RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

Document Sample
RIVERSIDE COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT Powered By Docstoc
					INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM REVIEW

         Annual Program Review Update

                Unit:_ PHILOSOPHY

             Campus:__RIVERSIDE__

     Contact Person: Romulus Masterson
            Due: March 15, 2007




       Riverside Community College District
                Office of Institutional Effectiveness

 Web Resources: http://www.rccdfaculty.net/pages/programreview.jsp


                 Last Revised: November 3, 2006




                                 1
                     Annual Program Review Update

                                      Instructions

The Annual Self-Study is conducted by each unit on each campus and consists of analysis
of general changes, staffing, resources, facilities, equipment and other needs. It should be
submitted or renewed every year by March 15th in anticipation of budget planning for
the next fiscal year which begins July 1st.

The questions on the subsequent pages are intended to assist you in planning for your unit.
If there is no change from your prior report, you may simply resubmit that report
(or any portion that remains constant) from the prior year with a new date.

Please include pertinent documents such as student learning outcomes assessment reports
and data analysis supporting any requests for new faculty, facilities or equipment. You
are encouraged to use lists, tables, and other formatting to clarify your requests and make
them easy for large committees to review quickly. If there may be negative consequences
for enrollment, safety or other important concerns please make this known in context.

The forms that follow are separated into pages for ease of distribution to relevant
subcommittees. Please keep the pages separated if possible (though part of the same
electronic file), with the headers as they appear, and be sure to include your unit, campus,
contact person (this may change from topic to topic) and date on each page submitted.
Don’t let formatting concerns slow you down. If you have difficulty with formatting, the
Administrative Support Center can adjust the document for you. Simply add responses to
those questions that apply and forward the document to the Administrative Support Center
with a request to format it appropriately.

Please retain this information for your discipline’s use and submit an electronic copy to
the Office of Institutional Effectiveness (institutional.effectiveness@rcc.edu). The Office
of Institutional Effectiveness will distribute it to the relevant offices and committees.



       Note:      All Data will be preloaded into these forms by
                           Institutional Research




                                             2
                      Annual Program Review Update
                                                   Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                                Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                        Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                 Date: ____________________________




                        Trends and Relevant Data (part 1)

1. Has there been any change in the status of your unit? (if not, skip to #2)

No changes.

       a. Has your unit shifted departments?



       b. Have new programs been created by your unit?



       c. Have activities in other units impacted your unit? For example, a new nursing
          program could cause greater demand for life science courses.




                                             3
                         Annual Program Review Update
                                                          Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                                       Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                               Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                        Date: ____________________________




                             Trends and Relevant Data (part 2)

2. Have there been any significant changes in enrollment, retention, success rates, or
   environmental demographics that impact your discipline?

Top Enrolled           Enrolled Spaces –     Change from        Valid Grades1      Retention2       Success3
Courses                Fall 05               Previous year
Intro to Philosophy                  369                 59                 354            86.4%         53.4%
Critical Thinking                    248                 21                 236            79.2%         58.5%
Ethics: Contemp
Moral Issues                            44                -75                43            81.4%        48.8%
Philosophy of Art                       16                -19                16           100.0%       100.0%
TOTAL PHI                              677                -22               649            83.8%        56.1%



        Occupational Programs must review the update of their labor market data provided
         by Institutional Research to illustrate that their program:
             1. Meets a documented labor market demand
             2. Does not represent duplication of other training programs (in the region)
             3. Is of demonstrated effectiveness as measured by the employment and
                 completion success of its students

Overall, enrollment has dropped slightly since the previous year. Philosophy’s drop at
Riverside though appears no greater than the enrollment drop for the college as a whole.



1
  Valid grade notations: A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, FW, I or IX (Incomplete).
2 The Retention Rate is computed based upon the percent of students retained in courses out of the total
enrolled in courses. The retention rate is calculated by dividing the numerator by the denominator and
multiplying by 100:
      Numerator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, CR, NC, I
      Denominator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, I
3 Success Rate: Percent of students successful in courses out of total enrolled in courses. The success rate
is calculated by dividing the numerator by the denominator and multiplying by 100
               Numerator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, CR
               Denominator: Number of students (duplicated) with A, B, C, D, F, CR, NC, W, I



                                                      4
Our two “bread and butter” courses—Intro to Philosophy and Critical Thinking—have
actually had a small increase in enrollment. Philosophy of Art enrollment has held steady (it
is historically a low enrollment course offered only at City Campus), but is misrepresented
this year because the instructor offered the course through our Study Abroad Program in
Italy (Fall, 2005). Hence, the course was not available to as many students.

