San Luis Obispo County Community College District ......5 San Luis Obispo County Community College...

San Luis Obispo County Community College District INSTITUTIONAL PROGRAM PLANNING & REVIEW (IPPR) Document 2014-2015 Student Development and Success

• Annual Program Planning Worksheet (APPW) English as a Second Language – College Success Studies • Unit Plan & Worksheets- Student Development & Success San Luis Obispo Campus North County Campus South County Center Distance Education

San Luis Obispo County Community College District 8/26/13

2 S a n L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y C o m m u n i t y C o l l e g e D i s t r i c t I n s t i t u t i o n a l P r o g r a m P l a n n i n g a n d R e v i e w D o c u m e n t 2 0 1 4 - 2 0 1 5

ANNUAL PROGRAM PLANNING WORKSHEET (APPW)

Program: ESL Planning Year: 2014-15 Last Year CPPR Completed: 2011-2012 Unit: Student Development and Success Cluster: Humanities Next Scheduled CPPR: 2016

NARRATIVE: APPW

I. Program-Level Outcomes: 1. Develop basic competence in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in order to pursue

further study. 2. Demonstrate reading comprehension skills of intermediate or advanced texts. 3. Produce paragraphs that communicate ideas clearly. 4. Demonstrate aural/oral competence in social and/or academic interactions. 5. Recognize and use intermediate or advanced grammatical structures.

II. Program Contributions to Institutional Goals, Institutional Objectives, and/or Institutional Learning Outcomes

In the 2014-2015 academic year, the English as a Second Language program will be working to help the district meet the following Institutional Goal and Objective:

Institutional Goal 1: San Luis Obispo County Community College District will enhance its programs and services to promote students’ successful completion of transfer requirements, degrees, certificates, and courses.

Institutional Objective 1.4: Increase English as a second language credit course success and improvement rates by 2% annually. The Student Development and Success Division Chair participated the 2014-2017 Strategic Planning Workshop held on September 12, 2013. During this workshop, participants examined and considered institutional data as well as current elements and mandates that are part of Cuesta’s “Changing Landscape.” For example, we considered current District fiscal challenges, SENSE and CCSSE data, a re-visioning of our new Student Success Centers, and implementation of the Student Success Act mandate. This mandate calls for new enrollment priorities which will give “fully matriculated students” priority registration. Fully matriculated students are those that have completed an assessment, orientation, and a Student Education Plan (SEP). Because these Student Success Act initiatives are meant to help increase student success rates, the ESL department focused on these initiatives as it began to develop its Action Steps for Institutional Objective 1.4. After completing a Cuesta College Application, all new potential ESL students must first take an assessment test. Beginning in spring 2014, the ESL program began to use the ESL Accuplacer test, which is offered through the assessment office. The ESL program also provides a new-student orientation before each semester begins. While it is not mandatory,


all new students are encouraged to attend. During the orientation, faculty and staff provide a PowerPoint presentation that gives students information that will help them successfully complete their courses and the ESL program. Students are also taken on a tour of campus and each student that completes the orientation receives a Cuesta College three-ring binder and notebook. An Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC) Grant provides funding for these “gifts.” Students who do not attend the in-person orientation will be encouraged to complete Cuesta’s online orientation. At this time, the online orientation is only in English, but a committee is working to update it and translate it so that students will have the option of completing it in either English or Spanish. Since the majority of ESL students use Spanish as their first language, the translated version will provide increased access to this important information for more of our students. We anticipate that this increased access to our assessment test and the new-student orientations will help us in improving our success and improvement rates. Many ESL students do not complete Student Education Plans. Because of this, for the 2014-2015 academic year the ESL program developed the following Actions Steps:

1.4.1—Determine a process that ensures ESL students complete an SEP by the time they complete 15 units. (December 2014)

1.4.2—Implement the process with ESL students enrolled in ESL 053, ESL 054, and ESL 099E. (May 2015)

1.4.2—Assess ESL course improvement and success rates. (August 2015)

1.4.4—Refine the process for SEP completion based on assessment results. (December 2015)

Because research shows that students who declare a goal and have a plan in place have higher completion and success rates, we also anticipate that these action steps will help in meeting Institutional Objective 1.4. In addition to helping the District achieve Institutional Objective 1.4, the ESL program will also be helping the District meet the following Institutional Objective:

Institutional Objective 1.6: Increase the percentage of first-time students who complete the fall semester and continue to the immediate spring semester at Cuesta College by 2% annually.

The action steps that are part of the Institutional Objective 1.4 will also contribute to an increase in the number of students who persist from fall to spring semesters. In addition, ESL retention assistants, who provide much needed bilingual and evening support for our students, have been integral in helping us increase our retention rates each semester for the past 5 years. In addition to the work that they do during the semester, they also call continuing students prior to the next semester beginning to remind about registration and the semester start date. This has helped us in encouraging our students to persist from fall


to spring as well as from spring to fall. We will continue to utilize our retention assistants for the purpose of increasing our persistence rates.

III. Analysis of Measurements/Data

Enrollments

Overall: In the 2009/2010 academic year, our total enrollments were 1615, down slightly from the previous three years (1643, 1653, and 1620). However, in academic year 2010/2011, our total enrollments decreased significantly to 1261. Then in 2011/2012 our enrollments increased modestly to 1480.

Enrollments by Region: Site 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 North County 721 603 809 721 SLO 578 435 501 456 AG 316 223 170 113 Overall 1615 1261 1480 1290

Interpretations and Future Enrollment Projections:

Our modest increase in enrollments in 2011-2012 may be attributed in part to Foundation Grant funding which was procured for spring 2012 and fall 2012. The funding allowed our outreach department to purchase TV advertisements and to increase advertisements on radio stations and in local publications. However, even with the increase marketing approaches, our over enrollments were still lower than in previous years, and in the South County, our numbers continued to decrease. In 2012-2013, we did not receive as much funding for outreach, and this may have contributed to the decline in numbers at all three of our sites. Regular and consistent funding for outreach and marketing purposes could help us in either maintaining or increasing our enrollment numbers.

The recent poor economy in California appears to still be affecting the number of our ESL students who are able to study at Cuesta. According to our student survey from our last those who do work, approximately 63% work between 31 and 50 hours per week. Because we have a predominantly working-class ESL student population, a number of our students have found it necessary to find new or additional employment which may prohibit them from being able to attend school.

Furthermore, evening student services (e.g. assessments, orientations, admissions, registration, counseling, cashier, financial aid) are very limited. Increasing these services would help support ESL enrollment and the growth of our program at all three sites. However, increased services would be particularly helpful on the SLO Campus and the AG Center, where it typically takes longer for students to complete admissions, registration and financial aid processes. These are also the sites where we have seen the greatest decrease in enrollment numbers.


Success and Retention

Overall: As of the 2009-2010 academic year, our overall student success rate was at 50.7% and our overall retention rate was at 82.6%. In 2010-2011, there was a significant increase in both areas: overall success rates jumped to 59.6% and overall retention rates increased further to 85%. In 2011-2012, our overall success rates dropped slightly to 57.7% and our overall retention rates increased slightly to 86.5%. In 2012-2013, our overall success rates once again increased to 60% and our overall retention rates increased slightly to 86.7%.

Success by Region: Site 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 North County 53.6% 57.1% 57.7% 55.9% SLO 49.3% 63.2% 61.7% 71.2% South County 46.5% 59.2% 46.2% 41.6% Overall 50.7% 59.6% 57.7% 60%

Retention by Region: Site 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 North County 82.2% 82.4% 85.7% 85.5% SLO 80.8% 86.5% 88.2% 88.4% South County 87.3% 89.2% 85.2% 87.6% Overall 82.7% 85% 86.5% 86.7%

Interpretations: We feel that the continued increases in our overall retention rates can be attributed in part to our retention assistants who have been working at all three sites for the past two years in support of our students. The retention assistants work in a number of ways to help us retain our students each semester. For example, they contact students who have missed one or two classes, learn the obstacles that the students are facing, try to provide solutions for the obstacles, and most importantly, encourage the students to remain in and complete their classes. In fall 2010, they also began conducting “retention visits” to our beginning level classes: ESL 090 (now discontinued), ESL 001 and ESL 002. The visits are motivational and encourage our students to persist to our higher levels. They have continued these visits each semester to ESL 001 and 002 classes.

There may be several causes for our improved overall retention rates and success rates. First, our faculty have been very involved in collaborating in the development of our Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments. Our SLOAs have helped us create more consistency in our courses and the way we measure student success. Working on our SLOAs together has helped us to have a better understanding of each level and the expectations for each level. We believe this is one important factor that is contributing to our increased success rates. Second, beginning in fall 2010, our course caps were lowered from 28 to 20. According to a best-practices research analysis conducted by the ESL team, many researchers agree that 20 students is the ideal number for basic skills classes. Our improved success rates correlate directly to the academic year in which we lowered our course caps.


However, beginning in spring 2012, our course caps were raised to 24 in effort to help the College improve its efficiency. We do not know how this modest increase in course caps might impact our future success and retention rates. Finally, increased success rates may also be attributed to the continued work of our retention assistants, who in their efforts to retain our students, are also motivating our students to successfully complete their courses. There is also likely a direct correlation between our improved retention and our improved overall success rates.

In the North and South County, success rates fell from the previous year. Part of the reason for this may be that these two campuses have a higher proportion of beginning level students. In the South County, we only offer up to the intermediate level, ESL 053. In the North County, there are at least two sections of our beginning to intermediate levels, and fewer sections of our high-intermediate and advanced classes, while in SLO, we have equal sections of beginning, intermediate, and advanced courses. Success rates at the more beginning levels, particularly ESL 001 and 002, may be lower because these students are typically newer to the formal and rigorous academic instruction they are receiving in our program. Their study skills and strategies are likely not as well developed as our more advanced students, who may have already completed 3 or more semesters in our program.

Additionally, there are demographic differences. Students in the North seem to be older and many students in both the North and South tend to work in the agricultural sector, which includes wineries in the North. In SLO, more of our students work in the services sector, such as hotels and restaurants. We feel these jobs allow students to have more consistent and stable work schedules throughout the year, whereas with agriculture and wineries, students’ work schedules fluctuate due to the timing of harvests and/or other cycles in the agricultural industry. Students working in the services sector also may have more opportunities to practice and use their English skills outside of class. These factors could be impacting student success rates at these two sites.

FTES/FTEF Overall In 2009/2010 our FTES/FTEF was 10.93. The following year in 2010/2011 this efficiency number dropped to 8.91. Then in 2011/2012, we saw a modest increase in our FTES/FTEF to 9.58.

FTES/FTEF by Region: Site 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 North County 11.90 10.17 10.35 9.45 SLO 10.16 8.58 9.70 7.64 AG 10.42 6.96 7.07 7.80 Overall 10.91 8.90 9.55 8.57


Interpretations: The drop in overall FTES/FTEF 2010/2011 corresponds to the lower course caps of 20 (from 28) which were implemented in that year. It also corresponds to our overall lower enrollments in that year. The modest increase in overall FTES/FTEF in 2011/2012 corresponds to the modest overall increase in enrollments in that year. Even though our course caps increased to 24 beginning in spring 2013, our efficiency rates did not increase for the 2012-2013 academic year, and in fact, they decreased at all three of our sites. This may be due to the fact that our overall enrollment numbers declined, and while we cut a number of sections that were under-enrolled, we have still tried to offer enough courses to meet the needs of our community at all three of our sites in the County.

Certificate Completion In 2006, the ESL program developed two certificates, the Intermediate and the Advanced Certificates of Specialization, for which our students could apply after having completed a sequence of ESL classes. Between fall 2006 and fall 2010, we issued 68 certificates. Below are the number of certificates that have been issued since our last program review in March 2011.

Spring Summer

Fall 2011 2012 2013

2014

2015

Total since

March 2011

Intermediate 15 4

NA

NA 56

Advanced 23 14

NA

NA


IV. Program Outcomes Assessment and Improvements:

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT CALENDAR

ESL DIVISION

CYCLE STAGE

S 2012 F

2012 S

2013 F

2013 S

2014 F

2014 S

2015 F

2015 S

2016 F

2016 S

2017

SLOs Assessment

ESL 3

ESL 4

ESL 6

ESL 2

ESL 015

ESL 054

ESL 035

ESL 053

ESL 025

ESL 043

ESL 044

ESL 1

Analyze Results & Plan Improvements

(CPAS)

ESL 90*

ESL 45

ESL 3

ESL 4

ESL 99E

ESL 2

ESL 015

ESL 054

ESL 035

ESL 053

ESL 025

ESL 043

ESL 044

ESL 1

Implementation

ESL 053

ESL 043

ESL 99E

ESL 2

ESL 015

ESL 054

ESL 035

ESL 053

ESL 025

ESL 043

ESL 044

ESL 1

Post-Implementation SLOs Assessment

ESL 90*

ESL 045

ESL 5

ESL 015

ESL 99E

ESL 2

ESL 015

ESL 054

ESL 035

ESL 053

ESL 025

ESL 04

ESL 044

ESL 1

* ESL 90 was deactivated in fall 2012. * In fall 2013, several changes were implemented in the ESL curriculum: • Course Deactivations: ESL 045, ESL 003, ESL 005

• Course Revisions: ESL 053 and ESL 054 are new reading and writing courses

• Course Additions: ESL 043 (Intermediate Grammar); ESL 044 (High-Intermediate Grammar), ESL 099E : equivalent to English 099


Below are our last program-level CPAS documents which were completed in April 2012 after we had completed a full cycle of our course assessments. Each CPAS summarizes the course assessments, implementation, and improvements for each of our Program Outcomes.

