English - Download as DOC by Pz8426

VIEWS: 25 PAGES: 63

									                      Glendale Community College
                   Instructional Program Review
                                     2005-2006




                                    English
                 Study Manager: Michael Harnett




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 5541
               pwitt@glendale.edu

               Jill Lewis
               Manager, Instructional Services
               (818) 240-1000 extension 5103
               jlewis@glendale.edu

If you have questions about the Program Review Word 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 – 2005-2006



                                Signature Page
                                     Program:


We certify that this program review document represents the plans, goals, and
critical analysis of this instructional program.




__________________________________                   ________________
Study Manager                                        Date


Study Manager Name (typed):          Michael Harnett




__________________________________                   ________________
Division Chair                                       Date



Division Chair Name (typed):         Michael Ritterbrown




                                            2
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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.

Overview
      Program Overview

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




                                            3
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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

Section 7. Goals & Action Plans
       Section 7.01. Five-Year Plan




                                           4
         Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                                   Overview


   1. Please give a brief overview of your instructional program.


One of the largest divisions on campus, the English division offers roughly 175
classes in a regular semester. Of those, 114 are required for degree or transfer and
another 55 serve the needs of basic skills students. The bulk of these classes are
composition classes offering instruction in writing, research, and the analysis of
texts. As a result, the division and its programs provide subject-specific
instruction, but beyond this, skills learned in English classes provide the
foundation for the articulate expression of knowledge and information necessary
for success in virtually every other academic discipline or profession.
Consequently, this instructional program not only serves the English Division
but the college as a whole.




                                          5
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 1
       Demand, Success, and Retention




                                 6
                  Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                                          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 (Fall and Spring semesters only)

                                          2001-2002       2002-2003          2003-2004        2004-2005
Day                                          5,811           5,826                 5,712          5,803
Evening                                      2,155           1,944                 2,181          1,804
Unknown/TBA                                   117                165               327            232
Program Total                                8,083           7,935                 8,220          7,839




Graph 1.01A. Census Enrollment

                               9,000

                               8,000

                               7,000
          Census Enrollments




                               6,000
                                                                                                          Day
                               5,000                                                                      Evening
                               4,000                                                                      Unknown/TBA
                                                                                                          Program Total
                               3,000

                               2,000

                               1,000

                                  0
                                       2001-2002     2002-2003         2003-2004      2004-2005




                                                             7
             Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


Table 1.01B. Weekly Student Contact Hours (WSCH)
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                              2001-2002           2002-2003           2003-2004         2004-2005
Day                              25,035              25,448            24,167               24,488
Evening                           9,424               8,152               9,367             7,804
Unknown/TBA                        274                 128                293                142
Program Total                    34,733              33,728            33,826               32,434
% of All Credit                   9.0%                8.7%                9.2%              8.9%



Graph 1.01B. Weekly Student Contact Hours (WSCH)

                   40,000

                   35,000

                   30,000

                   25,000                                                                            Day
            WSCH




                                                                                                     Evening
                   20,000
                                                                                                     Unknown/TBA
                   15,000                                                                            Program Total

                   10,000

                    5,000

                       0
                            2001-2002       2002-2003         2003-2004         2004-2005




                                Part 2. Enrollments Per Section

Table 1.01C. Number of Sections
(Fall and Spring semesters only)
Note: Mpull sections are counted as a single section in this table.

                              2001-2002           2002-2003           2003-2004         2004-2005
Day                                229                 221                225                226
Evening                             83                  77                 86                74
Unknown/TBA                          4                    4                4                  4
Program Total                      316                 302                315                304




                                                      8
                      Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


Table 1.01D. Census Enrollments Per Section
(Fall and Spring semesters only)
Note: Mpull sections are counted as a single section in this table.

                                                 2001-2002       2002-2003            2003-2004       2004-2005
Day                                                  25.4               26.4               25.4           25.7
Evening                                              26.0               25.2               25.4           24.4
Unknown/TBA                                          29.3               41.3               81.8           58.0
Program Total                                        25.6               26.3               26.1           25.8

All Credit                                           29.7               31.8               31.2           30.2

Graph 1.01D. Census Enrollment Per Section

                                      90.0

                                      80.0
             Enrollment Per Section




                                      70.0

                                      60.0                                                                        Day
                                      50.0                                                                        Evening
                                                                                                                  Unknown/TBA
                                      40.0                                                                        Program Total
                                      30.0                                                                        All Credit

                                      20.0

                                      10.0

                                       0.0
                                             2001-2002      2002-2003          2003-2004      2004-2005




                                                    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 (Fall and Spring
semesters only)

                                                 2001-2002       2002-2003            2003-2004       2004-2005
Day                                                  62%                64%                66%            68%
Evening                                              60%                66%                63%            64%
Unknown/TBA                                          68%                88%                87%            85%
Program Total                                        61%                65%                66%            68%
All Credit                                           68%                69%                69%            69%




                                                                        9
                      Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


Graph 1.01E. Course Success Rates

                                     100%
                                     90%
             Course Success Rate     80%
                                     70%
                                                                                                         Day
                                     60%                                                                 Evening
                                     50%                                                                 Unknown/TBA
                                     40%                                                                 Program Total
                                                                                                         All Credit
                                     30%
                                     20%
                                     10%
                                      0%
                                            2001-2002    2002-2003     2003-2004     2004-2005




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

                                               2001-2002      2002-2003      2003-2004       2004-2005
Day                                                84%           85%               83%           85%
Evening                                            83%           85%               83%           84%
Unknown/TBA                                        94%           98%               96%           97%
Program Total                                      84%           85%               84%           85%
All Credit                                         87%           88%               85%           85%


Graph 1.01F. Course Retention Rate

                                     100%
                                     90%
                                     80%
             Course Retention Rate




                                     70%
                                                                                                         Day
                                     60%                                                                 Evening
                                     50%                                                                 Unknown/TBA
                                     40%                                                                 Program Total
                                                                                                         All Credit
                                     30%
                                     20%
                                     10%
                                      0%
                                            2001-2002    2002-2003     2003-2004     2004-2005



                                                                10
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




Table 1.01G. Grade Distribution
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                             2001-2002     2002-2003      2003-2004        2004-2005
Graded
     A                             14%        14%             15%              17%
     B                             20%        21%             20%              26%
     C                             15%        15%             14%              17%
     D                              6%        5%               4%              5%
     F                              9%        9%               7%              8%
Credit/No Credit
     CR                            13%        15%             17%              9%
     NC                             7%        7%               6%              4%
Withdrawals (W)                    16%        15%             16%              15%
Census                             8,083     7,935           8,220            7,839



Graph 1.01G. Grade Distribution, Most Recent Year


1.   Given the data, what changes can be identified in enrollment patterns?
     Identify any important trends and explain them if necessary.


Enrollment over four years has remained fairly constant for students enrolled during the
daytime (about 5,800 students, with a slight dip in the 2003-2004 census numbers).
     Evening enrollment has dropped slightly — a little more than 10% from 2003-2004
to 2004-2005 (from 2,181 in 2003-2004 to 1,804 in 2004-2005). The number of sections
has followed this trend. Daytime sections have gone from 229 in 2001-2002 to 226 in
2004-2005, while evening sections fell from 83 in 2001-2002 to 74 in 2004-2005.


