Riverside Community College District
Instructional Program
Reading Discipline
Program Review
June 2002
Draft # 2
Prepared by:
Katie Smith
Diane Deickmeyer
Lori Ogata-Keeler
Mitzi Sloniger
1
Executive Summary
Topic I. Where are we now?
The Reading Discipline at Riverside Community College provides a wide scope of
instruction designed to meet the needs of a diverse student population. Remediation is a
critical focus of the discipline as we strive to repair and restore what is deficient in the
basic skills of our under-prepared students, such as understanding vocabulary in context,
locating the main idea and supporting details, and utilizing other comprehension skills.
Beyond remediation, however, we seek to enhance critical thinking skills such as
analyzing an argument, detecting bias, drawing inferences and conclusions, and
synthesizing information.
Despite recent efforts at the K-12 level to offer programs and set standards to help the
youth in our communities become better readers, reading continues to be a major area
where high school graduates fail to do college level work. The community college must,
then, continue to provide programs and services that are broad in scope yet able to
address specific needs of individual students.
RCC, like most community colleges, extends access to large numbers of minorities, the
disadvantaged, and the nontraditional student. “These groups are often less academically
prepared than their peers (Gardiner, 1994)”
. As the student population continues to increase and become more diverse, the need for
the college to provide access to reading courses and programs for basic skill
development increases. Universities continue to defer to the community college system
for basic skill development as well. The goal of the reading discipline is to assist RCC in
the quest to meet its mission in the area of reading development.
The Reading curriculum offers a sequence of three pre-collegiate classes that starts at an
upper elementary level of reading instruction and extends to college-level reading
instruction. Specialized classes, such as Rapid Reading, Reading for Academic Success,
and a Reading Practicum are also offered.
As stated in the Reading Discipline Handbook, reading “is not simply a basic skill that
will allow students to succeed academically and professionally. Reading is a higher-level
skill that will encourage students to think critically and thus prepare themselves to
assume their roles as citizens.” Reading is a “skill that will not only inform and entertain
but also enrich peoples lives.” In short, the discipline supports the academic goals of our
students, as well as provides enrichment for their professional and personal lives.
1
Grimes, S. K., & David, K. C. (1999). Underprepared community college students:
Implications…..differences. Community College Review, 27 (2), 73.
2
A. Purpose, goals and relation to institution:
The discipline of Reading is directly related to the following District Mission, Goals, and
Vision and Value statements:

Preparation of students for “critical and independent thought and self-reliance.”
(Mission Statement)

Provision for “pre-college, tutorial, and supplemental instruction for underprepared students.” (Mission Statement)

Improvement of “student retention and success…by establishing new programs
and course sequences that lead students to opportunities for transfer education
and career preparation.” (Goals)

Utilization of “advances in information technology to improve effectiveness of
instruction” (Goals)

