Chabot College
Academic Program Review Report
Year Three of
Program Review Cycle
Final Summary Report
PACE
Submitted on 3/4/2013
Mireille Giovanola
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Section A: What Have We Accomplished? ................................ 1
Section B: What’s Next? ........................................................... 2
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History .........................................................................................3
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule .................................4
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections ..........................................5
C: Program Learning Outcomes....................................................................9
D: A Few Questions ...................................................................................11
E: New Initiatives ......................................................................................12
F1: New Faculty Requests ..........................................................................13
F2: Classified Staffing Requests ..................................................................14
F3: FTEF Requests ......................................................................................15
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests .................................................16
F5: Supplies and Services Requests ............................................................17
F6: Conference/Travel Requests ................................................................18
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests ........................................19
F8: Facilities Requests ................................................................................20
A. What Have We Accomplished?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to
writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence, and
enrollment data at thttp://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm.
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks you to
reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used by the PRBC and
Budget Committee to assess progress toward achievement of our Strategic Plan and to inform future
budget decisions. It will also be used by the SLOAC and Basic Skills committees as input to their prioritysetting process. In your narrative of two or less pages, address the following questions:


What program improvement goals did you establish?
Did you achieve the goals you established for the three years? Specifically describe your progress
on goals you set for student learning, program learning,
and Strategic Plan achievement.
Year 1 goal: Agreed upon PLOs that genuinely define the program.
We proposed to have our CLOs assessed by the end of the three-year cycle, and to
request
faculty and student feedback to facilitate the development of our curriculum on a yearly basis.
o We have two PLOs, but have not been able to assess them.
Our program is
inter-disciplinary. PACE PLOs are not specific to any one discipline, but try to capture what we
would like our students to get out of the
program in general, while they pursue their
educational and career goals. Also,
all but two of our instructors are adjunct faculty
members in the discipline they teach for PACE. PACE instructors met voluntarily once in fall
2011 to discuss the
program.
o We have assessed CLOs and provided Closing-the-loop forms (ANTH 1, COMM
30, PSY
33) as requested by other disciplines.
o We have asked for students’ feedback informally by e-mail.
Year 2 goals:
1. Revise PACE criteria, and post them on the PACE website.
2. Revise the PACE Application Process, and post it on the PACE website.
Goals 1 and 2 have been accomplished. See below “What best practice…”
3. Assess the program’s effectiveness.
4. Revise the PACE curriculum.
These two goals are linked. We have made changes to the curriculum, but would
welcome
our dean’s guidance on the best way to structure the program at this time.
5. Advocate for greater resources for our students.
We have been requesting more funds for our counselor, as well as services for evening and
Saturday students (access to library and computers, tutoring and peer counseling hours), and space
where evening and Saturday students can meet informally. Our requests have not been honored, due to
lack of College funding.

What best practices have you developed? Those could include pedagogical
methods,
strategies to address Basic Skills needs of our students, methods of
working within your discipline,
and more.
1. Review of the PACE curriculum and development of a plan to streamline
(starting in fall 2011 and ongoing).
1
the program
o
We are reviewing our course offerings to maximize PACE enrollment.
Starting in fall 2012, we stopped offering Math 104 through PACE because the
course
was not cost effective. We thank Dean Vo-Kumamoto for facilitating
enrollment of PACE
students in a non-PACE Math 104 evening section in
spring 2013.
o We are reviewing our ratio of evening/Saturday/online courses.
We do not have data for PACE only, but according to the aggregate data on persistence
rates for online vs. traditional classes for fall 2012, face-to-face
success rates are higher for
History 7 and 8, Psychology 1,
and Sociology 1,
while online success rates are higher for
Health 1, Humanities 65
(http://www.chabotcollege.edu/programreview/Data2012.cfm). PACE
students’ preference for different types of classes varies according to their schedule and
computer literacy. We are also
arguing that evening and
Saturday face-to-face and
hybrid classes are more likely to help students
develop their own support system when very
little support is available on campus at those times. In fall 2013, we will offer History 8 as a face-toface
class, in response to students’ requests.
2. Development of a streamlined PACE application (fall 2011).
o The document explains the criteria for admittance to the program, and the pathways we
offer. Students must submit an essay explaining why they think they qualify for the program, as
well as all college transcripts.
Ref.: PACE Application at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/PACE/
o Goals (Chabot College 2012-2015 Strategic Plan, specifically #3, 5, 6, and 7):
a. To help students focus on their academic goals.
b. To help students identify past and possibly present hurdles to their academic
persistence and success.
c. To make the best use of PACE counselor Julie Machado’s drastically reduced
contact hours.
3. Establishment of mandatory orientation meetings for first-time PACE
students. Julie
Machado conducts four to six meetings each semester,
before and after the following
semester’s enrollment period.
o Goals (Chabot College 2012-2015 Strategic Plan, specifically #1, 2, 3 and 4):
a. To acquaint prospective students with the program.
b. To encourage prospective students to meet other PACE students.
c. To maximize PACE Counselor Julie Machado’s limited use of time
4. Collaboration with other divisions on the following (ongoing):
o Course scheduling.
o CLO assessment and Closing-the-Loop discussion (ANTH 1, COMM 30, PSY 33),
as
requested by other disciplines.
o Curricular changes (elimination of MTH 104 and COMM 30 from the PACE curriculum).
o Suggestions for new instructors.
o Resolution of instructional and student issues/conflicts.
5. Dissemination of transfer information to our students (ongoing) by
o Hosting representatives from our main transfer schools (CSUEB, St Mary’s, Holy
Names)
so students can meet with them.
o Participating in College transfer fairs.
o Sending e-news about transfer schools, deadlines, scholarships, and special events to our
students.
2

Are these best practices replicable in other disciplines or areas? Yes.
o Counseling proposes to introduce classes that offer joint counseling to a large group of
students with similar needs, in an effort to maximize their limited time.
o The word “pathway” is recurrent in the Chabot College 2012-2015 Strategic Plan. If this is
truly important, then let us support programs such as PACE and others who already offer an
integrated approach to learning.