2. How is the program responding to change?


     The drop in evening enrollment is consistent with the college-wide enrollment
trends. Daytime enrollment remains consistent, indicating that our efforts to reach
traditional students making the transition from high school to community college have
been successful.
     The program needs to respond by attempting to increase evening enrollment by
reaching out to less traditional, older, working students. Additionally, the division needs
greater access to classroom and lab facilities in order to offer more sections of core
classes during peak hours.



                                             11
                                  Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                                                 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
(Fall and Spring semesters only)
Percentage of available seats filled (census enrollment divided by class size)

                                                2001-2002        2002-2003         2003-2004        2004-2005
Day                                                 95%               99%              96%            95%
Evening                                             96%               91%              91%            88%
Unknown/TBA                                        146%               206%             409%           290%
Program Total                                       96%               98%              98%            95%
All Credit                                          87%               93%              91%            87%




Graph 1.02A. Fill Rate

                                  450%

                                  400%

                                  350%
          Course Retention Rate




                                  300%                                                                       Day
                                  250%                                                                       Evening
                                                                                                             Unknown/TBA
                                  200%                                                                       Program Total
                                  150%                                                                       All Credit

                                  100%

                                  50%

                                    0%
                                          2001-2002       2002-2003        2003-2004    2004-2005




                                                                      12
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


1.   Given the data, do sections in the program have a higher fill rate compared
     to sections in other programs? Identify any important trends and explain if
     necessary.


The program has had a consistently higher fill rate than other programs. There is a 7 to
8% higher fill rate in English than in credit programs as a whole for all four years
reported. Given that evening fill rates are lower than daytime classes, it is appropriate that
the division has placed proportionately fewer classes in the evening.
While dramatic, the Unknown/TBA fill rates represent less than 200 students per year.
The success and retention rates are consistent with the college averages.


2.   What adjustments are indicated? Please explain.

      This indicates a large demand for English classes, which is not surprising, given the
fact that most of the sections offered are required for graduation or transfer. These
numbers could be substantially improved with greater access to classroom and lab
facilities during peak hours.



                                  Go to Table of Contents




                                             13
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                   1.04. Demand: Number of Majors

Table 1.04A. Number of Credit Students by Major
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                          2001-2002         2002-2003          2003-2004   2004-2005
ENGLISH                        562              513               469         454




Total                          562              513               469         454



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

There were slightly fewer students enrolled in English classes in 2004-2005 compared to
2001-2002. This has spurred efforts to address the needs of English majors, in particular
the creation of the English Majors website, Book Club, Transfer Program, and Faculty
Mentoring Program.



2.   Has the number of majors changed over time?

Yes. There are fewer majors reported each of the four years.



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

Students have mentioned that they appreciate
    GCC English courses’ relatively small class sizes;
    the breadth of course offerings, including creative writing, literatures of various
       cultures, and Humanities, among others;
    the innovative uses of technology to facilitate the learning and practice of writing,
       particularly in developmental classes;
    the preparation that English courses provide, through rigorous standards, for
       upper-division courses after transfer,
    and the faculty’s accessibility and dedication to students, to name a few.


                                     Go to Table of Contents


                                               14
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                  1.05. Demand: Certificates Awarded

Table 1.05A. Number of Certificates Awarded
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                             2001-2002        2002-2003      2003-2004    2004-2005
ENGLISH                            0               0             0




Total                              0               0             0             0




Table 1.05B. Number of AS Degrees Awarded
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                             2001-2002        2002-2003      2003-2004    2004-2005
ENGLISH                            0               0             0




Total                              0               0             0             0



                                       Go to Table of Contents




                                                 15
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



              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.




                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Job Skills/ Job Preparation
                                                                                                                           AA/AS Grad Requirement
                                                                                  Certificate Requirement




                                                                                                                                                    General Ed. Transfer to
                                                                                                                                                    Independent Institution
                                                          Needed for Major Prep
                                  Needed for Transfer –




                                                                                                                                                                              Personal Enrichment
                                  Elective Units
                    CSU Breadth




                                                                                                            Prerequisite




                                                                                                                                                                                                    Basic Skills




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         Not Sure
           IGETC




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 Other
Course
ENGL      91%      10%              33%                   24%                     19%                       41%            24%                      52%                       19%                   29%            3%                            10%     0%
101
ENGL      80%      47%              43%                   33%                     22%                       4%             29%                      59%                       35%                   25%            6%                            0%      0%
102
ENGL      52%      21%              34%                   83%                     3%                        7%             7%                       17%                       34%                   14%            3%                            3%      0%
105
ENGL      38%       9%              22%                   24%                     36%                       64%            44%                      44%                       29%                   31%            11%                           7%      0%
120
ENGL      50%      19%              44%                   50%                     13%                       0%             31%                      19%                       69%                   25%            0%                            0%      0%
124




                                                                                                                   16
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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

         The data indicate that the English Division’s offerings appear to meet the needs of
students planning to complete requirements for graduation and transfer. We can see this
especially in the IGETC data for students enrolled in 101 and 102, and to a lesser degree
the numbers for 105, 124, and 120. The literature courses (especially 105, and 124 to a
lesser extent) appear to meet student needs in terms of preparations for their majors at 4-
year institutions.
         The data also suggest that students in these English courses are interested in
personal enrichment as well as the basic extrinsic incentives of graduation and transfer.
This indicates that the English offerings serve the needs of the community at large, in the
spirit of the GCC Mission Statement. To serve further everyone interested in taking
English courses, the English Division will pursue the implementation of certificate
programs, beginning with a Creative Writing Certificate, to acknowledge formally the
achievements of those not in degree programs.


                                 Go to Table of Contents




                                            17
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 2
        Curriculum & Learning Methods




                                 18
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



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
                                English 111
                                English 115
                                English 116
                                English 126
                                English 130
                                English 131
                                English 141
                                English 142
                                English 197
                                English 200
                                Humanities 101
                                Humanities 102
                                Humanities 110
                                Humanities 111
                                (Summer 2001)
                                Humanities 117
                                Humanities 120
                                Humanities 130

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


The decreasing relevance of technical writing over the last several years is the main
reason not to offer ENGL 131, Technical English.




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?

ENGL 113, Introduction to Library Resources and Research Methods, appears to be a
course that the Library now teaches, both in workshops and as a full-semester course,
Library 101 and also 191. The English division is reluctant to retire it because it may
prove to be an essential companion to ENGL 101.




                                            19
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


ENGL 115, Introduction to Fiction, and ENGL 116, Introduction to Drama, belong with
the offering of ENGL 114, Introduction to Poetry. If one is retained, all three should be
also for consistency of offerings. Also, in order to provide a full and robust offering of
literature courses that reflect the diversity of various traditions and orientations (ethnic,
gender, etc.) that typify the study of literature in colleges, then the present list of literature
courses should be retained, if not augmented as the scope of literature continues to
expand over time. It is a matter of the Division staffing and offering them.
         ENGL 197, Literacy Training Methods, could easily be incorporated into the
training of tutors for the Learning Center, especially the Writing Center, and should be
retained.
         ENGL 200, Speed Reading, should be retained because of continuing interest in
reading-efficiency improvement.
         Humanities courses offer collaborative efforts with divisions across the campus,
as well as in Study Abroad programs, and thus should be retained and in fact expanded.



                                   Go to Table of Contents




                                               20
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



      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?

