October 20071 Priority 8 Review Team 8: Planning Subcommittee M. DesVignes, D. Kinney, J. Moore, M. Siegel, R. Tillberg Collect and use data systematically.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Responding to Extreme Changes between Self-Study and the Evaluation Visit Dr. Andrew Thompson, Provost Dr. Richard Resch, Provost (Retired) The American.
Advertisements

Annual Updates: Planning for the Future Ryan Cornner Dean of Institutional Effectiveness May 2010.
THIS WORKSHOP WILL ADDRESS WHY THE FOLLOWING ARE IMPORTANT: 1. A comprehensive rationale for funding; 2. Measurable objectives and performance indicators/performance.
A Commitment to Excellence: SUNY Cortland Update on Strategic Planning.
Ivy Tech and the HLC Assessment Academy Learning College Conference February 26-27, 2009.
Matriculation March 10, :45-5:00. WHAT IS MATRICULATION? Matriculation is a process that enhances student access to the California Community Colleges.
Institutional Effectiveness Operational Update Presentation made to the Indiana State University Board of Trustees October 5, 2001.
Linda Nickel EPSB Project Specialist 1.
Strategic Planning Steering Committee Where Are We Now? UNO has been involved in strategic planning since its doors opened in Chancellor.
Dr. Mark Sanchez, Liz Estrella, Tony Anderson, Dr. Romero Jalomo
Columbia-Greene Community College The following presentation is a chronology of the College strategic planning process, plan and committee progress The.
Outcomes, Assessment and Improvement Student Learning Outcomes Implementation at Crafton Hills College.
Mia Alexander-Snow, PhD Planning & Institutional Effectiveness Tara Rose, MPA Assessment Roger Sugarman, PhD Institutional Research.
Strategic Planning Summit GAP/Committee Chairs/IE December 5,
GROWING LEADERS Opportunity. Engagement. Achievement. SSSP + SEP Steering Committee: August 26, 2014 Kathy Mendelsohn, Mark Sanchez, Brian.
2012 Self-Evaluation Report Update 7/27/11 1. LAHC 2012 Self-Evaluation Report Update 7/27/11 All Accreditation Commission recommendations successfully.
The Board of Governors Motion on Assessment: An Update Mark Wade Lieu Academic Senate for California Community Colleges.
COD Institutional Effectiveness Process (IEP) Planning, Assessment, Allocation Learn More.
May Priority 6 Review Team 6: Planning Subcommittee R. Hall-Allen, A. Cohen, D. Cohen, M. DesVignes, M. Hong, D. Kinney, S. Maradian, J. Ireland,
Academic Assessment Task Force Report August 15, 2013 Lori Escallier, Co-Chair Keith Sheppard, Co-Chair Chuck Taber, Co-Chair.
Accreditation, SLOs and You – What are the patient outcomes? or Will the patient survive? Facilitators: Janet Fulks and Phillip Maynard.
Dr. Marybeth Buechner Dean of Planning, Research & Institutional Effectiveness Sacramento City College Los Rios Community College District.
Educational and Facilities Master Plan: In-Flight Update Flex Day January 26, 2006.
Shared Governance Planning Sub-committee Update of Recommendations for Priorities 1-8 November 2007.
ANDREW LAMANQUE, PHD SPRING 2014 Status Report: Foothill Reaffirmation of Accreditation.
IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING for Institutional Effectiveness THE REASON: Improvement of Student Learning and Institutional Support Services THE OCCASION: Regional.
Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013 Greg Nelson Vice President of Administrative Services Tammeil.
LeBaron Woodyard Dean, Academic Affairs October 30, 2013 CALIFORNIA COMMUNITY COLLEGES CHIEF INSTRUCTIONAL OFFICERS FALL 2013 CONFERENCE.
Accreditation follow-up report. The team recommends that the college further refine its program review, planning, and resource allocation processes so.
Accelerated Instructional Program Review Handbook Spring 2007.
CONTEXT FOR ACADEMIC STRATEGIC PLANNING AT UM Foundation for upcoming Accreditation process Identify key issues and opportunities to address over the next.
Convocation Opening Address College of Sequoias Welcome&Introductions.
Learning Together Phoenix College’s Journey of Transformation.
A Multi-Campus Model for Program Review & Integrated Institutional Planning Raúl Rodriguez, Ph.D., Chancellor 1.
Presentation by: Carol Mattson, Dean of Academic Services, Fullerton College Nancy Deutsch, Reading Faculty/Staff Development Coordinator, Cypress College.
December Priority 5 Review Team 5: Planning Subcommittee R. Hall-Allen, K. Bute, A. Cohen, D. Cohen, M. DesVignes, J. Ireland, J. Moore, D. Kinney,
Program Framework Review November 2011 Pamela Miller, Ph.D. AVP for Learning.
Meeting the ‘Great Divide’: Establishing a Unified Culture for Planning and Assessment Cathy A. Fleuriet Ana Lisa Garza Presented at the 2006 Conference.
Institutionalizing Integrated Planning Dave Bolt West Hills College Lemoore.
August Priority 7 Review Team 7: Planning Subcommittee R. Hall-Allen, M. DesVignes, J. Moore, R. Romali, R. Tillberg Increase the resources available.
+ using Integrated Planning & Budget In a Participatory Governance Context Realizing our Foothill Vision 20/20.
Technology Task Force Mission Review/Discussion March 5, 2015 Technology Task Force Mission Review/Discussion March 5, 2015.
Draft Summary of Ideas as of July 13, 2010 IP&B Task Force Update Integrated Planning & Budget Task Force.
Response due: March 15,  Directions state that the report must “focus on the institution’s resolution of the recommendations and Commission concerns.”
Assessment Committee 20 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.
STRATEGIC PLANNING & WASC UPDATE Tom Bennett Presentation to Academic Senate February 1, 2006.
SPC Advisory Committee Training - TAC Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office 1 Abridged from the SPC Advisory Committee Training on October.
SPC Advisory Committee Training Fall 2015 Institutional Research President’s Office SPC 10/9/20151.
Campus Response to the Visiting Team Report January 2009 WASC Accreditation.
Accreditation Self-Study Progress Update Presentation to the SCCCD Board of Trustees Madera Center October 5, 2010 Tony Cantu, Fresno City College Marilyn.
Indiana University Kokomo Strategic Enrollment Management Consultation Final Report Bob Bontrager December 8, 2007.
CONTEXT FOR ACADEMIC STRATEGIC PLANNING AT UM Foundation for upcoming Accreditation process Identify key issues and opportunities to address over the next.
Introduction to CASSC. CASSC An acronym that stands for College Academic and Student Support Council and Campus Academic and Student Support Council.
Assessment Committee 20 October Self Evaluation HAPS is the result of a process that began in 2012, the last Accreditation self- evaluation.
Model of an Effective Program Review October 2008 Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.
January Priority 3 Review Team 3: Planning Subcommittee K. Bute, M. DesVignes, M. Eastcott, R. Galope, S. Maradian, J. Ireland, R. Mintz-Binder,
Presented by the Outreach & Training Subcommittee of College Planning Council, as required by Section V.8 of the College Planning Council Handbook College.
GOVERNANCE COUNCILS AND HARTNELL’S GOVERNANCE MODEL
Presented To: College Planning Council
Chairs and Managers Retreat 1 February 2016, SSA 219
Yuba Community College District Board of Trustees Meeting
Presented To: College Planning Council
In Preparation to ACCJC team site visit on 10/8-10/11
Accreditation & Institution Set Standards
Presented To: College Planning Council
Unit Planning Retreat 1 February 2016, SSA 219
District discipline lead spring meeting agenda
Accreditation follow-up report
Presented To: College Planning Council
Presentation transcript:

October Priority 8 Review Team 8: Planning Subcommittee M. DesVignes, D. Kinney, J. Moore, M. Siegel, R. Tillberg Collect and use data systematically to make informed decisions that lead to continuous organizational improvement.

October Areas of Review 1.Identify what has been accomplished using vital signs and other key indicators 2.Identify gap between strategic goals and outcome 3.Recommendations

October Strategic Priority 8.1 Design and implement a system that links assessment results, pre-requisite checking, and placement.

October Background Strategic Priority 8.1 Design and implement a system that links assessment results, pre-requisite checking, and placement. A pilot effort was begun in the spring of A subcommittee of the Matriculation Advisory Committee (research, admissions, counseling and four departments) initiated a series of changes in November The current plan is to add a few departments each semester while reviewing and improving the process for those departments using pre-requisite checking The goal is to be completed by summer, (Rev )

October Strategic Priority 8.2 Improve and extend the program review process college-wide to provide the means for department- based improvement and to inform the budget process

October Background Strategic Priority 8.2 Improve and extend the program review process college-wide to provide the means for department-based improvement and to inform the budget process. EPC –M. Des Vignes A new approach to program review was developed by the Educational Planning Committee and piloted in In addition, the Management Team is using appreciative inquiry to develop its own approach to program review. That pilot effort begins in the fall of 2002 and extends through the 2003 – 2004 academic year. DesVignes : This process has been implemented and includes annual program review documents completed by departments and IDWG deans, request for additional funds are prioritized by IDWGs, and presentations are prepared and presented to budget subcommittee.

October Strategic Priority 8.3 Research the issue of student achievement and implement a pilot project for assessing learning in specific disciplines.

October Background Strategic Priority 8.3 Research the issue of student achievement and implement a pilot project for assessing learning in specific disciplines. This is an effort that must be led by the Academic Senate. It acknowledges the fact that the assessment of student learning outcomes is likely to play an increasingly import role in accreditation and is a point of contention for external agencies.(2002) Kinney: The SLO Task Force was formed in Feb and has spearheaded a campus- wide dialog on SLOs. An Open Forum was held in Oct 2004 to identify institution wide Core Competencies and input is being sought from various campus constituencies, including SGC, EPC, Department Chairs, Academic Senate, and ASO and should be completed by Feb At the same time, workshops for academic departments and student services programs are being designed to address SLOs at the course and program levels. A workshop for department chairs and curriculum representatives was conducted in Nov 2004 and another for both academic departments and student services programs is planned for Feb An all-campus effort to develop course- and program-level SLOs is planned for March Pilot testing of assessments should begin by Fall 2005.

