CABOT Revised

Document Sample
CABOT Revised Powered By Docstoc
					                         Glendale Community College
                      Instructional Program Review
                                     2004-2005




         Computer and Business Office
                Technology
                         Study Manager – Joy Lottie
                            (Revised December 15, 2004)



For information on Program Review:

If you have questions about the GCC Program Review process, contact:

                   Pete Witt
                   Program Review Coordinator
                   (818) 240-1000 extension 5653
                   pwitt@glendale.edu

                   Jill Lewis
                   Manager, Instructional Services
                   (818) 240-1000 extension 3943
                   jlewis@glendale.edu

If you have questions about the Program Review document or the included data, contact:

                   Edward Karpp
                   Director of Institutional Research
                   (818) 240-1000 extension 5390
                   ekarpp@glendale.edu
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                   About the Program Review Document

Beginning in 2004-2005, the Program Review document is available in Microsoft Word format.
Data presented in this document are linked to an Excel spreadsheet, which should be located
in the same folder as this Word document.

Navigating the Document

This document may be navigated as any Word document, using the scroll bar to move to a
particular section. The Table of Contents includes hyperlinks to each section of the document,
and each section contains a hyperlink back to the contents page.


Responding to Questions
The document includes questions to which programs respond. After each question is an
answer box. If you type in the answer box, it will expand to contain the answer paragraphs.
Any kind of formatting can be included in the answer box, including different typefaces. Some
formatting (such as bulleted lists) can affect the borders of the answer box, but this can be
cleaned up using the usual Word formatting commands.




                                                 2
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                    Table of Contents

The table of contents allows access to all pages of the document. Click on an underlined
section to move to that page.

Section 1. Demand, Success, and Retention
      Section 1.01. Demand & Success
      Section 1.02. Demand: Fill Rate
      Section 1.03. (deleted)
      Section 1.04. Demand: Number of Majors
      Section 1.05. Demand: Certificates Awarded
      Section 1.06. Demand: Reason for Taking Course

Section 2. Curriculum and Learning Methods
      Section 2.01. Courses and Content: Courses Not Offered
      Section 2.02. Courses and Content: Course Additions and Revisions
      Section 2.03. Courses and Content: Course Standards
      Section 2.04. Prerequisites, Corequisites, and Advisories on Recommended
                    Preparation
      Section 2.05. Transfer and Articulation: Transfer Status of Courses
      Section 2.06. Transfer and Articulation: Articulation

Section 3. Student Equity
      Section 3.01. Enrollment by Equity Group
      Section 3.02. Retention by Equity Group
      Section 3.03. Success by Equity Group
      Section 3.04. Grade Distribution by Equity Group

Section 4. Program Management
      Section 4.01. Efficiency: Faculty Load
      Section 4.02. Planning: Planning Effectiveness
      Section 4.03. Planning: Distribution of Faculty Load

Section 5. Personnel
      Section 5.01. Staffing: FTEF, Adjunct FTEF, and Full-Time/Part-Time Ratio
      Section 5.02. Staffing: Overload and Large Lecture
      Section 5.03. Staffing: Teaching/Service Time
      Section 5.04. Professional Qualifications: FT Faculty Qualifications and Development
                    Activities
      Section 5.05. Professional Activities: FT Faculty Professional Activities
      Section 5.06. Professional Activities: Committee Participation
      Section 5.07. Future Needs: Projected Staffing

Section 6. Facilities and Equipment
      Section 6.01. Facilities and Equipment: Facilities
      Section 6.02. Facilities and Equipment: Equipment/Resources
      Section 6.03. Facilities and Equipment: Staffing

                                                 3
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 1
       Demand, Success, and Retention




                                 4
                    Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                      1.01. Demand & Success

Analyze the enrollment and success data provided by Research & Planning and answer the
following questions.



                                              Part 1. Enrollments

Table 1.01A. Census Enrollment
Number of students enrolled at census date

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003      2003-2004      Trend

Day                            1,217             1,369                1,807     1,830       No trend

Evening                         512               880                 1,096      946        No trend

Unknown/TBA                      0                 0                   0          0         No trend

Program Total                  1,729             2,249                2,903     2,776       No trend



Table 1.01B. Weekly Student Contact Hours (WSCH)

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003      2003-2004      Trend

Day                            4,157             6,167                6,718     6,446       No trend

Evening                        2,011             4,423                3,413     3,263       No trend

Unknown/TBA                      0                 0                   0          0         No trend

Program Total                  6,169            10,590            10,131        9,709       No trend

% of All Credit                1.8%              2.3%                 2.2%      2.3%




                                       Part 2. Enrollments Per Section

Table 1.01C. Number of Sections
Note: Mpull sections are counted as a single section in this table.

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003      2003-2004      Trend

Day                             68                75                   93        75         No trend

Evening                         35                41                   48        43         No trend

Unknown/TBA                      0                 0                   0          0         No trend

Program Total                   103               116                 141        118        No trend




                                                          5
                    Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
Table 1.01D. Census Enrollments Per Section
Note: Mpull sections are counted as a single section in this table.

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003        2003-2004    Trend

Day                            17.9              18.3                 19.4           24.4   No trend

Evening                        14.6              21.5                 22.8           22.0   No trend

Unknown/TBA                      --                --                  --             --       n/a

Program Total                  16.8              19.4                 20.6           23.5   Increasing

All Credit                     24.1              26.2                 27.7           27.5




                                        Part 3. Success & Retention

Table 1.01E. Course Success Rates
Percentage of students enrolled at census receiving a grade of A, B, C, or Credit.

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003        2003-2004
Day                            78%               81%                  79%            82%
Evening                        78%               79%                  81%            80%
Unknown/TBA                      --                --                  --             --
Program Total                  78%               80%                  80%            82%
All Credit                     69%               70%                  71%            71%



Table 1.01F. Course Retention Rate
Percentage of students enrolled at census receiving a grade other than W (Withdraw)

                           2000-2001         2001-2002         2002-2003        2003-2004
Day                            92%               93%                  93%            93%
Evening                        91%               91%                  91%            92%
Unknown/TBA                      --                --                  --             --
Program Total                  92%               92%                  92%            92%
All Credit                     87%               88%                  89%            86%




                                                          6
                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
Table 1.01G. Grade Distribution

                         2000-2001       2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004
Graded
   A                         30%             32%             24%             24%
   B                         27%             27%             25%             23%
   C                         18%             15%             12%             11%
   D                         6%              5%               5%              3%
   F                         7%              7%               5%              3%
Credit/No Credit
   CR                        4%              6%              19%             23%
   NC                        1%              0%               3%              4%
Withdrawals (W)              8%              8%               8%              8%
Census                      1,729           2,249           2,903           2,776



1. Given the data, what changes can be identified in enrollment patterns?

Day enrollment has increased. However, evening peaked in 2002-2003 and began to decline
in 2003-2004. This decline may be due to the budget crisis and/or increase in tuition. The
success and retention rate increased for day-time students.