Course or Program Assessment Summary

Division: ESL Program: ESL Date: April 16, 2012 Courses in program, or course:

• ESL 090, Literacy • ESL 001, Reading, Writing, Grammar and Conversation • ESL 002, Reading, Writing and Grammar • ESL 003, Reading, Writing and Grammar • ESL 004, Reading, Writing and Grammar • ESL 005, Writing and Grammar • ESL 006, Writing and Grammar • ESL 045, Advanced Reading • ESL 015, Beginning Conversation • ESL 025, Intermediate Conversation • ESL 035, Advanced Conversation

**Courses in bold contribute to Program SLO #1 discussed below

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Douglas Pillsbury, Nancy Seiler, Lucy Conklin, Becca Sciocchetti, Kathy Myers, Regina McKeown, Camille Nelson, Jillian Allen, Anthony Halderman, Amy Kayser, Donna Bower, Lisa Stephens, Jen Henderson Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements

X Program

□ Course

Develop basic competence in reading, writing, listening, and speaking in order to pursue further study.

2 Assessment Methods Plan (identify assessment instruments, scoring rubrics, SLO mapping diagrams)

• ESL Level 1 teachers collaborated on final exam that included reading, writing, grammar, vocabulary, and speaking in fall ’08.

• ESL Level 2 teachers collaborated on a final exam that included reading, writing, vocabulary and grammar in spring ’09.

• ESL 3 teachers collaborated on a final exam that included reading, writing, vocabulary and grammar in spring ’10.

• ESL 15 teachers collaborated on a listening/speaking final exam in spring ’09.


3 Assessment Administration Plan (date(s), sample size or selection of course sections, scoring procedures, etc.)

• The ESL 1 final exam was administered to 7 ESL Level 1 classes in December

2008. A total of 106 students completed the exam. Teachers scored exams using the same answer key. In the case of writing and speaking, teachers used agreed upon rubrics.

• The ESL 2 final exam was administered in May 2009 to three ESL 2 classes for a total of 65 students. Additionally, one class completed the Grammar/Reading/Vocabulary portion only (17 students); another the reading/vocabulary portion only (14 students). The instructors used an agreed upon rubric for the writing.

• The ESL 3 final exam was administered in spring ’10 to three ESL 3 classes for a total of 72 students.

• ESL 15 final exam was given to two classes for a total of 16 students in spring ’09. Teachers used a common listening/speaking rubric.

4 Assessment Results Summary (summarize Data)

ESL 1:

• 72 students out of 106 (i.e., 68%) passed with a score of 70% or better • Students were most successful in speaking. • Students performed similarly on the Reading, Writing, and

Grammar/Vocabulary portions of the test.

ESL 2: • The average score for the combined reading, vocabulary, and grammar

portions of the assessment was 74%. • The lowest overall score was in the grammar section, with only 54% total

students passing with a “C” or higher.

ESL 3: • In reading 74% scored a “C” or higher. In discreet skills, student mastery

of vocabulary was the strongest, with an 88% average. Reading comprehension was not as strong, with a 67% average overall.

• In writing, 74% total students passing with a grade of “C” or higher. • In grammar, 60% scored at a 70% or higher. Although the average score

was 65%, the simple past sections along with the simple present and adverbs of frequency tied for the lowest average, 55%.

ESL 15: • 15 out of 16 students passed with a score of 70% or better. • Students were generally successful in all sections of the exam.


5 Discussion of Assessment Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

The results indicate that lower level students in our program are strongest in speaking and listening skills. Grammar, reading, and writing proved more difficult. Several challenges were identified during the SLOs assessment process. First, the fact that we have many literacy students makes covering the necessary course material difficult in ESL 001. Adding ESL 090 has helped this situation somewhat, but there is still the issue of under prepared students. Secondly, the transition from ESL 001 to 002 needs improvement. While the majority of ESL 001 students met the course SLOs, this was not the case with ESL 002. The material, especially in terms of grammar and writing, is much more difficult and even successful 001students may still not be prepared for the level of difficulty they face in 002. They especially struggle with the concept of present progressive and simple present tense in grammar. The SLO results for ESL 003 further demonstrate this fact. Students performed the worst in grammar, and specifically had trouble with simple present tenses as well as simple past, which is a main outcome for ESL 003 grammar.

6 Recommended Changes & Plans for Implementation of Improvements

• Teachers of different levels need to coordinate more closely to establish a

clearer progression from level to level especially in terms of grammar and writing.

• Grammar objectives/outcomes need to be more clearly defined in each level. The courses should try to cover less but expect more mastery from students. For example, in Level 3, gerunds and infinitives and direct and indirect objects will be removed so that more time can be spent on the simple present, present progressive, and the simple past verb tenses.

• There needs to be a minimum standard for exit from each ESL level. The continued course SLOs assessment and the collaboration the process promotes will help the ESL program to improve in this area.

•

7 Description or evidence of dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results

• Teachers of each level met several times throughout this process to develop

the assessments and discuss the results (see related CPAS documents). • Teachers discussed the SLO assessment results of these classes at several

faculty meetings. • In October 2010 at an ESL staff meeting, teachers met by level to discuss the

specific outcomes of each course. As a result, course SLO documents were revised. Valuable discussions took place regarding the importance of having clear articulation between the levels. Instructors felt that overall the SLOs were fairly accurate, but several key components of the SLOs were changed to improve articulation. For example, in Level 2, “the writing process” was changed to “introduction to the writing process.” Additionally, “basic paragraph components” was changed to “sentence components and paragraph building.” Furthermore, under grammar components, the simple past tense was changed to “introduction to the simple past tense.”

• This information was also included in the ESL program review in Spring 2011.






Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Madeline Medeiros, Karen Garza, Anthony Halderman, Amy Kayser Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______


X Program

□ Course

Demonstrate reading comprehension skills of intermediate or advanced texts.


The three ESL 4 teachers met to create a common reading exam. The criterion for success was defined as a score of 70% or higher.


• The first reading exam was administered in December 2009. A total of 44 students completed the exam.

• The revised reading exam was administered to the three Level 4 sections in fall 2010.


• In December ’09: 58% of the students scored a 70% or higher, 42% scored 69% or lower.

• In December ’10: 87 % of the students scored a 70% or higher, 13% scored 69% or lower.


5 Discussion of

Assessment Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

• The initial ESL 004 SLOs assessment results indicated that students were the weakest in the area of reading compared to writing and grammar. The transition from ESL 003 to 004 is especially challenging because 004 focuses more on academic reading skills. ESL 004 has incorporated more reading skills development in class including practice in the following areas: understanding vocabulary in context, using dictionaries, and identifying detail and main idea. Additionally, teachers reexamined the level of difficulty in test tasks in order to ensure an appropriate progression from 004 to 005. After instituting changes, 86% of the students achieved the reading learning outcome in fall 2010 in ESL 004 (compared to 58% the previous year).

• There is insufficient time in 6 hours each week to cover three skill areas appropriately in ESL 004.

• Teachers also discussed the fact that some classes were weaker than others. For example, some students seemed to be at a low Level 3 level, yet they were in Level 4. This affected the material covered in class and the final exam/SLO results.


• Teachers can continue to develop the following reading skills: vocabulary in context, dictionary skills, identifying detail and main idea. In addition, listening and video can be incorporated to supplement the reading material.

• The ESL division can consider working on Level 4 curriculum by separating the skill areas and adding more units to allow more coverage of skills. Students may not be making sufficient progress because there is not enough time and practice in each skill area.


• Level 4 teachers met several times to design the exam, discuss the results and the content of this report.

• The results and report were shared with ESL faculty at a monthly meeting.






Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Madeline Medeiros, Karen Garza, Anthony Halderman, Amy Kayser, Kati Wright, Regina Voge

Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______


X Program □ Course

Produce paragraphs that communicate ideas clearly.


ESL 4: Three teachers met to create a common writing exam. Teachers agreed upon a writing rubric. ESL 5: Two instructors collaborated on a writing exam for fall 2010 and again in spring 2011. ESL 6: Two instructors collaborated on a final essay prompt with the same grading rubric. The criterion for success was defined as a score of 70% or higher in all classes.


ESL 4 • The first writing exam was administered in December 2009. A total of 44

students completed the exam. • The revised writing exam was administered to the three Level 4 sections in

spring 2010. ESL 5 • The first writing exam was administered in fall ’10 to 24 students. • The revised exam was administered in spring ’11 to 34 students. ESL 6 • The first writing exam was administered to two sections of ESL 6A in

December of 2008 to 22 students. • The revised exam was administered to two sections of ESL 6A in spring 2010

to 26 students.



ESL 4 • In December ’09: 77% of the students scored a 70% or higher, 23% scored

69% or lower. • In spring’10: 81% of the students scored a 70% or higher, 19% scored 69% or

lower. ESL 5 • Fall ’10: 19 out of 24 passed • Spring ’11: 30 out of 34 passed ESL 6 • In fall ’08: 16/22 students passed the exam with a grade of 70% or higher. • In spring ‘10: 20/26 passed the exam with a grade of 70% or higher.


• The writing outcomes for Level 3 and 4 are very similar. • Students’ writing strength includes content/ideas and organization. • Students are weakest in grammar, especially verb tense usage and vocabulary. • Students need more verb tense review time in the class. • Students need to know more specifically what is expected of them in each

writing assignment so as to be more successful. • More in-class time is needed to focus on specific writing issues which arise

with each writing assignment. • There is inadequate time to focus on writing in current 6 unit format in ESL 4

and 5.


• The writing outcomes for Level 3 and 4 need to be distinguished. Level 3 could focus more on communicative type of writing, and Level 4 could be an introduction to academic writing.

• Teachers need to concentrate more on language accuracy in teaching/grading

• Support for the curriculum change which will begin in fall 2012 semester to remove much of the reading component from ESL 5 and place it in a separate course (ESL 045). This will allow more time to focus on writing in class.

• The ESL division can consider working on Level 4 curriculum by separating the skill areas and adding more units to allow more coverage of skills like ESL 5 and 6. Students may not be making sufficient progress because there is not enough time and practice in each skill area.


• Teachers met several times by level to design the exams, discuss the results and the content of related CPAS documents.

• The results and related CPAS reports were shared with ESL faculty at a monthly meeting.


Course or Program Assessment Summary .




Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Madeline Medeiros, Karen Garza, Amy Kayser, Donna Bower Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______


X Program

□ Course

Demonstrate aural/oral competence in social and/or academic interactions.


• ESL 25: Two teachers collaborated on a listening and speaking test and rubric. • ESL 35: Two teachers collaborated on a listening and oral presentation test

and rubric. • The criterion for success was defined as a score of 70% or higher in both

classes.


ESL 25: • In spring ’09: 30 students completed the exam. • In fall ’09: 22 students completed the exam. • In both semesters, the exam was administered to two sections of ESL 25. ESL 35: • In spring ’10: two sections of ESL 35 completed the test, 29 students took

listening; 28 took speaking. • Students were retested in spring ’11 (see CPAS document).



ESL 25: Spring ’09 results:

• 27 students out of 30 (i.e., 90%) passed the speaking test with a score of 70% or better.

• 24 students out of 30 (i.e., 80%) passed the listening test with a score of 70% or better.

Fall ’09 results: • 22 students out of 22 (i.e., 100%) passed the speaking test with a score of

70% or better. • 17 students out of 22 (i.e., 77%) passed the listening test with a score of

70% or better. ESL 35: Spring ’10 results:

• 18/29 students (62%) received a grade of 70% or higher on the listening assessment.

• 19/28 students (67%) received a grade of 70% or higher on the oral presentation.

• Students were retested in spring ’11 (see CPAS document). 5 Discussion of

Assessment Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

• Intermediate listening and speaking skills are strengthened - the vast majority met this outcome in ESL 25.

• Students do particularly well communicating in social situations (ESL 25 focus).

• In advanced listening, students seem to struggle with the sustained listening. • There is a large difference in the number of students who met the ESL 25

SLOs vs. ESL 35 in both speaking and listening. There can be a better transition from ESL 025 to ESL 035. ESL 25 may not be challenging enough.


• These courses are difficult in the present 2 unit format. The 50 minute classes seem inadequate to cover the necessary material. If the class could be taught as a 3-unit class with students meeting for one hour and twenty minutes twice a week, the material could undoubtedly be covered more adequately.

• ESL 25 needs to be more aligned with ESL 35. As per the ESL 035 instructors’ suggestion from the first shared SLOA in spring 2010, ESL 025 instructors have adopted a new textbook that incorporates more sustained listening. The new book is more challenging and should prepare students better for ESL 35.

• Classes can focus on developing students’ note-taking skills 7 Description or

evidence of dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results


• ESL 25 and 35 teachers met to discuss the transition from 25 to 35. • The results and related CPAS reports were shared with ESL faculty at a

monthly meeting.






Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Madeline Medeiros, Karen Garza, Amy Kayser, Donna Bower Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______


X Program

□ Course

Recognize and use intermediate or advanced grammatical structures.


Three ESL 4 teachers met to create a common grammar exam. The criterion for success was defined as a score of 70% or higher.


The first exam was administered in December 2009. A total of 44 students completed the exam. The revised exam was administered to the three Level 4 sections in spring 2010.



Fall ’09 results: 68% of the students scored a 70% or higher, 32% scored 69% or lower. Spring ’10 results: 61% of the students scored a 70% or higher, 39% scored 69% or lower.


• Students had the most difficulty with present perfect questions and past progressive. Simple present/present progressive, simple past and future are all review of material presented in Level 3.

• Several students did not seem to be prepared to take Level 4, and that could account for the large number of failures in spring ‘10. ESL 004 SLO assessment showed that many students struggle with tenses they should have already mastered. There are problems with accuracy in producing the forms as well as usage.

• After comparing Level 3 and Level 4 final grammar assessments, these concerns were discussed: o The assessments seem very similar in both content and level. o Level 3 and Level 4 need to coordinate more closely. There needs to be a

clearer progression from Level 3 to Level 4. 6 Recommended

Changes & Plans for Implementation of Improvements

• For all levels in the ESL program, students should be required to demonstrate proficiency so that they are prepared for more complicated material in the next level.

• Level 3 and Level 4 need to distinguish their curriculum. For example: o Level 3 can focus on basic tenses and forms e.g., simple

present/present progressive and simple past. The focus can be on mastery/competency. If other tenses/structures are introduced, they don’t need to be a main focus of the final assessment.

o Level 4 can review the basic tenses (i.e., simple present/present progressive and simple past), but the focus can be on past progressive vs. simple past, future tense and time clauses, and present perfect.

