Annual Program Assessment (APA)

Annual Program Assessment (APA) Academic Year 2015-16

Program Description The A.A.-T in Geography transfers to a four-year college and prepares students for a future in a field related to Geography. The Geographic Information Science (GIS) non-transfer Certificate and AS degree prepares students for GIS related careers which are enhanced by completion of a bachelor or graduate program. For students currently working within these fields there may be potential for salary and/or career advancement. From local to global scales, geographers study political organization, transportation systems, marketing, economics, climate and weather, urban planning, land use development, globalization, and more. They examine distribution of land forms, study soils and vegetation, analyze limited resources such as water, and human impacts on the surface of the planet. In general, Geographers work in government research, public agencies, and are environmental consultants for nonprofit organizations. Geographic Information Science (GIS) involves basic to advanced analysis and scientific research methods for identifying patterns, trends and relationships that are represented spatially and temporally on maps, large databases, reports and animations. Recent advancements make it possible to analyze, interact and produce maps using cloud technology. Students enrolled in our GIS courses online have the advantage of learning advanced communication and mapmaking skills that prepare them for a career in GIS, anywhere.

I. Program, Course and Assessment

A. Awards and Completion Using the 2015 Program Review Data for your discipline, please provide the number of Associate degrees and certificates awarded. Also report the average time to completion for these degrees and certificates. Please respond to each prompt below.

A1. Awards

Under “Program Award Count”, provide the total number of Associate degrees and the total number of certificates awarded by your program per year. (Please see instructions for suggested response formats for this and all subsequent prompts).

Click here to enter text.

 For each degree type (AA/AS for Option B, Option C and Transfer) and certificate (CT), is the number of awards increasing, decreasing or constant?

1  If the number of any award is decreasing, please identify this award and suggest ways to reverse this trend.

 Is there any additional information or commentary?

A2. Average Years to Completion

Under “Program Average Years to Completion,” report the typical years to completion for each degree and certificate in your program.

 For each degree type (AA/AS for Option B, Option C and Transfer) and certificate (CT), are the numbers increasing, decreasing or constant with time?

 How do the rates for each degree and certificate compare to the District Average Time to Completion?

 If any of these rates are much larger than the District Average Time to Completion, please list these awards, their completion times and provide suggestions to decrease their completion times.

2 B. Program and Courses Please review the data for your program and courses and respond to each prompt below. NOTE: Please utilize the Fall 2015 Convocation input for Fill, Retention and Success Rate responses.

B1. Fill Rate

B1a. Program Fill Rate

Provide the typical Program Total Fill Rate and the typical Institutional Average Fill Rate (see instructions to locate these rates in the data).

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the Program Total Fill Rate compare to the Institutional Average Fill Rate?

 Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific program fill rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the program’s total fill rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific rates compare to one another?

3  Note any significant differences found in the comparisons above. Please provide brief commentary and suggest explanations for these differences. For each site or modality (face-to-face or online) mentioned, please include its rate.

 To increase program fill rates while maintaining student access and equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings and/or scheduling (e.g. adjusting the number of sections offered, mix of modalities, frequency, location)

o other?

 What will be required to implement these changes?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if program fill rates are low, can the number of courses offered be reduced without increasing student time-to-completion or impacting full-time instructor workloads?

B1b. Course Fill Rates

 How do the typical course fill rates for courses in your discipline compare to the program total fill rate? Please see instructions for suggested response formats.

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

4 Click here to enter text.

 TEM:

 Note any significant differences found in the comparisons above. Please provide brief commentary and suggest explanations for these differences. For each site or modality (face-to-face or online) mentioned, please include its rate.

 To increase course fill rates while maintaining student success, access and equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings or scheduling (e.g. adjusting length of course (17.5 vs. 8 weeks), days/times, modality)

o curriculum (e.g. increasing or decreasing content, prerequisites)

o pedagogy (e.g. lecture vs. group work, use of technology)

o other?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if course fill rates are low, can the number of sections offered be reduced without increasing student time-to-completion or impacting full-time instructor workloads?

B2. Waitlists

B2a. Program Waitlist

How has the Program Total Waitlist Count trended?