2. How is the program responding to change?

Since the last review, our name has changed from Business Office Technologies (BUSOT) to
Computer Applications/Business Office Technology (CABOT). This change identifies that our
area is more technology oriented. We see a favorable change because we are trying to stay
on course with technology and we have been successful in doing this. Our day program has
expanded and we feel this is due to the changes in our program.




                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                    7
                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                     1.02. Demand: Fill Rate

Review and analyze the fill rate data provided by Institutional Research and answer the
following questions.

Table 1.02A. Fill Rate
Percentage of available seats filled (census enrollment divided by class size)

                           2000-2001         2001-2002        2002-2003          2003-2004
Day                            77%               70%              81%              87%
Evening                        75%               85%              92%              76%
Unknown/TBA                     --                --                --              --
Program Total                  76%               75%              85%              83%
All Credit                     82%               87%              91%              91%


1.    Given the data, do sections in the program have a higher fill rate compared to sections in
      other programs? Please comment.

Our fill rate increased in the day category, declined in the evening. Our fill rate for the day is a
few percentage points below other programs. Our evening fill rate has a much more significant
change in percentage points that the other programs


2.    What adjustments are indicated? Please explain.

We have cut down on sections and this increases the fill rate because the students have to
take the sections when they are offered.




                                           Go to Table of Contents




                                                         8
                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                          1.04. Demand: Number of Majors

Table 1.04A. Number of Credit Students by Major

                                                                   2000-2001       2001-2002   2002-2003   20
CLERICAL TRAINEE                                                        1                  1       0
BUSINESS - SECRETARY, EXECUTIVE                                         4                  3      13
BUSINESS-MEDICAL ASSISTANT (ADMINISTRATIVE)                             2                  2       5
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTION                 7              11          6
BUSINESS-GENERAL OFFICE                                                24              29         27
BUSINESS-OFFICE ASSISTANT (BILINGUAL)                                   3                  6       3
BUSINESS-SECRETARY, GENERAL                                             4                  3       6
BUSINESS-SECRETARY, LEGAL                                              10              10          7
BUSINESS - SECRETARY, MEDICAL                                           3                  2       0
BUSINESS - WORD PROCESSING SPECIALIST                                   0                  3       1
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL FRONT OFFICE                 15              10         14
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT                       11                  6       6
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL OFFICE                                 38              32         21
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL SECRETARY                     4                  3       3
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - EXECUTIVE SECRETARY                             2                  1       1
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL SECRETARY                               6                  6       7
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - LEGAL SECRETARY                                 7                  5       2
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - LEGAL SECRETARY                            1                  1       4
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY – SECRETARY                                  0                  0       1
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - GENERAL OFFICE                             5                  7      10
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - EXECUTIVE SECRETARY                        0                  0       1
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT                   0                  2       1




Total                                                                  147             143        139



1.      Given the data, is the number of majors what you would expect? Please comment.

 Because of the change in technology and the demand of learning the new technology the
majors in some areas have declined a little. ie. secretary, executive and secretary, legal and
some have remained stable. ie. medical assistant and general office.




2.      Has the number of majors changed over time?




                                                    9
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

After reviewing again carefully number 1.04 Demand: Number of Majors, there appears to be a
change. Most have declined except Medical Administrative Services-Medical Transcription and
Administrative Assistant.




3.   What evidence is there that strengths of the program (e.g., its uniqueness) attract students
     to GCC?

We exude energy and are on the cutting edge. Our students feel this energy which
consequently attracts them to our program. The Computer Applications/Business Office
Technology Department is constantly responding to industry changes. ie MOUS courses. The
material on chart 105A indicates how the MOUS courses have given a big boost to the
certificates that we award.




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  10
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                    1.05. Demand: Certificates Awarded

Table 1.05A. Number of Certificates Awarded

                                                                2000-2001       2001-2002   2002-2003   20
CLERICAL TRAINEE                                                     1                  1       4
BUSINESS-SECRETARY, LEGAL                                            0                  0       0
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL FRONT OFFICE               8                  5       5
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL OFFICE                               1                  0       0
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - LEGAL SECRETARY                              1                  0       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - LEGAL SECRETARY                         2                  0       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - GENERAL OFFICE                         41              30         65
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - EXECUTIVE SECRETARY                     1                  1       1
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT                3                  3       3
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL SECRETARY                            0                  0       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY – SECRETARY                               0                  1       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 1                          0              13          1
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 2                          0                  6       5
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 3                          0                  5       1
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 4                          0                  8      10
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 5                          0                  7       6
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTION              0                  0       1
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 7                          0                  0       2
RECEPTIONIST/OFFICE CLERK                                            0                  0      12
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL SECRETARY                  0                  0       0




Total                                                               58              80         116




                                                 11
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
Table 1.05B. Number of AS Degrees Awarded

                                                                2000-2001       2001-2002   2002-2003   20
CLERICAL TRAINEE                                                     0                  0       0
BUSINESS-SECRETARY, LEGAL                                            1                  0       0
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL FRONT OFFICE               0                  2       1
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL OFFICE                               3                  3       1
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - LEGAL SECRETARY                              0                  0       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - LEGAL SECRETARY                         2                  2       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - GENERAL OFFICE                          8              15          8
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - EXECUTIVE SECRETARY                     0                  1       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY - ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT                0                  1       0
OFFICE ADMINISTRATION - GENERAL SECRETARY                            0                  1       0
BUSINESS OFFICE TECHNOLOGY – SECRETARY                               0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 1                          0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 2                          0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 3                          0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 4                          0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 5                          0                  0       0
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL TRANSCRIPTION              0                  0       0
MICROSOFT OFFICE USER SPECIALIST - OPTION 7                          0                  0       0
RECEPTIONIST/OFFICE CLERK                                            0                  0       0
MEDICAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES - MEDICAL SECRETARY                  0                  0       0




Total                                                               14              25         10



                                     Go to Table of Contents




                                                 12
                     Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                         1.06. Demand: Reason for Taking Course

Instructions: Administer the student questionnaire provided by Institutional Research to two
sections of each of four representative courses. If possible, include both day and evening
classes. (If fewer than four courses exist in the program, then survey each course.) Then fill in
the matrix below summarizing the percentage of respondents who indicated each reason for
taking the course, and answer the following questions.

Refer to Section 2.05 to see the actual transferability of courses in the program.

         Note: In administering the student questionnaire, it is permitted to explain to
               students what the terms ―IGETC,‖ ―CSU Breadth,‖ etc. mean.

                   IGETC (Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum) is a set of
                   requirements for a student to fulfill general education requirements before
                   transferring to a UC or CSU institution.

