1

INSTRUCTIONAL PLANNING REPORT SOCIOLOGY PROGRAM 2011-2012

I. BACKGROUND, EVALUATION & ANALYSIS A. Program Description

“Neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.”

– C. Wright Mills, The Sociological Imagination (1959)

The Sociology Program is a vital part of the general education and transfer mission of the College. All sociology course offerings are approved for the College’s A.A./A.S. degrees and lower-division GE requirements in the area of Social Sciences. The main aim of the sociology program is to provide an intellectually engaging environment in which students can develop college-level reading, writing, and critical thinking skills to aid them in their academic, professional, and personal lives. Every course offered by the program emphasizes the development of social scientific reasoning and analytical skills and the cultivation of global awareness and social responsibility. All sociology faculty utilize teaching methodologies to prepare students for the challenges and opportunities of careers in our contemporary information- and service- based economy. For the past 5 years, the Sociology Program comprises one contract faculty member and five adjunct instructors:

Teresa Macedo, contract since 2006, currently teaching 4 Sociology courses & 1 Women’s Studies course

Mik Moore, currently teaching 2 courses

Jackie Logg, currently teaching 3 courses

Liz Roberts, currently teaching 3 courses

Sadie Reynolds, currently teaching 1 course

Anthony Villarreal, currently teaching 1 course The Program currently offers 14 sections a semester from pool of 7 courses, all of which fulfill GE US/CSU requirements for Social Sciences:

SOC 1 Introduction to Sociology

SOC 2 Contemporary Social Problems

SOC 3 Introduction to Race and Ethnicity

SOC 5 Gender and Society

SOC 8 Introduction to Latina/o Studies

SOC 9 Global Society

SOC 47 Crime and Society

According to the institution-level analysis conducted by the Program Reduction and Discontinuance Task Force presented December 2011, the Sociology Program ranks 4th of the 50 transfer and basic skills departments on campus based on the criteria of: 1) efficiency, 2) core mission, 3) student success, 4) access, and 5) community support.

2

B. Relationships Sociology transfer courses are fully articulated with UC and CSU systems. Our offerings are consistent with lower-division offerings at other educational institutions within the vicinity (UCSC, SJSU, CSUMB). Sociology departments within the UC and CSU systems typically require a lower-division sequence of Introduction to Sociology (SOC 1) and Social Problems (SOC 2). Most require a number of additional lower-division sociology electives that can be fulfilled at Cabrillo by taking SOC 3, 5, 8, 9, and/or 47. The program also offers a number of courses that are required lower-division preparation for other majors, including social science, social welfare, and social work at UCSC, CSUMB, SJSU, and UC Berkeley. SOC 2/2H, 3, 8 and 9 fulfill the Cabrillo Multicultural Studies degree requirement. SOC 5 fulfills the Lifelong Learning and Self-Development requirement. Several CTE programs utilize sociology classes as required classes. In the Dental Hygiene Program, SOC 1 or 2 is one of the four required courses outside the DH core needed for graduation. Similarly the Human Services and Nursing Programs require SOC 2 as a graduation requirement, which is, again, one of four courses required outside of these departments’ core. Program faculty serve or have served on numerous campus committees including: Curriculum Committee, Student Disciplinary Committee, Social Justice Conference Steering Committee, and Services and Programs Reduction Committee. Our faculty have served in leadership roles in CCFT. They have also served as faculty advisers to the Organization of Latin Americans and LGBT student clubs. Program faculty belong to professional organizations such as the American Sociological Association, Pacific Sociological Association, Society for the Study of Social Problems, Sociology of Education Association, American Educational Research Association, and the National Association for Chicana and Chicano Studies. Dr. Sadie Reynolds holds a Visiting Scholar position at Stanford University. There are two possible opportunities for inter-programmatic collaboration that would be beneficial to students in the Sociology Program. The Sociology and Psychology Programs have discussed designing a statistics course for social/behavioral science majors. Currently the recommended statistics course is Math 12 which, as a general Math offering, does not emphasize the applicability of statistical analysis to social and behavioral phenomena. Math 12 is a 5 unit course whereas a PSYCH/SOC statistics class would be 3 units, a sufficient amount of preparation for upper-division social and behavioral science quantitative methodologies courses. Secondly, we have the potential to offer students an opportunity to participate in interdisciplinary inquiry around contemporary social, moral, and ethical issues. The Sociology and Philosophy Programs could offer a linked block of two sections – one SOC 2 (Contemporary Social Problems) and one PHILO 16 (Contemporary Moral