“Commitment to students…excellence in teaching…responsive to the
communities we serve.” (Vision & Values)
B. History:
We are currently undertaking our first autonomous program review effort under the new
discipline structure. The last program review (1999-2000) was undertaken with the
English and Speech Communication Department (English, Reading, Speech
Communication, and ESL). A draft was prepared; however, the process was not
completed due to an inability to access and/or correctly interpret appropriate statistical
data. No recommendations were made. Reading became a discipline in Fall 2000 as part
of a district-wide restructuring effort. As part of the Program Review Pilot Project, the
discipline has had the opportunity to self-assess and share dialogue with seven full-time
faculty members’ input. This process has provided a venue for new faculty to learn
historical information about the discipline and for members to address discipline issues
as a strong, unified body. In response to the need for accurate data for self-assessment,
we have asked for specific data that answers questions more pertinent to our discipline.
Institutional Effectiveness has also been better able to supply appropriate statistical data
in this review process than last.
I) Issues relating to history:
1. Growth - The Reading discipline has increased the number of full-time faculty with
the hiring of three full-time faculty members in Spring 2000. We currently have seven
full-time tenure-track faculty positions and one full-time temporary position, which will
become a full-time tenure track position in 2002-2003. There are four adjunct positions
in the district. The increase in staffing was necessary to accommodate the increase in
enrollment in the discipline.
3
2. Staffing - The number of full-time reading instructors in the district has allowed for
placement of one full-time, tenure track reading instructor each at Moreno Valley and
Norco Campuses, resulting in the subsequent increase in course offerings at the sites and
spaces used for classrooms and laboratories. A paraprofessional divides a full-time
position between the two campuses. Additional instructors and aides, full- and part-time,
will be needed to meet future demands.
3. Institutional Issues - The Curriculum Committee has addressed the process by which
the college measures student performance to meet the Reading graduation requirement.
The committee reviewed whether reading courses should be used as prerequisites for
English courses, or as a requirement for graduation. As a result, reading instructors are
seeking to substantiate their discipline practices with appropriate assessment data.
4. Placement - Accuplacer, a computerized test, was selected as the college’s placement
instrument for reading in the spring of 2000. Preliminary results from the validation
research that is currently being conducted indicate that the new placement procedure is
working very well. There is a high correlation (r= .69) between the recommended
placement and instructors' rating of student preparation levels. Additionally, no
disproportionate impacts in placement have been detected by ethnicity, gender, or
disability status. Possible age differences in the effectiveness of placement scheme are
still being investigated. The process of validating placement scores continues as well.
5. Strategies - In an effort to provide access to a larger segment of our student
population, there has been an increase in the use of technology across all campuses. The
most prominent examples of such use are the online Reading 83 and Reading 3 courses,
in addition to the Hybrid Reading 82 course. Other examples of technology include the
use of internet-based lab assignments geared for the interactive involvement of students
in a classroom environment and the use of networked instructional programs.
Reading students have access to Internet sites through the Writing and Reading Center
Laboratories. An updated version of the Weaver Reading Efficiency Program (a skills
based software tutorial program) was installed in the fall of 2000.
A pilot program called Success was planned and implemented for one summer session in
1999 in an effort to meet the needs of students who were unable to directly enter a fouryear institution because of inadequate reading skills. The program was abandoned in
deference to the onset of The First Year Experience Program the following year, which
had similar objectives and was more comprehensive. The First year Experience Program
does not, however, have a reading component.
II.) Issues relating to goals:
An examination of goals set last year (2000-2001) revealed that while they are still
worthy goals, perhaps there is a need to prioritize them and set additional ones.
4
Goals for the Promotion of Student Learning:
One identified goal was to develop paired courses for multiple-section content area
courses by Spring 2001. The Reading discipline is continuing to consider paired courses
for content areas. We realize that if we develop these paired courses, we may have the
ability to draw comparisons helpful in answering the question of whether or not Reading
classes should be required or used as a prerequisite for other courses.
A second goal was to develop learning (reading) modules for single-section content area
courses. Reading workshops on single skills have been offered to all students enrolled in
the English, speech, ESL, and reading courses. The number of workshops and skills
taught should be increased to include discipline specific content. In addition, students
from other disciplines, not just the English and Speech Communication Department,
should be made aware that the workshops are offered.
Goals for the discipline’s contribution to the broader college community:
A third goal was to develop faculty workshops on basic organizational strategies that
could be implemented in any existing curriculum for faculty to help students understand
how to read required textbooks – by Spring 2002. Tim Brown and Cornelia Wylldestar
developed Faculty Development modules for 4faculty.org, which provided information
on content area reading instruction. In addition, the Fund for Student Success Grant
speaks to many of the instructional issues that concern adjunct faculty as well as fulltime faculty across content areas. Specific FLEX Day workshops, however, have not yet
been offered due to time constraints and obligations of faculty members.
A new goal identified this year was to design a strategy by which the discipline can
assess our effectiveness and guide our decision-making. This would include getting
feedback from Institutional Effectiveness, evaluating student performance in the
classroom, and seeking other available resources.
C. Programs & Curriculum:
The discipline has courses that range from remedial to college level. The lower levels
(Reading 81 and 82) have laboratory requirements for the practice of skills taught in
classroom format. Courses in each subsection below are sequenced from high to low.
Discipline Courses:
Pre-Collegiate Core Sequence:

Reading 83, Reading Level III, 3 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: qualifying placement score or successful completion to Reading 82

Reading 82, Reading Level II, 3.5 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: qualifying placement score or successful completion to Reading 81
5

Reading 81, Reading Level I, 3.5 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: none
Specialized Courses:

Reading 3, Reading for Academic Success, 3 units, transferable
Prerequisite: none, recommended for college level readers

Reading 2, Rapid Reading, 2 units, transferable
Prerequisite: none, recommended for college level readers

Reading 66AB, Specialized Training for Reading Skills Development Aides, 2
units, non-degree
Prerequisite: none. Designed for competent readers

Reading 86, Corrective Spelling, 3 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: none

Reading 95, Specialized Topics in Reading, .5 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: none. Designed for Workforce Preparation
Reading Practicum Courses:


Reading 88, Reading Laboratory, 1 unit, non-degree
Prerequisite: none
Reading 87, Reading Tutorial, .5 units, non-degree
Prerequisite: none
Students who currently enroll in a reading practicum register for English 96 (.5 units) or
English 97 (1 unit). This has occurred as a result of combining the physical laboratories
for English, reading and ESL student under one Writing and Reading Center director,
who oversees practicum registrations. The discipline will need to discuss whether the
course numbers, Reading 87- 88, should be retained.
Curriculum Changes:
Several curriculum changes have occurred during recent years. Course outline revision
for Reading 2 was completed in November 2000. Course approval for Special Topics in
Reading was received from the curriculum committee May 23, 2000. Reading 3:
Reading for Academic Success and Reading 86:Corrective Spelling were approved by
the curriculum committee as online courses March 13, 2001. The format for delivering
Reading 83 and Reading 82 has been broadened to include the distance education format
6
and were first offered in this format during the academic year of 1999-2000. Reading 83
became one of the first reading courses statewide to be offered in an online format. Use
of this format by the department has increased the number of course sections by six per
year.
All course outlines are attached in Appendix A.
Students served:
The discipline serves a broad cross section of students from the college and community.
According to output data from MIS files (see Appendix B) the number of students
enrolled in reading classes has increased steadily from 645 in 1998 to 1077 in 2001. Of
those, 63.8 % are females; the majority are under age 19 years old (52.9), predominantly
Hispanic (39 %), and predominantly English speakers (82.5%). Many of the students
(38.9 %) want to earn an A.A. degree leading to a B.A. degree. Many students were
identified as continuing (44.2 %) or first-time students (33.6 %).
Pre- or co-requisites:
Reading 82 requires a qualifying placement test score or successful completion of
Reading 81. Reading 83 requires a qualifying test score or successful completion of
Reading 82 or ESL 73. All other classes have no pre- or co-requisites.
Identifying the successful completion of Reading 83 as one of multiple ways to
demonstrate reading competency required for graduation was a major accomplishment.
Students must now (as stated in the 2000-2001 College Catalog) demonstrate reading
competency by obtaining:
1. a satisfactory score on RCC's placement test equivalent to placement in college
level reading; OR
2. completion of Reading 83 with a "C" or higher; OR
3. satisfactory reading score on a standardized reading test approved by the English
department. Students who do not meet Riverside Community College's reading
competency requirement should enroll in a reading class within their first 18 units
undertaken at the college.
4. Students who have completed an associate's or higher degree at an accredited
institution are exempt from the reading competency requirement. Waivers may
also be granted on a case-by-case basis.
7
Learning objectives and competencies:
Learning objectives have been identified for all courses and are reflected in the course
outlines, establishing clarity for expected competencies for classes that have pre- or corequisites and to delineating appropriate sequencing.
D. Student Outcomes Assessment:
The development of an effective assessment plan must be an immediate discipline goal.
Assessing student outcomes will be part of that plan. The growth of the discipline and
the district, plus the focus on student learning outcomes makes strategic assessment
planning imperative.
Means of assessing student success
The Reading Discipline review team has divided assessment into three categories:
(1) student success within a course, (2) student success in the Reading program
(placement in, and completion of recommended Reading coursework) and (3) success in
other disciplines.
Student success within a course is currently being assessed by indirect measures:



Passing grades (A, B, C or CR)
percentage of students retained
Passing grades matched with course repetition
Student success within the Reading Program is currently being assessed by:

Passing grades matched with recommended placement
The program review team recognizes that the discipline is lacking in available
information to adequately measure the success of the program, further indicating the
need for a workable assessment plan.
Standardized tests (Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test and Nelson-Denny Test) provide
additional information on the skill development of students; however, they are currently
used only to diagnose skill deficiencies and to plan remediation, not to assess program
success. It would be beneficial to calculate the average growth of successful reading
students in the district by percentile ranking (a national ranking) and to compare their
growth, for example, with students who 1) were not assessed 2) did not follow
assessment recommendations 3) followed assessment recommendations or 4) completed
the course unsuccessfully. This would require all instructors to administer in-class
assessment uniformly and to submit results to Institutional Effectiveness for calculations.
8
Faculty Involvement in Placement Assessment
The Reading Discipline has worked to set new assessment standards for entry into the
different course levels (Reading 81, 82, 83, and college level). All Discipline members
participated in the validation of a new placement instrument (Accuplacer) by evaluating
the placement of students in their courses. This information was compared to
Accuplacer placement recommendations cut scores.
Faculty members continue to participate in discussions regarding the Reading
Graduation Requirement and ways to strengthen efforts to provide early intervention for
students.
In academic year 2000-2001, two faculty members studied the tutoring services of the
Reading Center and designed new approaches for tutor/student accountability and
tracking, as well as technological approaches. One approach was to survey students
being tutored after each tutoring session. Another was to use computer software to
obtain information about students being tutored.
Current Status of Assessment Plan
Discipline members are currently asking questions that will generate additional data that
informs specifically about the effectiveness of our curriculum, our instruction, and
student success. We recently asked for data that answered, for example, whether students
who complete their recommended Reading coursework fare better in academic classes
than students who place into but fail to take suggested coursework.
E. Collaborations with other units:
In an effort to collaborate with other units at RCCD and reach beyond the classroom
walls, the discipline has articulated with the departments at each campus that include the
discipline instructors, as well as with the Curriculum Committee, Matriculation, and the
Academic Senate regarding the Reading 83 graduation requirement. We have offered
reading-focused workshops to students through the Writing and Reading Center. We
have offered reading and study skills workshops to faculty through Faculty and Staff
Development. Instructors collaborated closely with Open Campus to establish online and
hybrid course offerings. Reading instructors dialogued with the developers of the Middle
College High School Program at Moreno Valley, which included reading courses in the
program structure. We also continue discussions with administration, faculty, and
students on the subject of remediation by serving on committees and task forces dealing
with that issue. In addition, we established a CSU, UC transfer agreement for Reading 3.
As we increase staffing at each campus, we envision being able to increase our outreach
which currently includes the Middle College High School Program, the First Year
Experience Program, the CAL-Works curriculum design, as well as the L. A. Times and
Press Enterprise Newspapers in Education Programs. We will continue consultation with
programs and services at other local institutions during the decision-making process for
change in the district related to reading.
9
F. The discipline is constrained in our ability to offer courses and services to
students by limited classroom space, laboratory space, personnel, technology and
software. At the Riverside campus, classroom space has been maximized. Growth
will require additional space. The space shared with the English and ESL
disciplines is inadequate, limiting the reading student’s access to technology. A
planned relocation to a remodeled Martin Luther King, Jr. Library does not relieve
this problem.
At the Moreno Valley campus, a computer lab equipped to service 30 students in a
permanent space is needed, in addition to a full-time reading paraprofessional to staff the
labs. Presently, Reading 81 and 82 classes rove among the computer labs, contingent
upon space availability.
At the Norco campus, an open Writing and Reading Center, which contains
approximately 36 computers with Internet access and two pay-for-print printers, is
available for shared usage to students in English, Reading, and ESL classes. In addition,
a shared CIS/Math Lab classroom with approximately 36 computers with Internet access
has been made available to reading classes at specifically designated class times. There
are currently no classrooms specifically designated for the reading discipline only. The
Weaver Reading Efficiency System is installed and accessible only in the
Writing/Reading Center. The shared CIS/Math Lab is equipped with Altirus software, as
well as an LCD projector and a non pay-for-print printer. Recently, additional reading
skill software and audio text equipment was purchased for use with Reading 81 students.
This affects student access to computer-aided instruction.
For personnel assistance, a part-time reading paraprofessional is shared with the Moreno
Valley Campus. There are no part-time instructors available during the fall, spring, or
winter sessions, and only one part-time instructor is available during the summer session.
G. Overall assessment of the discipline performance:
In the course of our discussion, the discipline agreed that meaningful self-assessment
could not be done without first agreeing on the critical areas of assessment that should be
our focus. Also, we realized that we needed to determine some sort of point system or set
of standards by which to measure.
In order to accomplish this, we first examined the Mission Statements, Visions, and
Values of RCC to determine which of these we felt were most critically linked to our
discipline. We agreed on the following:
Three Primary Areas of Focus