                   CSU Breadth is a requirement for transferring to a CSU campus.
                                                                                   Certificate Requirement




                                                                                                                                               General Ed. Transfer to
                                                           Needed for Major Prep




                                                                                                                                               Independent Institution
                                   Needed for Transfer –




                                                                                                                                                                         Personal Enrichment




                                                                                                                                                                                                              Job Skills/ Job
                                   Elective Units
                     CSU Breadth




                                                                                                                                 Requirement
                                                                                                                                 AA/AS Grad
                                                                                                             Prerequisite




                                                                                                                                                                                                              Preparation
                                                                                                                                                                                               Basic Skills




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Not Sure
           IGETC




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                Other
Course
CABOT     14%        0%             28%                    45%                     72%                       66%                 55%           10%                       17%                   66%            59%               3%      0%
103
CABOT     13%        4%               0%                   30%                     74%                       39%                 52%           17%                       22%                   39%            22%               4%      0%
103
CABOT     13%        2%             15%                    38%                     73%                       54%                 54%           13%                       19%                   54%            42%               4%      0%
103
TOTAL

CABOT      0%        0%               0%                   9%                      64%                       18%                 64%             0%                      27%                   18%            55%               0%      0%
105

CABOT      9%        0%             23%                    32%                     95%                       32%                 41%           14%                       14%                   55%            50%               0%      0%
110
CABOT     13%        6%               6%                   38%                     63%                       19%                 44%             6%                      19%                   13%            19%               13%     0%
110
CABOT     11%        3%             16%                    34%                     82%                       26%                 42%           11%                       16%                   37%            37%               5%      0%
TOTAL
CABOT      0%        0%               4%                   11%                     64%                       0%                  36%             4%                      18%                   0%             29%               0%      0%
260
CABOT     11%        0%               0%                   11%                     26%                       11%                 47%             5%                      26%                   5%             32%               0%      5%
270

CABOT      0%        0%               0%                   10%                     40%                       10%                 10%             0%                      50%                   0%             50%               20%     0%
270

CABOT      7%        0%               0%                   10%                     31%                       10%                 34%             3%                      34%                   3%             38%               7%      3%

                                                                                                                            13
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
270
TOTAL



1.   What (if anything) is indicated by the program data?

Few CABOT students surveyed are taking these courses in order to transfer. The majority of
CABOT students indicated they are working toward a certificate or an A.A.degree. Students
who listed ―other‖ as their reason taking the course included wanting to have an introduction to
the computer, improving their English and writing skills for business, and needing to type
college papers for other classes.



                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  14
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 2
        Curriculum & Learning Methods




                                 15
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

        Section 2.01. Courses & Content: Courses Not Offered

Instructions: List all courses in your program which are in the Catalog but have not been
offered in the last three years.

                                        Name of Course
                                     ABC SHORTHAND
                                     BEGIN. SHORTHAND
                                     SHORTHAND SPEED
                                     DEV.
                                     CABOT 254
                                     CABOT 256




1.   Given the data, are there courses that should be retired? Please comment.

The Shorthand courses are now obsolete and should be retired




2.   If there are courses not offered in the last three years that you do not wish to retire, what
     extenuating circumstances are there to keep them listed?

CABOT 254 AND 256 should not be retired. These are generic titles for word processing and
software changes occur frequently, i.e. word perfect. We would like to keep the generic title in
case we need to use it in the future.




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  16
                  Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

       2.02. Courses & Content: Course Additions and Revisions

Instructions: List all courses in your program that have undergone significant changes since
they (and their course outlines) were last approved by C&I and Academic Affairs.

                                        Name of Course
                                      NONE




1. Given the data, are there course outlines that should be revised?


N/A



2.    Are there courses which are not consistent with current practice in the field?


N/A



                                       Go to Table of Contents




                                                   17
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                2.03. Courses & Content: Course Standards

Instructions: Complete the chart below, reflecting the frequency with which activities take
place within the program to determine what content is actually taught and learned.

Determination of what is taught and learned takes place as part of:

     A) Division chair’s review of individual instructors’ class       Once a semester
        overviews
     B) Mentoring of part-time faculty to ensure integrity of          Once a semester
        course outline
     C) Evaluation of program faculty                                  Other
     D) Exit survey for program students                               Never
     E) Exit survey for program faculty                                Never
     F) Program-wide or course-wide exams (e.g., ESL level             Never
        exams)
     G) Division chair’s review of individual instructors’ finals or   Once a semester
        other exams

1.   Is there another mechanism in place (formal or informal) to assure that course content is
     being taught and learned? Please explain.


Meeting by content area.


2.   Based on the available data, are all faculty teaching to the course outline/standards?
     Please explain.

Yes. Since a lot of our classes are skill oriented, we must teach with common standards in
mind. It only seems fair that students taking the same skills courses be taught by the same
standards from all faculty..




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  18
               Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

         2.04. Pre/Co-requisites: Prerequisites, Corequisites,
            and Advisories on Recommended Preparation


Instructions: Analyze the data provided on prerequisites, corequisites, and advisories on
recommended preparation to answer the following questions.

Courses with prerequisites:
                                                                                         Requires
Course          Prerequisite                                                             Validation
CABOT 101       CABOT 205 or one year of typing and one of the following: Eligibility       Yes
                for CABOT 102 or ENGL 191 or ESL 141
CABOT 102       CABOT 103 and one of the following: Eligibility for ENGL 191 or ESL     By 2007-2008
                141
CABOT 103       Eligibility for ESL 133 or English 189                                  By 2007-2008
CABOT 105       CABOT 103 and eligibility for ENGL 120, CABOT 103 and eligibility for   By 2007-2008
                ESL 151, or CABOT 102
CABOT 120       Eligibility for CABOT 102 or English 120                                    Yes
CABOT 125       CABOT 205 or equivalent and eligibility for CABOT 102                       Yes
CABOT 130       CABOT 120 or CABOT 125, or one year of high school shorthand or             Yes
                equivalent
CABOT 155       CABOT 205 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 155       CABOT 254 or CABOT 265 or equivalent                                        Yes
CABOT 162       CABOT 210 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 162       CABOT 101                                                                   Yes
CABOT 162       CABOT 254 or CABOT 265 or equivalent                                        Yes
CABOT 165       CABOT 210 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 165       CABOT 254 or CABOT 265 or equivalent                                        Yes
CABOT 165       Eligibility for CABOT 102 or ENGL 191 or ESL 141                            Yes
CABOT 185       CABOT 182 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 190       CABOT 182                                                                   Yes
CABOT 190       CABOT 210 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 190       CABOT 103                                                                   Yes
CABOT 190       CABOT 254 or CABOT 265 or equivalent                                        Yes
CABOT 195       CABOT 190                                                                   Yes
CABOT 209       CABOT 208 or CS/IS 208 or equivalent                                        Yes
CABOT 210       CABOT 205 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 230       CABOT 205 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 254       CABOT 205 or equivalent and CS/IS 208                                       Yes
CABOT 256       CABOT 254 with same software or equivalent                                  Yes
CABOT 260       CABOT 200 and CS/IS 208                                                     Yes
CABOT 265       CABOT 200 and CS/IS 208 or equivalent                                       Yes
CABOT 266       CABOT 265 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 270       CABOT 200 and CS/IS 208 or equivalent                                       Yes
CABOT 271       CABOT 270 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 275       CABOT 200 and CS/IS 208 or equivalent                                       Yes
CABOT 276       CABOT 275 or equivalent                                                     Yes
CABOT 280       CABOT 200 and CS/IS 208 or equivalent                                       Yes
                                                  19
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
CABOT 281        CABOT 280 or equivalent                                                    Yes
CABOT 285        CABOT 200 and CABOT 208 or equivalent                                      Yes
CABOT 286        CABOT 200 and CABOT 208 or equivalent                                      Yes

