i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF APPENDICES IX

EXHIBITS X

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY XII

ORGANIZATION OF SELF-STUDY xii

COMMUNICATION OF SELF-STUDY TO COLLEGE CONSTITUENTS xiii

STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS XV

MSCHE SELF-STUDY EXPLORERS XVII

NOTE ON THE PRESENTATION OF THE SELF-STUDY XXII

INTRODUCTION XXIII

DESCRIPTION OF COLLEGE AT TIME OF SELF-STUDY xxiii

HISTORY OF CCAC xxiv

COLLEGE OBJECTIVES xxv College Mission xxv College Vision xxv College Values xxvi Institutional Goals xxvi

OVERVIEW OF SELF-STUDY FINDINGS xxvi

CHALLENGES AND CHANGES SINCE THE TIME OF SELF-STUDY xxvii The New President and the Reorganization xxvii State Funding of Full-time Equivalent Students xxviii

INITIAL RESPONSES TO SELF-STUDY FINDINGS xxviii AFT Leadership Concerns Over Institutional Resources xxviii Assessment and Planning xxix Program Review xxix Technological Infrastructure xxix Other Responses to Key Findings of the Self-study xxix

SUMMARY OF THE SELF-STUDY CHAPTERS XXXI

ii

CHAPTER 1: MISSION, GOALS, AND OBJECTIVES 1

OVERVIEW 1

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CCAC’S MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS 1

EMPLOYEE PERCEPTION OF MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS 2

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION 3

THE ASSESSMENT OF MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS 4

EMERGING TRENDS AND MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS 5

Recommendation 5

CHAPTER 2: PLANNING, RESOURCE ALLOCATION, AND INSTITUTIONAL RENEWAL 6

OVERVIEW 6

THE COLLEGE PLAN AND CCAC’S NEW PRESIDENT 6

COLLEGE PLANNING AND MISSION, VISION, VALUES AND GOALS 6

CCAC'S PLANNING PROCESS 7

ACADEMIC PLANNING AND COLLEGE PLANNING 7

COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COLLEGE PLAN 8

ASSESSMENT OF COLLEGE PLANNING 8

CCAC’S CURRENT STRATEGIC PLANNING INITIATIVES 9

Recommendations 9

CHAPTER 3: INSTITUTIONAL RESOURCES 11

OVERVIEW 11

FINANCIAL PLANNING 11 Capital Budget Planning 12 Operating Budget Planning 12 Personnel Budget Planning 13 Cost Control 14 Revenue Sources 14

HUMAN RESOURCES 15

TECHNOLOGY 17 Communication Concerns 18

iii

Summary 18

FACILITIES 18 Plans for Improvement of Funding Processes for Facilities Allocation 19 The Use of Space 20

EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REVIEW 20

ASSESSMENT ISSUES 21

Recommendations 21

CHAPTER 4: LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE 22

OVERVIEW 22

GOVERNING BOARD 22

CCAC'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER 23

PRESIDENT’S CABINET AND PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL 23

COLLEGE COUNCIL 23

STUDENT GOVERNMENT 25

ASSESSMENT OF COLLEGE LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE 25

Recommendations 25

CHAPTER 5: ADMINISTRATION 26

OVERVIEW 26

DESCRIPTION OF CCAC’S ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND PROCESSES 26

THE CURRENT FOCUS OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT 26

QUALIFICATIONS OF ADMINISTRATION AND STAFF 27

CCAC’S ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION MAKING 28

INFORMATION SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR ADMINISTRATORS 29 Colleague 29 The CCAC Website 30 Administrative Report Center (ARC) 30

EMPLOYEE PERCEPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE EFFECTIVENESS 30

ADMINISTRATION AND OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT 32

Recommendations 32

iv

CHAPTER 6: INTEGRITY 33

OVERVIEW 33

CCAC STUDENTS AND INTEGRITY 33 Student Grievances and Disciplinary Procedures 33 Student Evaluation 33 Student Access to Catalogs 33

CCAC EMPLOYEES AND INTEGRITY 34 Teamwork, Communication, and Mutual Respect 34 Hiring, Evaluation, Dismissal, and Grievance Practices 34

INTEGRITY AND ACADEMIC INQUIRY 35 Curriculum 35 Intellectual Property Rights 35

INTEGRITY AND THE DISSEMINATION OF INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES 35 Honesty and Truthfulness in Public Relations Materials 36

ASSESSMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY 36

Recommendations 36

CHAPTER 7: INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT 37

OVERVIEW 37

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT 37

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL ANALYSIS OF INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT METHODS 37 Summary of Findings 38 Administrative Reporting Center (ARC) 38 Institutional Assessment and Campus Budgets 39

CONCLUSIONS 39

Recommendations 39

CHAPTER 8: STUDENT ADMISSIONS 40

OVERVIEW 40

ADMISSION POLICIES AND CCAC’S MISSION 40 First-Time Students 40 Dual Enrollment 40 Health Programs 41 Building and Trades Apprenticeships, Applied Services and Trades 41

POLICY AVAILABILITY FOR PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS 41

ACCURATE AND COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM INFORMATION 42 Communicating Programmatic Changes 42

v

ACCESS TO INFORMATION ON STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES 43

FINANCIAL AID AT CCAC 43

ADVANCED STANDING AND EXTRA-INSTITUTIONAL CREDIT 44

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT SUCCESS 45

Recommendations 46

CHAPTER 9: STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES 47

OVERVIEW 47

PROFILE OF CCAC STUDENTS 47

DESCRIPTION OF CCAC'S STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES 47 Registration and Student Accounts 47 Academic Advising 48 Counseling, Career Services, and Special Programming 48 Library and Tutorial Services 49 Child and Health Care Services 49 International Student Services 49

RETAINING QUALIFIED STUDENT SERVICES PERSONNEL 49

STUDENT ATHLETICS 50

STUDENT CONDUCT, COMPLAINTS, GRIEVANCES AND RECORDS 51

ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT SERVICES 52 Response to Assessment of Academic Advising 52 Response to Assessment of Transfer Services 53 Response to Assessment of Student Complaint Procedures 53

Recommendations 54

CHAPTER 10: FACULTY 55

OVERVIEW 55

FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS 55

FACULTY AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 55 Influence of Advisory Committees 56

EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND PROFESSIONAL GROWTH 56

COLLEGE SUPPORT FOR FACULTY DEVELOPMENT 57

STANDARDS FOR FORMAL FACULTY ACTIONS 58 Faculty Evaluation 59

vi

CCAC AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM 60 Assessment of Principles of Academic Freedom 60

Recommendations 60

CHAPTER 11: EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS 61

OVERVIEW 61

COURSES AND PROGRAMS 61 Accessibility 61 Articulation 62 Standardization 62 Curriculum 62 Community Involvement and Oversight 63 Faculty Assignments 63

CO-CURRICULAR AND STUDENT LIFE PROGRAMMING 63

LEARNING RESOURCES AND INFORMATION LITERACY 64 Library Services: A Learning Resource 64 Bibliographic Instruction: A Learning Resource 65 Information Literacy 65

ACCESS FOR ADULT LEARNERS 66 A Case Study in Alternative Scheduling for Adult Learners 67

PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WITH REGARD TO EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS 68 Planning 68 Outcomes Assessment 68

Recommendations 69

CHAPTER 12: GENERAL EDUCATION 70

OVERVIEW 70 Method of Analysis 70

GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS IN OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS 70 Catalog and Website 70 Program Flowcharts 70

GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS IN DEGREE PROGRAMS 71

GENERAL EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL MISSION 71

GENERAL EDUCATION AND FACULTY COURSE DESCRIPTIONS 72

GENERAL EDUCATION, ETHICS, VALUES, AND DIVERSITY 72 Program Reviews 73 Faculty Survey 73

ASSESSMENT OF PROFICIENCY IN GENERAL EDUCATION STUDIES 74

vii

What Do Students Learn? 74 How Well Are Students Learning? How Does the Institution Know? 74 Deficiencies in Student Learning Outcomes Assessment in General Education 75

Recommendations 76

CHAPTER 13: RELATED EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES 77

OVERVIEW 77

BASIC SKILLS 77 Placement Testing 77 Understanding the Need for Developmental Course Work 78 Learning Supports for Developmental Education 78 Assessment of the Success of CCAC’s Developmental Education Program 78

CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS 79 Industry or National Review of Certificate Programs 79 Additional CCAC Certificate Programs 80

EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING 80

NONCREDIT OFFERINGS 80 Designing CCAC's Noncredit Offerings 80 Qualifications of Noncredit Employees 81 Evaluation of Noncredit Offerings 81

COLLEGE CENTERS, ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS, AND OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SITES 81 Student Enrollment and Faculty/Staff Ratios 82 Educational Offerings 83 Staffing 83 Facilities 83 Support Services 84 Middle College 84

DISTANCE LEARNING 85 Consistency of Instruction in DL Offerings 85 Regulation of Distance Learning Offerings 87 Distance Learning Program Coherence and Stated Learning Outcomes 87 Partnerships and Distance Learning Offerings 87 Learning Resources and Distance Learning 88 Technical and Physical Plant Support for Distance Learning 88

CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS AND AFFILIATED PROVIDERS 89 Foundations for Contractual Agreements 90 Oversight of the External Agencies/Contracted Partners 90

Recommendations 91

CHAPTER 14: ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT LEARNING 92

OVERVIEW 92

viii

CCAC'S DIRECT METHODS OF ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING 92

IMPROVING TEACHING THROUGH STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT 93

ARTICULATED EXPECTATIONS OF STUDENT LEARNING 94

SHARING AND USING STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT INFORMATION 94

ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM 95

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT AND COLLEGE PLANNING 96

STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT AT THE CAMPUS AND PROGRAM LEVEL 97

Recommendations 97

ix

LIST OF APPENDICES

Appendix A: Middle States Steering Committee Organizational Chart Appendix B: Middle States Communication Plan Appendix C: MSCHE 2005 Suggested Improvements Appendix D: CCAC Organizational Charts Appendix E: Eligibility Certification Statement Appendix 3.1: CCAC Grants Appendix 3.2 Private Grants and Partnerships Appendix 4.1: President’s Cabinet Appendix 4.2: President’s Council Appendix 5.1: Survey on Administrative Job Descriptions Appendix 5.2: Survey Regarding Distribution of Administrative Decisions Appendix 7.1: Planning Team Appendix 7.2: Framework for Institutional Assessment and Planning Appendix 8.1: Survey of Department Heads Regarding Program Changes Appendix 9.1 Credit Student Profile Appendix 9.2: Enrollment by College Centers Appendix 9.3: Fall 2003 Non-credit Student Profile Appendix 9.4: Demographics on Student Athletes’ Participation by Gender Appendix 9.5: Programs for Special Populations Appendix 9.6: Academic Advisors Survey Appendix 11.1: ACRL Staffing Standards Appendix 11.2: ACRL Collection Comparison Appendix 11.3: Services Valued by Adult Learners Appendix 11.4: FASTRACK Student Survey Appendix 12.1: General Education Goals Achieved Through Degree Requirements Appendix 13.1: CCAC Website Hyperlinks to Information and Documentation Supporting Distance Learning Research Appendix 14.1: Additional Research Sources

x

EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT 1 Advisor Manuals EXHIBIT 2 AFT Collective Bargaining Agreements EXHIBIT 3 Benchmarking Reports EXHIBIT 4 Board of Trustees Membership and Meetings Minutes EXHIBIT 5 Bottom Lines: CCAC Trends in Planning Data EXHIBIT 6 Budget Committee Recommendations for 2002-2003 EXHIBIT 7 CCAC Academic Affairs Committee Minutes EXHIBIT 8 CCAC Administrative Performance Appraisal EXHIBIT 9 CCAC Administrators Report - September 2002 EXHIBIT 10 CCAC Articulation Agreements EXHIBIT 11 CCAC Catalog EXHIBIT 12 CCAC College Council and Sub-Committees’ Meeting Minutes EXHIBIT 13 CCAC College Plan: 2001-2003 EXHIBIT 14 CCAC Common Course Syllabi/Electronic Access EXHIBIT 15 CCAC Demographics EXHIBIT 16 CCAC Job Descriptions EXHIBIT 17 CCAC “Minimum Criteria for Full and Adjunct Faculty Hires” EXHIBIT 18 CCAC M/V/V/G Development Process August 2003 EXHIBIT 19 CCAC Policies and Procedures Manual EXHIBIT 20 CCAC Program Review Records EXHIBIT 21 CCAC Organizational Charts EXHIBIT 22 CCAC Student Handbook EXHIBIT 23 CCAC View Books EXHIBIT 24 COMPASS Study EXHIBIT 25 Credit by Exam Policies/Records EXHIBIT 26 Credit and Non-Credit Schedule of Classes EXHIBIT 27 Data on Success of Students Given Advanced Standing EXHIBIT 28 Department or Course Exit Exam EXHIBIT 29 Departmental Needs Assessment Form EXHIBIT 30 Developmental Program Studies EXHIBIT 31 Distance Learning Ad Hoc Advisory Committee Minutes EXHIBIT 32 Distance Learning Documents EXHIBIT 33 Effectiveness Indicators for Institutional Assessment EXHIBIT 34 Employee Survey, Fall 2003 EXHIBIT 35 English Department Survey of Transfer Institutions: Writing Placement Practices and Goals and Requirements of Preliminary Writing Courses EXHIBIT 36 Environmental Scanning Reports EXHIBIT 37 Exit and Graduate Surveys EXHIBIT 38 External Contractual Agreements with Outside Agencies EXHIBIT 39 Fast Track Course Offerings/Success Rates EXHIBIT 40 First Year Assessments Report - CCAC College Plan EXHIBIT 41 Graduation Rates and Records EXHIBIT 42 Hiring Guidelines EXHIBIT 43 Human Resources Data

