San Luis Obispo County Community College district Institutional Effectiveness Outcomes/ARCC Report

R E P O R T T O T H E 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 B O A R D O F T R U S T E E S

O C T O B E R 3 , 2 0 1 2

SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT INSTITUTIONAL

EFFECTIVENESS OUTCOMES/ARCC REPORT

WHAT’S IN THE INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS OUTCOMES REPORT?• IEOs 1 – 7 assess Student Progress, Success and

Completion; they are based on the Accountability Reporting for the Community Colleges (ARCC) report.

• IEO 8 assesses job placement rates for Cuesta College students who complete vocational degrees and certificates

• IEOs 9a & 9b assess the degree to which Cuesta College reflects the demographics of its service area as well as provides an inclusive campus climate

• IEO 10 assesses Cuesta’s financial management

WHAT IS ARCC?

• Accountability Reporting for the Community Colleges• Performance Framework • Implementation of AB 1417 (Pacheco, 2004)• Performance indicators based on MIS data• Performance is compared to similar peer colleges• Very public data!

IEO #1: STUDENT PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENT RATE (ARCC INDICATOR 1)

• DEFINITION: Percentage of cohort of first-time students with minimum of 12 units earned who attempted a degree/certificate/transfer course within six years and who are shown to have earned AA/AS or Certificate OR transferred to four-year institution OR became Transfer Directed or Transfer Prepared within six years of entry. See Appendix A for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: Student Progress and Achievement Rate of Peer Group

• See Appendix B for detailed explanation of Peer Group construction

• GOAL: To consistently meet or exceed the Benchmark

IEO #1: STUDENT PROGRESS AND ACHIEVEMENT RATE (ARCC INDICATOR 1)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201248.0%

50.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%

58.0%

60.0%

62.0%

55.4%56.1% 57.3% 56.2%

59.1%

58.6%

60.9%

55.2%

0.581

0.534

0.588

0.597 0.607

0.61

Student Progress and Achievement Rate

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #2: PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO EARNED AT LEAST 30 UNITS (ARCC INDICATOR 2)

• DEFINITION: Percentage of cohort of first-time students with minimum of 12 units earned who attempted a degree/certificate/transfer course within six years of entry who earned at least 30 units while in the CCC system. See Appendix A for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: Percent of students who earned at least 30 Units within Peer Group



IEO #2: PERCENT OF STUDENTS WHO EARNED AT LEAST 30 UNITS (ARCC INDICATOR 2)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201264.0%

66.0%

68.0%

70.0%

72.0%

74.0%

76.0%

78.0%

80.0%

71.9%

75.1%75.7%

78.0%

75.7% 75.3%

77.0%

73.4%

0.693

0.709 0.7110.721 0.724

0.733

Percent of Students Who Earned at Least 30 Units

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #3: PERSISTENCE RATE (ARCC INDICATOR 3)

• DEFINITION: Percentage of cohort of first-time students with minimum of six units earned in their first Fall term in the CCC who return and enroll in the subsequent Fall term anywhere in the system. • See Appendix A for detailed methodology

BENCHMARK: Persistence Rate of Peer Group • See Appendix B for detailed explanation of Peer

Group construction• GOAL: To consistently meet or exceed the

Benchmark

IEO #3: PERSISTENCE RATE (ARCC INDICATOR 3)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201256.0%

58.0%

60.0%

62.0%

64.0%

66.0%

68.0%

70.0%

72.0%

74.0%

69.1% 69.5% 70.1% 70.5%

67.8%66.9%

69.1%

71.5%

0.666

0.624

0.6760.665

0.692 0.691

Persistence Rate

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #4: ANNUAL SUCCESSFUL COURSE COMPLETION RATE—VOCATIONAL COURSES (CREDIT) (ARCC INDICATOR 4)

• DEFINITION: Vocational courses were defined via their SAM (Student Accountability Model) priority code. SAM codes A, B, and C indicate courses that are clearly occupational. Success was defined as having been retained to the end of the term (or end of the course) with a final course grade of A, B, C, or CR.