Courses with corequisites:
                                                                                         Requires
Course           Corequisite                                                             Validation


Courses with advisories on recommended preparation:
                                                                                         Requires
Course           Recommended preparation                                                 Validation
CABOT 102        Keyboarding skill at the rate of 25 wpm or concurrent enrollment in a      Yes
                 keyboarding course
CABOT 104        Eligibility for CABOT 102 or ENGL 120                                      Yes
CABOT 105        Keyboarding skill at the rate of 30 wpm                                    Yes
CABOT 155        CABOT 105                                                                  Yes
CABOT 182        Eligibility for ENGL 120                                                   Yes
CABOT 200        Eligibility for CABOT 102 or equivalent                                    Yes
CABOT 205        English 191 or ESL 141                                                     Yes
CABOT 210        Eligibility for CABOT 102 or ENGL 120                                      Yes
CABOT 254        Eligibility for one of the following: BUSAD 106 or ENGL 120 or ESL         Yes
                 151 and a recommended typing speed of 25 wpm


1a. Would adding a prerequisite, corequisite or advisory to any course within the program
    increase the success rate in the course?

More English or ESL.


1b. Are there any drawbacks to adding a prerequisite, corequisite, or advisory to any such
    course? Please comment.

Yes. Enrollment would decrease for some time until enough people had taken the pre, co, rec
in order to enroll in the course. This would have a devastating effect on our program.



2.   What review of the course content has been done for these courses and their
     pre/corequisites and advisories? (For more information on content review, see pages VI-5
     through VI-13 of the GCC Curriculum Handbook.)

Upgrading of course outlines.



The college must review each prerequisite, corequisite, advisory on recommended preparation
or limitation on enrollment at least every six years, pursuant to Section 55201(b)(3) of Title 5,

                                                   20
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
and section 6141.7 of the Glendale College Policy. The college has specified that the six-year
review cycle will be met as part of the program review process.

The required levels of scrutiny and the appropriate review procedures are described in the
GCC Curriculum Handbook on pages VI-5 through VI-13. Please complete and attach to your
program review self study the appropriate form(s) from these Curriculum Handbook pages.

Programs that are not in compliance with this Title 5 standard should be in compliance by the
third year of the program review process. Programs should include compliance as a goal in the
Summary section of this document.

                         Prerequisites/Co-requisites and Advisories

Every program must review all course prerequisites, co-requisites, and advisories on
recommended preparation by the third year of their program review process. Pre/co-
requisites and advisories that are not reviewed during the six-year cycle will be
dropped.

The following information is provided for programs that wish to complete their validation of
prerequisites, co-requisites, and advisories as part of their program review. Section 2.04 of the
program review document responds to Section 55201(b)(3) or Title 5 and Section 6141.7 of
the Glendale College Policy.

The Office of Curriculum Management is the principal resource on all matters relating to
curriculum (ext. 5311).

Use the following guidelines in completing this task:

Obtain the current course outline for all courses that have pre/co-requisites or advisories in
your program. There are two categories of pre/co-requisites and advisories: those established
within the program (English 189/191) and those that require courses from other disciplines
(History 110/English 120).

Category I: Pre/Co-Requisites and Advisories Within a Discipline

For courses within the discipline, create a matrix that compares the course objectives of the
required course to the entrance expectations of the course with the pre/co-requisite or
advisory. A template of the matrix can be obtained from the Office of Curriculum Management.
All matrices must be filed both electronically and in hard copy.

If the course outline requires revision to match these two components, the course outlines
must be rewritten through the current approved format. A template of the matrix can be
obtained from the Office of Curriculum Management. All course outlines must be filed
electronically and in hard copy.

Courses that require minor or substantive change of content must be sent to the Curriculum
and Instruction Committee before the end of the fall semester. Substantive changes are
changes so significant they must go through the curriculum process and on to C&I and
Academic Affairs, but need not go to the Board of Trustees for final approval. Minor changes
                                                 21
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
are brought by the division to C&I for approval, sent on to Academic Affairs as information, and
need not go to the Board.

Use the following chart to determine if changes in your course outlines are major or minor.

                                         SUBSTANTIVE
                     Changes in units
                     Changes in hours
                     Changes in lecture/lab ratio
                     Changes in course exit standards
                     Courses brought back after being formally deleted
                     Courses to be deleted from curriculum
                     Changes in prerequisites, co-requisites, and advisories
                                              MINOR
                     Changes in course name, number, or title
                     Changes in catalog description
                     Changes in notes
                     Courses to be removed or returned to catalog
                     Splitting an existing course
                     Combining two courses
                     Changes in course repetitions

Note: Pre/co-requisite revisions require division approval before going to the Curriculum and
Instruction Committee. The course outline revision and the content validity matrix must be
approved on a separate division vote.

All courses requiring major or minor revision must be turned in to the Office of Curriculum
Management by the end of the fall semester. All content validity matrices must be signed off
prior to course outlines being turned in to the Office of Curriculum Management. A copy of
each matrix will remain on file in the Office of Research and Planning.

Category II: Pre/Co-Requisites and Advisories Across Disciplines

There are many ways to validate pre/co-requisites and advisories across disciplines.

      Establish that three UC/CSU campuses have the same pre/co-requisite or advisory
       (Curriculum Handbook, VI-9).
      Present research that establishes a higher success rate for students that have taken the
       pre/co-requisite (Curriculum Handbook, VI-11).
      Establish that there are health and safety concerns (Curriculum Handbook, VI-12).
      Justify a limit to enrollment (Curriculum Handbook, VI-13).
      Describe a placement process (Curriculum Handbook, VI-14).

English-language and skill-range expectations are described on pages VI-15 through VI-17 of
the Curriculum Handbook.


                                     Go to Table of Contents

                                                 22
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

       2.05. Transfer & Articulation: Transfer Status of Courses

Instructions: List each course in the program and specify which transfer institutions (i.e., CSU,
UC, or private universities) grant each type of transfer credit upon transfer (i.e., major prep,
general ed, elective credit, or other). Refer to Section 1.06 to see reasons students give for
taking each course.

