FINAL REPORT – MARCH 9, 2012
SHORELINE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
ACCOUNTING
PROGRAM REVIEW
Winter 2012
Prepared by Karen Demetre, Consultant
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PURPOSE...... 3
METHODOLOGY…………………………….. . 4
CONSULTANT REPORT
Findings on Program Review Elements
Assessment …………………………………….. 5
Program Information…………………………… 9
Student Data Trends…………………………… 12
Curriculum………………………………………. 31 Faculty……………………………………………. 35
Resources……………………………………….. 36
Schedule of Classes…………………………… 37
Partnerships…………………………………….. 39
Support Services……………………………… . 40
Revenue Potential……………………………… 41
The Virtual College…………………………….. 41
Competition………..……………………………. 43
Program Access………………………………... 48
Labor Market Opportunities………….………. 49
Analysis of Findings
Institutional Issues…………………………...... 51
Program Strengths……………………………… 52 Follow-up on 2004 Recommendations……… 54
Recommendations for 2012 ……………...... 58
APPENDIX
Faculty Response..……………………………… 61
Student Survey Results…………………...... 77
Advisory Committee Survey Results………… 85
PURPOSE
The purpose of the program review process at Shoreline Community College is continuous quality improvement. This process is scheduled on a five year cycle across all instructional areas at the college.
This process serves to meet standards established by the State Board for Community and Technical College Education and the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities. Relevant accreditation standards are listed below:
4.A Assessment
4.A.1 The institution engages in ongoing systematic collection and analysis of
meaningful, assessable, and verifiable data – quantitative and/or qualitative, as appropriate to its indicators of achievement – as the basis for evaluating the accomplishment of its core theme objectives.
4.A.2 The institution engages in an effective system of evaluation of its
programs and services, wherever offered and however delivered, to evaluate achievement of clearly-identified program goals or intended outcomes. Faculty has a primary role in the evaluation of educational programs and services.
4.A.3 The institution documents, through an effective, regular, and comprehensive system of assessment of student achievement, that students who complete its educational courses, programs, and degrees, wherever offered and however delivered, achieve identified course, program, and degree learning outcomes. Faculty (members) with teaching responsibilities are responsible for evaluating student achievement of clearly-identified learning outcomes.
4.A.4 The institution evaluates holistically the alignment, correlation, and integration of programs and services with respect to accomplishment of core theme objectives.
METHODOLOGY
First Committee Meeting
(orientation including full-time faculty, division dean, workforce dean, institutional researcher, and consultant)
Qualitative Information Collected
· College website and planning guides
· Schedule of Classes
· Class Waitlists and Clustering
· Faculty Input (written assignment)
· Student Surveys (13 current students)
· Advisory Committee Roster + Meeting Minutes
· Advisory Committee Surveys (5 of 6 members)
· Faculty Group Interview
· Division Dean Interview
· Program Review Report – 2004
Quantitative Information Collected
· Faculty teaching loads (full-time and part-time)
· Division budget figures
· Annualized FTES, Headcount, and % of Enrollment
(by program and by certificate + degree)
· Student demographics (age, gender, ethnicity, academic +
economic disadvantage)
· Completion of degrees and certificates
· Student grade distributions
· State and college comparative data on S:F ratios
· State employment data on former students
Preliminary Report (presented to faculty/dean for feedback and
revised by consultant)
Final Committee Meeting
(discussion of consultant’s report + program review process)
Completion + Distribution of Final Program Review Report
CONSULTANT REPORT
Accounting Program - Winter 2012
ELEMENTS REVIEWED, FINDINGS, + ANALYSIS
1. ASSESSMENT (FAC. REPORT Pg 61)
TOOLS TO ASSESS PROGRAM OUTCOMES
1.1 Program outcomes have been established for the AAAS degree and are clearly stated in the program website, planning guides, and college catalog.
1. Apply basic principles, theories and procedures for recording and
reporting financial data.
2. Apply practical accounting practices in a variety of business structures
including corporations, partnerships, and small businesses.
3. Prepare financial reports, which summarize or analyze relevant financial
data.
4. Provide management support in the budgeting, planning and decision-
making processes.