English Division’s composition courses are currently under review by departmental
committees. That they have not been substantially revised in the last few years is not by
itself a reason to revise the course outlines, but they are being reviewed for their
currency.
          The Division expects to bring two additional courses, ENGL 189 and ENGL 191,
to Curriculum and Instruction in the next academic year.



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

Division committees are continually reviewing both developmental composition and
composition courses for their relevance and currency.




                                Go to Table of Contents




                                           21
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



         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.




                                           22
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




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

A) Division chair’s review of individual instructors’ class        every semester
   overviews
B) Mentoring of part-time faculty to ensure integrity of           As needed or requested
   course outline
C) Evaluation of program faculty                                   tenured: every 3 years;
                                                                   probationary: every year

D) Exit survey for program students                                As part of Carnegie grant
                                                                   in developmental
                                                                   composition courses
E) Exit survey for program faculty                                 As part of Carnegie grant
                                                                   in developmental
                                                                   composition courses
F) Program-wide or course-wide exams (e.g., ESL level              Every semester for ENGL
    exams)                                                         189, 191, 120 common
                                                                   finals
G) Division chair’s review of individual instructors’ finals       As needed or requested
   or other exams


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

Peer reviews are conducted on a regular basis, as mandated by the college.


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

     Based on formal evaluations and informal monitoring of full-time and part-time
     faculty by the division chair and assistant chair, respectively, we ensure to the best of
     our ability that all faculty are teaching to the course outlines and standards.

     Elements of faculty-practice monitoring with respect to course outlines:
      number of essays assigned in composition courses
      total word count for essays in composition courses
      final exam monitoring
      common exit exams for composition classes

                                   Go to Table of Contents




                                              23
         Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



 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
ENGL 101       ENGL 120 or ESL 151                                           Yes
ENGL 102       ENGL 101                                                      Yes
ENGL 103       Eligibility for ENGL 101 or equivalent                        Yes
ENGL 104       ENGL 101                                                      Yes
ENGL 105       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 106       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 109       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 110       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 114       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 115       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 116       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 118       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 120       ENGL 191 or placement                                         Yes
ENGL 121       Eligibility for ENGL 120 or ESL 151                           Yes
ENGL 126       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 127       Eligibility for ENGL 120 or ESL 151                           Yes
ENGL 130       none
ENGL 131       Eligibility for ENGL 120 or ESL 151                           Yes
ENGL 141       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 142       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 187       ENGL 186                                                      Yes
ENGL 189       ENGL 188                                                      Yes
ENGL 191       ENGL 189 and 190                                          By 2005-2006
ENGL 192       ENGL 190                                                      Yes
ENGL 197       Eligibility for ENGL 120 or ESL 151                           Yes
ENGL 200       Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes

Courses with corequisites:
                                                                          Requires
Course         Corequisite                                                Validation
ENGL 188       Concurrent enrollment or satisfactory completion of           yes
               ENGL 189
ENGL 189       Concurrent enrollment or satisfactory completion of               yes
               ENGL 188


                                          24
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


ENGL 190         Concurrent enrollment or satisfactory completion of               yes
                 ENGL 191
ENGL 191         Concurrent enrollment or satisfactory completion of               yes
                 ENGL 190

Courses with advisories on recommended preparation:
                                                                            Requires
Course           Recommended preparation                                    Validation
ENGL 111         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 112         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 117         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 120         ENGL 192                                                      Yes
ENGL 122         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 123         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 124         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 125         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 128         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 130         Eligibility for ENGL 101                                      Yes
ENGL 192         Recommended corequisite: Concurrent enrollment in             Yes
                 ENGL 120

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

At this time, there is no such indication.


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

Adding such restrictions to course entry would prevent students from enrolling in these
courses, and thus adversely affect fill rates.



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.)

A full review of literature courses was done in the 2003-2004 academic year. All
composition and developmental courses require placement or matriculation.




                                             25
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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, 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



                                            26
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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 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).



                                           27
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


      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




                                           28
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



     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
ENGL 101                                     X       X        X             X        X        X
ENGL 102                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 103                                     X       X                               X                     X         X         X
ENGL 104                                                                             X        X            X
ENGL 105                                     X       X        X             X        X        X
ENGL 106                                     X       X        X             X        X        X
ENGL 107                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 108                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 109                                     X       X        X             X        X
ENGL 110                                     X       X        X             X        X
ENGL 111                                                                    X        X                                         X
ENGL 112                                                                                                             X
ENGL 113                                                                                                   X         X
ENGL 114                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 115                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 116                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 117                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 118                                                                             X
ENGL 120                                                                                                                                    X
ENGL 121                                                                                                                                    X
ENGL 122                                     X       X        X             X        X        X
ENGL 123                                     X       X        X             X        X        X
ENGL 124                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 125                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 126                                                                    X        X        X
ENGL 127                                                                             X
ENGL 128                                                                    X        X        X



                                             29
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


ENGL 130                                                    X   X                  X
ENGL 131                                                                               X
ENGL 141                                                    X   X   X
ENGL 142                                                    X   X   X
ENGL 150                                                                               X
ENGL 151                                                                               X
ENGL 152                                                                               X
ENGL 155                                                                               X
ENGL 156                                                                               X
ENGL 157                                                                               X
ENGL 181                                                                               X
ENGL 182                                                                               X
ENGL 183                                                                               X
ENGL 184                                                                               X
ENGL 185                                                                               X
ENGL 186                                                                               X
ENGL 187                                                                               X
ENGL 188                                                                               X
ENGL 189                                                                               X
ENGL 190                                                                               X
ENGL 191                                                                               X
ENGL 192                                                                               X
ENGL 197                                                                               X
ENGL 200                                                                               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.


Not at this time.




                                  Go to Table of Contents




                                             30
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



          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?


None


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?

We would like a more complete articulation of literature and composition courses with
CSUs and UCs and are continuing to collaborate and pursue agreements with other
institutions.




                                Go to Table of Contents




                                           31
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 3
             Student Success & Equity




                                 32
                        Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


                               3.01. Enrollment by Equity Group

Table 3.01A. Census Enrollment by Equity Group (Fall and Spring Semesters)

                                2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004       2004-2005       2004-2005
Census Enrollments                 8,083           7,935           8,220           7,839        Collegewide
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                       Credit
       Caucasian/Armenian          25%              29%             32%             31%            35%
       Caucasian/Anglo             17%              15%             13%             12%            15%
       Latino Citizen              24%              24%             24%             25%            18%
       Latino Resident              5%              5%              4%              4%             3%
       Asian/Pacific
                                   10%              9%              9%              9%             12%
     Islander
       African American             3%              3%              3%              3%             3%
       Filipino                     6%              6%              6%              6%             5%
       Other                        9%              9%              10%             10%            10%
Age Group
       Under 21                    52%              53%             53%             55%            38%
       21 to 25                    27%              26%             26%             26%            30%
       26 to 30                     8%              8%              9%              7%             10%
       31 to 40                     8%              8%              8%              7%             12%
       Over 40                      5%              5%              5%              4%             11%
       Unknown                      0%              0%              0%              0%             0%
Gender Group
       Male                        42%              42%             44%             44%            41%
       Female                      57%              57%             56%             55%            58%
       Unknown                      1%              1%              1%              1%             1%
Disabled                            7%              6%              7%              7%             5%
International Students              2%              3%              2%              3%             6%


1.     What is indicated by the program data? Identify any important trends and explain if
       necessary.

In all of the English division’s course offerings, ongoing efforts are made to retain students of all
ethnicities, learning conditions, ages, and other demographic considerations. Our expanding use of
technology, for example, allows for diverse learning situations and forms of instructional delivery,
allowing more students to be retained and to succeed than otherwise might have been the case.