                                                                                 Transfers as...
                                                   Major Prep                      General Ed                        Elective




                                                                                                                                               Not Transferable
                                                                    To Private




                                                                                                    To Private




                                                                                                                                  To Private
                                                           To CSU




                                                                                           To CSU




                                                                                                                         To CSU
                                                   To UC




                                                                                   To UC




                                                                                                                 To UC
       Course
       CABOT 260                                           X
       CABOT 105                                                                                                         X
       CABOT 162                                                                                                         X
       CABOT 205                                                                                                         X
       CABOT 210                                                                                                         X




Refer to this list to answer the following questions.

1.   Are there courses in the program that should be reviewed or recommended for articulation
     and transfer status? If yes, please list the courses.

None




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  23
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                 2.06. Transfer & Articulation: Articulation

Instructions: Review your data on articulation and answer the following questions.

1.   What new articulation agreements have been established since the last program review?

CABOT 260



2.   What articulation agreements have been cancelled since the last program review?


None


3.   What problems, if any, does the program have in articulating courses?

None




                                     Go to Table of Contents




                                                 24
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 3
             Student Success & Equity




                                 25
                                      Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005



                                             3.01. Enrollment by Equity Group

Table 3.01A. Census Enrollment by Equity Group

                         2000-2001       2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004        2003-2004           Program    College
Census Enrollments            1,729         2,249           2,903           2,776        Collegewide           Trend    Comparison
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                 Credit
    Caucasian/Armenian        65%            66%             70%             70%             35%              Higher      Higher
    Caucasian/Anglo            7%            8%              6%              7%              15%               Same       Lower
    Latino Citizen             7%            6%              5%              6%              17%               Same       Lower
    Latino Resident            4%            2%              2%              2%              3%                Same       Same
    Asian/Pacific
                               7%            6%              6%              5%              12%
  Islander                                                                                                     Same       Lower
    African American           1%            1%              1%              1%              3%                Same       Same
    Filipino                   3%            2%              2%              2%              5%                Same       Lower
    Other                      8%            8%              8%              7%              10%               Same       Same
Age Group
    Under 21                   5%            4%              3%              4%              30%               Same       Lower
    21 to 25                  14%            12%             12%             12%             35%               Same       Lower
    26 to 30                  13%            12%             10%             11%             11%               Same       Same
    31 to 40                  62%            64%             68%             65%             21%               Same       Higher
    Over 40                    6%            7%              7%              8%              3%                Same       Higher
    Unknown                    0%            0%              0%              0%              0%                Same       Same
Gender Group
    Male                      11%            14%             16%             14%             41%               Same       Lower
    Female                    88%            85%             83%             85%             58%               Same       Higher
    Unknown                    1%            1%              1%              1%              1%                Same       Same
Disabled                       3%            2%              3%              5%              5%                Same       Same

                                                                       26
                                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

International Students     3%             3%              3%              2%              5%               Same   Same

1.   What is indicated by the program data?

The data shows that our students are high in all three groups. Compared to collegewide we are leading in all three categories. The
age group 31-40 is high because our population consists of mothers returnig to school. Which also explains the high precentage of
females.



                                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                                    27
                                     Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                             3.02. Retention by Equity Group

Table 3.02A. Course Retention by Equity Group

                         2000-2001      2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004        2003-2004           Program    College
Overall                       92%           92%             92%             92%         Collegewide           Trend    Comparison
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                Credit
    Caucasian/Armenian        94%           93%             94%             93%             89%               Same       Higher
    Caucasian/Anglo           86%           89%             91%             93%             86%              Higher      Higher
    Latino Citizen            87%           90%             86%             88%             83%               Same       Higher
    Latino Resident           90%           86%             89%             93%             83%              Higher      Higher
    Asian/Pacific
                              93%           96%             89%             91%             88%
  Islander                                                                                                    Same       Same
    African American          --             --             70%             76%             82%              Higher      Lower
    Filipino                  89%           90%             91%             89%             85%               Same       Higher
    Other                     84%           89%             94%             92%             85%              Higher      Higher
Age Group
    Under 21                  81%           84%             92%             91%             86%              Higher      Higher
    21 to 25                  91%           87%             91%             86%             84%               Lower      Same
    26 to 30                  94%           91%             91%             94%             87%               Same       Higher
    31 to 40                  93%           94%             93%             94%             89%               Same       Higher
    Over 40                   81%           90%             94%             89%             90%               Same       Same
    Unknown                   --             --              --              --             90%                n/a        n/a
Gender Group
    Male                      85%           89%             91%             90%             85%               Same       Higher
    Female                    92%           93%             93%             93%             87%               Same       Higher
    Unknown                   94%           82%             88%             94%             87%              Higher      Higher
Disabled                      89%           94%             87%             86%             85%               Lower      Same
International Students        94%           97%             95%             98%             95%               Same       Higher

                                                                      28
                                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005


1.   What is indicated by the program data?

Th retention rate compared to collegewide is higher in every category. This data is extremely important important and shows that our
program is successful and very crucial to the college.




                                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                                    29
                                     Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                              3.03. Success by Equity Group

Table 3.03A. Course Success by Equity Group

                         2000-2001      2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004        2003-2004           Program    College
Overall                       78%           80%             80%             82%         Collegewide           Trend    Comparison
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                Credit
    Caucasian/Armenian        81%           83%             83%             84%             75%               Same       Higher
    Caucasian/Anglo           75%           76%             76%             83%             74%              Higher      Higher
    Latino Citizen            63%           65%             67%             66%             61%               Same       Higher
    Latino Resident           73%           70%             70%             72%             63%               Same       Higher
    Asian/Pacific
                              83%           81%             74%             80%             74%
  Islander                                                                                                    Same       Higher
    African American          --             --             52%             48%             58%               Lower      Lower
    Filipino                  68%           79%             76%             72%             70%               Same       Same
    Other                     71%           77%             77%             76%             69%               Same       Higher
Age Group
    Under 21                  57%           58%             63%             67%             68%              Higher      Same
    21 to 25                  72%           72%             73%             68%             67%               Lower      Same
    26 to 30                  79%           78%             77%             83%             73%              Higher      Higher
    31 to 40                  82%           84%             83%             85%             79%               Same       Higher
    Over 40                   69%           78%             75%             77%             78%               Same       Same
    Unknown                   --             --              --              --             67%                n/a        n/a
Gender Group
    Male                      61%           69%             68%             68%             67%               Same       Same
    Female                    80%           82%             82%             84%             73%               Same       Higher
    Unknown                   89%           71%             72%             82%             69%              Higher      Higher
Disabled                      63%           72%             61%             65%             66%               Same       Same
International Students        86%           88%             75%             84%             81%               Same       Same

                                                                      30
                                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005


1.   What is indicated by the program data?

Again, the data shows our success rate for each is higher compared to collegewide.




