Draft 1: 10-18-06
PROGRAM REVIEW REPORT
for the
DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION
PROGRAM
for
Academic Years 2002 - 2005
November 1, 2006
/ 45-720 Kea’ahala Rd., Kaneohe, HI 96744-4570Telephone: (808) 235-7400
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Institution
1
Program Review Health Indicator Summary
DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION
for AYs 2002– 2005
Overall Program Status
Healthy / Cautionary / UnhealthyOverall Program Demand
Healthy / Cautionary / UnhealthyOverall Program Efficiency
Healthy / Cautionary / UnhealthyOverall Program Outcome
Healthy / Cautionary / UnhealthyAbbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Program Review
AY Academic Year
APAPA Academic Planning, Assessment, and Policy Analysis, Office of the Associate Vice President, Community Colleges Academic Affairs,University of Hawaii
FTEFull-time Equivalent
IEC Institutional Effectiveness Committee
IROInstitutional Resource Office, University of Hawaii, Manoa
MAPSManagement and Planning Support, Institutional Research Office, University of Hawaii
PCPosition countfaculty
PHIProgram Health Indicator
PTEPart-time equivalent
SLOsStudent Learning Outcomes
SSHsStudent Semester Hours
UHUniversity of Hawaii
UHMUniversity of Hawaii at Manoa
WCCWindwardCommunity College
Considerations for the Developmental Education Program Review
The Developmental Education Program does not have applicants and majorsor graduates from the program. Consequently, the reporting of applicants, majors and graduates cannot be reported as there are none.
Similarly, there are no direct program costs associated with the program as the costs of the classes are part of the offerings of the general education classes of the College. If there are other costs attributable to the program they are reported.
Sources of Information for this Annual Assessment
The information in this report starts with the implementation of the Banner database in 2002-3. Research and development of the information for this report has revealed that there were coding input errors. The incorrect information in the database has been corrected to report the correct information; as such, it may differ slightly from census data.
The information sources for this report are:
1.The WCC Banner Database with the following census dates.
Semester / Term / DateFall 2002 / 200310 / September 27, 2002
Spring 2003 / 200330 / February 14, 2003
Summer 2003 / 200340 / August 8, 2003
Fall 2003 / 200410 / September 26, 2004
Spring 2004 / 200430 / February 12, 2004
Summer 2004 / 200440 / August 6, 2004
Fall 2004 / 200510 / September 24, 2005
Spring 2005 / 200530 / February 11, 2005
Summer 2005 / 200540 / August 5, 2005
Fall 2005 / 200610 / September 23, 2005
Spring 2006 / 200630 / February 2, 2006
Summer 2006 / 200640 / August 4, 2006
Note: this review covers the period 2002-2006 as program information
before 2002 pre-dates the use of the Banner Database.
2.WCC program information.
3.Anecdotal information gathered by program faculty.
Signature Page
Faculty review and coordination for this report was provided by:
______Mathematics Coordinator Clayton Akatsuka
______Language Arts Coordinator
Ellen Ishida-Babineau
Administration review for this report was provided by:
______Dean of Instruction
Linka Corbin-Mullikin
______Chancellor
Angela Meixell
Program information and research for this report was prepared by:
______Director, Office of Institutional Research
Jeffrey W. Hunt
1
Table of Contents
Program Review Health Indicator Summary......
Abbreviations and Acronyms Used in this Program Review......
Considerations for the Developmental Education Program Review......
Sources of Information for this Annual Assessment......
Signature Page......
Table of Contents......
Mission Statements......
College mission statement......
Program mission statement......
Part I. Executive Summary of Program Status......
Review of the program rating......
Overall Program Status......
Overall Program Demand......
Overall Program Efficiency......
Overall Program Outcomes......
Response to previous program review recommendations......
Part II. Program Description......
Description and history of the program......
Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)......
Admission requirements......
Credentials, licensures offered......
Faculty and staff......
Resources......
Articulation agreements......
Community connections, advisory committees, internships, coops, DOE connections......
Part III. Quantitative Indicators for Program Review......
Demand/Efficiency......
Number of applicants......
Number of majors......
Student semester hours for program majors in all program classes......
Number of classes taught......
Average class size......
Class fill rate......
Retention rates in program classes......
Low-enrolled Courses......