Preparing students for success in college courses
Pre-college remediation
Community partnership
10
We then further discussed and agreed upon a five-point scale to reflect our selfassessment. That point system was as follows:
Five-Point Scale
1= Commendable
2= Strong
3= Satisfactory
4= Inconsistent
5= Unsatisfactory
The faculty discussed the activities, growth, accomplishments, and direction of the
reading discipline, as we perceived them to be over the recent three-year period. We then
voted, by a show of hands, on our opinion of the Discipline’s standing in each of the
three areas noted above. The results were as follows:
Results of Self-Assessment
Student Preparation
Pre-college Remediation
Community Partnership
=2
=2
=4
We agreed that a particular area of continued focus and determined improvement should
be community partnership.
Topic II. Where do we want to be?
A. Findings - Environmental Scan
The reading discipline desires to serve 100 % of the students whose placement scores
indicate a need for remediation or developmental learning, as well as to provide
resources to assist the entire student population in becoming proficient in college level
reading. The latest assessment/placement cumulative course distribution survey provided
by Institutional Research for the period from 7/1/01 – 5/18/02 shows that 15,342 students
(excluding high schools) took the placement test. Of those, 19.9% scored at the college
level, 17.5% scored at Reading 83, 19.8% at Reading 82, and 42.8% at Reading 81. We
are clearly serving a population of under-prepared students at the college.
The students with the lowest skill level make up the largest category. Because the
challenge to succeed is so great and progress can be reflected in various ways, we wish to
define success as rate of progress indicated by an increase in student achievement as
demonstrated by course completion with a grade of C or better; increases in grade
equivalency, percentile ranking, or stanine scoring on standardized tests; persistence in
course enrollment; and successful completion of academic courses.
11
To further describe our discipline population, the analysis of Reading Students
Characteristics data from Fall-1998 – Fall-2001 describes the typical reading student as
24 or younger (78.7%). A large percentage (63.6) is female. The group is largely
Hispanic (39%), English speaking (82.35), desiring to transfer with an A. A. (38.9%) or
undecided (30.8). Many are continuing students (44.2%) or first-time students (33.6%).
A majority of students (65.8%) earn a C or better overall at RCC. See Appendix C.
The Enrollment Simulation and Planning Summary section of the Environmental Scan
document (McIntyre, p.5) depicts continued growth of the student who is served by our
institution and the need to tailor services to student needs. To ensure that we are able to
meet students’ needs in the classroom, we propose to remain vigilant of class size.
National recommendations for federally funded reading programs (typically K-12) favor
low teacher/students ratios for developmental or at risk students. The Discipline
recommends maintaining a cap of 30 for its pre-collegiate courses. A fifteen to 30 range
in the number of students provides enough students for collaborative interaction to occur
as well as for instructor management. Management and learning are facilitated by
adequate seating per class, which allows students to form groups, instructors to move
about between rows and desks, and students who have disabilities or interpreters to
access classrooms. Laboratory space should accommodate classes without infringement
from other students. Space allocation should be adequate at all three campuses.
The Discipline desires a seamless curriculum for development of skills. This can be in
the format of classes, computer assisted instruction, labs, projects, or workshops.
Students should be able to have their learning competencies identified and begin work at
their level of need. They should have resources available to expediently move them from
one level of achievement to another.
Students need strong guidance to follow placement recommendations for enrollment.
Research data from Institutional Effectiveness shows that when students (fall, 1998
cohort) followed placement recommendations, or registered for a course lower than was
recommended, they succeeded at a higher rate than those who failed to follow the
placement recommendation or who enrolled in a course higher than was recommended.
Additionally, more than half of the students who enrolled in the recommended course
level experienced success. The discipline must still question whether this percentage
(58.9%) can be increased.
A concern of the Reading Discipline is that there is no designated classroom space in the
district for reading classes. All classroom space is shared with other disciplines or
departments. Laboratory space in the district is also shared. This limits our ability to
increase course offerings.
Hybrid and Internet courses provide additional non-physical space; however, but as the
student population grows, more physical space will be needed.
An additional concern is the California State Universities’ (CSU) plan to reduce its
remedial instruction to minimal levels by 2007 (McIntyre, p. 29.) RCC will most likely
need to anticipate growth in the Reading Discipline as a result of this action. In the
interim, RCC should collaborate with CSU to address remediation issues.
12
Finally, the community needs services provided by RCC to assist students who seek post
high school education, remediation, workforce preparation, and life-long skills
development. We must strengthen our resources and compel students to take reading
classes early in their academic careers.
B. Internal Review:
In order to meet the need of preparing the students from the community with precollegiate remediation and preparation for the competitive nature of our society, we must
make these determinations:
Immediate Goals:
1. Work with Institutional Effectiveness to implement a process to use
standardized test results and other qualitative measures to evaluate student
success
2. Explore strategies for serving the expanding student population: faculty,
space, and technology

Faculty: How will we supply the staff needed to offer a full
curriculum at the Moreno Valley and Norco campuses?

Space: How will we secure space to accommodate enrollment
increases?