• ESL 5 and 6A can focus on grammar in their next SLOAs to compare to the results of ESL 4.



• The results and related CPAS reports were shared with ESL faculty at a monthly meeting.


Curriculum:

In fall 2012, we began revising our curriculum to accelerate our more advanced courses and to change the skill focus to reading and writing as opposed to writing and grammar in ESL 005 and ESL 006 or integrated skills in ESL 003 and ESL 004. Using models that were observed at the Strengthening Student Success Conference in October 2012, the division agreed to increase reading instruction and to more effectively integrate reading and writing instruction. These curricular revisions were submitted by the February 10, 2013 deadline and were approved in time for the classes to be in place for fall 2013. ESL faculty revised ESL 003 and ESL 004, which focused on reading, writing, and grammar, and they developed one course, ESL 053, which focuses only on intermediate reading and writing skills. We also developed a separate grammar course, ESL 043, for students at this intermediate level. Faculty also revised ESL 005 and ESL 006, which focused on writing and grammar skills, and developed a new course, ESL 054, which focuses on high-intermediate reading and writing skills. They also developed a new grammar class, ESL 044, for students at this high-intermediate level. The new curriculum also includes ESL 099E, an advanced reading and writing course, which is the equivalent of English 099, but is designed specifically for second language learners. In fall 2013, ESL faculty began teaching this new curriculum at all Cuesta sites.


English as a Second Language Program Sequence

CSS 058 2.0 units

ESL 044 3.0 units

ESL 043 3.0 units

____

____

GRAMMAR

ENGL 156 4.0 units

ESL 099E 6.0 units

ESL 054 6.0 units

ESL 053 6.0 units

ESL 002 6.0 units

ESL 001 6.0 units

READING/WRITING CONVERSATION

____

ESL 015 A, B, C 2.0 units




STUDENT DEVELOPMENT AND SUCCESS DIVISION COURSES FOR COLLEGE SUCCESS The courses below are designed to prepare students to succeed in college-level coursework. Research indicates that completing these courses will improve your grades.

Subject English as a Second Language (ESL)

Pre-Collegiate/College Success

AA/AS Applicable

READING ESL 001 Beginning ESL 002 High Beginning ESL 053 Intermediate ESL 054 High Intermediate ESL 099E Advanced

CSS 034 Building Reading Essentials (inactive) CSS 005 College Success Lab CSS 036 Reading Essentials

ENGL 156 College Reading & Writing CSS 121 Strategic Textbook Study (inactive)

WRITING ESL 001 Beginning ESL 002 High Beginning ESL 053 Intermediate ESL 054 High Intermediate ESL 099E Advanced

ENGL 099 Basic Reading & Writing CSS 005 College Success Lab

ENGL 156 College Reading & Writing ENGL 201A **English Composition

GRAMMAR ESL 043 Intermediate ESL 044 High Intermediate

CSS 058 Grammar Essentials

CONVERSATION

ESL 015A (B,C) * ESL 025A (B,C) * ESL 035A (B,C) *

SPELLING CSS 005 College Success Lab

CSS 055 Spelling Essentials (inactive)

MATH

CSS 005 College Success Lab MATH 003 Arithmetic MATH 007 Pre-Algebra MATH 008 Into to Factoring (NC only) MATH 021 Two-Semester Elementary Algebra- Part I MATH 122 Two-Semester Elementary Algebra- Part II

MATH 114 Word Problems (NC only) MATH 123 Elementary Algebra MATH 126A Two-Semester Intermediate Algebra Part I MATH 126B Two-Semester Intermediate Algebra Part II MATH 127 Intermediate Algebra MATH 128 Applied Algebra

COMPUTER ESL Support Lab CSS 005 College Success Lab

STUDYING

ESL Support Lab

CSS 005 College Success Lab

CSS 120 Learning Essentials for College CSS 217 Supplemental Instruction (SI) CSS 225 **College Success

ALL SUBJECTS ESL Support Lab CSS 005 College Success Lab CSS 227**Test & Performance Anxiety (inactive) * ESL - A/Fall, B/Spring, C/Summer **These courses are transferable to CSU/UC Revised November 21, 2013


Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments

In fall 2012, all ESL courses had completed a full cycle of assessment, analysis and improvements, implementation, and a post-implementation assessment. Additionally, in fall 2012, all CPAS forms were submitted for each course. This process continues to help the program maintain a clear pedagogical focus and course sequencing standards. We feel this process has also been instrumental in our recent increase in student success rates. To begin a new cycle of assessment and improvement, instructors at adjacent levels have begun collaborating in an effort to better align and articulate outcomes in sequential courses. In fall 2012, the ESL 003 and ESL 004 instructors began this process. In spring 2013, these two groups continued to collaborate. Also, in spring 2013, ESL 006 instructors began collaborating on instruction and Student Learning Outcomes as part of Strategic Objective 1.4. In fall 2013, ESL 002 and ESL 015 instructors began working to better align the Student Learning Outcomes and the course curriculum for these two courses. Additionally, in fall 2013, the ESL 099E instructors collaborated on the curriculum and design of this new course and worked together to develop shared assessments, which included common final exams in both reading and writing. In spring 2014, the ESL 054 and ESL 035 instructors will begin collaborating on Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments for these two courses. Below are the course-level CPAS documents that have been completed since the last APPW:


Course or Program Assessment Summary Division: Student Development and Success Program: English as a Second Language Dates: 10/4/13, 11/01/13, 12/6/13, 2/7/14 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: ESL 002

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Becca Sciocchetti, Margaret Lima, Melinda Weaver, Regina Voge, (Lucy Conklin 2/7/14)

Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program X Course

The ESL 02 SLO we chose for our focus as the area of greatest need/where are our students struggle with mastery:

Recognize and use high-beginning grammatical structures and verb tenses; our focus will be the simple present question and negative form, including the be verb and do-don’t/does-doesn’t for other verbs. We unanimously decided this is the most difficult concept for our ESL 2 students to master, and we all feel that we need to improve our instruction of these question and negative forms.


The ESL 2 instructors decided to use pages 1 and 2 of our final exam as the shared portion of our assessment. The first page is simple present tense; the second page assesses the simple present Wh- questions. Both pages measure both affirmative and negative statements.


Four instructors administered the final exam during final exam week, December 2013. Class sizes ranged from 11 to 20 students. Instructors were told to average class scores for pages 1 and 2 of the final exam (simple present tense). A total of 77 students were assessed.


Page 1 scores ranged from 72-84% with a total weighted average of 76.8%. Page 2 (wh- and yes/no questions) scores ranged from 70.5% to 86%, a total weighted average of 77.7%. Both pages combined average was 77.25%. For both sections, all classes were at mastery (70%) or higher. This total was also much higher than the 63% average of the SLOA from 2009, which measured the same simple present verb tense.


Level 2 instructors felt that the assessment procedure went smoothly, in part due to the time we spent together agreeing upon the elements to include in the assessment. Results were delivered in January. There was no previous improvement plan as this is the first assessment within this cycle.



• ESL 2 instructors agreed to shoot for the goal of our students scoring at a 79% average on the simple present tense at the end of next semester, moving the average up 1.75% from 77.25% this term.

• The four instructors have adopted Grammar in Context Basic, taking the place of the Focus on Grammar 2A text beginning Spring 2014 semester. Level 3 instructors have seen remarkable improvement in their students’ grammar mastery after switching to the Grammar in Context series.

• The instructors plan to include more comprehensive, collaborative review before administering the shared assessment. Two review activities were shared at the 2/07/14 meeting.

• Instructors plan to use more kinesthetic and collaborative approaches in each lesson, and plan to meet monthly in mini-pedagogical retreats to share these lessons (three were shared from four different instructors at the meeting 2/7/14).


ESL 2 Instructors collaborated in planning the portions of the shared assessment, text section, pedagogy, analysis of assessment results, and plans for changes and instructional improvement on 10/4/13, 11/01/13, 12/6/13, and 2/7/14, for a total of eight hours on the SLO Campus in room 3435.


Course or Program Assessment Summary x

Division: Student Development and Success Program: ESL Date: 2/19/2013

Courses in program, or course: ESL 003 and ESL 004

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Amy Kayser, Lucy Conklin, Nancy Seiler, Alicia Moretti, Barbara Hawkins, Kathy Myers, Karen Garza

Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes_X_ No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program XCourse

ESL Level 3: Recognize and use low-intermediate grammatical structures. ESL Level 4: Recognize and use intermediate grammatical structures. Note: This is only one out of three outcomes for each course. We wanted to focus on the grammar outcome and discuss results across the levels.


In September 2012, five Level 3 and 4 instructors met to discuss SLO assessment. Teachers of both levels agreed to give a shared final grammar exam to assess how students are achieving the grammar outcome for Levels 3 and 4.


ESL Level 3: 49 students took a common grammar final exam in December 2012. One class in SLO and two sections in NCC participated. ESL Level 4: 34 students took a common grammar final exam in December 2012. One class in SLO and two sections in NCC participated. All exams were administered by participating ESL teachers.


Level 3 Grammar Exam Results

Class Average Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Entire Grammar Test 68% 73% 86% A- D: Simple present 78% 77% 83% E-F: Present Continuous 63% 71% 72% G-K: Future 71% N/A 90% L-Q: Simple Past 64% 66% 78%

http://academic.cuesta.edu/sloa/docs/Course_and_Program_Assessment_Summary_F_2011.docx


Level 4 Grammar Exam Results

Class Average Class 1 Class 2 Class 3 Entire Grammar Test 86% 76% 75% Part 1: Simple past and progressive 85% 71% 69% Part 2: Future 87% 83% 78% Part 3: Present perfect 85% 75% 76%


Teachers discussed the fact that students scored lowest on the simple past section in Level 3, which is a major objective of the course. One reason could be because the editing task in this section is challenging for students. Also, in Level 4, the simple past and past continuous section results were low. On the other hand, students performed well in the future section in both Levels. We discussed the fact that students performed better on the discrete items on the test. For example, they can memorize simple past verb forms. However, when they are asked to apply their knowledge, they have difficulty. This was evident in the Level 3 editing exercise as well as in the Level 4 writing final. In both sections that reported writing exam results, students scored the lowest on grammar and structure and mechanics compared to other categories such as content and organization. Overall, students appear to be meeting the grammar outcome better than in the last SLO assessment. However, the repetition between the levels with lack of student mastery is still problematic. For example, present progressive and simple past are taught in both levels, yet results for these sections do not indicate strong student mastery of the concepts.


The new curriculum merges the current ESL 003 and ESL 004 into a new class, ESL 053: Intermediate Reading and Writing. In addition, there is a 3 unit grammar class, ESL 043: Intermediate Grammar, which will focus on instruction in present, past, and future tenses. This will help to eliminate the repetition that currently exists in our curriculum and focus on mastery of the material. In terms of the new reading and writing course, teachers agreed that we could provide more writing assignments that require students to use the simple past. Also, more in-class writing can be added and a writing journal for fluency. Finally, teachers discussed comparing rubrics in a future meeting to establish clear guidelines about expectations.


Five ESL teachers met on 9/14/12 (see attached meeting minutes) to plan the assessment. Four ESL teachers met on 2/8/13 to discuss the results and implications for our new curriculum. The meeting dates, minutes, and SLO results were shared with all fall 2012 ESL 3 and 4 teachers via email.


Course or Program Assessment Summary Draft Update

Division: Student Development and Success Program: ESL Date: Summer and Fall 2013 Course, or courses required in program: ESL 006, Writing and Grammar / ESL 099E, Advanced Reading and Writing Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: ESL 006: Madeline Medeiros and Alicia Moretti; ESL 099E: Madeline Medeiros and Jessica Michelsen Course to program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes X No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program x Course (ESL 006/099E)

1. Produce rhetorically effective texts using clear and accurate vocabulary and advanced grammatical structures. 2. Recognize and use advanced grammatical structures.


In spring 2013, the two ESL 006 instructors, Madeline Medeiros and Alicia Moretti administered the following common assessments:

1. Direct Assessment: Multi-paragraph in-class, timed essay graded with a shared rubric, which assessed grammar and structure (30%), content and ideas (20%), word choice and vocabulary (20%), organization (15%), and mechanics (15%).

2. Student self-assessment pre- and post-surveys asking students to evaluate their writing and reading skills at the beginning of the semester and again at the end of the semester.


Final Essay Exam: The two instructors met mid-semester (April 1, 2013) to determine and develop a shared final exam and study guide. The instructors decided on appropriate rhetorical styles and topics for the final in-class, written and timed essay. They also agreed to the evaluation criteria on the rubric. The final essay was administered in both sections of ESL 006: 14 students in the North County and 16 students on the SLO Campus. The week after the instructors administered the final exam and scored the essays, they met to assess student compositions, the rubric that was used to evaluate the compositions, and to discuss skill areas in which students demonstrated a need for improvement. Each instructor read and reviewed several of the essays from the other instructor’s class (high, medium, and low-scoring) to cross check for grading consistency to ensure that grading was balanced and unbiased.


Student Self-Assessment Survey: Both instructors administered the student self-assessment pre-survey by the end of the second week of the semester and then again the week before the final exam was administered. Survey results were examined to determine if students’ perceptions of their reading and writing skills improved over the course of the semester. For both classes, there were slight increases in the students’ perceptions of their overall reading and writing skills. For example, in the pre-survey only 6% of students felt that they could write organized and developed compositions of one or more paragraphs “fairly well.” In the post-survey, 61% said responded “fairly well” to the same prompt. Likewise, in all other areas of the survey, a higher percentage of students responded either “fairly well” or “very well” in the post survey than they did in the pre-survey.

