1 Foothill College Opening Day 2003 Segmentation, Puente, and Selected Organizational Change Thoughts Rob Johnstone, 9/19/03

2 Section 1 Foothill Fall 2002 Headcount Segmentation

Foothill Headcount Segmentation Starting 2002F Credit Students Headcount = 18,896 –Note: Total Unduplicated Headcount = 19, students took Non-Credit courses only

Foothill Headcount Segmentation Summary Segment 1: “PE/Fine Arts Only” –N = 4,738, or 25% of overall Segment 2: “Single Course Takers, not PE/FA” –N = 5,884, or 31% of overall Segment 3: “2+ Courses, Degree Holders” –N = 2,406, or 13% of overall Segment 4: “2+ Courses, Non-US Citizens” –HS/HS-equivalent only –N=1,669, or 9% of overall Segment 4A – International Students: N = 729 Segment 4B – Immigrant Students: N = 940 Segment 5: “2+ Courses, US Citizens” –HS/HS-equivalent only –N=4,201, or 22% of overall Segment 5A - Non-FHDA-District Students: N = 1,171 Segment 5B - FHDA-District Students: N = 3,030

Demographics of 2002F Segments - Gender

Demographics of 2002F Segments - Ethnicity

Demographics of 2002F Segments – Age Group

8 1.6 – Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 1 – PE/FA Only

9 1.7 – Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 2 – Single Course Takers, non-PE/FA

– Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 3 – 2+ Courses, Degree Holders

– Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 4A – HS/HS Equiv. International Students

– Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 4B – HS/HS Equiv Immigrant Students

– Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 5A – HS/HS Equiv. Non-FHDA Dist. Students

– Top 20 Courses Taken by Seg. 5B – HS/HS Equiv. FHDA Dist. Students

– Division Breakdown by Segment Note: Seg 1 – PE/FA Only; Seg 2 – Single Course Takers, non-PE/FA; Seg 3 – 2+ Course Degree Holders; Seg 4A – HS/HS Equiv International Students; Seg 4B – HS/HS Equiv Immigrant Students, Seg 5A – HS/HS Equiv non-FHDA District Students, Seg 5B – HS/HS Equiv FHDA District Students

– Top 10 Departments by 2002F Enrollment - Breakdown by Segment Note: Seg 1 – PE/FA Only; Seg 2 – Single Course Takers, non-PE/FA; Seg 3 – 2+ Course Degree Holders; Seg 4A – HS/HS Equiv International Students; Seg 4B – HS/HS Equiv Immigrant Students, Seg 5A – HS/HS Equiv non-FHDA District Students, Seg 5B – HS/HS Equiv FHDA District Students

Student Contact Hours of 2002F Segments

– Basic Skills & 2002F Segments

Success Rates of 2002F Segments

Persistence of 2001F Segments

Five-Year Fall Quarter Segmentation History

22 Section 2 Top 25 WSCH Departments and Courses

Top 25 WSCH Departments, 2002S to 2003W Data Excerpted from P112 Summary Tables

Top 25 WSCH Courses, 2002S to 2003W Data Excerpted from P112 Summary Tables

25 Section 3 Puente Statistics

– Puente Program, 2000 Cohort Success/Persistence Data Excerpted from P87B Summary Tables Note: 33 started in the fall quarter in Eng 100 in Puente, 60 were non-Puente Hispanic, and 200 were non- Puente, non-Hispanic.

Puente Program, 2001 Cohort Success/Persistence Data Excerpted from P87B Summary Tables Note: 23 started in the fall quarter in Eng 100 in Puente, 64 were non-Puente Hispanic, and 216 were non- Puente, non-Hispanic.

Puente Program, 2002 Cohort Success/Persistence Data Excerpted from P87B Summary Tables Note: 20 started in the fall quarter in Eng 100 in Puente, 51 were non-Puente Hispanic, and 219 were non- Puente, non-Hispanic.

Puente Program, 2000 Cohort Long-Term Outcomes Data Excerpted from P87B Summary Tables

30 Section 4 Food For Thought – Selected Quotes from Change Magazine Articles

31 Excerpted from Guskin & Marcy (2003) “Dealing with the Future Now: Principles for Creating a Vital Campus in a Climate of Restricted Resources”

Guskin & Marcy (2003) Basic Thesis: –“Muddling through is a time-honored practice for dealing with recurring fiscal problems in higher education.”, but –“Projected future economic realities indicate a scenario very different from past projections.”, so –“there is a pressing need to significantly restructure our colleges and universities through fundamental reform”

Three Organizing Principles, Guskin & Marcy (2003) Principle I - Create a Clear and Coherent Vision of the Future Focused on Student Learning, Quality of Faculty Work Life, and Reduced Costs Per Student Principle II – Transform the Educational Delivery System Consistent with Vision of the Future. Principle III – Transform the Organizational Systems Consistent with Vision of the Future.

Seven Transformative Actions, Guskin & Marcy (2003) Principle II Actions –Establish and assess institution-wide common student learning outcomes as a basis for the undergraduate degree. –Restructure the role of faculty to include faculty members and other campus professionals as partners in student learning, while integrating technology –Recognize and integrate student learning from all sources. –Audit and restructure curricula to focus on essential academic programs and curricular offerings.

Seven Transformative Actions, Guskin & Marcy (2003) Principle III Actions –Utilize zero-based budgeting to audit and redesign the budget allocation process, involving faculty and staff as responsible partners. –Audit and restructure administrative and student services systems, using technology and integrated staffing arrangements to reduce costs –Audit and redesign technological and staff infrastructures to support transformational change.

36 Excerpted from Twigg (2003) “Improving Quality and Reducing Cost: Designs for Effective Learning”

Twigg (2003) – Pew Grant on Course Redesign through Technology Article summarizes initial findings from Pew Grant on Program in Course Redesign – redesigning instruction using technology to achieve quality enhancements as well as cost savings. For most institutions, new technologies represent a black hole of additional expense. This is because the majority have simply bolted new technologies onto an existing set of physical facilities, a faculty already in place, and an unaltered conception of classroom instruction.

Twigg (2003) Focus on High Enrolled Courses In order to have a significant impact on large numbers of students, an institution should concentrate on redesigning the 25 courses in which most students are enrolled instead of putting a lot of energy into improving quality or cutting costs in disparate small-enrollment courses.

Twigg (2003) Redesigned Course Types To counter the commonly held belief that only courses in a restricted subset of disciplines – science or math, for instance – can be effectively redesigned, the program contains successful examples in many disciplines including the humanities (6), math and statistics (13), social sciences (6), and the natural sciences (5).

Twigg (2003) Results Preliminary results show improved student learning in 19 of the 30 projects, with the remaining 11 showing no significant difference between redesigned and traditional sections. Preliminary results show that all 30 reduced the costs of course delivery by 40 percent on average, with cost savings ranging from 20 to 86 percent. Other positive outcomes associated with redesigned courses include increased course-completion rates, improved retention, better student attitudes toward the subject matter, and increased student satisfaction.

Twigg (2003) Strategies The primary goal is to move students from a passive, note-taking role to an active-learning orientation. As one mathematics professor involved in the project put it, ‘Students learn math by doing math, not by listening to somebody talk about doing math’. Lectures are replaced with a wide variety of learning resources, all of which involve more active forms of student learning or more individualized forms of assessment. In moving from an entirely lecture-based to a student engagement approach, learning is less dependent on words uttered by instructors and more dependent on reading, exploring, and problem-solving undertaken actively by students.