View
2
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
5/29/2015
1
2015 Joint PIE / BUDGET
Meeting
May 28, 2015
Reflection & Recommendations /May 8, 2014 Recommendations
Recommendations Responsible Parties and Committees
1. Use the new Student Equity, Access, and Completion Committee to identify ways to improve Scorecard measures. Investigate the possibility of awarding certificates without
requiring an application.
Student Equity Access & Completion CommitteeDean of Admissions & Records
1. Research causes for low completion and transfer. Research course coding to see if courses have the correct CTE
codes. Research the barriers to awarding certificates
Office of Research & Planning
1. Research course coding to see if courses have the correct CTE codes. Academic Affairs
1. Institutionalize the connection of cohort programs with campus as a whole. Senate
1. Identify colleges that have improved the basic skills progression rates and find out the strategies they used to make the improvement.
Office of Research & PlanningSenate
1. Create a process to identify and evaluate non-contractual reassigned time, such as FPIP chair and ILO Poster Showcase.
SenatePlanning & Institutional Effectiveness Committee
1. Extend the discussion about Scorecard metrics college-wide, for example at Academic Senate, Divisional Council, Division meetings, SEAC, Fall flex day, Spring summit.
Office of Research & PlanningStudent Equity Access & Completion CommitteeSenate
5/29/2015 2
5/29/2015
2
Accountability RequirementsAccountability Instrument Source
Institution Set Standards ACCJC (2013)
Scorecard State (2014)
Equity Plan State (2014)
IEPI State (2015)
District Strategic Plan & Metrics District
Educational Master Plan & Metrics College (2014)
ISLOs ACCJC
Program Review ACCJC
5/29/2015 3
Evaluating Effectiveness / 2015
• Financial Resources / FTES
• Strategic Plans• District Strategic Plan• Educational Master Plan
• Standards and Targets• IEPI (Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative)
• Institution Set Standards
• Institutional Learning Outcomes
5/29/2015 4
5/29/2015
3
Financial Re$ources& FTES
5/29/2015 5
Expenditure, Ending Balance, FTES
Expenditure EndingBalance
FTES Generated
FTES Funded
FY 2008 (6/30/08) $32,458,367 $582,074 7,265 7,226
FY 2009 (6/30/09) $33,259,717 - $596,119 8,209 7,334
FY 2010 (6/30/10) $29,970,701 $163,257 7,541 7,061
FY 2011 (6/30/11) $29,117,025 $1,864,130 7,674 7,212
FY 2012 (6/30/12) $28,965,067 $1,691,474 6,781 6,685
FY 2013 (6/30/13) $29,746,486 $2,422,660 6,774 6,747
FY 2014 (6/30/14) $33,198,144 $1,359,536 6,999 6,899FY 2015 (estimated
as of April 2015) $34,371,787 $232,266 7,227 7,225
5/29/2015 6
5/29/2015
4
Expenditure, Ending Balance, FTES
7,265
8,209
7,541 7,674
6,781 6,774 6,999 7,227
7,226 7,3347,061 7,212
6,685 6,747 6,8997,225
$32,458,367 $33,259,717
$29,970,701 $29,117,025
$28,965,067
$29,746,486
$33,198,144 $34,371,787
$582,074 ($596,119) $163,257
$1,864,130 $1,691,474 $2,422,660 $1,359,536
$232,266
($5,000,000)
$0
$5,000,000
$10,000,000
$15,000,000
$20,000,000
$25,000,000
$30,000,000
$35,000,000
$40,000,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
10,000
11,000
12,000
ACTUALFY 2008
(6/30/08)
ACTUALFY 2009
(6/30/09)
ACTUALFY 2010
(6/30/10)
ACTUALFY 2011
(6/30/11)
ACTUALFY 2012
(6/30/12)
ACTUALFY 2013
(6/30/13)
ACTUALFY 2014
(6/30/14)
ESTIMATEDFY 2015
(as of April2015)
En
din
g B
alance
/ Exp
en
diture
Full-