4 Assessment Results Summary (summarize Data/Statistical Reports)

Final Essay Exam: Both instructors agreed that an area of persistent weakness in student writing was the ability of students to consistently write complete, grammatically correct sentences. Both instructors agreed that students would benefit from more instruction in sentence concepts and correct sentence structure. This would include increased instruction in simple, compound, and complex sentences and practice in correcting fragment, comma splice, and run-on sentence errors. The instructors also agreed that another area of weakness in student writing was in word choice and vocabulary. Student writing demonstrated a persistent lack of knowledge of word choice, word forms, and/or word order. The instructors also agreed that student writing would benefit from more reading that included vocabulary development exercises and explicit instruction in vocabulary learning strategies.


The instructors agreed that the final writing assessment and procedures were appropriate and accurately measured students’ writing skills and abilities. Additionally, they felt the skill areas on the rubric were appropriately weighted. However, they agreed that there was some duplication in the areas of Grammar/Structure and Mechanics. To correct this, the evaluation of commas and periods will be removed from the Mechanics skill area and will be measured only in the Grammar/Structure skill area. When ESL 006 SLOAs were last evaluated in 2010, the instructors agreed to weight Grammar/Mechanics more heavily than the other skill areas and to make that a stronger focus of instruction. Both instructors that participated in this current SLO assessment agreed that Grammar/Mechanics need to remain a strong focus of future instruction as well. However, they also felt that more could be done in the area of vocabulary development.

While the survey was useful in determining student perceptions of their reading and writing skills, the instructors found that the direct assessment and the discussion of student skills and classroom instruction techniques was more useful in determining plans for improvement. However, the survey did show that, overall, students perceived their skills to be stronger at the end of the semester than at the beginning of the semester.



Beginning in fall 2013, the ESL program began offering a new curriculum at this level (three levels below transfer). The new course, ESL 054, has a much stronger focus on reading skills, vocabulary development, and grammar skills that are more relevant to composition writing (e.g. using correct sentence grammar and structure, including instruction in compound and complex sentences, and fragment, comma splice and run-on error correction). We feel that this new curriculum will better address many of the skill areas that ESL 006 students most needed to develop and improve. Additionally, a new ESL 099E course, which is the equivalent of English 099 (two levels below transfer), but designed specifically for ESL students, was also offered in fall 2013. This course has a much stronger focus on reading skills and vocabulary development. The textbook for this class is an academic ESL reading and writing textbook (Quest 3, Reading and Writing) with a focus on reading and writing strategies, the mechanics of writing and critical thinking strategies, which includes synthesizing, summarizing, and making inferences. We feel these skills will also help students in developing their vocabulary and writing skills. The two instructors who participated in the ESL 006 SLOA process agreed that grammar skills in this new class should also focus on sentence concepts and structure. The ESL 099E instructors will need to supplement the reading and writing textbook with additional sentence development and editing instruction. In Fall 2013, two instructors taught ESL 099E: Madeline Medeiros and Jessica Michelsen. The instructors collaborated in the design of this class throughout the semester and administered shared exams throughout the semester and shared final exams at the end of the semester, one exam focused on reading skills and the other was an essay writing exam.


ESL 006: Madeline Medeiros and Alicia Moretti met on April 1 in Room 3431 on the SLO Campus for one and a half hours and developed a shared final exam and agreed to criteria for assessing student writing. The instructors met again on May 28 at Starbucks, Los Osos for one and a half hours to discuss final exam results and to make plans for improvement. Faculty also administered student pre- and post-surveys in both of their classes. ESL 099E: In December 2013, Madeline Medeiros and Jessica Michelsen met to review the ESL 099E final writing exams. The instructors read and evaluated each other’s students’ exams to determine student skills, the effectiveness of the writing prompt and the effectiveness of the rubric. The meeting provided an opportunity for the instructors to norm the student compositions, examine areas of strengths and weaknesses in student writing, and to determine instructional improvements for future semesters in this course.



Division: Student Development and Success Program: English as a Second Language Date: 10/25/13, 2/18/14 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: ESL 015

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Lucy Conklin, Nancy Seiler, Donna Bower

Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program X Course

In general, ESL 015 course assessments have both a written and an oral component. It was agreed upon that the latter would be the focus of this current analysis with regard to the course student learning outcome: Demonstrate the ability to participate in familiar and controlled social situations.


In October of 2013, it was decided that instructors would ask similar types of questions on the final exam which would reflect what was covered during the entire semester. In other words, the oral part of the exam would be comprehensive in nature. Even though the two classes which participated in this study were using different textbooks—A Conversation Book 1 and Side By Side Book 1—a consensus was reached as to what types of questions would be asked in order to require the same listening comprehension and to generate the same or similar responses in terms of grammatical structures and vocabulary usage. Students would demonstrate the ability to use the simple present and present progressive, as well as answer questions involving what, where, when, how many, and how often. The criteria for the rubric was understands question, uses targeted grammatical structures and vocabulary, uses clear pronunciation, and demonstrates fluency.


Two instructors—one from the NC campus and one from the SLO campus, administered the final exam in December. One class consisted of 9 students and the other 11 for a total of 20 students being assessed. The class scores were averaged only for those parts of the oral exam that were the same or similar for both classes.


The SLO ESL 15 class averaged 83.7% and the NC class averaged 70.9% for a total weighted average of 77.3%.


The difference between the class averages could reflect a difference in the student populations at the respective campuses. The NC instructor did identify at least 3 out of the 11 students as being “Level 1” students. Even though ESL 015 is designed for ESL 002 students, occasionally ESL 001 students also enroll (or self-place) in the course.



A change that has begun this semester is the use of the same textbook—Side By Side Book 1—in SLO and NC ESL 015 classes. This will help facilitate the aligning of skills mastery and the assessing of the intended outcome. There will be more discussion among faculty aimed at the consistent use of standardized rubrics and like items in the oral assessment. The discussion will also involve the inclusion of items which have students asking questions and not just answering them. We will continue to refine the discussion about the weighting of the oral component versus the written component of exams so as to have more uniformity in assessment among the ESL 15 classes. Instructors will continue to work on assessing and advising students during the first week of class to ensure the proper placement of students in order to avoid having the “Level 1” or underprepared student prematurely entering ESL 15. There have been and will continue to be more discussions about meshing ESL 15 and ESL 2 so that these two courses, which are aligned on our flow charts, can enhance the language and the learning of each other.


Participants met in October of 2013 to agree on the above assessment plan and ESL 15 instructors will be meeting to accomplish the plans for implementation of improvements in time for next semester’s actual implementation.


The following budget requests are directly related to our Student Learning Outcomes and Assessment results and have been identified in our Unit Plan: Replacement Computers: The Learning Resource Center in the North County currently provides a computer classroom, N3431, with new computers where ESL instructors can take students during regularly scheduled class times. In SLO, ESL shares the 3411 and 6103 computer classrooms with English and Languages and Communications. While the computers in 3411 were replaced for fall 2013, the computers in 6103 still need to be replaced as they are old and slow and frequently malfunction. ESL Readers: With the Department’s new reading and writing curriculum in place, our classes will need to add to its library of adapted as well as non-adapted readers. Our new curriculum is designed to accelerate student learning primarily by increasing critical reading, thinking, and writing skills. So to help students afford the cost of all of their textbooks and to ensure that all students have access to the required course reading materials, the Department will need to purchases new sets for the reading and writing courses at all three of our sites as well as additional ESL readers for our students to be able to check out from the library. Dictionaries: While many of our students use their electronic devices to look up words, many of our students still prefer to use a traditional dictionary, which often give more complete and sometimes more accurate definitions and word information. Also, many instructors do not allow electronic devices during in-class writing assessments, but students can use traditional dictionaries. As a result, the Department would like to purchase a number of Longman Dictionaries of American English that our high-intermediate students can in turn buy at a discounted price. The Longman Dictionary is often listed as a recommended textbook on many instructors’ textbook requisitions. Having greater access to a good a dictionary and learning to effectively use a dictionary will allow more of our students to improve both their reading and writing skills. Upgrades to ESL Language Lab Software: Computer labs at all sites need updated ESL software. The two primary ESL software programs that we currently use, English Discoveries and Focus on Grammar, have newer and better web-based versions that require annual site-license fees. Also, because the software is dated, it often does not run properly on our current operating systems. For example, the software runs slowly and students frequently have problems logging on and using the programs. It will be imperative to modernize our software so that we can continue to offer a quality computer-assisted instruction to our students. Restoration of Funding for Professional Development: ESL instructors need to stay current in this very specialized discipline. Funding for professional development is necessary for allowing faculty to participate in trainings and attend conferences and workshops. In recent years, professional development funding has become very limited or non-existent. However, it is critical that we give our instructors ample opportunities for professional growth and development. Providing adequate support for professional development opportunities is one of the College’s Core Principles and therefore should become a priority of the College. As part of Cuesta’s Strategic Plan and Institutional Objective 1.4, ESL needs to increase student success rates by 2% annually. Ensuring that our faculty remain current and have continual access to professional training will help us meet this objective.

34 | S a n L u i s O b i s p o C o u n t y C o m m u n i t y C o l l e g e D i s t r i c t I n s t i t u t i o n a l P r o g r a m P l a n n i n g a n d R e v i e w D o c u m e n t 2 0 1 4 - 2 0 1 5

Equitable Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments Compensation for Part-time Faculty: Part-time faculty are still not equitably compensated for all the work they have done and continue to do on our Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments. While the College has approved a maximum of one and a half hours of compensation for part-time faculty per each semester, this is not equitable pay. Student Learning Outcomes and Assessments are a key component of our accreditation, and our part-time faculty are doing much of the work without pay at this time. Therefore, it is imperative that they be compensated fully for their work.

Program Outcome Courses/Assessment

1. Develop basic competence in reading,

writing, listening, and speaking in order to pursue further study.

ESL 001, 002, and/or 015 discussion of SLO assessment

2. Demonstrate reading comprehension skills of intermediate or advanced texts.

ESL 053, 054, and 099E discussion of SLO reading assessment

3. Produce paragraphs that communicate ideas clearly.

ESL 053, 054, and/or 099E discussion of writing SLO assessment

4. Demonstrate aural/oral competence in social and/or academic interactions. ESL 025 or 035 discussion of SLO assessment

5. Recognize and use intermediate or advanced grammatical structures.

ESL 043 and 044 discussion of grammar SLO assessment

V. Program Development/Forecasting for the Next Academic Year:

The ESL Department plans to continue to provide a full range of classes in our program for second-language individuals in the community at both our North County and SLO Campuses. However, in recent years, we have had to eliminate some courses in the South County due to declining enrollments in that region. At the same time, we added sections of some of our courses to the North County, where we saw some growth and have had strong fill rates. In the North County, it appears that for now, our enrollments have stabilized and while we have not seen growth, we also have not had to eliminate any course sections. The San Luis Obispo Campus enrollments have not seen significant change in the past year, with numbers somewhat below our maximum fill rates but still above 85% overall.

The most recent Census data indicated that the highest growth rate in the County is occurring in the North County. Because of this, it is likely that our program will continue to see higher fill rates at that site. We may also expect to see our enrollments in SLO and AG remain flat or even


continue to decrease. If Cuesta is able to establish a permanent center in the South County, this could perhaps help us to increase our enrollments and fill rates in that region.

In fall 2012, we deactivated our ESL 090, literacy course and we collaborated with the non-credit ESL program, which agreed to offer a non-credit literacy class, ESL 701, at the North County Center. At our August 2012 assessment in the North County, we assessed, advised, and placed 22 students into ESL 701 with the intention that these students would then matriculate into the credit program. However, ESL 701 only had a 64% retention rate and 0% success rate in fall 2012. Therefore, none of the students transitioned to the credit program. This is an area that will require research and planning to determine how we can best serve these beginning-level students and ensure that they have every opportunity to pursue credit and college-level courses, certificates, and/or degrees.

Based on our SLOA data analysis, instructors still feel that it would be beneficial for our students to increase our conversation class contact hours from two hours per week to three hours per week. According to student surveys from our Program Review, a majority of our students chose conversation as the skill they most wanted to develop. However, due to budgetary shortfalls, we have not been able to increase course units. Additionally, since all of our classes are offered only the evening, it may be difficult for many of our students to increase their weekly contact hours since the majority of them work full time during the day.

In fall 2013, we began offering our new 6-unit upper-level reading and writing courses at both the SLO and NC sites along with our new 3-unit grammar courses. The new curriculum also includes ESL 099E, Advanced Reading and Writing, which is the equivalent of English 099, and which prepares ESL students for English 156. We feel this course will help our student’s transition to and be successful in college-level certificate and degree programs. Due to low enrollments, in fall 2013, we did not offer any ESL language labs.

In the South County, we offered a much reduced schedule. At this time, our plan is to continue offering only ESL 001, ESL 002, and ESL 053, which is our new intermediate reading and writing class, along with ESL 043, the intermediate grammar class. We will also continue to offer one beginning level conversation class, ESL 015.

