1. Mary Pape Toño Ramirez SLO 2011-12 Progress Report

2. 2012 ACCJC Annual Report and Self Study Percent of all college courses with defined Student Learning Outcomes: 100% (This percentage omits courses that are to be deleted, cross-referenced and special projects courses). Percent of all college courses with on-going assessment of learning outcomes: 58% 26% of all courses have at least one completed SLOAC cycle. 763 courses have at least part of the assessment cycle complete (Phase II and/or Phase III for one more SLO statements). SLOs

3. 2012 ACCJC Annual Report and Self Study Percent of all college programs with defined Student Learning Outcomes: 98% This is evidenced by the TracDat report entitled PLOs All Assessment Units. It should be noted that 100% of Certificate and Degree Programs have Program Level Outcome statements written and these appear in the 2011-2012 De Anza College Catalog Percent of college programs with on-going assessment of learning outcomes: 83% This is evidenced by the form “PLO Assessment Timeline” submitted by faculty. PLOs

4. 2012 ACCJC Annual Report and Self Study Percent of student and learning support activities with defined Student Learning Outcomes: 100%. Percent of student learning and support activities with on-going assessment of learning outcomes: 100% SSLOs

5. 2012 ACCJC Annual Report and Self Study Has the institution defined institutional Student Learning Outcomes? Yes and these are referred to as the Institutional Core Competencies. They are: · Communication and expression · Information literacy · Physical/mental wellness and personal responsibility · Global, cultural, social and environmental awareness · Critical thinking Percent of institutional outcomes with on-going assessment of learning outcomes: 100% This is evidenced by documents completed by faculty mapping the program level outcome statements to the Institutional Core Competencies. This evidence will reside in TracDat. ICCs

6. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 1: S TUDENT L EARNING OUTCOMES AND A UTHENTIC A SSESSMENTS ARE IN P LACE FOR C OURSES, P ROGRAMS, S UPPORT S ERVICES, C ERTIFICATES AND D EGREES. Suggested evidence: Evidence demonstrating numbers/percentages of course, program (academic and student services), and institutional level outcomes are in place and assessed. Documentation on institutional planning processes demonstrating integrated planning and the way SLO assessment results impact program review. Standards: I.A.1; II.A.1.a; II.A.1.c; II.A.2.a,b,e,f,g,h,i; II.A.3 [See II.A.3.a,b,c.]; II.A.6; II.B.4; II.C.2].

7. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 2: T HERE IS A WIDESPREAD INSTITUTIONAL DIALOGUE ABOUT ASSESSMENT RESULTS AND IDENTIFICATION OF GAPS. Suggested evidence: Documentation on processes and outcomes of SLO assessment. Specific examples with the outcome data analysis and description of how the results were used. Descriptions could include examples of institutional changes made to respond to outcomes assessment results. Standards: I.B.1; I.B.2; I.B.3; I.B.5.

8. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 3: D ECISION MAKING INCLUDES DIALOGUE ON THE RESULTS OF ASSESSMENT AND IS PURPOSEFULLY DIRECTED TOWARD ALIGNING INSTITUTION - WIDE PRACTICES TO SUPPORT AND IMPROVE STUDENT LEARNING. Suggested evidence: Documentation of institutional planning processes and the integration of SLO assessment results with program review, college-wide planning and resource allocation, including evidence of college- wide dialogue. Standards: I.B; I.B.3; II.A.1.c; II.A.2.f; III.A.1.c; IV.A.2.b.

9. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 4: A PPROPRIATE RESOURCES CONTINUE TO BE ALLOCATED AND FINE - TUNED. Suggested evidence: Documentation on the integration of SLO assessment results with institutional planning and resource allocation. Standards: I.B; I.B.4; I.B.6; III.C.2; III.D.2.a; III.D.3.

10. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 5: C OMPREHENSIVE ASSESSMENT REPORTS EXIST AND ARE COMPLETED AND UPDATED ON A REGULAR BASIS. Suggested evidence: Documentation on the process and cycle of SLO assessment, including results of cycles of assessment. Copies of summative assessment reports, with actual learning outcomes. Standards: : I.A.1; I.B; I.B.3; I.B.5; I.B.6; II.A.2.a; II.B.

11. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 6: C OURSE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ARE ALIGNED WITH DEGREE STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES. Suggested evidence: Documentation on the alignment/integration of course level outcomes with program outcomes. Description could include curriculum mapping or other alignment activities. Samples across the curriculum of institutional outcomes mapped to program outcomes. Standards: II.A.2.e; II.A.2.f; II.A.2.i.

12. P ROFICIENCY R UBRIC S TATEMENT 7: S TUDENTS DEMONSTRATE AWARENESS OF GOALS AND PURPOSES OF COURSES AND PROGRAMS IN WHICH THEY ARE ENROLLED. Suggested evidence: Documentation on means the college uses to inform students of course and program purposes and outcomes. Samples across the curriculum of: course outlines of record and syllabi with course SLOs; program and institutional SLOs in catalog. Standards: I.B.5; II.A.6; II.A.6.a; II.B.

13. S ELF -A SSESSMENT ON L EVEL OF I MPLEMENTATION L EVEL OF I MPLEMENTATION : Points to be addressed: D ID YOU PLAN TO ADDRESS NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS ? W HAT L EVEL OF SLO I MPLEMENTATION WOULD YOU ASSIGN TO YOUR C OLLEGE ? W HY ? W HAT EFFORTS HAVE YOU PLANNED TO ADDRESS NEEDED IMPROVEMENTS ?

14. Over summer:The Core team will be collecting data alias evidence, forming reports, writing the draft of the reply to ACCJC’s request. In Conclusion Opening Day Morning: Report out from CT Task Forces and Evidence collected for report Opening Day Afternoon: We will meet with individual divisions to fill out evidence