anyone tried, or read about, something that they consider effective? Can we adapt that successful method to our own classes? It is fair to
say that this type of discussion predated PLO analysis, but it is documented in a way that was not seen previously.
Last year, in fall 2013, we assessed PLO-5, about taxonomy and classification. Although this is fundamental to the study of biology, it is
studied more explicitly in some classes than others. Zoology and botany students demonstrated mastery of this concept, while microbiology
students (in BIO-27, an allied-health preparatory course) were less successful.
With one exception (a course that is being taught this semester, but was last offered in Spring 2012), all of the SLOs for all of the classes have
been assessed. The content of this class, genetics BIO-12, is covered in different ways in other classes: one of them, BIO-1, is for biology
majors, and the other, if offered to students in the pre-allied health track. BIO-1 and BIO-27 have prerequisites, but BIO-12 does not. However,
BIO-12 has a semester-long focus on genetics, while genetics is one topic among several in the other classes. It will be interesting to compare
their success.
3. Describe how Core Competencies (Communication Skills, Information Skills, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, Global
Awareness, Aesthetic Appreciation, Personal Growth and Responsibility) were specifically addressed by the
program/discipline during the past year. For example, were data gathered at the course level? Was there review and
analysis of the data? How did the discipline faculty engage in discussion? Were any interventions conducted? Are there
any plans to make changes to courses or improvements in teaching and student learning?
We have mapped SLOs for all of our courses to Core Competencies. The SLOs that mapped to PLO 5 also map to the core competency
concerning critical thinking. We did not discuss this result separately, but conclude that if student performance exceeds our program level
outcome, it also meets the core competency. We will apply the same assumptions to the results from analysis of PLO-2 and PLO-6 later this
semester. These PLOs map to critical thinking and communication.
COURSE LEVEL STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES
4. Please complete the following tables.
List courses scheduled for SLO assessment as
previously specified
BIO 1
BIO 2
BIO 3
BIO 5
BIO 6
BIO 6L
BIO 10
BIO 11
BIO 13
BIO 18
BIO 27
BIO 30
BIO 42
BIO 47
BIO 48
BIO 48L
List courses scheduled for SLO assessment in
AY 2015-16
BIO 1
BIO 3
BIO 6
BIO 6L
BIO 10
BIO 11
BIO 12
BIO 13
In what term was the course
assessed?
Was the Course Assessment
Summary Report completed?
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013 (Spring 2014 SLO2) Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Spring 2014
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Spring 2014
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Fall 2013
Yes
Faculty member(s) responsible
for coordinating
Alexander Edens
Jeff Hughey
Rebecca Fields
Alexander Edens
Nancy Wheat
Ann Wright
Ann Wright
Jeff Hughey
Target semester and year—Fa
2015 or Sp 2016
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Spring 2015
Fall 2015
Spring 2015
Fall 2015
Spring 2015
Fall 2015
BIO 18
BIO 20
BIO 27
BIO 30
BIO 47
BIO 48L
Rebecca Fields
Jeff Hughey
Ann Wright
Jeff Hughey
Nancy Wheat
Nancy Wheat
Spring 2016
Fall 2015
Spring 2016
Spring 2016
Spring 2015
Fall 2015
5. Describe course level assessments results and how they will influence your plans moving forward.
Course level assessment results vary considerably between student learning outcomes and classes. Examination of the biology major’s core
courses (BIOs 1, 2, 3) shows the following:
Biology 1 (Fundamental Biological Sciences)
SLO1- 57% answered 6-8 parts correctly, 33% answered 4-5 parts correctly, 10% answered fewer than 4 parts correctly
SLO2- 67% answered 75% or more correctly, 19% answered 50-74% correctly, 14% with less than 50% correctly
SLO3- 15% answered 75% or more correctly, 57% answered 50-74% correctly, 28% answered less than 50% correctly
SLO4- 57% answered 75% or more correctly, 38% answered 50-74% correctly, 5% answered less than 50% correctly
SLO5- 57% answered 75% or more correctly, 33% answered 50-74% correctly, 10% answered less than 50% correctly
SLO6- 50% answered 75% or more correctly, 10% answered 50-74% correctly, 40% answered less than 50% correctly
Biology 2 (General Zoology)
SLO1- 93% was the average score on the 6 representative assessment questions
SLO2- 91% was the average score on the 5 representative assessment questions
SLO3- 82% was the average score on the 7 representative assessment questions
SLO4- 80% was the average score on the 8 representative assessment questions
Biology 3 (General Botany)
SLO1- 51% was the average score for students matching characters to the major plant phyla (78%) and illustrating a life history
accurately were 0% (13 students), 29% (1 student), 43% (3 students), 71% (1 student), 86% (2 students), 100% (1 student)
SLO2- 64% was the average score on the 5 representative assessment questions
SLO3- 54% was the average score on the 5 representative assessment questions
SLO4- 47.5% was the average score on the 2 representative assessment questions
The results suggest that students in BIO 1 and BIO 3 are not adequately meeting the course level outcomes. Students taking BIO 2 however,
appear to be performing well above average. Since the same students are taking all three of these classes, one would predict that the results
would be similar between classes, assuming the assessment questions are equal in difficulty between courses. Thus, the variation observed
above may be due to assessment differences between the classes. The other possibility is that this variation is due to students taking BIOs 1 and
3 first, and BIO 2 later in the biology major series. The difference being therefore explained by the academic level of the student. As we move
forward as a department, we’ll be discussing and investigating assessment criteria between the three major’s classes to determine the reason for
the failure of the majority of the students to meet basic course level outcomes in BIOs 1 and 3.
6. Describe assessment activities that need to be strengthened or improved. What are the challenges to achieving
these improvements?
