PLANNING TASK FORCE
LINKAGES BETWEEN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE, TRANSITIONAL
STUDIES AND OTHER CITY COLLEGE PROGRAMS

Part One: Executive Summary

In order for City College of San Francisco to fulfill its mission of providing students with the necessary career education and skills to successfully participate in the workplace and global economy, the College needs to provide students with reasonable access to non-credit programs. It is also important and often necessary for the College to facilitate the transfer into vocational or other programs for students who have completed non-credit instruction in basic skills and life skills. These pathways must be clearly marked and supported by the College if students are to develop and reach educational and vocational goals.

In light of this, in the Fall of 1996, the City College of San Francisco Master Plan Committee (MPC) approved a resolution establishing the Planning Task Force, to be comprised of faculty and administrators with additional contributions from students and the community. The MPC recognized the need to begin the process of building a comprehensive education plan for the non-credit programs, beginning with English as a Second Language (ESL) and Transitional Studies (TS).  The mission of the Planning Task Force was to prepare a plan that would address the establishment and strengthening of linkages between non-credit programs, especially those in ESL and TS, and also with other CCSF programs as well as other institutions and organizations in the City and County of San Francisco.

In order to determine areas of concern and to develop an action plan for each area, the Planning Task Force employed several methods of inquiry:

•  Student focus groups at six CCSF campuses
• Interviews with instructors, staff and administrators
• A review of available information about non-credit ESL and TS students and their educational goals
• An examination of non-credit programs by five subcommittees:

As an outcome of this research, the Planning Task Force identified four areas of concern and established goals to improve the institutional effectiveness in each area:
 
 

Area of Concern	Findings	Goals
1.  Availability of accurate public information about non-credit programs	Major gaps exist in the provision of timely and useful information to students, faculty, staff, and members of the community.	1.  Increase student, staff, faculty, administration and community awareness of available college programs, courses, departments and services.
2.  Student access to non-credit programs	Students continue to experience difficulty in accessing appropriate classes and programs, a situation exacerbated by the inconsistency of procedures across the various CCSF campuses.	2.  Improve access of ESL and TS students into appropriate programs at CCSF and in the community at large.
3. Linkages among non-credit programs at CCSF	In examining the issue of linkages between non-credit ESL, TS and outside agencies or programs, the Planning Task Force found that there are currently few, if any, organized program models or vehicles at CCSF that focus on creating and maintaining these linkages and that existing linkages are not well known or utilized by faculty and students.	3.  Establish linkages among CCSF programs and outsides agencies, and provide adequate resources to maintain them.
4. Lack of  reliable data and accountability	There have been a limited number of surveys of faculty and students in non-credit programs, and very little systematic research of the impact of programs upon students.	4.  Conduct systematic research to evaluate non-credit programs

All data suggest that for recommendations in this report to be effective, ESL and TS Departments, Counseling, and other student services must establish better cooperation, problem solving, and collaboration.  The tasks necessary to facilitate student access, assessment, enrollment, retention, and completion require planning for alternative methods of delivery as well as identification of those who can best deliver these services.

The Task Force recognizes that there are some issues raised by the CCSF Non-Credit Issues Committee which contribute to the challenge of providing excellent non-credit education and could hamper full and effective implementation of this plan.  These include part-time employment, workload and pay issues.

The rest of this report consists of Part Two, a review of available information on non-credit ESL and TS students and their educational goals, completion rates, and satisfaction with CCSF programs and services; Part Three, a discussion of areas of concern in the CCSF non-credit program; and Part Four, the goals, objectives and actions proposed by the Planning Task Force.

Part Two: Non-Credit ESL and Transitional Studies Students

These studies document CCSF students' educational goals, completion rates and satisfaction with programs. The student focus groups also gathered information on students' knowledge and opinions of CCSF programs and services. These studies indicate that a significant number of non-credit ESL and TS students are interested in and have goals beyond completion of the ESL and TS programs, but results of focus groups indicate that students are having difficulty meeting these goals because they aren't aware of other opportunities at CCSF and find access to other programs difficult and confusing. In addition, although articulation between credit and non-credit CCSF programs has been strengthened, these studies indicate that more needs to be done to increase success of students moving into the credit program.
 

• ESL Level 7/8 Survey  A Spring 1995 study of non-credit ESL shows that a significant percentage of ESL Level 7/8 students are interested in job training or English for job-related purposes. A Survey of 568 students from five campuses showed that over one-third (36%) stated that they were in ESL for the purpose of obtaining a job or improving their English to obtain a better job.

• Non-credit ESL Student Satisfaction Survey   (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)  As part of the program review process, a Student Satisfaction Survey was conducted with non-credit ESL students at Alemany, Chinatown/North Beach, Downtown, John Adams, Mission, and Southeast.  The data were analyzed by the Research and Planning Department in May, 1997.  Approximately 2500 ESL students responded to the survey questions. Of the 2,578 students responding, 41 percent indicated a Chinese background, followed by 23.6 percent Latino/Hispanic, 19.3 percent White, 6.9 percent SE Asian.  All other ethnic groups each accounted for less than 5 percent of the total population. Gender of these ESL students was 58.7 percent female and 38.6 percent male. The data indicate that this sample group of students are very much interested in linkages to vocational subjects and basic skill classes.

The graph which follows shows that of the students sampled for this survey, 24 percent are attending to improve basic skills, while a significant percentage(29%) are interested in job skills and vocational certificates, and 11 percent expressed a desire to go on to higher education.

Responses to this same ESL Satisfaction Survey also indicate that 2.95% of the students surveyed are concurrently taking credit ESL.

Student Satisfaction Survey of Credit ESL Students
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)
During the same period of time, a similar Student Satisfaction Survey was administered to a sample of 450 Credit ESL students. This was done as part of the program review process.  Of these sample students, 29 percent indicate that they have taken a non-credit ESL class. Of this sample, 9 percent have taken one class, 7 percent have taken two classes, and 6.5 percent have taken 5 or more classes.

ESL Study of Articulation Between Non Credit/Credit Programs
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)
A study in 1992, which investigated the rate of articulation between the non-credit and credit programs, tracked a group of Level 600 students and their movement from non-credit to credit ESL.   This study found that the majority (55%) of the Level 600 students surveyed indicated that they would like to take credit classes, but that they were encountering obstacles. Changes in the test delivery system and other systemic changes were made as a result of this study.
 

