STANDARD I.B. ASSURING ACADEMIC QUALITY AND INSTITUTIONAL EFFECTIVENESS
Evidence for Standard I.B.1
Gavilan College demonstrates a sustained, substantial, and collegial dialog about student outcomes, achievement, equity, and the continuous improvement of teaching and learning to produce higher academic quality and better institutional effectiveness. The College begins each year with a theme at Convocation. The past three years have been defined with the themes of “Renaissance” in 2016-2017, “Practice” in 2017-2018,” and “Service” in 2018-2019. These concepts bring the college into a culture of continuous engagement with student success trends, equity data inquiry, and touchpoints of discussion that leads to deep dialog about student learning and the impact of instruction, building strategic educational environments and building on past outcomes to lead to future improvements.
There are several examples unique to Gavilan College that illustrate this commitment. The first is the Learning Council, a Chancellor’s Office award-winning component of the shared governance structure where innovation is encouraged and the focus of meetings is to reach into outcomes and student need to develop new programs and services. Focused Inquiry Groups (FIGS) study issues and brainstorm solutions for “just in time” wrap-around services to strengthen instruction and student services throughout the year. Membership is open and the Learning Council reports both to the Academic Senate and the President’s Council, which illustrates the collaboration of these decision-making committees on campus.
A report on the activities of the Learning Council was presented to the President’s Council at their July 2018 meeting (I.B-1). The Learning Council report highlighted the accomplishments of the past three years of their work, contributed through FIGS for each year (I.B-2):
|
2016-2017 FIGs |
2017-2018 FIGs |
|
|
● Information and Resource ● Communication ● Instructional Improvement ● Early Alert/Early Connect ● Veterans ● Academic Support Services ● Habits of Mind ● Professional Learning |
● Information and Resource ● Communication ● Academic Support Services ● Habits of Mind ● Guided Pathways |
● Information and Resources ● Communications ● Guided Pathways ● Homelessness |
A second example of the focus on dialog is the expansion of the institutional research office, formerly led by a director, to the Division of Research, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) supervised by a Dean (I.B-3). This division continues to evolve but is the hub of data resources on student outcomes, institutional effectiveness, the college schedule, and is driving departmental conversations about student success and equity. Resources have been allocated and data tools, such as GavDATA (I.B-4) have been developed to aid in the dialog throughout all stakeholder groups (I.B-5, I.B-6).
Since the last comprehensive visit, several established committees and within the shared governance structure have added student learning outcomes and student equity as stated objectives of their committees’ goals. These include the Equity Committee, which states one of its purposes as “To raise awareness of cultural competency, spectrum of diversity and the imperative of equity in our college community” (I.B-7). The Institutional Effectiveness Committee (IEC) last updated its bylaws with a statement on SLOs: “The IEC reviews program self-study reports to ensure all programs include Student Learning Outcomes including assessment of those outcomes” (I.B-8). The Learning Council, in its mission, makes clear the emphasis on equity and its relationship to student success: “Learning Council is an advisory group committed to the development, promotion, and advancement of a student success agenda for prospective and enrolled students at Gavilan College” (I.B-9).
There are three faculty liaison positions within the Gavilan College Faculty Association (GCFA) contract that include professional development, instructional improvement, and mentoring. The job descriptions from the three liaison positions include a commitment to equity and learning outcomes (I.B-10, I.B-11, I.B-12).
These efforts have culminated in the revision of the Participatory Governance Handbook, which was revised after a semester-long dialog with all campus groups in Spring 2018. The effectiveness of committees, and the resulting outcomes and application of those outcomes to daily practice, are now incorporated into the campus culture and will be reviewed and assessed by the Governance Committee which will report to the President’s Council at the conclusion of the 2018-19 academic year.
Analysis and Evaluation, Standard I.B.1
Gavilan College demonstrates a robust dialog and institutional commitment to student outcomes, equity, and continuous improvement. This dialog is supported by student achievement data and in the educational environment that is created and maintained at Gavilan. According to Gavilan’s recent benchmark scores on the Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE), the College scored highest in areas of active and collaborative learning, academic challenge, support for learners, and student effort (I.B-13).
The institution defines and assesses student learning outcomes for all instructional programs and student and learning support services. (ER 11)
Evidence for Standard I.B.2
All instructional programs and student and learning support services have defined their learning outcomes and almost all assess on a scheduled cycle, with each cycle taking 3-5 years. Student support services have developed program learning outcomes (PLOs) while instructional programs have developed Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) for each course as well as for each program. All PLOs and SLOs are aligned with the Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs) and linked in the Course Outline of Record (COR) (I.B-14). All Learning Outcomes, including ILOs, are reviewed during the cycle and adjustments are made as needed for clarity. Assessment of student learning outcomes at all levels is the engine that drives instructional improvement. The cycle is diagrammed on Gavilan’s Student Learning Outcomes Support Page (I.B-15).