3

Issues) – that would integrate topics, survey humanistic and social scientific scholarship, and promote a synthetic approach in analyzing modern social phenomena. Such collaboration would require additional College support because, given the limited number of SOC 2 sections offered per term (4-5), it is not feasible at this time to reserve one of those for a linked block of sections. C. Cost & Efficiency The data that follow are drawn from the 2011 Cabrillo College Fact Book. The data reveal that the Program is highly cost efficient. Some of the key reasons to explain this are:

1. Compared to similar disciplines (for example, Anthropology, History, Political Science), Sociology has a relatively high enrollment cap of 49.

2. Our classes are all lecture based and do not require lab costs or other associated

expenditures.

3. Our Program also relies heavily on adjunct instructors which brings down the overall costs of operation.

Program Load: A comparison of Sociology Program load with the College average shows the extremely cost effective nature of the Program. In the past five years, we have consistently and substantially exceeded the College average in terms of Program Load.

Program data:

College data:

As the chart below indicates, from FA06 through SP11 the Sociology Program’s load was an average of 120% higher than the overall College rates.

4

Program Base Expenditures: The Sociology Program is highly cost efficient. In each of the years under analysis here the income it brings to the College has exceeded its costs. For instance, the table below shows that, on average, the Program has brought in 50% more income than was expended.

To put this in a monetary perspective, over the past 10 Fall and Spring terms the Program has brought in $2,993,984 and cost $917,1191.As compared to other transfer programs, Sociology ranks 8th of 50 in terms of income/expense ratio:

1 Based on 2009-10 estimate of $4564/FTES.

5

D. Student Learning Outcomes Core Four Competencies: Every course in the Sociology Program has been reviewed and revised to include the four core competencies and student learning outcomes. Every sociology course moves students towards competency in the following areas: Communication, Critical Thinking and Information Competency, Global Awareness, and Personal Responsibility and Professional Development. The bases of sociological inquiry are critical thinking and global awareness. Sociological thinking requires and fosters the ability to perform analysis, evaluate information, and solve problems with real-life implications. Sociology courses require students to analyze tables, graphs, and charts in addition to verbal data. Sociology classes develop students’ ability to discern the difference between facts and assumptions and to create well-substantiated arguments based on the former. Second, sociological study promotes a greater understanding of social diversity and civics and increases students’ capacity to effectively interface with people from a variety of backgrounds in social and professional settings. Third, sociology classes and faculty facilitate student competency in reading, writing, speaking and listening in individual, small group, and large group settings. Finally, sociology classes foster a high degree of personal responsibility and professional development by requiring that students manage a rigorous workload, meet deadlines and complete tasks, and be accountable for their own learning. Student Learning Outcomes: The Program was among the first to develop SLOs when it went through instructional planning 2006-7. It was a particularly unstable point in the Program’s history, with one full-time faculty member retiring and another just coming on board. At that point in time a set of 3 shared course SLOs were put in place. The department devised a core set of learning outcomes that are applicable to all courses and tailored them to be specific to each course in the Program. In the subsequent years, it became clear to Program faculty that one of the original shared course SLOs was not especially appropriate as an overarching SLO so we did not assess it. The SLOs we concentrated on were:

1. Observe, describe, and sociologically analyze social interaction and forms of social organization relating to [specific course focus].

2. Construct and support sociological analysis relating to [specific course focus] using sociological concepts and data.

All Program faculty include SLOs in their syllabi and center course design and delivery around them. We have created a range of assignments to assist students’ attain mastery of SLOs. We employ a wide variety of assignment types (objective tests, in- and out-of-class essays, group projects, video responses, reading journals, etc.) and instructional modalities to better create the conditions students with different learning preferences need to excel. As a Program, we have been committed very strongly to making active learning a central part of our classroom instruction because the general consensus among