xi

EXHIBIT 44 In Pursuit of Excellence EXHIBIT 45 Intramurals Report 2002-2003 EXHIBIT 46 IPEDS Reports EXHIBIT 47 IR Data on Persistence of Developmental Students EXHIBIT 48 Library Services Records EXHIBIT 49 Master Facilities Plan EXHIBIT 50 Non-Credit Course Surveys EXHIBIT 51 Non-Returning Student Report EXHIBIT 52 Operational & Capital Budget Documents EXHIBIT 53 Periodic Review Report EXHIBIT 54 President’s Council Minutes EXHIBIT 55 Professional Development Committee Plans/Records EXHIBIT 56 Professional Development Survey of Faculty Needs EXHIBIT 57 Program Brochures EXHIBIT 58 Program Flow Charts EXHIBIT 59 Records of Presidential Searches EXHIBIT 60 Research-The Gartner Group EXHIBIT 61 “Search Committee: A Tool Kit for Human Resource Professionals, Administrators and Committee Members” EXHIBIT 62 Second Year Assessment, College Plan 2001-2003 EXHIBIT 63 SEIU Collective Bargaining Agreement EXHIBIT 64 Student Development Plan EXHIBIT 65 Student Satisfaction Survey Reports and Instruments EXHIBIT 66 Teaching Portfolios EXHIBIT 67 The CCAC Advisory Committee Handbook EXHIBIT 68 Vacant Position Analysis

xii

2005 MSCHE SELF-STUDY: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Community College of Allegheny County, centered in and around the Pittsburgh area, consists of four campuses, each of which administers one or more of seven off-campus centers, and numerous satellite locations. Through the last re-accreditation process in 1994, each campus was accredited separately, though one of the stated goals of that study was to bring greater unity to the College through a single, system-wide self-study. In 1996, the Commission on Higher Education acted to grant the request by the College for accreditation as a single institution. Since then, through evolving re-organizations, the College has sought additional synergy, consistency and educational effectiveness by becoming a more centralized, unified system. This Middle States self-study is the first that CCAC has undertaken as one College, with the goal of a single, college-wide accreditation. Dr. Roy Flores, then president of the College, set the self-study process in motion when, in the fall of 2002, he appointed a three-member leadership team for the purpose of planning and organizing the self-study process. In consultation with Dr. Flores and other administrators, the first decision the team made was to select the most appropriate model for self-study. Because this is CCAC's first accreditation as one College, it is important that all major functions of the College be evaluated in the light of one of the two comprehensive models. During the previous re-accreditation process, CCAC did not have a comprehensive strategic planning process in place, and implementing such a process was one of the recommendations that emerged from the team visit. Since then, the College has instituted a planning process that has the goal of truly driving the management of the organization; the initiation of the self-study afforded CCAC the first opportunity to assess the success of Planning’s institutional reach. Thus, the leadership team decided to undertake the Comprehensive with Emphasis model, with the focus on planning. Self-study has revealed some of the flaws in the planning process, particularly with regard to assessment. Further, the appointment of Stewart Sutin as the College's 7th president in the fall of 2003, while self-study was already underway, has taken planning in a more strategic direction, as is revealed in Chapter 2 and the Introduction of this report. Dr. Sutin has introduced the concept of "institutes" to the College; these have been implemented in conjunction with a new organizational model during the fall of 2004. Along with the completed self-study, this will drive the new strategic planning initiative instituted in January of 2005. ORGANIZATION OF SELF-STUDY Once the model was chosen, the team began discussions on the organization of the self-study. Team members decided much would be gained by aligning the self-study as closely as possible with Middle States' Characteristics of Excellence. This created a common understanding and vocabulary that facilitated internal communication and ultimately communication with the Middle States Evaluation Team. To this end, Task Forces for 12 of the 14 Characteristics of Excellence formed the framework for the self-study design (Appendix A). The two remaining characteristics were addressed as follows:

1 Integrity: because this characteristic is such an integral part of every aspect of the College, it was included as at least one charge question under most Task Forces. Their findings were then sorted into the findings that appear in Chapter 6.

2 Governance: because governance was a major focus of the Periodic Review Report of 2000, and received a positive response from Middle States, Chapter 4 was prepared without convening a full Task Force.

xiii

The self-study leadership team, in consultation with Dr. Flores, determined that the members of the Steering Committee would write the charges for each Task Force. These members assumed leadership roles for Task Force committees by chairing them, and, in some cases, sharing those duties with another when the work for that Characteristic was challenging and complex. This chain of command had two key benefits. First, those writing the charges were responsible for implementing them. Second, as chairs of Task Forces and chief liaisons between Task Force members and the Steering Committee, Steering Committee members assured that there was full and fluid communication between those doing the research and reporting, and those responsible for shaping it into the final report. It was also in this initial planning phase that the philosophical approach to the self-study was established. The key elements of this philosophy were as follows:

1 A commitment to honesty and objectivity in evaluating CCAC; 2 A focus on strategic issues that make a meaningful difference in the evaluation of students; 3 An emphasis on analysis of findings, rather than description of processes; and 4 An unswerving insistence on quantitative and qualitative data to support assertions.

In order to promote awareness of the self-study, and to express the leadership team's belief in its benefits, the Steering Committee adopted a logo and a slogan, "Exploring the Past--Shaping the Future." The team also developed an intricate communication plan for the work of the committee that promoted dissemination of all aspects of the progress of the study (Appendix B). The goal was to assure faculty, staff, and students who participated in this project to know that the work they did would have a lasting impact on the quality of education at CCAC. Dr. Stewart Sutin, the College's new president, assured all college constituencies that the self-study and the implementation of its major recommendations--discussed in the introduction that follows this executive summary--would become part of his own performance evaluation, and a major component of the College's new strategic plan. All stages of the development of this plan will be underway in January of 2005. COMMUNICATION OF SELF-STUDY TO COLLEGE CONSTITUENTS Well over 200 college employees were involved in some aspect of the self-study. This level of participation reflects the comprehensive efforts on the part of the leadership team to involve all willing college employees at every campus, center, and site. Several email requests for participation, along with individual letters sent to the homes of employees, led to the formation of full and representative Task Forces. No volunteer was turned away. The College established a web-site (www.ccac.edu ) for communicating all aspects of the self-study, from the design to Steering Committee progress reports. Each chapter of the self-study went through three drafting stages, with each stage reviewed and critiqued by designated members of the Steering Committee. A fourth and final draft was shaped after a meeting of individual Task Force Chairs, self-study chairs, and the editor of the report. Throughout this process, extensive revisions and updates were incorporated by Steering Committee and Task Force members; their dedication has led to the complete and comprehensive study of CCAC that follows. The initial final draft of the completed self-study was posted to the College's website for easy access by all college employees, along with an email address to which employees could address their comments and concerns. Additionally, each of CCAC's four campuses, along with College Office and two Centers, held planned forums chaired by Steering Committee members where all college employees had the opportunity to speak about their perceptions of the report. Significant and

xiv

substantiated recommendations for revision were documented, then discussed by the Steering Committee, and changes made in the self-study when the committee deemed it appropriate. The chairs of the self-study have also designed a series of quizzes based on the findings of the report are being disseminated to all employees through March, 2005, in order to encourage them to read the study. Employees responding correctly to all quiz questions will be eligible for prizes. The Steering Committee believes that such incentives will lead to an informed and prepared college community when the Middle States team visits in April of 2005. A final draft of the self-study was shaped after the visit from team chair Dr. Eugenia Proulx on October 31st and November 1st of 2004. Dr. Proulx made recommendations for the organization and condensing of the report that is presented here. The over 200 employees who actively participated in shaping the study's findings have shown a commitment to the College that is pervasive and laudatory. Their good work allows us to present the introduction and fourteen chapters of CCAC’s self-study with confidence that it is truly comprehensive.

xv

MSCHE STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBERS

Steering Committee Members

NAME TITLE CAMPUS Susan Myrick Professor of Business

Co-Chair Editor – Standard Five

North Campus

Betty L. Davis Dean of Enrollment Management Co-Chair Editor – Standard Five

College Office

Daniel Lowe Associate Professor of English Editor

Allegheny Campus

Clifford Baylis Director of Library Services Steering Committee Standard Eleven

North Campus

Jeanette Blackston Vice President, Instructional Technology Steering Committee Standard Ten Standard Thirteen

Allegheny Campus

Charles Blocksidge Vice President, Organizational Development Steering Committee Standard Thirteen

College Office

Renee Clark Dean of Student Development Steering Committee Standard Eight

South Campus

Anna DelVitto Associate Professor of Mathematics Steering Committee Standard Fourteen

North Campus

Fran Dice Assistant Dean of Enrollment Services Steering Committee Standard Nine

College Office

John Glenn Academic Dean Steering Committee Standard Ten

North Campus

J. Joseph Hester Vice President, Administrative Services and Chief Financial Officer Steering Committee Standard Three

College Office

James Holmberg Vice President, Academic Services Editor, Standard Four

College Office

Joanne Jeffcoat Professor of Occupational Therapy Steering Committee Standard Two

Boyce Campus

Mark Juliani Associate Professor of Mathematics Steering Committee

Allegheny Campus

xvi

Standard Twelve Diane Maldonado Associate Professor of English

Steering Committee Standard Fourteen

South Campus

Sharon Mills Director of Business Affairs Steering Committee Standard Two Standard Nine

Allegheny Campus

Martin Olshinsky Vice-President, South Campus Steering Committee Standard One

South Campus

Judith Savolskis Academic Dean Steering Committee Standard Eleven

Boyce Campus

Kevin Smay Executive Director, Strategic Planning Steering Committee Standard Seven Editor, Standard Two

College Office

Allysen Todd Academic Dean Steering Committee Standard Twelve Standard Thirteen

Allegheny Campus

xvii

MSCHE SELF-STUDY EXPLORERS Standard One – Mission, Goals, and Objectives Martin Olshinsky, Chair

Name Title Campus Aiken, Duvall Senior Buyer College Office Aston, Jean Faculty, English Allegheny Barash, Allison Faculty, Psychology North Farinelli, Rob Faculty, Math Boyce Hennessey, Dennis Librarian Assistant Allegheny Miller, Joe Personnel Generalist College Office Pavlik, Maureen Faculty, Nursing North Sciulli, Mary Con. Ed. Administration South Serafin, William Faculty, Accounting South Turich, Tom Faculty, CIT South Wehrle, Michelle Faculty, Hotel/Motel Mgt. North Wozniak, Claire Director of Accounting College Office Standard Two – Planning, Resource Allocation and Institutional Renewal Sharon Mills/Joanne Jeffcoat, Chairs

Name Title Campus Brieck, Robert Operations Administrator College Office Burzachechi, Nancilee Executive Director, External Affairs College Office DiCola, Rose Ann Executive Director, Foundation College Office Dziak, John Faculty, Biology Allegheny Holmberg, James V.P., Academic & Student Affairs College Office Hunter, Joann Faculty, Business North Logreco, Ronald Assistant Dean, Neville Technical North - Neville Lucas, Anthony Faculty, Business Allegheny Pauley, Amy Director of Development College Office Perdziola, Stephen Asst. Director of Business Affairs South Robertson, James Asst. Director, Planning & Research College Office Rose, Michael Recruiter College Office Silk, David Director of Business Affairs South Stec, Richard Faculty, Accounting North Williams-Betlyn, Margaret Vice President North Standard Three – Institutional Resources Joe Hester, Chair

Name Title Campus Blecher, Christopher Faculty, Computer/Info. Science South Bobick, Sandy Faculty, Biology Allegheny Breckenridge, Joyce Controller College Office Cvetic, Michael Asst. Director of Purchasing College Office Furlong, Larry Business Coordinator Allegheny Gardner, Sue Sr. Administrative Secretary North Hamilton, Robert Director of Facilities Management College Office Harr, Shirley Bursar College Office Jenkins, Nancy Director of Business Affairs Boyce Lindenfelser, Roger Faculty, Business South

xviii

Markiewicz, Eddy Director of Lifelong Learning Boyce Post, Kay Faculty, Computer/Info. Science Allegheny Russell, Christina Director of Information Technology College Office Shader, Jeanne Executive Director of H.R. College Office Sullivan, Tim Faculty, Hotel/Motel Management Boyce Tanski, Anne Director of Library & Learning Svcs. Allegheny Vogel, Lynda Facilities Clerk North Waltz, Esther Faculty, Chemistry South Weber, Ken Physical Plant Supervisor North Zizka, Eugene Faculty, Physics Allegheny Standard Five – Administration Betty Davis/Susan Myrick, Chairs