FTE of BOR appointed program faculty......
Classes and credits taught by position count faculty and lecturers......
Per cent of classes taught by lecturers......
Majors per FTE faculty......
Cost of program per student major......
Cost per SSH......
Determination of program’s health based on demand and efficiency......
Outcomes......
Attainment of student educational goals......
Persistence of majors fall to spring......
Graduation rate......
Transfer rates......
Success at another UH campus based on GPA......
Determination of program’s health based on outcomes......
Part IV. Assessment Chart for Program SLOs......
Program SLOs......
Changes made as a result of findings......
Part V. Curriculum Revision and Review......
Description of the curriculum......
Student satisfaction......
Part VII. Analysis of the Program......
Alignment with the mission statement......
Strengths and weaknesses based on analysis of data......
Evidence of quality......
Evidence of student learning......
Resource sufficiency......
Recommendations for improving outcomes......
Part VIII. Action Plan......
Program goals......
Part IX. Budget Implications......
Appendices......
Appendix A.......
Appendix B.......
Appendix C.......
Appendix D.......
Mission Statements
College mission statement
WindwardCommunity College is committed to excellence in the liberal arts and career development; we support and challenge individuals to develop skills, fulfill their potential, enrich their lives, and become contributing culturally aware members of our community.
Program mission statement
The mission is to provide quality remedial and developmental education through a series of courses designed to strengthen mathematics, reading, and writing skills; to encourage the development of academic and life skills to handle the rigors of future academic endeavors and to function in today's society.
PartI. Executive Summary of Program Status
Review of the program rating
Overall Program Status
Overall Program Demand
Overall Program Efficiency
Overall Program Outcomes
Response to previous program review recommendations
This review is the first review in this format and the program health indicators were not used in the previous review.
Part II. Program Description
Description and history of the program
Description
A developmental education program, which has a separate organizational structure or funding, does not exist on this campus. There is no coordinator nor is there separate funding. Course offerings are under the purview of each department in consultation with the Dean of Instruction. The program is a set of sequential courses designed by the Language Arts and mathematics faculty.
In mathematics, the courses are:
MATH 21 A, BasicCollege Mathematics IMATH 21B, BasicCollege Mathematics II MATH 22, Pre-Algebra Mathematics MATH 24, Elementary Algebra I
MATH 25, Elementary Algebra II
In English, the courses area
LSK 035, Learning Skills for College Success ENG 021. Intermediate Reading
ENG 022, Introduction to Expository Writing
History
When the college first opened its doors, the campus offered only college-level courses, i.e., courses above the 100-level. However, it became evident that with the open-door policy, studentswere under-prepared to handle the expectations of college-level work. By 1984,developmental English courses such as English 001-Reading I, English - Basic Reading Skills, English 010Basic Writing Skills, English 021-Intermediate Reading_ 022-Introduction to Expository Writing, and LSK 035-Study Skills were included in the English curricula. In 1990, ESL 005was offered but was not successful because of the small ;tats of non-native speakers on the campus. In response to the Chancellor of the Community Colleges and the President of the University of Hawaii system, remedial English and math courses were replaced with pre-developmental courses in 1990. In 1995, English 001, English 009, English 010 were replaced with LSK 035-Learning Skills for College Success, a four-credit course integrating reading, writing, and study skills.
By 1978, Math 001 was being offered. In 1981, Math 025-Elementary Algebra was included in the catalog. Math 025 was changed to Elementary Algebra II in 1994. In 1995, Math 027-Intermediate Algebra and Math 033-Unified Geometry were offered. Math 024 was added in 1997. In response to the needs of students, Math 021 A-Basic College Mathematics I, Math 021 B-Basic College Mathematics II were added to the curricula in 2004, and Math 022-Pre-Algebra Mathematics was added in 1998. See Program History for the current English and mathematics course offerings.
Program Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs)
Because there is no formal structure for developmental education, program student learning outcomes have not been identified. The student learning outcomes are identified in specific course outlines for specific courses. (see Appendix for Remedial and Developmental English Courses, Fall 2005 and Remedial and Developmental Mathematics Courses, Fall 2005).
or new info?
Students who have completed the Developmental Education program will be able to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
These SLOs are under review and the program is working with the IEC to assess their outcomes.
Admission requirements
There are no admission requirements to the Developmental Education program.