The main assessment method for biology courses is through embedded examination questions. On tests, standardized questions for the major
biology classes, general education, and allied health science courses address the specific student learning outcomes. We could improve
assessment techniques possibly by:
• Continuing to revise the current SLOs, no major challenges are identifiable to meet this improvement
• Continuing to revise exam questions that specifically address each course SLO, no major challenges are identifiable to meet this
improvement
• Implementing quizzes that are administered throughout the duration of the semester. These may be able to capture a more accurate
picture of the student’s understanding of the material and improvement during the semester.The challenges of implementing this are
its application by all instructors teaching different sections of the same biology class.
E. PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED ACTIVITIES
This subsection focuses on activities that were previously scheduled. An activity can address many different aspects of your
program/discipline, and ultimately is undertaken to improve or enhance your program/discipline, and keep it current.
Activity scheduled
What success has been
achieved to date on this
activity?
1. Secure sufficient technical
None
support (ideally two FT biology
12-month technicians in all) to
support our current capacity and
allow for expansion into our
new facilities
2. Podcasts of lectures for
instructors who opt for it.
What challenges existed or
continue to exist?
Will activity
continue into AY
15-16?
Salary and benefits for an yes
additional technician. Please
see attached document re:
justification for additional
lab support.
Last year, Dr. Edens checked Lack of funding to pay for Yes.
with Megan Blevins in the
equipment and training of
FCR to see if equipment and faculty to record their own
software were available for this lectures. There is a
to be done. Some equipment is possibility that the
available but can only be used equipment and software can
in the recording studio in the be purchased with existing
FRC. The Biology department grant funds. A proposal will
prefers to be able to produce be submitted in this
these podcasts live in the
academic year.
classroom to make the screen
cast an exact recording of the
lecture material, exactly as it
was presented to the students.
Will activity
continue into AY
16-17?*
Yes, until the problem
has been solved.
No if project has been
completed.
3. Evaluation of the use of open Several sources for open book Lack of separate one
source textbooks for Bio-5 and texts were searched for the
semester texts for anatomy
Bio-6
availability of texts for a one atone and physiology alone.
semester anatomy course and a All texts located were for a
one semester physiology
two semester course with
course. No suitable texts are anatomy and physiology
currently available, thus none included together. The texts
were selected for use.
are not always supported
**It should be noted that Dr. with additional free
Edens’, although not assigned resources materials for
this task, independently did
instructors and students.
research for Bio-1 texts and
adopted one which he used this
semester. Please refer to
section III-1, below, for this
discussion.
Not at this time.
No
Periodic checks will
be made to see if more
appropriate offerings
become available.
4. Take an active role in
We previously said time would Time, personnel, as well as Yes, with completion No, if project has been
oversight of construction of the be required for possible
timely and accurate
upon successful
completed.
new building. This will include formation of a subcommittee information as to what needs occupation of the
inventory, planning for purchase and any needed clerical
to be done. Development of building.
of new equipment and disposal support. To date no such
some kind of orderly staging
of old, etc.
committee has been designated. of the activities that need to
This is dependent on the
be undertaken.
anticipated date for occupation
which has changed. The
anticipated date at present is
Spring 2016 so efforts for this
year will be intensified.
5. Development new
experiments and test, purchase
new reagents to modernize
microbiology and cell biology
labs.
New PCR kits have been
Funds to buy reagents,
Yes
sourced and used in the lab and possible grant funds to pay
faculty and staff to develop
are working well. PCR
Simulation and BLAST
new experimental protocols.
analysis have also been added
as new experiments. Much of
the work is directed toward
doing rapid identification. All
of these techniques supplement
the classical biochemical
analysis that is part of the
curriculum..
No, if project has been
completed.
6. Conduct research on patterns Dr. Edens and Dr. Wright
Data analysis requires time Yes
of retention and success in
completed COGNOS training and there continue to be new
biology classes.
in Summer of 2014 and are
developments to the
prepared to help any faculty
software. This requires
members to use this tool. Data continued faculty training.
from COGNOS were used to
analyze student success in Bio5 with respect to the student’s
prior completion of certain
biology math and English
courses. The results of this
study resulted in demonstrating
the need for a prerequisite. To
keep the number of hours
required for prenuring at a
minimum, Eng-1A was
selected as the prerequisite
This change was taken through
the curriculum process. The
first class of anatomy for which
this prerequisite goes into
effect is Fall 2015. For the full
report please see the attached
document re: Analysis of
Prerequisite for BIO-5.
COGNOS data were utilized by
Dr. Wright for analysis of BIO42 in the current report (see
section II-3, above).
Expected to be
ongoing.
7. Development of DLA for
biological macromolecules
Last year, Dr. Edens contacted Lack of funding.
the outside consultant who has
previously developed such
materials for Biology in the
past. The consultant is
available and has agreed to do
the work when funding
becomes available.
Yes
No if project has been
completed.
* For each activity that will continue into AY 2016-17 and that requires resources, submit a separate resource request in Section III.
1. Evaluate the success of each activity scheduled, including activities completed and those in progress. What
measurable outcomes were achieved? Did the activities and subsequent dialogue lead to significant change in student
learning or program success?
Activity 1 (Securing sufficient technical support): This is not completed. The two 10 month, 20 hours per week hiring has not satisfied
the needs of the biology department. In fact, due to changes made in the allocation of these hires between biology and chemistry, the amount of
hours to support biology has become less and less. However, the demand for more offerings in the biology majors classes is still being made.
These courses are especially intensive in lab prep and clean up. Moreover, with the move to our new building planned for Spring 2016, it is not
at all clear with the present staffing arrangement, how laboratories can be prepped and the move occur simultaneously when the same personnel
will be required for both activities.
In addition, as many faculty predicted, the creation of these types of positions do not attract highly skilled people who would intend to
stay in the job. The turnover rate in these personnel in the short amount of time this plan has been in place is evidence of this. In the meantime
our only full time lab person is in a constant mode of retraining personnel while ensuring every prep is ready for the instructor when their lab
convenes.