What were your greatest challenges?
1. Lack of funding for the PACE Counselor since July 1st, 2011.
2. Loss of clerical help in 2011.
3. Little academic support and few or no services for evening and Saturday students.
4. Difficulty filling classes with PACE students only.
According to Carolyn Arnold (e-mail of 2/26/2013), there were 1,196 PACE-flagged
(Major
Code 2) students in fall 2012. If the number is accurate (we are asking
Admission and Records
for additional information), we should have no problem
filling all our classes with PACE students,
even if all the students took only one PACE class per semester. Unfortunately,
students
admitted before spring 2012 were flagged PACE when they first took a PACE class because there
was pressure to fill our
classes. Many of these students take PACE classes sporadically, when it is
convenient.
We are in the process of identifying and un-flagging these students. From spring
2012, we have asked students to fill out an application and sign a pledge stating that they will take
only or mostly PACE classes to satisfy their GE requirements. Most of these students do not honor
their commitment. At this time, we simply do not have the means (time, data) to track every
student, and the power to make sure that they stick to their commitment.
This has two unfortunate consequences:
a. Because we cannot fill most PACE classes with PACE students only, we have to
open up classes to all students. This goes against the goals of the program, and
makes
it impossible for us to track PACE student persistence, success, and
transfer rates.
b. Due to lack of funding for the PACE counseling, we cannot afford to offer
counseling to students who are flagged PACE, but who take mostly non-PACE
classes, or no PACE classes in a given semester.
5. Difficulty in tracking student progress through the program AND
6. Lack of good data (persistence, success, transfer rates) for PACE students.
We still do not have pertinent data for PACE because
a. We have a mix of PACE and non-PACE students in many of our sections.
b. Our
list of PACE students changes on a semester basis, as students have
completed their GE requirements, as we accept new students, and as we un-flag
the
students who do not take PACE classes. Julie Machado informs Admission
and
Records of the changes. Again, we simply do not have the time and means
to keep
track of our students.
7. There has been some confusion about program “ownership”. PACE is part of Social
Science
and thus under the supervision of the dean of Social Science. PACE courses are paid for by a Social
Science/PACE fund. We work collaboratively with deans
from other divisions and welcome their
suggestions and help, but our primary
concerns are our students’ needs and the integrity of
the program, including the retention of well-liked instructors and courses that satisfy our pathways’
requirements.

Were there institutional barriers to success? Yes. The most important are:
1. Lack of College funding for the PACE Counselor.
3
2. Little to non-existent support for evening and Saturday students.
3. Changes in the program mission forced on us by budgetary constraints.
4. Lack of good data to address student persistence, success, and transfer rates,
despite
everyone’s efforts, especially Carolyn Arnold’s, and for reasons stated
under (6) above.

Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty ratios,
CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation
demands, etc.).
1. Most of these issues were addressed in various places above.
2. FT/PT faculty ratios for spring 2013:
The program offers 23 courses or sections (2 sections of English 1A) across 4
divisions (if we
put together Social Sciences and SotA).
2 Full-time faculty members teaching 1 course each.
15 Adjunct faculty members teaching a total of 21 courses or sections. Two of these faculty
members are full-time at Chabot, but not in the discipline they teach
for PACE.
4
B. What’s Next?
This section may serve as the foundation for your next Program Review cycle, and will inform the
development of future strategic initiatives for the college. In your narrative of one page or less, address
the following questions. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested)
to further detail your narrative and to request resources.
 What goals do you have for future program improvement?
 What ideas do you have to achieve those goals?
 What must change about the institution to enable you to make greater
student learning and overall student success?
progress in improving
1. Get College funding for the PACE counselor (immediate need).
We are requesting financial support from the College, and are including a request
for
funding in this report. We will run out of counseling hours before the end of this semester. In an
effort to conserve hours, Julie Machado has both volunteered
some of her time, and taken
time off.
2. Redefine the program (mission, ownership).
We will need guidance and assistance from our dean (and possibly the VP of
Academic
Services and the President of the College) to tackle the following issues:
o If PACE is to be offered at all, should we restrict the program to PACE students
only, or
should we open up classes to all students if they do not fill, as we have done in the past?
1. Opening up classes to all students helps students who do not qualify
for the PACE
program but can only take evening and Saturday classes to fulfill their
requirements.
It also would allow us to offer a greater range of courses.
2. Restricting the program to PACE students would better serve our program
goals and
would allow us to have better data on PACE students’ persistence and success rates (as
opposed to persistence and success rates in PACE classes). However, we would have to
streamline the program and track whether our students are indeed enrolling in all-PACE
classes to satisfy their
GE requirements. At present, we do not have the time and data to
do this.
o Who has jurisdiction over the PACE program?
3. Streamline the program if deemed necessary (see 2 above).
4. Keep lobbying for services and academic support for our students.
Requests for facilities and tutors are included in this report.