The learning outcomes, as well as the results of assessment, are reported in several places. On the Learning Outcome Reporting page (I.B-16) each program must include its learning outcomes, the metrics by which they are assessed, the resulting data, and the planned improvements to be made once the data are analyzed. Additionally, each program includes its learning outcomes, as well as the metrics, data and improvement plan, in the Self-Study generated every four years for Program Review, all of which are available on the Institutional Effectiveness Committee / Program Integrated Planning and Review’s webpage (I.B-17). All active course outlines of record must include the learning outcomes, which are housed on the Gavilan College Curriculum homepage (I.B-18), and all instructional course learning outcomes are listed on the course syllabus for students to view (I.B-14, I.B-19).
Information on learning outcomes is available to the public on a page linked to the homepage and accessible from any page on the website. It includes relevant links and documents for the evaluation of student, program, and institutional learning outcomes (I.B-15).
The College is currently in the process of reviewing and revising these outcomes. A task force has been charged with this responsibility, and has produced a draft of the new ILOs for all stakeholders to examine and evaluate (I.B-20). This work is in progress and expected to be completed by Spring 2019.
The ILOs are linked to the Student Learning Outcomes webpage and have a link on the footer of each page on the College website(I.B-15). The Outcomes site also contains a comprehensive collection of resources on learning outcomes (I.B-21), including the SLO reporting site, guidelines for writing and assessing learning outcomes, the current Gavilan learning outcome plan, a link to outside resources such as the Academic Senate of the State of California, a timeline for learning outcome review, and all necessary forms.
In 2015 the College appointed a Student Learning Outcome liaison to provide a contact person available to all programs to help them keep learning outcomes current, viable, and on track to be fully assessed in the four year cycle (I.B-10). The Student Learning Outcome liaison convened a Learning Outcomes Committee for that year to oversee the process and create a plan for ensuring that learning outcomes were reviewed, assessed and reported.
Through 2018, the Institution has been using a Gavilan-designed database to house SLOs. Over the 2018-2019 academic year, the institution will be implementing an SLO module for the curriQunet software that houses the curriculum. This will have the following benefits:
● Learning outcomes will be automatically aligned from course to program to institution after faculty do the initial mapping.
● Results will be housed in a central repository that is also connected to the student record system.
● Recording of outcomes results will be much easier and faster to accomplish.
● Outcomes will always be up to date, as they are directly tied to the curriculum process via technology
● Reporting of outcomes will become more automated. At present, outcomes reports must be manually generated by a programmer or manually compiled by the assessment liaison.
● Workload will be substantially reduced for IT and RPIE (via curriculum specialist). At present, the site must be manually updated each time an outcome, course, or program changes.
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.2
Gavilan College meets Standard I.B.2. The College defines and assesses student learning outcomes for all instructional programs and student and learning support services.
An area that Gavilan has identified for improvement is in the assessment of SLOs for some learning support services. Some of the College’s support services, such as the Learning Commons, do not yet have learning outcomes defined; for others the SLOs have been defined but not yet assessed. For example, the Writing Center and Tutoring Center have Learning Outcomes in the reporting system, but no reported results. Both of these programs are currently undergoing program review, and it is anticipated that assessing learning outcomes will be among the recommendations of the program review committee.
The College is currently in the process of reviewing and revising these outcomes. A task force has been charged with this responsibility, and has produced a draft of the new ILOs for all stakeholders to examine and evaluate (I.B-20).
The institution establishes institution-set standards for student achievement, appropriate to its mission, assesses how well it is achieving them in pursuit of continuous improvement, and publishes this information. (ER 11)
Evidence for Standard I.B.3
Gavilan College has institutional set-standards for student achievement and assesses how well it is achieving them on a regular basis. These standards include metrics on completion rates, remedial rates, and career education rates, completion of degrees and certificates, and completion of transfer-level English and math. For each metric there is a standard, a “stretch” goal, historical data, and a multi-year average (I.B-22).
Gavilan College uses the California Community College’s Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative (IEPI) performance metrics framework for establishing and tracking college-wide institution-set standards (I.B-22). With the exception of a recent year wherein the Office of Academic Affairs was in transition, the institution-set standards are set collaboratively through the shared governance process. The Vice President for Academic Affairs, along with the Dean of Research, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness, take the results of the standards and discuss setting new standards with shared governance organizations, including Academic Senate and President’s Council. Past performance, current short-term goals, and stretch goals are posted publicly on the Gavilan College RPIE website (I.B-23).
Job placement rates for career education programs (I.B-24), and licensure exam pass rates are posted (I.B-25) online for the public annually on the webpage of the Research, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) Division (I.B-23).
When completed each year, these items are circulated electronically among college leadership, who in turn disseminate it to constituent groups as appropriate. The information is also publicly posted on the College website at the RPIE webpage (I.B.23) and can be found in the IEPI website through the California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office (I.B-26). The latter allows the College to compare its results and goals to those from other institutions.
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.3
The College has established institution-set standards for student achievement and regularly assesses how well it is achieving them as part of the institutional cycle of continuous improvement. This information is published on the college website and discussed through appropriate college committees.