ESL Research Studies-Credit Course Completion
(Document available at Office of Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)
A study, completed for the ESL Department in 1995, took a look  at student success by focusing on successful course completion rates for each credit ESL course over two fall semesters.  One section of the study examined students who came from non-credit ESL. New credit ESL students who came from non-credit ESL had a higher than average
overall course completion rate in Fall '93 and Fall '94.

However, a longitudinal credit study completed for the college of all students who took the ESL Placement Test at CCSF in Spring 1993 offers a different picture of the success of non-credit students in credit courses.   This study followed all students who took the Credit ESL Placement Test in 1993, examined their class records from Spring 1993 to Spring 1996 to see how they did in the credit ESL sequence of courses.   Former non-credit ESL students tended not to have completed ESL 82 (highest course in the ESL sequence).  Another indicator of higher risk of not completing or still being in progress in ESL courses after three years is initial placement in ESL 22, 32 or 42 (basic skills courses).  Over half (51%) of non-credit ESL students who take the credit placement test initially place in these non-degree applicable courses.

Transitional Studies Student Satisfaction Survey
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or TS Offices)
This graph, taken from the data collection of the program review process, demonstrates that while over one-third of the sampled students are in the program to improve basic skills, a significant percentage are interested in higher education (43%) or vocational oriented programs (17%).

CalWorks Data
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)
The new California Welfare to Work plan is called CalWorks  (California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids). Clients who were formerly on AFDC are now called TANF (Temporary Aid for Needy Families) recipients. This new state program creates a priority for developing linkages between non-credit ESL and TS, as well as from TS and non-credit ESL to credit and vocational programs. CCSF will be receiving federal and state funding to provide education, training and support for TANF students who are referred to the college by the Department of Human Services (DHS). A profile of TANF students indicated that of the 2,316 identified TANF recipients enrolled in Spring, 1997, a significant percentage (73%) were enrolled only in non-credit, 23 percent enrolled in credit only and 4 percent enrolled in both. The courses most often taken for these non-credit students are; 68 percent in ESL, 17 percent in TS, 16 percent in Business, 7 percent in Child Development and 2 percent in DSP&S.  These students are predominately female (73%). John Adams, Alemany and Phelan serve approximately 400 non-credit TANF students each, with Chinatown/ North Beach, Downtown, Mission and Southeast campuses serving about 100-200 each.
 

Student Focus Groups
Information from Non-credit ESL and TS Students

One of the missions of the Task Force was to gather information from ESL and TS students on their knowledge and opinions of CCSF programs and services.  Focus Groups were held at John Adams, Downtown, Mission, Alemany, Southeast and the Learning Center at Gough Street. Approximately 100 students participated in these focus meetings. A process for selecting student participants and the agenda was established by the Task Force, following a model used previously in Chinatown/North Beach. Instructors and students were provided with a standard list of questions for classroom discussion. Following discussion, students were elected or volunteered to attend the Focus Meetings.

Sample Discussion Questions
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)

How well-informed are they about CCSF, campuses and programs ?
How did they find out about and register for current classes?
What are future educational interests?  Do they know how to access the classes and programs they need to meet their goals?
What skills and requirements are needed to meet future goals?
Do they have suggestions for improving linkages from current classes to other classes and programs at CCSF?

Commonalties

1. Students generally have very little knowledge of programs at other campuses and even of some of the other programs at their own campus. As an example, students at all other campuses believe that John Adams was only for GED. They select a campus mostly because of location and by word of mouth.

2. They would like to know more about other programs, particularly about vocational programs and how to get help in obtaining employment. Non-credit students feel that this assistance is available only for credit students.

3. They would like consistency of requirements across campuses for similar courses as well as more standard intake processes. They would like to be able to transfer between campuses and programs without having to travel all over the city and deal with new lines and registration procedures.

4. Bulletin boards and flyers are generally ignored as there are too many of them, they are often not timely, and are not focused, e.g. contain everything from important information about classes to notices about things for sale. Flyers and schedules are not easy to read for many with low basic skills and limited English.

5. In most instances, students had problems with the intake process at their campus. They expressed dissatisfaction with having to leave jobs and find baby sitters to come back two or three times to register for a class.

6. Campus orientations are usually offered only once a semester and those who are unable to attend would like instructors routinely to provide information. In fact, most wanted instructors to spend some class time disseminating campus and CCSF information, helping them to meet educational and vocational goals.

7. Students discussed problems that are unique to their campuses. They usually do not know to whom to talk or where to go for assistance in resolving campus issues about cleanliness or safety. While Student Councils are in place at some campuses, they are sometimes more about social events than real campus problems.

8. Students universally wanted to continue this process of having regularly scheduled focus meetings.

9. Students were generally complimentary about the quality of instruction and especially appreciate the free classes.

Part Three:  Areas of Concern

Area of Concern One:
Availability of Accurate Public Information about Non-Credit CCSF Programs

A. Existing Sources of Information Available to the Public

• CCSF Schedule of Classes  The layout and the information are not easily accessible to students with limited English and basic skills.
• Vocational Education Program Guide (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)   CCSF, Spring 1998 edition lists all Vocational Education programs, whether they are credit or non-credit, Entry Requirements, Program Length, and Campus Information. ESL students in focus groups expressed interest in this information, but were generally unacquainted with this document.  Entry requirements for ESL students are not clearly stated.

• Vocational Road Show  The vocational programs at City College have assembled an exhibit of programmatic materials called the Vocational Road Show.  This well-developed show was on-going for several years, but it is currently not available. There has been a need to update and revamp the show and to collect more evaluation data on its effectiveness.
• Vocational Education Program Guide (see above)
• ADVISE Adult Vocational Interest Survey for ESL Students, 1991 edition. (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)    This assessment tool is a curriculum-based instrument for use by instructors and is a survey of activity and task preferences designed to help students better choose classes, training programs and jobs. It is easy to read and can be used by ESL or TS students.
• Improving Access to Vocational Programs Project  This project has a group of ESL Instructors  working along with the ESL Non-Credit Curriculum Committee to incorporate general information about CCSF non-credit programs into ESL lessons for Levels 7 and 8. This is part of an on-going process of encouraging instructors to include current school information in their lessons.