6

scholars of teaching and learning is that this style of teaching promotes learning.2 There is a concerted effort to incorporate active learning techniques to supplement more instructor-centered techniques like lecturing to foster student learning in the context of large classes (49 students). Assessment Findings: We have been pleased with the assessment result data generated thus far because they indicate that we are organizing our classes around the Core Four/SLOs and assisting our students in reaching them. Faculty members noticed that across the board our students have some difficulties producing college-level writing and analyzing issues from a more individualized perspective rather than the broader perspective emphasized by sociologists. However, to expect that students would enter an Introduction to Sociology class (or any other we offer) already having mastered college writing and sociological theories and concepts would be unreasonable. Through our discussion we also landed on a couple key ways that we already facilitate student learning, and will continue to build on in the coming years. Something that surfaced in our discussions was the necessity of explaining, often and thoroughly, what the expectations for performance are on each assignment, and in the class as a whole. Second, we stressed the necessity of not only modeling the sociological paradigm in as clear a way as possible but also bringing attention to our efforts to do so in a more deliberate manner. Through the assessment process we were able to identify these two strategies as common threads throughout our department. Areas/Strategies for Improvement in Assessment: The assessment form addenda are not as well-developed as they could/should be. Our assessment process has been less systematized and thorough as is required to stay up-to-date on the revolving wheel of assessment. We were incredibly behind in assessment up until the SP11 Flex Workshop on Program Planning. We took that opportunity to try to catch up on our assessment. At this point in time, we have assessed all of the Core Four Competencies and SLO’s. However, the CIP will undoubtedly notice that we completed these assessments very late in the cycle and with a compressed timeline. The primary explanation for this admittedly major irregularity is that the teaching, service, and PC duties of a one FTC department for the past five years have been overwhelming and, to be frank, untenable to the author of this plan. The main focus has been on rebuilding the Program by updating existing and conceiving new curricula, designing and offering new courses, promoting course offerings to increase enrollment,

2 Jennifer L. Faust and Donald R. Paulson, “Active Learning in the College Classroom,” Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 9 no. 2 (1998), 3-24. Michael Prince, “Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research,” Journal of Engineering Research 93, no. 3 (2004), 223-231. Karl Smith, “Going Deeper: Formal Small-Group Learning in Large Classes,” New Directions For Teaching And Learning, 81, Spring (2000), 25-46.

7

hiring and mentoring new part-time faculty, and the like. The Assessment process has suffered because of the energy expended on these other program-building activities. We would like to stress the fact that, despite lacking a set of assessment scheduled at regular intervals, Program faculty were/are consistently evaluating, adjusting, and collaborating with each other about how to become better teachers and enhance student learning and success. Members of our faculty have led a number of campus-wide Flex Week workshops on “The Industrialization of Education: Origins, Effects & Alternatives,” “Hands-on HASS: Classroom Jeopardy!,” “Teaching Exchange: Small Group/Discussion Activities in the Humanities and Social Sciences,” and “Incorporating a Human Rights Perspective in the Classroom.” However, we recognize that our efforts to achieve and maintain teaching excellence must be standardized. To that end, we have a number of strategies in place for the next planning cycle to make strides in the realm of assessment. 1) Streamline process: Shared course SLOs have been reduced to from three to two

core outcomes to make the assessment process will be more manageable. 2) Strengthen leadership: An adjunct faculty member, Jackie Logg, will be receiving a

portion of PC units to lead the assessment process. 3) Routinize process: Follow the plan below to bring the Program in compliance with

the assessment requirements. The SLO coordinator has worked with us to create a multi-year plan for the regular assessment of both SLOs and the Core Four.

4) Formalize process: Capture the informal evaluation of teaching and learning that takes place within the department. Use our Flex meetings to more explicitly focus on our goals, obstacles, strategies, and accomplishments related to teaching and learning.

E. Student Success The tables below illustrate how the Sociology Program’s student success and course completion rates in the last Planning cycle have steadily improved and now exceed College rates. We are particularly proud of our success and completion rates because our courses have heavy reading and writing loads, characteristics that can often lead to students’ failure to finish and pass courses. The data below will bear testament to the fact that, in terms of retention, completion, and success rates, the Program has unquestionably exceled during the FA06-SP11 cycle. Among other factors, this is a result of having recruited such a strong contingent of stellar part-time faculty members as well as having developed a culture within our department of regularly, rigorously, and collaboratively evaluating our teaching methods. We have made a serious attempt to develop our capacity for and commitment to student-centered learning. We have hired instructors to courses in their specialized areas (Gender, Crime, Latinas/os). We have developed and offered courses that appeal to students’ increasing sense of themselves as global citizens (Global Society) in a rapidly diversifying society (Race and Ethnicity, Latinas/os). These tables summarize the data used to support the analysis that follows:

8

Completion and retention rates: The chart below illustrates that with the exception of a slight dip in SP07/FA07, the Sociology Program has been on par with and slightly above the College’s completion rates. As with success rates discussed below, even as the College’s completion rates have increased, Sociology students’ completion rates have similarly increased. As of SP11, the Sociology Program completion rate reached 90%.