                                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                                    31
                                    Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                                     3.04. Grade Distribution by Equity Group

Table 3.04A. Grade Distribution by Equity Group, 2003-2004

                              A        B              C              D              F             CR        NC    W
Overall                       24%     23%            11%            3%             3%             23%       4%    8%

Ethnicity/Citizenship Group
      Caucasian/Armenia
                              25%     25%            12%            3%             2%             22%       3%    7%
  n
      Caucasian/Anglo         34%     18%            4%             2%             3%             26%       5%    7%

      Latino Citizen          12%     14%            12%            5%             8%             29%       9%    12%

      Latino Resident         10%     16%            9%             17%            3%             38%       0%    7%
    Asian/Pacific
                              28%     17%            5%             3%             5%             30%       3%    9%
  Islander
      African American        12%     12%            12%            0%             16%            12%       12%   24%

      Filipino                23%     15%            6%             4%             11%            28%       2%    11%

      Other                   21%     20%            15%            5%             6%             21%       6%    8%

Age Group

      Under 21                13%     12%            6%             6%             12%            36%       5%    9%

      21 to 25                18%     12%            12%            4%             8%             25%       6%    14%

      26 to 30                23%     23%            12%            3%             4%             25%       5%    6%

      31 to 40                27%     26%            11%            3%             2%             22%       3%    6%

      Over 40                 16%     21%            16%            4%             3%             24%       5%    11%

      Unknown                 --       --             --             --             --             --       --    --

Gender Group

      Male                    15%     14%            6%             5%             8%             28%       7%    17%

      Female                  25%     23%            12%            3%             3%             21%       3%    10%

      Unknown                 24%     24%            9%             6%             3%             24%       3%    9%

Disabled                      18%     16%            7%             9%             8%             24%       4%    14%

Int'l Students                35%     18%            4%             4%             5%             27%       5%    2%


                                                                     32
                                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005



1.   What is indicated by the program data?

In the first group the Asian/Pacific Islander is the strongest ―A‖ group. The Caucasian/Armenian comes in second. African Americans
are a low percentage but have the highest failure rate. I cannot explain why. Age group 31-40 is the most successful. This goes back
to our population of mothers who take their courses very seriously.



                                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                                    33
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 4
                Program Management




                                 34
                  Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                             4.01. Efficiency: Faculty Load

Instructions: Analyze the WSCH (Weekly Student Contact Hours) per FTEF (Full-Time
Equivalent Faculty) data provided by Institutional Research and answer the following
questions.

Table 4.01A. WSCH, FTEF, and Load

                         2000-2001        2001-2002        2002-2003       2003-2004       Difference*

Program WSCH               6,168.9         10,590.0         10,130.6         9,709.3           +8%

Program FTEF                 14.4             17.8            20.2             19.3            +11%

Program Load                429.0            596.0            502.6           502.3             -1%

Credit Load                 480.1            578.0            612.7           609.5            +9%

*The difference column shows the difference between measures for the most recent year compared to the
average of the three previous years.



1.   Given the data, could the number of students served by the program be increased without
     additional cost or adverse effects on student outcomes? Please comment.

No. We are now in desperate need of a new faculty member. We are teaching overload hours
and increased student numbers would cause additional overload.



2.   What else (if anything) is indicated by the program data?

Nothing



3.   Do any instructors meet or work with students in hours not included in WSCH? Would it be
     useful to the program in any way to try to get WSCH credit for these hours? Explain.

Yes. Instructors in CABOT 102 and 103 frequently meet with students for extra help sessions
over and above normal office hours. Adjunct instructors in the CABOT area also spend
additional hours with students.




                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                      35
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                            4.02. Planning Effectiveness

Instructions: Please review division meeting minutes or memos from program discussions
and/or advisory committee meetings and complete the chart below, indicating how often each
planning area is discussed in meetings. (Place an ―X‖ in the appropriate box.)

Table 4.02A. Planning Topics

                                                       Once    Once      Once
                                                        Per     Per       Per      Once/2-   Other
Planning Topics Discussed                 Never        Month   Term      Year      4 Years (Specify)
Student retention & success rates                                X
Student demand & enrollment                             X
External changes affecting program                      X
Changes required in program to                          X
adapt to external environment
Relationship of program goals to             X
Educational Master Plan
Program goals & objectives                              X
Strategies for achieving program                                 X
goals & objectives
Timelines for achieving program              X
goals & objectives
Other (specify below)

Explain any ―Other‖ responses:




1.   Do the program faculty and other personnel have a clear idea of what is happening to the
     program, where it is headed, what external changes are affecting it, and what changes
     need to be made in order to enable it to adapt and continue to be successful? Explain.

Yes. The faculty is current with teaching methods and software used in industry. The faculty
works together to improve individual courses, write exit standards, and work on new courses
and certificates. They are involved in revising current program offerings and certificates.



2.   What data, not currently provided, would be needed in order to improve planning for the
     development of the program? Please explain.

Statewide data is not provided.

                                                  36
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                     Go to Table of Contents




                                 37
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                4.03. Planning: Distribution of Faculty Load

Instructions: Complete the chart below showing how the teaching load of full-time instructors is
distributed in the program. Then answer the following questions.

Use these definitions for time of day:

       Morning       Class beings at noon or before noon
       Afternoon     Class begins after noon but before 4:30 pm
       Evening       Class beings at 4:30 pm or later

Each row in the table should sum to 100%.

                                               % of Full Load for Year 2003-2004
                                                                                                       Via
                                                                                                   distance
                                                                               Weekend             learning
                                         Weekday       Weekday      Weekday      (any                 (any
                                         morning,      afternoon,   evening,    time),   During      time),
Full-Time Faculty             Released     Fall/          Fall/       Fall/      Fall/   Winter       Fall/
Member                          time      Spring         Spring      Spring     Spring   Session    Spring
JOYELLEN LOTTIE                  0         90%           10%
DIANE YOUNG                      0         75%                       25%
MARILYN LAMMERS                  0         79%                       21%
SANDI SHEFFEY                   10%        30%           10%         10%        10%       30%




1.   What (if anything) is indicated by the data?

Data indicates that three-quarters of the full-time faculty load is weekday mornings.




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  38
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 5
                          Personnel




                                 39
                   Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

          5.01. Staffing: FTEF, Adjunct FTEF, and FT/PT Ratio

Instructions: Analyze the data on FTEF, adjunct FTEF, and the full-time/part-time ratio
provided by Institutional Research and answer the following questions.

Table 5.01A. FTEF and Full-Time/Part-Time Ratio

                         2000-2001       2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004          Trend

Full-Time FTEF               5.8              8.3            10.5            10.6          No trend

Adjunct FTEF                 8.6              9.4             9.6             8.7          No trend

% Full-Time                  40%             47%             52%             55%           Increasing

All Credit % Full-Time       49%             49%             49%             52%           No trend


1.   What do the program data indicate? Comment on any trend or unusual data.

Not applicable.
2. Does the FT/PT ratio affect the program? Please comment


Yes. Not enough staffing for planning and reaching out to business and industry.