Area of Concern Two:
Student Access to Non-Credit Programs

A.  Student Concerns
Student Satisfaction Survey data show that 29 percent of ESL and 17 percent of TS students surveyed expressed an interest in going on to a vocational class or program.

Students in all Focus Groups expressed the need to understand expectations and standards for entry into non-credit vocational programs throughout CCSF. Processes for enrollment were also a problem for most students as they are different at each campus.

Vocational faculty interviewed expressed interest in students’ having the  basic language and communication skills needed to complete their classes and obtain employment.

Thus, one  vocational program, the Business Program was selected by the Task Force to study access issues in depth because of the interest in this program by large numbers of ESL and TS students. The Downtown Campus was the focus of the study in Spring 1997; smaller programs at John Adams and Chinatown/North Beach were studied in Fall 1997.

B.  Enrollment Process and Admissions Requirements for Business Classes at Downtown Campus
(Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)
Currently, students wishing to enroll in non-credit Business classes at the Downtown Campus must wait in line on registration day.  Because of this first-come first-served policy, there is little control of the level of proficiency in English or basic skills of the students. There are usually 700 openings at each four week cycle. A clerk handles all students and there is no waiting list.  Those who have waited in line are notified as to whether or not they are in the class and do not always see a counselor. (They may make an appointment, if desired.)

ESL Levels 7/8 have been recommended for entry into most Business classes, but the non-credit Business Dept. instructors do not know the language or basic skill background of their students, or if they come from ESL, TS or a Bridge class.  The instructors report that they lose a large number of their students before completion of a class because of language or basic skill deficiencies, or perhaps because of the enrollment process. Business course offering information is distributed with flyers which have been difficult for students to read.

C.  Enrollment Process and Admissions Requirements for Business Classes at Chinatown/North Beach Campus
Chinatown/North Beach provides non-credit Business and Computer classes. Business classes such as Introduction to Personal Computers are offered with typing skill requirements only.  Enrollment is on a first-come first-served basis.  Students sign up on the first day class meets.  The first 40 students who sign up are admitted to the class. The counselors try to screen ESL students and steer them to appropriate classes for their level.

D.  Enrollment Process and Admissions Requirements for Business Classes at John Adams Campus
John Adams Campus has an intake process which includes assessment of prospective students by the Counseling Department. One entry requirement for their vocational programs is a baseline score of 225 on a CASAS Test. Those who do not qualify are referred by counselors to TS or ESL classes. As instructors determine that a student is more proficient, the student may be referred to the Business classes.  The Business Department Coordinator at John Adams concurs with this process of setting and maintaining basic standards and believes that it increases students' chances for success in the courses and in the workplace.

E.  Summary of Findings and Recommendations
The Planning Task Force found that many Level 7/8 ESL students at all CCSF campuses are interested in changing from upper level ESL, where some have been taking classes for several semesters.  These students are ready for business-oriented and professional growth-oriented instruction. As a result of the Task Force meetings, the ESL Department has begun to make ESL instructors more aware of Business programs so that they can assist students in selecting appropriate classes.

Students at all campuses requested more consistency of requirements across campuses and more standard intake processes. The Planning Task Force agrees that these changes would improve the quality of service provided to CCSF non-credit students and would increase their chances for success in reaching vocational goals. The Planning Task Force recommends that the College establish consistent intake/registration processes and prerequisite skill levels for similar courses at all campuses. The College also needs to take steps to improve the preparation of ESL and TS students for entry level enrollment in other non-credit programs, and then facilitate that enrollment process.
 
 

Goal Two. Improve access of ESL and TS students into appropriate programs at City                  College and in the community at large

Area of Concern Three: Linkages among Non-Credit Programs

A.    Linkage between ESL and TS
Instructors and coordinators from both departments had not established an on-going working model for linking their programs. The Task Force was an opportunity for many to work together and understand the levels and programs available.

• Determining Levels for Linkages (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices) Department Chairs in ESL and TS provided Task Force members with the listings of course offerings, times and locations. Additionally, Transitional Studies courses from the CCSF Catalog were examined to determine which would be of interest to upper level non-credit ESL students. The Task Force members studied the levels ESL students need for success in Transitional Studies classes.
• Transitional Studies Instructor Questionnaire (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or TS Offices) In Spring 1997 the TS Department Chair surveyed his instructors on the ESL students in their classes. Of the twenty-five instructors who responded to the survey, most (22) currently had ESL students in their classes and 18 instructors expressed a desire to work with more ESL students.  A significant number of TS instructors felt that good attendance (20) and good study habits (12) are strengths of ESL students and that having these students in TS classes would strengthen the TS programs, motivate their students, and could also provide additional basic skills instruction for ESL students who have completed or are near completion of the non-credit ESL program.


The Planning Task Force recommends the establishment of an on-going partnership between the two departments to facilitate the transfer and concurrent enrollment of those ESL students who can benefit from instruction in Adult Basic Education (ABE) or are interested in pursuing a GED Certificate or high school diploma.

• Vocational ESL (VESL) (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)

VESL classes are designed to prepare ESL students for the language skills needed in the various vocational classes. These classes have been made available at the different campuses as needs have arisen. A chart completed in 1996 shows ESL Levels, linking each level to VESL and non-credit vocational classes at each campus.
• New VESL projects for 1997-1998 (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices) These projects include:
1) Learning Modules for a VESL Lab Tutorial Classes
2) Improving Access to Vocational Programs for Limited English Proficient Students, and
3) Integrating SCANS into Basic ESL and VESL-Review of Courses and Curriculum.
• Non-credit Hospitality Class at Downtown Campus  This is a program which has been successful  and could become a model for others. Hospitality Careers is a two semester program for a total of 1050 hours.  The courses are Food Technology, Dining Services, and Introduction to the Hospitality Industry.   During the Spring semester 1996, the Hospitality Department, in collaboration with the Transitional Studies Department and through the support of VATEA grants, piloted  vocational/academic classes for students who are enrolled in the Hospitality Department at the Downtown Campus. The academic program has three components: communication, mathematics and computer literacy.  Entry to the Hospitality Careers is determined by the Counseling Department using a CASAS placement test require with a suggested minimum score of 225.  All students are required to participate in six hours per week of Transitional Studies basic skills instruction, unless their presence is required in the dining room or kitchen. The Transitional Studies classes are integrated into the core curriculum and offered in the middle of their day.  Classes are variously individualized, whole group, or cooperative. It has been observed by Edward Hamilton, Hospitality Department Chair, that the passing rate on the final examination has increased from 50% to 80% since the TS Hospitality Academic program has been in place.  Most graduates have no difficulty finding work in the hospitality industry, while some transfer to the Phelan Campus for further study in the Hotel and Restaurant Management Department.
• VESL Class developed for Automotive Technology Evans Campus  The need for a VESL class was established by instructors and an appropriate curriculum was developed and taught from 1994-1996.  Sara Jacobson, the curriculum developer and instructor, reported that the class succeeded in preparing ESL students for automotive, but was discontinued because of low enrollment with many students unwilling or unable to spend the additional hours in a class that was held at a separate time from the already time demanding credit automotive program.  Other VESL classes have faced similar problems.