Success rates: From 2006-07 to 2011-12 Program success rates increased nearly 10% (9.7%). The chart below illustrates how after remaining fairly comparable with College success rates from FA06 through SP09, since FA09 Sociology has outpaced the overall success rates for the College as a whole. Even as the College’s success rates have increased, Sociology students’ success rates have similarly increased. As of SP11, Sociology Program student success rates have risen to about 4% higher than the College’s.

9

After a change in program leadership beginning in the 07-08 school year, several major changes were implemented which we believe culminated in the general uptick in student success and completion rates that started to occur in 08-09. Chief among these changes were:

the successful retention, recruitment and hiring of a number of dynamic adjunct instructors who are extremely dedicated to staying current in the field and updating course material as appropriate.

the wide-scale adoption of student-centered, active learning practices in our classes that have had the effect of increasing comprehension and retention of course material.

the extensive incorporation of learning activities that allow students to grasp the “real world” applicability of sociological perspectives and paradigms, for example by incorporating current news stories and documentary films related to course topics.

the department-wide commitment to creating meaningful grading rubrics to convey expectations for evaluation as well as core recommendations for improvement.

Majors: Another set of figures from the current evaluation cycle that Sociology faculty are particularly pleased by is the steady increase in the number of majors. Looking at the Spring figures, we have gone from 63 majors in SP07 to 110 in SP11. We believe that this marked rise in majors reflects the Program’s ever-increasing commitment to teaching excellence and student success. The increased number of majors reflects the concerted efforts Program faculty have made to convey the relevance of sociology not just for potential sociologists but also for those who are interested in pursuing a wide range of occupations and professions. Also, by increasing the rigor of our courses, students have a stronger sense of the ways in which sociological training at Cabrillo can greatly enhance their success after transferring. Access: Additional data from the Fact Book indicate that the Sociology Program, while striving to address the degree and transfer needs of all students, also plays a notable role in serving the needs of students from underrepresented minority backgrounds. With the exception of Women’s Studies, Sociology has the highest level of minority student

10

enrollment of all social science programs in the College. Because our courses directly and comprehensively address many of the issues facing people from underrepresented minority backgrounds, it comes as no surprise that there would be a disproportionate number of students concentrated in our classes. F. Results of Student Survey Though a sample of 70 students is quite small, the results of the survey conducted in FA10 cast a favorable eye on the Program. Quantitative data: Notable findings from standardized portion of the survey point to some of the success of the Sociology Program. 84% of students agreed that students’ performance in the department is assessed Sufficiently. When asked to respond the statement “The class outline/syllabus provided by the instructor reflects what is actually taught in class,” 100% of students responded Accurately. To the degree that student success is due in part to their sense that they are being assessed fairly and taught in a predictable manner, these data reflect well on the Program. These views may have lead 90% of them to respond Yes to the question “Would you recommend classes in this department to other students?” In large part what the quantitative portion of the student surveys revealed was the Program’s success in explicitly conveying to students what our courses are about, maintaining a clear direction/focus throughout the term, and fostering a sense of being treated/evaluated fairly. Qualitative data: The results of this portion of the survey were overwhelmingly positive. However, there was a small cluster of comments suggesting instructors lighten the workload. Another small cluster focused on the cost and availability of texts. Some suggested incorporating more “real-life” application of the material, as well as more “up-to-date” media materials. Others indicated they would benefit from guest lecturers. These are certainly concerns that faculty are interested in discussing further. The vast majority of suggestions for improving the program actually reflected its strengths. A very large number of students requested more classes (sections) and more classes (topics). All in all, students identified the major strengths of the Program in the following ways:

Instructors who: o are prepared, enthusiastic, passionate, engaging, knowledgeable, and

inclusive o “want students to do well in school and know important things about the

world for future reference.”