Time
Equi
vale
nt S
tud
ents
(FTE
S)
FTES Generated FTES Funded Expenditure Ending Balance
5/29/2015 7
Bond Fund Highlights
5/29/2015 8
Source: Facilities Committee Budget Report, 5/20/2015, Excerpts
5/29/2015
5
Bond Funds Overview
95/29/2015
Completed Projects
105/29/2015
5/29/2015
6
Funds Reallocated to These Projects
115/29/2015
StrategicPlans
5/29/2015 12
5/29/2015
7
Strategic Plans
WestEducational Master Plan
District Strategic
Plan
5/29/2015 13
Strategic Plans / AlignmentDistrict Strategic Plan Goal
Goal 1Access and Preparation for Success
Goal 2Teaching andLearning for Success
Goal 3Organizational Effectiveness
Goal 4Resources and Collaboration
WESTEducational Master Plan Goal
Strategic Direction 3Programs and Services Responsive to Student Needs
Strategic Direction 1Dedication to Learning
Strategic Direction 2Culture of Continuous Improvement
StrategicDirection 4Collaboration, Engagement, and Respect
Strategic Direction 2Culture of Continuous Improvement
StrategicDirection 5Connections with Communities
5/29/2015 14
5/29/2015
8
Strategic Plans / AlignmentDistrict Strategic Plan Goal
Goal 1Access and Preparation for Success
Goal 2Teaching andLearning for Success
Goal 3Organizational Effectiveness
Goal 4Resources and Collaboration
WESTEducational Master Plan Goal
Strategic Direction 3Programs and Services Responsive to Student Needs
Strategic Direction 1Dedication to Learning
Strategic Direction 2Culture of Continuous Improvement
StrategicDirection 4Collaboration, Engagement, and Respect
Strategic Direction 2Culture of Continuous Improvement
StrategicDirection 5Connections with Communities
5/29/2015 15
District Strategic Plan MetricsGoal 1 / Access & Preparation for Success
Objective / Measure District WEST WESTThree Year Change
1.1.2 / Eligible students receiving Pell Grant 71% 63% -1%
1.2.1 / New students completing English Assessment in 1st term or before
73% 70% +8%
1.2.1 / New students completing Math Assessment in 1st term or before
75% 72% +8%
1.3.1 / New students completing one English and Math class in 1st year 19% 18% -1%
1.3.2 / Persistence, Fall to Spring 87% 84% +3%1.3.2 / Persistence, Fall to Fall 75% 70% +6%
5/29/2015 16
5/29/2015
9
District Strategic Plan MetricsGoal 2 / Teaching & Learning for Success
Objective / Measure District WEST WESTThree Year Change
2.2.1 / New students completing 30 units in 3 years 62% 52% +1%
2.2.1 / New students completing 60 units in 3 years 29% 19% 0%
2.2.2 / New students successfullycompleting English 101 & Math 125 in 3 years
26% 16% +3%
2.2.2 / New students successfully completing English 101 & Math 125 in 6 years
33% 19% +2%
2.2.3 / Completion rate in 3 years 13% 11% -4%2.2.3 / Completion rate in 6 years 33% 30% +2%
5/29/2015 18
Targets&
Standards5/29/2015 20
5/29/2015
10
Targets & Standards
Institution Set Standards
…the identified level of performance determined by the
institution to be acceptable…
…a measure the institution can and does use in assessing both institutional and programmatic performance in these areas…
5/29/2015 21
Targets & Standards
I E P IInstitutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative
…a framework of indicators designed to measure the ongoing condition of a community college’s operational environment in the following areas:
(1) Accreditation status.(2) Fiscal viability.(3) Student performance and outcomes.(4) Programmatic compliance with state and federal guidelines.