• Bridge ESL Classes at the Downtown Campus  (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL Offices)

Bridge ESL courses are designed to prepare ESL students for a specific vocational course or program. This Introduction to Computer Skills bridge class develops computer vocabulary related to word processing spreadsheets and databases and includes application of related reading and writing skills.
The curriculum for this Bridge class was originally developed cooperatively among VESL, ESL and Business programs, but the curriculum dialogue between the Bridge and Business instructors has not been maintained.  Bridge and Business instructors do not know if the Bridge curriculum is updated to reflect current Business curriculum.  Business instructors are not informed if their students have completed a Bridge class and what that means in terms of competency. Bridge instructors are not informed of changes in the Business curriculum. There is a question of the overlap of curriculum between the two departments.

Meetings were held in March and April 1997, arranged by the non-credit Business coordinator for a sub-committee of the Task Force.  These meetings included non-credit Business coordinators from Chinatown/North Beach, Mission, John Adams and Southeast along with ESL and Business instructors from the Downtown campus. As a result of the Task Force meeting with instructors and coordinators, some students who successfully complete the Bridge class at the Downtown campus are now being given priority to pre-enroll into the Business classes.

• Business and ESL Departments

The Business Department and the ESL Coordinator at the Downtown Campus have discussed linkages between the programs. Issues being addressed include the courses ESL students could take, language proficiency recommendations for those courses, and specific information on how ESL and TS students could be informed of and enroll in the Business classes.

The difference between Introduction to Microcomputers and the Beginning Application classes needs to be made clear to students and ESL instructors. The introduction class is the more difficult class in terms of language proficiency and basic skills while Beginning Application classes are more "hands-on".

One of the Task Force goals was to examine the access and information needed to link ESL and TS students to programs such as Consumer Education and Older Adults Departments. Previously there has been no regular interaction between these departments.
 

• Consumer Education  (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)

May Fong, Department Chair, Consumer Education, met with the Task Force on May 7,1997. She described a number of Consumer Education classes taking place on CCSF campuses and in the community. Task Force Members and their students are generally unaware of these classes. The Consumer Education Department distributes flyers and places ads to publicize the program.  The majority of students are referred from WIC, Head Start, GAIN and other outside agencies.
 
• Older Adults Programs  (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)

Wood Massi, Department Chair, Older Adults, met with the Task Force on May 21, 1997. There have been some linkages between Older Adults and ESL, with ESL running a program for older adults at the Mission Campus. Interviews with instructors and coordinators indicated questions regarding placement of the older students who have been in ESL for some time. Non-credit ESL students need information about available courses, entrance levels, and language skills needed. The College needs to assess the interest of the older adult populations in enrolling in basic skill classes such as math. The Older Adults Department distributes flyers, one of which is a description of the Older Adults Department of CCSF, the location of the classes, and information on the instructors.  A more complete description of courses is included in the Schedule of Classes for Spring 1997.  These flyers are mailed to some students and distributed to the campuses.

For some agencies wishing to develop joint projects, CCSF appears not to have a planning process to evaluate a proposal by an outside agency. A clear process which identifies advantages and disadvantages for both parties is needed as well as communication that promotes mutual understanding and cooperation.

Obstacles for encouraging outside agencies to work with CCSF include the inflexibility of the two-semester instructional year, rigid curriculum, and faculty scheduling restrictions.  Delays by CCSF in starting projects can sometimes create serious program implementation problems.

One model that has worked is the Transitional Studies Homeless/At Risk Transitional Students Program (HARTS). This program has served homeless and at risk populations for over five years and provides important linkages to essential college and community services and educational advising for potential or enrolled students who are referred by community based organizations, college counseling, and concerned faculty.
 

• Career Connection (Document available at Office of  Research, Planning & Grants or ESL or TS Offices)

is a placement service of CCSF for Bay Area employers. However, none of the non-credit students interviewed knew about the service or had any information on how to access it, so more needs to be done to evaluate and advertise this program.

• Transitional Studies and Credit Programs

For Transitional Studies there is no on-going dialogue with credit programs (English and Math) which would enhance placement of students into appropriate classes. At present, credit departments and counselors make little or no use of the non-credit offerings to assist students.

The Transitional Studies Department suggested that a minimum score be developed for placement into credit English and math classes.  Although Title V prohibits the use of placement instruments to bar students from credit courses, students scoring below a minimum level could be advised of their non-credit options. Students who are encountering difficulty in credit classes should also be encouraged to enter the non-credit program. Credit faculty and counselors need to work with TS so that they can be relied on to make these referrals.

• Non-credit ESL and Credit ESL

Findings from the longitudinal research study of ESL credit students (page 4)indicate that non-credit ESL students are not completing the credit ESL sequence of classes at as high a rate as other students. There may be several reasons why former non-credit ESL students do not complete or persist in the credit ESL program as successfully as other students (F-1 Visa students or former high school students). Some students may not have completion of the ESL sequence as their goal, but rather simply wish to improve their English. Others may not clearly understand the differences between non-credit and credit ESL and find that they are not interested in credit courses or able to keep up with the demands of credit courses. It may be that those  who place in the basic skills courses do not have a high level of education in their native language and lack basic skills in their own language, thus making the process of performing academically in a second language more difficult. As this report indicates, many non-credit students are unaware of their other non-credit educational options at CCSF. It may be that if non-credit ESL students are better informed of the other non-credit courses and programs available to them, they will find that they can satisfactorily meet their educational needs in non-credit.