• Levels or delivery of support services

In spring 2013, the ESL department and Academic Skills (non-DSPS courses) joined forces and began working under one new division, Student Development and Success (SDS). At the same time, SDS was assigned a new division assistant at 40% or 16 hours per week, which was a tremendous help since we did not have an assistant in fall 2012. In fall 2013, the SDS division assistant, Kathy DeCou retired and was replaced by Carolyn Lorimer, who then provided support to our division at 50%, or 20 hours per week. This increase in support from fall 2012 will undoubtedly help both departments; ESL and College Success Students (formerly Academic Skills) become more effective by allowing us to focus on instruction, curriculum and program development. The ESL department continues to feel the need for improved outreach/recruitment in the South County. In future years, as the economy improves and the potential for growth increases, we anticipate the need for an additional Outreach Recruitment and Retention Specialist, one who


can focus solely on building our South County program. Currently, the North County has its own specialist and one other specialist is responsible for both the SLO and South County Center. We feel that our ESL program could demonstrate improved growth, matriculation, and retention in both SLO and the South County with an additional Outreach Recruitment and Retention Specialist who can focus on the South County. The nature of the ESL population drives the funding required to maintain our program. Lack of English skills is just one of several barriers. Unfamiliarity with educational institutions, especially in the U.S., makes applying, registering, accessing financial aid, and being a student challenging each step of the way. Additionally, our courses are offered almost exclusively in the evening and this presents us with certain unique challenges and needs. Currently, our program depends on two categorical funding sources to ensure the functionality of our program: the Basic Skills Initiative and Matriculation dollars. The ESL Department currently relies on Basic Skills Initiative money to fund our retention assistants. The assistants provide much needed evening hour support for our students. The retention assistants are often the first line of support for new students. They assist students in the application and registration processes and once students are enrolled, they help retain students by calling students that miss classes, and they provide counseling for students who may be struggling to stay in school. Our current overall retention rates are at 86.7%. We requested funding for retention assistants for all three of our sites for the 2013-2014 academic year, but this funding is not guaranteed from year to year, and we will have to request additional funding for 2014-2015. Funding for these employees needs to be institutionalized and paid for through the general fund because BSI dollars are not guaranteed every year. In addition to the BSI funding, Student Support and Success Program (3SP, formerly Matriculation) dollars allow us to hire testing staff for each of our three sites. Beginning in spring 2014, ESL changed its assessment instrument and procedures. In fall 2013, we began to pilot the ESL Accuplacer test, and by the end of the semester, we had established cut scores for our courses and began to use the test in December 2013. The assessment test is the first step in becoming a “fully matriculated student” and it is important that we provide adequate access to assessment for all our students. Because Cuesta’s assessment office only has two full-time assessment technicians, and because only one of them is bilingual, we still desperately need to maintain a number of our bilingual assessment staff. Additionally, ESL offers courses at all three sites, San Luis Obispo, the North County, and Arroyo Grande, but with only two full-time assessment staff, it is difficult to ensure that we will have adequate assessment access at all sites. Five to six hourly bilingual testers have traditionally helped us administer our assessment test. These same bilingual individuals will be critical in helping our program successfully use the new Accuplacer test as well. The testing staff are able to help individuals who need Spanish translations when they come in to take the assessment test. Furthermore, since all of our ESL classes are currently only offered in the evenings, we also need to make sure that there are adequate test dates offered in the evening hours at all three of our sites. It is imperative for the success of the ESL program that these positions be retained. Matriculation monies have been


greatly reduced in recent semesters, and this has impacted the amount of assessments we can provide for new students as well as the number of staff we can hire for each assessment. Funding for tutoring has been reduced dramatically in recent years. Currently, tutoring services are extremely limited or non-existent in some areas. ESL students need more access to out-of-class support services. While we are no longer offering our ESL language/support labs, ESL faculty are still working in the Writing Center, but the number of hours we can spend there is quite limited. We still need to make sure we have bilingual tutors who work later hours in the Student Success Centers and provide this important support services to our students. At this time, Basic Skills Initiative funding pays for tutors to work in the labs on the SLO Campus and at the North County. However, BSI funding is not guaranteed from year to year, and we will have to request additional funding for 2012-2013. While ESL received $5,000 for ESL tutoring support from a Wells Fargo Grant this past semester, we need help in recruiting, hiring and training qualified and reliable tutors for the Student Success Centers. Because we are an evening program, our students are most likely to seek help in the evening hours when they come to campus to attend their classes. Evening student support services are very limited and at times non-existent on the San Luis Obispo Campus. Additional funding for evening services staff in Admissions and Records, Financial Aid, Counseling, Health Center, Cashier’s Office, ASCC, the bookstore and the cafeteria would help make our SLO Campus more inviting and user-friendly for our ESL students as well as other evening students. This support could also help us increase enrollments and improve success and retention. As the economy continues to improve and the College finds that it is able to support increased FTES, increased evening and bilingual support services will become more critical for improving our student access, success, retention, and persistence. For the past several years, the ESL Department has received Foundation Grant money, which has helped our students to purchase their textbooks. For 2013-2014, we received $2,000 for textbook support. ESL students are typically the most needy and vulnerable students at Cuesta College. Because textbooks are so expensive, the costs often prevent our students from registering for classes. These funds have allowed us to help many of our neediest students continue their language studies. For academic year 2013-2014, we also again received Foundation Grant money ($1,500) to help students pay for their fees. With this funding, and we helped several students by a paying a portion of their tuition. We plan to apply for this funding again for the next academic year because as student fees have been steadily increasing, the cost of attending a community college is becoming prohibitive for many of our students.

• Facilities changes South County: It is very difficult for faculty in the South County Center to operate without proper facilities and equipment. They need offices to complete lesson plans, store materials, and meet with students. In addition, the South County Center needs appropriate classroom technology (e.g. computers, data projectors, A/V systems) so that students are able to receive equitable instruction.


Furthermore, the retention assistant for the South County Center does not have a regular office to work in with a computer, telephone, and storage space. The South County retention assistant is only able to use a small office provided for Cuesta counselors only when the counselors are not occupying the office. Otherwise they do no do not have a location from which to make confidential phone calls to students or to work on data entry. Testers and outreach staff have observed that ESL loses many prospective students because they cannot find the assessment sites as there are not enough signs or lighting for the students to find the testing location at the Arroyo Grande campus. San Luis Obispo Campus: ESL currently shares the 3411 and 6103 computer classrooms in San Luis Obispo with English and Languages and Communications, but we do not have first call for these classrooms, and they are sometimes occupied by English classes during the times that we need to take our students into the lab. Additionally, while the computers in 3411 were replaced this past year, the computers in 6103 are very old and do not work well making it virtually impossible to use this computer classroom at all.

• Staffing projections ESL has still not replaced the full-time faculty member who retired in December 2010 as part of the Separation Incentive Package. Therefore, the need remains for another full-time faculty member as it becomes more difficult to staff all classes and remain within the Peralta guidelines. The ESL program only has four full-time faculty members, but we have 18 part-time faculty. For fall 2012, we hired two new part-time faculty, and for spring 2013 we had to hire two additional part-time faculty members. In fall 2013, we again hired one more part-time faculty member. In order to maintain the integrity of our program and in order for our Department to be adequately represented at the college level through participatory governance, we will need at least one additional full-time instructor to replace our retiree. The ESL Department feels the need for improved outreach/recruitment in the South County. In future years, as the economy improves and the potential for growth increases, we anticipate the need for an additional Outreach Recruitment and Retention Specialist, one who can focus solely on building our South County program. Currently, the North County has its own specialist and one other specialist is responsible for both the SLO and South County Center. We feel that our ESL program could demonstrate improved growth and matriculation in both SLO and the South County with an additional Outreach Recruitment and Retention Specialist who can focus on the South County.

ESL currently relies on Basic Skills Initiative money to fund our retention assistants. The assistants provide much needed evening hour support for our students. The retention assistants are often the first line of support for new students. They assist students in the application and registration processes and once students are enrolled, they help retain students by calling students that miss classes, and they provide counseling for students who may be struggling to


stay in school. Funding for these employees needs to be institutionalized and paid for through the general fund because BSI dollars are not guaranteed every year. ESL currently has five fully bilingual hourly assessment testers to serve all three sites. It is imperative for the success of the ESL program that these positions be retained especially as we begin using our new assessment tool, ESL Accuplacer. Only one of the College’s assessment testers is bilingual and with only two full-time assessment staff, it is difficult to provide adequate assessment access at all three of Cuesta’s sites during evening hours. Because we are an evening program, our students are most likely to seek help in the evening hours when they come to campus to attend their classes. Evening student support services are very limited and at times non-existent on the San Luis Obispo Campus. Additional funding for evening services staff in Admissions and Records, Financial Aid, Counseling, Health Center, Cashier’s Office, ASCC, the bookstore and the cafeteria would help make our SLO Campus more inviting and user-friendly for our ESL students. This support could also help us increase enrollments and improve retention. As the economy continues to improve and the College finds that it is able to support increased FTES, increased evening support services will become more critical for improving our student access and success.

• Strategies for responding to the predicted budget and FTES target for the next academic year

ESL raised its course caps from 20 to 24 in spring 2013. We did this in an effort to increase our efficiency rates and respond to the current budget. The College could assist us in increasing our overall FTES by increasing evening and bilingual/bicultural evening student support services. Increased evening student services, which include admissions, financial aid, and counseling, will help us attract and retain greater numbers of culturally and linguistically diverse students. It will also assist our students in completing certificate and degree programs at the College. We also need a consistent source of funding for outreach and marketing in the community. We began to implement our new curriculum in fall 2013. The new sequence of courses in our program will reduce the time it takes for a student to complete our program by one year. This acceleration model also helps us respond to the budget and to better serve our students by increasing their chances for successful program completion and persistence.


ANNUAL PROGRAM PLANNING WORKSHEET (APPW)

Program: College Success Studies Planning Year: 2014-15 Last Year CPPR Completed: 2011 Unit: Student Development and Support Cluster: Humanities Next Scheduled CPPR: 2016

NARRATIVE: APPW

I. Program-Level Outcomes:

1. Student will demonstrate self advocacy and knowledge of their academic goals. 2. Student will progress to college level coursework successfully completing pre-college

Academic Skills courses. 3. Student will demonstrate knowledge of college resources to help her/him successfully

complete coursework, including tutoring, advising, and services such as EOPS/CARE and DSPS.

II. Program Contributions to Institutional Goals, Institutional Objectives, and/or Institutional Learning Outcomes:

The courses in College Success Studies directly address Strategic Plan Institutional Goal 1: San Luis Obispo County Community College District will enhance its programs and services to promote students’ successful completion of transfer requirements, degrees, certificates, and courses. Specifically the College Success Department supports the following college-wide strategic goals and Institutional Learning Outcome:

Institutional Objective 1.3: Increase successful completions in distance education courses by 2% annually.

• The instructor of the distance education section of CSS College Success 225 has

completed a successful transfer to Moodle. • CSS 121 Textbook Reading Strategies, a hybrid web-based course has not been offered

due to budget constraints, but is currently is under CSS curriculum revision review.

Institutional Objective 1.4: Increase English as a second language credit course success with improvement rates by 2% annually.

• CSS 058 Grammar Essentials is offered in the evenings on the SLO and NCC campuses at the request of the ESL department.

• Articulation with the ESL department has improved student transition to College Success Studies courses.

• Re-alignment with the ESL department under the newly-formed Student Development and Success Division has provided greater collaboration, articulation, and sharing of expertise, especially in developmental reading and writing instruction.


Institutional Objective 1.5: Increase basic skills course success and improvement rates by 2% annually.

• A faculty member in the CSS department participated the 2014-2017 Strategic Planning

Workshop held on September 12, 2013. During this workshop, participants examined and considered institutional data as well as current elements and mandates that are part of Cuesta’s “Changing Landscape.” Participants considered current District fiscal challenges, SENSE and CCSSE data, a re-visioning of our new Student Success Centers, and implementation of the Student Success Act mandate. This mandate calls for new enrollment priorities which will give “fully matriculated students” priority registration. Fully matriculated students are those that have completed an assessment, orientation, and a Student Education Plan (SEP). Because these Student Success Act initiatives are meant to help increase student success rates, the CSS department focused on these initiatives as it began to develop its Action Steps in anticipation of increased enrollments.

• Because research shows that students who declare a goal and have a plan in place have higher completion and success rates, we also anticipate that these action steps will help in meeting Institutional Objective 1.5.

• The College Success Lab also offers placement exam preparation, thereby ensuring appropriate placement of students in English and math courses and preparation for TEAS nursing students.

• The Basic Skills Initiative has funded designated tutoring for developmental math and English courses.

• Drop-in times are available in CSS 005 College Success Lab on the SLO/NCC campuses to allow supplemental instruction for students desiring additional help in their courses.

• The CSS department is currently reviewing course SLO’s and making curriculum revisions to better serve our students.

Institutional Learning Outcome Regarding Reading Comprehension.

• Sixteen hours of the Enhancing Reading across the Disciplines grant-supported seminars were offered to seven faculty members from different disciplines. Feedback was very positive. Faculty presented a FLEX activity in January, 2013 to share their investigations and result.

• Student Summative Data collected at the end of the 2012 fall semester reveals the

percentage of students reporting an increased use of the selected reading behaviors. o Preview for concepts 52% Identify important information 70% o Look up words 51% Summarize in own words 58% o Mark text 49% Understand what was read 59% o Avoid cramming 44% Keep up with assigned reading 53% o Create study aids 45% Maintain concentration 28%


III. Analysis of Measurements/Data:

• Our CPAS Cycle is set and all SLO’s for all courses will have completed a full cycle of assessment, analysis, and implementation by our next program review in 2016.

• We annually compile and analyze assessment data in the semester report developed by the instructor of record and the Instructional Associate in the College Success Labs. This report includes the total hours that CSS 005 Lab students and walk-in students have logged as well as results from student self-report surveys. Feedback from these surveys contributes to continuous quality improvement and development of the program.

• Effective Spring 2014, our department is officially known as College Success Studies, separate from DSPS/Academic Skills courses. This distinction will allow us to analyze and interpret data for our courses separately from DSPS/Academic Skills courses and to use this data in our annual reports and program reviews.

• CSS classes have experienced a decline in enrollment. Possible reasons include our recent department name change, a reduction of course offerings, and assessment placement concerns.