Name Title Campus Allison, Richard Dean of Washington County South-WC Barb, Debbie Systems Analyst II College Office Brock, Catherine Coordinator, Student Accounts Boyce Campano, Jo Ann Account Executive Boyce Carmo, Beverly Faculty, English South Greene, Richard Faculty, Computer/Information Science North Kaufman, Frank Director of Student Life Boyce Robbins, Michael Faculty, English Allegheny Safran, Cynthia Operations Coord. Workforce Training College Office Stefanchik, Michael Director of Business Affairs North Trettel, Brenda Director of Field Operations Boyce/South Standard Seven – Institutional Assessment Kevin Smay, Chair

Name Title Campus Archey, Mary Frances Dean, Arts & Sciences South Berardino, Jerry Faculty, Accounting Boyce Betters, Richard Dean, Arts & Sciences Boyce Binns, Elliott Librarian North Broderick, Don Data Base Administrator College Office Cairns, James Director of Purchasing College Office Cornely, Chris Web Content Manager College Office Davis, Richard Faculty, Mathematics South DeJulio, Karen Director of Tech Prep College Office Jacobs, Diane ITS Training & Documentation College Office Sekula, Fran Account Executive Allegheny Shamblee, Betty Director of Child Care Allegheny Way, Lauren Public Information Officer College Office Weber, Carol Asst. Director of Child Development Allegheny Standard Eight – Student Admissions Renee Clark, Chair

Name Title Campus Arensberg, Barbara Director of Registration Boyce Barton, Margaret Director of Financial Aid Allegheny Boston, Olla Campus Admissions Representative South Chielli, Jack Executive Director of Communications and College Office

xix

Marketing Florentine, Patty Director of Supportive Services Boyce Greenwood, Jane Asst. Dean, Braddock Hills Boyce-Braddock Kennedy, Mary Lou Asst. Dean of Student Development Allegheny McShane, Rosemarie Dean of Students Representative Allegheny Mosley, Kyle Director of Financial Aid South Mule-Lyons, Nina Director of Student Life North Musher, Dennis Dean of Student Development North Pappas, Della Director of Admissions North Saltsman, Cheryl Senior Staff Accountant College Office Strenkowski, Liz Recruiter College Office Standard Nine – Student Support Services Fran Dice/Sharon Mills, Chairs

Name Title Campus Amrhein, Jennifer Director, Voc. Education Program Allegheny Barone, Kelly Coordinator, Health Services Allegheny Beighley, Richard Tutor North Bell, Chuck Student Development Specialist North Caugherty, Richard Student Development Specialist Allegheny Christensen, Jan Asst. Director of Business Affairs Allegheny Heisler, Richard Faculty, Art Allegheny Hetrick, Kerry Director of Student Life South Kachmar, Petrina Director of Registration North Kaiser, Helen Public Information Officer College Office Kern, Linda Director, Airport West Center North-AWC Ketchum, Ted Recruiter College Office Magnone, Mary Jo Senior Secretary Allegheny Mason, Esther Director of Supportive Services South Pettway, Annie Director of Multicultural Affairs Allegheny Santucci, George Director of Financial Aid Boyce Snider, Jean Director, Homewood Brushton Center Allegheny-HBC Talbot, Sandy Student Development Specialist North-AWC Standard Ten – Faculty John Glenn/Jeanette Blackston, Chairs

Name Title Campus Akinkuoye, Nick Dean of Occupational Technologies South Byers, Ruth Librarian Allegheny Caldrone, Sally Librarian South Campano, Irene Vice President Boyce Crocker, Gordon Faculty, Economics South Cunningham, Pearly Faculty, Engineering South Guldenschuh, John Account Executive Allegheny Hirschl, Ken Dean of Arts and Sciences North Kersten, Katherine Senior Secretary North Lee, Caroline Faculty, Business Allegheny Martoni, Charles Dean of Student Services Boyce Morris-Davidson, Maria Faculty, English Allegheny O’Toole, Roger Faculty, Speech Boyce Porach, Melanie Director of Placement South Reeder, Marilyn Career Support Specialist Allegheny

xx

Sheets, Erin Human Resources Administrator College Office Wieloch, Tom Faculty, Physics North Young, Pam Counselor South Standard Eleven–Educational Offerings Cliff Baylis/Judy Savolskis, Chairs

Name Title Campus Anderson, Maryann Faculty, Health Information Tech Allegheny Arensberg, Jean Senior Library Clerk North Billeck, Darlene Director, Voc. Ed. Program Boyce Biondo, John Faculty, Psychology Boyce Bostaph, Charles Director of Placement Boyce Boston, Gary Recruiter College Office Chandler, Barbara Director, Library & Learning Svcs South Connolly, Jacqueline Director of Registration South Ditka, Joyceann Faculty, English North Eshenbaugh-McKay, Mary Director, Downtown Center Allegheny-DTC Grimm, Irene Librarian South Hallock, Stacey Public Information Officer College Office Harmon, Rebecca Director of Health Programming Boyce Heidingsfelder, Fred Faculty, Multimedia/Communications North Kennedy, Carol Senior Library Clerk North Koch, Robert Faculty, Automotive North Mangieri, Sam Director of Student Life Allegheny McKenna, Alice Dir., Freida Shapira Center for Learning College Office Russo, Robert Manager ACT/Intake Center Allegheny-DTC Sukiennik, Adelaide Part-time Librarian Boyce Tauson, Alexandra Faculty, Math Allegheny Thompson, Barbara Librarian North Vanderweerd, Ann Employment Specialist-Voc. Ed. North Standard Twelve-General Education Mark Juliani/Allysen Todd, Chairs

Name Title Campus Biondo, Denise Director of Child Development South Brown, Barb Faculty, Philosophy North Burns, Yvonne Director of Registration Allegheny Cavalier, Jaqueline Faculty, History Allegheny Cunningham, Elora Librarian Allegheny Fennel, Julia Faculty, English South Graham-Eason, Cheryl Faculty, Social Studies North Harper, Aylene Faculty, Psychology South Haymon, Elmer Dean of Student Development Allegheny Hines, Imogene Faculty, Speech Boyce Hrico, Michael Faculty, Developmental Studies South Jaber, George Faculty, Theater South Mervos, Mark Account Executive College Office Moran, Patricia Faculty, Library Allegheny O’Leary, Terry Recorder College Office Platt, Sharon Director of Financial Aid North Sitko, Fran Asst. Dir. of Curriculum/Assessment College Office Stradley, Maureen Faculty, Developmental Studies Allegheny

xxi

White, Kathy Director of Supportive Services North Standard Thirteen – Related Educational Activities Charles Blocksidge/Jeanette Blackston/Allysen Todd, Chairs

Name Title Campus Avoli, Joanne Faculty, Health Information Technology Allegheny Bowers, Doris Library and Learning Services Boyce Brooke, Franus Part-time Faculty North Cornely, Chris Web Content Manager College Office Donehue, Ross Asst. Dean, Instructional Technology Allegheny Downey, Norman Computer Technical Specialist College Office Gnipp, Diane Director of Lifelong Learning Allegheny Guercio, Mary Jo Director, Community Training/Dev. Allegheny Hoskinson, Karen Asst. Director of Contracts College Office Lauer, JoAnne Faculty, Admin. Office Professional Allegheny Mandler, M.J. Director of Lifelong Learning South Mullin, Gretchen Dean, Bethel Park Center South Sartori, Lori Director, Child Development Center North Steinhart, David Professional Development Coordinator College Office Walk, Knox Director of Public Safety Institute Allegheny Yoannone, Carol Director, Student Performance, Perkins College Office Standard Fourteen – Assessment of Student Learning Diane Maldonado/Anna DelVitto, Chairs

Name Title Campus Boyea, Gail Faculty, Developmental Studies North Dailey, Anne Faculty, Psychology North Farkas, Rod Faculty, CIT North Hannon, Brian Account Executive College Office Imhoff, Donna Faculty, Psychology South Kane, Kathy Faculty, Mathematics Allegheny Malloy, Kathie V.P., Health Professional Boyce Mooney, David Faculty, Librarian Allegheny Nettrour, Lila Faculty, Biology North Parrish, Mark Development Management Adm. College Office Pavlik, Tim Faculty, Business North Wells, Stephen Faculty, English South Williamson, Patsy Faculty, English Allegheny

xxii

NOTE ON THE PRESENTATION OF THE SELF-STUDY All appendices except for those listed in the Executive Summary and the Introduction are numbered according to the chapters in which they appear. In other words, the first appendix listed for Chapter 3, Institutional Resources, is numbered 3.1, the second 3.2, etc. There are chapters for which there are no appendices. The larger exhibits are presented separately from the report. All major subheadings are bold-faced and presented with every letter capitalized. Minor subheadings under the major ones are merely bold-faced, with key words capitalized.

xxiii

INTRODUCTION

DESCRIPTION OF COLLEGE AT TIME OF SELF-STUDY The Community College of Allegheny County (CCAC) is the second largest community college in Pennsylvania and one of the largest multi-campus colleges in the United States, with four campuses and seven centers, along with more than 400 other instructional sites serving students in and around the Pittsburgh area. CCAC is the number one choice of high school graduates and the largest provider of educational services in western Pennsylvania. More than 22 percent of Allegheny County residents have attended CCAC’s credit or noncredit programs in the last five years, with nearly 80,000 students attending the College in the 2003-2004 academic year. CCAC is a comprehensive two-year college, offering degrees in the Associate in Arts, the Associate in Science, and the Associate in Applied Science in career and transfer programs, as well as certificates and diplomas in a number of career areas. The College is the nation’s third largest provider of health care graduates, and nearly 18,000 area workers receive training annually through employer-sponsored programs. The Distance Learning program has grown by over 200 percent in recent years, and served over 7200 students in the 2003-2004 academic year. Credit courses are offered over two traditional 16 week semesters, with additional courses offered over 14, 10, eight, six, and four week terms, as well as Fastrack and weekend courses. Noncredit courses are offered over a variety of periods, and present highly flexible scheduling options to prospective students. The following lists specific information on CCAC for the 2003-2004 academic year; much of the information for the self-study was gleaned from College sources available during this time frame: Academics: More than 170 academic programs in Business, Health, Social Services, Applied Arts Technologies, Applied Service and Trade Technologies, Engineering and Science Technologies and more. Annual Enrollment: For the 2003-2004 academic year, 30,872 credit students, 48,175 non-credit, and 79,047 combined. Student Profile: 54% women, 46% men, 18% ethnic minorities. Enrollment patterns: 59% part-time, 41% full-time. 65% daytime students, 24% evening, 5% weekend. 55% in career programs, 45% in transfer programs. Average age: 24 years Job Placement: 94% of career program graduates work for local employers. Faculty: 305 full-time credit professors and instructors and 801 part-time credit professors. Average class size: 18 students. Tuition: For regular academic coursework: $77.50 per credit for Allegheny County residents, $91.50 per credit for residents of counties without a community college, $155 per credit for residents of other counties with a community college.

xxiv

Student Services: Child care, job placement services, transfer assistance, financial aid, tutoring, personal and career counseling, and supportive services for individuals with disabilities. Governance: Board of Trustees nominated by the County Executive and confirmed by the County Council. Professional Development: Customized contract training for more than 50 regional employers; CCAC trains more than 18,000 employees annually. Partnerships: Hundreds of businesses, including John J. Kane Regional Centers, UPMC Health System, and Duquesne Light Company. Unions, such as the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 5 and the International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council 57. Several universities, including Carnegie Technology Education/Carnegie Mellon University (CTE/CMU), Carnegie Mellon's Software Engineering Institute, Robert Morris University, Point Park College, Geneva College, Indiana University of Pennsylvania (IUP) and California University of Pennsylvania (CUP). Awards Conferred: 2064 students earned associate degrees, certificates, or diplomas. Degrees and Certificates: Associate in Arts, Associate in Science, Associate in Applied Science, diplomas and certificates. Locations: Four campuses: Allegheny Campus on Pittsburgh’s North Shore, Boyce Campus in Monroeville, North Campus in McCandless Township, South Campus in West Mifflin. Seven college centers: Airport West (associated with North Campus), Bethel Park (South Campus), Braddock Hills (Boyce Campus), Downtown (Allegheny Campus), Homewood-Brushton (Allegheny Campus), CCAC Technical Center (Neville Island-North Campus), and Washington County (South Campus). HISTORY OF CCAC

With the passage of the Pennsylvania Community College Act in 1963, the County Boards of School Directors in Allegheny County took the necessary steps to establish a comprehensive community college. The People’s Bond Issue in 1965, which passed by a 66% majority, established a county-sponsored college. The College’s first trustees were appointed and sworn in by December of the same year. In September 1966, the College opened its doors on two campuses, Allegheny, the city site, and Boyce, located in the eastern suburbs. A separate “College Office” housed the president and support personnel. Two more campuses were added by 1972: South, serving the southern suburbs and what were then the old steel-making towns; and North, serving what is now one of the county’s major growth corridors, the northern suburbs. The original plan for the College called for “five regional colleges” with separate identities and campus presidents, operating under one system president with one Board of Trustees. However, in 1972, on recommendation of the College’s second president, the Board of Trustees changed the title of campus president to executive dean and emphasized “the one college concept.” This 1972 reorganization created an ongoing challenge for the College as it learned how to define operationally and developmentally the “one college” concept in all of its ramifications. Until 1986, each campus still had its own catalog, a situation that was addressed in that year through the creation of a unified catalog. Until 1996, the campuses each carried separate accreditation with the Middle States Association. Thus, the 1994 self-study process resulted in a self-study from each campus and a college-wide study

xxv

of five areas where the campuses intersected: planning, finance and budget, outcomes, governance and organization, and diversity and equity. Each campus was visited by a separate evaluation team. This multiple accreditation changed in 1996 when the College requested and received single accreditation. The case for this change in status was based on actions taken by the prior president and approved by the Board of Trustees. The most critical actions included:

• a reorganization that assigned college-wide responsibilities to the campus executive deans

and to the academic and student service deans; • negotiations with the American Federation of Teachers that eliminated campus committees

and created a college governance system with college committees; • a focus on faculty working college-wide with colleagues in their discipline to change

curriculum and review programs; • the creation of a unified continuing education program and the elimination of competing

campus programs; and • the development of a unified college plan to replace individual campus plans.

