AY 2013 LBRT Instructional Program Review Process. Data Description Process – Timeline Rev. 10-18-13. 55 Data points to choose from…. Lockheed SR71. Covered in today’s session…. Quick review of Program and Unit Review website Navigating the Annual Reports from Program Data (ARPD) website
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Process – Timeline
Comprehensive Program-Unit Review Cycle and Schedule
Upon conclusion of every program/unit review cycle, the IR Office takes extra care to ensure that we are improving our program/unit review process on campus. This is accomplished by sending out questionnaires specific to the groups, and then meeting with those groups across campus and collecting their feedback. The feedback is reviewed and an action plan is put into place, which is used in the planning phase for our next review cycle. Your suggestions, and the actions taken for improving this process, are then published to the Program Review website and have been linked here for your convenience.
2012 Program-Unit Process Improvement Summary
To drive accountability in the organization, the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will ensure that all of the work we commit to as part of this process, is completed every year. Based on the feedback we received from everyone last year from our program-unit review process improvement focus groups, the following changes have been made and have been incorporated into the planning of this year’s review:
In order to assure the best possible communication and attendance for our annual training, the IR Office developed the Program-Unit Review Campus Communication Plan. We found out that information about our program and unit review process on campus was not always getting to the people that need it, availability of faculty, lecturers and staff were not taken into consideration when scheduling meetings/training, and using email alone was not sufficient to reach everyone on campus.
The new communication plan includes: managing a scheduling request for meetings, using the campus-wide email distribution to include faculty, lecturers and staff, and a hardcopy reminder will be printed off and placed in division/department mailboxes and posted in break areas.
Additionally, the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs will work with the Admin Team and the DC’s to ensure that we are adequately communicating program and unit review activities across the campus.
A special “Mahalo” goes out to our local UHCC IPRC representatives for helping us improve this important process!
This is the improved process we are using this year:
Comprehensive Program-Unit Review Process
Remember: Joni will find someone to copy your template information into the online ARPD tool. Just fill out the template you are required to submit this year!
The following data elements are all new this year:
UHCC Annual Report of Program Data Web Submission Tool
Provide documentation that the program has submitted evidence and achieved certification or accreditation from an organization granting certification in an industry or profession. If the program/degree/certificate does not have a certifying body, the recommendations for, approval of, and/or participation in, assessment by the program’s advisory committee/board can be submitted.
Describe the different levels of achievement for each characteristic of the learning outcome(s) that were assessed. What represented “excellent,” “good,” “fair,” or “poor” performance using a defined rubric and what percentages were set as goals for student success (for example: “85% of students will achieve good or excellent in the assessed activity.”)
List the courses assessed during the reporting period.
Describe what, why, where, when, and from whom assessment artifacts were collected.
The % of students who met the outcome(s) and at what level they met the outcome(s).
Include any information that will clarify the assessment process report.
Describe what the program will do to improve the results. "Next Steps" can include revision to syllabi, curriculum, teaching methods, student support, and other options.
Cheryl Chappell-LongDirector Academic Planning, Assessment, and Policy AnalysisPhone: 808-956-4561Email: email@example.com
If you are on the schedule to complete a comprehensive review this year, follow this simple 2-step process:
Step 1:Complete your review in the ARPD online submission tool.
Step 2: Move to the Comprehensive Review Process for further instructions.
If you are on the NOT on the schedule to complete a comprehensive review this year, follow this simple 2-step process:
Step 1:Complete your review in the ARPD online submission tool.
Step 2: Move to the Annual Review & Budget Process for further instructions.
The comprehensive review process, and annual review and budget process, and their associated templates, are brought to you this year by the VCAA and Interim Dean of CTE Programs. The template and instructions should be part of their presentation today.
Assessment = James Kiley 934-2649
IR = Shawn Flood 934-2648
Dean CTE = Joyce Hamasaki 934-2522
VCAA = Joni Onishi 934-2514
#1a Number of Majors Native Hawaiian
Count of program majors who are Native Hawaiian and home‐institution at your college. Count excludes students that have completely withdrawn from the semester at CENSUS.
This is an annual number. Programs receive a count of .5 for each term (fall and spring) within the academic year that the Native Hawaiian student is a major. A maximum count of 1.0 (one) for each student.
#1c Fall Part-Time
Percentage of majors (#1) enrolled in less than12 credits in the college in the reporting Fall semester.
#1d Fall Part-Time who are Full-Time in System
Percentage of majors in #1c (enrolled in less than 12 credits in the reporting Fall semester in the institution) who are enrolled in credits in other UH institutions where their total number of credits enrolled in the UH System is equal to or greater than 12.
Percentage of majors enrolled in 12 or more credits in the reporting Spring semester at the institution.
#1f Spring Part-Time
Percentage of majors enrolled in less than 12 credits at the institution in the reporting Spring semester.