Therefore, all of our enrollment losses are in the perennially problematic Ethics (Phil 12)
course. Note that since 2005, only part-timers have taught this class. We have discussed
ways to increase the Phil 12 enrollment for years now. Changing the name to “Introduction
to Ethics…” is one suggestion that has been made. We have also responded to the low
enrollment in Phil 12 classes by offering fewer sections. So, this in part explains the drop.
However, the abysmal success rates coupled with concerns about having only part-time
teachers teach this course suggest that having one of our full-time instructors begin to teach
the course again would be a good idea.

What was difference in 2005-2006 at Riverside City College? As mentioned, one full-time
faculty member was on the Study Abroad Program for the Fall of 2005. This significantly
reduced the total number of students taught by our full-time staff. Without specific
statistics for individual instructors, however, it is difficult to say for sure whether this
anomaly helps explain the drop in Critical Thinking (Phil 11) retention rates, or the overall
drop in our student’s success rates.

Note that Philosophy is traditionally a difficult discipline compared to other disciplines in
the Humanities. A considerable number of our instructors—both full-time and part-time—
use (mostly) difficult to read, primary texts in their Intro, Philosophy of Art, and Ethics
courses. On the other hand, this may also be true for Norco and Moreno Valley, though
their retention and success rates are considerably higher than Riverside’s. As noted in
Norco’s Program Review Document, this may be due to grade inflation. It is further
suggested that this may be occurring more among the part-time instructors (the lone full-
timer at Norco was on sabbatical, and Moreno Valley did not yet have a full-time instructor).

Concerning the drop in retention for Critical Thinking courses, it should also be noted that
the instructor that was off campus half the year (teaching abroad) teaches all face-to-face
Critical Thinking courses, whereas the other full-time instructor that was on campus all year
teaches mostly online versions of this course. As a result, about 75% of our critical thinking
classes were taught online. This percentage is much higher than a typical year, when around
half of our Critical Thinking courses are taught by the online delivery method. But online
courses are known to have lower retentions rates. So this probably explains some of the
drop in retention. It should also be noted that while there was a dip in retention (probably
for the reasons described above), that Critical Thinking retention remains fairly strong,
especially in comparison to success rates.

We will need to keep an eye on success rates for Riverside Philosophy classes. Though
Philosophy’s success rates may be by nature lower than other disciplines in the humanities,
it seems odd that the other two campuses have such a higher rate in our discipline. As Norco
notes, we will need to check this again next year when all of our full-timers are on their
respective campuses. An important tool that is needed to get a more complete picture of
success will be assessment data. While philosophy may be passing fewer students, these
student may be achieving our stated learning outcomes to a (comparatively) higher degree.




                                              5
                     Annual Program Review Update
                                                  Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                               Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                       Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                Date: ____________________________



                                   Other Resources

3. Do you have new needs (professional development, library resources, and so forth) not
   previously required by the discipline? Please describe.

As pointed out by Norco, we also really need professional development support for training
part-time faculty in assessment, and for assuring their participation in ongoing
implementation of assessment.

Library resources seem fine, though having instructor offices (and classrooms) so far from
the library has made them less accessible. While more philosophy texts are always
appreciated, the availability of on-line material and the paper writing needs of students
make computer access a greater priority. Recent student feed-back suggests that there are
just enough computers currently. As enrollment grows though, so will this need.

4. Does your discipline need additional support from Student Services beyond that
   previously provided?




                                             6
                      Annual Program Review Update
                                                    Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                                 Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                         Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                  Date: ____________________________




                       Learning Outcomes Assessment Update

[Units that perform these functions at a district level may use the same comment for all
campuses.]

5. How has your unit been engaged this past year in assessing student learning?

       a. Summarize your results (whenever possible, provide documentation of student
          learning in your discipline and evidence that assessment data has been generated).

Spring 2005 was the last time an assessment project was worked on collectively by the
discipline. In Spring 2006, the philosophy full-time faculty met with part-time to discuss
assessment and to bring part-time faculty into the project. As mentioned, our discipline
facilitator was on the Study Abroad program in the Fall of 2005. While the philosophy
discipline has not progressed to assessing more SLOs in more courses (after their initial
assessment of SLOs for PHI 11 in Spring 2004 and 2005), we have begun to discuss assessing
learning outcomes for our Introduction to Philosophy course. This is a particularly difficult
but important course to get moving as far as assessment goes. There are many different but
legitimate approaches to teaching the Intro course. It will thus take some time to develop
and implement an assessment instrument.

While the two full-time instructors at Riverside continue to gather assessment data in their
Critical Thinking courses. there has been no progress in getting part-time instructors
involved. As mentioned, there is the ongoing problem of motivating them to do “extra”
work. Again, we need support (money) from the college to draw them in. The district wide
assessment of the general education SLOs pilot project (being conducted this spring
semester 2007, by Arend Flick) may be of some help here. They have chosen our Philosophy
11, Critical Thinking class as one of the classes to be assessed in this pilot program. We
welcome this development.


       b. What did your unit learn from these results that enabled you to improve
           teaching and learning in the discipline?