Technology: What is needed to support curriculum offerings?
3. Strengthen the reading graduation requirement to ensure that identified
students select reading courses early in their academic planning
4. Determine if we should validate Reading 83 as a prerequisite to English 50A
to compel students to take reading courses early
5. Seek opportunities to partner with the community and other units of the
college to support student needs
Long Range Goals:
1. Format our curriculum to increase service for a growing population of
students
2. Determine the specific data we need to adequately assess the discipline
13
C. Revised Vision – restatement of what the discipline desires to be
We view reading as a basic skill that allows students to succeed academically,
professionally, and socially. Decision-making and critical thinking are essential to
student success in the communities in which they live. Through our curriculum and
services, we provide a foundation upon which students can build varying degrees of
competencies for living, a fundamental right of all citizens. As a result of quality
instruction and strategic interactions, we should positively impact the ability of students,
particularly those who are at risk, to gain knowledge from print media and to process
ideas logically. The use of these competencies can improve various aspects of their lives.
D. Gaps between the current and desired state
The gap between the current state of the Discipline and its vision is primarily one of
impact and reliability. The Discipline needs to systematically assess its impact on
student learning and preparation for independent living. The Discipline now has the
problem of not being able to effectively articulate to what degree we are impacting the
development of students whose needs are the greatest. When we design an assessment
plan that gives feedback on student learning outcomes, persistence in courses, and
retention at the college for students who take reading courses, we will be better able to
determine our needs relating to the growth of the Discipline.
Topic III. What we need to do to get there:
The discipline must meet the following needs in order to be effective:

Identify an assessment strategy that provides district-wide information. Clearly,
the Reading discipline needs to continue its pursuit of hard data that examines our
inherent belief that early onset reading instruction for remedial students is
absolutely necessary in order to truly fulfill our commitment to give students a
meaningful higher education experience.

Utilize assessment results (SDRT/Nelson Denny) from classes in addition to
institutional research data to indicate/support student progress and to make
decisions relating to curriculum, instruction, growth, policies and procedures.

Increase course offerings at Moreno Valley and Norco to achieve a full range of
courses, and to increase college-specific assessment data.

Increase faculty at Moreno Valley and Norco to accommodate
increased/expanded curriculum offerings.

Secure more space (Riverside); better utilize space (Moreno Valley, Norco).

Encourage students to take a reading practicum.
14

Increase access to technology.
Resources needed to support initiatives, strategies, goals, and activities:

Seek ways to continue to meet with students and increase student service with
little increase in designated physical space.

Increase curriculum offerings to include more hybrid courses, computer-aided
instruction, online courses and web-enhanced instruction at the Riverside,
Moreno Valley and Norco Campuses.

Increase faculty by the equivalent of two full-time positions (one at Moreno
Valley and one at Norco).

Gain support from Institutional Effectiveness to design and implement the
assessment plan and to gather and analyze data needed for ongoing evaluation.

Adhere to instructional plans and departmental procedures.

Acquire appropriate technology (hardware and software).
Topic IV. Evidence needed to track our progress:

Documents/evidence needed to demonstrate success (to be further outlined in an
assessment plan)

Documents/evidence of student placement scores

Documents/evidence of student scores on standardized tests (Nelson Denny or
SDRT).

Evidence of links between success in program and retention in the district.

Information regarding reasons students discontinue enrollment in classes or leave
the college to clarify some loss of student enrollment.

Utilization of a system to track student progress through and beyond the college
district.

Information to help us understand student objectives.
Assessment Plan Status
The Reading Discipline is currently asking more meaningful questions as to how to
accurately assess the effectiveness of its curriculum in order to better meet the needs of
15
students and the community. Plans are being made to consult with Institutional
Effectiveness to outline procedures for continual analysis of data.
A rubric for self-evaluation is now established as a result of the cooperative efforts of all
the Reading Discipline members.
There remains a need for statistical data regarding the effects of reading instruction as it
pertains to student success in content area classes.
Meaningful ways for utilizing results from SDRT and Nelson-Denny tests are being
considered.
Topic V. Improvement of the discipline self-study process:
The discipline Self–Study process has been an effective tool for providing input from
discipline faculty members. The Program Review Resource Guide, when finalized,
should provide clarity of the process by, specifically, outlining target dates, resources,
and explanations of each section of the guide. Disciplines should be given suggestions
on how to develop self-evaluation rubrics and a routine timeline for regular self-study.
Discipline facilitators should take primary responsibility for the on-going collection of
data and should assume leadership in the self-study process.
16