Otherwise, no major trends are apparent, though some small changes are observed. The largest single
group of students is still Caucasian/Armenian, a sector that has grown a small amount over time. The
proportion of Latino students is about the same, and there has been a slight drop in Anglo students. The
age of most students remains largely under 30. The trend of more women than men students has
remained relatively stable.

                                                           33
                        Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                                3.02. Retention by Equity Group

Table 3.02A. Course Retention by Equity Group (Fall and Spring Semesters)

                                2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004       2004-2005       2004-2005
Overall                            84%              85%             84%             85%         Collegewide
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                       Credit
       Caucasian/Armenian          86%              88%             88%             86%            87%
       Caucasian/Anglo             85%              85%             83%             86%            85%
       Latino Citizen              81%              83%             80%             83%            81%
       Latino Resident             80%              81%             79%             82%            83%
       Asian/Pacific
                                   84%              83%             85%             85%            87%
     Islander
       African American            76%              75%             80%             86%            83%
       Filipino                    82%              82%             81%             85%            85%
       Other                       87%              88%             83%             84%            86%
Age Group
       Under 21                    86%              88%             85%             86%            85%
       21 to 25                    80%              82%             81%             83%            83%
       26 to 30                    81%              81%             84%             81%            85%
       31 to 40                    82%              84%             85%             87%            88%
       Over 40                     85%              85%             85%             88%            90%
       Unknown                       --              --              --              --            98%
Gender Group
       Male                        83%              83%             82%             84%            84%
       Female                      84%              87%             85%             86%            86%
       Unknown                     77%              82%             85%             84%            87%
Disabled                           85%              84%             80%             86%            85%
International Students             93%              91%             95%             93%            96%


1.     What is indicated by the program data? Identify any important trends and explain if
       necessary.

The biggest change is in the African American student retention rate, which has increased by 10% since
2001. Additionally the retention rate of students over the age of 31 has shown about a 5% increase over
the past five years. This and the relative stability of the retention rates overall suggest that the division,
like the college, has responded to the diverse needs of its equity groups.


                                             Go to Table of Contents


                                                          34
                        Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006

                                 3.03. Success by Equity Group

Table 3.03A. Course Success by Equity Group (Fall and Spring Semesters)

                                2001-2002       2002-2003       2003-2004       2004-2005       2004-2005
Overall                            61%              65%             66%             68%         Collegewide
Ethnicity/Citizenship Group                                                                       Credit
       Caucasian/Armenian          68%              72%             73%             74%            74%
       Caucasian/Anglo             66%              69%             69%             70%            73%
       Latino Citizen              52%              56%             57%             59%            59%
       Latino Resident             55%              55%             62%             64%            64%
       Asian/Pacific
                                   64%              68%             71%             71%            72%
     Islander
       African American            50%              47%             51%             55%            56%
       Filipino                    58%              64%             69%             70%            68%
       Other                       64%              67%             64%             69%            70%
Age Group
       Under 21                    62%              65%             67%             69%            66%
       21 to 25                    58%              61%             61%             64%            65%
       26 to 30                    60%              66%             69%             66%            72%
       31 to 40                    68%              69%             73%             74%            78%
       Over 40                     65%              71%             75%             78%            80%
       Unknown                       --              --              --              --            88%
Gender Group
       Male                        57%              60%             61%             64%            65%
       Female                      64%              69%             70%             71%            72%
       Unknown                     53%              57%             65%             64%            74%
Disabled                           53%              61%             61%             63%            67%
International Students             74%              77%             77%             80%            82%


1.     What is indicated by the program data? Identify any important trends and explain if
       necessary.

The data indicate that there has been an increase in success of all students across the board, consistent
with the trend in the entire college credit population. This suggests that the program has been improving
in its ability to reach students of the various equity groups, some better than others. The groups of
students whose success since 2001-2002 is most remarkable are the Filipino with a 12% increase, the
disabled student with a 10% increase and the Latino Resident with a 9% increase. On average most
groups’ success rates increased 6% over the past five years.



                                              Go to Table of Contents

                                                          35
                                    Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006

                                     3.04. Grade Distribution by Equity Group

Table 3.04A. Grade Distribution by Equity Group, 2004-2005 (Fall and Spring Semesters)

                               A       B              C              D              F              CR       NC    W
Overall                       17%     26%            17%            5%             8%             9%        4%    15%

Ethnicity/Citizenship Group
      Caucasian/Armenia
                              18%     27%            18%            4%             5%             12%       4%    14%
  n
      Caucasian/Anglo         25%     29%            12%            5%             7%             5%        3%    14%

      Latino Citizen          10%     22%            17%            8%             12%            9%        4%    17%

      Latino Resident         12%     23%            16%            7%             8%             13%       4%    18%
    Asian/Pacific
                              21%     26%            17%            3%             9%             7%        3%    15%
  Islander
      African American        8%      21%            19%            10%            11%            6%        10%   14%

      Filipino                22%     27%            15%            5%             8%             7%        2%    15%

      Other                   16%     26%            18%            4%             8%             8%        2%    16%

Age Group

      Under 21                17%     27%            18%            6%             8%             6%        4%    14%

      21 to 25                14%     25%            18%            6%             11%            7%        3%    17%

      26 to 30                16%     26%            13%            5%             8%             10%       3%    19%

      31 to 40                19%     23%            9%             2%             6%             22%       4%    13%

      Over 40                 20%     16%            5%             3%             1%             37%       7%    12%

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

Gender Group

      Male                    14%     25%            18%            6%             10%            8%        5%    16%

      Female                  19%     26%            16%            5%             7%             10%       3%    14%

      Unknown                 18%     27%            20%            9%             2%             0%        9%    16%

Disabled                      10%     17%            14%            6%             4%             21%       14%   14%

Int'l Students                21%     32%            25%            2%             9%             2%        1%    7%




                                                                     36
                                       Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


1.   What is indicated by the program data? Identify any important trends and explain if necessary.

     Generally speaking, the English Division grades reflect the overall college distribution. A grade
of B remains the single most frequently reported grade. Women tended to receive higher grades than
men. Older students were more likely to get an A than any other age group of students. 54% of
Caucasian students received either an A or a B, which was somewhat more than any other group,
with 49% of Filipino students, 47% of Asians, and 45 % of Armenians earning a B or better. By
contrast, 29% of the African American students earned A’s and B’s. 21% of African American
students and 15% of Latino Citizen students earned D’s and F’s. It is worth noting that Anglo, Asian,
and Filipino students received more A’s than the overall rate of 17%, while African Americans and
Latino citizens received more D’s and F’s than the overall rate of 13%.
        The data also suggest that the division needs to continue to reach out to African American
and Latino students in order to improve their success at the highest levels. The division has already
been addressing this specific area, through Title V, by introducing courses that feature themes such
as Chicano writers, and by pairing Student Development courses with English composition courses,
to give two examples. In addition, the work through a Carnegie grant for the implementation of
computer technology in developmental writing courses is underway in Fall, 2005 and Spring, 2006.
Further, the division’s participation in Writing Across the Curriculum and Outcomes-Based
Education work is done in the interest of enhancing the instructional program for all students. Efforts
such as these to engage and empower students of all equity groups are ongoing.