IV. Program Outcomes Assessment and Improvements:

STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES

ASSESSMENT CALENDAR COLLEGE SUCCESS STUDIES DEPARTMENT

CYCLE STAGE

S 2012 F 2012 S 2013 F 2013 S 2014 F 2014 S 2015 F 2015 S 2016 CPPR

F 2016 S 2017

SLOs Assessment

ACSK 005 225 217 168

ACSK 099 120 225

ACSK 225 ACSK 168

CSS 005 CSS 120 CSS 036

CSS 099 CSS 058

Analyze Results & Plan Improvements

(CPAS)

ACSK 036 227 058

ACSK 005 225 217 168

ACSK 099 120 225

CSS 225 CSS 168

CSS 005 CSS 120 CSS 036

CSS 099 CSS 058

Implementation

ACSK 036 227 058

ACSK 005 225 168

CSS 225 CSS 168

CSS 005 CSS 120 CSS 036

CSS 099 CSS 058

Post-Implementation

SLOs Assessment

ACSK 036

227 058

CSS 225 CSS 168

CSS 005 CSS 120 CSS 036

CSS 099 CSS 058

*ACSK 058: 0 sections offered in fall 2013 (courses canceled due to low enrollment) *ACSK 227: 0 sections offered in fall 2013 *ACSK 217: 0 sections offered in spring 2013 and fall 2013 *Beginning in Spring 2014, all courses will be “College Success Studies”



Division: LIB//DE/ACADEMIC SUPPORT Program: ACADEMIC SUPPORT Date: AUGUST 17, 2012 v. 3 2012 Courses in program, or course: ACSK 005, ACSK 036, ACSK 058, ACSK 120, ACSK 225, ACSK 227

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Cheryl Ziehl, Karen Waska, Mary Hastings, Berta Parrish, Madeleine LaMon, MaryAnn Dockstader, Marsha Robinson, Norma Ortiz, Devon Hodgson Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes __X__ No______

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements X Program

□ Course

PROGRAM LEARNING OUTCOMES 1) Student will demonstrate self advocacy and knowledge of their academic goals. 2) Student will progress to college level coursework successfully completing pre-college Academic Skills courses. 3) Student will demonstrate knowledge of college resources to help her/him successfully complete coursework,

including tutoring, advising, and services such as EOPS/CARE and DSPS.


Five assessment methods were used: 1) Student self-report surveys were developed and piloted to assess the student learning outcomes for all courses. 2) Tutorial Services employs a formal qualitative evaluation process for tutors, tutees, classified and clerical staff every

semester. 3) A web-based student survey was prepared and administered as part of the 2011 Academic Support Comprehensive

Planning and Program Review to provided data on PLO #2. 4) A statistical analysis of Banner data regarding student success in subsequent course work after taking ACSK 225 College

Success provided data on PLO #2 and #3. 5) The ACSK 225 student learning outcome related to identifying campus resources provided feedback on PLO #3.


1) Hundreds of students completed the self-report surveys for the Academic Skills courses, beginning in 2009 with ASCK 120 Learning Essentials. The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment provided frequency, percent, and mean for each learning outcome.

2) 36 tutors, approximately 1,250 tutees, 6 classified and 6 clerical staff members completed a questionnaire for the 2011-2012 academic year.

3) Of the 400 students who completed a web-based survey in 2011, 60% had completed at least one Academic Skills course and 50% had accessed Tutorial Services.


4) Using the Argos Script program, we compared how the 264 students who were enrolled in the Fall 2008 ACSK 225

College Success classes did over the next four semesters in the subsequent English and Math courses. This was from Spring 2009 through Fall 2010. In math we looked at ACSK 075, Math 003, Math 021, Math 122, and Math 123. In English, we examined ACSK 032, ACSK 036, ACSK 050, Engl 099, Engl 156, and Engl 201A.

5) Seventy-one students in three of the Spring 2012 ACSK 225 sections indicated how well they could identify campus resources available to support students in addition to nine other student learning outcomes.


The student survey data indicate that students consistently rate the Academic Skills courses, Tutorial Services, and Academic Support Lab high when asked whether the courses/services help them succeed in college. The statistical means of related questions range from 3.98 to 4.31 on a 5-point scale. For each question, about half of the respondents “strongly agree” that the program has helped them succeed. Overall, about forty-five percent of the students responding report they successfully completed either English 099 or English 156 after taking Academic Skills classes or using services, and about 20% say they passed Math 007 or Math 021. Other courses successfully completed include English 201A, Math 123, 127, 242, 265A, Chemistry 201A, Business 201B, German 201, statistics, geology, astronomy, and microbiology courses. (PLO #2) Students completing ACSK 225 College Success had substantially higher persistence and success rates in subsequent math and English courses than the overall college percentages. The overall success rate for math students was 29.1 percent, whereas, the rate for students who had taken College Success was 52.9 percent. And, the overall student success rate in an English class was 46.7 percent, whereas, the rate for College Success students was 68.8 percent. The differences of 23.8% and 22.1% respectively, suggest that the College Success course is enormously beneficial for achievement in math and English courses. (PLO #3) Of the 71 ACSK 225 students surveyed in Spring 2012, 94% responded that they felt well informed about campus resources and how they can support their academic success (PLO #3). We did not directly assess PLO #1. In fact, as mentioned below, we have decided to revise, if not eliminate, this Program Learning Outcome in favor of a more appropriate and more measurable objective.



In reviewing the data, it’s clear that students are successfully completing courses and meeting program outcomes. The development of SLO assessments has led to improvements in the Academic Support Program. All Academic Skills faculty are now listing the course SLOs on course syllabi and making specific reference to the SLOs as appropriate. The faculty is now considering the course SLOs when creating assignments, exams and other course materials in order to focus student learning on the various SLOs for the course and for the Program.

For instance, following the first round of SLO assessments for ACSK 120 in Spring and Fall ‘09, the results were used to provide the basis for planning improvements of student learning. Changes to instruction involved placing greater emphasis on critical thinking skills with expanded examples, class discussion and exercises. The assessment data for Spring and Fall ’10 show substantial improvement in the mean rating of the SLO for critical thinking, suggesting the plan for improvement produced the desired effect.

Five of the six ACSK 225 instructors met in June, 2012 to discuss the results of the assessment data. The exchanges of ideas, of instructional practices, and of possibilities to assess student progress were very productive and rewarding. We look forward to future conversations focused on achievement of student outcomes.


• Modify the Program Learning Outcomes to better reflect the program in its role within the campus community – what our program really strives to achieve. For example, revise or eliminate PLO #1.

• Add a Program Learning Outcome that better assesses the access to and effectiveness of Tutorial Services. • Develop and implement several direct assessment methods for selected courses, such as ACSK 036 Reading

Essentials and ACSK 058 Grammar Essentials, to add to the self-reporting survey information. • Encourage greater participation by adjunct faculty and DSPS faculty in the assessment process. • Improve communication about curricular matters and assessment among all faculty and staff.


In addition to ongoing informal discussions among instructors, SLO assessment data is a regularly agendized topic at the Academic Support Workgroup monthly meetings. The agenda and minutes from the meetings reflect this discussion. The SLO assessment data is also saved to the “G” drive for convenient shared access. Instructors of courses with multiple sections have met to analyze and discuss the SLO results: ACSK 225 instructors in 6/12, ACSK 227 in 6/12, ACSK 005 staff/faculty in 8/12, and ACSK 058 in 4/12.

• Program-Level CPAS is attached in lieu of recent assessment efforts and methods.


Course or Program Assessment Summary Division: Academic Support Program: Academic Support Date: November 25, 2013 Courses in program, or course: Academic Skills 168

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Luis A. Gonzalez Course to program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes_X__ No______ 1 Student Learning Outcome

Statements Program Course

1. I can effectively demonstrate communication skills in a tutorial setting. 2. I am aware of and can demonstrate different tutoring techniques. 3. I can describe effective study skills methods. 4. I can apply problem solving techniques to deter negative behavior. 5. I can effectively summarize and evaluate reading assignments. 6. I can identify campus and online resources. 7. I can effectively recognize and apply critical thinking skills for my content area.


During the final week of instruction, a survey was distributed to the students. The survey asked the student to self-assess their ability for the outcomes above. Students responded to each item by choosing one of the following responses: 4= Absolutely YES 3= Yes 2=Slightly 1=Not at All Additionally, a few of the questions in the survey were open ended and designed to assess what they learned from the course and course material.


The survey was distributed to all students during the final class in early November. The survey was completed by 6 students, all in the class. Only one section of this course is taught each semester.


Assessment Summary available on next pages. There are some multiple choice survey questions and several open ended questions that are meant to directly assess the students’ knowledge of the subject matter.


The assessment procedure was designed to not only gather the student’s opinions about the course but to also directly assess their retention of the material covered in the course. That is why there were multiple choice survey questions that asked about their opinion on different topics as well as open ended questions that tested their knowledge of topics covered in the course. This was my first time delivering this material, which was the same material that had been taught for years. However, I did not get as much time as I would’ve liked to review, revise and update course material and delivery. I know that there are many areas that can be improved and I’m looking forward to making those changes for the next semester.



I am working on researching more up-to-date material, delivery methods and certification programs that can be applied locally. I am collaborating with other campuses on what they use for their tutor training courses and will be looking to apply what works for us.


This course is taught by one instructor.


Course or Program Assessment Summary Division: SDS Program: College Success Studies Date: February 12, 2014 v. 3 2012

Courses in program, or course: CSS 225- College Success

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: Devon Hodgson, MaryAnn Dockstader, Paula Robinson, Berta Parrish, Norma Ortiz, and Cheryl Ziehl Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed Yes__X___ No _

1 Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program

X Course

1. Demonstrate knowledge of their preferred learning style and apply them to life-long learning. 2. Construct and analyze personal time management habits and strategies. 3. Employ effective content-specific reading strategies to approach, comprehend, and summarize

academic reading. 4. Formulate effective and efficient study techniques for note taking and test taking in their

content area courses. 5. Reveal a basic understanding of wellness concepts and relationship between healthy living and

academic success; including the role of stress and procrastination, diet, sleep, and exercise , and money management.

6. Show basic technological literacy and informational competency for library research. 7. Identify campus resources designed to support students.


• Student achievement of selected outcomes was measured through a self-reporting pre and post assessment tool (Discovery Wheel) provided in the CSS 225 course textbook, Master Student Concise, 13th Edition.

• Students assessed their skills at the beginning and end of the course in 10 key areas using a likert scale (5= strongly agree, 4= agree, 3 = somewhat agree, 2= disagree, 1= strongly disagree).

• The 10 key areas were Attitude, Time/Money, Memory, Reading, Notes, Tests, Thinking, Communicating, Health, and Purpose.



• 116 students were surveyed in Fall 2013 in six randomly selected sections of CSS 225 (formerly ACSK 225) on both the San Luis Obispo and North County Campuses.

• The data was reviewed, aggregated and analyzed.


• The data averaged and aggregated was the difference between the self reported assessments of skills in 10 key areas from the beginning to the end of the course.

• From the largest increase to the smallest increase, the assessment results are the following: Attitude (5.1), Time/Money (4.9), Memory (5.8), Reading (7.1), Notes (5.4), Tests (5.6), Thinking (4.4), Communication (4.3), Health (2.7), and Purpose (3.6).


• We discussed the fact that Reading had the highest impact (7.1) and yet it is one of the lowest scoring areas of readiness at the beginning of the semester. This stimulated an analysis of the subgroups in our classes. For instance, re-entry students and students on academic probation tend to rate themselves lower than the traditional transfer-level student.

• The faculty feel the highest scoring improvement area, reading, is sufficient evidence that SLO #3 “Employ effective content-specific reading strategies to approach, comprehend, and summarize academic reading” is being addressed appropriately across sections.

• Through the detailed discussion regarding the areas that scored lower than desired overall in the post assessment but demonstrated growth between pre and post assessments influenced a redirection of instructional emphasis for the next assessment cycle.


• We will continue collecting the pre and post self-report from the Discovery Wheel and analyzing the difference between the beginning and ending ratings on the 10 key areas.

• It is the goal of the CSS 225 faculty to improve the outcome of the SLO #7“Formulate effective and efficient study techniques for note taking and test taking in their content area courses.” .

• In the spring of 2014, a rubric will be created to assess note taking proficiency. • In the fall of 2014, SLO #7 will be directly assessed through the random collection of student

notes , including predicted test questions, from each CSS 225 section using a rubric ranging from excellent to poor note-taking skills and test prediction strategies


Description or evidence of dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results

• CSS 225 faculty regularly meets with the SDS division and CSS department as well CSS 225 workgroup.

• Five CSS 225 instructors met on February 7, 2014 to discuss SLOs, curriculum, instructional approaches and assessment data.

• In addition to the Discovery Wheel, most instructors emphasize Student Learning Outcomes in the following ways:

1. Present the SLOs at the beginning of the semester. 2. CSS 225 SLOs and/or course objectives are listed on all syllabi. 3. Publish the SLOs on the MyCuesta, Course Studio. 4. Assess their own material (written assignments, readings, etc.) for their relationship to

the SLOs and course objectives. 5. Create activities throughout the terms that specifically highlight selected SLOs. 6. Integrate campus resources and technology into the classroom.



Division: Student Development and Success Program: College Success Studies/Academic Skills Date: 10/24/2013 Courses in program, or course: Reading Essentials (ACSK/CSS 036)

Faculty involved with the assessment and analysis: M LaMon; MA Dockstader Prepared by Madeleine LaMon Course-to-program outcome mapping document** is completed N/A - No degree or certificate programs

1

Student Learning Outcome Statements □ Program

X Course

Upon successful completion of this course, students will: 1. identify main idea, implied main idea, and supporting details.

2. describe author’s tone, purpose, and text organization.

3. distinguish between fact, opinion and propaganda techniques.

4. demonstrate knowledge of vocabulary and methods for understanding meaning.

5. organize an approach to summarize, outline, and remember text information.

2

Assessment Methods Plan (identify assessment instruments, scoring rubrics, SLO mapping diagrams)

The CSS Program has adopted a survey-based assessment for student learning outcomes (SLOs) for each course that uses an instrument administered with the course final exam. Surveys are tabulated and statistical summaries for each course section are produced by the Office of Institutional Research and archived on the G:drive with other SLO documentation. Beginning with the ’13-’14 academic year, a plan for direct assessment of SLOs will be implemented using ‘embedded’ course assessments. This will be done for selected courses by conducting an audit to identify existing test items and assignments that correspond to each SLO. By sampling and aggregating student scores on those items, a direct assessment of student learning for each SLO can be derived.

3

Assessment Administration Plan (date(s), sample size or selection of course sections, scoring procedures, etc.)

End of term assessments in sections of ACSK 036 Reading Essentials courses at the San Luis Obispo campus with approximately 20 students each were completed in the Spring and Fall 2010 semesters, and in Fall 2011. In Spring 2013 assessments in sections at both the San Luis Obispo and North County Campuses were conducted. The data for each course section has been scored and statistically analyzed for each course SLO.