The institution uses assessment data and organizes its institutional processes to support student learning and student achievement.
Evidence for Standard I.B.4
Gavilan College uses assessment data and organizes institutional processes to support student learning and student achievement.
Increasingly since the last comprehensive team visit, all stakeholder groups at Gavilan have engaged in a culture of data-based decision making. Starting with modifications in the organizational structure to include liaison positions that were contractually created to support instructional outcomes, mentoring and professional development for faculty, the College now has a practice of monitoring data trends through ARGOS, GIDS, and GavDATA and then incorporating the findings into daily operations. Student achievement rates in non-credit, especially focusing on ESL pathways to credit courses, is an example of how faculty, the RPIE division and the administration used data to change the structure of how services were offered throughout San Benito County, leading students to certificate and degree pathways that previously had been fragmented. Department chairs are directed to historical enrollment data as they make decisions in the scheduling process.
To help set standards and expectations around learning outcome development, the Dean of Research, Planning, and Institutional Effectiveness has made multiple presentations to the entire campus as well as to departments, programs, and on a one-to-one basis. For example, a session during a Division Meeting in 2016 (I.B-27), covered concepts, discussed the reasoning behind SLOs, and emphasized that SLO review is an iterative process. In 2017, the SLO Faculty Liaison and four other faculty and staff members attended the Academic Senate for California Community College’s 5th Annual SLO Symposium at Orange Coast College in Costa Mesa, California. The following month, a presentation was given at a Department Chair Committee meeting reflecting key takeaways and thoughts about areas where departments might adapt learning outcome support and development to the work at Gavilan College, as well as where more cross-campus dialogue is needed (I.B-28).
Gavilan employs a Faculty Liaison for Student Learning Outcomes. The duties of the SLO Faculty Liaison include creation of professional learning opportunities regarding learning outcomes and assessment, working collaboratively with faculty and staff, providing opportunities for campus-wide discussion, and developing ways to report outcome data (I.B-10). In 2014-16, the SLO Faculty Liaison created a Student Learning Outcomes Support Site (I.B-15) with much needed information for faculty and staff. This site includes assessment models (I.B-29), support for the measurement of learning outcomes (I.B-30), and responses to frequently asked questions related to outcomes and assessment (I.B-31).
In Spring 2017 the SLO liaison helped guide colleagues in the review and reduction of the number of learning outcomes during Professional Development Day. This was followed up with individual and department consultations, as evidenced by notes from a professional learning session with the Fine Arts Department (I.B-32). In 2017, 39 of the 41 contacted faculty had assessed their SLOs for 58 courses with an emphasis “on courses which had not been assessed in 5 years” (I.B-33). The SLO Faculty Liaison subsequently assessed the percentage of SLO and PLO classes and programs assessed, gathered assessment data, and formulated findings in an easy to understand spreadsheet which identified where efforts needed to be channeled (I.B-34). The SLO Faculty Liaison and colleagues led Professional Development Day activities in Spring 2017 with a presentation on SLO development and assessment and helped to create a menu of options for all faculty and staff to help support their work on departmental, program, and service outcomes and assessment (I.B-35). To support the value the institution places on learning outcome design and assessment, the College compensates faculty for their work (I.B-36).
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.4
Gavilan College has structure in place to support Student Learning Outcomes work, and uses data to inform that work. Outcomes assessment has taken center stage with the Faculty Liaison for Student Learning Outcomes position and funding for outcomes assessment. The College will be undertaking additional work to provide shared governance committee support for the Faculty Liaison.
The institution assesses accomplishment of its mission through program review and evaluation of goals and objectives, student learning outcomes, and student achievement. Quantitative and qualitative data are disaggregated for analysis by program type and mode of delivery.
Evidence for Standard I.B.5
The means by which Gavilan College assesses accomplishment of its mission is articulated broadly in the Education Master Plan (I.B-37), and in more detail in the Learning Outcomes website (I.B-15), which assesses Program and Student Learning Outcomes; the Institutional Effectiveness Committee / Program Integrated Planning and Review website (I.B-17), which documents the cycle of program review; and the Research, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) website (I.B-3), which provides tools and mechanisms for tracking student achievement. All assessments of Learning Outcomes, student achievement, and program effectiveness are ongoing and occur in regular cycles, and begin with an examination of the salient data, both qualitative and quantitative.
All instructional and student support services undergo Program Review once every four years. This process uses data and self-study evidence to assess the effectiveness of each program and its contribution to the college’s mission. Each program examines and analyzes quantitative data about student achievement in several forms, including student success and retention by program and course (in the case of instructional programs) and number of students served (in the case of student support services). Additionally, all programs collect and analyze qualitative data in various forms, such as surveys, intake forms, user feedback forms, etc. The data and the program’s analyses of strengths and areas needing improvement are collected once every four years in the self-study report, which is submitted to the Institutional Effectiveness Committee/Program Integrated Planning and Review (IEC/PIPR); that committee then provides recommendations for further improvement.