5. Apply knowledge of payroll laws and related procedures.
6. Integrate accounting functions within a computerized business environment, select appropriate software and convert a manual accounting system to a computerized one.
7. Apply knowledge of individual income tax laws.
1.2 Published program outcomes primarily describe technical accounting skills and do not mention collaboration and professional communication in the workplace, which are also important for continued employment (i.e. soft skills). The consultant has suggested that wording about written/verbal communication skills and human relations in the workplace be included to provide a more explicit obvious reference to general education outcomes. These outcomes are mentioned in the college catalog and website for other business-related programs. and pertain to some required general education courses that provide important skills for success in the workplace. Also, outcomes could mention self-promotion/social networking and entrepreneurial skills which are needed to work in a competitive job market. Faculty is receptive to expanding program outcomes in the future. Accounting faculty is opposed to expanding accounting program outcomes to include areas of “soft skills” (i.e. general education outcomes for communication and human relations); and they state “philosophically we believe program outcomes should attempt to communicate what is unique about the degree not what it has in common with all AAAS degrees.” This is a new viewpoint which the consultant has not heard from other administrators or faculty at the college. Also, accounting faculty indicates that since they do not have direct instructional control of content in these areas, they believe faculty in non-accounting courses must assess these general education outcomes for AAAS-accounting students. The consultant is not aware of a feedback loop or system for tracking achievement of these skills by students completing the AAAS-Accounting degree.
1.3 Advisory committee feedback shows lack of familiarity with published program outcomes. Since program outcomes provide the foundation for curriculum development and assessment of student learning, it is beneficial to periodically review these with the committee to deepen their understanding of the program and the language of learning outcomes.
1.4 Faculty reports that all accounting courses required for an AAAS-Accounting
degree or certificate are structured with common learning outcomes:
· Read and analyze published accounting principles
· Use critical thinking skills
· Evaluate financial information
· Make necessary quantitative computation, apply accounting models and solve accounting.
These course-level learning outcomes are well written and organized. Faculty indicates this alignment assures them “that the regular course assessments (tests, projects and class participation) and the resulting grades awarded provide a reliable indication of students’ success in achieving these outcomes”. Further, the faculty concludes “the distribution of grades awarded to our program students offer the best indication of student progress in the accounting program from the perspective of learning outcomes and objectives”.
1.5 Program faculty are skilled at assessing student learning in their discipline;
and they utilize a variety of methods to accomplish this. Authentic assessment of students’ abilities and job-related performance occurs throughout the curriculum (e.g. projects and assignments). Opportunities are provided for students to apply knowledge and learn through “real life” experiences.
1.6 With regard to assessing achievement of program-level outcomes, faculty
indicate individual courses that are aligned with each program outcome. This provides a useful point of reference for assessment. They believe successful completion of courses connected with each program outcome is the “best indication to us of students’ success in achieving program outcomes.” Course and program learning outcomes are clearly defined and course grades are tracked over time. The consultant has suggested the assessment process would be enhanced by setting explicit benchmarks and evaluating achievement of these from year to year (e.g. one example might be the minimum percentage of students who pass key courses with a 2.0 or higher grade; or reach a certain level on key assignments). However, accounting faculty indicates they do not have an expectation of a minimum percentage of students who should achieve that level, since they believe it conflicts with the open door philosophy of the community college system. They prefer to remain very consistent with their content coverage and assessments and indicate they occasionally have high performing as well as low performing class sections. Based on this approach, it is not clear what indicators or findings over time might lead the faculty to determine changes that would be beneficial in the program.
1.7 Faculty reports a 3.56 average GPA for AAAS-Accounting degrees last year.
Minimum grade standards are strictly adhered to and have been part of the accounting program for many years. The AAAS-Accounting degree and Certificate of Proficiency require a minimum of 2.0 in all program accounting courses. While it might be possible that a student could do poorly in one of the learning outcomes and still earn a minimum 2.0 in a course, faculty indicates that all courses are cumulative and the ability must be demonstrated to meet minimum requirements of subsequent assessments. Faculty has compiled data which shows the percent of students achieving the minimum 2.0 required for three of the more difficult accounting courses over the last two years. Two of the courses (ACCT 102 and 170) have around 85% passing rates, while a third course (ACCT 103) dropped from 78% to 59%. Faculty does not wish to establish minimum benchmarks for the percent of students they hope will pass these courses with a 2.0 or higher grade. The consultant has suggested this approach would provide a way to compare results from year to year for evaluating achievement of program outcomes and determining whether any follow-up actions are advisable.