The task force recommends several strategies to address these issues.

Area of Concern Four:
Lack of Reliable Data and Accountability

The College will need to develop uniform means of measuring student goal attainment and evaluate the effectiveness of the actions recommended in this report on an on-going basis.
 
 

Goal Four: Conduct  systematic research to evaluate non-credit programs

1. ESL Department Outcomes desired from Planning Task Force
2. Transitional Studies Department Outcomes desired from Planning Task Force
3. Transitional Studies  -Faculty Questionnaire Spring 1997
4. ESL Non-Credit Student Satisfaction Survey
5. ESL Non-Credit Student Satisfaction Survey  Response Frequencies, Responses by
Campus Spring 1997
6. Credit ESL Student Satisfaction Survey: Response Frequencies, Spring 1997
7. CCSF Credit ESL Course Completion-Report 956-01  August 1995
8. Non-Credit to Credit Articulation:  The City College of  San Francisco Model.
Seymour, Scholnick, Gibson. 1995
9. Transitional Studies Program Review - Student Satisfaction Survey,  1997
10. CalWorks Data - Profile of CCSF Students Who Are TANF Recipients.  City
Currents, December 1997
11. Transitional Studies Programs and Locations  Pamphlet
12. ESL Programs at CCSF Levels Feb. 1997
13. Vocational ESL (VESL) and Non-Credit ESL Levels
14. Chinatown/North Beach VESL office Training Program
15. VESL Projects for 1997-98 Descriptions
16. Non-Credit VESL Linkage Project
17. Vocational Education Program Guide, CCSF, November 1996.
18. Adult Vocational Interest Survey for ESL Students (ADVISE)
 Career Link, CCSF, 1997.
19. ESL Bridge Course outline for Introductions to Microcomputers, Fall 1994
20. Business Department Downtown Campus Schedule and Recommendations
21. Business Department John Adams Campus. Applications and  Requirements
22. Non-Credit Business and Computer Classes at Chinatown/North Beach,  Fall 1997
23. CCSF Consumer Education Information,  1997
24. The Older Adults Department of CCSF Description and Schedule of Classes 1997
25. Career Connection, Winter 1996
26. Student Focus Group Questions for Class Discussion,  1997
 

During the next five years, the College must address the application of technology to instruction and student services. Educating students in the 21st century will require access to a much more comprehensive set of technological tools including the Internet, multi-media technologies, and state-of-the-art computers. Yet, all campuses currently lack relatively basic information tools and equipment, such as easy access to fax machines and  computers.  The overall result is that students are being underserved.

For faculty, staff and administrators, information technology should mean on-line access to student records resulting in better customer service and more efficient departmental management.  A line item for technology in departmental budgets may facilitate more effective planning for and distribution of technological capacity.

Three Objectives
CCSF’s education technology plan entitled Creating Opportunities: Using Information Technology in Education identifies three primary objectives for the college to pursue.  They are,

A: Build a Collegewide Technology Infrastructure to Make Technology Accessible to Students, Faculty and Staff
B: Increase Opportunities for Students, Faculty and Staff to Use Information Technology for Educational and
Administrative Functions
C: Create a System for Planning, Evaluation and Continuing Funding of Technology

A: Build the Physical Infrastructure for Technology

Strategies/Actions
A1:   Install a secure, college-wide communications network infrastructure, including video cabling as appropriate, between buildings and campuses as well as offices and classrooms
A2:   Provide technical support for offices, labs, and classrooms, including a fully-staffed help desk, on-site support in labs and traveling support for classrooms
A3:   Expand access to information technology for students by investing in “state-of-the-art” end user computers and related equipment in labs and classrooms
A4:   Expand access to information technology for all faculty and classified staff, including the creation of a Technology Learning Center for staff development and training

B: Increase Opportunities for Technology Use

Strategies/Actions
B1: Implement a systematic staff development program for faculty and staff
B2: Train students in the use of computers and other information technology
B3: Improve and enhance the delivery of student services as enumerated in Objective D

C: Create a System to Plan for, Evaluate and Fund Technology

Strategies/Actions
C1: Continue and strengthen education technology by creating an Education Technology Office and a Teaching and Learning Technology Round Table comprised of students, faculty, classified staff and administrators to discuss and recommend college policies related to application of information technology to teaching and learning
C2: Establish and maintain funding for information technology; the college should explore the feasibility of supporting a modification of state law which would allow the college to establish a student technology fee.
C3: Establish annual and ongoing planning and evaluation system through schools and departments
C4: Develop guidelines on critical legal and usage issues related to information technology and disseminate to the CCSF community
C5: Develop a hardware acquisitions plan which standardizes purchases whenever possible and plans for cyclical upgrades and replacements
C6: Develop a software acquisitions plan to standardize software purchases and subsequent upgrades of the selected software.  Develop a list of software that will be “official” software for which CCSF will provide extensive technical support.  (More modest support will be available for unofficial software.)
C7: Make standardized computer and software packages available at discount to students and disseminate purchasing information to students
C8: Examine distance education options and determine long-term goals and expand where appropriate based upon student and faculty needs and preferences.

D: Improve Student Services

Strategies/Actions
D1: Provide on-line data to improve college decision-making
D2: Enhance information access to students through information kiosks, web sites, multi-media orientations
D3: Develop additional enrollment options for students through the application of technology
D4: Develop electronic counseling support systems
D5: Improve interactivity of counseling support services among campuses by establishing common data systems
D6: Develop systems to support distance orientation and on-line counseling
D7: Support data collection and processing to evaluate counseling services delivery system
D8: Review the feasibility and desirability of creating a shorter, more responsive computerized testing process to reduce test anxiety for new students
D9: Shorten the award processing time to financial aid applicants using an improved data system
 

Create a modern physical environment for CCSF students and employees that emphasizes flexibility, minimizes obsolescence and promotes the highest level of teaching excellence and student learning.  The college will use an inclusive participatory process to ensure that the construction and renovation of facilities meets the needs of its users.

