Chabot College
Academic Program Review Report
Year Two of
Program Review Cycle
Chemistry
Submitted on 3/11/13
Wayne Pitcher
Final Forms, 1/18/13
Table of Contents
Section A: What Progress Have We Made? 1
Section B: What Changes Do We Suggest? 2
Required Appendices:
A: Budget History 3
B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule 4
B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections 5
C: Program Learning Outcomes 9
D: A Few Questions 11
E: New Initiatives 12
F1: New Faculty Requests 13
F2: Classified Staffing Requests 14
F3: FTEF Requests 15
F4: Academic Learning Support Requests 16
F5: Supplies and Services Requests 17
F6: Conference/Travel Requests 18
F7: Technology and Other Equipment Requests 19
F8: Facilities Requests 20
A. What Progress Have We Made?
Complete Appendices A (Budget History), B1 and B2 (CLO's), C (PLO's), and D (A few questions) prior to writing your narrative. You should also review your most recent success, equity, course sequence, and enrollment data at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/ProgramReview/Data2012.cfm.
In year one, you established goals and action plans for program improvement. This section asks you to reflect on the progress you have made toward those goals. This analysis will be used by the PRBC and Budget Committee to assess progress toward achievement of our Strategic Plan and to inform future budget decisions. It will also be used by the SLOAC and Basic Skills committees as input to their priority-setting process. In your narrative of two or less pages, address the following questions:
· What were your year one Program Review goals?
· Did you achieve those goals? Specifically describe your progress on the goals you set for student learning, program learning, and Strategic Plan achievement.
· What are you most proud of?
· What challenges did you face that may have prevented achieving your goals?
· Cite relevant data in your narrative (e.g., efficiency, persistence, success, FT/PT faculty ratios, CLO/PLO assessment results, external accreditation demands, etc.).
In last year’s Program Review, Chemistry set forth goals and activities as indicated in the table on the following page. A description of our progress is on the page after that.
PLOs and/or Program Goal(s) / Timeline / Activity / Support Needed to Accomplish These Activities* / Outcome(s) Expected / Person(s) Responsible / Accomplished? Yes/No/In Progress /Increase student success in STEM courses / Ongoing 2012-2014 / Participate in Division-wide STEM-related grants / Grant-writing support; release time for grant coordinator(s) / Increased student success, particularly among underrepresented minorities / Donna Gibson, Wayne Pitcher / YEAR
ONE
LEAVE
BLANK
Increase student success; modernize labs / Ongoing 2012-2014 / Revise additional laboratory experiments in Chem 1A and 1B / Supplies/equipment / Increased student interest in labs leading to increased success; modernization of labs / All
Increase student success / 2012-2013 / Revise Chem 1A and 1B laboratory manuals / none / Increased student interest in labs leading to increased success / Andy Wells;
Wayne Pitcher
Increase student success / 2012-2013 / Investigate supplemental learning lab program / none / Development of a plan for implementing a supplemental learning lab program / Laurie Dockter; Donna Gibson
Increase student success / Ongoing 2012-2014 / Assess CLOs / Flex day activity / Potential revision of pedagogy leading to increased student success / All
Increase student success / Ongoing 2012-2014 / Analyze SLO assessment data and relate to PLOs / Flex day activity / Potential revision of pedagogy leading to increased student success / All
Improve functioning of Chemistry Program / 2012-2013 / Determine responsibilities for discipline coordinators; establish rotation schedule for coordinator duties / None (release time requested for coordinators) / Improved day-to-day functioning of cChemistry Program (lectures, labs, etc.) / All
Description of Progress:
We were able to work on most of our program goals over the last year. Our largest success has been in the area of participating in Division-wide STEM-related grants, namely the MESA program. The Chemistry faculty (along with colleagues in other disciplines) have embraced the concept of the MESA program and are participating to a very large extent. In its first year of operation, the MESA program has increased access to Science and Math courses for traditionally underrepresented ethnic groups. Preliminary data indicate that 40% of this year’s MESA participants are Latino, which is actually higher than the percentage of Latino students campus-wide. While last year we anecdotally commented on a perceived increase in the number of Latino students in our highest level chemistry courses, Organic Chemistry I and II (Chem 12A and 12B), we now have the data to show that the increase was real. Over a 3-year period the number of Latino students in Chem 12A went from 5 to 9 to 15! We feel this is explained in part by the MESA program, and in part by our offering of an additional section of Chem 12A starting Fall 2011. In short, our greatest success has been in the area of increasing student access.