Course content that is interesting, relevant, current, informative, and captivating

Diversity of teaching modalities, including lecture, discussion, media, and “hands-on” activities

Introduction to an academic discipline that: o “gives us the ability to see things differently” o helps students “understand the world in a different light and allow[s] us to

gain more than just course material but also help[s] us understand ourselves and the environment we are in”

11

o “teaches one to be aware about the surroundings that we live in and know what is happening within the community that we are living in”

o is “empowering through critical thinking” o “can be applied to a lot of fields in the workplace”

All Sociology courses are approved for the GE/IGETC lists in the area of Social and Behavioral Science. For inclusion, the main criteria are that these courses:

Develop an understanding of the ways in which social and cultural phenomena constitute the framework for the behavior of individuals and groups

Give students tools to place individual behavior in the context of human social, political, and economic institutions

The representative statements above signal that the Program is exactly where it should be in terms of providing sound instruction in the social sciences. G. Curriculum Review For this Instructional Plan process, all Program courses went through a thorough review in consideration of the appropriateness and currency of our course offerings. We also revisited and revised our department’s model program(s). Core mission: Every Sociology course at the College have been determined to be “core” for transfer programs and can be taken to fulfill UC and CSU General Education requirements. In the present planning cycle, the Sociology Program has utilized all of its allotted TU’s to support the College’s core mission of transfer education. Course outlines: Sociology faculty worked to revise SLOs, course objectives, course content, methods of evaluation and textbooks for all courses. The main goals were to streamline course SLOs based on a core set of Program SLOs. For SOC 1 those are:

1. Evaluate the dynamics of human social behavior, interaction, and structures using a sociological perspective. 2. Formulate individual- and societal- level analysis employing sociological theories, concepts, research, and data sources.

Other courses’ SLOs contain a specific description adjusted for each course’s content. All proposed revisions were submitted to the Curriculum Committee and are on track to be approved SP12. When revising course SLOs, objectives and content, the Program drew very heavily from C-ID, the supra-numbering system being developed to ease the transfer and articulation burdens in California’s higher educational institutions. All course content and objectives were updated as much as possible to parallel the published course content, rigor, and student learning outcomes of comparable courses in California Community Colleges and universities. Reliance on the C-ID in curriculum revision has increased the Program’s ability to ensure that courses offered at the College are comparable to those elsewhere and, thusly, to facilitate students’ attainment of degrees in as timely a manner as possible.

12

Transfer Model Curriculum (TMC): The Sociology Program participated in the first round of developing a statewide curriculum for new associate degrees for transfer, which simultaneously award students an associate degree and prepare them for special benefits/guarantees upon transfer to CSU. Working closely with the College Matriculation Articulation Officer, our TMC was approved by the Chancellor’s Office in FA11 becoming one of two such model plans in effect at the College. Model Program: In light of its involvement in the TMC process, Sociology made a major change in its Model Program to better accommodate the needs of students. The main motivation behind this revision was to reduce time to degree and transfer. The Model Program now gives students the ability to select among more Core courses so that they are not held back, for instance, by having to take a course that is only offered one time a year. Distance Education: As part of its ongoing commitment to meeting the needs of a wide range of students, including those for whom distance education is desirable and/or necessary, for each semester in the past 3 years the Sociology Program has used one of its fourteen sections to offer SOC 1 or SOC 2 in an online format. Honors Program: Sociology was among the first departments at the College to develop Honors courses. After developing new curriculum and shepherding it through the Curriculum Committee, the Program offered SOC 1H SP10 and will be offering SOC 2H in SP12. II. PROGRAM DIRECTIONS AND GOALS & RECOMMENDATIONS Over the past five years the Sociology Program has evolved significantly and improved dramatically. Some of this evolution and improvement can be captured by quantitative data on WSCH and FTES, completion and retention rates or qualitative data gathered through student surveys, all of which are discussed above. Our success, however, is made manifest in other important ways that are not as easily measurable or well documented – students who regularly email or drop back by on campus to say that they have transferred and are exceling in upper-division coursework because of the preparation they received in our classes, or those who are now entering graduate programs in sociology and related fields such as social work, law, or public policy committed to effecting change in the world and equipped to do so in part because of the foundation laid in sociology classes at Cabrillo. The Program has accomplished some of its goals stated in the 2007 Instructional Plan, among them: 1. Make more course material available online: The majority of Program faculty now

utilize an online course management system to make resources available to students at all times.

2. Develop and offer online version of SOC 1: The Program now offers SOC 1 and SOC 2 on a alternating basis (Fall and Spring). Each time these courses have been offered they have filled to capacity with students being turned away.