The needs for technical support have not changed. Attached to this report is the analysis that legitimizes our need. If we add more lab
courses the need only becomes worse.
Activity 2 (Podcasting of lectures for instructors who opt for it): This activity has not yet been completed. The software and hardware
have not yet been purchased. Inquiries have recently been made with the IT department and with sources of grant money to make these
purchases.
Activity 3 (Evaluation of open source textbooks for Bio-5 and Bio-6): Several sources for open sour texts were searched for availability
of texts for a one semester anatomy course and a one semester physiology course. Many of the sites contain texts for K1-K12 only. The sites
that had textbooks for anatomy and physiology only contained texts in which the subjects were combined and intended for use with a course
offered over two semesters. Such a text does not adapt well to the format used for the independent, one semester anatomy and physiology
courses offered at Hartnell.
Another problem is lack of instructor resources similar to those now supplied from the publishers of commercial texts. The Openstax
site now claims to have such materials available with are truly free. At first if you sought such resources they were available from another
company called “Learning Tree” whose sales people hound you endlessly to buy their materials. Not a lot is gained if the student gets the text
free but has to buy additional resources for online study guides, practice homework and quizzes. At this time I do not consider the combined
A&P texts a good fit for our students the way our courses are set up. No further is planned at this time. This will probably be reassessed in a
few years when development of more suitable texts may be available. Project completed Fall 4014.
Activity 4 (Active role in oversight of new building is adequately described in the table above and will not be reiterated here. This is
true for Activity 5 listed in the table.
Activity 6 (Research on patterns of student retention and success in biology classes): As mentioned above in the table the use of
COGNOS and the data it can generate have been put to use in the preparation of this document. The most impactful use of the data was in the
prerequisite analysis for Bio-5 conducted by Dr. Fields and Dr. Wright. This data clearly indicated that students who successfully completed
any biology course or those who successfully completed an English course prior to taking BIO-5 had a significantly higher success rate. This
lead to a change from an advisory to take a Biology class prior to taking Bio-5 to requiring successful completion of ENG-1A prior to taking
BIO-5. This change was taken through the curriculum process and approved. The complete report on this study is attached to this document.
At this time the first class to have to have the prerequisite will not take BIO-5 until Fall 2015, therefore no data will be available to evaluate the
impact on success and retention until that class completes the course. Plans are to do another statistical analysis on the Fall 2015 class when
data become available in Spring 2016. (Please see new activities section for a description of the study to be done).
Activity 7 (Development of the biological macromolecule DLA) has not been completed. The funding has not yet become available to
pay for this activity
III.
ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
This section must be completed for ALL academic programs, whether scheduled for annual or
comprehensive review in spring 2015.
A. NEW ACTIVITIES
This subsection addresses new activities for, and continuing new activities into, AY 2015-16. An activity can address many
different aspects of your program/discipline, and ultimately is undertaken to improve, enhance, and or keep your program/discipline
area current. A new activity may or may not require additional resources. Activities can include but are not limited to:
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
NEW CURRICULUM
FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAM OR SERVICE
GRANT DEVELOPMENT AND PROPOSALS
FACULTY AND STAFF TRAINING
MARKETING/OUTREACH
ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT
STUDENT SERVICES
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
SUPPORT OPERATIONS
FACILITIES
1. List information concerning new projects or activities planned. The first activity listed should be the most important; the
second activity listed the second most important, etc. Please keep in mind that resources needed, if funded, would not be
approved until spring 2016 and provided until FY 2016-17. Ongoing activities involving resources that will no longer be
available from grant funds starting FY 2016-17 must be planned for appropriately.
NOTE: These activities are sufficiently different in scope and investment that it is difficult to prioritize them. Numbers 1 and 2 are top priority, but we
consider the others to be of equal priority. Note that many require minimal resources besides time and thought.
Activity
Strategic
Plan
Goal(s)
No. &
Letter
(e.g., 5A)*
Related
Courses, SLOs,
PLOs,
or goals
Desired
Outcome(s)
Resources
Needed
1.Hire a full-time
laboratory technician
2A, 2B, 4A,
4B, 4C
All of them
To see an
institutional
commitment to
laboratory growth
that supports
successful
relocation to a new
building, support
of laboratory
classes, and
enrollment
management that
considers
equipment and
supply needs.
Hiring
committee
2.Equip the new building
2A, 2B, 4B,
4C, 4D, 5A
All of them
To meet student
needs and realize
the objectives of
building a new
building
Many (described
below)
Person
Responsible
Estimated
Date of
Completion
(can be more than
one year in length)
Biology faculty Hiring should be
and management ASAP,
employment
ongoing
Biology faculty
and staff
This will continue
for several years.
We have included
items we need now
Comments
“Full time” means
12-month, 40
hours/week. This
position should be
funded by the
institution, not be
contingent on grant
funding.
Additional funding
sources include
schedule 2 Measure
H finds and grant
funds. We will use
these funds for this
purpose wherever
appropriate.
3. Adopt free on-line
2A, 2B, 5A
textbook for Bio 1.
Research effectiveness by
a survey of student
satisfaction of free on-line
textbook versus
traditional paper and glue
textbook.
All of them
Determine (a) the None.
% of students that
will acquire a
commercial
textbook in a
science course.
(b) The % of the
total course content
that the students
feel was dependent
on their reading the
textbook in their
science courses
(c) Satisfaction with
the Bio 1 free online textbook.
4.
1, 2A, 2B, 3B,
Develop ability to make and 4C
screencasts of lectures for
instructors who opt for it.
BIO 1, BIO 11, BIO Improved student
6L, BIO 27
success by
providing an
additional study
resource for
students
Alex Edens
Funding to pay for Alex Edens
podcasting
software,
equipment, and
training of faculty
to record and
upload their own
lectures.