Percentage of majors in #1f (enrolled in less than 12 credits in the reporting Spring semester in the institution) who are enrolled in credits in other UH institutions where their total number of credits enrolled in the UH System is equal to or greater than 12.
Courses Taught Aligned to Instructional Programs
Your program health is determined by 3 separate types of measures: Demand, Efficiency, and Effectiveness. This slide explains why these measures were chosen to determine program health.
i.e. your programs ability to attract new students every year based on your offering.
i.e. your programs ability to use its resources in the best possible way.
i.e. your programs ability to produce the desired result.
#9 Fill Rate
Total active student registrations in program classes (number of seats filled) at Fall and Spring census divided by the maximum enrollment (number of seats offered).
Captured at Census and excludes students who have already withdrawn (W) at this point.
2013 BOR Appointed Program Faculty
#12a Analytical FTE Faculty (Workload)
Calculated by sum of Semester Hours (not Student Semester Hours) taught in program classes divided by 27.
Analytic FTE is useful as a comparison to FTE of BOR appointed faculty (#10). Used for analysis of program offerings covered by lecturers.
#13b Special/Federal Budget Allocation
The dollars from Federal grants
#13c Tuition and Fees
The amount collected for tuition and fees in the 2013 academic year.
#14 Cost per SSH
Overall Program Budget Allocation (#13) divided by SSH in all program classes (#5)
#17 Withdrawals (grade = W)
Number of students actively enrolled (at this point have not withdrawn) at Fall and Spring census who at end of semester have a grade of W.
31 majors start in Fall
21 majors of the original 31 persist into Spring
21/31 = .6774 or 67.74%
31 majors start in Fall
11 majors of the original 31 persist into Fall of the next year
11/31 = .3548 or 35.48%
“Fiscal year, where the value indicates the ending of the fiscal year. For example, a FISCAL_YR_IRO value of 2005 indicates the fiscal year 2004‐2005 (July 1, 2004 to June 30, 2005) which includes Summer 2004, Fall 2004, and Spring 2005 semesters…”
#20b Transfers without degree from program
Students included in #20 who did not receive a degree from the community college program prior to transfer.
Number based on Fall semester only.
#22 Enrollments Distance Education Classes
At the Fall and Spring census, the number of students actively enrolled in all classes owned by the program and identified as Distance Completely On‐Line (#21).
Does not include students who at Census have already withdrawn from the class.
The number is an unduplicated count of registrations but is a duplicated count of students. (e.g. If a student is enrolled in two DCO classes both are included in this count.)
#24 (DE) Successful Completion (Equivalent C or higher)
Percentage of students enrolled in program Distance Education classes (#22) at Fall and Spring census who at end of semester have earned a grade equivalent to C or higher.
#25 (DE) Withdrawals (Grade=W)
Number of students actively enrolled in program Distance Education classes (#22) at Fall and Spring census who at end of semester have a grade of W.
31 students enrolled in DE classes in Fall
21 students of the original 31 students persist into any Spring class
21/31 = .6774 or 67.74%
#28 Performance Funding: Number of Degrees Native Hawaiian
The number of majors who received a Pell Grant in the Academic Year beginning Fall.
Publish all Comprehensive Program Reviews to Program-Unit Review WebsiteComprehensive & Annual Program Review Timeline
Work with Process Improvement Team to determine what feedback needs to be taken back to UHCC IPRC
Develop training materials for Instructional Liberal Arts program/ Data Validation
Liberal Arts program review due to your DC and/or UHCC ARPD website by EOB Wednesday November 27th.
Develop/update documentation for website needed for program review
Follow up on last year’s list of suggested improvements for completion
Evaluate ARPD online web submission site for functionality and report bugs to system office
Review instructional CTE glossary and health call scoring rubric and provide suggestions for improvements to system office
Send Campus-wide update on program review process with link to data and due date
Provide Program Review Training to Liberal Arts Instructional Programs
VCAA collects all annual Unit reviews and forwards on to IR to submit to system office as required.
Summarize PR Process Improvement Feedback, communicate results to groups, publish to web.
Administer PR Process Improvement Sessions (Develop questionnaire, schedule sessions, collect feedback)
Plan this year’s program review based on suggested improvements from last year’s review
The intention of this presentation was to provide a single source for all of the documentation related to the Annual Reports for Program Data —specifically for the Liberal Arts program. All of the documents you should need for your ARPD review have been linked directly into this presentation.
As always, your feedback regarding this process is essential in making improvements year over year. Please take a moment to provide feedback at the end of this process.
Those wishing to print this presentation without color may set their printer settings to print in “grayscale,” and set to print in portrait orientation, if desired.
If you need more information on this process please feel free to contact me:
HawCC Institutional Analyst Shawn Flood934-2648
If you need assistance with the P-SLO Tab information please contact:
Institutional Assessment Coordinator