5/29/2015 22
5/29/2015
11
Targets & Standards
• Institution Set StandardsStandard we hold ourselves to not fall below
– If we fall below, we must examine & take action
PIE Committee recommended standards to College Council after examining trend data
• IEPIAspirational targets we strive toward
Four percentage-point increase in six years, recommended by PIE, approved by College Council
We (The College) set the standards & targets
5/29/2015 23
Targets & Standards2013-2014 3-year Average Target/Standard
Inst
itutio
n Se
t St
anda
rds
. Successful Course Completion Rate 62.4% 62.8% 60% Standards
. # Students Earning Degrees (Unduplicated) 329 370 330
. # Students Earning Certificates (Unduplicated) 203 184 116
. All Awards (Degrees & Certificates, Undup.) 561 524 445
. Transfers to 4-year institutions (UC / CSU) 202 196 175
Inst
itutio
nal E
ffect
iven
ess P
artn
ersh
ip
Initi
ativ
e (IE
PI)
Scor
ecar
d
. Completion Rate / College-Prepared 68% 64.9% 69%
Targets(for 2015-2016)
. Completion Rate / Unprepared for College 32.5% 33% 34%
. Completion Rate / Overall 37.8% 38% 39%
. Remedial Rate / Math 18.7% 19.1% 20%
. Remedial Rate / English 31.9% 32.6% 33%
. Remedial Rate / ESL 22.1% 24.9% 23%
. Career Technical Education Rate 40% 38.6% 41%
Dat
amar
t . Successful Course Completion 61.2% 61.2% 63%. # Students Earning Degrees 426 400 430. # Students Earning Certificates 266 245 277. # Students who Transfer to 4-year institutions 267 302 270
5/29/2015 24
5/29/2015
12
Institution Set StandardsSuccessful Course Completion Rates
63.0%62.3%
59.8%
61.5% 61.5% 62.1% 61.9%62.7% 63.1% 63.2%
62.0%63.1%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%Su
cces
sful
Cou
rse
Com
plet
ion
Rate
s
Standard: 60%
5/29/2015 25
2003-2004
2004-2005
2005-2006
2006-2007
2007-2008
2008-2009
2009-2010
2010-2011
2011-2012
2012-2013
2013-2014
Assoc. Degree 360 349 313 325 341 397 342 325 392 331 389Certificate 110 75 67 90 86 105 110 172 133 217 203Undup Awards ** 459 412 368 402 413 487 434 484 496 515 561
360 349313 325
341
397
342325
392
331
389
11075 67
90 86105 110
172
133
217 203
459
412
368402 413
487
434
484 496515
561
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Undu
plic
ated
Stu
dent
Cou
nt
Institution Set StandardsDegrees & Certificates Awarded
Standard: 330 Degrees
Standard: 116 Certs.
Standard: 445 Awards
5/29/2015 26
5/29/2015
13
89-90
90-91
91-92
92-93
93-94
94-95
95-96
96-97
97-98
98-99
99-00
00-01
01-02
02-03
03-04
04-05
05-06
06-07
07-08
08-09
09-10
10-11
11-12
12-13
13-14
UC/ CSU 257 289 230 246 258 273 264 261 283 245 243 232 222 212 216 236 255 232 240 248 177 192 212 174 202ISP & OOS 45 57 74 84 105 107 127 147 158 162 151 145 178 171 150 103 65
257
289
230246
258273 264 261
283
245 243232
222212 216
236255
232 240 248
177192
212
174
202
4557
7484
105 107127
147158 162
151 145
178 171150
103
65
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
Tran
sfer
Cou
nt
Institution Set StandardsTransfers
to Campuses of UC and CSU, In-State Private (ISP), and Out of State (OOS) Colleges and Universities
Standard175 Transfers to UC and CSU, Annually
5/29/2015 27
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014City 61.7% 61.3% 62.4% 65.7% 65.2%East 68.0% 68.1% 68.8% 72.6% 71.8%Harbor 64.9% 64.1% 64.8% 67.4% 66.1%Mission 63.4% 64.5% 65.5% 69.2% 66.0%Pierce 67.7% 67.7% 67.7% 69.8% 69.4%Southwest 56.1% 58.8% 59.7% 63.4% 61.4%Trade 63.5% 65.4% 66.6% 69.2% 68.7%Valley 66.1% 66.4% 67.3% 69.8% 69.3%West 58.3% 57.5% 59.4% 63.2% 63.2%
