2. Please provide an analysis of the data trends for your department. If you have additional data that you would like to provide, please also include that here.
- Analyze the provided data thoroughly and systemically, separating each point into separate paragraphs for visual clarity (available at www.ccsf.edu/program_review)
- Describe how well the department and/or its programs address needs and challenges as indicated by data
- Describe trends for under-represented students; address disaggregated program enrollment data as well as disaggregated student success data
- Specify any impact on student success due to programmatic changes, changes in budget, et cetera
- Note the impact of any location changes, moves, or remodeling on department/ program
- Address any changes in size of classes, limits on primary class offerings, limits on ability to offer special / advanced courses; courses not restored need a recovery plan
- Indicate whether FTEF has kept up with enrollment trends (discuss credit versus non-credit)
- Show how FTES increases or decreases have affected the growth/reallocation of resources
- For student service areas, discuss other productivity trends such as student contacts per FTEF
- When available, discuss student and employee survey results
- Indicate how data apply to services, materials, resources, workshops, programs, facilities, personnel
- REMINDER: In addition to addressing the data provided, please include other data you have available that reveal important trends for classes, activities, focus areas, or services in your department
- One example of additional data is demand for credit course per the Current Enrollment module
Example: Human Resources (provided 4 reference tables)
1. ACADEMIC HIRING UNIT (reference Table 1)
---new job announcements issued decreased for two reasons; 1) less full-time openings, 2) many part-time pool job announcements issued in 08/09 remain open for recruitment (recruitment period--two years) (these job announcements are reflected in the 08/09 data).
---new hires processed decreased mainly because the District’s policy of no new part-time/emergency hires
---the TB notices sent/TB test results received has improved due to the newly implemented database program, including reporting functionality—the o9/10 data reflects an increase as a result
--due to budget restraints, the HR staff were not able to attend any job fairs in 09/10—this unfortunately has a negative effect on the College’s recruitment efforts.
2. GENERAL SERVICES UNIT (reference Table 2)
---Customer Service Inquiries including Job Announcement Requests: Customer Service inquiries have substantially changed. (this is explained in a paragraph)
---Agenda History Card Posting: (a paragraph indicates how a decrease in History Card Posting led to a decrease in academic hiring)
3. CLASSIFIED UNIT (reference Table 3):
---New Hires Processed: (followed by a paragraph of explanation)
---Salary Increments: While salary increments were not frozen (not processed) in 09/10 the monthly review/tracking process to identify eligible employees continued.
4. BENEFITS/HR IT SUPPORT/STAFF DEVELOPMENT UNITS (reference Table 4). (This is followed by two paragraphs; the first explains how HR has taken over many functions previously performed by HSS; the second paragraph explains how the benefits unit is adversely impacted by the HSS (medical), Kcares (dental), and SFCCD (PeopleSoft) systems.)
Example: Earth Sciences
After 3-4 weeks of registration this year, GOG 1 had received 191 closed notices. 39% of those who attempted to register received a closed notice for Spring 2010. However, this number does not include # of students who didn’t try to register because course was listed as closed. We face similar problems in GEOG 1L (20% received closed notice), and OCAN 1 (10% received closed notice) and 1L (14% received closed notice), and GEOL 10 (10% received closed notice), and 10L (10% received closed notice). All our course preregistered full. Our enrollments are overflowing. We have a number of impacted classes and need to be able to add more units.
The data also show that our department has grown steadily over the last few years---and could grow even more if additional sections are made available to us, especially Physical Geography lectures and labs. Our measure of “Productivity”—although a crude indicator of efficiency—reflects our large average class size even when our laboratory sections are averaged in with our lecture sections. We have been limited by our ability to offer specialty classes (such as climate change and environmental geology), yet still not satisfied the overall student need in the core programs. It also forces us to admit 40 students to lab classes, when the rooms comfortably fit only 35 or less, and field-oriented lab classes lose their effectiveness when class size is so large. In fact, as a whole, we’ve been upping the numbers of students admitted to our classes to handle the large enrollment pressure, but we’d rather be able to offer more smaller-sized classes which is what we feel a community college is all about.
We also notice from the data that our students are generally on the younger side (relative to the CCSF average) with slightly more white students than the average. Our student success data show that we struggle, as does the rest of the college, with the lowest performances associated with certain target ethnicities (African American, Filipino, and Hispanic/Latino). We continue as a department to develop strategies to improve the performance of all our students and hope that these will help to decrease the achievement gap. In fact, you will notice from our data that performance has been steadily improving for the past 5 years. We credit our mentoring program and study halls as the major source of this improvement.