Key Issues
Improving facilities is a top priority for City College. The college has many owned and leased facilities which are thirty to fifty years old and are in need of major renovations.  The condition of the physical environment is one of the important determinants of how well the college can fulfill its educational mission. Facilities can send positive (or negative) messages to students, messages which can help or hinder learning.  This same effect applies to CCSF's employees.  The modernization and renovation of facilities can markedly improve the learning and working experience providing opportunities to create places for students to congregate with each other and with faculty, interactions which are an integral part of the educational process.

To ensure that facilities are modernized, renovated and built to meet the needs of the users--the students, faculty and staff, this plan proposes to implement five objectives which address the facilities planning processes.  As funding from the state, the SF bond issue and college capital campaigns becomes available, the college will use these planning processes to determine the most appropriate types of facilities for students, faculty and staff.

Five Objectives
 

A: Restructure the Facilities Review Committee
B: Adopt Facilities Planning Principles
C: Integrate User Groups into Facilities Design and Construction
D: Evaluate Projects on Basis of Educational Needs
E:   Fund Projects on Basis of Facilities Process
A: Restructure the Facilities Review Committee
Upon agreement of the college organizations in the CCSF Shared Governance System, the Committee will be renamed as the "Facilities Committee." The committee’s charge will be to:  (1) review and evaluate all potential projects (including evaluating proposals; setting development priorities; and recommending projects to senior management); (2) incorporate the expertise and experience of the range of college stakeholders; and (3) provide oversight and stewardship of the facilities principles established under Goal B of this section.

Strategies/Actions
A1: Revise the new Facilities Committee composition to ensure a range of expertise and representation from varied disciplines and campuses, and from constituency groups of faculty, staff, students, and administrators.
A2: Designate a "facilities needs coordinator" for each building including bungalows  to consolidate requests for facilities improvements.
A3: Provide opportunities for community input on projects that have a clear impact on neighborhoods adjacent to CCSF facilities, including input from established community organizations.
A5: Establish a standard form for project evaluation and assessment that conforms to the educational plan and strategic plan principles.
A6: Continue the Design Review Board under the new Facilities Committee, including an outside community member.

B: Adopt Facilities Planning Principles
Adopt a set of facilities design principles to guide facilities development and improvements.  The planning principles will provide broad parameters and guidelines for facilities planning, and describe prototypical solutions to a range of facilities needs at CCSF (a "pattern language".)  The Facilities Committee will use the principles to review proposed projects.  User groups and units seeking facilities improvements will also use the principles and guidelines in defining their facilities needs and developing possible solutions.

Strategies/Actions
B1: The new Facilities Committee will review the principles included in the "master plan" produced by the Facilities Master Plan Subcommittee for possible inclusion in the facilities principles.
B2: Review the planning principles periodically at the Facilities Committee to determine their success in providing guidance on facilities development.  Use various inputs in this review, including user groups' post-occupancy evaluation of facilities that are built or renovated according to the design principles.

C: Integrate User Groups into Facilities Design and Construction
Support users in programming and design of facilities as full participants throughout entire process including evaluation of facilities by users after occupancy.

The objective is to establish a  participatory, user-driven facilities process that is open to change; inclusive; empirically driven; and information based.  The process will rely upon a productive communication system and accepted protocol for facilities needs, including: feedback and review; education of stakeholders; clear information on how a project progresses from idea to reality.

Strategies/Actions
C1: Establish a process for project sponsorship by user groups representing broad constituencies and conduct ongoing communication with sponsoring groups.
C2: Provide assistance, education and training to user groups in establishing project goals and preliminary program as outlined in the planning principles document established under Objective B of this section, including graphic rendering of goals and preliminary program.
C3: Program and design facilities employing an interactive process between users and architects.
C4: Create a structured participation program with milestones and deadlines to involve college community in prioritizing projects for recommendation to senior administrators.
C5: Conduct user group post-occupancy evaluation of new or renovated facilities.

D: Evaluate Projects on Basis of Educational Needs
Evaluate facilities projects with participation of the college community in light of the CCSF Strategic Plan and other collegewide education plans.

Strategies/Actions
D1: Establish evaluation criteria based on the CCSF Strategic Plan and other collegewide and campus planning documents.
D2: Maintain flexibility in the facilities plan to be responsive to unforeseen developments and opportunities.
D3: Define user groups for each project through an open process, and provide opportunities for them to participate meaningfully in the programming and design process.

E: Fund Projects on Basis of Facilities Process
Develop a process for funding projects recommended by the new Facilities Committee.

Strategies/Actions
E1: Consider all projects for funding equally, regardless of size. Define small, medium, large, and maintenance projects based on criteria such as costs, benefits, and disruption. Develop guidelines for funding facilities projects.
E2: The College Capital Improvement Program will utilize the Committee's recommendations in the development of an annual plan.
E3: For planning purposes, consider college-wide block grants for deferred  maintenance, renovations, infrastructure, and capital projects, etc.  Advocate  changes in state law to create this approach.

To best serve students and the community, CCSF's faculty and staff need a productive and supportive working environment.  A healthy college workplace allows faculty and staff to focus on helping students meet their educational goals and helps employees' develop to their highest potential.

Key Issues
CCSF faces several challenges in creating productive working conditions for its 2,700 employees.  Effective communications are difficult due to the necessary complexity of a multi-campus institution offering a wide range of educational programs and services.  This organizational complexity can also hinder efforts to promote collaboration and teamwork.  The College must also address critical issues of health, safety, facilities and part-time employment.
This strategy area outlines strategies to build a productive workplace environment that promotes service to students, productivity, teamwork, and a spirit of mutual trust and respect. An over-arching goal is to improve and increase employee satisfaction.

Five Objectives

A: Improve Working Conditions
B: Increase Options for Part-Time Employee Involvement
C: Promote a Diverse College Culture
D: Build a Team Orientation


A: Improve Working Conditions
Improve physical working conditions that impact the well-being and productivity of classified staff, faculty and administrators.