For Critical Thinking, we have begun to get some data that suggests that students learning is
deficient in two areas. One shortcoming is fairly specific. While students are pretty
successful at finding an argument when they are told a passage definitely contains one, their
ability to find one when they are not sure if there is one is much weaker. Another, more


                                               7
general problem area is the evaluation of arguments. Students seem to be able to tell
whether an argument is a strong or weak one; but they have great difficulties in explaining
why it is strong or weak.

While we have not yet formulated a discipline wide approach to dealing with these initial
findings, some of us have already made adjustments to our teaching in order to address the
weaknesses. For example, one instructor has developed two take-home tests in which
students have to find and extract an argument of their own choosing, in a subject-matter
that interests them. For the second one, they are asked to evaluate the argument by
comparing the strength of its conclusion with competing, alternative conclusions. These
assignments give students the practice and motivation needed to improve their ability to
recognize and evaluate arguments.


       c. How have part-time faculty been made aware of the need to assess student learning
          outcomes and been included in assessment activities?"

As mentioned previously, part-time faculty met with full-time faculty to discuss the
importance of assessment and to be informed of its methods. Again though, motivation and
follow-through for part-time faculty (regarding assessment) remains a challenge.




                                              8
                       Annual Program Review Update
                                                       Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                                    Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                            Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                     Date: ____________________________


                                    Human Resource Needs


6. Complete the Faculty Employment Grid below (please list full and part time faculty
   numbers in separate rows):



                                    Faculty Load Distribution in the Unit

Course                Total         % of        % of        WSCH       FTEF       WSCH/FTEF    Explanations
                      Teaching      Total       Total                                          and Additional
                      Load for      Teaching    Teaching                                       Information
                      fall term     Load by     Load                                           (retirement,
                                    Full-time   Taught                                         reassignment,
                                    Faculty     by Part-                                       etc.)
                                                Time
                                                Faculty
Intro to Philosophy           1.8      40.71       59.29     1311.07        1.8       728.37
Critical Thinking             1.8      66.67       33.33      868.16        1.8       482.31
Ethics: Contemp               0.4          0          100     161.04        0.4       402.60
Moral Issues
Philosophy of Art             0.2        100           0       54.08        0.2       270.40
TOTAL PHI                     4.2      42.86       57.14     2394.35        4.2       570.08


7. Do you need additional faculty? If yes, explain why. If a need is not clear based on
   the data above please include additional data sheets justifying the need.

         a. Full-time? Yes. While Philosophy at City Campus may be functioning
            well enough with two full-timers, we will need a new hire soon. Already,
            close to 60 % of our courses are taught by part-timers; and enrollment
            will expand when we move back to the quad. Though the college might
            prefer to hire in a discipline with better numbers, such an approach risks
            putting our discipline in a “Catch-22” situation. We need the energy, full-
            time/part-time balance, and assessment involvement of a third full-timer
            to help us bring the numbers up. Further, our discipline needs to keep up
            with the national trend in Philosophy toward providing students with a
            more balanced, “World Philosophy” curriculum (rather than only
            offering courses in “Western Philosophy”). None of our full-time or part-


                                                  9
   time instructors are really qualified to teach Non-Western Philosophy. In
   sum, in a short time the Philosophy discipline will need to add diversity
   and energy, or we will be unable to either flourish or fully implement an
   effective assessment program. But implementing an effective assessment
   strategy is the key to improving student success in philosophy courses.
   Hence, the effects of a new hire on both our college and discipline will
   more than justify the expense.

b. Part-time?

At current enrollment levels, our current part-time faculty is sufficient.




                                   10
                      Annual Program Review Update
                                                       Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                                    Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                            Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                     Date: ____________________________




                         Human Resource Needs (continued)

8. Complete the Classified Staff Employment Grid below (please list full and part time
   staff numbers in separate rows:

                                     Staff Employed in the Unit
Assignment (e.g.   Full-time staff        Part-time staff   Gains over Prior   Losses over Prior
Math, English)     (give number)          (give number)     Year               Year (given
                                                                               reason, retirement,
                                                                               reassignment,
                                                                               health, etc.)




9. Do you need more classified staff? If yes, explain why and be sure to include data
   sheets justifying the need.

        a. Full-time?

        b. Part-time?

Staffing appears to be adequate.



10. If necessary, to clarify your needs, please comment on current available staff and
    distribution of FTE's for contract and part-time faculty. Describe strengths and
    weaknesses of faculty/staff as appropriate to program's current status or future
    development.