We have also worked to improve student success. Part of this work involves revisions and updates to the Chem 1A lab manual. We have a revised version of our Chem 1A lab manual, which features new experiments that have been added over the last three years. These experiments are intended to be up-to-date and increase student interest in the hands-on portion of chemistry. Our general observation is that our success rates have been slowly moving upward, something a more thorough review of the data in the next Program Review cycle will address.
Chemistry has also made sure our CLOs and PLOs are up-to-date. More importantly than keeping CLOs and PLOs up-to-date are the discussions we have had (amongst the full-time Chemistry faculty) concerning these SLOs. Our closing-the-loop discussions have revealed areas in which we are being effective in teaching the material, areas where a different assessment is needed, and areas where we need to adjust our pedagogical approach. The SLO data seem to confirm what we have noticed in our classrooms—in general students pick up some topics very well, but other topics are deserving of focus across our curriculum. That is, through our work analyzing our SLOs, we have identified topics that we will emphasize in all Chemistry courses, topics that are common throughout the entire Chemistry sequence. Our reports on SLOs later in this document detail some of these.
Finally, we have not been able to address two of our goals: investigate supplemental learning programs and determine discipline coordinator duties (and establish a coordinator rotation schedule). We attribute our lack of progress in these areas to the lack of time. We would have liked to have used some flex day time to address these issues, but just this year we spent two Fall flex days determining what classes to cut if Proposition 30 did not pass, as well as two Spring flex days determining what classes to add now that growth funds are available. Obviously this work was necessary, but it demonstrates how outside forces can present a drain on the time available to faculty. We hope to address these goals over the next year.
B. What Changes Do We Suggest?
Review the Strategic Plan goal and key strategies at http://www.chabotcollege.edu/prbc/StrategicPlan/SPforPR.pdf prior to completing your narrative. Please complete Appendices E (New Initiatives) and F1-8 (Resources Requested) to further detail your narrative. Limit your narrative to two pages, and be very specific about what you hope to achieve, why, and how.
Given your experiences and student achievement results over the past year, what changes do you suggest to your course/program improvement plan? What new initiatives might you begin to support the achievement of our Strategic Plan goal? Do you have new ideas to improve student learning? What are your specific, measurable goals? How will you achieve them? Would any of these require collaboration with other disciplines or areas of the college? How will make that collaboration occur?
The following are areas we wish to investigate in the next year:
First, since the MESA program is in its first year of operation, we would like to see what its effects are on student success. In particular, have our increased numbers of Latino students translated into an increased success rate for those students? Also, how can we improve our success rates among African-American students (in addition to increasing the overall numbers of African-American students in Chemistry and other STEM classes)? As the initial success numbers become available, we should be able to better focus our efforts.
For next year, then, we will continue with our existing goals, as they are all long-term. We will update and revise lab manuals for more courses (e.g. Chem 1B). We will continue to assess SLOs. We will investigate supplemental learning programs and how to better organize coordinator duties within Chemistry. And, of course, we will continue to participate in the MESA program as mentors and advisors for the leaders of the peer-led study groups.
Appendix A: Budget History and Impact
Audience: Budget Committee, PRBC, and Administrators
Purpose: This analysis describes your history of budget requests from the previous two years and the impacts of funds received and needs that were not met. This history of documented need can both support your narrative in Section A and provide additional information for Budget Committee recommendations.