Strategies/Action Plans
A1: Develop a transportation plan that increases availability of parking and evaluates the feasibility of an inter-campus shuttle.
A2: Provide for the facilities needs of faculty and staff, including:

• Quiet spaces for meetings.
• Adequate personal working space.
• Congregating space for staff and faculty and interactions among classified staff, faculty and students.
• Upgraded bathrooms
• Adequate lighting, heating, and ventilation.
A3:  Assist campus and school deans identifying and implementing innovative  methods and funding sources for working conditions improvements.
A4: Review and upgrade programs that address health and safety needs, including:
• Office and computer ergonomics issues (including back/shoulder and repetitive stress issues)
• First-Aid and CPR training
• Personal safety and wellness programs
• Disease prevention
• Disaster preparedness procedures and programs
B: Increase Options for Part-Time Employee Involvement
Create options for part-time faculty and classified staff to be more involved in college life.

Strategies/Action Plans
B1: Provide part-time faculty adequate space for meetings with students and storage of instructional equipment.
B2: Explore inclusion of non-instructional activities (e.g., orientation; office hours; and committees) of part-time faculty within the 60% limit.
B3: Ensure that all CCSF employees receive the same basic information,  e.g., schedules, catalogues. Establish a handbook for part-time faculty.
B4: Integrate part-time CCSF employees into staff development activities.
B5: Conduct collegewide surveys and  studies of  the status and working conditions of part-time faculty and classified staff through the establishment of two special task forces  with representation from all college constituencies (students, administrators,  faculty, classified staff ) and AFT 2121 and SEIU 790.  The task forces--one to  focus on classified staff and the other on faculty--will report findings to the  College Advisory Council.

Objectives of the study include, but are not limited to,

• extent of use of part-time employees in college departments and operations
• impact upon teaching and learning goals of the college
• impact upon efficiency and effectiveness of college operations
• access of part-time employees to college resources and support
• identification of major issues and problems affecting part-time employees
• remedies for current problems facing part-time employees
Proposed size and composition of task forces (subject to review and approval from college organizations):

C:  Promote a Diverse College Culture

Strategies/Action Plans
C1: Conduct college educational programs to develop positive shared understandings  on diversity and affirmative action.
C2: Recruit qualified diverse applicants to college hiring pools for administrators, faculty and classified staff.
C3: Pursue diversity hiring
C4: Create institutional ground rules for diversity, civility and communication.
C5: Provide regular venues for dialogue on diversity issues.
C6: Support training in diversity issues in race, gender, sexual orientation, disabilities (e.g. active listening, consensus building skills).
C7: Provide diversity and communication training for leaders of unions, student groups, and college professional associations to support leadership on diversity issues.

D: Build a Team Orientation
Develop small working teams to build trust and community and to enhance productivity.

Strategies/Action Plans
D1: Conduct flex day classes and other professional development activities on teamwork and team formation
D2: Encourage and support team building.
D3: Integrate team message, skills, and concepts in faculty and classified staff orientations.
D4: Provide leadership training to all those involved in managerial, supervisory positions and constituency group representatives to complement team orientation.

For CCSF to address its long-term education priorities, the college must continue to diversify its revenues.







Key Issues
College funding depends upon state allocations which continues to be uncertain. Given the constantly shifting state budget priorities, the college must diversify its long-term revenue sources while maximizing revenue from the state.  Efficient and effective allocation of all resources must also be addressed, if the college wishes to build the needed resource slack for innovations and other college initiatives.

Three Objectives

A:  Maximize Revenue from Public Funding Sources
B:  Expand Revenue from Non-State Sources
C:  Promote Efficient Allocation and Use of College Resources

A: Maximize Revenue from Public Funding Sources

Strategies/Actions
A1:  Optimize enrollments throughout the college to ensure that the college receives the maximum level of funding from the state in all categories--cost of living, growth, categorical programs and categorical grants for equipment, technology, etc.
A2:   Build awareness among faculty and staff of the mechanisms through which the college receives its funding from the state including regular reports on state funding, orientation sessions and reports on college enrollment goals, and strategies to support full classes, student retention and timely submission by faculty of enrollment sheets.
A3:   Expand existing database and Web site information on sources for public funding grants from both state and federal sources.
A4:  Encourage CCSF employees to participate in public government agencies, commissions and boards which have access to public funds related to postsecondary education.  Develop direct links with these participants to make them aware of opportunities to promote partnerships with the college.
A5:   Support the passage of the CCSF bond referendum in June, 1997 for funding for capital improvements in technology infrastructure, modernization, renovation, health and safety and child care center.
A6:   Explore the feasibility of issuing participation bonds to fund specific capital improvement projects.
A7:   Investigate opportunities to utilize local redevelopment funds to support projects at specific college campuses.
A8:   Expand partnerships initiatives with other educational institutions including community colleges, SFUSD, SFSU, and UC, to compete for public partnerships grants from local, state and federal agencies.
A9:   Utilize college media including Telecourses, Channel 52 and KCCSF to market and enhance enrollments.

B: Expand Revenues From Non-State Sources

Strategies/Actions
B1:   The Office of College Development will be responsible for the planning and implementation of a comprehensive resource development program to provide increased funds from private sources for college programs and services, facilities and equipment.
B2:   Implement an alumni development plan to identify and involve alumni in the resource development programs of the college.
B3:   Increase the operations of the Office of Contract and Continuing Education where appropriate to widen the scope of educational offerings to the public.
B4:   Expand enrollments where appropriate in the international students program and the student services affiliated with this program.  Add short specialized programs for international students as needed.  Ensure that the expansion program meets the following criteria:
1. Enrolled students will get the appropriate amount and level of services needed to conduct a successful program.
2.   Students enrolled in credit and non-credit programs will not be displaced as a result of the expansion of the international students program.
3.   Expansion of the program will result in added value to the overall function and operation of the college.
B5: Establish resource development activities in coordination with the Office of Development  within college departments, schools and campuses to encourage expanded fund-raising initiatives.

C: Promote Efficient Allocation And Use Of College Resources

Strategies/Actions
C1:   Establish Financial Accountability Center agreements with college units, departments and programs which will promote efficiency incentives by allowing units to carry over part of the savings in their budgets to the next fiscal year.

---

The foundation of the CCSF strategic plan will be a system that integrates planning, budgeting and assessment.  Based upon clear, accurate and timely information, the college must establish a representative decision-making system, which will support long-term planning priorities.

Key Issues
The college currently has a complex and cumbersome planning and budgeting process. First, there is a lack of connection between planning, budgeting and the assessment of the college’s progress toward meeting its goals.  Too often, budgets do not reflect planning priorities, and conversely, planning efforts do not always attend adequately to budgetary considerations nor assessments of college performance.