                                        Go to Table of Contents




                                                    40
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                  5.02. Staffing: Overload & Large Lecture

Instructions: Provide the overload and large lecture data in the table below and answer the
following questions.

Table 5.02A. FT Overload and Large Lecture Hours Per Week

                                             Fall 2000      Fall 2001      Fall 2002       Fall 2003
FT Overload Hours                              N/A            N/A               6         THIS INFO
                                                                                           WILL BE
                                                                                          SENT TO
                                                                                            YOU IN
                                                                                             THE
                                                                                         MORNING.
                                                                                             NOT
                                                                                         AVAILABLE.
Large Lecture Hours                             N/A            N/A            N/A            N/A

Describe the evaluation that has been done on the impact of overload and large lecture
sections on student success.

Large lecture classes are not applicable to our program as I have mentioned earlier. Impact of
overload is minimal.




1.    Given the data, how has overload impacted the program?

We are teaching more and meeting our students’ needs. Overload hours have not impacted
our program negatively because we are dedicated to our students.



2.    Given the data, how has the large lecture format impacted the program?

N/A



                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  41
                  Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                     5.03. Staffing: Teaching/Service Time

Instructions: Fill in the data below and answer the questions that follow.

Table 5.03A. Teaching/Service Time

                                                         Anticipated
                                Currently   Retired in   to retire in   FT hired
                                on leave     last 2        next 3       in last 3        Units   % FTF
     FT Instructor Name         (yes/no)     years          years        years          banked   banked
     JOYELLEN LOTTIE            No          No           No             No          0            0
     DIANE YOUNG                No          No           No             No          2            13%
     MARILYN LAMMERS            No          No           No             Yes         3            20%
     SSANDI SHEFFEY             No          No           No             Yes         3            20%




1.    Given the data, how have these activities impacted the program?

Class sizes are increasing and we are providing for more students.



2.    Will these and any other activities affect the program in the future?

Eventually, but not for a while because there is no plan for any of us to be leaving anytime
soon..




                                       Go to Table of Contents




                                                   42
               Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                      5.04. Professional Qualifications:
        FT Faculty Qualifications and Development Activities

Instructions: Administer to program faculty the survey provided by Institutional Research.
Analyze the responses and other information and fill in the data below.

Table 5.04A. Faculty Qualifications and Development Activities

                                                                                   Recent Notable
                                 Highest       Service      Recent Notable Flex   Workshops/ Courses
FT Instructor Name               Degree         Years           Activities              Taken
JOYELLEN LOTTIE                   M.ED           19        CCCAOE CONF.                 OUTLOOK
                                                            ON COURSE                    CLASS
                                                            WORKSHOP                   PLAGARISM
                                                               GREAT                   WORKSHOP
                                                             TEACHERS
                                                              RETREAT
DIANE YOUNG                    MASTERS            4       ABC NAT’L CONF.              PLAGARISM
                                  OF                        ON COURSE                   STUDENT
                               SCIENCE                                                  SUCCESS
MARILYN LAMMERS                MASTERS            3        CBEA BULLETIN                OUTLOOK
                                  OF                         CO-EDITOR                  COURSE
                               SCIENCE                       ASSOC. FOR                  WEB CT
                                                                 BUS.                  PLAGARISM
                                                          COMMUNICATION                WORKSHOP
                                                                CONF.
                                                             TECH EXPO
                                                             NBEA CONF.
                                                               COURSE
                                                            TECHNOLOGY
DR. SANDI SHEFFEY                 PH.D            3             GREAT      WORKING
                                                              TEACHERS   CONNECTIONS
                                                               RETREAT     TECH ED
                                                                 FMI      DATABASE
                                                          ACCREDITATION PROGRAMMING
                                                                COMM.    FOR THE WEB




                                                43
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005
1.   How are student outcomes affected by the professional activities? What steps are
     recommended for improvement?

By the faculty attending professional activities, our students are positively impacted. We are
able to expose them to what is going on in business and industry. This information that they
receive from us gives them direction and options.




2.   What else (if anything) is indicated by the program data? Please comment.

None




                                     Go to Table of Contents




                                                 44
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                           5.05. Professional Activities:
                       FT Faculty Professional Activities


Instructions: Fill in the chart below with the number of each type of activity completed since the
last program review (or the last six years).

Table 5.05A. Professional Activities

                                        Scholarly
FT Instructor                          projects or
Name                     Grants        sabbaticals   Research/ Publications   Presentations   Other
JOYELLEN             *TITLE V TO
LOTTIE                WORK ON
                         THE
                    DEPARTMENT
                        NAME
                       CHANGE
                    FROM BUSOT
                     TO CABOT.
                     ALSO WORK
                     ON COURSE
                      OUTLINES
                       FOR THE
                        MOUS
                      PROGRAM
DIANE YOUNG           *STUDENT                                        *STAFF
                      SUCCESS                                     DEVELOPMENT
                                                                  WORKSHOPS:
                                                                      WORD
                                                                    SHORTCUT
                                                                  NOODLES AND
                                                                      TOOLS
                                                                      WORD
                                                                     UPDATES
                                                                    MERGE IN
                                                                      WORD
MARILYN                                             TEST BANK FOR     *STAFF
LAMMERS                                               MARY ELLEN  DEVELOPMENT
                                                        GUFFY’S   WORKSHOPS:
                                                       BUSINESS     WINDOWS
                                                   COMMUNICATION POWER POINT
                                                     PROCESS AND      EXCEL
                                                       PRODUCT
SANDI               MULTI-MEDIA                                       *STAFF
SHEFFEY                NAT’L                                      DEVELOPMENT
                      SCIENCE                                     WORKSHOPS :
                    FOUNDATION/                                    FRONT PAGE
                                                 45
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                      CAL STATE                                              POWER POINT
                       TITLE V                                                 ACCESS
                      DATABASE




1.   Please indicate with an asterisk (*) those projects which are directly related to the goals or
     interests of the program. What percentage of the projects fall into this category?

About 95% of these projects are directly related to our goals and/or interests of our program.

2.   Provide a brief description of each project marked with an asterisk.

Staff development provides critical information to our classified staff and maintains a good
working relationship between our department and the classified staff. Any activity dealing with
course outlines and program name changes is definitely related to our goals/and or interests.
And of course student success is our main goal here at the college; not just for our program
but for all programs.



3.   What steps are recommended for improvement, if any?


At this time none.




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  46
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

        5.06. Professional Activities: Committee Participation

Instructions: For the period since the last program review (or the last six years), fill in the data
below for each full-time faculty member and answer the questions that follow.