What recommendations do you have to improve the Program Review process?
1. Please try not to change the format every year.
2. Feedback would be much appreciated.
5
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Audience: Budget Committee, PRBC, and Administrators
Purpose: This analysis describes your history of budget requests from the previous two years and the
impacts of funds received and needs that were not met. This history of documented need can both
support your narrative in Section A and provide additional information for Budget Committee
recommendations.
Instructions: Please provide the requested information, and fully explain the impact of the budget
decisions.
Category
Classified Staffing (# of positions)
Supplies & Services
Technology/Equipment
Other: Monies for Counselor
Peer advising
Tutors
TOTAL
2011-12
Budget
Requested
Clerical help,
Part time (10
hrs/week)
$0
$0
$0
5 hrs/wk
5 hrs/wk
?
2011-12
Budget
Received
0
$0
$0
$0
0
0
$0
2012-13
Budget
Requested
Clerical help
Part time (10
hrs/week)
$0
$0
15 hrs/wk
5 hrs/wk
5 hrs/wk
?
2012-13
Budget
Received
0
$0
$0
0
0
0
$0
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved student learning? When
you requested the funding, you provided a rationale. In this section, assess if the anticipated
positive impacts you projected have, in fact, been realized.
None of our requests were honored.
2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has student
learning been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively impacted?
2.1. PACE STUDENT POPULATION AND PROGRAM STAFF
According to Carolyn Arnold, there were 1,196 PACE-flagged (Major Code 2) students in fall 2012.
According to our unofficial count, we currently serve between 350 and 400 active PACE students who
are taking at least one PACE course every semester. This may be a conservative estimate. Most of our
students are working adults who cannot attend day classes and need a flexible, non-traditional course
schedule. The PACE program offers courses that allow our students to transfer, primarily to CSU, East
Bay PACE Program, majoring in either Human Development or Liberal Studies. Our students depend on
our course offerings to fulfill their transfer requirements. In addition, PACE has partnered with ECD, and
provides general education courses for ECD majors. PACE has also partnered with ACOE (Alameda
County Office of Education) Paraeducator Program, and provides all general education and lower
division courses so students in this program can fulfill their transfer requirements to CSU, East Bay.
The PACE program staff currently consists of a PACE coordinator (Mireille Giovanola – 3CAHs/semester
reassign time), a counselor (Julie Machado – 7-8 hours/week) and course instructors, most of whom are
adjunct. Social Sciences Administrative Assistant Cheryl Sannebeck provides some clerical support.
2.2. PACE COUNSELING AND THE IMPACT OF NOT GETTING ADEQUATE FUNDING FOR OUR
6
COUNSELOR:
PACE counselor Julie Machado does the following:
1. Reviews prospective PACE students’ applications with PACE coordinator.
2. Evaluates new applicants’ transcripts for proper placement into classes.
3. Conducts mandatory information meetings for prospective PACE students (4-6 meetings per
semester).
4. Meets with individual PACE students, and devises study plans for them (afternoon and evening
hours).
5. Maintains case files for individual T3 students (Paraeducator program, funded by ACOE).
6. Responds to students’ e-mails.
7. Meets on a regular basis with the PACE coordinator to discuss Program needs, criteria, staffing,
scheduling, and specific PACE students, as needed.
8. Regularly communicates with PACE students and faculty via newsletter.
According to Carolyn Arnold’s data (e-mail of 2/26/2013), there were 1,196 PACE-flagged (Major Code 2)
students in fall 2012. Since July 1, 2011, we have not had adequate funding for the PACE counselor. We
are requesting college funding for 15 hours of counseling per week. Basis for request: PR Yr One: A.I.
Basic success and Equity; A.III. Course Review; A.IV. Budget Summary; C. Action Planning. PR Yr Two:
IA/B.3). We simply cannot serve our students as well as we should, despite streamlining the
application process and requesting new students to attend a mandatory meeting so they can learn
more about the program and the services it offers. An ed plan requires ½ hour on the part of a
counselor, and that is a best-case scenario. Many of our students are coming back to school after several
years, and many have attended several schools in the past. All their transcripts must be evaluated for
proper class placement. Also, we cannot keep good track of our students and make sure they follow
their Ed plan and honor their commitment to take PACE classes to fulfill their GE requirements.
2.3. THE NEED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE/CLERICAL HELP
We need some type of clerical help. Basis for request: PR Yr 1: A.2. Basic Success and Equity.
The PACE coordinator and counselor positions are “part-time” positions. Without an administrative
assistant, the tasks usually performed by this individual have become the responsibility of the program
coordinator and counselor which essentially takes time away from working directly with students to
answer phones, make appointments, explain the program to everyone who calls in or emails for
information. However, I would like to note that this past year we have received help from Social Science
Administrative Assistant Cheryl Sannebeck for the following: classroom scheduling, PAFs for counselor
and instructors, and course schedule.
2.4. THE NEED FOR TUTORING/PEER ADVISING
As stated earlier, evening and Saturday students do not have access to the same academic and support
services as other students. However, while we cannot say how access to library services and academic
support would boost student persistence and success rates because we do not have the relevant data, it
is fair to say that our students’ persistence and success rates would be expected to increase with
increased access to these services
7
Appendix B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
All courses must be assessed at least once every three years. Please complete this chart that defines
your assessment schedule.
As stated elsewhere, PACE instructors assess CLOs within the context of the discipline they teach, and
only if asked to do so. Only three PACE courses have been assessed: ANTH 1, COMM 30, and PSY 33.
The schedule below reflects the assessment schedule we followed in the previous 3-year cycle. It does
not include COMM 30 which has been retired.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE:
Spring
2013
Fall
Spring
2014
2013
Fall
Spring
2015
2014
Fall
2015
Spring
2016
Fall
Spring
2017
2016
Courses:
Group 1
ANTH 1
Full
Assesst
Discuss,
report
results
Group 2
Full
Assesst
Full
Asst
PSY 33
Discuss,
report
results
Group 3:
Group 4:
This assessment schedule can be adjusted at any time if PACE instructors are asked by individual
discipline leads to assess their course’s CLOs.
8
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
PLEASE NOTE: This course was assessed recently. Only one section of the course was offered. It is now
no longer offered.
I am submitting the Closing-the-loop form that Janis Clark submitted and which contains the same
type of information that is asked for here. Members of the Communication discipline are also
supplying the information as part of their Program Review.
Course
Communication 30
Semester assessment data gathered
Spring 2012
Number of sections offered in the semester
1
Number of sections assessed
1
Percentage of sections assessed
100
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Spring 2012
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
1 (Janis Clark)
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
Outcome: Recognize, define and apply the principles of practical communication and
communication theory.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
90% of the class scored 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
100% of the class scored 3 (19%) or 4 (81%).
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students exceeded my expectations. There was no discussion with faculty teaching other sections of
this course, because this is the only section of COMM 30 that is offered.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
9
Students are working at Community College level and above.
Set clear goals and expect the best from your students.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
Communication 30 is no longer offered in the Language Arts Division because it duplicates
Communication 1. It will no longer be offered in PACE, beginning in fall 2012.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
X





Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
Outcome: Adopt an ethical perspective when presenting original ideas and/or incorporating the
ideas of others
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
90% of the class scored 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
95.3% of the class scored 3 (14.3%) or 4 (81%). 4.8% of the class scored 2.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The class as a whole exceeded my expectations. There was no discussion with faculty teaching other
sections of this course, because this is the only section of COMM 30 that is offered.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Students are working at Community College level and above.
10
Set clear goals and expect the best from your students. Mature students will rise to the challenge.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
Communication 30 is no longer offered in the Language Arts Division because it duplicates
Communication 1. It will no longer be offered in PACE, beginning in fall 2012.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
X





Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
Outcome: Listen to, evaluate, and respond to the ideas of others.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
90% of the class scored 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
100% of the class scored 3 (19%) or 4 (81%).
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students did excellent work. There was no basis for comparison with other sections of
Communication 30 because this is the only that is offered.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
My students are mature professionals who understand how to listen, evaluate, and respond to the
ideas of others. Emphasis on success is a key factor.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
Communication 30 is no longer offered in the Language Arts Division because it duplicates
Communication 1. It will no longer be offered in PACE, beginning in fall 2012.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
11
X





Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
Outcome: Understand the variety of value systems people use to communicate in daily life,
business, and community activities.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
90% of the class scored 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
95.3% of the class scored 3 (19%) or 4 (81%). 4.8% scored 2.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students did excellent work. There was no basis for comparison with other sections of
Communication 30 because this is the only that is offered.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
This was an excellent group of students who are professionals and come to school at night. They are
driven and focused. They pay attention and want to learn.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
Communication 30 is no longer offered in the Language Arts Division because it duplicates
Communication 1. It will no longer be offered in PACE, beginning in fall 2012.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
X





Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:

12
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
PLEASE NOTE: This course was assessed recently. Only one section of the course was offered.
I am submitting the Closing-the-loop form that was submitted by the Psychology faculty, based on
PACE instructor Ray Grimm’s answers and data. The form contains the same type of information that
is asked for here. Members of the Psychology discipline are also supplying the information as part of
their Program Review. The course was discussed at the discipline level by the full-time Psychology
faculty memberts.
Course
Semester assessment data gathered
Number of sections offered in the semester
Number of sections assessed
Percentage of sections assessed
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop”
discussion
Psychology 33
Spring 2012
1
1
100%
Spring 2012
Aldrian Estepa, Rani Nijjar,
Andrew Pierson, based on
Ray Grimm’s answers and
data
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
Outcome: Identify, compare, and contrast the key themes in adjustive
behavior including sociocultural, biological, and cognitive-behavioral
influences.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate
success for you? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
80% of the students will score either 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
93.3% of the students scored either 3 or 4.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your
discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The students that have remained in the class are quite engaged with the material taught
in the class. However, about a third of the students have dropped out of class, mostly
for life-related situations (death in the family, change of job, etc.).
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections
revealed?
Students take the VIA strength-assessment test, and have to build on their strengths
during the course of the semester. Most of the students report that they made
significant changes in their life while learning the material. They have improved
relationships with spouse or partner, and family members. They also have to contribute
to their community.
13
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
We need to improve student access to class. Students need to be able to apply material
to real-life setting.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
 Curricular
 Pedagogical
 Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
Outcome: Explain basic human nature and the development of human
potentialities through maturation and learning in a physical and
sociocultural environment.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate
success for you? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
80% of the students will score either 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
93.3% of students scored a 3 or 4.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your
discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The students that have remained in the class are quite engaged with the material taught
in the class. However, about a third of the students have dropped out of class, mostly
for life-related situations (death in the family, change of job, etc.).
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections
revealed?
Students take the VIA strength-assessment test, and have to build on their strengths
during the course of the semester. Most of the students report that they made
significant changes in their life while learning the material. They have improved
relationships with spouse or partner, and family members. They also have to contribute
to their community.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
We need to improve student access to class. Students need to be able to apply material
to real-life setting.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
14
X



Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
Outcome: Identify the principles of personality dynamics and their
relationship to the improvement of personal effectiveness.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate
success for you? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
80% of the students will score either 3 or 4.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
93.4% of students scored either 3 or 4.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your
discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
The students that have remained in the class are quite engaged with the material taught
in the class. However, about a third of the students have dropped out of class, mostly
for life-related situations (death in the family, change of job, etc.).
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections
revealed?
Students take the VIA strength-assessment test, and have to build on their strengths
during the course of the semester. Most of the students report that they made
significant changes in their life while learning the material. They have improved
relationships with spouse or partner, and family members. They also have to contribute
to their community.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your
reflections, discussions, and insights?
We need to improve student access to class. Students need to be able to apply material
to real-life setting.
What is the nature of the planned actions?
X Curricular
 Pedagogical
X Resource based
 Change to CLO or rubric
 Change to assessment methods
 Other:
15
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
PLEASE NOTE: There was only one Anth 1 section taught in the PACE program. I am submitting the
Closing-the-loop form that was submitted by the Anthropology faculty. The form contains the same
type of information that is asked for here, and remarks about the success of PACE students are
included in the form. The form will also be submitted as part of the Anthropology PR.
Course
Anthropology 1
Semester assessment data gathered
Fall 2011
Number of sections offered in the semester
9 (3 by FT; 6 by PT)
Number of sections assessed
5 (3 by FT; 2 by PT)
Percentage of sections assessed
55.56%
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion
Spring 2012
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion
Mireille Giovanola, Steve Gravely,
Christina Milner-Rose
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
Outcome: Students will be able to explain the difference between and significance of scientific
and non-scientific methodology and apply to their lives.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
75% of the class scoring 2 or higher.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
79% of the class scored 2 or higher.
(0=5.4%; 1=15.7%; 2=30.9%; 3=31.9%; 4=16.2%)
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
In this case, the results were better than expected, but they are not in the least satisfactory.
Students have difficulty understanding what science is, have difficulty using critical thinking skills to
solve problems, and have difficulty applying concepts learned in class to everyday life.
We think that students self-select into Anthropology 1. Many of them tell us that they are taking
Anthropology 1 instead of Biology, because it is not really science, or because they feel are not good
16
at science.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
We all agree that this SLO is extremely important and are considering spending more time on critical
thinking.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
We need to spend more time developing critical thinking skills, and offer students additional
resources. Ideally, we should have a prerequisite, but cannot at this time. We are thinking of
strongly recommending that students be eligible for English 1A for this class.
What is the nature of the planned actions?






Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
Outcome: Students will be able to integrate knowledge of genetics and evolutionary processes to
analyze diversity in modern human populations.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
80% of the class scoring 2 or higher.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
Overall, 76.8% scored 2 or higher.
(0=8.4%; 1=14.8%; 2=31.0%; 3=26.6%; 4=19.2%)
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Students generally have difficulty with genetics. Usually, the day students, who tend to be younger
and are exposed to some type of biology in high school, do better, on average, than the PACE
students. Interestingly, this was not the case here.
17
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
This is an important topic. See also below.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
We use different media to present the topic of (molecular, Mendelian, population) genetics, such as
presentations, in-class exercises, and short videos. We thought that perhaps resistance to the idea
of evolution might make it more difficult for students to learn these concepts. One of us (Mireille
Giovanola) did a small project to see whether this was in fact true. She found that of the 20 students
who took part in the survey at the end of the semester, the great majority said they felt strongly
about their religious beliefs. Out of these, only 2 said they felt that the idea of evolution had been
forced on them. These 2 students also said that they had never been exposed to the idea of
evolution before coming to Chabot. Admittedly, the sample was very small and should be expanded
at some point, but based on this survey, we think that many students lack critical thinking skills, and
that students who need a science class but are not interested in science may self-select into
Anthropology 1. Students would greatly profit from tutorial help. We are considering formally
recommending that students be eligible for English 1A when they take the class.
What is the nature of the planned actions?






Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 3:
Outcome: Students will be able to interpret human anatomy and behavior in the context of nonhuman primate anatomy and behavior.
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
80% of the class scoring 2 or higher.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
73.8% scored 2 or better.
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
This was such a disappointment! Usually, students enjoy the section on primates because they get
18
to handle specimens, discuss primate behavior based on videos shown in class, go on a zoo trip, and
apply their findings to human anatomy and behavior. They usually do well on this section of the
course.
In this particular case, however, students were partially evaluated on the basis of a short essay.
Students were asked to choose 2 out of 5 articles on primate behavior, extract the main idea,
explain how such studies allow us to understand early human behavior better (according to the
author/s of the article), and briefly critique the author/s conclusions. Several students either did not
answer the essay question (perhaps because they did not read the articles), or did a very superficial
job. Several could not extract the main idea or find the author’s/authors’ statement about human
behavior, even though the articles were discussed in class.
It might be worthwhile to broaden the material that is being assessed.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
We all feel that the CLO is valid as stated and assessed.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
When asked, students will freely admit that they do not read the assigned reading for various
reasons (they do not have money to buy the text (but all reading materials are on reserve in the
library), are not interested, do not have the time, get discouraged by too many unfamiliar words, for
example). One strategy would be to ask students to bring the articles to class, and use the “talking
to the text” technique to get them to read, as well as identify parts that they find hard to
understand. In this case, small-group discussion would also be helpful; in preparation for the test, so
would tutorial help. However, these are band-aids. It is very hard to assign primary sources on
unfamiliar topics when many students lack the necessary language and critical-thinking skills.
What is the nature of the planned actions?






Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
Other:
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 4:
Outcome: Students will be able to evaluate comparatively the paleo-anthropological evidence
for hominin/d evolution.
19
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you?
(Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
65% of the class scoring 2 or higher.
How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
59.3% of the class scored 2 or higher.
(0=24.2%; 16.7%; 2=34.3%; 3=19.2%; 4=5.6%)
Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with
other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Again, this was a disappointment. The fossil record of humans and their fossil relatives is one of the
last topics of the semester and by then, we feel, students should have the necessary tools and
enough practice to evaluate different ideas. However, this topic is also the hardest because students
have to integrate most of the concepts they learned during the semester in order to evaluate
competing hypotheses.
In this particular case again, students were partially evaluated on the basis of a short essay question.
It was shocking to see that overall, almost half of the students did not perform satisfactorily, and
that 24.2% of them scored 0, meaning that they either did not answer the question, or answered it
incorrectly.
What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Students are expected to integrate more concepts and evaluate competing ideas more critically as
the semester progresses.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections,
discussions, and insights?
This was the topic that required students to integrate different concepts and use sophisticated
analysis. It seems that many students need more help/time leading up to this level. However, we
are faced with the same problems that we encounter during the course of the semester.
(1) Many students do not read the assigned material for various reasons. We need to encourage to
read (even if they do not buy the texts), not just with words, but with different techniques (reading
to the text, small-group discussions, etc.).
(2) Many students do not have the proper reading or writing proficiency that is necessary to
succeed in the class. There are unfortunately no pre-requisites for any of the Anthropology classes.
We are thinking of including a language advisory for Anthropology, and possibly all Anthropology
classes.
(3) Many students have poor critical thinking skills. Some are shocked to hear that in science, ideas
are not necessarily equally valid! Good critical thinking in the field of study (Biological Anthropology)
20
is one of the outcomes we hope for in this course. Techniques such as the ones described under (1)
would probably also be useful here.
What is the nature of the planned actions?