Programs are encouraged to use a collaborative model, which relies upon dialogue within the program and with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee/Program Integrated Planning and Review (IEC/PIPR) to generate the program review report. The members of the IEC/PIPR review each report both individually and collectively. Representatives of the program under review are given a summary of questions and concerns and are invited to meet in-person to dialogue with the committee to discuss these items. Collaborative recommendations are generated and assessed two years after the review is completed. At the end of each academic year, an executive summary and copies of the final program review summaries are provided to the Board of Trustees.
Each instructional and student services program also submits to the committee a mid-cycle Status Update Report, which details the progress made on each recommendation. Programs are asked to evaluate student success and achievement by analyzing these data, and also by reviewing all Learning Outcomes, professional development and student equity efforts, contributions to shared governance, and any other significant achievements, as well as prominent trends and challenges to the program. Instructional Programs are also asked to review and evaluate the program’s course offerings (those that are included in any major or certificate offered by the program, as well as those that meet General Education requirements), productivity, modalities, pedagogical approaches, outreach to the community, and workforce preparedness. In addition to assessing student success and effectiveness of the program, the Program Review Self-Studies outline each program’s goals and objectives for the coming cycle. These goals and objectives are drawn from the program’s official Program Plan, a document which is updated every year (I.B-38), and from the recommendations provided by the IEC/PIPR Committee during the last Program Review Cycle.
Over the 2018-2019 academic year, the IEC/PIPR Committee is changing its name to Program Integrated Planning and Review (PIPR). The program review process is undergoing a complete redesign, begun in 2017 and scheduled for completion in 2019. This involves changing board policy and administrative procedure, the makeup of the committee, a revamp of the artifacts used in review, and a focus on a three-year prospective planning process rather than a snapshot retrospective.
An example of a program using the assessment process to improve student success can be seen in the last review by the English Department. A significant number of students had not been qualifying for the college level English composition course. Program Review revealed that many of the students who had placed into classes one level or more below college level did not complete degrees or transfer. Additionally, a significant number of students who persisted into the college-level composition class did not pass. This observation led the department to investigate best practices for supporting students in their goal of passing English 1A. The English Program Plan was amended to include new goals and objectives to address the needs of these students:
- Switch to an accelerated model to greatly expanded the number of students placing directly into first year composition
- Add a unit to first year composition, making it a four unit class
- Create a new placement tool using multiple measures
- Explore new ways of supporting struggling students, such as implementing Integrated Reading and Writing (IRW) strategies and offering flexible co-requisite support units,
- Identify professional development and training opportunities for faculty,
- Create an extensive plan for assessing these new initiatives in partnership with the RPIE
- Draft a comprehensive department handbook outlining all the changes and listing further resources (I.B-39)
- Develop new curriculum in alignment with AB 705 requirements
- Develop an informed self-placement tool
Another example is in the area of Student Equity. The self-study process asks all programs to assess their student equity efforts by:
- Providing evidence for how, in the previous cycle, the program addressed the needs of students identified in the Equity Plan (I.B-40),
- Identifying what gaps remain in the program’s Student Equity efforts, and
- Providing the program’s plan, with goals and objectives, to fill those gaps.
Similarly, each program is asked during every cycle to evaluate its efforts to provide online services and Distance Education course offerings, and to identify and create a plan to address any needs (I.B-41).
Evaluation of Goals and Objectives
The Gavilan College Educational Master Plan (EMP) is supported by the Facilities Master Plan and the Technology Master Plan, all of which inform the annually updated Strategic Plan that outlines the institution’s goals and objectives. Until this year, the Strategic Plan covered a five-year period. In 2018-2019, the Strategic Planning Committee made the decision to change it to a three-year plan (I.B-42). The Strategic Plan is a “rolling” plan that is evaluated and updated annually by the Strategic Planning Committee, comprised of students, staff, faculty and administrators (I.B-43). The timeline and process for review of all functions of this committee is outlined in the proposed integrated planning model (I.B-44), and is updated annually (I.B-45).
The committee refers to the EMP, which includes environmental data including external scans at the state, regional and local levels, as well as individual Program Plans in assessing progress towards institutional goals. Additional data considered by the Strategic Planning Committee is provided by the Research, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness Office (RPIE). The RPIE generates a series of reports throughout the year which are available to the college community, and presented to the Board of Trustees in an annual report (I.B-46). This report, and work of the Strategic Planning Committee, form the foundation for the next iteration of the EMP.
For example, the College’s most recent EMP includes discussion of the new statewide student success initiatives included in SB 1456 (I.B-47). The passage of this bill prompted Gavilan College to evaluate a number of policies and procedures, leading to significant changes in the way the College meets the needs of basic skills students.
These include a new system for student placement, comprehensive orientations and counseling services, creation of pathways to efficiently move students toward their educational goals, and the creation of a scorecard metric to evaluate progress in these areas. The recommendations of the EMP formed the basis for further discussion and inclusion of new goals in the Strategic Plan and department program plans.