5 Describe the program waitlist trends for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN).

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

B2b. Course Waitlists

 For each site (SJC, MVC, BAN, TEM, ONLIN), list a course (or two) in your discipline with a large waitlist. Please include the actual typical waitlist size for each course.

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

6  For the courses listed above, what scheduling improvements have been, or will be, devised to satisfy student demand and maximize schedule efficiency (i.e. decrease our waitlist sizes but still fill our classrooms!)?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, does a lack of room or instructor availability limit the number or modality of additional sections that can be offered?

 To decrease waitlists sizes (and increase student access) while maintaining equity, does the waitlist information suggest changes to

o course offerings or scheduling (e.g. adjusting frequency, day vs. evening, location, modality),

o curriculum (e.g. prerequisites, class cap size),

o initial placement (e.g. using high school GPA for initial placement of English and math students)

o other?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, is room size an issue? Is a section typically offered in a room that has fewer seats than the curriculum cap?

B3. Retention Rates

7 B3a. Program Retention Rates

List the typical Program Retention Rate and the Institutional Standard and typical District Average Retention Rates. NOTE: Please utilize the Fall 2015 Convocation input for Retention Rate responses.

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the Program Retention Rate compare to the District Average Retention Rate?

 Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific program retention rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the Program Retention Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 For this same time frame, how do the site-specific rates compare to one another?

 To improve program retention while maintaining equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings and scheduling(e.g. adjusting mix of modalities, course length, frequency, location)

o other?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if courses required for a degree or certificate are not offered regularly, so students are leaving MSJC before completing their degrees and certificates, are there sufficient numbers of instructors and rooms to schedule these courses more often?

B3b. Course Retention Rates

 How do the course retention rates for your discipline compare to the program’s retention rate? Please see instructions (make “instructions” a link) for suggested response formats

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 To improve course retention rates while ensuring equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings or scheduling (e.g. adjusting length, days/times, modality)

o pedagogy (e.g. lecture vs. group work, use of technology)

o other?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if reducing the length of a course section from 17.5 weeks to 8 weeks would increase student motivation (and, hopefully, improve student engagement and retention), is a room and instructor available for this accelerated section?

B4. Success Rates

B4a. Program Success Rates

List the typical Program Success Rate and the Institutional Standard and typical District Average Success Rates. NOTE: Please utilize the Fall 2015 Convocation input for Success Rate responses.

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the Program Success Rate compare to the District Average Success Rate?

 Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific success rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the Program Success Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 For the same time frame, how do the site-specific rates compare to one another?

 To improve program success while ensuring equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings and/or scheduling (e.g. length of course, location, learning communities)

o other?

 Are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if a learning community would increase student success, is creating the common assignments or projects a significant challenge?

B4b. Course Success Rates

 How do the course success rates for your discipline compare to the Program Success Rate? Please see instructions for suggested response formats.

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 To improve student success, access and to ensure equity, does the data analysis above suggest changes to

o course offerings or scheduling (e.g. adjusting days/times, modality)

12 o pedagogy (e.g. lecture vs. group work, use of technology)

o other?

 Specifically, are there any impediments to the implementation of these changes? For example, if supplemental instruction or tutoring would improve success, does a suitable population of qualified students exist?

C. Assessment Summary Please list the CIPs completed during this program review cycle, note any suggested improvements to assessment and/or course delivery and review the three-year CLO schedule to determine which courses must be assessed at least once more by the end of Spring 2017. Please respond to each prompt below.

C1. Completed Fall 2014 Course Improvement Plans Click here to view the course improvement plans (CIPs). Choose “Fall 2014” for Fall 2014 data analysis completed by your discipline. Please list these below.

Open each of these CIPs and…

 Record any assessment improvements to be implemented the next time the course is assessed (e.g. improved or different assessment tool or rubric). See instructions to quickly locate these CIP text fields.

 Also record any course improvements to be implemented the next time the course is taught (e.g. curriculum revision, utilization of technology). See instructions to quickly locate these CIP text fields.

C2. Completed Spring 2015 Course Improvement Plans Click here to view the course improvement plans (CIPs). Choose “Spring 2015” for Spring 2015 data analysis completed by your discipline. Please list these below.