Table 5.06A. Committee & Campus Participation

                                                        Other College-
                                              Governance    Related     Other Campus
FT Instructor Name                            Committees Committees      Participation
JOYELLEN LOTTIE                                 EEOC        HIRING         CABOT
                                                            COMM.      COORDINATOR
                                                        CHAIR OF D. MENTOR/SANDI
                                                           YOUNG          SHEFFEY
                                                           TENURE         TENURE
                                                            TRACK          TRACK
DIANE YOUNG                                   LIBRARY        RAC         ROTARACT
                                                          STUDENT         CLUB CO-
                                                         SHOWCASE        SPONSOR
                                                          STUDENT
                                                          SERVICES
                                                            HIRING
                                                        ALLOCATION
                                                        TASK FORCE
MARILYN LAMMERS                               CAMPUS       WRITING
                                            DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE
                                                        CURRICULUM
SANDI SHEFFEY                                                 TMI
                                                        FLEX COMM.




CPF Index (Committees Per Full-Time Faculty)

Supply the following data for the most recent academic year.

                    (1) Total number of full-time faculty members: 4

                                                  47
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

             (2) Total number of committees in most recent term: 11
                                  CPF Index [ (1) divided by (2) ]: .3636

1.   Given the data, discuss the involvement of faculty in the program in campus activities.

OUR ACTIVITIES COVER A WIDE RANGE ACROSS THE CAMPUS. THE
DIVERSIFICATION OF ACTIVITIES GIVES EACH ONE OF US INSIGHT INTO DIFFERENT
ACTIVITIES THAT WE SHARE WITH EACH OTHER. SOME OF THE COMMITTEES ARE
DISCUSSED IN OUR DIVISION MEETINGS TO INCLUDE EVERY ONE IN THE BUSINESS
DIVISION NOT JUST IN THE CABOT DEPARTMENT.




                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  48
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                    5.08. Future Needs: Projected Staffing

Instructions: Review and analyze the data on faculty matters provided in this section, plus your
responses to the previous personnel questions, and answer the following questions.


1.   Please discuss any trends that will impact your projected staffing needs.

At this point in time there are no apparent trends that will impact our projected staffing needs.
The four of us are not looking at retirement any time soon. Nor do any one of us plan to take a
sabbatical or take a leave.




2.   Given the data from this section, outline a case to made (if one exists) for increasing the
     staff in your program.

As mentioned before, we are all doing overloads. This does not give us ample time to reach
out to business and industry and to keep abreast of what is going on. We do have advisory
committee meetings twice a year with business and industry. This is monumental in keeping us
in the know. Diane Young has submitted a full-time instructional hire request form for a new
staff position. Hopefully, our request will be granted in the near future.




If you would like to request a new full-time instructional position in your program, complete the
form ―Full-Time Instructional Hire Request Form,‖ available as part of the program review
package.


                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  49
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                          Section 6
                Facilities & Equipment




                                 50
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                    6.01. Facilities & Equipment: Facilities

1.   Are your facilities needs being met? Please discuss.

Most of the faculty needs are being met. However, the temperature in classrooms SG 136,
137, and 138 are not regulated well. Handicap accessibility is adequate. Wire management in
the classrooms could be worked on because they are a danger to the students and faculty.




If you have any facilities requests, fill out a ―Facilities Request Form,‖ a document that is part
of the program review packet. Print out each request form and submit it with any supporting
data to the Office of Business Services.



                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  51
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

         6.02. Facilities & Equipment: Equipment/Resources

1.   Are your equipment and resource needs being met? Please discuss.

Yes. Each semester we asked to submit our equipment and resource needs. It seems no one
is complaining that our needs are not being met.



                                     Go to Table of Contents




                                                 52
                 Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                    6.03. Facilities & Equipment: Staffing

1.   Are your classified staffing needs being met? Please discuss.


Yes. Hasmik is doing a great job. She is organized, timely and keeps us deadline oriented.



                                      Go to Table of Contents




                                                  53
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                                          Section 7
                                 Goals & Action Plans


Note: You must complete either Section 7.01 (Goals & Action Plans) or Section 7.02 (Five-
      Year Plan).


Revising Courses: We plan to revise the General, Medical, and Legal Transcription courses.
We will combine the three and link them to voice recognition. Voice recognition is a new
technological invention that allows you to train your PC to recognize the intonations of your
voice. Consequently, having the PC automatically type what you speak into it.

New Courses: We have already instituted a new Outlook and a Publisher course. We are also
planning to implement a Word Processing for Writers. This course is well on its way. As for
long-range courses we would like to implement a Medical Billing class and put together a
certificate for this career in Medical Billing. Everyone, including the counselors, seems to think
this is a hot ticket. The counselors say that they are constantly asked about this class and
certificate. We are also toying around with a Paralegal course.

However, for both the Medical Billing and Paralegal we must have qualified staff to teach such
technical courses. We most definitely need additional staff. A capstone software course has
been discussed. This course would include advanced levels of Excel, Word, PowerPoint and
Access. Right now we have CABOT 260 that is at the beginning level.

Teaching Methods: We plan to revise all of the Keyboarding courses and move to on-line or
hybrid courses.

We plan to retire Medical and Legal Transcription because we are combining the three
transcription courses and linking them to voice recognition.

Staffing Needs: As far as classified staffing needs, that is at the discretion of our department
chair. However, I cannot emphasize the need for an additional faculty member.

Facilities: I have mentioned earlier about the facilities issue. The temperatures in our
classrooms cannot be regulated—even by the custodians. Wire management is a problem—
dangerous situation.

There is not enough working space in our computer rooms for our students to place their
books and supplies and still have enough room to work comfortably and successfully. The
keyboards and mice take up all of the room. We need larger working areas. Also, it is very
difficult to monitor tests because of the closeness of the students while they are writing.



                                                 54
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005




                                 55
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                            7.01. Goals & Action Plans


List any goals you have developed based on your work on sections 1-6.

Rank your goals. Indicate the level of urgency using the following scale:
      1 – this goal should be addressed immediately
      2 – this goal should be addressed within the next year
      3 – this goal should be addressed during the next 2-3 years

Action plans should be developed as appropriate for goals rated 1 or 2 in urgency.



Goals

   Section          Goal                                        Rank               Urgency




One-Year Action Plan
Develop action plans for goals that should be completed during the following year.

Goal      Strategies       Needs       Who is         Who is            How Plan        When
                                       Involved       Responsible       Is To Be        Completed
                                                                        Evaluated




                                                 56
                Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2004-2005

                         7.02. Five-Year Plan (optional)



Develop a Five Year Plan which includes curriculum, staffing, and facilities. Within curriculum,
you may list courses you may want to revise, new courses which may be needed, or courses
which may be deleted. Staffing needs may include certificated staff and classified staff.
Facilities should include new space requirements and/or remodeled space.

Within your plan, try to be as specific as possible about what year you hope to accomplish
each goal, as well as what you need to do to attain that goal.




                                                 57

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:6
posted:10/27/2011
language:English
pages:57