Gavilan College uses learning outcomes at all levels, from institutional to program to course outcomes, to evaluate student achievement and to plan for improvement. In academic year 2017-2018, the College convened a task force to revise and streamline Institutional Learning Outcomes (ILOs) to make it easier for programs to align their Program Learning Outcomes (PLOs) and course-level Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) with the ILOs. The College also assigned a dedicated coordinator to facilitate the assessment and revision of learning outcomes (I.B-10). Each program is responsible for assessing its learning outcomes, for using the results of assessments to make improvements to instruction and student services, and for updating learning outcomes as needed.
In the Math Department, for example, an analysis of learning outcomes led the department to conclude that students needed more support, as well as more rigorous standards for placement, in order to ensure improved progress at the higher levels. This led to the creation of a new placement model which raised the cutoff scores for placement into college level math classes, ensuring that students would have reasonable expectations of success while upholding the department’s rigorous standards. This further led to the development of a number of student support initiatives, such as math boot camp and the acceleration model with flexible co-requisites to support students once they arrive in transfer level math classes.
Program and Course Learning Outcomes are updated on a regular basis by department faculty through the curriculum review process. This ongoing assessment cycle ensures that the learning outcomes remain effective as a tool to track and improve efforts toward student success (I.B-16).
The College uses proven data-gathering tools and techniques to assess student achievement, and provides training opportunities for the constituent groups who use these tools. The Research Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) office website and the GavDATA site serve as sites where the data is stored and disaggregated in various ways (I.B-4). Those responsible for implementing student success initiatives have free access to all manner of data that they can use to identify gaps in support services as well as to provide documentation for the success of the services that are in place. Not only are these reports and data collections accessible on the RPIE website; the RPIE office disseminates salient information to all stakeholders, highlighting areas that are of particular interest to those stakeholders’ goals. The RPIE office is also instrumental in providing support for constituent groups wanting to develop metrics for further measuring student success.
Analysis and Evaluation, Standard I.B.5
Student achievement is integral to Gavilan’s mission, and the majority of recent initiatives and policy changes undertaken by the college have student success as their goal. Gavilan’s assessment of the achievement of its mission is ongoing, using reliable data drawn from the program review process, and from evaluation of learning outcomes at all levels in conjunction with regularly-updated goals and objectives in the Educational Master Plan. Student success is measured using sound methods and clear parameters and benchmarks. All results are tracked and recorded systematically and made accessible to all stakeholders, in electronic and hard copy form. Reports are provided to the appropriate groups on a regular basis, with the relevant material highlighted and the conclusions synthesized where appropriate.
Over the 2018-2019 academic year the name of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee (IEC) will change to Program Integrated Planning and Review (PIPR). The program review process is undergoing a complete redesign, begun in 2017 and scheduled for completion in 2019. This involves changing board policy and administrative procedure, the makeup of the committee, a revamp of the artifacts used in review, and a focus on a three year prospective planning process rather than a snapshot retrospective
The institution disaggregates and analyzes learning outcomes and achievement for subpopulations of students. When the institution identifies performance gaps, it implements strategies, which may include allocation or reallocation of human, fiscal and other resources, to mitigate those gaps and evaluates the efficacy of those strategies.
Evidence for Standard I.B.6
The College uses an online data access system available to all employees, and in a more limited form, the general public. This data system includes built-in tools for evaluating disproportionate impact down to the course level and includes the ability to evaluate twenty different student outcomes disaggregated by up to twenty eight different broad categories of student demographic and academic characteristics. This interactive data system, GavDATA, is used by employees an average two hundred times per month, with each user session lasting an average of ten minutes, and with an average of two reports accessed (I.B-48). Additionally, RPIE posts most comprehensive reports to its public website for viewing by any stakeholder (I.B-17).
The College regularly disseminates and discusses this information in a variety of settings including with the Board of Trustees (I.B-49), equity committee (I.B-50) and academic senate minutes for presentation of disproportionate impact report (I.B-51). Actions are taken based upon these data.
For example, when analysis revealed that a majority of students who achieve 30-units will go on to graduate regardless of multiple background characteristics (I.B-52), student services began a second-year project to boost unit completions. Additionally, these data fed into plans for the College Promise program and a campaign for encouraging full-time enrollment.
An additional example is the recent comprehensive EOPS program evaluation (I.B-53). This evaluation included disaggregation of student data by 26 characteristics in an effort to separate the effect of student demographic academic, and program participation statuses from the effect of participation in EOPS. Results of the evaluation are leading to planning for scaling of intrusive advising and nudge points that are a cornerstone of the EOPS program (I.B-54).
Analysis of data from noncredit students in ESL “mirrored” courses revealed significant student drop points, leading that program to develop a comprehensive system of interventions, including enhanced tutoring and academic support services to provide supportive success strategies as students move into credit courses.