The Commission on Higher Education required the College to prepare a follow-up report and receive a follow-up team in 1997. This team viewed the College as a single unit when it assessed progress on planning, program review, outcomes assessment and student service issues. The College has had seven presidents. The current president, Dr. Stewart Sutin, was appointed in August, 2003, as the current self-study was underway. His predecessor had served since 1998. Two groups in the college have collective bargaining agreements. Full-time teaching faculty, counselors, librarians, athletic coaches, audio-visual specialists, educational technicians and others defined under the contract recognition clause (Article I) are represented by the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). The current collective bargaining agreement (CBA) is in effect until August 2007. Service Employees International Union (SEIU) represents clerical support staff and maintenance personnel. This contract ends in August of 2006. COLLEGE OBJECTIVES Under the leadership of the previous college president, Dr. Roy Flores, the College’s Mission evolved through the planning process into a statement of Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G). This statement forms the bedrock of all that CCAC achieves in the community, county, and state, and is the basis for all strategic planning. References to the M/V/V/G are threaded throughout the self-study, and these general philosophies underscore how CCAC measures its success and progress as an educational institution. College Mission The mission of the Community College of Allegheny County is to make quality education affordable and accessible to the community, and to provide leadership in workforce training and support the economic development of the region. College Vision

xxvi

The Community College of Allegheny County will be the college of choice for our community and an exemplary learning community where all individuals can develop their full potential. The College will be a nationally recognized leader in:

1. Academic Excellence 2. Technological Advancement 3. Innovative, Responsive Programming 4. Economic Development

College Values

1. A learning environment that fosters the success of all students 2. Personal accountability for our actions, as well as effective and efficient use of resources 3. The treatment of each person as an individual 4. A climate that supports the richness of our cultural, racial and ethnic diversity 5. Professional and personal honesty, and the trust placed in us by the community 6. Partnerships with the community to achieve a better quality of life 7. The ability to meet the changing needs of the community

Institutional Goals

1. To provide access to education without the limits of time, place and distance 2. To make four-year degrees more accessible by providing quality transfer programs 3. To provide career programs that meets the needs of students and employers 4. To provide opportunities for personal growth and cultural enrichment 5. To deliver support programs to help students achieve their goals 6. To foster institutional diversity that reflects the demographic and cultural characteristics of

our community 7. To lead in the creation of partnerships that fosters the economic development of the region 8. To provide our students with an understanding and appreciation of world cultures 9. To help prepare our community to succeed in the global economy

OVERVIEW OF SELF-STUDY FINDINGS Research for the self-study was concluded by February of 2004; while anecdotal updates may have been included in revisions, the timeline for the 14 chapters is fairly consistent with regard to that date. Substantial changes and challenges the college has faced since the completion of the self-study are described later in this introduction. Most of the self-study findings show how CCAC remains an excellent teaching and learning institution, with a bright, diverse student population, a dedicated faculty, solid administrative leadership, and a skilled support staff. Many of the statistics listed above, the accomplishments listed in the Executive Summary, and descriptions and discussions in the self-study itself support these findings. But there are areas of concern the College must address. Some of these reach across the self-study, and some are confined to a specific area of the College. While the 54 recommendations listed throughout the self-study, and, to a lesser extent, the 50 suggestions for improvement listed in Appendix C offer the most careful articulation of these concerns, those the College should address most urgently are as follows:

1. Assessment. More than any one issue, the College must address its weaknesses in assessment and the reporting and implementation of assessment data. While the College does assess

xxvii

aspects of all of its functional areas, there is no comprehensive model that effectively links institutional and student learning outcomes, and no clear plan for the development of measurable student learning outcomes. Thus, their impact on college planning is unclear, and college planning itself becomes incomplete.

2. Strategic, Academic, and Fiscal Planning. While the College has made enormous strides in college planning since the last self-study, in the absence of comprehensive assessment tools, there are times when strategic, academic, and fiscal planning are not coordinated under a single plan, and thus resources are not allocated to appropriate areas.

3. Morale, teamwork, and administration. The self-study suggests that there is a perception among employees that the College is weak with regard to principles of teamwork, the opportunity for a free exchange of ideas, and fostering an atmosphere of trust and respect. Such perceptions must be addressed by those in leadership positions.

4. Technological infrastructure. The College lacks the infrastructure necessary for state-of-the-art streaming of educational offerings that threatens the quality of its initiatives with regard to Distance Learning and appropriately equipped classrooms and offices.

5. Program Review. While significant strides have been made in establishing one- and five-year program review cycles, the relevance of the reviews is often questioned by college faculty and administrators.

6. Academic Advising. While most of the advisors are effective academic consultants for students, policies and training for advisors is inconsistent from campus to campus to center. Advising and Counseling Services need to be better integrated, while services offered in each area more carefully articulated to students. Students need to receive more reliable and consistent advising regarding developmental education. The College needs to devise methods for offering advising online, especially for students in Distance Learning programs.

7. Faculty evaluation. Criteria for the evaluation, promotion, and tenure of full-time faculty need to be stronger and more consistently enforced.

8. Common course syllabi. Through appropriate review, the College needs to ensure the consistency of common course syllabi across campuses, and establish measurable student learning outcomes for each. This should include a review of faculty course outlines to see that the criteria of these syllabi are met.

9. General Education. The College must develop a concise and consistent definition of its General Education philosophy, and develop a clearly defined core of General Education courses with common exit criteria that include indicators for information literacy.

10. Developmental Education. The College must develop a college-wide strategy for the assessment of developmental students’ skills, and establish a program for students who are significantly under-prepared.

CHALLENGES AND CHANGES SINCE THE TIME OF SELF-STUDY The New President and the Reorganization As noted several times throughout the self-study, the College's Board of Trustees hired a new president in August of 2003 when self-study was substantially underway. Thus, parts of the core fourteen chapters of the study report activities conducted under the previous president's leadership. Additionally, the College was again reorganized, after external evaluation and consultation, in the fall of 2004. The new organization consolidates a number of leadership positions in academic areas, re-defines responsibilities of vice presidents, and brings administrative functional areas in line with the new president's initiatives. Both Administrative Structures appear in Exhibit 21 and Appendix D.

xxviii

State Funding of Full-time Equivalent Students In December of 2003, after research for Chapter 3 (Institutional Resources) of this self-study had been completed, the new Pennsylvania state budget passed by the Congress and approved by the governor changed the equation on how Pennsylvania community colleges would be funded for fte's. In previous years, when enrollments exceeded estimates, CCAC was compensated by the state at the one-third cost per fte it had observed for years. In other words, the College was rewarded for increasing enrollments on a per student basis. In the new equation, such compensation is not guaranteed, since the pool of money set aside for compensation to community colleges is now a fixed figure. Thus, Pennsylvania community colleges are now competing for limited state dollars available for additional fte's. The College's response to the state's actions, in the short term, was to increase class size, reduce section offerings by six percent, and eliminate under-enrolled sections. While individual campuses did not always approach this task with consistency and uniformity, and this occasionally presented problems for students attempting to enroll in courses where sections had been cut, these changes did result in the saving of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Long-term savings continue to be investigated; these include savings anticipated through the new reorganization, early retirement opportunities for administration, faculty, and staff, and the consolidation and elimination of certain positions as employees retire or leave. INITIAL RESPONSES TO SELF-STUDY FINDINGS AFT Leadership Concerns Over Institutional Resources As noted above, changes in state funding left a direct impact on classroom teaching and, on some campuses, availability of certain courses that was not reported in Chapter 3 of this self study, since research and writing had largely been concluded when the changes were announced. As a result, in an email correspondence written in November of 2004, CCAC's AFT president communicated several concerns with regard to the financial health of CCAC. These included the following:

The Board of Trustees, acknowledging that the funding the College receives from the State and County will not be sufficient to meet all of the College’s financial needs, selected a president in part because of his fundraising abilities;

The change in the state funding formula discussed above will drain funding from academic areas in order to support building and renovations needs;

Changes in state funding will lead to tuition hikes that may “price out” lower income students, which may undermine the College’s mission;

Lack of state and alternative funding may undermine new college initiatives and partnerships; The College budget, at its current levels, does not fund operating and capital budgets for

individual departments, and these departments can purchase only the highest priority items. While CCAC’s faculty is excellent, ineffective or dated equipment directly impacts the range of possible instruction;

The College does not provide adequate funding to meet the increased cost of laboratory supplies, especially when more supplies are needed due to increased student enrollment; and

Perhaps the most compelling reason to believe that CCAC has only marginally adequate financial resources can be extrapolated from last year’s administrative evaluation. The financial situation at CCAC was considered so critical last year, administrators were told the basis of their administrative evaluation would be how they handled their budgets.

xxix

While these issues do not threaten the overall financial viability of the College nor its ability to offer quality education to all of its students, their deepening impact must be successfully addressed in the near future. Assessment and Planning The College has responded to a number of issues raised regarding assessment and planning in the initial draft of the self-study:

A committee of faculty and administrators was formed to create a short-term plan for addressing student learning assessment;

Dr. Joanne M. Nicoll, Associate Director, Center for Instructional Development and Distance Education, gave a presentation to the deans on June 21, 2004, titled “Developing Objectives for Assessing Outcomes.”

Academic Discipline meetings, held August 17th, were geared towards establishing a process for revising all Master Syllabi Course Objectives, with a goal that objectives and outcomes will be measurable;

The August 18th All College Day had as its keynote speaker Dr. Cynthia Wilson from the League of Innovation, who presented a program titled “Assessment and the Search for Outcomes: Who, What, When, Where, How, How, How, How, and Why?”;

During the Fall semester, 2004, all common course syllabi were revised by academic departments so that stated learning goals and outcomes can be measured;

The college president announced a new comprehensives strategic planning initiative that will begin in January, 2005. The strategic plan will be developed through the efforts of five working committees: Environmental Scanning; Mission, Vision and Values; Student Services; Educational Model; and Delivery Systems. Representation on these committees will include employees from all functioning areas of the College. Many of the recommendations established in the self-study will be addressed through this initiative.

Program Review The College has revised its Program Review process, and the new system has been implemented for those programs under review in the 2004-2005 academic year. While the former program review process was beneficial in offering perspective on the effectiveness of individual programs, little of substance happened with regard to completed program reviews from an administrative angle. The new process assures that action will be taken on program reviews, and recommendations more credibly incorporated into program change. Technological Infrastructure The College has received a bond issue that will allow for badly needed upgrading of the technological infrastructure. Priorities will be addressed immediately, but long term upgrades of Distance Learning technology and technology in the classroom will be part of the new Strategic Planning Initiative. Other Responses to Key Findings of the Self-study While individual departments may respond to elements of the self-study through college governance, the greater issues not highlighted above, such as changes in developmental education, general education, academic advising, and faculty evaluation will emerge from the formation of a new strategic plan. All elements of the self-study, along with reports from the recent Master Facilities Plan and other information gathered by Institutional Research , will help forge the new strategic plan.

xxx

All members of CCAC’s community look forward to meeting the challenges presented in this report, even as we improve on the fine programs and practices introduced in the self-study. As is always the case, self-study provides a snapshot of the College at a moment in time. Even since research has been conducted for re-accreditation, new challenges have emerged as have been cited here, and CCAC has responded with short-term actions and long-range planning. By implementing processes to respond to these issues, along with the more strategic recommendations in this report, by celebrating the extraordinary achievements of its students, faculty, administrators, and staff, and by continuing to offer flexible, cutting-edge programs, classes, and student services, no challenge will be left unmet. CCAC is poised to continue its role as the leader in education and training of the citizens of western Pennsylvania and beyond.