The free on-line
None.
textbook was
adopted for Bio 1 in
the spring 2015
semester. The
survey of the
students regarding
the textbook will be
done at the end of
the spring 2015
semester. The
survey results will
be analyzed in the
spring 2015
semester.
Ongoing from
2014-5
The FRC currently has
a recording studio
equipped with
software,
microphones, and
cameras for instructors
to make screencasts of
their lectures. The
request we are making
in this report is for
installing
screencasting software
on six smart room
computer and for six
wireless microphones
and six web cameras to
be issued to any
instructors who wish
to screencast their
lectures as they
present them to their
students in the lecture
hall.
5. Conduct research on
patterns of student
retention and success in
biology classes
1A, 2A, 2B, 5A
All of them
That we consciously We can use
devote time and
research tools like
effort to analyzing COGNOS that are
the effects of our
already up and
efforts over the last running. Alex and
several years, and Ann have been
use them to inform trained, and
new and ongoing Rebecca and Ann
activities.
have already
conducted
research with this
tool
Alex and Ann will
coordinate, but all
will participate as
they see a need.
6. Submit Transfer Model
Curriculum for Biology
1A
BIOs 1, 2, 3
AS-T in Biology None
Biology Faculty Fall 2015
Interested faculty Supplies for lab
will develop and
use lab activities in
the lab
Ann Wright
Spring 2016 for
Grant funds have been
preliminary results invested to start the
lab, and will be
requested to continue
to support certain
startup activities
Students will
Supplies for lab
experience modern
rapid-identification
techniques for
analyzing microbes
Ann Wright
Spring 2016 for
These techniques
preliminary results could be applied to
other classes as well.
7.Develop and utilize the 2A, 2B, 4B, 5A All of them
STEMART lab
8.Develop molecular
biology techniques for
microbiology
2A, 2B, 5A
9. Investigate a cohort 1A, 2A, 2B, 5A
model for STEM majors
(across disciplines)
BIO-27
Potentially, this
will affect all STEM
disciplines
* See Appendix A for a list of the 11 goals in the college’s Strategic Plan.
Ongoing. We
completed one
analysis in Fall
2014. We see the
value in this; it
resulted in a
prerequisite change
already. This will be
useful for cohort
analysis.
None
This item is used to describe how the new activity, or continuing new activity, will support the program/discipline.
Action Plan 1: Secure a second full-time biology technician.
Consider:
• Faculty
• Other staffing
• Facilities
• Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000),
• Software
• Hardware
• Outside services
• Training
• Travel
• Library materials
• Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
Pursuant to the job description, the technician will support instruction by setting up and dismantling lab exercises in an efficient manner;
assist faculty with planning, coordinating, and supplying labs; support special activities like the science academy, summer bridge, and
student research; support the institution by contributing to planning and safe use of equipment and facilities. In particular, the technicians
will play a vital role in providing oversight, along with the faculty, of the construction and outfitting of the new building.
b) Describe how this activity supports any of the following:
1) Core Competency- critical thinking, communication skills, global awareness
2) Program level Outcome-all of them (they have a laboratory component)
3) Course level Outcome- lots of them
4) Program/Discipline Goal-all of them
5) Strategic Priority Goal- student access, student success, effective utilization of resources, innovation,
partnerships
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
YES
NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
We hope that completion of the hire will be of short duration, but that we will reap the benefits of this additional expertise for a long time
to come.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
The job description for this position clearly indicates that planning, coordination, and development of activities and procedures is part of
the job. We expect to see more seamless support of lab instruction with an adequate number of people to do it. We first identified the need
for a second technician in 2005. We have been able to grow our program substantially since then, and the additional technical support has
been critical to that growth. This is especially important when planning evening (and possibly weekend) labs. Not only have more labs been
prepped, but the technicians’ role in planning of facility and resource allocation has been essential.
With permanent people in place we can do more assessment and refinement of our activities, and conduct better research for ordering new
equipment and supplies. Since the full time technicians are better placed to monitor resources, we expect that we will use supplies more
efficiently and economically.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
If we don’t have adequate support, planning and management of supplies and equipment are more difficult. That will be more important
than ever in the coming years as we leave our “home” of some 40 years and move to a new facility.
In any case, having a clear indication of the institution’s support of STEM, or lack of it, will help us be realistic in our planning for the
future.
Action Plan 2: Equip the new building
Consider:
 Faculty
 Other staffing
 Facilities
 Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000)
 Software
 Hardware
 Outside services
 Training
 Travel
 Library materials
 Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
1. Equip the new building.
The science department is moving to a new building, tentatively in time for the Spring 2016 semester. The biology department will have one
additional laboratory that must be equipped. Additionally, although we are moving many items to the new facility, we must replace many
worn-out or antiquated items. Some of the latter must be miniaturized, made safer, supported by technology, or otherwise adapted to the new
space. For example, we will no longer have warm and cold rooms for storage and incubation, so new refrigerators and incubators must be
purchased to offset that change.
As mentioned above, additional funding sources may be available for many of these purchases, and we must work expeditiously to be sure the
decisions and purchases are made in a timely fashion. Some purchases can be postponed but we must be ready to support lab classes at the
beginning of the semester.
b) Describe how this activity supports all of the following that apply:
1) Core Competency (Communication Skills, Information Skills, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, Global Awareness,
Aesthetic Appreciation, Personal Growth and Responsibility)- all
2) Program level Outcome (list applicable program outcome)-all
3) Course level Outcome (list applicable course level outcome)-all
4) Program/Discipline Goal (list applicable program/discipline goal)-all
5) Strategic Plan Goal (list applicable strategic plan goal)-all
This is a profound change that affects all Hartnell students, since all must take science classes to graduate. It will affect all of the core
competencies and all of the SLOs and PLOs for all of the science classes. It can be argued that the activities in this building affect, in one
way or another, all of the strategic plans as well.