The course SLO assessments showed high levels of student achievement across all SLOs. Comparison of results from assessments conducted in the Spring and Fall 2010 semesters showed small, non-significant differences in the average survey ratings of the course SLOs across the sections/semesters. The results from the Fall 2011 assessment showed substantial improvement in the means for all SLOs, with no ratings by any student for any SLO in the lowest achievement categories. With assessments from three semesters compared, it was also noted that the SLO: students will organize an approach to summarize, outline, and remember text information, consistently had slightly lower mean ratings than the other course SLOs in each of the assessments, which provided a focus for future plans to improve student learning. The Spring ’13 assessment continued to show high levels of student achievement across all SLOs, with small, but consistent difference between the average survey ratings of the course SLOs from each section.

5

Discussion of Assessment Procedure and Results, and Effectiveness of Previous Improvement Plans

The use of a survey-based assessment of SLOs has provided evidence of increases in aggregate student achievement following implementation of plans for improving student learning, as well as consistent differences between course SLOs that indicate areas to make additional plans for continuing improvement. Although there are many variables that affect student learning, the SLO assessments indicate success of the previous plans for learning improvement. The use of direct assessments of student learning may allow a more precise identification of the knowledge and skills that challenge students, which can be used to guide improvements in curriculum and instructional methods.


The assessments have been useful for identifying challenges for student learning that may be addressed by giving greater emphasis to specific SLOs through careful selection of instructional activities and assignments. Instruction should continue with explicit reference to the various learning outcomes at the beginning and throughout the semester, with intentional selection of course content to reinforce the various course SLOs. Special consideration of specific ways students can organize course content to facilitate their learning and retention will be provided in subsequent semesters.

7

Description or evidence of dialog among course or program-level faculty about assessment plan and results

Instructors use texts that provide topics and scope consistent with the approved Course Outline and SLOs. At all instructional sites, instructors use the course assessment form, conduct assessments and receive course data that are used for planning improvements for student learning.


Program Improvements since last APPW

• Creation of the newly-formed College Success Studies department within the Student Development and Success division under the auspices of Academic Affairs.

• Separation from DSPS/Academic Skills will yield clearer institutional data for future department planning.

• Tutorial Services has been separated from CSS and now completes its own APPW and Program Review along with its own budget. The exact supportive relationship between the Student Success Centers and College Success Studies needs to be defined and articulated.

• CSS now has the benefits of a department chair to represent our interest campus-wide.

Budget requests related to student learning outcomes assessment results or institutional/programmatic objectives include:

Instructional Associate for Tutorial Services: This position is vital for the daily operations of the SLO tutorial services and will support the NCC Student Services Assistant position. Current coverage is funded for only 2 hours a day for 4 days a week for 9 months to support a 40 hr/week program. This position needs to be a .75 FTE for 10 months. Tutorial Services Assistant: The demand for tutoring continues to increase as NCC expands its course offerings. All clerical support has been provided by one 6.8 hr/wk classified employee and students tutors. Classified Tutors, Peer Tutors, and Instructional Aides: A vibrant Student Success Center will demand ample tutoring services provided at different levels to meet the demands of a diverse student population.

Site license for PLATO: This software program is used in several College Success Studies courses, for math and English placement test preparation, and for several nursing exam preparations (TEAS). It should be included in the General Fund, not part of the CSS budget.

Professional Development Funding: Adequate professional development funding and opportunities for instructors ensures a current curriculum and instructional expertise.


Outcome Courses/Assessment 1. Student will demonstrate self advocacy and knowledge of their academic goals.

.

CSS 225, CSS 120, and CSS 005 address PLO 1. Students in CSS 225 courses will be completing Student Educational Plans (SEP) in 2014. CSS 120, CSS 225, and CSS 005 address all Program SLO’s.

2. Student will progress to college level coursework successfully completing pre- collegiate College Success courses.

We review Institutional Research Data to monitor success and persistence rates of students enrolled in CSS courses. CSS 225, CSS 120, CSS 058,CSS 036, and CSS 005 will use direct assessment to assess outcomes.

3. Student will demonstrate knowledge of college resources to help her/him successfully complete coursework, including tutoring, advising, and services such as EOPS/CARE and DSPS.

CSS 225, CSS 120, and CSS 005 address all Program SLO’s will use direct assessment to assess outcomes.

V. Program Development/Forecasting for the Next Academic Year:

Action steps for achieving Institutional Goals and Objectives:

1.5.1 Identify a process that ensures basic skills students complete a student education plan (SEP) by the time they complete 15 units. (December 2014)

1.5.2 Perform discipline specific curriculum alignment within each Basic Skills Discipline to increase effective and timely instruction and student success (May 2015)

• College Success Studies transfer and pre-collegiate courses; Student Success

Workshops; limited Writing, Math, ESL, and Academic Support labs with PLATO and other CAI; and limited Supplemental Instruction. In the future, we would like to incorporate Directed Learning Activities (DLA) for developmental Math and English courses; Individual academic evaluation and assistance by Learning Specialists; and Faculty Professional Development as it pertains to student success.

• Institutionalize the site license for PLATO.


Action steps for achieving program outcomes include the following:

• CSS courses to be assessed 2014-15 are: CSS 005, CSS 036, CSS 120, CSS 099, and CSS 058.

• Develop and implement several direct assessment methods for selected courses, such as CSS 036 Reading Essentials, CSS 058 Grammar Essentials, and CSS 120 Learning Essentials to add to the self- reporting survey information.

• Encourage greater participation by adjunct faculty in the assessment process. • Improve communication about curricular matters and assessment among all faculty

and staff by updating and disseminating CSS brochures and promotional materials. • Fall 2013 and Spring 2014, faculty in CSS along with the division chair met separately

with DSPS faculty, Basic Skills English Instructors, our Curriculum rep, and our Dean to share our curriculum development vision.

The CSS department proposes to make several curriculum changes.

Course Name Changes

• CSS 005 – CSS 025 • CSS 058 – Grammar Essentials to Grammar Strategies (CSS 058) • CSS 036 - Reading Essentials to Reading Strategies (CSS 080) • CSS 120 - Learning Essentials to College Learning Strategies (CSS 125)

Rationale: Faculty agreed that changing the names of our courses will better align and reflect new department name.

Course Revision

• CSS 125 – Learning Essentials {College Learning Strategies} (1.5 units) to (2.0 units).

Rationale: To better meet Student Learning Outcomes of the course and to better cover course content, instructors believe student contact time needs to be increased. Also, this revised course has potential to pair with content-area courses and special populations (Promise Grant).

New Course

• Develop a new writing course CSS 090 – Writing Strategies (3 units).

Rationale: There needs to be a non-DSPS basic skills writing course that pairs with CSS 080 – {Reading Strategies}. This new writing course will focus on sentence and paragraph construction and will also include a lab component. The course cap for this new course will be 24 unlike 16 which is the course cap for ACSK 050. This new course will ultimately replace ACSK 050 - Writing Fundamentals in the assessment piece. Currently, ACSK 050 is the paired course to CSS 080. ACSK 050 will remain with DSPS.


Future curriculum changes New Course: CSS 155 – (Name to be determined) Focus: developing/expanding reading curriculum Rationale: There needs to be a “100” level reading course that bridges English 099 and English 156. Focus will be on creating a college-level reading skills course that focuses on content-specific reading and critical thinking strategies to better prepare students for transfer-level college courses. Levels or delivery of support services

• CSS 005- College Success Lab offers drop-in assistance for students seeking help with basic skills and content area classes. (Continued efforts are being made to ensure the CSS 005 Lab is available on SLO/NCC campuses)

• Student Success Center collaboration to ensure student access to resources and assistance.

• Classroom presentations for outreach and campus resources, such as academic counseling, financial aid, Health Center, and Career Connections.

Facilities changes • With the creation of a new department writing course and reading course, access to

the Writing Labs on both campuses will be required.

Staffing projections • Hire two full-time College Success Studies Instructors to replace a FT instructor

retirement and to supplement a reduction in load for one full-time instructor. • A new adjunct instructor began teaching in 2013-14 since a part-time pool was

opened in the Spring 2013. Due to anticipated retirements of PT instructor(s), a pool should be opened during the Fall of 2015.

• A new priority registration process implemented in Fall 2014, the Student Success Act mandates for a “matriculated student”: completion of assessment; orientation; SEP. We anticipate this will impact our enrollment in CSS courses. Also, for local high school students to receive the Promise Grant, they must complete an assessment, meet with a counselor, and develop an SEP. This will impact our courses and increase enrollment. Therefore, serious consideration needs to be given to hire full-time faculty for the anticipated increase of enrollment.


UNIT PLAN

Unit: Student Development & Support Cluster: Humanities Planning Year: 2014-2015

NARRATIVE: UNIT PLAN

The Unit Plan ties program planning and review to resource allocation. For this first segment of the Unit Plan, write a narrative analysis of the fiscal assumptions and needs for your division/department for the upcoming year (e.g. Continued categorical funding, support staff not funded, etc.). The Student Development and Success Division is a “human-intensive” unit. When considering our top ten Unit Plan priorities, it becomes clear that we require a significant amount of support staff in order for both departments within our division to function optimally. Both English as a Second Language and College Success Studies serve a relatively high number of developmental/basic skills students. As such, we understand the importance of providing these students with out-of-class support services. This includes tutors, classroom aides, Writing Center staff, ESL retention assistants and ESL assessment staff. These hourly or temporary positions make it possible for many of our students to succeed in their courses, in our programs, and in their studies beyond our programs. This is what we require and value most. Categorical funding, Foundation Grants, and general fund dollars will be necessary for us to maintain the student service that we work to provide each year. Additionally, we are in need of additional full-time faculty within our division. Both of our departments have the potential to provide great service to the College and its students. College Success Studies is a department with potential for growth, particularly in the area of college reading. This is something that is sorely lacking at Cuesta, and CSS is the department best suited to develop and offer this curriculum. The English as a Second Language department also has potential for growth. If Cuesta College were willing to commit itself to exploring avenues for increasing its international student population and developing a true international student program or partnering with Cal Poly to do so, the ESL department would be poised to provide the language instruction to the international students. Additional full-time faculty in our division could help Cuesta not only diversify its student population but also help the College provide the instructional support that so many of its students need to succeed.

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- PRIOR YEAR UNIT FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success

Cluster: HumanitiesPlanning Year: 2014-2015

Category Program Description Cost Funded? Source (s) Impact on Program

1 Personnel ESLRetention Assistants perform a number of duties in an effort to increase ESL student retention at all sites: SLO, NC, and AG.

$ 18,000 Fully Funded BSI Grant Retention Assistants contribute to our increase student success and retention rates.

2 Instr Tech ESL

Replacement computers and monitors for the 3411 computer classroom on the SLO Campus. 28 computers and monitors at $750 each. Current computers are very old and slow and often do not work properly.

$ 21,000 Fully Funded NA Students are now able to use the lab as part of their course requirement.

3 Personnel Tutorial Services Expand Classified tutors' hours $ 25,000 Partially

FundedBSI/ ASCC

GrantsThe College still has very few classified tutors. More tutors will help increase overall student success rates across disciplines.

4 Personnel Tutorial Services Expand Peer tutors' hours $ 35,120 Partially

FundedBSI/ASCC

Grants The number of peer tutoring hours still needs to be increased in order for all Cuesta students to be have sufficient access.

5 Instr Tech Student Dev & Success - ESL

Upgrades to existing ESL Software and/or purchase new software $ 17,000 Not Funded NA

ESL students do have access to fully-functioning software programs because the programs are so old they are no longer supported on existing computers.

6 Personnel Tutorial Services

Skilled tutors for advanced classes, SI and Adjunct $ 20,000 Partially

FundedBSI /ASCC

Grants The number of SI tutors still needs to be increased in order for all Cuesta students to be have sufficient access.

7Instr

Supplies/Equip ESLFunds to offset the cost of expensive textbooks for our students. $ 5,000 Partially

FundedFoundation

Grant

The Foundation funds helped a number of ESL students purchase books, which allowed students to enroll in more classes. The funds need to be increased for coming terms.

8Non-Instr

Supplies/Equip ESLFunds to offset the cost of tuition and other fees for our students. $ 4,000 Partially

Funded FoundatinThe Foundation funds helped a number of ESL students pay their fees, which allowed students to enroll in more classes. The funds need to be increased for coming terms.

9 Instr Tech Academic Support

Web-based intstructional software Site License - SLO/NCC $ 12,000 Fully Funded General Fund

PLATO was available for all Cuesta students in both SLO and NC Student Success Centers. This contributes to overall improved student success rates.

10Instr

Supplies/Equip ESLClass sets of adapted readers for our core classes: 10 sets of 25 books priced at $8-15 per book. $,3750 Fully Funded ESL Division

Budget

ESL students enrolled in the reading and writing classes did not have to purchase their own novel, which helped us ensure that all students had access to required textbooks for the courses in which they were enrolled.

PRIOR YEAR'S (2013-2014) LIST OF UNIT FUNDING REQUESTS -- ALL CATEGORIES, ALL PROGRAMS

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- PERSONNEL FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success


Full-Time ESL Instructor ESLFull-time ESL faculty with a split assignment between the South County and San Luis Obispo.

salary-based SLO R IMMAt the end of fall 2010, one full-time instructor retired and has not been replaced. Part-time faculty are teaching approximately 70% of the weekly student-contact hours. The addition of a full-time faculty will be necessary to provide adequate leadership for the Division as well as the college.

Full-time College Success Instructor CSS Full-time Academic Skills instructor salary-based NC N IMM North County campus needs a full-time faculty member to create a legitimate College Success Studies program and to help create and staff a viable, new Student Success Center.

Full-time College Success Instructor CSS Full-time Academic Skills instructor salary-based SLO R IMM Without replacing the full-time faculty member due to retirement and reduced load faculty member, the program will remain stalled.