Implemented strategies and resource allocations addressing these gaps include Gavilan’s Basic Skills Initiative and Basic Skills Outcomes Transformation grant, the hiring of a Basic Skills counselor, the hiring of two retention specialists, multiple measures placement, acceleration, touchpoint technology such as GradGuru, 85% check-ins by counselors, and a second year experience initiative. Additionally, once gaps were identified in the data, the data access system was revised with specific tools to allow departments and disciplines identify stop-out points amongst their students. Disaggregating data in math and English is another key area where faculty addressed the mandates of AB 705 and the entrance requirements for students in gateway courses.
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.6
The availability and functionality of the GavDATA system combined with data pushing and reports from the RPIE Division result in a shared achievement knowledge base at the College. Learning outcome and achievement data is widely discussed, and identified gaps are addressed in multiple program initiatives. All of these activities start with data-driven decision making and outcomes analyzed from the institution set achievement standards to support the mission of the College.
The institution regularly evaluates its policies and practices across all areas of the institution, including instructional programs, student and learning support services, resource management, and governance processes to assure their effectiveness in supporting academic quality and accomplishment of mission.
Evidence for Standard I.B.7
Policies and procedures are regularly reviewed at the institutional level through the shared governance process. The President’s Office receives annual updates from the Community College League of California (CCLC) and distributes these updates to the various instructional and service areas for review, modification, and to ensure policies are broadly discussed within the participatory governance process. In Spring 2018, the President formed the President’s Council Policy Committee to assist in streamlining the policy review process as well as encourage an institutional discussion on the meaning and operational application of policies across the College.
At the Leadership Council meeting on August 28, 2018 a draft of the Board Policy and Administrative Procedure Review Cycle was circulated and discussed (I.B-55). The review cycle has two goals:
- An Annual Review of policies and procedures, incorporating biannual legal update revisions issues by the Community College League of California, and
- A six year review cycle of all policies and procedures.
The Board Policy Manual is posted online at the Gavilan College website (I.B-56). In 2018, the BoardDocs platform was adopted to house meeting agendas, documents, and minutes. Over the next year the Policies and Procedures manual will be transferred from the current pdf-based document format to the searchable BoardDocs platform. The addition of the President’s Council Policy Committee and bi-weekly review process of policies at Leadership Council has added new layers of structure to the policy review process at Gavilan.
Programs evaluate their practices and procedures through the yearly Program Plan and the program review process (I.B-17). During the process, departments identify procedures and practices specifically relating to the college’s mission and the goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan (I.B-57), and identify larger trends affecting those procedures and practices.
Academic programs scrutinize the information in GavDATA about such areas as retention and student success and provide an analysis of the data (I.B-58). Each program evaluates its procedures and practices with regard to equity; the report specifically calls for a review of how academic departments currently work to close identified equity gaps and for a summary of what gaps still remain and what plans the department has for addressing those gaps in the coming program review cycle (I.B-59). The program review committee then makes a series of recommendations for programs to work on, based on the Self-Study Report (I.B-60). Midway through each review cycle, programs are required to submit a Status Update detailing the progress made on each recommendation (I.B-61). The Self-Study report, the Program Review recommendations, and the Status Updates are all compiled in the Annual Report of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee/Program Integrated Planning and Review, which is then presented to various constituencies, including Cabinet, President’s Council, Academic Senate and finally the Board of Trustees for a final vote before it is made available to the entire college on the intranet (I.B-17).
Instructional programs also review their procedures and practices internally, via department and division meetings and discussions. For example, the English Department last year reviewed and revised its practice regarding collaborative decision making based on the Department’s established values and principles (I.B-62). A task force was convened to draw up a draft of the steps in the procedure. This draft was posted to the department’s shell on Canvas, the College’s course management software, and also distributed via email to all English faculty for review and comment in advance of the discussion at the monthly department meeting. All department members were invited to weigh in on each successive draft, either by proxy, by email, or at the meeting. The task force compiled all feedback and incorporated it into the subsequent drafts. From first draft to final draft, the process involved all members of the department.
Instructional programs also use the college’s Enrollment Management Plan (I.B-63) to examine how program offerings fulfill the college’s mission and the goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan. This comprehensive document looks at procedures and practices of scheduling and staffing classes, and in doing so allows instructional faculty to review and analyze the data generated by their departments on student success, retention and persistence, including the groups identified in Gavilan’s Equity Report.
Student Support Services also review procedures and practices internally, with each service having its own method of review. For example, the Writing Center conducts weekly meetings with the drop-in tutors and Supplemental Instructors, advising them on any procedural or policy changes, but also soliciting their opinion as to what’s working and what is not (I.B-64). Additionally, the coordinator of the Writing Center delivers a standing report at all English Department meetings, detailing any changes in procedures and/or practices and allowing faculty to offer suggestions for improvement (I.B-65). All student support services, like all academic programs, are required to submit yearly Program Plans and undergo Program Review every four years, with a mid-cycle Status Update report falling due after the first two years of the cycle. As always, authors of the Self Study reports are asked to explain how their procedures and practices address the goals and objectives delineated in the Strategic Plan (I.B-57).