Open each of these CIPs and …

13  Record any assessment improvements to be implemented the next time the course is assessed (e.g. improved or different assessment tool or rubric). See instructions to quickly locate these CIP text fields.

 Also record any course improvements to be implemented the next time the course is taught (e.g. curriculum revision, utilization of technology). See instructions to quickly locate these CIP text fields.

C3. Three-Year CLO Assessment Schedule Click here to view your Three-Year CLO Assessment Schedule. NOTE: each course that is offered at least once a year needs to be assessed twice during this program review cycle (Fall 2014 – Spring 2017). Please compare the courses in sections C1 and C2 above, along with those being assessed this semester (see your e-mail), with those in the assessment schedule and respond to each prompt below. See instructions for additional explanation.

 Which courses still need to be assessed only once more before the end of Spring 2017?

 Which courses still need to be assessed twice before the end of Spring 2017?

II. General Education, Remediation and Dual Enrollment For familiarization with the program data for general education and remediation, please respond to each prompt below.

A. General Education Under the “GEN.ED” section of your 2015 Program Review Data, please respond to the prompts below.

A1. Program Fill Rate

List the GEN.ED Program Total Fill Rate and the Institutional Average Fill Rate (see instructions to locate these rates in the data).

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the GEN. ED Program Total Fill Rate compare to the Institutional Average Fill Rate?

14  Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific GEN.ED fill rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula, (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the Institutional Average Fill Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 Note any significant differences found in the comparisons above.

 Any commentary or analysis (at the program and/or course-level)?

A2. Program Success Rates

List the GEN.ED Program Success Rate and the Institutional Standard and District Average Success Rates.

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the GEN.ED Program Success Rate compare to the District Average Success Rate?

 How do the site-specific GEN.ED success rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the District Average Success Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

 How do the site-specific rates compare to one another?

B. Remediation

B1. Program Fill Rate

List the REMEDIATION Program Total Fill Rate and the Institutional Average Fill Rate (see instructions to locate these rates in the data).

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the REMEDIATION Program Total Fill Rate compare to the Institutional Average Fill Rate?

 Over this same time frame, how do the site-specific REMEDIATION fill rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula, (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the Institutional Average Fill Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

17  Note any significant differences found in the comparisons above.

B2. Program Success Rates

List the REMEDIATION Program Success Rate and the Institutional Standard and District Average Success Rates.

 From fall 2010 through spring 2015, how does the REMEDIATION Program Success Rate compare to the District Average Success Rate?

 How do the site-specific REMEDIATION success rates for San Jacinto (SJC), Menifee Valley (MVC), San Gorgonio Pass (BAN), Temecula (TEM) and online (ONLIN) compare to the District Average Success Rate?

 BAN:

 MVC:

 ONLIN:

 SJC:

 TEM:

18  How do the site-specific rates compare to one another?

C. Dual Enrollment Click here for the Dual Enrollment data. NOTE: If there are no dual enrollment courses in your discipline, you may skip to the next section.

 How many sections of your discipline are typically offered per year?

III. Planning and Resource Requirements

Please briefly update the goals and needs included in last year’s comprehensive program review (CPR). Here is the link to your CPR. Please include any updates to your program goals and objectives, along with any additional facilities, staff, technology, equipment, professional development and library resources that would improve student learning or increase program quality and/or efficiency. Specifically, connect your goals and needs with the analysis of program, course and assessment data above.

A. Program Goals

19 Update goals and objectives of your program and describe how you will attain them.

B. Facilities, Staffing, Technology, Equipment and Professional Development

Update facility, staffing, technology, equipment and professional development needs here.

C. Library Resources

Identify library resources (databases, texts, etc.) that would improve student success, access and ensure equity.

IV. Budget Allocation

RAP (Resource Allocation Proposal) Submissions

For which needs identified previously in this program review will you be submitting a RAP?

V. Final Summary

A. Based on the data and analysis contained in this review, please forward your three greatest needs to your dean/division.

B. Discuss any major activities/highlights/achievements and any student success innovations during the past year.

C. Please list all faculty who participated in this review.

D. Any suggestions, concerns or constructive criticism regarding the MSJC program review process?

Once you have completed this entire form, please mailto:[email protected]

20 Due Date: February 11, 2016

Thank you very much!!!