xxxi

SUMMARY OF THE SELF-STUDY CHAPTERS Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives The Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G) at CCAC were re-developed most recently during the 1998-1999 academic year. The M/V/V/G, highly generalized in order to embrace the College's multiple and complex initiatives, form the basis for all planning at the College, and planning goals are measured within their context. While the majority of College employees believe the CCAC is fulfilling its mission, they are not entirely satisfied that all constituencies are involved in college planning. Chapter Two: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal Planning at CCAC has become sophisticated and comprehensive since the last self-study report in 1994, when campuses were accredited separately and campus plans were sometimes in conflict. While the College has made enormous strides in implementing its planning initiatives, fiscal, academic, and institutional planning still need to work more effectively in concert with each other so that appropriate resources can be dedicated to areas with the clearest and most urgent need. Chapter Three: Institutional Resources The College's financial planning processes insure involvement at all levels of college operations. Human Resources, from administration to faculty to staff, remain adequate as measured against available benchmarks. Like most public institutions, CCAC occasionally struggles to maintain viability in its technological and physical plant facilities, due to budget constraints. In particular, the College's technological infrastructure is in urgent need of updating in order for CCAC's on-line academic offerings to remain cutting edge. Fiscal and institutional planning need to work more effectively within the context of each other so resources can be dedicated to appropriate areas. Chapter Four: Governance CCAC's chief governing body is the Board of Trustees, which has ultimate responsibility for the College and delegates operations to the college president while approving policies that govern operations. College Council, staffed by both college administrators and faculty members, is charged with the development and approval of institutional policy and academic procedures. The College needs to develop assessment tools for measuring the effectiveness of the Board and College Council. Chapter Five: Administration The organizational structure of CCAC, along with its administrators, is generally effectively in managing the College's diverse student population, faculty, and staff. On occasion, open administrative positions have been left to interim appointees for protracted periods of time. The recent Employee Survey indicates concern with the effectiveness of college leadership in terms of developing a spirit of teamwork and cooperation among employees, developing effective lines of communication, and nurturing an environment of trust and mutual respect at the College. Chapter Six: Integrity The self-study reveals that CCAC effectively manages student evaluation, grievances, and disciplinary procedures, and makes every effort to communicate the College's policies concerning

xxxii

these issues to students. The College's hiring practices are generally well-considered and equitable. The Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) between the College and the local chapter of the American Federation of Teachers governs issues of faculty obligation and academic integrity and freedom. As described in Chapter 5, there are some concerns over the spirit of teamwork, cooperation, and mutual respect at the College that must be addressed. Chapter Seven: Institutional Assessment CCAC conducts institutional assessment regularly and consistently, but the information resulting from such assessment is not always effectively disseminated nor used to promote institutional change. The College should develop a comprehensive method of institutional assessment that effectively incorporates measures of student learning outcomes so that appropriate resources can be dedicated towards positive change. Similar findings are discussed in Chapter 14. Chapter Eight: Student Admissions CCAC's open admissions policy is founded in a college mission that provides flexibility in developing policies that provide a bridge from secondary education to baccalaureate and further educational study. The College's Admissions and Financial Aid policies are generally effective and equitable and fully communicated to students through publications and the college website. In order to communicate to prospective students the quality of its programs, CCAC should better measure student success through assessment measures exemplified by the Perkins program and other programs that are assessed externally. Chapter Nine: Student Support Services CCAC provides appropriate student services to all credit and noncredit students regardless of the time or place the students attend; these services are comprehensive and support the diversity of demographics and educational experiences selected by students. The College needs to address weaknesses in the consistency in its offering of academic advisement, particularly with regard to students seeking to transfer to other institutions. Chapter Ten: Faculty CCAC employs highly qualified faculty to develop, review, modify, and support its academic programs and to consistently lead students to success in their educational endeavors. Faculty qualifications are governed by consistent policy, and the CBA establishes clear guidelines in terms of faculty duties, obligations and college governance. The College effectively supports faculty development in the spirit of academic freedom. CCAC needs to develop a faculty evaluation system that will fairly measure the quality of full and part-time faculty from the perspective of students. Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings CCAC offers courses, programs, certificates, and degrees that are characterized by appropriate levels of content rigor, depth, sequencing, and sensitivity to the needs of both adult and traditional-aged learners. These are offered through multiple delivery methods and scheduled with flexibility. All programs need to do further work to insure that information literacy is a measurable student learning outcome, and faculty course outlines need to more clearly reflect requirements established in common course syllabi.

xxxiii

Chapter Twelve: General Education From its inception, CCAC has included General Education courses as part of all Associate’s Degree programs. The College needs to develop a clearer and more consistent statement of its general education philosophy, and better define a core of general education courses to ensure rigorous general education requirements in all of its programs. Exit criteria and common assessment indicators should be developed for each general education course. Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities CCAC works to maintain educational standards through every method of delivery and at every site, from developmental courses at its main campuses to distance learning courses offered on-line. While these standards represent a College strength, CCAC needs to better demonstrate that student learning outcomes are consistent and measurable everywhere and every way it offers courses. Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning CCAC students experience different types of student learning assessment on an individual course or program basis, and some anecdotal and institutional data is collected in these courses and programs on student learning outcomes. The governance process insures that all changes in programs and courses incorporate learning goals. But the College has no institutional, official, or comprehensive plan that describes student learning assessment activities; nor does it have a means by which planning and resource allocation emerges from such assessment.

Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives

1

Chapter 1: Mission, Goals, and Objectives OVERVIEW

The Mission, Goals, and Objectives of the Community College of Allegheny County--more accurately identified as the College’s Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G)--are the cornerstone for all that the College works to build in Allegheny County and southwestern Pennsylvania. Self-study offered the College the opportunity to reflect on the reconstruction of the College’s M/V/V/G during recent years, and to assure that they are known by all college employees and are consistently fulfilled through the College’s many programs and initiatives.

A review of past CCAC catalogs indicates that several goals have been maintained across the years that represent the comprehensive nature of the College’s curriculum. Generally, these goals have been aligned with the mission of the Pennsylvania Commission on Community Colleges. All of the colleges share a mission that includes the following:

• A commitment to serve all segments of society through an open access admissions policy that

offers equal and fair treatment to all students; • A commitment to a comprehensive educational program; • A commitment to serve its community as a community-based institution of higher education; • A commitment to teaching; • A commitment to lifelong learning; and • A commitment to workforce development in their communities and throughout the state.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF CCAC’S MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS

Task Force Explorers found that the M/V/V/G are embedded in all aspects of the College. They serve as the foundation for planning and establish a blueprint for the advancement of college initiatives, action items, and accountability measures. The creation of the M/V/V/G is a collaborative project; the information that follows validates the efforts made by the College to assure they are developed through an inclusive process.

The 1994 self-study noted that the College “has not developed a mechanism and process for routine review of the Mission and Goals that would permit changes beyond revision of language.” (Note that the 1994 study accredited separately the four main campuses) MSCHE (Middle States Commission on Higher Education) recommended that CCAC develop a procedure for “ensuring a methodical review within an agreed upon time frame.” In response, CCAC initiated a review of college planning that culminated in 1998 with the development of new M/V/V/G by a committee of faculty, support staff, students, and administration. The process involved a series of monthly meetings that evolved into several reiterations of the M/V/V/G. The CCAC M/V/V/G Development Process August 2003 (Exhibit 18) provides documentation of the effort beginning in September 1998, with the introduction of the planning process. The committee solicited input from the college community after preliminary drafts of the M/V/V/G were distributed. In subsequent meetings on October 7, 1998 and November 18, 1998, the M/V/V/G were drafted and refined. The responses were compiled in the CCAC M/V/V/G Development Process August 2003. The final product was presented and accepted by the Board of Trustees during a June 17, 1999 meeting.

The process for developing the current M/V/V/G included the College Master Planning Committee, an ad hoc subcommittee made up of volunteers from the Master College Planning committee, the college president, and the Board of Trustees.

Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives

2

While no formal minutes were kept of the meetings of either the ad hoc subcommittee or the college planning committee, the entire college community was invited to participate in the process. The college planning committee was comprised of 62 people. The college president at that time, Dr. Roy Flores, chaired the committee while the Planning Director from Institutional Research functioned as the executive secretary. The distribution of the appointees to this committee appears below.

COMPOSITION OF MASTER PLANNING COMMITTEE

ADMINISTRATION 39

FACULTY 14

SERVICE EMPLOYEES UNION 3

STUDENTS 5

BOARD MEMBERS 1 (Ex Officio)

The ad hoc committee's composition included the director of public relations, director of planning and research, a college center director, a director of student life, and others.

In September 1998, the president presented for discussion to the College Master Planning Committee the prior mission and goals. Participants were asked to submit comments about the mission and goals to the director of planning. Thirty people from the Master Planning Committee submitted comments on the existing mission, goals, vision, and values. Of the 30, 11 commented on mission and seven on goals. The remaining 12 discussed vision and values statements. The ad hoc committee examined these comments along with mission statements from other community colleges, four-year colleges, and non-education organizations. For guidance, the committee also referred to material on mission and goals from MSCHE.

The committee produced a draft of a new mission statement as well as vision and values statements, which they presented to the Master Planning Committee on October 21, 1998 for response. On November 18, 1998, the Master Planning Committee discussed the mission and goals that the ad hoc committee had distributed for comment five days earlier. Based on the responses, the ad hoc committee revised the mission and goals.

On January 21, 1999, the new M/V/V/G were proposed to the Board of Trustees. The president, in presenting the eight planning initiatives derived from the proposed mission and goals, stressed that creating a “learner centered environment” would be the focus for the next two years and that the activities undertaken to achieve this environment would be documented. The Board approved the 1999-2001 College Plan, along with the new M/V/V/G.

At the beginning of each new planning cycle, the first order of business for the Planning Committee is to review the relevance of the M/V/V/G, though any recommendations for revision or change must be approved by the president and the Board of Trustees.

EMPLOYEE PERCEPTION OF MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS When Dr. Stewart Sutin arrived in the fall of 2003, he directed Institutional Research to develop an Employee Survey in order to gain a comprehensive sense of employee perceptions of the College. The survey included the following three statements on the evaluation of CCAC's M/V/V/G:

Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives

3

(1) The College’s mission statement is relevant to today’s challenges. (2) Daily work at this college is closely related to our overall mission and goals. (3) The mission, goals, vision, and values of this college are familiar to employees.

All responses were scored from 0 to 5. Results of the survey are reported in Exhibit 34.

The results of the survey show that all segments of the college believe "the college's mission statement is relevant to today's challenges" and that “the daily work at this college is closely tied to our overall mission and goals" (Overall mean 3.47). In addition, all segments believe the M/V/V/G are “familiar to employees" (Overall mean 3.03). Responses to the latter statement, while still in an acceptable range, show that employees are less confident in general employee awareness of M/V/V/G.

With regard to M/V/V/G, the only aspect of the Survey that showed a significant need for improvement was in assuring processes are in place to provide “all employees a voice in college planning," though this item did not speak directly of M/V/V/G. (Overall mean 2.92). The extent to which some employees may feel excluded from the planning process as it is reflected by the M/V/V/G merits further investigation.

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYEE RECOGNITION

The current Mission Statement includes the phrase “quality education” and asserts that CCAC will “provide leadership in workforce training.” The Institutional Goals mention “quality transfer programs” and “opportunities for personal growth and cultural enrichment.” These phrases indicate that CCAC is committed to providing a quality experience to its students, academically, culturally, creatively, and socially. For students to experience this kind of positive atmosphere, faculty and staff must be encouraged to pursue scholarly and creative endeavors. This is implied in both the Mission and Goals statements. The varied opportunities and funding support for professional development directly advance the College’s mission. All professional development activities are associated with improving teaching, learning, and providing services to students.

The College supports scholarly and creative activities annually through a variety of actions:

• Through funding and reassigned hours, the College assists faculty and staff in attending professional workshops and conferences;

• The CCAC Educational Foundation accepts nominations for exceptional CCAC employees, and The Legendary Faculty/Staff/Administrator Award is bestowed on those who have shown “a proven loyalty to the mission, philosophy and goals of CCAC" (from Legends in Leadership nomination form);

• Press releases are generated on a regular basis for outstanding performance on a local or national level;

• Recognized exemplary performances are listed in the president’s newsletter; • Scholarly faculty and staff activities are highlighted in the College’s annual report; • Completion of advanced degrees is annually acknowledged by the Board of Trustees; • Foundation grants are awarded to faculty and administration for innovation in the classroom; • Travel funds for professional development are allocated as a part of the AFT (American

Federation of Teachers) contract; and • Faculty and staff attend the League for Innovation in Community Colleges conferences on a

regular basis.

Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives

4

The Rewards and Recognition Committee was established in 1994 to recognize faculty and staff who have gone above and beyond the duties of their job descriptions or have displayed outstanding creativity as employees. The Committee has recently disbanded; however, individual campus committees still carry on its duties. The Professional Development Coordinator is now forming a committee of past award winners “to revise the criteria, the process, and the way we promote and recognize outstanding teaching.”

THE ASSESSMENT OF MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS The principal instruments through which the currency of the M/V/V/G is assessed are the College’s planning cycles. The initiatives arising out of the College Plan are implemented by an administrator or faculty member accountable for the actions identified. The initiatives are filtered down to the appropriate departments for action. Individuals in those departments are held accountable through evaluations by their supervisors for their piece of any initiative. Other tools used to assess M/V/VG through planning include Student Satisfaction Survey reports and instruments, state and national standards reports, professional development committee survey of faculty needs, Graduate Surveys, and Exit Survey reports.