Curricular
Pedagogical
Resource based
Change to CLO or rubric
Change to assessment methods
 Other:

21
Appendix C: Program Learning Outcomes
Considering your feedback, findings, and/or information that has arisen from the course level
discussions, please reflect on each of your Program Level Outcomes.
Program: PACE

PLO #1: The understanding of and appreciation for diversity

PLO #2: The ability to communicate effectively in both speech and writing
What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
There is no such thing as a PACE degree.
PACE is an inter-disciplinary program for working adults, and one of three learning communities at
Chabot College. The program offers all but one of the GE requirements (PE) for several AA degrees, and
offers the required GE courses for transfer. According to fall 2010 figures, about 61% of our students
transfer to another institution, mostly to the PACE program at CSU East Bay, to major in either Human
Development or Liberal Studies. In addition, PACE has partnered with ECD, and provides general
education courses for ECD majors. PACE has also partnered with ACOE (Alameda County Office of
Education) Paraeducator Program, and provides all general education and lower division courses so
students in this program can fulfill their transfer requirements to CSU East Bay.
Although the PACE program has two PLOs, we simply have not been able to assess and discuss our
courses as a group.
1. Unfortunately, a broad discussion of PLOs involving the mostly adjunct PACE instructors has not
occurred. We try to capture what we would like our students to get out of the program in general, while
they pursue their educational and career goals.
PACE instructors met voluntarily once in fall 2011.
2. PACE PLOs have been mapped to selected CLOs, but CLOs and CLO rubrics were developed in the
context of the respective disciplines, not by individual members of the PACE program.
3. Likewise, assessments and discussions are conducted within the respective disciplines, not by
individual members of the PACE program. So unless a PACE instructor is asked by his/her discipline to
assess CLOs, he/she is not part of the general discussion about the discipline. This is complicated by the
fact that 15 of 17 PACE instructors are adjunct faculty members.
It may be time to revise the PLOs for PACE.
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:
N/A.
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of students
completing your program?
Actions planned:
N/A
22
Program: ________________________________________________
 PLO #1:
 PLO #2:
 PLO #3:
 PLO #4:

What questions or investigations arose as a result of these reflections or discussions?
Explain:
What program-level strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
Strengths revealed:
What actions has your discipline determined might be taken to enhance the learning of students
completing your program?
Actions planned:
23
Appendix D: A Few Questions
Please answer the following questions with "yes" or "no". For any questions answered "no", please
provide an explanation. No explanation is required for "yes" answers :-)
1. Have all of your course outlines been updated within the past five years? If no, identify the
course outlines you will update in the next curriculum cycle. Ed Code requires all course
outlines to be updated every six years.
No. The following course outlines should be updated: ARTH 1 (last updated in fall 2007), HUMN
65 (last updated in fall 2006). However, these outlines must be updated by members of the
respective disciplines, not by individual PACE instructors.
2. Have all of your courses been offered within the past five years? If no, why should those
courses remain in our college catalog? Yes.
3. Do all of your courses have the required number of CLOs completed, with corresponding
rubrics? If no, identify the CLO work you still need to complete, and your timeline for
completing that work this semester.
Yes. CLOs and rubrics are established within the context of each discipline (i.e. Anthropology,
Math, etc.). PACE instructors do not make up their own CLOs and rubrics.
4. Have you assessed all of your courses and completed "closing the loop" forms for all of your
courses within the past three years? If no, identify which courses still require this work, and
your timeline for completing that work this semester.
Yes. PACE instructors who were identified as needing to assess their PACE course/s
by
SLOAC and members of their individual disciplines have done so and submitted a Closing-the-Loop
form. Closing-the-loop forms were submitted for ANTH 1, COMM 30, and PSY 33, and are submitted
with these disciplines’ program review.
5. Have you developed and assessed PLOs for all of your programs? If no, identify programs
which still require this work, and your timeline to complete that work this semester.
Two PLOs have been developed, and mapped to selected CLOs. However PLOs have not been
assessed. PACE is not a degree, nor is it a major. Rather, the program offers GE courses for the
completion of various AA degrees, and for transfer, mostly to CSUEB PACE program
6. If you have course sequences, is success in the first course a good predictor of success in the
subsequent course(s)?
Course sequences exist for Math and English. It is difficult to assess whether success in the first
course is a good predictor of success in subsequent courses, because we are given aggregate data,
not data for PACE only.
7. Does successful completion of College-level Math and/or English correlate positively with
success in your courses? If not, explain why you think this may be. Not necessarily. Many PACE
students put off taking Math classes. However, successful completion of English courses ought
to help students succeed in other classes. Again, data are shown as aggregates, so this is difficult
to gauge for PACE only. I would argue that even if a student has not started or completed the
Math and/or English sequence, successful completion of Anthropology 1, for example, is a
predictor of success for future courses. The course requires students to develop critical
reading and writing skills.
24
Appendix E: Proposal for New Initiatives (Complete for each new initiative)
Audience: Deans/Unit Administrators, PRBC, Foundation, Grants Committee, College Budget Committee
Purpose: A “New Initiative” is a new project or expansion of a current project that supports our Strategic
Plan. The project will require the support of additional and/or outside funding. The information you
provide will facilitate and focus the research and development process for finding both internal and
external funding.
How does your initiative address the college's Strategic Plan goal, or significantly improve student
learning?
What is your specific goal and measurable outcome?
What is your action plan to achieve your goal?
Target
Required Budget (Split out
Completion personnel, supplies, other
Date
categories)
Activity (brief description)
How will you manage the personnel needs?
New Hires:
Faculty # of positions
Classified staff # of positions
Reassigning existing employee(s) to the project; employee(s) current workload will be:
Covered by overload or part-time employee(s)
Covered by hiring temporary replacement(s)
Other, explain
At the end of the project period, the proposed project will:
Be completed (onetime only effort)
Require additional funding to continue and/or institutionalize the project
(obtained by/from):
Will the proposed project require facility modifications, additional space, or program relocation?
No
Yes, explain:
Will the proposed project involve subcontractors, collaborative partners, or cooperative agreements?
No
Yes, explain:
Do you know of any grant funding sources that would meet the needs of the proposed project?
No
Yes, list potential funding sources:
25
Appendix F1: Full-Time Faculty/Adjunct Staffing Request(s) [Acct. Category 1000]
Audience: Faculty Prioritization Committee and Administrators
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time faculty
and adjuncts
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Cite evidence and data to support your request,
including enrollment management data (EM Summary by Term) for the most recent three years, student
success and retention data , and any other pertinent information. Data is available at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm .
1. Number of new faculty requested in this discipline: Counselor, part-time (15 hours/week)
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal. Please use the enrollment management data. Additional data that will
strengthen your rationale include FTES trends over the last 5 years, persistence, FT/PT faculty ratios,
CLO and PLO assessment results and external accreditation demands.
According to Carolyn Arnold’s data (e-mail of 2/26/2013), there were 1,196 PACE-flagged (Major Code 2)
students in fall 2012. Since July 1, 2011, we have not had adequate funding for the PACE counselor. We
are requesting college funding for 15 hours of counseling per week. Basis for request: PR Yr One: A.I.
Basic success and Equity; A.III. Course Review; A.IV. Budget Summary; C. Action Planning. PR Yr Two:
IA/B.3). We simply cannot serve our students as well as we should, despite streamlining the application
process and requesting new students to attend a mandatory meeting so they can learn more about the
program and the services it offers. An ed plan requires ½ hour on the part of a counselor, and that is a
best-case scenario. Many of our students are coming back to school after several years, and many have
attended several schools in the past. All their transcripts must be evaluated for proper class placement.
Also, we cannot keep good track of our students and make sure they follow their Ed plan and honor
their commitment to take PACE classes to fulfill all their GE requirements.
4. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and your student learning goals are
required. Indicate here any information from advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews
that is pertinent to the proposal.
More counseling hours would allow the PACE counselor to do the following for evening and Saturday
PACE students:
1. Clarify our pathways and capacity of each pathway vs. student goals (Chabot College 2012-2015
Strategic Plan, possible initiative #1).
2. In general, provide information to the Chabot community to help our students achieve their goals
(possible initiative #2).
3. Help the undecided to define a goal (possible initiative #3).
4. Get students onto their “critical path” quickly (possible initiative #4).
26
5. Help the PACE coordinator to arrange for PACE instructors to hold joint office hours (possible initiative
#5) in a common space such as a dedicated space in the library (see attached facilities request).
6. Help the PACE coordinator to assess scheduling patterns and work collaboratively with other divisions
(possible initiative #6).
7. Keep assessing which courses are better offered as online, hybrid, or face-to-face courses, based on
student requests and success rates (possible initiative #6).
8. Help the PACE coordinator streamline and strengthen pathways (possible initiative #7).
9. Track students throughout their academic career at Chabot (with the help of Institutional Research
and Admissions and Records).
27
Appendix F2: Classified Staffing Request(s) including Student Assistants [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement positions for full-time and
part-time regular (permanent) classified professional positions (new, augmented and replacement
positions). Remember, student assistants are not to replace Classified Professional staff.
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal, safety, mandates, accreditation issues. Please cite
any evidence or data to support your request. If this position is categorically funded, include and