• See Appendix A for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: Vocational Course Completion Rate of Peer Group



IEO #4: ANNUAL SUCCESSFUL COURSE COMPLETION RATE—VOCATIONAL COURSES

(CREDIT) (ARCC INDICATOR 4)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201271.0%

72.0%

73.0%

74.0%

75.0%

76.0%

77.0%

78.0%

79.0% 78.6% 78.6%

77.2%

78.2%

75.6% 75.6% 75.5% 75.3%0.757

0.744 0.7450.74

0.749 0.748

Annual Successful Course Completion Rate for Vocational Courses

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #5: ANNUAL SUCCESSFUL COURSE COMPLETION RATE—BASIC SKILLS COURSES (CREDIT) (ARCC INDICATOR 5)

• DEFINITION: Basic skills courses were those having a course designation of B in CB08 (basic skills course). Success was defined as having been retained to the end of the term (or end of the course) with a final course grade of A, B, C, or CR. • See Appendix A for detailed methodology

BENCHMARK: Basic Skills Course Completion Rate of Peer Group • See Appendix B for detailed explanation of Peer

Group construction• GOAL: To consistently meet or exceed the

Benchmark

IEO #5: ANNUAL SUCCESSFUL COURSE COMPLETION RATE—BASIC SKILLS COURSES

(CREDIT) (ARCC INDICATOR 5)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201250.0%

52.0%

54.0%

56.0%

58.0%

60.0%

62.0%

64.0%

66.0%

56.3% 55.8%

58.5%57.0%

55.8%

58.5% 58.5%

62.8%0.614

0.578

0.621

0.6380.63

0.638

Annual Successful Course Completion Rate for Credit Basic Skills Courses

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #6: IMPROVEMENT RATE FOR CREDIT ESL COURSES (ARCC INDICATOR 6)

• DEFINITION: The ESL improvement rate cohorts consisted of students enrolled in credit ESL courses who successfully completed that initial course. Success was defined as having been retained to the end of the term (or end of the course) with a final course grade of A, B, C, or CR. The outcome of interest was that group of students who successfully completed a higher-level ESL course or college level English course within three academic years of completing the first ESL course.

• See Appendix A for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: ESL Improvement Rate of Peer Group



IEO #6: IMPROVEMENT RATE FOR CREDIT ESL COURSES (ARCC INDICATOR 6)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

41.9%39.4%

35.5%

25.6%

18.8% 17.7%

39.8% 39.5%0.393 0.413 0.415

0.494 0.488

Improvement Rate for Credit ESL Courses

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #7: IMPROVEMENT RATE FOR CREDIT BASIC SKILLS COURSES (ARCC INDICATOR 7)

• DEFINITION: The basic skills improvement rate cohorts consisted of students enrolled in a credit basic skills English or Mathematics course who successfully completed that initial course. Only students starting at two or more levels below college level/transfer level were included in the cohorts. Success was defined as having been retained to the end of the term (or end of the course) with a final course grade of A, B, C, or CR. The outcome of interest was that group of students who successfully completed a higher-level course in the same discipline within three academic years of completing the first basic skills course.

• See Appendix A for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: Basic Skills Improvement Rate of Peer Group



IEO #7: IMPROVEMENT RATE FOR CREDIT BASIC SKILLS COURSES (ARCC INDICATOR 7)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 201230.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

55.0%

60.0%

65.0%

46.4%

49.5%

61.0%

50.5%

55.4%52.8%

49.3%47.3%

0.509

0.4710.483 0.492

0.525 0.528

Improvement Rate for Credit Basic Skills Courses

Cuesta Peer Group

IEO #8: STUDENTS SUCCESSFULLY OBTAIN AND RETAIN A JOB RELATED TO THEIR VOCATIONAL DEGREE OR CERTIFICATE AFTER ONE

YEAR OF PROGRAM COMPLETION/GRADUATION. (CTEA CORE INDICATOR 4P1)

• DEFINITION: This indicator is the percentage of CTE program leavers and completers who did not transfer to a two or four year institution and were found during one of the four quarters following the cohort year in an apprenticeship program, UI covered employment, the federal Government, or the military.