Credentials, licensures offered
There are no credentials or licensures offered as part of the program.
Upon completion of the program students are able to enroll in more advanced liberal classes at the100 or above level.
Faculty and staff
Classes Taught
Clayton AkatsukaPhD.Associate Professor
Ellen Ishida-BabineauPHD.Professor
Associate Professor C. Akatsuka and E. Ishida-Babineau are Co-coordinators of the program. When necessary, lecturers are used to augment the program offerings. There are no staff positions assigned to the program.
Resources
The resources allocated to the program are sufficient to support the attainment of its mission, goals and objectives. There aretwo faculty member allocated to coordinate and staff the program.
Articulation agreements
Over the years, WCC English and mathematics faculty have met with DOE teachers from the Windward side. In January 2000, there was an O'ahu Tech Prep Consortium Articulation Meeting to share information about ways to prepare students for matriculation into post-secondary institutions. There has been little discussion since then.
Community connections, advisory committees, internships, coops, DOE connections
There is no advisory committee for the Developmental Education Program.
Distance education programs
This program is not associated with any distance education programs.
Part III.Trend dataQuantitative Indicators for Program Review:
Demand/Efficiency
Number of applicants
There are no applicants to the Developmental Education Program. Students enroll in developmental education classes as needed to improve their educational skills and to prepare for 100 level and above classes.
Number of majors
There are no majors in the Developmental Education Program. Students enroll in developmental education classes as needed to improve their educational skills and to prepare for 100 level and above classes.
Student semester hours for program majors in all program classes
The SSHs for all Developmental Education Program classes ranged from a low of 2,793 SSHs in 2004-5 to a high of 3,013 SSHs in 2002-3 with an average of 2,927.8 SSHs for the four-year reporting period.
ENG 21 and 22 classes averaged 1,129.5 SSHs, LSK 35 averaged 40 SSHs, and MATH 21A, 21B, 22, 24 and 25 averaged 1,753.3 SSHsper year for the four-year reporting period.
SSHs of Developmental Education ClassesCourse Alpha / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
ENG / 21 / 267 / 288 / 183 / 264 / 1,002 / 250.5
22 / 942 / 951 / 783 / 840 / 3,516 / 879.0
ENG Total / 1,209 / 1,239 / 966 / 1,104 / 4,518 / 1,129.5
LSK / 35 / 40 / 52 / 68 / 160 / 40.0
LSK Total / 40 / 52 / 68 / 160 / 40.0
MATH / 21A / 98 / 106 / 204 / 51.0
21B / 106 / 102 / 208 / 52.0
22 / 462 / 417 / 333 / 219 / 1,431 / 357.8
24 / 660 / 618 / 645 / 747 / 2,670 / 667.5
25 / 642 / 570 / 645 / 663 / 2,520 / 630.0
MATH Total / 1,764 / 1,605 / 1,827 / 1,837 / 7,033 / 1,758.3
Grand Total / 3,013 / 2,896 / 2,793 / 3,009 / 11,711 / 2,927.8
FTE course program enrollment
The FTE program enrollment for theDevelopmental Education Program ranged froma low of 64.3 in 2004-5 to a high of 68.8 in 2005-6with an average FTE of 66.0for the four-year program review period.
FTE Program Enrollment for the Developmental Education Program (1)2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
Student registrations / 1,001 / 961 / 965 / 1,032 / 3,959 / 989.75
FTE enrollment / 66.7 / 64.0 / 64.3 / 68.8 / 263.9 / 66.0
(1) FTE program enrollment = no. student registrations/15.
FTE Program Enrollment for the Developmental Education Program by Sub-groupCourse Alpha / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
ENG / 21 / 89 / 96 / 61 / 88 / 334 / 83.5
22 / 314 / 317 / 261 / 280 / 1,172 / 293
ENG Total / 403 / 413 / 322 / 368 / 1,506 / 376.5
LSK / 35 / 10 / 13 / 17 / 40 / 10
LSK Total / 10 / 13 / 17 / 40 / 10
MATH / 21A / 49 / 53 / 102 / 25.5
21B / 53 / 51 / 104 / 26
22 / 154 / 139 / 111 / 73 / 477 / 119.25
24 / 220 / 206 / 215 / 249 / 890 / 222.5
25 / 214 / 190 / 215 / 221 / 840 / 210
MATH Total / 588 / 535 / 643 / 647 / 2,413 / 603.25
Grand Total / 1,001 / 961 / 965 / 1,032 / 3,959 / 989.75
Number of classes taught
The four-year matrix of classesshows that the frequency of Developmental Education Program classes is sufficient to meet the demands of the students requiring classes at the below 100 level.