58.3% 57.5%59.4%
63.2% 63.2%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%
Com
plet
ion
Rate
-O
vera
ll
IEPI / WestCourse Success Rate
5/29/2015 28
6-year Target: 66%
1-yearTarget: 64%
5/29/2015
14
IEPI / District ComparisonCourse Success Rate
2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014City 61.7% 61.3% 62.4% 65.7% 65.2%East 68.0% 68.1% 68.8% 72.6% 71.8%Harbor 64.9% 64.1% 64.8% 67.4% 66.1%Mission 63.4% 64.5% 65.5% 69.2% 66.0%Pierce 67.7% 67.7% 67.7% 69.8% 69.4%Southwest 56.1% 58.8% 59.7% 63.4% 61.4%Trade 63.5% 65.4% 66.6% 69.2% 68.7%Valley 66.1% 66.4% 67.3% 69.8% 69.3%West 58.3% 57.5% 59.4% 63.2% 63.2%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%C
ompl
etio
n Ra
te -
Ove
rall
5/29/2015 29
6-year Target: 66%
1-yearTarget: 64%
IEPI / WestScorecard Completion Rate
Overall (All Students in Cohort)
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 38.2% 37.1% 37.2% 39.5% 33.9%East 42.1% 40.9% 42.4% 41.9% 38.1%Harbor 43.6% 41.3% 45.1% 40.1% 38.5%Mission 38.3% 37.3% 35.0% 33.3% 34.7%Pierce 49.9% 53.3% 53.1% 50.9% 47.8%Southwest 31.6% 32.3% 35.5% 31.4% 31.1%Trade 29.0% 32.5% 33.1% 32.7% 30.0%Valley 44.0% 43.9% 42.3% 42.5% 42.1%West 39.7% 36.0% 39.2% 37.1% 37.8%
39.7%36.0%
39.2% 37.1% 37.8%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
Com
plet
ion
Rate
-O
vera
ll
5/29/2015 30
6-year Target: 42%
1-yearTarget: 39%
5/29/2015
15
IEPI / District ComparisonScorecard Completion Rate
Overall (All Students in Cohort)
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 38.2% 37.1% 37.2% 39.5% 33.9%East 42.1% 40.9% 42.4% 41.9% 38.1%Harbor 43.6% 41.3% 45.1% 40.1% 38.5%Mission 38.3% 37.3% 35.0% 33.3% 34.7%Pierce 49.9% 53.3% 53.1% 50.9% 47.8%Southwest 31.6% 32.3% 35.5% 31.4% 31.1%Trade 29.0% 32.5% 33.1% 32.7% 30.0%Valley 44.0% 43.9% 42.3% 42.5% 42.1%West 39.7% 36.0% 39.2% 37.1% 37.8%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%C
ompl
etio
n Ra
te -
Ove
rall
5/29/2015 31
6-year Target: 42%
1-yearTarget: 39%
IEPI / WestScorecard Completion RateCollege Prepared Students
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 66.3% 58.7% 63.5% 68.1% 59.3%East 72.0% 70.1% 72.7% 69.9% 65.4%Harbor 73.7% 65.3% 71.0% 70.4% 53.5%Mission 69.4% 64.4% 74.5% 63.2% 60.2%Pierce 77.7% 79.5% 80.0% 75.9% 73.7%Southwest 68.6% 63.0% 81.9% 66.7% 63.3%Trade 80.0% 66.7% 73.8% 70.2% 67.9%Valley 68.9% 71.4% 70.1% 69.7% 64.9%West 67.5% 68.1% 63.4% 63.4% 68.0%
67.5% 68.1%63.4% 63.4%
68.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%
80.0%
85.0%
90.0%
Com
plet
ion
Rate
–C
olle
ge P
repa
red
5/29/2015 32
6-year Target: 72%
1-yearTarget: 69%
5/29/2015
16
IEPI / District ComparisonScorecard Completion RateCollege Prepared Students
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 66.3% 58.7% 63.5% 68.1% 59.3%East 72.0% 70.1% 72.7% 69.9% 65.4%Harbor 73.7% 65.3% 71.0% 70.4% 53.5%Mission 69.4% 64.4% 74.5% 63.2% 60.2%Pierce 77.7% 79.5% 80.0% 75.9% 73.7%Southwest 68.6% 63.0% 81.9% 66.7% 63.3%Trade 80.0% 66.7% 73.8% 70.2% 67.9%Valley 68.9% 71.4% 70.1% 69.7% 64.9%West 67.5% 68.1% 63.4% 63.4% 68.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%
80.0%
85.0%
90.0%C
ompl
etio
n Ra
te –
Col
lege
Pre
pare
d
5/29/2015 33
6-year Target: 72%
1-yearTarget: 69%
IEPI / WestScorecard Completion Rate