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.7
Gavilan has regular processes in place to evaluate its policies on an institutional level as well as au universal review process for all programs. In addition, Instruction and Student Services engage in internal evaluation processes, and externally-generated evaluations, such as the Equity Report, provide analytics for further policy and practice review.
The institution broadly communicates the results of all of its assessment and evaluation activities so that the institution has a shared understanding of its strengths and weaknesses and sets appropriate priorities.
Evidence for Standard I.B.8
Gavilan College communicates the results of assessment and evaluation activities through broadly accessible data tools, the college website, and the Shared Governance Process.
The Chancellor’s Office provides several tools that staff and the public can use to access and evaluate information about college performance. These tools, provided to the College and communicated through the web page, provide baseline data for all stakeholder groups:
● The Student Success Scorecard (I.B-66) which is linked to from every page on the Gavilan College website, and displays success metrics in Math/English ESL achievement, program completion, and career education achievement.
● The Chancellor’s Office MIS DataMart (I.B-67) allows more specific data searches by college and student characteristics, including enrollment status, citizenship status, and education status.
● The CCC LaunchBoard (I.B-68)
● SalarySurfer (I.B-69) provides wage information for those who have completed programs of study, aggregated statewide and linking to colleges with the named majors.
To provide more meaningful data at the local level, the District uses the following:
● GavDATA: Gavilan College has contracted with Precision Campus to create GavDATA (I.B-4), an interactive, customizable database available to the public as well as to the campus community. GavDATA allows users to create their own custom data reports on student outcomes cross-referenced by demographic and academic characteristics. This tool has made information about the college’s performance widely accessible and useful across the institution. It has also been successful: in an average month, 100 to 200 unique employees access the data system and create reports about student outcomes. Additionally, the tool comes prebuilt with in-depth disaggregated impact analysis, allowing all users to examine student outcomes for different cohorts and groups of students at the college, division, department, discipline, course and even individual section levels. The tool also allows users to upload custom cohorts of students so that a user can track the results of a given intervention over time. The Research Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) office has conducted training workshops and created instructional videos in the use of GavDATA to evaluate student outcomes and to compliment the program review process. GavDATA is used widely, from counselors evaluating impact of majors, to instructional faculty and academic administrators evaluating outcomes, to grant administrators tracking cohorts of students, to administrators making enrollment management decisions.
● RPIE: The Research Planning and Institutional Effectiveness (RPIE) webpage (I.B-3) provides one-stop access to the Chancellor’s office data tools and “Quicklinks” to basic college data, downloadable reports, and other publications, planning documents, Institutional Learning Outcomes, and surveys.
● curriQunet (I.B-70): Over the 2018/19 academic year, the College will be implementing the Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) module for curriQunet (which will replace the internally-developed system (I.B-71) that has been in use for a number of years).
Data and reports are also communicated through the Shared Governance process. For example, the RPIE division disseminates reports on a regular basis using multiple methods, and presents at committees such as Leadership Council (I.B-55) and President’s Council (I.B-72). Another example is the broad communication of the College’s annual disproportionate impact analysis, which was presented to various committees (I.B-50) and posted publicly online. The division serves as a resource for such shared governance committees as the Academic Senate and twelve other committees.
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.8
Gavilan College broadly communicates the results of all of its assessment and evaluation activities through the website, shared governance, and online tools. With continuing training in GavDATA, sharing of reports through the RPIE website and shared governance, and implementation of the Student Learning Outcomes (SLO) module in curriQunet, the College is moving towards better lines of dialog and feedback circles wherein the strengths and planning implications of the data can be infused across all College planning processes.
The institution engages in continuous, broad based, systematic evaluation and planning. The institution integrates program review, planning, and resource allocation into a comprehensive process that leads to accomplishment of its mission and improvement of institutional effectiveness and academic quality. Institutional planning addresses short- and long-range needs for educational programs and services and for human, physical, technology, and financial resources. (ER 19)
Evidence for Standard I.B.9
Gavilan College engages in a continuous cycle of planning and evaluation at the Board, institutional, functional, and program levels.
FIGURE 39: INSTITUTIONAL Planning and Review Cycle
Integrated planning has taken a predominant focus for the past two years as Gavilan has developed major comprehensive planning documents, such as the Educational Master Plan (I.B-37) and the Facilities Master Plan (I.B-73), along with a number of ancillary plans to form a culture of continuous assessment and evaluation in all areas of campus instruction and service.
● The Strategic Plan (I.B-57)
● Program Plans (I.B-38)
● Program Review Self-Studies (I.B-74)
At the program and department level the College’s system for broad-based evaluation and planning is outlined on the webpage of the Institutional Effectiveness Committee (which is now in the process of changing its name to Program Integration, Planning and Research (PIPR) (I.B-75), the shared governance committee that conducts program reviews for all areas on campus, including administration, operations, support services and instructional programs (I.B-17). Program review is continuous in that every area on campus undergoes review once every four years; each completes a comprehensive Self-Study detailing the accomplishments and challenges of the past cycle and analyzing the data compiled during that time (I.B-74). The goal of program review is for programs to reflect on what was or was not effective during the past cycle, but even more importantly, to use those reflections to plan for the future and improve performance. All Self-Study reports begin with the Mission Statement and the goals and objectives of the Strategic Plan and continue with an analysis of how the department’s activities address those larger concerns and the more detailed concerns under that umbrella, such as Equity and Student Success. They include data gleaned from GavDATA and from Human Resources detailing the department’s statistics regarding student success, retention and persistence.