                                                              Go to Table of Contents




                                                                         37
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 4
                Program Management




                                 38
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                        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
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                             2001-2002         2002-2003         2003-2004          2004-2005           Difference*
Program WSCH                   34,733.1         33,728.0           33,826.4          32,433.7              -4%
Program FTEF                       0.0             59.2              63.4               62.0               +1%
Program Load                       --             569.6              533.3             522.9               -5%
Credit Load                        --             617.1              605.5             578.7               -5%

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

Assuming that the question is whether additional students could be served by the program
without hiring additional full-time faculty, the answer is possibly. The obvious issue
where FTEF/WSCH/Load ratios are concerned is the division’s seat load for composition
and literature classes, both of which are lower than the college average. It is essential to
understand that, given the nature of instruction in English classes, a lower seat load is a
necessity in order to adequately serve students in terms of substantial commentary on
essays and research assignments. The same is true of the lower faculty load. If either is
increased, we are likely to see an impact on student success and retention. The only way
we might be able to increase the number of students served is to increase the division’s
fill rate, already over 90% in most areas. This would necessitate more offerings of high-
demand classes in high-demand time slots. The college has an ongoing problem with
class space, so it seems unlikely that we will be able to accomplish this.


2.   What else (if anything) is indicated by the program data? Identify any
     important trends and explain if necessary.

The trends indicated by the data are not particularly significant. Overall, the numbers
have decreased slightly since 2002, but this is a college trend as well as a division trend.




                                                  39
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




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.

English instructors may serve one office hour per week as tutors in the Learning Center,
where WSCH is collected. In addition faculty members work with the English Club as
advisors and mentors. It is possible that WSCH might be collected for these activities, but
it would require that a system of monitoring be created and implemented, and the number
of hours generated might not warrant such efforts.




                                 Go to Table of Contents




                                            40
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                     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                           X
rates
Student demand & enrollment                 X
External changes affecting                  X
program
Changes required in program                 X
to adapt to external
environment
Relationship of program                                        X
goals to Educational Master
Plan
Program goals & objectives                            X
Strategies for achieving                    X
program goals & objectives
Timelines for achieving                                        X
program goals & objectives
Other (specify below)                                 X

Explain any ―Other‖ responses:

The division is actively involved with developing and integrating appropriate technology
into the curriculum. Members of the division work constantly to achieve this end, and an
estimate of its discussion at once per term is conservative. Additionally, the division
engages in regular planning and discussion of student learning outcomes and their
implementation in our curriculum.


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.




                                           41
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


We have worked hard to create a committee and division structure that facilitates
communication and awareness. Each year, the division is asked to create and approve a
list of goals. Progress toward these goals is regularly evaluated at the committee and
division levels. Responsibility for progress is clearly established and monitored at the
division level. The structure of committees is also designed to facilitate planning and
implementation that serves the needs of the students and the curriculum in light of both
internal and external factors. Each level of composition as well as the literature and
humanities program has its own committee, and committee chairs gather on a regular
basis with the division chair to ensure the integration of program goals and maintain lines
of communication.

While the structure of committees and their relationship to the division and its decision-
making process is sound, the volume of work generated by the needs of the curriculum as
well as those external factors that have an impact upon it are difficult for the current
number of full-time faculty to adequately address. The division currently has 7 curricular
committees and 6 other taskforces or committees. Additionally, each member of the
division serves on faculty governance committees and outside programs. As a result,
curricular committees have only 3 full-time faculty members each, and other committees
must solicit volunteers from an already overburdened pool. In order to more adequately
serve the needs of the division, both internally and in terms of the division’s
responsibilities to the larger structure of the college, additional full-time faculty members
are needed.


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




                                  Go to Table of Contents




                                             42
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



         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 2004-2005
                                                                                       Via
                                                                                    distance
                                                                   Weekend          learning
                                Weekday    Weekday      Weekday      (any             (any
Full-Time                       morning,   afternoon,   evening,     During
                                                                    time),           time),
Faculty             Released      Fall/       Fall/       Fall/      Winter
                                                                     Fall/            Fall/
Member                time       Spring      Spring      Spring      Session
                                                                    Spring           Spring
Alice Adams            20         0      60         20        0         0        0
Sue Brinkmeyer         80        20       0          0        0         0        0
Dennis Doyle           50        50       0          0        0         0        0
Bart Edelman           60        40       0          0        0         0        0
Denise Ezell           40        20      40          0        0         0        0
Ida Ferdman             -        80      20          0        0         0        0
T. Hanley               -       100       0          0        0         0        0
Michael Harnett         0         0      40         40       20*        0        0
Susan Henry             -        40      40         10        0         0        0
Phyllis Hoover**        -        40      40          0        0         0        0
Chris Juzwiak          40        30      30          0        0         0        0
Desmond                10        40      20          0        0         0        0
Kilkeary**
Rosemary Kwa           20        40      20         20        0         0        0
Angela Morales         20        40      40          0        0         0        0
Nancy Phillips          -        60      20         20        0         0        0
Michael                80         0       0         20        0         0        0
Ritterbrown
Francien              20%        20      30         30        0         0        0
Rohrbacher
Steve Taylor            -         0      40         60        0         0        0
Monette Tiernan       20%        80       0          0        0         0        0
Phil Vallicella**       -         0      60         20        0         0        0
Michael Wheeler       20%        80       0          0        0         0        0
David White             -        20      40         40        0         0        0
*Instructor taught PACE Saturdays   **Instructor used banked units amounting to 20%



                                            43
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




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

A number of significant trends emerge from the division’s load distribution. First, and
perhaps most significant, is the degree to which the division’s service to the college as a
whole is apparent. In addition to the fulfillment of the faculty’s professional obligation
through work on governance and divisional committees, the total of 500% released time
demonstrates an exceptional level of service. Our faculty have initiated or been recruited
into positions such as director of the campus’s Writing Across the Curriculum program,
designed to make students more successful in the various writing challenges they will
encounter outside of their English Classes and faculty more successful in directing these
efforts on the part of students. Other positions include the Academic Senate’s executive
body, Glendale’s High School English Collaborative program, the English Majors
Program, and the nationally recognized literary Journal Eclipse. Positions also support
grants brought to the college by members of the division, including Title V grants and a
Carnegie Foundation, both of which have brought the college notoriety and have led to
invitations to apply for other grants. It is important also to note in this context that the
sacrifice of the equivalent of 5 full-time positions is a significant challenge to the
division. While some would argue that release time should be more strictly limited in the
division, the loss to the college that such a policy would necessitate, would be significant
as well. Rather, this seems a compelling argument for more full-time faculty members in
the English Division.