Unprepared Students
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 34.4% 33.7% 33.2% 35.9% 31.3%East 38.4% 37.2% 38.1% 38.1% 35.2%Harbor 35.6% 35.0% 37.6% 33.2% 35.1%Mission 33.6% 34.1% 30.4% 30.6% 32.2%Pierce 43.0% 46.5% 45.6% 45.2% 41.5%Southwest 29.6% 30.4% 30.5% 28.9% 29.0%Trade 27.5% 31.2% 30.7% 29.0% 27.4%Valley 37.5% 37.0% 35.4% 35.8% 35.9%West 35.6% 29.6% 34.4% 32.0% 32.5%
35.6%
29.6%34.4%
32.0% 32.5%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
Rem
edia
l Pro
gres
s Ra
te -
Mat
h
5/29/2015 34
6-year Target: 37%
1-yearTarget: 34%
5/29/2015
17
IEPI / District ComparisonScorecard Completion Rate
Unprepared Students
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 34.4% 33.7% 33.2% 35.9% 31.3%East 38.4% 37.2% 38.1% 38.1% 35.2%Harbor 35.6% 35.0% 37.6% 33.2% 35.1%Mission 33.6% 34.1% 30.4% 30.6% 32.2%Pierce 43.0% 46.5% 45.6% 45.2% 41.5%Southwest 29.6% 30.4% 30.5% 28.9% 29.0%Trade 27.5% 31.2% 30.7% 29.0% 27.4%Valley 37.5% 37.0% 35.4% 35.8% 35.9%West 35.6% 29.6% 34.4% 32.0% 32.5%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%Re
med
ial P
rogr
ess
Rate
-M
ath
5/29/2015 35
6-year Target: 37%
1-yearTarget: 34%
IEPI / WestRemedial Progress Rate
Math
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 21.1% 21.9% 23.4% 24.3% 24.2%East 28.8% 28.1% 29.8% 32.7% 37.9%Harbor 37.4% 42.4% 36.8% 38.6% 37.7%Mission 21.5% 24.3% 26.4% 28.7% 29.0%Pierce 29.9% 32.5% 34.5% 37.1% 35.8%Southwest 18.5% 14.3% 15.6% 14.2% 14.9%Trade 8.1% 8.9% 9.7% 7.5% 7.9%Valley 23.5% 24.6% 23.9% 26.5% 26.4%West 17.2% 14.7% 19.1% 19.4% 18.7%
17.2%14.7%
19.1% 19.4% 18.7%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
Rem
edia
l Pro
gres
s Ra
te -
Mat
h
5/29/2015 36
6-year Target: 23%
1-yearTarget: 20%
5/29/2015
18
IEPI / District ComparisonRemedial Progress Rate
Math
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 21.1% 21.9% 23.4% 24.3% 24.2%East 28.8% 28.1% 29.8% 32.7% 37.9%Harbor 37.4% 42.4% 36.8% 38.6% 37.7%Mission 21.5% 24.3% 26.4% 28.7% 29.0%Pierce 29.9% 32.5% 34.5% 37.1% 35.8%Southwest 18.5% 14.3% 15.6% 14.2% 14.9%Trade 8.1% 8.9% 9.7% 7.5% 7.9%Valley 23.5% 24.6% 23.9% 26.5% 26.4%West 17.2% 14.7% 19.1% 19.4% 18.7%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%Re
med
ial P
rogr
ess
Rate
-M
ath
5/29/2015 37
6-year Target: 23%
1-yearTarget: 20%
IEPI / WestRemedial Progress Rate
English
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 36.0% 34.2% 36.6% 39.2% 36.9%East 40.2% 44.9% 44.8% 44.3% 42.0%Harbor 39.7% 40.6% 39.3% 36.2% 39.6%Mission 32.7% 30.3% 31.7% 38.0% 31.4%Pierce 45.5% 50.4% 50.0% 51.1% 50.5%Southwest 23.9% 22.1% 24.0% 25.5% 22.1%Trade 21.4% 19.8% 20.3% 21.4% 19.3%Valley 38.7% 38.8% 39.5% 41.5% 40.0%West 31.2% 28.9% 31.3% 34.5% 31.9%
31.2%28.9%
31.3%34.5%
31.9%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
Rem
edia
l Pro
gres
s Ra
te -
Engl
ish
5/29/2015 38
6-year Target: 36%
1-yearTarget: 33%
5/29/2015
19
IEPI / District ComparisonRemedial Progress Rate
English
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 36.0% 34.2% 36.6% 39.2% 36.9%East 40.2% 44.9% 44.8% 44.3% 42.0%Harbor 39.7% 40.6% 39.3% 36.2% 39.6%Mission 32.7% 30.3% 31.7% 38.0% 31.4%Pierce 45.5% 50.4% 50.0% 51.1% 50.5%Southwest 23.9% 22.1% 24.0% 25.5% 22.1%Trade 21.4% 19.8% 20.3% 21.4% 19.3%Valley 38.7% 38.8% 39.5% 41.5% 40.0%West 31.2% 28.9% 31.3% 34.5% 31.9%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%Re