The two most recent planning reports, the CCAC College Plan 2001-2003 (Exhibit 13) and the Second Year Assessment, College Plan 2001-2003 (Exhibit 62) conclude that the “College mission, vision, values, and goals” were “still valid and that there was no need to revise them for this planning cycle.” This report then detailed six (6) planning initiatives to further implement the M/V/V/G:

1. Initiative 1: Increase Access to College Programs and Services (Goal #1) 2. Initiative 2: Improve Developmental Education (Goal #1) 3. Initiative 3: Develop Partnerships in All Sectors of the Community (Value 6) 4. Initiative 4: Support the Workforce Training Needs of the Region (Value 7) 5. Initiative 5: Implement a Comprehensive Assessment Program 6. Initiative 6: Improve the College’s Information Technology (Value 2)

The second report, Second Year Assessment, College Plan 2001-2003, listed the actions undertaken by the College that emerged from the six planning initiatives delineated in the first. The relative success the College has enjoyed through these actions is discussed in detail in Chapter 2 of this self-study report, and is revealed in the Second Year Assessment. The chart below gives an overview of the effectiveness of college planning for two full cycles: The College Plan, 1999-2001 contained eight major initiatives, 47 actions, and 194 strategies; The College Plan, 2001-2003 contained six major initiatives (defined above), 28 actions, and 159 strategies. (Since actions always contained more than one strategy, strategies have been counted with the following results.) 1999-2001

Strategies Completed Ongoing Revised Reconsidered

194 29.9% (58) 40.7% (79) 16.5% (32) 12.9% (25)

2001-2003

Strategies Completed Ongoing Revised Reconsidered

159 29.6% (47) 55.3% (88) 10.7% (17) 4.4% (7)

Chapter One: Mission, Goals, and Objectives

5

As the chart above reveals, many initiatives are ongoing; however, the College can assess its degree of completion of these initiatives through certain quantitative methods; for example, CCAC has the largest computer training facility in the region; has the third highest number of graduates in the health care field in the Nation; and overall has 94% of its graduates remaining to work in southwestern Pennsylvania. (Source ?)

From a planning perspective, CCAC continues to pursue important, but incomplete initiatives beyond their two-year cycles. An initiative may be deleted if it is no longer deemed necessary or achievable. EMERGING TRENDS AND MISSION, VISION, VALUES, AND GOALS The Institutional Research Department presents current trend information from a variety of sources such as ACE (American Council of Education), AACC (American Association of Community Colleges), or other Government and Educational resources. In addition, members of the Planning Committee present ideas as they report back from their task forces. For example, an institutional response to the rising trend in international students in the area has been incorporated into the planning process, as have new workforce initiatives. When such issues arise, the college president, using a collaborative evaluation process, initiates changes to the M/V/V/G and or the College Plan. Valid emerging trends are incorporated into the college mission and plan. The College does have a system of checks and balances in place to catch activity that strays from the mission. The College can identify such actions through a series of governance organizations, including the President’s Cabinet, the President’s Council, and the Board of Trustees. But because the M/V/V/G are broadly defined, inconsistencies have not been identified. Should they arise, the planning process would deal with inconsistencies through the annual assessment of the College Plan.

The following are a few of the initiatives that have been enhanced through planning in light of the CCAC’s continued dedication to its mission, vision, values, and goals:

• Distance Learning: during the past three years, registration in distance learning courses has

grown from slightly over 3000 students in 2000-01 to more than 6600 students in 2002-03; • Dual Enrollment: dual enrollment is the program through which students may attend CCAC

classes and earn college credit while still in high school. This program has experienced an 8.2% growth during the last three years;

• The College has opened a center in Washington County, where no county community college exists, and has run phlebotomy programs and culinary programs in both Armstrong and Somerset counties;

• The College has partnered with many local health care providers in order to offer educational programs in nursing, surgical technology, and central services technician. Among these are UPMC (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center), Kane Hospitals, Presbyterian Senior Care, and Grane Health Care; and

• A new honors program is being developed, in cooperation with iCarnegie (a partnership with Carnegie Mellon University), for promising high school students.

Recommendation

1. Correct the perception that not all employees are involved in M/V/V/G as they are linked to

planning by either better communicating to employees the means by which their concerns are addressed or by reconfiguring the Planning Committee to reach broader college constituencies.

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

6

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal OVERVIEW Planning at CCAC has undergone fundamental structural changes since the last Middle States report was submitted in 1994, when the evaluation teams found that campus planning processes were often competing with college-wide processes (PRR report, 2000). The College has since combined the planning functions for campuses under system-wide college planning, and has made strides in incorporating the various planning streams into a vision for the College in the short-and long-term. Still, the college plan should better reflect the often parallel planning efforts made through Academic Planning, Human Resources Planning, and Facilities Planning; a more coordinated college planning effort would result in more efficient use of the College’s capital and operating budgets. THE COLLEGE PLAN AND CCAC’S NEW PRESIDENT Institutional planning style is substantively influenced by presidential leadership. Currently the College is on a short hiatus from its continuous planning cycles to assess its effectiveness and adopt a more strategic approach to planning. This break in planning is the direct result of the transition in presidential leadership. One material change in college planning is the change in duties and title of the college planning officer from Director of Planning and Research to Executive Director of Strategic Planning. The Executive Director is examining past planning practices of the College, identifying best practices at other institutions, and attending national organizational development and planning conferences. The new strategic planning design will be reviewed by college senior management with final approval coming from the college president. Much of what Task Force Explorers summarize below the College had achieved with regard to planning in the years leading up to appointment of the new president.

COLLEGE PLANNING AND MISSION, VISION, VALUES AND GOALS Each planning cycle begins with a review of the College's Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals. As was described in Chapter 1, the college-wide Planning Committee examined and revised the M/V/V/G in 1999, and they were shortly thereafter approved by the Board of Trustees. Subsequent planning cycles begin with a review and reaffirmation of the M/V/V/G that reestablishes their foundation for the creation of college plans. Generally, there is a perceived harmony between the M/V/V/G and daily operations, as evidenced by the results of the Fall 2003 CCAC Employee Survey (Exhibit 34). All campuses and employee groups were neutral or in agreement with the statement “I believe the daily work at this college is closely tied to our overall mission and goals.” The College aggregate rating of this statement was 3.47 on a five point scale. Of 48 statements this ranked 13th, placing it squarely in the top third. When planning processes are running smoothly-and there are exceptions to this-M/V/V/G are used to set a context for college planning. Any initiative that demands significant resources has evolved from the College Plan, and thus is evaluated in light of the M/V/V/G. Unit plans sponsored by individuals, departments, divisions, and campuses must describe how they will support the general College Plan. Unit budgets are developed to reflect adjustments in the allocation of funds to enable larger operating areas to support the implementation of college-wide goals articulated in the College Plan. Barring a significant emergency, with regard to resource allocation, planned initiatives take precedence over initiatives that are unplanned or do not align with M/V/V/G.

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

7

CCAC'S PLANNING PROCESS CCAC follows a well-defined process for college-wide planning; at the beginning of each planning cycle, the process is documented in flow chart form and as a calendar of planning process milestones. Formats and writing styles for plan documents are well-defined by examples. Planning meetings with agendas linked to the planning calendar are held at regular intervals at a regular time and location throughout the planning process. Constituencies participate in the college-wide planning process by virtue of membership on the College Planning Committee. The Planning Committee structure is designed by senior management to be representative of college functions and locations and to provide diverse perspectives. A number of seats on the Planning Committee are permanent, including the college president, the chair of College Council (faculty position) and the Executive Director for Strategic Planning. When there are administrative offices held by more than one person, such as the Dean of Student Development at each of the four campuses, representatives are selected on a rotational basis. There is faculty representation from each of the four campuses, along with the chair of the Academic Planning Sub-Committee of College Council. Planning committees are formed by written invitation from the college president. Planning Committee members participate and provide input into the planning process as follows: discussing and deliberating during meetings, conducting research on community college topics and making presentations to the committee, evaluating alternatives, and drafting language for planning initiatives. Members of the committee attend monthly meetings to report on their activities and offer insight into the initiatives other members have undertaken. Review and acceptance of the decisions articulated in these reports is one approach to establishing initiatives in the planning process. In order to facilitate the shaping of the entire plan, committee members rate the importance of a broad range of initiatives and then identify priorities. Additionally, the committee considers opportunities and threats identified by members or other areas of the college operations. While forming planning initiatives, the committee also uses information gathered independently by the institutional research department. Institutional planning is one of the primary responsibilities of the college president, who has authority over final decision making with regard to college plans. Final drafts are approved by the college president and are presented to the Board of Trustees for adoption. The planning process has been flexible enough to incorporate change. Improvements are proposed by the Executive Director for Strategic Planning and approved by the college president. Changes in the planning process are communicated to Planning Committee members in meetings at the beginning of each planning cycle. As indicate in Chapter 1, in the Fall 2003 Employee Survey (Exhibit 34), employees expressed some dissatisfaction with their perception of the inclusiveness of college planning. Most campuses and employee groups disagreed with the statement “Processes are in place to give all employees a voice in college planning.” Of 48 statements this ranked 37th, placing it in the bottom quartile of responses. ACADEMIC PLANNING AND COLLEGE PLANNING As required by the CBA between the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and CCAC, a sub-committee of the College Council is responsible for academic planning. The Academic Planning sub-committee consists of four college administrators appointed by the president, two or more faculty members from College Council and six additional faculty members. This sub-committee is charged with developing the academic calendar, reviewing staffing needs and making recommendations to College and President’s Councils and facilitating the program and discipline review process.

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

8

The Vice President of Academic Affairs, the chair of the College Council and the chair of the Academic Planning sub-committee of College Council are standing members of the Planning Committee. Their involvement provides a bridge between academic planning and college planning, though, as articulated elsewhere in this chapter, there is not always fluid, coordinated planning between the Academic Planning subcommittee and the College Planning Committee. The College was working on a resolution to this problem when the new president arrived, and the focus of planning efforts became more strategic. COMMUNICATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COLLEGE PLAN The College planning process is described in writing and in diagram form in the introductory sections of college plans and on the college website. The process is also explained to planning committee members at the beginning of each planning cycle. The College Plan documents are designed and formatted to support implementation at the operational and tactical levels. Plans itemize the major initiatives to be achieved, the tactics identified to achieve them, an office that is accountable for their completion, a deadline, and a source of funds. Copies of college plans are sent to all regular college employees, and posted on the college website at the end of each planning cycle. Planning Committee members recommend the assignment of particular initiatives to appropriate administrative offices and personnel. These assignments are reviewed by the Executive Director for Strategic Planning and changes are recommended to the college president, who makes final decisions regarding the office responsible for the initiative, which is then published in the planning documents. Every attempt is made to make implementation assignments that are within the authority of the person or office named. Vice presidents, essentially the administrative leaders of individual campuses and their branch affiliates, are charged with implementing significant initiatives of the plans. Often academic deans and College Center deans are called upon to assist in these tasks and oversee the implementation of strategies as a result of research and investigation into their departments or areas. Progress in completion of planning initiatives is reported in the annual reports. Administrative performance appraisals that incorporate goals related to these initiatives are conducted annually. The capital outlay budget is generally an integral part of the planning process to the extent that it is included in the College Plan and sometimes determines the feasibility of addressing certain planning initiatives. Items included in the capital outlay plan are prioritized according to a set of criteria that may vary from year to year based on budgetary constraints and need. Planning initiatives that demand significant capital funding are sometimes postponed due to the uncertain nature of securing capital resources under state and county funding mechanisms. Unit operating budgets are, or should be, created in the context of college planning priorities. Ideally, college planning and budgeting processes are parallel activities, and, as noted earlier, at CCAC they are often synchronous. However, the College has often conducted planning and budgeting processes independent of one another, and the methods for consistently building operating budgets that are in the context of college planning priorities remain unclear. Financial considerations were more carefully addressed in the planning for CCAC’s 2004-2007 strategic initiatives. This plan identified costs for which private and public grants would be sought, used financial models to plan for new faculty, and enumerated areas where staff has been reduced to end continuing budget deficits. ASSESSMENT OF COLLEGE PLANNING College planning assessment has two primary components: internal and external assessment. Internal assessment evaluates the performance of the institution through student goal attainment data, graduate

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

9

satisfaction, workforce placement rates, degree completion rates, retention and persistence rates, transfer rates, student demographics, and enrollment trends. Internal assessment also incorporates progress reports from prior planning cycles and assessment of the College’s external environment. AACC (American Association of Community Colleges), The Chronicle of Higher Education, the League for Innovation in the Community College, the U.S. Department of Labor, The U.S. Bureau of the Census, regional planning and economic development agencies, universities, and local news organizations provide external assessment information by which the College benchmarks itself. Additionally, the College conducts planning forums that engage regional experts and stakeholders in the planning process. Planning forum topics have explored the region’s K-12 education sector; future trends in post-secondary education; workforce trends; and social, political and economic issues. The planning process is designed to be assessment driven. Roughly the first half of each planning cycle is dedicated to the evaluation of assessment information gleaned from previous planning cycles and the sources listed above. The identification of planning directions and initiatives begins following the evaluation of this assessment information. As discussed earlier, those charged with implementing planning initiatives file annual progress reports that are aggregated into a composite report. Progress reporting will shift to a quarterly basis in future planning cycles. A quarterly meeting will be organized to review plan progress and adjust strategies to overcome barriers in implementation. CCAC’S CURRENT STRATEGIC PLANNING INITIATIVES The College is currently pursuing three strategic initiatives that were enumerated in a plan finalized in March 2004. The first initiative is a Center for Learning. It will improve CCAC’s remedial education programs, form partnerships with the K-12 sector to help ensure more students are prepared for the future, and develop programs and services that help the area’s disenfranchised populations. The second initiative is a Center for Health Careers. This initiative is designed to meet the workforce needs of the area’s health care industry. The center will improve program offerings, recruit quality students, improve student outcomes, and reorganize the administration of health careers’ instruction. The third initiative is a Center for Professional Development. This initiative is intended to improve the College’s capacity to serve the workforce needs of the area by transforming its workforce training division into a customer-oriented, quality-driven organization. While assessment of planning initiatives is incorporated at every level of college planning, no formal mechanism exists for assessing planning effectiveness itself. However, since the planning process is cyclical, lessons learned from prior cycles are applied to subsequent cycles. One change included the reduction of the size of the Planning Committee. Another change utilized an exercise for institutional assessment that was based on recommendations for community colleges made in AACC’s Knowledge Net report. In this planning exercise, members of the Planning Committee completed a structured evaluation of the effectiveness of CCAC in relation to the Knowledge Net recommendations. Committee members presented their findings to the Planning Committee for additional discussion. Finally, beginning in the fall of 2003, the Employee Survey was administered to evaluate employees’ perceptions about college planning and goal communication. This survey will be conducted once every two years.