Additionally, it is apparent that full-time faculty members teach the majority of their load
in the morning, which is consistent with primary student demand. Full time faculty
currently teach 53% of morning classes. Afternoons have the least student demand, and
here 42% of the classes are taught by full time division members. Evenings have the
fewest full time instructors; only 28% of these classes are taught by full-time division
members. In spring of last year 15 evening classes were taught by full-time division
members. While it would be easy to say that based on statistics alone, division members
should be compelled to teach more evening classes, a closer look reveals the difficulties
such a course of action presents. At one class per full time division member, 15 classes
means that 65% of division members are already represented. A significant number of
faculty members were hired before the contract mandated evening and weekend classes,
so the increase in evening load would in all likelihood be borne by those already doing
their part. We must also consider carefully the demands we place on faculty in order to
insure that they are able to serve the college to the best of their ability. Increased evening
hours would mean that full-time faculty would be less available for committee and
governance work that takes place during the day. Finally, even if all full-time faculty
members were compelled to teach at least one evening class, the bulk of evening
instruction would still fall to part-time faculty.


                                  Go to Table of Contents




                                             44
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                            Section 5
                           Personnel




                                 45
              Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



           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
(Fall and Spring semesters only)

                               2001-2002          2002-2003        2003-2004   2004-2005
Full-Time FTEF                     N/A              25.9             30.4        31.3
Adjunct FTEF                       N/A              33.3             33.0        30.7
% Full-Time                        --               44%              48%         50%
All Credit % Full-Time             --               51%              52%         51%


1.   What do the program data indicate? Identify any important trends and
     explain if necessary.

While the full-time FTEF’s and proportion of full-time faculty have grown, the ratio of
full-time to part-time staffing shows a heavy reliance on part-time faculty. Additional
full-time faculty would allow the division to address larger pedagogical issues of student
success.


2.   Does the FT/PT ratio affect the program? Please comment.

The heavy reliance on part-time faculty causes a lack of consistency and overburdens
full-time faculty in terms of reviewing and creating pedagogy as well as examining the
program so as to respond more effectively to student demand and create improvements
for student success and retention.

Over-reliance on part-time faculty affects the program in terms of a relatively high
turnover rate of part-time faculty as opposed to full-timers. It is difficult to evaluate
standards between levels. Grading norms and course content, along with division unity
and collegiality, for example, may be adversely affected by this lack of continuity, which
is largely a product of the nature of part-time teaching, often involving several different
colleges.

The observed movement toward a desirable full-time-to-part-time ratio such as 75%-to-
25% is encouraging, but not at all complete.




                                         Go to Table of Contents


                                                   46
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                 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 2001     Fall 2002    Fall 2003      Fall 2004
FT Overload Hours                      39/23        26/31       14.5/26.75     22.5/21.5
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.


     The English division has less overload than others on campus because the enormous
demands of evaluating essays and research assignments makes an overload difficult if not
impossible. A discussion in division of large lecture sections was held in Fall, 2005, and
the division unanimously decided that pedagogical demands preclude large lecture
classes.



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

Most overload in the English division is not additional hours, but hours which are taken
on in addition to released time assignments. Given this condition, overload has little
impact on the program as a whole.



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


N/A—the division does not offer large-lecture classes.


                                 Go to Table of Contents




                                           47
           Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                       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
Adams, Alice               No          No           No             No           13         87
Doyle, Dennis              No          No           No             No           1          6
Edelman, Bart              No          No           No             No           20         133
Ezell, Denise              No          No           No             No           0          0
Ferdman, Ida               No          No           No             No           5          33
Hanley, T.                 No          No           Yes            No           16         106
Harnett, Michael           No          No           No             No           1          6
Henry, Susan               No          No           No             No           1          6
Kilkeary, Desmond          No          No           Yes            No           27.5       183
Hoover, Phyllis            No          No           Yes            No           3          20
Juzwiak, Chris             No          No           No             No           7          46
Kwa, Rosemary              No          No           No             Yes          12         80
Marterella, Dana           No          No           No             Yes          1          6
Phillips, Nancy            No          No           No             No           4          26
Moreau, Michael            No          No           No             No           25         160
Ritterbrown, Michael       No          No           No             No           3          20
Rohrbacher, Francien       No          No           No             Yes          10         66
Tiernan, Monette           No          No           No             No           1          6
Wheeler, Michael           No          No           No             No           34         226
Brinkmeyer, Susan          Yes         No           Yes            No           14         93
Vallicella, Phillip        No          No           No             No           0          0
Taylor, Stephen            No          No           No             No           1          6
White, David               No          No           Yes            No           10         66
Morales, Angela            No          No           No             Yes          1          6



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

Anticipated retirement has caused 4 faculty members to take leave on banked units for
Spring, 2006, leaving the division drastically understaffed. We rely heavily on part-time
faculty because of this.


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

With 5 faculty retiring within 3 years, the Division will need to hire at least that many
within that time to remain at current staffing ratios. Also, load-banking may affect the
number of full-time faculty teaching in a given semester, depending on how many faculty
decide to use banked hours rather than teach a full load.



                                              48
             Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                        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
                                                                                      Workshops/
                                      Highest        Service     Recent Notable        Courses
FT Instructor Name                    Degree          Years      Flex Activities        Taken
Adams, Alice                           MA              15      Santa Barbara Film
                                                                     Festival
Doyle, Dennis                          MA              25      Winter Institute for     Diversity
                                                                Learning Center         Training
                                                                  Professionals
Edelman, Bart                          MA              29      Humanities/Socials       Diversity
                                                                 Studies Lecture        Training
                                                                 Series, various
Ezell, Denise                          MA              4        Student Learning
                                                                    Outcomes
                                                                   Workshop
Ferdman, Ida                           MA              9                               OnCourse
                                                                                       Training
Hanley, T.                             MA              35      Humanities/Socials
                                                                Studies Lecture
                                                                Series, various
                                                                Science Fiction
                                                                 Conventions
Harnett, Michael                       MA              8           Work on              OnCourse
                                                                  dissertation          Training
Henry, Susan                           MA              16          ECCTYC                Various
                                                                 Conferences          workshops on
                                                                    Various            technology
                                                                  technology
                                                                  workshops
Kilkeary, Desmond                      MA              35      Humanities/Socials     University of
                                                                Studies Lecture         Judaism
                                                                Series, various       workshops on
                                                                                       Archeology
Hoover, Phyllis                        MA              22        Great Teachers       Composition
                                                                  Workshops           workshops in
                                                                                         CSUN
                                                                                        Various
                                                                                        classes:
                                                                                        Women
                                                                                         Studies



                                                49
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


Juzwiak, Chris                        MA            4           ECCTYC           Skip Downing
                                                               Conference         Workshops,
                                                               League for         many more
                                                               Innovation
                                                               Conference
Kwa, Rosemary                         PhD           2       Writing Across the      CSUN
                                                               Curriculum          Writing
                                                                 Seminar          Workshops
                                                            Student Learning        Impact
                                                                Outcomes           Training
                                                               Conference
Marterella, Dana                      MFA           1           ECCTYC            Spanish 101
                                                               Conference           Student
                                                                                   Learning
                                                                                   Outcomes
                                                                                    Seminar
Phillips, Nancy                       MA            5        Great Teachers        Post Grad
                                                                 Retreat          Coursework
                                                                ECCTYC           from Indiana
                                                               Conference              U
Moreau, Michael                       MA            6          Journalism          Virginian
                                                              Association of         Woolf
                                                               Community          Conference
                                                                Colleges         Sonoma State
                                                               Convention
Ritterbrown, Michael                  MA            6        WebCT Training        Basquiat
                                                                                 Retrospective
                                                                                   (lecture)
Rohrbacher, Francien                  MA            2       Writing Across the    OnCourse
                                                               Curriculum          Training
                                                                 Seminar
Tiernan, Monette                      PhD           4         Workshops:           CSUN
                                                                 WebCT,          Workshops on
                                                               Smartboard          Writing
                                                            Writing Across the
                                                               Curriculum
Wheeler, Michael                      MA            13        Conferences:
                                                                 ASCCC
                                                                  MLA
                                                                  SAA
                                                                 PAMLA
Brinkmeyer, Susan                     MA            26
Vallicella, Phillip                   MA            23
Taylor, Stephen                       MA            20       Finished work on
                                                                   book:
                                                                Uncut Men
White, David                          MA            20
Morales, Angela                       MFA           2        Key West Literary
                                                                Conference
                                                             Iowa Non-Fiction
                                                                Conference
                                                               (University of
                                                                  Iowa)