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
☒ YES !!!
☐ NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
A resource list is attached for items that are needed to ensure that the labs have the basic equipment. Time will be of the essence. Having
trained technical personnel will greatly facilitate the planning and execution of this change.
As indicated elsewhere, we will schedule purchases and activities over time to minimize disruption and make sure needs are met.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
This activity is surely integrated with all of the other activities that are described in this plan. If it goes well, we will make progress in our
efforts to enhance teaching and learning. If we do not have the personnel, planning, and financial resources to do this properly, we will
lose time, efficacy, and morale.
We will measure success as we always do, through evaluation of our courses. We will determine if the building is functional and safe
through experience. Surveys would likely be a good tool to measure the success of the transition.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
Time for thoughtful planning, timely scheduling and execution of purchases and installation of equipment, fatigue!
Activity 3: Evaluation of open resource texts for BIO-1 and other classes.
This item is used to describe how the new activity, or continuing new activity, will support the program/discipline.
Consider:
• Faculty
• Other staffing
• Facilities
• Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000),
• Software
• Hardware
• Outside services
• Training
• Travel
• Library materials
• Science laboratory materials
Activity 4: Evaluation of open-source textbooks
a)Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
Evaluation of open resource texts for BIO-1. This activity is an ongoing analysis of identification of open resource texts covering the
subjects of BIO-1, Fundamental Biological Concepts. There are many sources to review. The first level of review will be to identify those
resources with texts available for these two subjects. The second level of review will involve evaluating all of the texts identified to select
perhaps the top 5 in each area for in depth evaluation as the text for the subject. Final review will involve side by side comparison of these
selected texts with the texts now being used to teach these courses to determine completeness of coverage, depth of coverage, and any
availability of support materials, such as online material to accompany the text for the student and the instructor.
Dr. Alex Edens is in the latter stages of this activity for BIO-1. We expect to pilot open-source materials in other classes as early as next
year.
Follow-on activity would involve adoption of the text and its use in an upcoming semester. Performance with the new text would be
evaluated using SLO data from before adoption of the open resource text and post adoption.
Besides surveying students in our classes, we are interested in learning about experiences of students and faculty in other disciplines.
b)Describe how this activity supports any of the following:
1)Core Competency
2)Program level Outcome
3)Course level Outcome
4)Program/Discipline Goal
5)Strategic Priority Goal
This activity supports course level outcomes if it can be shown to improve student success rates for these courses, especially anatomy.
This activity supports Hartnell College strategic goals 1A, 2A and 2B. These goals are designed to improve student access to higher
education and to provide means for students to achieve success in their academic endeavors.
Ensuring that every student has the textbook available to them on the first day of class, at no cost, provides every student with an equal
opportunity to be successful in these courses.
c)Does this activity span multiple academic years?
Yes
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
Only in the sense that, as with any textbook, we want to work with it for sufficient time to determine its effectiveness.
d)What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
Measureable outcomes will include evidence of increased retention in the class, higher success rates in the class and improvements in the
statistics for SLOs for these classes.
e)What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
Possible barriers include lack of an adequate free resources to replace currently used publisher materials, and ease of the student in gaining
access to the source.
4. Activity 4: Screencasting
This item is used to describe how the new activity, or continuing new activity, will support the program/discipline.
Consider:
• Faculty
• Other staffing
• Facilities
• Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000),
• Software
• Hardware
• Outside services
• Training
• Travel
• Library materials
• Science laboratory materials
a)Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
Develop ability to make screencasts of lectures for instructors who opt for it.
A screencast is a digital recording of an instructor’s lecture. It includes a recording of Power Point or other digital presentation materials
exactly as they appear on the computer screen during the lecture, a recording of the instructor’s voice, and a video image of the instructor
delivering the lecture. The image of the instructor is often a smaller picture in picture (PIP) on the side of the larger Power Point image.
The screencast recording of the lecture is made available to the students on-line. The students use the screencast as a study resource.
Students have indicated that having a recording of the lecture available offers many advantages. They can stop the lecture to take thorough
notes on each section. They can replay sections that they find confusing. They can use the recording as a review and study resource before
exams.
We propose installing Camtasia screencasting software on six teaching station computers in the N building. These are the computers in
room N1, N4, N6, N12, N22, an N29. We also propose that the department purchase six wireless microphones (to record the instructor’s
voice) and six web cameras (small video cameras to record the instructor’s image) which can be stationed in the classroom or in the biology
stockroom.
Any instructors wishing to screencast their lecture would put on the wireless microphone, turn on the web camera, and activate the
Camtasia program while lecturing.
We are also proposing training in the use of the Camtasia software and training on how to post the recording on-line.
b) Describe how this activity supports any of the following:
1)Core Competency
2)Program level Outcome
3)Course level Outcome
4)Program/Discipline Goal
5)Strategic Priority Goal
This proposal is intended to utilize technology to increase student success. It most directly addresess two parts of the Information Skills Core
Competency: (a) Apply information to accomplish a task, and (b) Display technical competency by using appropriate software, electronic
submission, and the internet.
c)Does this activity span multiple academic years?
NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
No. In theory, the software and equipment purchases can be accomplished within one academic year. The use of the screencasting software
would extend indefinitely.
This assumes that the activity actually is completed; this was rolled over from last year.
d)What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
The measurable outcome would be an increase in student success. This may be measured by an increase in student performance on exams
and on student learning outcomes.
e)What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
One barrier is obtaining funds for the software, microphones, and web cameras. Another barrier is scheduling the time with the faculty for
training on their use, and also allotting time to upload the recordings to the internet.