Second, CCSF lacks a clear and consistent communication channel between shared governance committees concerned with facilities, educational planning, equipment, and budget.  For example, facilities planning can sometimes go forward without adequate consideration of educational objectives, or educational plans may be established without the requisite discussions about facilities.  There is no comprehensive forum to examine and resolve any differences with cross-cutting planning and budgeting priorities.

Third, the college lacks clear communication channels among college constituency groups resulting in a low level of trust in the planning and budgeting process.  There is also a lack of clarity about the basic timelines and parameters for the planing-budget cycle, leading to confusion about how and when decisions were made on budget priorities.

To address these concerns, the college proposes to integrate its budgeting and planning system into a two-year budget cycle, improve linkages between shared governance committees, and establish clear and consistent timelines and cycles for the budget/planning process.

Two Objectives
A:  Integrate Planning, Budgeting and Assessment
B:  Improve the College’s Accounting System

A:   Integrate the College Planning, Budgeting and Assessment Functions
The integrated planning and budgeting system contains the following characteristics:

1.  The Planning and Budgeting Council
Upon agreement of the college organizations in the CCSF Shared Governance System, the PBC will become the new shared governance body with the responsibility to establish priorities for the college based upon the college strategic plan.

The Council will ensure an equal voice for all college constituency groups--students, faculty, classified staff and administration.  All collective bargaining units will be directly represented in the Council as well.

The Council membership will be facing the difficult task of balancing two competing and compelling interests:  the long-term planning priorities of the college and the continuing needs of all college employees for fair compensation and fringe benefits.  Council members will be responsible for establishing realistic priorities and a timetable for funding and implementing those priorities.

A number of committees will make recommendations on specific planning priorities to the Council. Two of these committees are the Master Plan Committee and the Facilities Review Committee.  The Council will also receive planning priority recommendations regarding institutional investment in technology and staffing (faculty and classified staff).  The specific committees responsible for making those recommendations remains to be determined.

Representatives from the Master Plan and Facilities Review Committees as well as the technology and staffing committees will sit on the PBC.  The PBC also has the responsibility for reviewing the recommended budget developed through the planning/budgeting process to assess how well it fits with the college’s strategic funding priorities.

2.  The Budget Framework
Based upon planning recommendations, the PBC will establish a budget/planning framework consisting of recommended “setasides” for resource allocations above and beyond the on-going college commitments for staff and operations.  Setasides are defined as a percentage of the total college budget that is kept separate from the rest of the college funds to be used to fund college priorities.  The following categories are primary examples for setaside funds:  Equipment/Supplies; Technology; New College Operations; New and Replacement  Staffing; New Facilities; Deferred Maintenance; Renovations of Existing Facilities; and Program Innovations.

3.  Development of  Department/Unit Budgets
All college units will assemble a two-year budget based upon two major guidelines.  The first guideline is the funding needed to maintain on-going operations and educational services. The second guideline is determined by the priorities established by the PBC from the college strategic plan. The unit budgets will be forwarded to the School and Campus Deans, and Directors who will work with the budget managers to reconcile differences or conflicts among departments within schools, or other student service or administrative college units.

4.  Role of College Senior Administrative Staff
The unit and departmental budgets with recommendations for augmentations based upon the college planning priorities will then go to the senior administrative staff--the Provost, Chief Operating Officer and Executive Vice Chancellor.  The senior staff has the responsibility for developing the collegewide budget with recommendations for using the funding setasides based upon college planning priorities .  The proposed budget and recommended funded planning priorities goes to the Planning and Budget Council for review and assessment of its fit with the strategic planning priorities of the college. The senior staff and the Council will seek to resolve any differences on funding priorities.  The budget then goes to the Chancellor who will make a final recommendation to the Board.  The Board makes the final decision on all college budgets.

5.  Program Innovation Track
Based upon the Planning and Budget Council’s recommendation, a percentage of the college’s funding allocation will be held as a Program Innovation Fund.  Faculty, administration and staff may compete for funding based upon criteria established by the Program Innovation Roundtables (see program innovation section for more details).

6.  Program Review, Collegewide Assessments and Other Feedback
To assess and evaluate how well the college budgeting and planning system is working in terms of meeting goals and objectives, a variety of assessment vehicles will be used.  The college will rely upon a set of performance indicators to evaluate college progress in reaching its desired institutional goals (see list of CCSF’s six major goals).  In addition, the college will annually assess the status of the completion targets established for each of the college’s seven change strategies.  Other instruments may include department and committee reports, constituency focus groups, environmental scanning, accreditation self-studies, community based surveys.

The Planning and Budgeting Council will be responsible for receiving regular assessment reports on progress toward reaching completion targets and level of institutional performance as measured by the college performance indicators.  The assessments will be among a variety of measures utilized for planning priorities for the next annual (or biannual) cycle.

B: Improve the College’s Accounting System

Strategies/Actions
B1: Ensure accuracy of data.
B2: Ensure that budget reports are on-time.
B3: Use life-cycle costing.
B4: Establish a modern on-line accounting system for all college units  accessible to all budget managers.

This strategic plan cannot be implemented without the active participation and commitment of the faculty and classified staff.  Their creativity and expertise will be a critical determinant of the success or failure of the college’s implementation efforts. Implementation of college plans will follow the established college processes and procedures. CCSF's administrative staff have the primary responsibility for providing the necessary coordination and resources needed to achieve college-wide goals and priorities. The Provost, Chief Operating Officer, Executive Vice Chancellor, the Director of Research and Planning, and the Director of Development will be the administrators primarily responsible for the implementation of  the college’s seven change strategies. They will meet with the Chancellor to address overall progress on the strategic priorities and  they will work with appropriate college shared governance committees regarding  implementation plans.

Administrators facilitating the implementation of each strategy are:
 
 

 MANAGING THE CHANGE PROCESS
The Plan includes different review processes for responding to changing educational needs.  On a six-year cycle, CCSF will conduct a major update of the Plan.  This cycle allows strategic planning to coordinate with the accreditation process.  Every three-years, CCSF will conduct a mid-course review and update. Assessment data from the college’s performance indicators, completion measures, program review evaluations, and other assessment instruments will be used by the college planning system at the three-year and six-year reviews.