C. Classified Employee: Permanent, Short-Term & Substitute

Program Description - What? Cost/Range Site

New

(N) o

r Rep

lace

men

t (R)

Imm

edia

te (I

MM

), In

term

edia

te

(IN

T) o

r Lon

g Te

rm (L

T)

Justification - Why?(1-2 Sentences)

Retention Assistant ESL Retention Assistants $ 18,000 ALL SITES R IMM Retention Assistants ensure that students stay in the program. They have been instrumental in helping us increase our success and retention rates.

Instructional Aides CSS and ESLInstructional classroom aides for ESL and Developmental CSS Courses.

$ 8,000 DE N IMM Research shows that students enrolled in classes that provide aides or supplemental instruction have higher success and completion rates.

Bilingual Assessment Testers ESL Assessment testers $ 5,000 ALL SITES R IMM The testers are essential as the College's testing staff are not bilingual and do not work the later hours of the evening when our assessments take place.

Classified Tutors CSS and ESLClassified tutors for the Student Success Centers $ 15,000 ALL SITES R IMM Trained tutors are an essential piece of a successful and fully functioning Writing Center/Lab. The tutors provide one-on-one

instructional support for all students.

Childcare Providers ESLChildcare services for evening ESL students. $ 30,000 ALL SITES N IMM Without evening childcare services, many potential ESL students are unable to attend classes and continuing students are

sometimes forced to drop out of their classes.

Faculty Professional Development CSS and ESL Faculty professional development $ 4,000 ALL SITES R IMM Professional development and training are necessary for faculty to maintain currency in the discipline.

Curriculum development compensation for part-time faculty.

CSSPay for part-time faculty to help write new reading and writing curriculum

$ 1,000 ALL SITES R IMM College Success Studies needs to update its curriculum and develop new courses in reading and writing. With only 1.75 full-time faculty in the department, part-time faculty could help in this effort. However, they are not compensated for their work.

Outreach Recruitment & Retention Specialist ESLOutreach recruitment and retention specialist salary based SC N IMM Currently, one Outreach Recruitment and Retention Specialist serves the San Luis Obispo and Arroyo Grande centers. It is very

difficult for one person to fill classes in both areas at the same time. Each location should have its own Outreach Specialist.

Equitable Pay for Part-time Faculty work on SLOAs CSS and ESLEquitable Pay for Part-time Faculty work on SLOAs $ 3,000 ALL SITES N IMM Part-time faculty are essential to completing clear and accurate SLOAs for courses, especially for those courses not taught by

full-time faculty. Current compensation should be increased.

Admissions and Records Staff ESLBilingual A&R staff to help process student applications salary based SLO R IMM

At the beginning of each semester, many students are not able to register in a timely fashion because there are not enough staff available to help with processing applications or to complete other matriculation processes. As a result, our classes are often slow to fill and some students must complete late add appeals.

Writing Center Staff CSS and ESLFunding will allow additional faculty to staff the Writing Center $8,500 ALL SITES R IMM Currently, the Writing Center struggles to provide sufficient hours to support students in all disciplines who need writing help.

Increased access to writing help will help more students succeed in their courses, many of which have writing requirements.

D. Student Worker Program Description - What? Cost/Range Site

New

(N) o

r Rep

lace

men

t (R)

Imm

edia

te (I

MM

), In

term

edia

te (I

NT)

or L

ong

Term

(LT)


Outreach Office Assistant ESL Outreach office hourly help $ 4,700 ALL SITES R IMM ESL students require extra support and one-on-one assistance in completing all admissions and records and registration paperwork. The outreach specialist is often unable to proccess and complete all of this alone. The additional assistance will help prevent excessive late registrations due to students who have not completed the necessary paperwork.

Peer Tutors CSS and ESL Academic Peer Tutors $ 8,000 ALL SITES R IMM Demand for tutoring continues to exceed Tutorial budget. Current funding provided by ASCC and BSI Grant dollars, but these funds are not guaranteed from year to year.

Personnel - Full-Time Faculty

Personnel - Classified Employee: Permanent, Short-Term & Substitute

Personnel - Student Worker

Personnel - Classified Employee: Permanent, Short-Term & Substitute continued

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- SUPPLIES FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success


Instructional Supply CSS and ESLStudent Textbook Purchasing Assistance - Funds to offset the cost of expensive textbooks for our students. $ 5,000 ALL SITES R IMM ESL students are typically the most needy and vulnerable students at Cuesta College. Because textbooks are so expensive, the costs often prevent

our students from registering for classes. These funds have allowed us to help a number of our neediest students continue their language studies.

Instructional Supply ESLPenguin Readers - Class sets of adapted readers for our core classes: 10 sets of 25 books priced at $8-$15 per book. $ 3,750 ALL SITES R INT

The adapted readers provide our students with accessible sustained reading opportunities allowing them to improve their reading skills and develop a desire for life-long reading. Because our new curriculum will increase reading instruction, we will need to purchase more of these class sets in the coming semester.

Instructional Supply ESL Dictionaries - Bilingual and/or monolingual English dictionaries for advanced-level students $1,800 ALL SITES N INT

Many ESL students do not own a dictionary, yet dictionaries are necessary for both classroom instruction as well as successful completion of out-of-class exercises. Assisting our advanced-level students purchase dictionaries will further increase their chances for successful course completion and persistence into mainstream courses.

Instructional Supply CSS and ESL USB flash drives for advanced ESL students $ 450 ALL SITES N IMM

ESL students tend to have very limited computer skills. Part of our classroom instruction involves teaching students the importance of saving documents that they create in the computer labs. Many students are not familiar with flash drives or how to use them. Some instructors of the advanced classes have already begin purchasing them for their students. The Division would like to provide flash drives for the advanced students so that instructors will not have to continue purchasing them with their personal funds.

Instructional Supplies CSS and ESL Classroom supplies - Paper, whiteboard pens, posterboards, etc. $ 2,500 ALL SITES R IMM Support classroom instruction, student activities, collaborative learning.Instructional Supplies CSS and ESL Headphones and Mice for Academic Lab use $ 350 SLO R IMM The lab has software that requires students to use headphones.

New-Student Orientation Budget ESL New-student orientation supplies $500/sem ALL SITES R IMM New student orientations help improve our student retention rates, the orientations help student feel that they are part of the campus community and the College, and they help them to be better prepared for their classes.

B. Non-Instructional Supply Program Description - What? Cost Site

New

(N) o

r Rep

lace

men

t (R

)

Imm

edia

te (I

MM

), In

term

edia

te (I

NT)

or L

ong

Term

(LT)


Non-Instructional Supply CSS and ESLStudent Fee Assistance - Funds to offset the cost of tuition and other fees for our students. $ 4,000 ALL SITES R IMM

As tuition and student fees have increased, ESL students struggle to remain in their classes. Foundation Grant funds have allowed us to assist students in purchasing parking permits and paying for a portion of their tuition. The funding helps us retain students and improve their chances for success.

Non-Instructional Supply ESL Bilingual Poetry Books $ 200 NC N INT

The Poetry in Translation event has been held for several years at the North County Center. Students participate in this event by reciting poems in English and their first language. This event is important in providing ESL students with an opportunity to participate in College events, and it is also critical in building community. Instructors have already begun a library of bilingual poetry books, yet more are needed to accomodate all the students who would like to participate and to allow for diversity in the presentations.

Instructional Supplies

Non-Instructional Supplies

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- EQUIPMENT FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success


Copy Machine ESLReplacement copier in 3400 building for ESL, math and English

$ 2,000 SLO R LT The existing copier is shared by three divisions and will eventuall need to be replaced.

Projector/ELMO ESL Projector in 6103 lab unknown SLO R IMM The projector is old and has very poor clarity and resolution.Projector/ELMO ESL Projector in 6108B unknown SLO R IMM The projector is old and has very poor clarity and resolution.Projector/ELMO CSS andESL Projector in N2404 unknown NC R IMM The projector is old and has very poor clarity and resolution.Projector/ELMO CSS andESL Projector in 6106 unknown SLO R IMM The projector is old and has very poor clarity and resolution.

Instructional Equipment

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- FACILITY FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success


Facility ESL First call classroom unknown SLO N IMM In order to offer daytime classes, the ESL Program needs a first call room in the 3300 building.

New Facilities Requests and/or Renovations

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- TECHNOLOGY FUNDING REQUESTSUnit: Student Development and Success


Data Projectors ESL (3) Portable classroom data projectors. 2-Classroom Media unknown SC N IMM The South County facility currently lacks adequate technology. Instructors must rely on overhead projectors that often do not function properly.

Laptops ESL (3) Windows Laptop computer ($ 900 each) 2-Classroom Media $ 2,700 SC N IMM

The South County facility currently lacks adequate technology. Instructors are prohibited from using computers and projectors that are in the classrooms. Current laptops and projectors for our use are limited and take time to set up in the classrooms.

ESL Software ESLUpgrades to existing ESL Software and/or purchase new software 1-Tech Instr $ 17,000 ALL SITES R IMM Current software is dated it making it difficult to use on existing computer

network.

Replacement Computers ESLReplacement computers and monitors in the 6103 computer classroom 2-Classroom Media $ 21,000 SLO R IMM Curent computers in the 6103 lab are very old and slow. This lab is used by

many of our ESL classes as part of their course requirement.

PLATO Software CSSPLATO Software licensing for the SLO and NCC Student Success Centers 1-Tech Instr $ 15,000 ALL SITES R IMM

PLATO is used by many Cuesta students in a number of disciplines and contributes to student success. Students enrolled in CSS 005 rely on PLATO for their work in the lab.

Computers ALLFour additional computers in the Student Success Center in the North County. 1-Tech Instr $ 3,000 NC N IMM Currently there are only three computers in the SSC in the NCC. More

computers are needed to meet student use demands.

Computers ALL Replacemnt computers in the SLO Campus SSC. 1-Tech Instr $ 16,500 SLO R IMM Computers in the SLO Student Success Center are getting old and will need to be replaced.

B. Non-Instructional Technology

Program Description - What?Technology Plan

Initiative Cost Site

New

(N) o

r Rep

lace

men

t (R

)Im

med

iate

(IM

M),

Inte

rmed

iate

(IN

T) o

r Lon

g Te

rm (L

T)


Non-Instruct Tech CSS and ESL Computer Upgrades 1 @ $800 each 4-Inventory $ 800 SLO R IMM Division office computer is old and needs to be upgraded.Non-Instruct Tech CSS and ESL Computer Upgrades 2 @ $800 each 4-Inventory $ 1,600 SLO R INT Faculty computers are old and need to be upgraded.

D. Top 3 Technology Funding Requests

Program Description - What?Technology Plan

Initiative Cost Site

New

(N) o

r Rep

lace

men

t (R)

Imm

edia

te (I

MM

), In

term

edia

te

(IN

T) o

r Lon

g Te

rm (L

T)


Replacement Computers ESL and CSSReplacement Computers in the 6103 computer classroom 2-Classroom Media $ 21,000 SLO R IMM Curent computers in the 6103 lab are very old and slow. This lab is used by

many of our ESL classes as part of their course requirement.

Non-Instruct Tech CSS and ESL Computer Upgrade 1 @ $800 each 4-Inventory $ 800 SLO N IMM Divison office (Room 3432)computer is old and needs to be upgraded.

ESL Software ESLUpgrades to existing ESL Software and/or purchase new web-based software 1-Tech Instr $20,000

(annually) ALL SITES R IMM Current software is dated it making it difficult to use on existing computer network.

Instructional Technology

Non-Instructional Technology

Overall Top 3 Technology Requests

UNIT PLAN WORKSHEET -- PRIORITIZED LIST OF IMMEDIATE UNIT NEEDS Unit: Student Development and Success

Cluster: Humanities

Planning Year: 2014-2015

Item Program Description Cost FrequencyImmediate

(IMM)2 Professional Development ESL & College Success Studies Professioanl Development $ for ESL and CSS divisions $ 4,000 Annual/Recurring IMM

3 Computers in 6103 ESL & College Success Studies Replacement computers and monitors in the 6103 computer classroom in SLO $ 21,000 One-Time Only IMM

4 Classified Tutors All Classified Tutors for the Student Success Center $ 15,000 Annual/Recurring IMM 5 Writing Center Staff All Funding will allow additional faculty to staff the Writing Center $ 8,500 Annual/Recurring IMM

6Student Textbook Purchasing

Assistance ESL & College Success Studies Funds to offset the cost of expensive textbooks for ESL and CSS students. $ 5,000 Annual/Recurring IMM

7 Student Fee Assistance ESL & College Success Studies Scholarships to offset the cost of tuition for ESL and CSS students $ 4,000 Annual/Recurring IMM 8 Software - Web-based ESL Web-based Software for ESL $ 20,000 Annual/Recurring IMM 9 Instructional Aides ESL Instructional classroom aides for ESL and Developmental CSS Courses. $ 8,000 Annual/Recurring IMM

10 Instructional materials increase ESL & College Success StudiesMaterials for the classroom i.e. class sets of novels and adapted readers, ESL adapted readers for the library, dictionaries for advanced ESL students, and …..

$ 2,500 Annual/Recurring IMM

SIGNATURE PAGE

Faculty, Director(s), Manager(s), and/or Staff Associated with the Program

Instructional Programs: All full-time faculty in the program must sign this form. If needed, provide an extra signature line for each additional full-time faculty member in the program. If there are no full-time faculty associated with the program, then the part-time faculty in the program should sign. If applicable, please indicate lead faculty member for program after printing his/her name.

Student Services and Administrative Services Programs: All full-time director(s), managers, faculty and/or classified staff in the program must sign this form.

Division Chair/Director Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

Name Signature Date

SUPPLEMENTAL DOCUMENTS

FACULTY HIRING PRIORITIZATION INFORMATION (IF APPLICABLE)

If your program requested a faculty position for consideration, please attach or embed the following worksheets that were presented to the College Council: • Worksheet A.1: Subjective Ranking Sheet • Worksheet B.1: Objective Criteria for Teaching Faculty

San Luis Obispo County Community College District ......5 San Luis Obispo County Community College...

Documents

Transcript of San Luis Obispo County Community College District ......5 San Luis Obispo County Community College...