Action Plan 5: Conduct research on patterns of student retention and success in biology classes
Consider:
• Faculty
• Other staffing
• Facilities
• Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000),
• Software
• Hardware
• Outside services
• Training
• Travel
• Library materials
• Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
This activity informs everything we do. We have devoted a great deal of effort to make the STEM class schedule accessible. How well is that
working? How has this changed the way the students take their classes from one semester to the next? Are we meeting demand?
Last year, we described programs that emphasized online instruction and supplemental materials. We perceive that these resources are not
producing the outcomes we hoped for, but we need to document our perceptions (either to confirm or refute them) so that we can decide
how to move forward. COGNOS analysis and surveys will be valuable to this effort. Will correcting the Hartnell-associated glitches solve
the problem? Do we need to think differently about how to teach students to use technology to learn? Do we need more training ourselves?
Analysis and reflection will help us figure this out.
b) Describe how this activity supports any of the following:
1) Core Competency2) Program level Outcome3) Course level Outcome
4) Program/Discipline Goal
5) Strategic Priority Goal
Core competency: all of them
Program level outcome: 1 and 2 (scientific method, chemical characterization of cellular activity)
Course level outcome: many of them
Program goal: all of them
Strategic priority goal: 1A, 2A, 2B, 4C, 4D, 5A
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
YES X NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
Undoubtedly. It may lead to future requests for training, development of materials, or technology.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
Depending on the results of our work, we may see changes in curriculum and scheduling. Increased retention and success will be indicators
of success.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
Like everything else we have proposed, it will take time and focused effort to complete the analysis. As for barriers to any changes that we
might implement, it depends on what we decide to do. There is no intrinsic barrier to completing this analysis, other than lack of time to
analyze and reflect.
A c t i o n P l a n 6 : Submit Transfer Model Curriculum for Biology
Consider:
 Faculty
 Other staffing
 Facilities
 Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000)
 Software
 Hardware
 Outside services
 Training
 Travel
 Library materials
 Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
Transfer Model Curriculum- The following was revised from information provided by the Academic Senate for California
Community Colleges (ASCCC). In 2010 the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 1440 authorizing California community colleges to
create associate degrees for transfer that guarantee students admission into the CSU system.
As a result, all California community colleges were directed to develop Associate Degrees for Transfer. In this case, the name of the
degree is an Associate in Science in Biology for Transfer (AS-T Biology). The degree would be composed of no more than 60
transferable units, including a general education plan for transfer (IGETC or CSU Breadth), and a minimum of 18 units in biology. The
legislation states that students who successfully complete these degrees will receive priority and guaranteed admission with junior status
to the CSU system into a major similar to their specific degree.
To facilitate the development of the transfer degrees and to ensure their statewide applicability, the Academic Senate developed a
“Transfer Model Curriculum” (TMC) that would fulfill the required 18 unit minimum of major preparation. During the 2010-2011
academic year, the Academic Senate convened intersegmental discipline groups to determine the content of TMCs for the 20 most
popular transfer majors at the CSU, including Biology. The TMC for Biology received final approval on February 1st, 2015. It has since
been disseminated to Hartnell’s articulation officer, Laverne Cook, and to biology faculty to develop a TMC-aligned AS-T Biology degree.
b) Describe how this activity supports all of the following that apply:
1) Core Competency (Communication Skills, Information Skills, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, Global Awareness,
Aesthetic Appreciation, Personal Growth and Responsibility)
2) Program level Outcome (list applicable program outcome)
3) Course level Outcome (list applicable course level outcome)
4) Program/Discipline Goal (list applicable program/discipline goal)
5) Strategic Plan Goal (list applicable strategic plan goal)
Transfer Model Curriculum- The AS-T Biology degree will provide Hartnell College students with a guaranteed transfer degree
upon the completion of 60 units. The creation of this degree specifically supports Goal 1A of Hartnell’s Strategic plan: Hartnell College
will provide higher education, workforce development, and lifelong learning opportunities—with seamless pathways—to all of the
college’s present and prospective constituent individuals and groups.
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
☒ YES
☐ NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
Transfer Model Curriculum- In consultation with LaVerne Cook, Hartnell’s articulation officer, and all biology faculty, the three
necessary documents (1. Chancellor's form, 2. Narrative, 3. College catalog page) will be drafted, edited, and then submitted to the
curriculum committee for approval in the fall of 2015. The biology faculty started this activity in the spring semester (March, 2015) and
will continue to work on it over the next 6-8 months. Discussion of the AS-T Biology degree and its submission process will continue
into April, May, and August, after returning from summer recess.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
Transfer Model Curriculum- The quantifiable outcome will be the increase in the number of biology transfers to nearby California
State University and University of California systems. The chief measurement of success will be an increase in the number of students
earning AS-T Biology degrees and transferring to the institution of their choice.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
Transfer Model Curriculum- No impediments to the completion and submission of a AS-T Biology degree are evident at this time.
Action Plan 7: Develop and utilize the STEMART lab
This item is used to describe how the new activity, or continuing new activity, will support the
program/discipline.
Consider:
 Faculty
 Other staffing
 Facilities
 Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000)
 Software
 Hardware
 Outside services
 Training
 Travel
 Library materials
 Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
STEMART lab: Eric Bosler (Art/Photography Instructor) and Ann Wright and Lawrence Yee (Biology and Chemistry Instructors. respectively)
formed a Faculty Inquiry Group (FIG) two years ago to develop novel teaching strategies for art and STEM students to collaborate to improve
critical thinking and problem solving skills. The STEMArt lab is a new collaborative, hands-on learning space for art and STEM students to
apply critical thinking and problem solving to manufacture physical works to elucidate art and science ideas and concepts, e.g., using a 3D
printer.