Recommendations

1. Develop an integrated college planning and budgeting process that considers individual unit plans and determines resource allocation. The planning calendar should coincide with the budgeting calendar.

Chapter 2: Planning, Resource Allocation, and Institutional Renewal

10

2. Develop college-wide resource allocation criteria founded in the College Plan to arbitrate competition for scarce resources.

3. Coordinate and integrate learning outcomes and institutional assessment processes for incorporation into the College Plan.

4. Incorporate Discipline Program Reviews into the College Plan, defining budget needs for human resources and program needs along with a process for the approval of new programs as a result of the planning process.

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

11

Chapter 3: Institutional Resources OVERVIEW The provision of adequate resources is essential to the College’s achievement of its Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals. Appropriate facilities provide an environment conducive to learning and teaching. Highly skilled and learned faculty members provide the necessary guidance to allow students to successfully access available learning resources and work toward their learning objectives. The availability of a rich array of texts, media, and other learning resources, along with the appropriate technological infrastructure to deliver those resources, provide students with the means to learn and develop. Capable support staff members offer services that support this educational enterprise. The College recognizes the need to evaluate the adequacy of its various resources in terms of their support of its mission, goals, and objectives. It also understands the need to assess the effectiveness of its evaluation processes in terms of adequate resource acquisition and deployment. In this chapter, the Task Force Explorers set out evidence and analysis to offer insight into its compliance with Middle State’s standard on institutional resources. CCAC addresses this objective from four perspectives. These are as follows:

1. Financial Planning 2. Human Resources 3. Technology 4. Facilities

Explorers believe that compliance is indicated when there is good evidence that:

• The College regularly evaluates the adequacy of resources it has to carry out its stated M/V/V/G and its conclusions are reflected in its budgeting decisions;

• Processes are in place to forecast the necessary replacement and associated cost of its current resources and the results are addressed in its budgeting decisions; and

• Processes are in place to evaluate the resource requirements associated with changing demand and strategic objectives and its results are addressed in its budget and/or resource development plans.

FINANCIAL PLANNING An outline and timeline for CCAC’s budgeting process has been documented in Section. 6.8 of the College’s Policies and Procedures Manual (Exhibit 19). This outline calls for operating budget development to begin at the department level and roll up to higher responsibility levels, culminating in a college-wide budget request. This bottom-to-top approach ensures participation by all levels of college staffing and includes cross-sections of both faculty and administrative involvement. A balanced budget is achieved using a top-to-bottom approach, which readjusts the allocation of funds on a college-wide priority basis, with one of the goals being the equitable distribution of resources for similar operations at each of the four campuses. This dual approach to budgeting therefore utilizes all available resources to come up with a budget that uniformly supports the college’s M/V/V/G. The annual budget for facilities acquisition and renewal is based on the goals outlined in the Master Facilities Plan (Exhibit 49). Projects listed in the plan, for which there are known funding sources, are submitted to the Board of Trustees for approval.

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

12

There is a predetermined road map for budget responsibility. The breakdown of particular functions under categories is available in the annual Current Operating & Plant Funds Budget book (Exhibit 52). Evidence of similar structure from campus to campus (vice President to vice President) is also apparent from the Organizational Chart (Exhibit 21), which shows how the directors at each campus report to the deans, who report to the campus vice president. The bottom-to-top approach to budget development, as previously discussed, can be traced on this organizational chart. Collective bargaining agreements are instrumental in facilitating the consistent allocation of resources throughout the College. Through contractual rates of pay reached through these agreements, there is consistency in the level of resource allocation directed toward staffing throughout the system. Capital Budget Planning In the development of the Capital Budget, the vice presidents are provided two forms: the Capital Outlay Planning Form for Movable Equipment Purchases (Exhibit 52); and the Capital Outlay Planning Form for Renovations and Improvement Projects (Exhibit 52). These forms are further distributed to all the deans and directors. The forms are completed at the departmental level and returned to the vice presidents. The vice presidents then compile their prioritized lists of capital projects and then merge the lists into a single prioritized list for the College. Advising this process are such staff as the business managers of each campus, the Director of Information Technology Services and the Controller. A broad representation of College functional areas, in this way, has a hand in the capital budgeting process. A strategic view of the institution is partly attained through the questions on the Capital Outlay Planning Forms themselves. Each request must be accompanied by a written justification that describes what positive impact will be realized if the request is granted, and what negative impact will be realized if it is not. For requests that involve Information Technology (IT), the department making the request must consult with the Information Technology Services (ITS) area to make sure that there are no compatibility issues with college technology standards. Any department making a request that might require infrastructure modifications must also consult the Facilities Management area to make sure that the modifications are feasible. Task Force Explorers wish to note the results of a survey of department heads that solicited responses to the budgetary processes (described later in this report). Most said that if, within academic programs, something was needed to keep these programs current and at industry standards, the College would find the money to buy whatever was necessary. The College did not support other requests, such as ones made to keep the department in general on the cutting edge or those made to develop new and creative approaches to teaching. A useful tool for the assessment of potential Capital Outlay needs is the Movable Equipment Inventory Records (Exhibit 52). These records are in the form of an Excel spreadsheet that can be manipulated to present movable equipment in the order that they will become fully depreciated, so that more immediate equipment needs can be identified and addressed. These records can be further subdivided to present an aging of equipment by campus, so that available funds can be equitably distributed among the campuses according to the most pressing equipment needs. Operating Budget Planning As a routine part of the annual operating budget process, the vice presidents at each campus are sent a packet of information that includes the following documents:

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

13

• Budget Development Methodology • Budget Process Description • Department Budget Instructions • Departmental Budget Worksheets • Departmental Needs Assessment Form

The Departmental Budget Worksheet includes projections for four fiscal years: the current fiscal year, the next fiscal year for which the budget is being built, and the succeeding two fiscal years. The Budget Development Methodology document describes the standards and assumptions that went into formulating those projections. This gives the vice presidents the opportunity to question those standards and assumptions as well as assuring that the decisions they make about their next year’s budget take into consideration the needs for future years, and more particularly, the impact that current decisions will have on future needs. As has already been demonstrated, multi-year budget projections are presented to all levels involved in the budget building process on the Departmental Budget Worksheet form, which works its way up from the department level to the Vice President level and, finally, the college-wide level. It is more difficult to develop projections to support the successful implementation of realistic initiatives, above and beyond ongoing operations. In this area, a projection of revenue sources is crucial, and that depends upon a multitude of factors, not the least of which is trend analysis. This trend analysis is published in Bottom Lines: CCAC Trends in Planning Data (Exhibit 5), prepared by the CCAC Department of Planning and Institutional Research. This document offers demographics on students, faculty productivity rates (average credit load, average section size, etc), enrollment history from term to term and year to year, and where (campus to campus) and when (day or evening) students are enrolling. CCAC’s Policies and Procedures Manual (Exhibit 19) details the College’s systemic approval system in Section 6.5. Multiple levels of approval are required for all types of purchases in order to provide for adequate internal control and accountability. CCAC has developed the Administrative Reporting Center (ARC) system, which makes accounting and budget reports instantly available on a “one click” basis at any time to any manager, dean, director, or department head having budget responsibility. In addition, the business managers of each campus are given the Vacant Position Analysis (Exhibit 68) report on a monthly basis, and they meet once a month with the Vice President of Administrative Services to get an overall view of the latest financial position of the College. The business managers are also given the Salary Budget Report (Exhibit 52) on a monthly basis, which enables them to track the status of all authorized positions. Personnel Budget Planning Personnel costs comprise the overwhelming majority of the annual operating budget. A College Budget Committee exists to develop methods for measuring personnel needs and redistributing funds to meet those needs. In the Budget Committee Recommendations for 2002-2003 report (Exhibit 6), the following recommendations were submitted to President’s Council for consideration:

1. Staffing levels will be based on developed formulas or comparative statistics. 2. All areas of the College will be reviewed to determine over or under staffing. 3. Personnel needs will be reviewed and prioritized at President’s Cabinet/Council.

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

14

4. Campus budgets should be responsible for all campus specific collective bargaining agreement costs and other costs impacting the budget as a result of campus originated initiatives.

The President’s Council would refer to the College Plan for guidance as it prioritized the staffing needs. For example, Action 2.3 under Initiative Two of the 2001-2003 CCAC College Plan called for improvements in the College’s developmental education curriculum and program delivery. The members of President’s Council will then rank the need for additional staff in developmental education against other staffing priorities. In summary, then, entities such as the Budget Committee will identify resource needs based on measurable standards, and the College administration will then prioritize those needs, using the College Plan as its guide. In the aforementioned document Budget Committee Recommendations for 2003-2004, personnel resource standards are clearly defined for three broad categories: custodial, student services, and faculty. The report recommends custodial needs be calculated by using custodial allocation software, which uses square footage and cleaning levels to determine need. Other factors such as landscaping/acreage are factored in after the base level is established. Student Service personnel needs (Registration, Business Office/Student Accounts, Library, Recruitment, Placement, Financial Aid, etc.) are likewise determined by a formula that allocates such resources according to how many full-time equivalent students each campus handles. Faculty needs are determined by a five-step process in an attempt to bring the full-time versus part-time faculty ratio to a more desirable level, as well as to achieve a more equitable distribution based on actual student semester credit hours, by campus and by discipline. Any budget plan, no matter how thoroughly projected, cannot accurately predict the actual use of human resources. As mentioned above, turnovers, sick leaves, etc. are tracked via CCAC’s monthly Vacant Position Analysis report, which is sent out regularly to the business managers of the campuses and continuing education. Authorized positions must be fully funded in the budget, under the assumption that any particular position will be filled and fully expended. However, a factor is built into the budget each year to allow for turnover savings realized at each campus at the end of each month of the fiscal year. Cost Control When enrollment has increased substantially over budgeted projections, the operating units may be authorized to increase expenditures estimated to be covered by the increased tuition revenue. For example, additional enrollment may require the addition of sections staffed by adjuncts, an expense that may be covered by increased tuition revenue. Conversely, when it becomes apparent that the College expenditures are on a path to exceed revenues, adjustments are made to cut costs, such as leaving open positions vacant. Revenue Sources

The College is a component unit of its sponsor, Allegheny County. The county provides funds for operating and capital expenditures. While enabling legislation for the College anticipated funding from sponsors as a fixed proportion of operating and capital needs, funding from the County is actually provided on an incremental basis not tied directly to such needs.

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

15

The College is also considered to be an instrument of the Commonwealth. The state pays its share of operating expenses at the end of each quarter, and has the option of paying its share of capital expenditures either when incurred or over a period of time. Election of the latter method requires the state to also pay a pro-rated share of the interest expense incurred by the College.

State legislation currently in effect provides that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania shall reimburse the Community College of Allegheny County $1,500 per full-time equivalent credit student. A variety of reimbursements for noncredit students and stipends for students in specific programs are also specified by legislation. In addition, the legislation provides that the state reimburse the College for one-half of all approved capital expenditures. College submission of enrollment for these reimbursements is subject to post-audit by the Commonwealth.

The College has authority to collect tuition and fees from its students and to seek supplemental funding through grants, contracts, and contributions from private sources to support it operating and capital needs. Tuition and fees currently provide approximately one third of the College’s operating funds.

In additional to its traditional revenue streams, the College seeks further funding for programs and initiatives through the Contracts and Grants Department. These are sought through federal, state, and county sources as well as through private sources. Some of these are listed in Appendix 3.1. The Contracts and Grants Department periodically issues to faculty and administration an online newsletter entitled Grants Online Alert, which lists potential grant opportunities and information regarding their deadlines, contact information, etc.

The College also has partnerships with other entities to leverage our common resources in the delivery of instruction. A prime example of this is the partnership with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW), where CCAC and the IBEW work together to offer an Associates of Science Program in Electrical Construction Technology at the IBEW site. Additional partnerships are listed in Appendix 3.2.