Instructions: Please provide the requested information, and fully explain the impact of the budget decisions.
Category / 2011-12 Budget Requested / 2011-12 Budget Received / 2012-13 Budget Requested / 2012-13 Budget ReceivedClassified Staffing (# of positions) / 0 / 0 / 0 / 0
Supplies & Services / $15,416.00 / $15,416.00
Technology/Equipment / $4,000.00 / $4,000.00
Other
TOTAL / $19,416.00 / $19,416.00
1. How has your investment of the budget monies you did receive improved student learning? When you requested the funding, you provided a rationale. In this section, assess if the anticipated positive impacts you projected have, in fact, been realized.
Yes, the budget monies we received have allowed for the purchase of equipment and supplies that have improved the laboratory portions of our courses. This has improved student learning.2. What has been the impact of not receiving some of your requested funding? How has student learning been impacted, or safety compromised, or enrollment or retention negatively impacted?
By not receiving some of our requested funding, we have had to “make due” with inefficient laboratory set-ups. This has resulted in labs taking longer or not working properly. Both of these results have a negative effect on student learning.Appendix B1: Course Learning Outcomes Assessment Schedule
All courses must be assessed at least once every three years. Please complete this chart that defines your assessment schedule.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE:
Spring Year 3 / FallYear 1 / Spring Year 1 / Fall
Year 2 / Spring Year 2 / Fall
Year 3 / Spring Year 3 / Fall
Year 1 / Spring Year 1
Courses:
Group 1:
Chem 31 Chem 1A Chem 12A Chem 30A / Full Assmt / Discuss results / Report Results / Full Assmt / Discuss results / Report Results
Group 2:
Chem 12B Chem 30B Chem 10 / Full Assmt / Discuss results & report
Group 3: / Full Assmt / Discuss results / Report Results
Group 4: / Full Assmt / Discuss results & report
Appendix B2: “Closing the Loop” Assessment Reflections
Course / Chem 1ASemester assessment data gathered / Fall 11
Number of sections offered in the semester / 5
Number of sections assessed / 4
Percentage of sections assessed / 80%
Semester held “Closing the Loop” discussion / Spring 12
Faculty members involved in “Closing the Loop” discussion / Wayne Pitcher, Donna Gibson, Harjot Sawhney, Maggie Schumacher, Andrew Wells; Laurie Dockter
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 1:
Outcome:Correctly predict the molecular geometry, bond angle, and hybridization, given the molecular formula for a simple molecule/ion
In the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
75 %How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
79.3 % We would like to continue with this CLO.Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
At the time, in this course, students seem to understand the concept.What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
The students seem to understand the concept of molecular shape and hybridizationWhat actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
For now, we will continue using this CLO.What is the nature of the planned actions?
c Curricular
X Pedagogical
c Resource based
c Change to CLO or rubric
c Change to assessment methods
c Other: ______
Course-Level Outcome (CLO) 2:
Outcome: Correctly balance the chemical equation, predict the products, and write net ionic and redox equationsIn the context of the course as a whole, what scores for your CLOs would indicate success for you? (Example: 75% of the class scored either 3 or 4.)
75 %How do your current scores match with your above definition of success?
45.1 %Based on the data gathered, and considering your teaching experiences and your discussions with other faculty, what reflections and insights do you have?
Investigate at what point students lose the concept. They may understand precipitation but not weak acids or weak bases. They may not understand the solubility of polyatomic ions. Take out the redox equation from the assessment and look more closely where the students need help.What course-level and programmatic strengths have the assessment reflections revealed?
30 % of the students understand the concepts. The material is covered at the beginning of the semester but it is assessed at the end. That may be one of the reason the students are struggling.What actions has your discipline determined might be taken as a result of your reflections, discussions, and insights?
Reconsider the order of some of the labs.What is the nature of the planned actions?
c Curricular
X Pedagogical