The program goal is to maintain sufficient offerings of classes to meet the demands of students requiring instruction at the below 100 level.
Number of Classes Taught in the Developmental Education ProgramCourse Alpha / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
ENG / 21 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 19 / 4.75
22 / 12 / 13 / 10 / 12 / 47 / 11.75
ENG Total / 17 / 18 / 14 / 17 / 66 / 16.5
LSK / 35 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3 / 0.75
LSK Total / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3 / 0.75
MATH / 21A / 2 / 2 / 4 / 1
21B / 2 / 2 / 4 / 1
22 / 6 / 5 / 4 / 3 / 18 / 4.5
24 / 8 / 8 / 9 / 11 / 36 / 9
25 / 8 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 32 / 8
MATH Total / 22 / 20 / 25 / 27 / 94 / 23.5
Grand Total / 40 / 39 / 39 / 45 / 163 / 40.75
Average class size
The average class size for all Developmental Education Program classes ranged from a low of 22.9 students per class in 2005-6 to a high of 25 students per class in 2002-3 with an average of 24.3 students per class for the four-year reporting period.
ENG 21 and 22 classes averaged 22.8 students per class, LSK classes averaged 13.3 students per class, and MATH 21A, 21B, 22, 24 and 25 classes averaged 25.7 students per class for the four-year reporting period.
The program goal is to maintain an average class size of 24 students per class.
Class Size of Developmental Education Classes (1)Course Alpha / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total
ENG / 21 / 17.8 / 19.2 / 15.3 / 17.6 / 17.6
22 / 26.2 / 24.4 / 26.1 / 23.3 / 24.9
ENG Total / 23.7 / 22.9 / 23.0 / 21.6 / 22.8
LSK / 35 / 10.0 / 13.0 / 17.0 / 13.3
LSK Total / 10.0 / 13.0 / 17.0 / 13.3
MATH / 21A / 24.5 / 26.5 / 25.5
21B / 26.5 / 25.5 / 26.0
22 / 25.7 / 27.8 / 27.8 / 24.3 / 26.5
24 / 27.5 / 25.8 / 23.9 / 22.6 / 24.7
25 / 26.8 / 27.1 / 26.9 / 24.6 / 26.3
MATH Total / 26.7 / 26.8 / 25.7 / 24.0 / 25.7
Grand Total / 25.0 / 24.6 / 24.7 / 22.9 / 24.3
(1)the average class size is a weighted average of all class sections for an alpha/number;
i.e., a course with two sections counts twice as much as a course with one section.
Class fill rate
The average class fill rate for all Developmental Education Program classes ranged from a low of 85.8 students per class in 2005-6 to a high of 93.9 students per class in 2002-3 with an average of 89.8 students per class for the four-year reporting period.
ENG 21 and 22 classes averaged 87.9 students per class, LSK classes averaged 62.3 students per class, and MATH 21A, 21B, 22, 24 and 25 classes averaged 92.0 students per class for the four-year reporting period.
The program goal is to maintain an average class fill rate of 89%.
Class Fill Rate of Developmental Education Classes (1)Course Alpha / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total
ENG / 21 / 71.2 / 75.9 / 57.0 / 72.9 / 69.9
22 / 104.7 / 89.7 / 95.4 / 91.6 / 95.2
ENG Total / 94.8 / 85.9 / 84.4 / 86.1 / 87.9
LSK / 35 / 50.0 / 52.0 / 85.0 / 62.3
LSK Total / 50.0 / 52.0 / 85.0 / 62.3
MATH / 21A / 87.5 / 94.6 / 91.1
21B / 94.6 / 91.1 / 92.9
22 / 91.7 / 99.3 / 99.1 / 86.9 / 94.6
24 / 98.2 / 95.2 / 85.3 / 80.8 / 89.0
25 / 94.6 / 96.9 / 97.1 / 87.7 / 93.8
MATH Total / 95.1 / 96.8 / 92.2 / 85.6 / 92.0
Grand Total / 93.9 / 90.6 / 89.4 / 85.8 / 89.8
(1)the average class fill rate is a weighted average of all class sections in an alpha/number; i. e., a course with two sections counts twice as much as a course with one section.