designate the funding source of new categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent
upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: ______
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1.
2.
3. Rationale for your proposal.
4. Statements about the alignment with the strategic plan and program review are required. Indicate
here any information from advisory committees or outside accreditation reviews that is pertinent to
the proposal.
28
Appendix F3: FTEF Requests
Audience: Administrators, CEMC, PRBC
Purpose: To recommend changes in FTEF allocations for subsequent academic year and guide Deans and
CEMC in the allocation of FTEF to disciplines. For more information, see Article 29 (CEMC) of the Faculty
Contract.
Instructions: In the area below, please list your requested changes in course offerings (and
corresponding request in FTEF) and provide your rationale for these changes. Be sure to analyze
enrollment trends and other relevant data at
http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm .
29
Appendix F4: Academic Learning Support Requests [Acct. Category 2000]
Audience: Administrators, PRBC, Learning Connection
Purpose: Providing explanation and justification for new and replacement student assistants (tutors,
learning assistants, lab assistants, supplemental instruction, etc.).
Instructions: Please justify the need for your request. Discuss anticipated improvements in student
learning and contribution to the Strategic Plan goal. Please cite any evidence or data to support your
request. If this position is categorically funded, include and designate the funding source of new
categorically-funded position where continuation is contingent upon available funding.
1. Number of positions requested: 2
2. If you are requesting more than one position, please rank order the positions.
Position
Description
1. Math tutor
Tutor for PACE and evening students in Math
65, 55 and 31
2. English tutor
Writing tutor for PACE and other evening
students
3.
4.
3. Rationale for your proposal based on your program review conclusions. Include anticipated impact
on student learning outcomes and alignment with the strategic plan goal. Indicate if this request is
for the same, more, or fewer academic learning support positions.
1. To support learning communities.
PACE is a learning community for adult students who have a traditional work schedule. PACE offers
evening, Saturday, and online courses. Facilities and services such as the library, WASC, PATH, etc. are
not available at those times.
2. To increase student persistence and success for evening students.
Evening students currently have virtually no support. Saturday students have none. The majority of
evening and Saturday classes have been and are taught by adjunct faculty, and so have been hit
particularly hard when class offerings needed to be reduced due to budget constraints. This was
followed by a reduction in services. Many students are applying to the PACE program because they
badly need evening classes, and because they need some kind of support.
One could argue that these students are entitled to such services: they are taxpayers and their tuition is
the same as that of day students.
30
Appendix F5: Supplies & Services Requests [Acct. Category 4000 and 5000]
Audience: Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for supplies and service, and to guide the Budget Committee in allocation of
funds.
Instructions: In the area below, please list both your current and requested budgets for categories 4000
and 5000 in priority order. Do NOT include conferences and travel, which are submitted on Appendix
M6. Justify your request and explain in detail any requested funds beyond those you received this year.
Please also look for opportunities to reduce spending, as funds are very limited.
Project or Items
Requested
N/A
2012-13 Budget
Requested Received
$0
S0
2013-14
Request
$69.99 + tax
$14.58 + tax
31
Rationale
1 black toner cartridge HP CE 285A
for HP Laserjet 1200 series for PACE
counselor’s printer.
Source: frys.com
2 reams of white paper (8.5” x 11”).
Hammermill, 500/Ream.
$7.29 each at staples.com.
Appendix F6: Conference and Travel Requests [Acct. Category 5000]
Audience: Staff Development Committee, Administrators, Budget Committee, PRBC
Purpose: To request funding for conference attendance, and to guide the Budget and Staff Development
Committees in allocation of funds.
Instructions: Please list specific conferences/training programs, including specific information on the
name of the conference and location. Note that the Staff Development Committee currently has no
budget, so this data is primarily intended to identify areas of need that could perhaps be fulfilled on
campus, and to establish a historical record of need. Your rationale should discuss student learning goals
and/or connection to the Strategic Plan goal.
Conference/Training
Program
2013-14 Request
Rationale
$0
32
Appendix F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests [Acct. Category 6000]
Audience: Budget Committee, Technology Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Budget Committee and to inform priorities of the Technology
Committee.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests. If you're requesting classroom
technology, see http://www.chabotcollege.edu/audiovisual/Chabot%20College%20Standard.pdf for the
brands/model numbers that are our current standards. If requesting multiple pieces of equipment,
please rank order those requests. Include shipping cost and taxes in your request.
Please note: Equipment requests are for equipment whose unit cost exceeds $200. Items which are
less expensive should be requested as supplies. Software licenses should also be requested as
supplies.
Project or Items
Requested
2012-13 Budget
Requested Received
$0
0
2013-14
Request
$0
Rationale*
* Rationale should include discussion of impact on student learning, connection to our strategic plan
goal, impact on student enrollment, safety improvements, whether the equipment is new or
replacement, potential ongoing cost savings that the equipment may provide, ongoing costs of
equipment maintenance, associated training costs, and any other relevant information that you believe
the Budget Committee should consider.
33
Appendix F8: Facilities Requests
Audience: Facilities Committee, Administrators
Purpose: To be read and responded to by Facilities Committee.
Background: Following the completion of the 2012 Chabot College Facility Master Plan, the Facilities
Committee (FC) has begun the task of re-prioritizing Measure B Bond budgets to better align with current
needs. The FC has identified approximately $18M in budgets to be used to meet capital improvement
needs on the Chabot College campus. Discussion in the FC includes holding some funds for a year or two
to be used as match if and when the State again funds capital projects, and to fund smaller projects that
will directly assist our strategic goal. The FC has determined that although some of the college's greatest
needs involving new facilities cannot be met with this limited amount of funding, there are many smaller
pressing needs that could be addressed. The kinds of projects that can be legally funded with bond
dollars include the "repairing, constructing, acquiring, equipping of classrooms, labs, sites and facilities."
Do NOT use this form for equipment or supply requests.
Instructions: Please fill in the following as needed to justify your requests. If requesting more than one
facilities project, please rank order your requests.
Brief Title of Request (Project Name): Study/Meeting space for PACE and evening and Saturday
students
Building/Location: Library
Description of the facility project. Please be as specific as possible.
A space with individual and communal worktables, as well as informal sitting arrangements open in
the evening and on Saturday. There should also be access to computers and library services.
What educational programs or institutional purposes does this equipment support?
1. To support learning communities, and
2. To increase student persistence and success for evening students.
3. See also Chabot College 2012-2015 Strategic Plan, #7.
Briefly describe how your request relates specifically to meeting the Strategic Plan Goal and to
enhancing student learning?
1. PACE is a learning community for adult students who have a traditional work schedule. PACE offers
evening, Saturday, and online courses. It is very difficult for evening and Saturday students to meet and
support each other if facilities and services (library, WASC, PATH, etc.) are not open or available at
those times.
2. Evening students currently have virtually no support. Saturday students have none. The majority of
evening and Saturday classes have been and are taught by adjunct faculty, and so have been hit
particularly hard when class offerings needed to be reduced. This was followed by a reduction in
services. Many students are applying to the PACE program because they badly need evening classes,
and because they need some type of support. One could argue that these students are entitled to such
services: they are taxpayers and their tuition is the same as that of day students.
34