                                             50
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


1.   How are student outcomes affected by the professional activities? What
     steps are recommended for improvement?

Through the professional activities, faculty keep current in the fields they teach, allowing
students to benefit from the best available practices.

To improve student outcomes, the division needs to:
    Continue ongoing work with Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs), and integrate
      the insights from such work in course outlines through the efforts of the division
      committees
    Continue to improve SLOs by developing improvements in assessment, including
      instruments such as common final exams, to provide reliable and valid data about
      student achievement


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


The staff reveals a large percentage of relatively recent hires. Yet as a whole the Division
is highly active within the relevant fields of developmental English, composition, and
literature.



                                 Go to Table of Contents




                                            51
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                          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
                                             projects or     Research/
FT Instructor Name           Grants          sabbaticals    Publications     Presentations     Other
Adams, Alice
Doyle, Dennis             *Von’s Cares                         Audio         *Programs on
                        Grant for Tutoring                  recordings:      Celtic Culture
                              Center                            Irish         on campus
                          *ASGCC CPS                         Blessings,       and various
                             Grant for                          Irish          locations
                         additional hours                   Meditations,       nationally
                         for the Learning                     Be in My
                              Center                           Heart
Edelman, Bart                                                 *Books:        *Presentations
                                                             The Last           at various
                                                               Mojito,           colleges
                                                             The Gentle       nationally on
                                                                Man,          use of poetry
                                                            many others       in instruction
                                                              *Editor:
                                                            The Eclipse
Ezell, Denise            *Carnegie Grant                                     *Presentations
                           (ongoing)                                         on campus on
                                                                                Student
                                                                               Learning
                                                                               Outcomes
Ferdman, Ida
Hanley, T.
Harnett, Michael                             *Sabbatical    *Dissertation       College
                                              in 2004 to                        Services
                                                 write                          Retreat
                                             dissertation                     presenter on
                                                                               humor and
                                                                               motivation
Henry, Susan
Kilkeary, Desmond                            *Sabbatical       Editor:
                                               UCLA          Chaparral
Hoover, Phyllis                                             Contributor to
                                                             Chaparral
Juzwiak, Chris           *Carnegie Grant                                      *ECCTYC
                           (ongoing)                                          Conference
                                                                             presentation,
                                                                             also League
                                                                                  for


                                               52
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


                                                                              Innovation,
                                                                              Various on
                                                                                campus
Kwa, Rosemary                *Title 5                     Dissertation
Marterella, Dana                                          Dissertation:       *Presenter
                                                            Adjacent           ECCTYC
                                                          published in        Conference
                                                            Cargo,           Guest Lecturer
                                                           Wisteria.           UCLA in
                                                          Reviews in          California
                                                         Santa Monica         Literature
                                                             Mirror
Phillips, Nancy              *Title 5,                    *In progress       *Presenter on
                           *coordinated                      text in         OnCourse on
                           Empowering                    developmental         campus
                            Educators                       reading
                            Conference
Moreau, Michael                                              Various
                                                           articles in:
                                                          Reference
                                                            Services
                                                            Review,
                                                              Crisis
                                                           Magazine,
                                                            LA Times
Ritterbrown, Michael                                       Stories in:
                                                          Clackamas
                                                         Review, Other
                                                             Voices,
                                                            Nebraska
                                                             Review
Rohrbacher, Francien                        *Working     *In progress:       *Presentations
                                             on grad       instructors            at :
                                             degree       manual for a         ECCTYC
                                                            textbook          2005, 2003
Tiernan, Monette             *Title 5                                        *Presentation
                         *Created Writing                                     at ECCTYC
                            Across the                                         on Hybrid
                           Curriculum                                           Courses
                             Program
Wheeler, Michael                            Sabbatical
                                            2000-2001
                                             in Italy
Brinkmeyer, Susan
Vallicella, Phillip
Taylor, Stephen                                             Book:
                                                          Uncut Men
White, David
Morales, Angela          *Carnegie Grant                  Publications: in
                           (ongoing)                     Puerto de Sol,
                                                          short story:
                                                           Territory




                                              53
            Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


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?

26 of 40 projects, or 65%, are directly related to the goals of the program. It may be that
more are directly related.


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

        Von’s Cares Grant for Tutoring Center
        ASGCC CPS Grant for additional hours for the Learning Center
        Programs on Celtic Culture on campus and various locations nationally
        Books:The Last Mojito, The Gentle Man, 3 other books, many other poems
        Editor:Eclipse
        Presentations at various colleges nationally on use of poetry in instruction
        Carnegie Grant (ongoing): collaborative developmental teaching and research
        Presentations on campus on Student Learning Outcomes
        Sabbatical in 2004 to write dissertation
        Dissertation: Humor as an Enhancement of Student Writing Motivation and Competence
        Dissertation (Kwa)
        Dissertation (Marterella)
        Sabbatical UCLA
        ECCTYC Conference presentation, also League for Innovation
        Title 5
        Presenter ECCTYC Conference
        Coordinated Empowering Educators Conference
        In progress: text in developmental reading
        Presenter for On Course on campus
        Working on grad degree in Education
        In progress: instructors manual for a textbook
        Presentations at ECCTYC 2005, 2003
        Created Writing Across the Curriculum Program
        Presentation at ECCTYC on Hybrid Courses



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


Continued participation in organizations and individual creative efforts; increased
scholarly work and research for publication or other purposes to benefit teaching
effectiveness; a more systematic way to share insights from conferences and individual
work with other Division members and the campus community at large.