med
ial P
rogr
ess
Rate
-En
glish
5/29/2015 39
6-year Target: 36%
1-yearTarget: 33%
IEPI / WestCTE Completion Rate
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 45.6% 44.9% 45.0% 46.0% 44.0%East 43.0% 45.1% 46.5% 48.1% 48.7%Harbor 61.4% 60.6% 60.1% 57.8% 57.4%Mission 43.8% 44.7% 46.2% 44.8% 51.5%Pierce 57.0% 53.2% 55.7% 51.3% 48.9%Southwest 55.7% 53.9% 55.6% 57.1% 55.0%Trade 44.9% 43.2% 41.7% 39.3% 38.9%Valley 56.0% 53.7% 54.8% 57.1% 53.0%West 48.9% 39.1% 38.7% 37.1% 40.0%
48.9%
39.1% 38.7% 37.1%40.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
CTE
Com
plet
ion
Rate
5/29/2015 42
6-year Target: 44%
1-yearTarget: 41%
5/29/2015
20
IEPI / District ComparisonCTE Completion Rate
2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009City 45.6% 44.9% 45.0% 46.0% 44.0%East 43.0% 45.1% 46.5% 48.1% 48.7%Harbor 61.4% 60.6% 60.1% 57.8% 57.4%Mission 43.8% 44.7% 46.2% 44.8% 51.5%Pierce 57.0% 53.2% 55.7% 51.3% 48.9%Southwest 55.7% 53.9% 55.6% 57.1% 55.0%Trade 44.9% 43.2% 41.7% 39.3% 38.9%Valley 56.0% 53.7% 54.8% 57.1% 53.0%West 48.9% 39.1% 38.7% 37.1% 40.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%C
TE C
ompl
etio
n Ra
te
5/29/2015 43
6-year Target: 44%
1-yearTarget: 41%
InstitutionStudent Learning
Outcomes
5/29/2015 44
5/29/2015
21
Institution Student Learning Outcomes
45
A.Critical Thinking: Analyze problems by differentiating fact from opinions, using evidence, and using sound reasoning to specify multiple solutions and their consequences.
B. Communication: Effectively communicate thought in a clear, well-organized manner to persuade, inform, and convey ideas in academic, work, family and community settings.
C.Quantitative Reasoning: Identify, analyze, and solve problems that are quantitative in nature.
D. Self-awareness/Interpersonal Skills: Apply self-assessment and reflection strategies to interpersonal, work, community, career, and educational pathways.
E. Civic Responsibility: Apply the principles of civility to situations in the contexts of work, family, community and the global world.
5/29/2015
Institution Student Learning Outcomes
46
F. Technical Competence: Utilize the appropriate technology effectively for informational, academic, personal, and professional needs. Use competent technique in a musical performance.
G.Cultural Diversity: Respectfully engage with other cultures in an effort to understand them.
H. Ethics: Practice and demonstrate standards of personal and professional integrity, honesty and fairness; apply ethical principles in submission of all college work.
I. Aesthetics: Use multiple modes of inquiry and approaches to experience and to engage with the arts and nature; develop and express personal creative visions throughout all aspects of one's life.5/29/2015
5/29/2015
22
ILOs / Districtwide Student Survey
47
B. Communication
G. Cultural Diversity
B. CommunicationA. Critical Thinking
C. Quantitative ReasoningF. Technical Competence
D. Self-AwarenessG. Cultural Diversity
E. Civic Responsibility
ILOs / Districtwide Student Survey
48
5/29/2015
23
ILOs / Districtwide Student Survey
49
ILOs / Districtwide Student SurveyPositive ILO Response by Number of Units Completed (Fall 2014)
50
5/29/2015
24
Reflections & Recommendations
5/29/2015 51
May 28, 2015 RecommendationsRecommendations Responsible Parties and Committees
5/29/2015 52
5/29/2015
25
fin5/29/2015 53
Recommended