                                                  11
Annual Program Review Update                                                        Campus/Unit Needs Worksheet
                                                         FACULTY

                                                                                       This section to be filled out by
                 This section to be filled out by the unit at each campus
                                                                                               Subcommittee
                                                                                                     Degree of
                                                                                      Recommend
                                                                                                     Justification (as
                                                                                          for
           Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below                         substantiated by
                                                                                       Approval
                                                                                                     the program
                                                                                        Status
                                                                                                     review)




                                                                                                 Approved




                                                                                                                   Moderate
                                                                                      Approved




                                                                                                   High
                                                                                                            High
                                                                                                   Very




                                                                                                                              Low
                                                                                                   Not
        List Faculty Positions Needed for Academic Year_________1__________



1. Full-Time Tenure Track (able to teach both Western and Non-Western Philosophy)


2.


3.


4.


5.




                                                             12
Annual Program Review Update                                               Campus/Unit Needs Worksheet
                                           CLASSIFIED STAFF

                                                                              This section to be filled out by
             This section to be filled out by the unit at each campus
                                                                                      Subcommittee
                                                                                            Degree of
                                                                             Recommend
                                                                                            Justification (as
                                                                                 for
       Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below                    substantiated by
                                                                              Approval
                                                                                            the program
                                                                               Status
                                                                                            review)




                                                                                        Approved




                                                                                                          Moderate
                                                                             Approved




                                                                                          High
                                                                                                   High
                                                                                          Very




                                                                                                                     Low
                                                                                          Not
      List Staff Positions Needed for Academic Year_________0__________



1.


2.


3.


4.


5.




                                                         13
                     Annual Program Review Update
                                                  Unit: ___         PHI _________
                                               Campus: ___________RIV____________
                                       Contact Person: ____________________________
                                                Date: ____________________________




                                        Facilities

11. Comment on facilities the program uses, their current adequacy, and any immediate
    needs. Have your discipline’s facilities needs changed? If so, how? Please provide a
    data-based justification for any request that requires new or additional facilities
    construction, renovation, remodeling or repairs.

We just want our quad back!

                                       Equipment

12. Have your discipline’s equipment needs changed? If so, how? Please provide a data-
    based justification for any request that requires a new or additional budget allotment.

       a. Is equipment in need of repair outside of your current budget?

Yes.
Several of our Philosophy instructors draw from current events and public
discussions for materials for their courses. One full-time instructor uses almost
entirely “fresh” newspaper and journal articles for material in his Critical Thinking
classes. This requires hundreds of same-day or next-day photocopies each week.
While such teaching methods make for more exciting, highly relevant, and up-to-
date courses, they require that there be a working and easily accessible photocopying
machine on most class days. Our low-volume, overworked, (it seems) poorly
designed, and usually broken department photocopier is too unreliable to support
these progressive teaching methods.

We need a reliable, high-volume photocopying machine in our departmental office.
While RCC staff at the photocopying centers are often helpful, they consider high-
volume same-day photocopying as “last minute” and an indication of procrastination
or poor planning. Rather, doing Philosophy in conjunction with current events
requires that we produce hundreds of pages of “last minute” copies on a normal
teaching day. This requires access to a high-volume machine that actually works.




                                            14
Annual Program Review Update                                                                   Campus/Unit Needs Worksheet
                                                            Equipment

                                                                                                  This section to be filled out by
                    This section to be filled out by the unit at each campus
                                                                                                          Subcommittee
                                                                                                 Recommend           Degree of
                                                                                                     for         Justification (as
     Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below                            Approval       substantiated by
                                                                                                   Status          the program
                                                                                                                      review)




                                                                                                            Approved




                                                                                                                              Moderate
                                                                                                 Approved




                                                                                                              High
                                                                                                                       High
                                                                                                              Very




                                                                                                                                         Low
        List Equipment or Equipment Repair Needed for Academic                   Approximate




                                                                                                              Not
                  Year_______2007-2008____________                                  Cost


1. One High-Volume Reliable Photocopier                                        $ 3500.00

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.




                                                                15
Annual Program Review Update                                                                 Campus/Unit Needs Worksheet
                                                             Facilities

                                                                                                This section to be filled out by
                    This section to be filled out by the unit at each campus
                                                                                                        Subcommittee
                                                                                               Recommend           Degree of
                                                                                                   for          Justification (as
     Please list/summarize the needs of your unit on your campus below                          Approval       substantiated by
                                                                                                 Status          the program
                                                                                                                     review)




                                                                                                          Approved




                                                                                                                            Moderate
                                                                                               Approved
                                                                               Approximate




                                                                                                            High
                                                                                                                     High
                                                                                                            Very




                                                                                                                                       Low
        List Facility Needs for Academic Year___________________




                                                                                                            Not
                                                                                  Cost
              (Remodels, Renovations or added new facilities)


1.


2.


3.


4.


5.

6.




                                                                16
         This Page is for Your Use Only

Notes:




                       17

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:0
posted:9/17/2012
language:Latin
pages:17