                                     Go to Table of Contents


                                                 54
             Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



         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
                                Governance          Other College-Related             Other Campus
FT Instructor Name              Committees              Committees                     Participation
Adams, Alice                 Tenure Committee        Senate Task Force,         Asst. English Division
                                                   Various hiring               Chair
                                                   committees                     Humanities Program
                                                                                          Chair
Doyle, Dennis              Campuswide              Reading Committee            English Lab Coordinator
                           Computer                English Technology           Learning Center Director
                           Coordinating            Committee                    Study Abroad:England &
                              Student Affairs                                            Ireland
                           Network Committees
Edelman, Bart              Sabbatical Committee        Creative Writing Chair   Eclipse Editor
                                                                                English Majors Club
Ezell, Denise                                          Developmental Writing    various hiring
                                                         Student Learning       committees,
                                                        Outcomes Committee      reader for Eclipse,
                                                                                reader for placement
                                                                                challenge exams
Ferdman, Ida                  Program Review       Developmental Writing           Deaf Club Advisor
                                                             Chair
Hanley, T.                  Petitions Committee    Scholarship Committee             Various hiring
                                                   Senate "Student of the             committees
                                                   Year" Scholarship
                                                   Committee
                                                   Petitions Subcommittee
Harnett, Michael           C&I Committee Co-       English 102/104 Chair           Reader for Eclipse
                           Chair                    English Technology              PACE Program
                                                          Committee                Scholars Program
                                                   Humanities Committee         Supplemental Instruction
                                                    Literature Committee             AMP Mentor
                                                      Program Review              Faculty profiles for
                                                           Manager                    Chaparral
                                                    3 Hiring Committees
Henry, Susan                                       Humanities Committee           Scholars, Paired and
                                                    Literature Committee            Service Learning
                                                                                     Classes, using
                                                                                Supplemental Instruction
Kilkeary, Desmond                                   Literature Committee            Chaparral Editor
Hoover, Phyllis             Parking Committee      Literature Program               AMP Mentoring
                                                   Chair                           Book Club Faculty
                                                   Freshman Seminar                     Advisor
                                                   Committee
                                                      Freshman Seminar
                                                    Committee Co-Chair
Juzwiak, Chris             Technology-Mediated     English Developmental



                                                  55
             Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006


                                Instruction                                     Research Showcase
                                  Library
Kwa, Rosemary                                      English 101 Committee       English Majors Transfer
                                                                              Program, English Majors
                                                                               Club, reader for Eclipse
Marterella, Dana              Baja Committee       Developmental Writing      reader for Eclipse
                                                         Committee
Phillips, Nancy            Technology Mediated     Reading Committee           Co Chair Accreditation
                               Instruction         Chair                         Report standard 5
                                                   Developmental Writing
                                                         Committee
Moreau, Michael                Study Abroad                                      El Vaquero Faculty
                                                                                      Moderator
                                                                                  Academic Senate
Ritterbrown, Michael        English Department       Library Committee        Fiction Editor:
                                   Chair                    C&I               Eclipse
                               Senate Exec         English Technology
                              Senate Budget        Committee
                                  Parking              Faculty Senate
                               Assessment
                                 Scholars
                                  Library
Rohrbacher, Francien                                     Developmental         Mentor: English Club
                                                        Writing, Writing
                                                      Across the Curriculum
                                                           English 101
Tiernan, Monette                 Senate                Writing Across the      Mentor: English Club
                               Senate Exec                 Curriculum
                            Governance Review           Program Review
                                                      Developmental Writing
                                                         English 101/120
Wheeler, Michael           Staff Development              Various hiring        Scholar Program
                           Campus Development              committees          Mentor: English Club
                           Faculty Senate                                         Accreditation
                               Senate Budget
                            Advisory Committee
                                   Senate
                                 Senate Exec
Brinkmeyer, Susan          Title V Director
                                Campuswide
                                  Computer
                                Coordinating                                        AMP Mentor
                             Writing Across the
                                 Curriculum
                           Matriculation
                            Master Plan Steering
                                 Committee
Vallicella, Phillip
Taylor, Stephen                                         English 120 Chair
                                                                               Title V Faculty Mentor
White, David               Scholars
                                Assessment
Morales, Angela             Staff Development         Developmental Writing
                                                          , English 120
                                                           Committees



                                                 56
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



PF Index (Committees Per Full-Time Faculty)

Supply the following data for the most recent academic year.

                 (1) Total number of full-time faculty members: 24
            (2) Total number of committees in most recent term: 77
                               CPF Index [ (2) divided by (1) ]: 3.2

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

Considering the size of the division and the numerous division committees, faculty are
heavily involved in both the division and the campus at large. Given the workload of
English classes, particularly composition classes that require significant amounts of time
for grading and preparation, the division faculty is a highly dedicated group, perhaps to
the point of overburdening themselves in some cases. Faculty released-time work
amounts to over 500%, indicative of service to the college outside of the division. Only
one faculty member is not involved in some kind of campus service.



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

There certainly is a need for more faculty in the English Division, especially since 5
faculty members will retire within the next 3 years. Since the overwhelming majority of
the faculty is committed to work within the division, in the campus at large, and
elsewhere, the addition of more full-time faculty would ease the strain felt by this
majority and make the work of the division, and the college, more efficient and far-
reaching.



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




                                            57
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 6
                Facilities & Equipment




                                 58
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



              6.01. Facilities & Equipment: Facilities

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

The English division is in constant need of more classroom space in order to provide a
full curriculum offering.
Specific Comments/Requests/Areas of need (from survey responses):
1. Custodial cleaning: offices, classrooms and restrooms not clean on a consistent basis
4. Classroom furniture: desks in CR and AD 207 are broken; more consistency needed in
accommodating students of various sizes.
7. Airflow: Temperature control in Library Building and other classrooms is not reliable
and is noisy.
8. Office furniture not comfortable
9. Restrooms and classrooms dirty, not satisfactorily equipped with paper towels
10. Other: More consistency with availability of Level 3 classrooms desired.


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




                                             59
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



     6.02. Facilities & Equipment: Equipment/Resources

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


Office supplies such as paper, whiteboard pens, etc., are in short supply and division
members have been asked to supply their own.
Faculty computers need upgrading and replacement to allow efficient work and access to
online resources and media.


                                Go to Table of Contents




                                           60
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



              6.03. Facilities & Equipment: Staffing

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


With the retirement of our English Division secretary at the end of Fall, 2005, a
replacement will be needed. At this critical point, we cannot afford to be without the
excellent service that the secretary now provides very well.
The English Lab needs more staff.




                                 Go to Table of Contents




                                            61
Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006




                          Section 7
                 Goals & Action Plans




                                 62
          Glendale Community College – Instructional Program Review – 2005-2006



                            7.01. Five-Year Plan



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. Please
include any suggestions for improvement in your Five-Year Plan.

      Curriculum:
   1. Revise course outlines to be more consistent across the division and more useful
      as guides for instruction: Coordinate prerequisites, corequisites, and
      recommended preparation advisories with course entry and exit standards for the
      following courses:
          a. Prerequisites: ENGL 103, 121, 127, 131, 141, 142, 187, 189, 191
          b. Corequisites: ENGL 152, 188, 189, 190, 191
          c. Recommended Preparation: ENGL 120, 122, 123, 130, 192
          Timeline for completion: within 2005-2006 school year or as soon as possible.
   2. Develop innovative curricula, teaching strategies, and uses of technology for
      effective instruction
      Timeline for completion: ongoing through 2010-2011and beyond

       Staffing:
          1. Hire additional full-time faculty to replace retirements and allow full
              course offerings
          Timeline for completion: Spring 2006 and each semester as faculty retire
          2. Hire additional classified staff (division secretary replacement, English
              Lab staff)
          Timeline for completion: by Spring 2006

       Facilities:
       1. Obtain additional classrooms to allow for more complete course offerings
       2. Obtain additional lab space/lab classrooms to allow for more complete student
          access to writing and research technology. The English division has been
          promised 2 labs in the upcoming College Services building; this will help
          greatly
       3. Obtain additional and upgraded computer equipment for faculty
       Timeline for completion: Spring 2006/as soon as possible




                                           63

								
To top