To make the STEMArt lab available and useful to our students, we require the following:
1, auxiliary supplies, such as:
a. filament for 3D printer
b. raw materials, such as wood, plastic, and plaster
2. remodel of the foundry space in the VAF Building
3. staffing to support the various components of the STEMArt lab, e.g, the wood and metal shop, 3D modeling on 3D printers, and laser
cutting.
b) Describe how this activity supports all of the following that apply:
1) Core Competency (Communication Skills, Information Skills, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, Global Awareness,
Aesthetic Appreciation, Personal Growth and Responsibility)
2) Program level Outcome (list applicable program outcome)
3) Course level Outcome (list applicable course level outcome)
4) Program/Discipline Goal (list applicable program/discipline goal)
5) Strategic Plan Goal (list applicable strategic plan goal)
The STEMArt lab supports Strategic Priority Goal 1A by providing student access, Goal 2A by helping students pursue educational and achieve
educational success, and Goal 5A by developing a culture of innovation that is relevant to the real- world needs of art and science students that
will lead to improved student learning..
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
X☐ YES
NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
Grant funding has been secured to remodel existing classroom space and purchase equipment to begin activites with students. Pending
apporvla by the College Planning Council, it could begin as early as this summer (2015.) For the first year, we expect to complete the first stage
of remodeling, utilize equipment already purchased, and are requesting consumables at this point. In subsequent years, further funding needs
to be secured to remodel the foundry space, purchase equipment and supplies. Eventually, it may be necessary to hire additional personnel to
staff this space. Art and Science Faculty will develop teaching materials for students to use this lab.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
We expect that students will show demonstrably better mastery of scientific concepts by doing lab activities that “make the invisible visible.”
We will be able to document this through assessment of their ability to design, construct a project and communicate its significance to others.
This is a truly innovative undertaking and will challenge preconceived notions of what we should be measuring.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
We have shown that the STEMART lab can be launched with a modest investment and be available for use in 2015-6. The main barrier
is the completion of the approval process. We have been able to acquire the equipment and supplies needed for first year, and believe that
existing staff can provide the necessary supervision.
Action Plan 8: . Develop molecular biology techniques
Consider:
• Faculty
• Other staffing
• Facilities
• Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000),
• Software
• Hardware
• Outside services
• Training
• Travel
• Library materials
• Science laboratory materials
a)Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
This is a carry-0ver and refinement from last year. We would like to update some of our experiments to reflect the types of technology that
are used in labs in academia and industry today. In microbiology, for example, there is increased emphasis on rapid identification and
DNA technology (so-called RMM, rapid methods for microbiology). We need to develop instructional approaches that not only introduce
the techniques but provide background and perspective on the value of these techniques. Thus, we expect to develop dry labs as well as
experiments.
We use bacteria as reagents in other classes that involve biotechnology techniques (BIO-1, BIO-59, ABT-135). Conceivably, we could use
these techniques in several classes.
b)Describe how this activity supports any of the following:
1)Core Competency2)Program level Outcome3)Course level Outcome
4)Program/Discipline Goal
5)Strategic Priority Goal
Core competency: critical thinking, skill development
Program level outcome: 1 and 2 (scientific method, chemical characterization of cellular activity)
Course level outcome: BIO-1 and BIO-27, anything having to do with identification and chemical characterization
Program goal: 1 and 4
Strategic priority goal: 1A, 2A, 2B, 4C, 4D, 5A
c)Does this activity span multiple academic years?
YES
NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
In the sense that this may be a continuous budget need, yes. Dry labs will require little if any infusion of resources. We emphasize that dry
labs will supplement, not replace, wet labs.
In the short term, we plan to add lab exercises (one or more) that utilize DNA extraction and amplification. Dr. Jeffery Hughey is
advising on this. We have the major equipment already, but will need to obtain additional consumable supplies so as not to detract from
other labs.
d)What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
We expect that students will experience more success in achieving understanding of molecular biology and the use of molecular techniques
in scientific research. It may help with retention and placement in internships, but that is speculative.
e)What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
This takes time and focused effort to develop, apply, test, and refine the labs. Also, since funding is likely to be unpredictable, we need to be
sure that we develop cost-effective innovations to do this work (innately part of good planning).
Action Plan 9: Investigate a cohort model for STEM majors (across disciplines)
Consider:
 Faculty
 Other staffing
 Facilities
 Equipment (non-expendable, greater than $5,000), supplies (expendable, valued at less than $5,000)
 Software
 Hardware
 Outside services
 Training
 Travel
 Library materials
 Science laboratory materials
a) Describe the new activity or follow-on activity that this resource will support.
Support a discipline-wide discussion of the feasibility of a cohort model for moving STEM students through their major programs
b) Describe how this activity supports all of the following that apply:
1) Core Competency (Communication Skills, Information Skills, Critical Thinking/Problem Solving, Global Awareness,
Aesthetic Appreciation, Personal Growth and Responsibility)
2) Program level Outcome (list applicable program outcome)
3) Course level Outcome (list applicable course level outcome)
4) Program/Discipline Goal (list applicable program/discipline goal)
5) Strategic Plan Goal (list applicable strategic plan goal)
This effort addresses all of the above.
c) Does this activity span multiple academic years?
☒ YES
☐ NO
If yes, describe the action plan for completion of this activity.
We could support discussion in a similar manner as the FIGs, i.e., a combination of flex credit and a stipend. We would discuss
scheduling and the optimal sequence in which (for example) a biology major could complete a degree and transfer. We believe that
students in a cohort support each other and thus increase the chance for success for all. We also believe that the only way faculty can get
together to have these deep discussions (and we all work with the same students) is to give them the time and support to do so.
We must also investigate ways to support students in such an undertaking. In the CSIT-in-3 program, for example, the students have
generous scholarships so they can afford to be full-time students. They also take classes year-round and spend at least eight hours a day
in class and study time. The results speak for themselves, but involve an extraordinary investment of resources.
We anticipate that this would take at least two years.
d) What measureable outcomes are expected from this activity? List indicators of success.