Retention rates in program classes
The retention rate for all Developmental Education Program classes ranged from a low of 83.1% students in 2002-3 to a high of 85.3% in 2003-4 with an average of 84% students retained per class for the four-year reporting period.
ENG 21 and 22 classes averaged 84%, LSK classes averaged 67.3, and MATH 21A, 21B, 22, 24 and 25 classes averaged 84.5% students retained for the four-year reporting period.
The program goal is to maintain an average retention rate of 85%.
Retention Rate of Students in Developmental Education ClassesItem / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
no. of classes / 40 / 39 / 39 / 45 / 163 / 40.8
enrolled to start / 1,007 / 970 / 988 / 1,021 / 3,986 / 996.5
enrolled at end / 840 / 830 / 832 / 854 / 3,356 / 839
per cent retained / 83.1 / 85.3 / 83.9 / 83.7 / ---- / 84.0
Retention Rate of Students in Developmental Education Classes by Sub-group
Course / Item / 2003 / 2004 / 2005 / 2006 / Total
ENG / 21 / no. classes / 5 / 5 / 4 / 5 / 19
enrolled to start / 89 / 94 / 61 / 89 / 333
enrolled at end / 69 / 79 / 50 / 74 / 272
per cent retained / 78.3 / 84.3 / 76.9 / 84.0 / 80.9
22 / No. classes / 12 / 13 / 10 / 12 / 47
enrolled to start / 313 / 306 / 274 / 278 / 1171
enrolled at end / 270 / 266 / 222 / 240 / 998
per cent retained / 86.2 / 86.7 / 81.0 / 86.0 / 85.2
ENG classes / 17 / 17 / 14 / 17 / 65
ENG sum enrolled at start / 402 / 400 / 335 / 367 / 1504
ENG sum enrolled at end / 339 / 345 / 272 / 314 / 1270
ENG average per cent retained / 83.9 / 86.1 / 79.8 / 85.4 / 84.0
LSK / 35 / no. classes / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3
enrolled to start / 14 / 15 / 19 / 48
enrolled at end / 9 / 8 / 16 / 33
per cent retained / 64.3 / 53.3 / 84.2 / 67.3
LSK classes / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3
LSK sum enrolled at start / 14 / 15 / 19 / 48
LSK sum enrolled at end / 9 / 8 / 16 / 33
LSK average per cent retained / 64.3 / 53.3 / 84.2 / 67.3
MATH / 21A / no. classes / 2 / 2 / 4
enrolled to start / 52 / 56 / 108
enrolled at end / 45 / 50 / 95
per cent retained / 86.5 / 89.3 / 87.9
21B / no. classes / 2 / 2 / 4
enrolled to start / 55 / 53 / 108
enrolled at end / 53 / 50 / 103
per cent retained / 96.2 / 93.8 / 95.0
22 / no. classes / 6 / 5 / 4 / 3 / 18
enrolled to start / 163 / 146 / 112 / 80 / 501
enrolled at end / 129 / 126 / 97 / 56 / 408
per cent retained / 78.9 / 86.3 / 86.6 / 68.8 / 81.0
24 / no. classes / 8 / 8 / 9 / 11 / 36
enrolled to start / 212 / 208 / 229 / 236 / 885
enrolled at end / 182 / 184 / 184 / 190 / 740
per cent retained / 86.2 / 88.4 / 81.4 / 80.8 / 83.8
25 / no. classes / 8 / 7 / 8 / 9 / 32
enrolled to start / 216 / 201 / 205 / 210 / 832
enrolled at end / 181 / 167 / 181 / 178 / 707
per cent retained / 84.0 / 83.5 / 88.6 / 85.4 / 85.5
MATH classes / 22 / 20 / 25 / 27 / 94
MATH sum enrolled at start / 591 / 555 / 653 / 635 / 2434
MATH sum enrolled at end / 492 / 477 / 560 / 524 / 2053
MATH average per cent retained / 83.4 / 86.1 / 86.1 / 82.6 / 84.5
Total no. classes / 40 / 39 / 39 / 45 / 163
Total enrolled at start / 1007 / 970 / 988 / 1021 / 3986
Total enrolled at end / 840 / 830 / 832 / 854 / 3356
Total average per cent retained / 83.1 / 85.3 / 83.9 / 83.7 / 84.0
Low-enrolled Courses
There have been no low-enrolled courses in the Developmental Education Program for the four-year program review period.