October Strategic Priority 8.4 Create and institutionalize an Institutional Research Council that ensures that our data-gathering efforts match key institutional decisions and is responsible for the vital signs process of this strategic plan.

October Background Strategic Priority 8.4 Create and institutionalize Institutional Research Council that ensures that our data-gathering efforts match key institutional decisions and is responsible for the “vital signs” process of this strategic plan. Inst Effectiveness – R. Tillberg The IR Advisory Council is charged with oversight of the “vital signs” of the strategic plan and contributing to the research agenda of the college. Led by the Dean of Academic Research and Planning, the council will meet quarterly with membership from Academic Affairs, Student Services, Administrative Services, as well as from the faculty and students. The first meeting is scheduled for Spring, Tillberg : IRAC has met regularly, has reviewed the Vital Signs, and has recommended new, behavioral vital signs in response to accreditation recommendations. (Rev )

October Strategic Priority 8.5 Revise the shared governance document 1998 to reflect a renewed commitment to participative decision-making and continuous improvement.

October Background Strategic Priority 8.5 Revise the shared governance document (1998) to reflect a renewed commitment to participative decision-making and continuous improvement. SGC – P. Schmolze This effort was begun in the spring of 2002 and a new Shared Governance Model was adopted beginning in July It eliminated several committees and replaced them with two other committees: a Planning Committee that operates for six months each year and a Budget Committee that operates for the other six months. Shared Governance Model Updated 6/8/05 P. Schmolze, SGC Chair,

October Vital Signs Used as Measures of Success for Priority 8 Degree to which faculty, staff, and administrators believe the college is increasing available resources (Campus Climate Survey). Budget Dollars per full time equivalent student. Percent of college community that believes the college’s budgeting process meets the needs of the institution. (Survey). Number and percent of prioritized allocation requests that are funded.

October Degree to which faculty, staff, and administrators believe the college is efficiently allocating its resources (Campus Climate Survey).

October

October

October Recommendations Priority 8.1 Ensure that all non-exempt entering students are assessed and placed in appropriate classes. Enforce pre-requisites and co-requisites as they exist on course outlines. Design and implement a system that links assessment results, pre- requisite checking, and placement.

October Recommendations Priority 8.2. Continue the established program review process and strengthen the function of program outcomes within that process. Continue to directly link funding to program review. Identify and assess SLOs for academic and student services programs. Ensure that Administrative Services and the President’s Office participate in the program review process. Identify and assess SLOs for Administrative Services and the President’s Office. Improve and extend the program review process college-wide to provide the means for department-based improvement and to inform the budget process.

October Recommendations Priority 8.3. Ensure that all departments identify and assess SLOs. Expand the SLO assessment pilot program conducted by the following disciplines: child development, political science, Chicano studies, music, geophysical science, photography, Spanish, Korean, math and learning skills to all departments. Implement changes based on assessment of outcomes that lead to improved learning and achievement. Research the issue of student achievement and implement a pilot project for assessing learning in specific disciplines.

October Recommendations Priority 8.4. Continue the work of the Institutional Research Advisory Council and identify additional appropriate assessment measures. Institutional Research Advisory Council (IRAC) should report to Shared Governance Council (SGC). Create and institutionalize an Institutional Research Council that ensures that our data-gathering efforts match key institutional decisions and is responsible for the vital signs process of this strategic plan

October Recommendations Priority 8.5. Continue the process established by Shared Governance Planning (SGP) in 2002 and 2004 whereby the Shared Governance Model is reviewed and updated every two years. Revise the shared governance document 1998 to reflect a renewed commitment to participative decision-making and continuous improvement.

October Priority Summary Below Expectation GoodExemplary Recommendations Priority 8.1 XXXX Ensure that all non-exempt entering students are assessed and placed in appropriate classes. Enforce pre-requisites and co-requisites as they exist on course outlines Priority 8.2 X XXXX Continue the established program review process and strengthen the function of program outcomes within that process. Continue to directly link funding to program review. Identify and assess SLOs for academic and student services programs. Ensure that Administrative Services and the President’s Office participate in the program review process. Identify and assess SLOs for Administrative Services and the President’s Office.

October Priority Summary Below ExpectationGoodExemplary Recommendations Priority 8.3 X XXXX Ensure that all departments identify and assess SLOs. Expand the SLO assessment pilot program conducted by the following disciplines: child development, political science, Chicano studies, music, geophysical science, photography, Spanish, Korean, math and learning skills to all departments. Implement changes based on assessment of outcome that lead to improved learning and achievement. Priority 8.4 Priority 8.5 XXXXXX Continue the work of the Institutional Research Advisory Council (IRAC) and identify additional appropriate assessment measures. IRAC should report to Shared Governance Council (SGC). Continue the process established by Shared Governance Planning (SGP) in 2002 and 2004 whereby the Shared Governance Model is review and revised every two years.