The best indicator, obviously, is a cohort plan. If we decide that it involves funds for financial support for students so they can be fulltime students (and the amount per student would be significant), we would apply for grant funds or investigate some other way of
financing this endeavor. If we decide it is not feasible, we would provide a detailed analysis explaining why.
e) What are the barriers to achieving success in this activity?
There should be no barriers to completing the analysis other than buy-in from faculty. As for the actual implementation, the barriers are
considerable- scheduling, facilities, the unpredictability of the students themselves. This would actually be the subject of the analysis.
B. RESOURCE REQUESTS
If new/additional resources are needed for your program/discipline, it is important that you identify them and project their cost,
and that these resources and costs be considered through the College’s integrated planning (governance, budget development,
funding decision making, and resource allocation) processes. A resource is likely to be something needed to support an activity that
you have identified in IIIA above, in which case you must link the resource with a specific activity number (first column below). All
resource requests completed in the various columns of a specific row must be linked to the new or continuing
activity numbered on the first column of that same row. The first activity listed should be the most important; the second activity
listed the second most important, etc. A resource could also be something necessary for your program/discipline to function properly to
improve student learning, such as updated equipment in a classroom; in such case be sure to note that the resource is NOT tied to
a specific activity.
Activity
No.
1.hire
technician
Personnel
Classified
Staff/
Faculty
(C/F/M)*
Supplies/
Equipment
(S/E)**
Technology
Hardware/
Software
(H/S)***
Contract
Services
Training
C. technician
2.equip new all
building
Faculty,
3.open
students
source
resource for
students
Travel
Library
Materials
Facilities
/Space
e.g.,
Science
Labs
Projected
Costs
$75,000
See attached
Sufficient
access points to
support all
technology
Sufficient Internet
access so students
can actually read
their books
As needed,
to use new
equipment
$192,100
$1000 per access
point. We
estimate that the
building needs as
many as 120 in all
Grant funds?
4.screencasting
C staff in FRC to Camtasia
provide training screncasting
software for six
classroom
computers (S), six
wireless USB
microphones (H),
and six web
cameras (H).
5.retention
research
Faculty
6.Submit
TMC
Faculty
7.STEMART Faculty,
Six copies of
Camtasia
software =
$1494.00. Six
wireless USB
microphones =
$1197.36. Six
web cameras =
$954.00. Total
cost for
software and
hardware =
$3645.36.
Possibly
COGNOS
training
None; possibly
stipends from
grants?
none
Filaments for 3-D
technician (to printers
oversee lab; no
new hires
needed)
8.techniques Faculty
Training to
learn use of
software and
how to
upload the
recorded
lectures to
the internet.
Supplies for RMM
project
Training to
Day trips
use equipment to see
(safely)
facilities at
Stanford
Pending
Complete
remodeling approval of the
of Building J request,
(future cost) consumables
are only need
for this year (ca
$50.00 per
filament)
Training to
use supplies
$1000
9.STEM
cohort
inquiry
Inquiry
group
stipends for
cohort
study
Additional notes and details for item 2:
32
32
22
16
8
5
1
6
1
7
7
4
compound microscopes
dissecting microscopes
stirring hotplates
balances
waterbaths
large refrigerators
small refrigerator/freezer
lab prep carts
microcentrifuge
electrophoreisis apparatus
power supplies
incubators
repair or replace
1 environmental shaker
Grand total:
$80,000
$64,000
$8,800
$6,400
$4,000
$5,000
$300
$1,800
$2,500
$1,500
$2,800
$8,000
up to $7,000
$192,100
We will investigate what can be bought with grant funds and/or schedule 2 funds and proceed accordingly.
$500 each (up
to 10 people)
APPENDIX A. Strategic Priorities & Goals
(from Hartnell College Strategic Plan 2013-2018)
Priority 1: Student Access
Goal 1A: Hartnell College will provide higher education, workforce development, and lifelong
learning opportunities—with seamless pathways—to all of the college’s present and prospective
constituent individuals and groups.
Priority 2: Student Success
Goal 2A: Hartnell College will provide a supportive, innovative, and collaborative learning
environment to help students pursue and achieve educational success.
Goal 2B: Hartnell College will provide a supportive, innovative, and collaborative learning
environment that addresses and meets the diverse learning needs of students.
Priority 3: Employee
Diversity and Development
Goal 3A: Hartnell College is committed to 1) increasing diversity among its employees; 2)
providing an environment that is safe for and inviting to diverse persons, groups, and
communities; and 3) becoming a model institution of higher education whose respect for
diversity is easily seen and is fully integrated throughout its policies, practices, facilities, signage,
curricula, and other reflections of life at the college.
Goal 3B: To attract and retain highly qualified employees, Hartnell College is committed to
providing and supporting relevant, substantial professional development opportunities.
Priority 4:
Effective Utilization of Resources
Goal 4A: To support its mission, Hartnell College is committed to the effective utilization of
its human resources.
Goal 4B: Hartnell College is committed to having its physical plant, furnishings, and grounds
maintained and replaced in a planned and scheduled way to support learning, safety, security,
and access.
Goal 4C: Hartnell College will maintain a current, user-friendly technological infrastructure
that serves the needs of students and employees.
Goal 4D: Hartnell College is committed to maximizing the use and value of capital assets,
managing financial resources, minimizing costs, and engaging in fiscally sound planning for
future maintenance, space, and technology needs.
Priority 5:
Innovation and Relevance for Programs and Services
Goal 5A: Hartnell College will provide programs and services that are relevant to the real- world needs of its diverse student
population, while also developing and employing a culture of innovation that will lead to improved institutional effectiveness and
student learning.
Priority 6: Partnership with
Industry, Business Agencies and Education
Goal 6A: Hartnell College is committed to strengthening and furthering its current partnerships, in order to secure lasting, mutually
beneficial relationships between the college and the co