FTE of BOR appointed program faculty
The FTE of BOR appointed Developmental EducationProgram faculty ranged from a low of 2.4 in 2005-6 to a high of 3.0 in 2004-5 with an average FTE of 2.7 for the four-year program review period. The FTE of lecturers ranged from a low of 0.8 in 2004-5 to a high of 2.0 in 2005-6 with an average FTE of 1.4 for the four-year program review period. The average total FTE of BOR appointed faculty and lecturers was 4.0 for the four-year reporting period.
FTE of BOR Appointed Program faculty (1)2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
FTE BOR appointed / 2.6 / 2.7 / 3.0 / 2.4 / 11 / 2.7
FTE lecturer / 1.4 / 1.2 / 0.8 / 2.0 / 5.4 / 1.4
Total / 4.0 / 3.9 / 3.8 / 4.4 / 16.1 / 4.0
(1) FTE of BOR appointed faculty = no. semester hours taught/30.
Classes and credits taught by position count faculty and lecturers
Per cent of classes taught by lecturers
The number of classes and semester credits taught by position count faculty and lecturers in the Developmental Education Program for the four-year program review period are shown on the following pages. Position count faculty taught 66.9% of classes (109 of 163)and 66.5% of credits (322 of 484) offered in the program. Lecturers taught 33.1% of classes (33 of 163)and 33.5% of credits (162 of 484) offered in the program. Students in the Developmental Education Program would likely receive close to 65% of their instruction from position count faculty.
The program goal for is to have lecturers teach no more than 30% of program classes and 30% of program credits.
Per Cent of Classes Taught by PC Faculty and Lecturersin the Developmental Education Program
Faculty Type / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Average
Lecturers / 35.0 / 30.8 / 20.5 / 44.4 / 33.1
PC Faculty / 65.0 / 69.2 / 79.5 / 55.6 / 66.9
Total / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0
Number of Classes Taught by PC Faculty and Lecturers
in the Developmental Education Program
Faculty / Course / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Total / Average
Lecturers / ENG / 21 / 5 / 5 / 1.3
22 / 5 / 3 / 2 / 6 / 16 / 4.0
ENG Total / 5 / 3 / 2 / 11 / 21 / 5.3
MATH / 22 / 2 / 1 / 3 / 0.8
24 / 4 / 5 / 2 / 5 / 16 / 4.0
25 / 3 / 4 / 4 / 3 / 14 / 3.5
MATH Total / 9 / 9 / 6 / 9 / 33 / 8.3
Lecturer Total / 14 / 12 / 8 / 20 / 54 / 13.5
Position / ENG / 21 / 5 / 5 / 4 / 14 / 3.5
Count / 22 / 7 / 10 / 8 / 6 / 31 / 7.8
Faculty / ENG Total / 12 / 15 / 12 / 6 / 45 / 11.3
LSK / 35 / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3 / 0.8
LSK Total / 1 / 1 / 1 / 3 / 0.8
MATH / 21A / 2 / 2 / 4 / 1.0
21B / 2 / 2 / 4 / 1.0
22 / 4 / 5 / 4 / 2 / 15 / 3.8
24 / 4 / 3 / 7 / 6 / 20 / 5.0
25 / 5 / 3 / 4 / 6 / 18 / 4.5
MATH Total / 13 / 11 / 19 / 18 / 61 / 15.3
PC Faculty Total / 26 / 27 / 31 / 25 / 109 / 27.3
Grand Total / 40 / 39 / 39 / 45 / 163 / 40.8
Per Cent of Credits Taught by PC Faculty and Lecturers
in the Developmental Education Program
Faculty Type / 2002-3 / 2003-4 / 2004-5 / 2005-6 / Average
Lecturers / 34.7 / 30.5 / 21.2 / 45.5 / 33.5
PC Faculty / 65.3 / 69.5 / 78.8 / 54.5 / 66.5
Total / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0 / 100.0