Program review is linked to budget allocation practices and to the larger Strategic Plans and to the Gavilan College Mission Statement. Recommendations from each department’s Self-Study Report are developed into yearly Program Plans, which detail the goals of the department and the accompanying request for funds. The self-studies and recommendations are compiled into an Annual Program Review Report at the end of spring semester, along with an overview and evaluation of that year’s process, and presented to Cabinet, Academic Senate and President’s Council and then to the Board of Trustees. The approved annual report is published on the Gavilan College Intranet and made available to the entire Gavilan community (I.B-76).
The IEC’s recommendations are also forwarded to the Budget Committee, which makes resource allocation recommendations based in part on whether or not each request is supported by a recommendation from the IEC / PIPR (I.B-77). Midway through the cycle, each program submits a Status Update progress report to the IEC / PIPR committee.
Because the program review process is tied to the institutional goals and objectives laid out in the Strategic Plan and are designed to help individual programs and departments align with those goals and objectives, every year the IEC / PIPR Committee assesses the review process and makes changes as needed. For example, every year for the last several years, the form used for the Self Study report has been revised. The most recent review cycles, AY 2016-2017 and AY 2018-2019 (I.B-78, I.B-74) the Committee has issued comprehensive amendments not just to the form, but to the process itself.
The IEC/PIPR committee, in conjunction with the RPIE division, is currently working on a substantial redesign of the program review process. The College was recently approved for a Professional Resource Team (PRT) through the California Community Colleges Institutional Effectiveness Partnership Initiative (IEPI) to expand upon these efforts. The main goal of the redesign is to shift the process from an emphasis on retrospective review to an emphasis on prospective planning. The new process will be called Program Integrated Planning and Review (PIPR). Each program will be asked to form a mini strategic plan that outlines specific goals, activities, resources, responsible parties, and cross-functional operations opportunities, to tie the goal to the college mission and strategic plans, to create a timeline for completion, and to develop an evaluation strategy. These components will become the basis for the annual program plan/budget requests, and the evaluation results from the goals will become the foundation for the subsequent program review cycle. It is hoped that this new process will turn program review self-studies into living documents that are referenced throughout the review cycle.
Analysis and Evaluation for Standard I.B.9
The College evaluates its planning documents in a regular cycle and evaluates its programs continuously through program review. Results are posted on the Gavilan College website. In response to the assessment of the current cycle, large changes are being planned for the next cycle, 2018-2019, including a restructuring of the IEC / PIPR committee from a stand-alone independent committee to being under the supervision of the newly created office of Research, Planning and Institutional Effectiveness.
Gavilan College incorporates data in all conversations about College planning. The Office of RPIE effectively uses its website and the GavDATA tool to broadly communicate disaggregated data and research to help inform College decision-making processes. The College is now ready to engage in a more intentional cycle of dialog about the action implications of data related to equity and student achievement.
- Student Learning Outcomes, Program Learning Outcomes, and Institutional Learning Outcomes: The College is currently in the process of reviewing and revising ILOs. A task force has been charged with this responsibility, and has produced a draft of the new ILOs for all stakeholders to examine and evaluate (I.B-20). Over the 2018/19 academic year, the College will be implementing the Student Learning Outcomes module for curriQunet (which will replace the internally-developed system (I.B-71) that has been in use for a number of years).
- Institution Set-Standards: Discuss Institution Set-Standards and their assessment and revision through the participatory governance process.
- Strategic Plan: Complete the transition from a five-year to a three year Strategic Plan
- Program Review: Over the 2018-2019 academic year, the IEC is changing its name to Program Integrated Planning and Review (PIPR). The program review process is undergoing a complete redesign, begun in 2017 and scheduled for completion in 2019. This involves changing board policy and administrative procedure, the makeup of the committee, a revamp of the artifacts used in review, and a focus on a three year prospective planning process rather than a snapshot retrospective
- Shared Governance:
1. Review and assess the effectiveness of committees, and the resulting outcomes and application of those outcomes to daily practice,
2. Begin work of the Governance Committee which will report to the President’s Council at the conclusion of the 2018/19 academic year.
3. Provide shared governance committee support for the Faculty Liaison.
- Policies and Procedures: Evaluate progress of the newly-formed President’s Council Policy Committee to assist in streamlining the annual and six year process as well as encourage an institutional discussion on the meaning and operational application of policies across campus. Evaluate progress. Complete transition of Policies and Procedures manual into BoardDocs (I.B.7)