• See Appendix C for detailed methodologyBENCHMARK: State Performance Level Target See Appendix C for detailed methodology


IEO #8: STUDENTS SUCCESSFULLY OBTAIN AND RETAIN A JOB RELATED TO THEIR VOCATIONAL DEGREE OR CERTIFICATE

AFTER ONE YEAR OF PROGRAM COMPLETION/GRADUATION. (CTEA CORE INDICATOR 4P1)

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

83.5% 84.0%87.6% 85.2% 85.3%

93.5% 93.0%

82.6%

79.4% 79.3% 80.6% 81.8% 81.4%

90.1%86.6%

76.4%

Vocational Student Employment Rates

Cuesta State

IEO #9A: THE CUESTA COLLEGE STUDENT BODY IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ITS SERVICE AREA.

• DEFINITION: This measure compares the percentage of each population group that is enrolled at Cuesta College to that group’s representation in the adult population with the community service area. BENCHMARK: Percentage representation within the community service area • GOAL: To represent the demographics of the

service area in Cuesta’s student body

IEO #9A: THE CUESTA COLLEGE STUDENT BODY IS REPRESENTATIVE OF ITS SERVICE AREA.

AGE Cuesta College Service Area Difference15-19 31.7% 8.1% 23.6%20 to 24 32.9% 10.1% 22.8%25 to 34 18.3% 11.9% 6.4%35-64 16.9% 39.3% -22.4% DISABILITY STATUS Cuesta College Service Area DifferenceDisability 4.5% 9.1% -4.6%No Disability 95.4% 90.9% 4.5% ETHNICITY Cuesta College Service Area DifferenceWhite alone 61.4% 71.1% -9.7%Hispanic or Latino (of any race) 25.1% 20.8% 4.3%Two or more races 2.7% 3.8% -1.1%Some other race alone/Unknown 5.1% 0.0% 5.1%Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 0.2% 0.1% 0.1%Asian alone 2.1% 3.2% -1.1%American Indian and Alaska Native alone 0.8% 0.9% -0.1%Black or African American alone 1.1% 2.1% -1.0% GENDER Cuesta College Service Area DifferenceMale 48.3% 51.2% -2.9%Female 50.5% 48.8% 1.7%Unknown 1.0% 0.0% 1.0%

IEO #9B: CUESTA COLLEGE PROMOTES A CAMPUS CLIMATE THAT IS INCLUSIVE AND SUPPORTIVE OF ITS DIVERSE STUDENT BODY.

• DEFINITION: This measure compares Cuesta’s mean level of satisfaction with the national sample of community college respondents on two constructs measured by the Noel Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory: Campus Climate and Responsiveness to Diversity.• See Appendix D for more details

BENCHMARK: Mean Satisfaction level of National sample of Community College Students• GOAL: To meet or exceed the Satisfaction level of

the National sample

IEO #9B: CUESTA COLLEGE PROMOTES A CAMPUS CLIMATE THAT IS INCLUSIVE AND SUPPORTIVE OF ITS DIVERSE STUDENT

BODY.

1995 1998 2001 20064.90

5.00

5.10

5.20

5.30

5.40

5.50

5.105.15

5.12

5.42

5.11 5.105.13

5.08

Campus Climate - Noel Levitz

Cuesta College National Sample

IEO #9B: CUESTA COLLEGE PROMOTES A CAMPUS CLIMATE THAT IS INCLUSIVE AND SUPPORTIVE OF ITS DIVERSE STUDENT

BODY.

1995 1998 2001 20065.00

5.10

5.20

5.30

5.40

5.50

5.60

5.185.24 5.22

5.51

5.335.30 5.31

5.26

Responsiveness to Diversity - Noel Levitz

Cuesta College National Sample

IEO #10: THE DISTRICT DEMONSTRATES APPROPRIATE MANAGEMENT OF ITS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES ACTIVITIES

BY OBTAINING AN UNQUALIFIED INDEPENDENT AUDIT ANNUALLY.

• CUESTA COLLEGE OBTAINED AN UNQUALIFIED INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF ITS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE ACTIVITIES IN 2010/11—AS IT HAS SINCE THE COLLEGE’S INCEPTION.

CHALLENGES & STRENGTHS

• Primary Challenge: Basic Skills Success and Progression

• Primary Strength: Vocational Success and Job Placement

• Questions?

Documents

San Luis Obispo County Community College district Institutional Effectiveness Outcomes/ARCC Report