1.8 Although student self-perception alone does not equate to authentic assessment of
learning by an experienced evaluator, a favorable finding is the large percentage of survey respondents who give high ratings for how well their individual learning needs were met (62%) and how well they were prepared for employment (67%). This indicates a majority of current students is satisfied with their education in the program and believe it provides adequate preparation for working in the field.
1.9 Student data from the institutional researcher is another tool to assess the
attainment of program outcomes. The college has initiated “Dashboards” for annual analysis of program data, which can support assessment of program outcomes in the future. However, faculty is concerned about erroneous student intent codes and does not trust the accuracy or completeness of institutional data.
1.10 The consultant has also mentioned another strategy which is to select samples of
students’ work (i.e. capstone or advanced projects/assignments) across the program and annually document student performance levels on these. This is an accepted approach to assessment of program or general education outcomes, but accounting faculty is not comfortable with this approach and believes the overall course grade is a better indicator of student thinking skills.
1.11 Graduate follow-up consists of occasional conversations with former students
who contact faculty to keep them informed. Graduates express high regard for the faculty and program. Faculty is satisfied with abilities of students who complete the program, but more feedback from former students would better validate these perceptions. This is difficult to achieve with limited time and resources. Faculty explored the possible use of social networking media, but FERPA concerns were an obstacle. Accounting faculty has stated “Until federal educational privacy laws are changed it appears to us that obtaining a consistent feedback from our graduates is not going to happen. Based on our inquiry into establishing a school sponsored social networking effort to develop feedback, it became clear that the internal and/or internet sharing of personal student information (necessary to generate feedback) presents a real legal exposure to the school under FERPA. Institutional level procedures must be developed to enable the development of direct feedback from graduates.”
As an alternative, the faculty could seek individual feedback from graduating students by the use of exit surveys that do not require sharing personal student information with others (as might occur with social media networking). Students could be given a brief questionnaire that asks them to rate how well they feel prepared in each of the program outcomes and to describe their employment prospects or plans. They are receptive to utilizing an email list serve for surveying and communicating with current and former students who voluntarily share their email addresses for this purpose. A list serve might be developed by a work study student, who could manage distribution of information or survey questions and summarize responses. Although graduate follow-up continues to be a goal, it is difficult to achieve due to competing priorities. Resources or staff support are needed to conduct focused follow-up activities and systematically compile results.
1.12 The college initiated a general survey to graduates from programs across the
institution, but survey results cannot readily distinguish Accounting students from any others. Thus, specific survey responses from accounting program graduates were not available for review. In the future, it would be advisable for the college survey of former students to identify their areas of study in order to provide useful feedback for program review.
1.13 State data on employment of former students (completers + early leavers)
shows favorable rates of employment, although the economic downturn has caused a decline. During the most recently reported year (2008-09) more than 60% of former students were employed one year after leaving the college; and employment rates were similar for both completers and early leavers. Faculty describes numerous types of positions for graduates and positive anecdotal evidence; however, there is no systematic data collection from follow-up with former students and aggregate employment information is non-existent.
Faculty would welcome assistance from the college to provide an effective system for follow-up on employment of accounting graduates.
TOOLS TO ASSESS GENERAL EDUCATION OUTCOMES
1.14 Master course outlines typically identify general education outcomes addressed by
a course (such as quantitative reasoning or general intellectual abilities); however, specific guidelines/criteria or performance levels (rubrics) for assessing achievement of general education outcomes have not been defined by the college. Since many courses and assignments or projects include multiple learning outcomes it is sometimes difficult to isolate and collect assessment data on individual general education outcomes. Although it is assumed that passing grades provide evidence of achieving general education outcomes The consultant has suggested this area of assessment could be further refined as shown in the following chart; however, accounting faculty is not comfortable assessing general education outcomes and indicates that this should be done by faculty teaching general education outcomes in non-accounting courses.