13

3. Find interested and qualified faculty to teach SOC 47 (Crime): The Program

recruited and hired a Sociology Ph.D. with a specialization in crime and society to teach one section of this course per semester. Each time this course has been offered it has filled to capacity with students being turned away.

4. Develop and offer Global Society course for sociology majors and non-majors. After

successfully going through the College curriculum process, SOC 9 was approved by the VPI in FA07. It was approved for inclusion on the GE/IGETC lists, as well as for the Multicultural requirement, SP08. It has been offered each term since FA08, filling to the 49 seat capacity.

5. Capture under-represented student population: After successfully going through the

College curriculum process, SOC 8 (Latina/os in Society) was approved by the VPI in SP06. It was approved for inclusion on the GE/IGETC lists and the Multicultural requirement. Sine that time, it has been offered one time a year on the Watsonville campus, filling to the 49 seat capacity. While this course is open to and applicable to all Cabrillo students, because its primary focus is on the experiences of Latina/os in U.S., its enrollment pulls heavily from the Latina/o population in our community.

Above all, our main direction for the future will be continuing our demonstrated effectiveness in introducing students to the field of sociology and preparing them to enter and thrive in the labor market. That the Program has been so successful in so many ways with only one FTC faculty speaks to the enormous depth of talent and dedication among our five adjunct faculty members who have been teaching 65% of sociology offerings for the past three years. However, a second full-time faculty member would allow the Program to build on its record of success. Of course the Program will continue to work on the previously outlined goals and build upon its accomplishments. Some of the new (or renewed) directions we see the program moving toward in the coming years are: 1) We will continue to enhance our capacity to make student-centered, active learning central to our classroom instruction. Scholarship in the field of Teaching and Learning strongly indicates that students learn best and more when they are actively engaged in their own learning. To this end, we will research, implement, and assess different active learning strategies in the classroom. Some of our focus will be on the following areas:

Cooperative learning through group/team projects (for example, in-class reading analysis and reports)

Interactive lecturing techniques (for example, real-time assessment of lecture comprehension)

“Applied sociology” learning activities (for example, analysis of Current Events and Public Policy Analysis)

2) We will continue to enhance our capacity to provide consistently high quality instruction across the Program through faculty development. To this end, we will

14

increase the frequency and types of assessment tools we use to evaluate the success of our students and our courses. Some of our focus will be on the following areas:

Encouraging faculty to attend and/or participate in professional seminars and workshops on “best practices” in teaching

More fully utilizing the SLO assessment process as a way to identify student needs

Adapting teaching techniques and assignments to better respond to student needs

In the next planning cycle, the key goals for the Program are: GOAL #1: Enhance student success by improving consistency of and access to faculty by changing staffing level from 29% contract to 71% adjunct to 64% to 36% respectively (CMP Objective A4: Increase the number of transfers and/or the transfer rate; CMP Objective A5: Increase recruitment, enrollment, retention, and success of basic skills students; CMP Objective B1: Increase access to educational resources and support services; CMP Objective B2: Recruit, retain, and support a diverse, well-qualified faculty and staff; Address workload issues identified in plan relating to a one-person department).

Hire one FTE instructor. Replace 30 adjunct TUs with 30 FT TUs. (Cost: $39,062 annually)

GOAL #2: Assist majors in achieving academic excellence while at Cabrillo and facilitate their transition to universities (CMP Objective A2: Clarify and communicate the pathways through Cabrillo College and assist students in navigating those pathways; CMP Objective A4: Increase the number of transfers and/or the transfer rate; Address trend of increased number of majors).

a) Identify and work more closely with sociology majors. (Cost: $0) b) Cultivate relationships with regional transfer institutions. (Cost: $0)

GOAL #3: Increase student engagement with class material by encouraging students to see the real world applicability of course content and to identity openings for social change within our community (CMP Objective B4: Promote awareness of the interdisciplinary nature of emerging trends, such as global sustainability, social justice, and community service; CMP Objective E2: Promote communication and collaboration between Cabrillo and other organizations in the community).

a) Work with College Greensteps to make stronger linkages between classroom instruction on sustainability issues and campus-wide efforts to improve environmental performance. (Cost: $0)

b) Recruit guest speakers from community organizations to increase students’ awareness of social issues and different interventions used to address them. (Cost: $0)