HUMAN RESOURCES The teaching staff is at the heart of CCAC’s strategic efforts to address its mission. There are no industry standards for the staffing of educational programs that apply across the curriculum. There are, however, program-specific standards that apply in some program areas where graduates are subject to outside certification and/or the programs are subject to program-specific accreditation. As programs are created through the College governance processes (see the AFT contract), the requirements for faculty in the core disciplines is outlined based on the delivery requirements of those disciplines. Minimum standards for full-time faculty in the program are also specified. The College reviews its programs on a five-year review cycle. Part of this review process involves the review for adequacy of instructional staff for the conduct of the program The National Association of College and University Business Officers (NACUBO) and the American Association of Community Colleges (AACC) offer no industry standards for comprehensive institutional staffing. There have been localized efforts to develop staffing benchmarks. In the early 1970s the State Council of Higher Education in Virginia (SCHEV) developed such guidelines for community colleges in their state system and based it on a study of staffing across the nation. What follows is a comparison of CCAC’s staffing against these independently developed benchmarks. In brief, the SCHEV guidelines included:

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

16

Academic Support • 1 Administrator per 25 full-time equivalent teaching faculty member in the fall; • 1 Support Staff per 8 full-time equivalent teaching faculty member in the fall;

Libraries • 1 Administrator and 2 Support Staff, plus • 1 Administrator per 1,500 fte students and 1 per 150 fte faculty in the fall;

Institutional Support and Student Services • 3 Administrators and 6 support staff, plus • 3 Administrators per 1,000 fte students in fall; • 10.5 Support Staff per 1,000 fte students in fall.

These guidelines were for colleges in a system and did not address staffing needs for centralized administrative functions and computer operations. Applying these guidelines to CCAC campus numbers for fall 2003 yields the following results:

Allegheny Boyce North South Fall FTES (30 hr Base) 3,641 1,890 2,250 2,938 FTE Teaching Faculty 197 102 122 159 Academic Support Administrators 7.87 4.09 4.86 6.35 Support Staff 24.60 12.77 15.20 19.85 Libraries Administrators 4.74 2.94 3.31 4.02 Support Staff 9.48 5.88 6.62 8.03 Institutional Support/ Student Services Administrators 13.92 8.67 9.75 11.81 Support Staff 44.23 25.85 29.63 36.85 Total Staff Guideline 105 60 69 87 CCAC Staff Authorization 101 60 61 78

These calculations show that staffing patterns at CCAC campuses have developed over time in a manner consistent with these independently determined benchmarks. In the area of housekeeping, the College employs software that calculates staffing requirements at various qualitative levels of maintenance. Current staffing levels by campus allow consistent maintenance at a median level of quality. The College is currently deploying staffing software for other plant maintenance. The current practice of allocating resources to personnel does not reflect the more standardized and scientific approaches described here. In the past, practice of staffing in the full-time faculty, administrative, and support areas at CCAC has been a combination of history, articulation of need,

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

17

available job slots, and funding. The more scientific and systematic approach to determining human resource needs, in light of this history, will have to be instituted over time. Self-study included a survey entitled “Faculty Department Heads Survey Summary of Resources” (Appendix 3.3), which asked Faculty Department heads questions about the three resource areas of full-time faculty, part-time faculty, and capital items (see subheading Facilities and Equipment). Perception ranged widely as to how these positions are developed and authorized. Many of those responding indicated very clearly the need for a better way of identifying and prioritizing needs not only on the individual campuses but also within the system. The second part of the survey pertained to part-time faculty instruction. In this area most of those responding indicated that they were satisfied with how this was done. Many indicated instructors were usually hired to fill a specific course. In order to evaluate the extent to which CCAC makes efficient use of its resources, human and otherwise, the College analyzed IPEDS (Integrated Post Secondary Data System) reports of 12 similar institutions, then averaged the categorical spending over three years. The results indicate the impact human resources have on the institution’s finances: CCAC spent significantly more of its budget (up to a 4.7% difference) for “Instruction” and “Institutional Support” and significantly less in “Academic Support” (up to a 6% difference). The “Student Service, and Operation and Maintenance of Plant” categorical was similar among the institutions. Taken together, the College’s efforts at evaluating the adequacy of its instructional and support staffing are substantial. Given the funding constraints within which it operates, the College staffing for program and support activities is handled consistently across the College. TECHNOLOGY The purpose of Information Technology Services (ITS) is to provide a “shell” (infrastructure) that is sufficiently flexible and robust to support the College’s needs in both the administrative and academic areas. Mission critical software must fit, work, and function seamlessly in this environment. CCAC has engaged in a variety of well-documented efforts to evaluate the condition of its ITS resources with regard to their adequacy to support the College’s M/V/V/G. These efforts include: an analytical report prepared by the Gartner Group (technology consultants); email questionnaires to faculty department heads; ITS condition reports published in September 2002 and August 2003; the Facility Master Plan prepared by Sasaki Associates and the publication on the College website of technology standards for College operations. The report by The Gartner Group supports an urgency to act if the College expects to not only remain operational but also to be able to keep up with current and rapidly emerging technology. The article, “Key Technology Advances from 2003 to 2012” (Fen and Lincoln, December 2002), emphasizes the need for a robust physical connectivity to support an ever-increasing demand for wireless connectivity. There will be an increased demand for an agile network to support mobility for new wireless products and PC interfaces. The College has not budgeted for a technology infrastructure in support of its current M/V/V/G, nor can the existing infrastructure support emerging technologies. The Gartner Group further reports that the capability must exist to support web accessible applications, which are service-oriented and personalized to meet individual information needs. The demands of the workplace will focus on a network that is “always on” and is flexible enough to accommodate constantly changing business processes

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

18

Gartner set two benchmark standards for the College. The College meets the first benchmark when CCAC’s ITS annually refreshes standards for desktops and peripheral devices (scanners, local printers, system printers, digital cameras, CD/DVD burners, etc.), as well as standards for servers and operating systems. Second, Gartner emphasizes the need to set network architecture standards that meet business requirements of the organization. All CCAC ITS plans point to the need for a massive network upgrade and lifecycle management of servers to support technologies demanded by end users, such as audio and video streaming, smart cards, and the capability of supporting a parallel teaching/training network in tandem with the production network.

The August 10, 2003, executive summary of the Sasaki Associates report on the College facility plan (Exhibit 49) regarding technology resources listed “Investment in Technology” as their #2 recommendation. Specifically, it indicates that a “robust, high-speed network with broad bandwidth will allow members of the academic community to communicate digitally and take advantage of a wide range of information services. Network improvements will make it possible to expand e-learning and hybrid learning opportunities.…” Interviews conducted with faculty, administration, and key ITS staff, in conjunction with the ITS User Survey and the Needs Assessment Form responses, all corroborate the findings of Gartner and Sasaki. The conclusion of the various assessments efforts conducted by the College with respect to adequacy of ITS resources is that the College infrastructure is inadequate for its needs. Communication Concerns Email and voicemail concerns are another recurring theme with voicemail being a great problem in shared offices where there is more than one faculty member per office. Help Desk records indicate that in the past year (October ‘02-October ‘03) 21 phone outages, 20 network outages, and nine maintenance notices have occurred, creating disruptions to daily operations. As equipment and the infrastructure age, and as added stress is placed upon the latter, these outages will continue to increase in severity and duration.

Summary The College sees that there is clear evidence that requirements to remediate its resource deficiencies have been consistently included for consideration in the Capital Budget process, which has resulted in the funding and acquisition of the upgrade of the Colleague server, the Colleague firewall components, and the replacement of all of the College’s desktop computers on a recurring four-year schedule. (Colleague is the College’s business enterprise system software, developed by Datatel®, and described in Chapter 5.) Because of deficiencies in available funding for capital projects and a variety of other critical needs competing for those funds, many of the identified ITS resource requirements have not been addressed. Because these improvements are essentially bound to the capital budget process for which funding has recently been scarce, the College has lagged behind its intended pace with regard to making these improvements. However, in its 2004-06 Capital Budget, a bond issues that addresses these needs has been authorized by the Board of Trustees, so the College will realize significant gains in the currency of its ITS in the near future. FACILITIES

The Facilities Master Plan for the Community College of Allegheny County was initiated in February 1990 with the internal planning process entitled, “The Agenda for the 90s.” This was an examination

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

19

of the programmatic, functional, and cultural aspects of college operations. The planning process then evaluated facility size and use, enrollment histories, projections of square footage requirements for programs, student support, and administrative and building services. The charge for this process was given to The Saratoga Associates by the Community College of the Allegheny County Board of Trustees. Each of the four main campuses was evaluated individually, along with the College as a whole. It was guided by direction, growth, and change to support and enhance the mission of the Community College of Allegheny County. With the exception of the 1992 off-campus center plan that has been used very little, this action item has received considerable application. Several recommendations of the 1990-91 Plan have been implemented, including the construction of the Student Services Center at Allegheny Campus, the Allied Health Wing at Boyce Campus, and the “G” Wing at South Campus. Since the North Campus had only been open for two years at the time of the study, needs were more critical at the other campuses. The new structures incorporated the higher priority items as identified in the “Needs and Priorities” pages in Chapter D of the Master Plan. Another high priority item on the Allegheny Campus-a sciences and allied health programs facility-has been designed and is pending funding.

A current Master Plan produce by Sasaki Associates is now available. The 1991 and 2003 plans address space issues and express concerns about space utilization, technology, and scheduling. The capital budget at Community College of Allegheny County has been driven by the campuses’ best efforts to allocate scarce funds to several categories of competing needs. Since the source of capital funds has dwindled over the past several years, it is difficult for campuses to plan for regular replacement of programmatic needs and physical plant requirements. Classroom demands and rapidly changing instructional technology, coupled with an ever increasing backlog of deferred maintenance items, intensify the competition for limited capital funding. In an ideal situation, there would be adequate categories of funds to address deferred maintenance, instructional, and mandated program needs. Allocation of annual capital funds go to those projects which campuses view as mission critical, which include replacement of failed equipment and facilities, along with those items mandated by various agencies. Moving to a life-cycle replacement format on a larger scale would assist campuses in prioritizing projects on a more accurate basis. Plans for Improvement of Funding Processes for Facilities Allocation Several programs in the developmental stages will assist campuses in better planning for the systematic replacement of building and site components, as well as plant equipment. The College has purchased and begun use of a preventive maintenance software package that does several things. This program allows campuses to schedule and track maintenance on its equipment, vehicles, and buildings. If the program is diligently monitored, any of the maintained items can be tracked for increasing downtime, repairs, costs, or obsolescence. Using this data, campuses can plan for replacement through the budget building process. Elevators, escalators, fire protection equipment, and other items not maintained by campus personnel can be entered into the system with the stipulation that the contractors provide the required maintenance data and service records.

Complementing this is the developing ability to monitor and schedule large-scale maintenance-intensive components such as roof systems, roads, and parking areas and larger HVAC equipment for expensive maintenance procedures during the useful lives of the systems. Following manufacturers’ or industry guidelines for systematic preventive maintenance will allow the College to include items needing attention to be included in the budgeting process before an emergency arises.

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

20

Facilities Management is currently seeking consultants to perform a comprehensive facilities condition assessment as part of its 04-05 goals. This assessment will lead to establishing a database that will be continually updated to forecast work schedules and costs, allowing plan and budget building to be completed on a timelier basis. The Use of Space Space guidelines at the Community College of Allegheny County are not a part of a formal policy or procedure, but have been in place and applied by the Facilities Management Department since the early years of the College. Guidelines are based on room sizes suggested by the Pennsylvania Department of Education and those of other higher education space use agencies or associations such as the Council of Education Facility Planners International. While some of these published guidelines offer more detail or depth, all are somewhat comparable. There are two specific sets of guidelines, related but used for different purposes. The first guideline is established by Pennsylvania Department of Education and is the basis for allocating various classes or room spaces when constructing new buildings or for major renovations. The guidelines establish minimum and equity levels of 11 different types of space and determine state participation in the cost of construction and renovation. The second guideline establishes figures for designing actual spaces for use. While the first guideline establishes funded space parameters, the second defines the specific sizes of spaces based on use and occupancy. There is significant evidence that the College uses a variety of tools and methods to evaluate the adequacy of its facilities to support its programs. On the basis of these evaluation efforts, the College has identified a variety of specific needs. These include new science laboratories on the Allegheny Campus, science lab updates on the other campuses, a consolidated facility to house College programs in the “airport corridor,” and a backlog of renovation and capital equipment needs totaling more than $20 million. These needs have been consistently addressed in the College’s annual capital budget process. Most of these needs have been justified and presented to the College’s sponsors. The College expects that most of these projects will be authorized in the near future. The facilities master plans of 1991 made reference to the need for the College to do a better job of space scheduling. During fiscal 2003, the College implemented the use of the space scheduling software, Schedule 25. This software allows the assignment of classrooms based on the requirements of each class in terms of the number of expected students, required equipment, and a number of other factors. People interviewed about the process indicate that a relatively high skill level is required to use the system and that there are not always sufficient people trained in its use to allow the timely entry of information into the system. Space assignments are not always seen as convenient compared to assignments made by department. In general, however, administrators indicate that use of the system is improving efficient assignment of space. CCAC is approaching 40 years of age. Many of its physical facilities were constructed in its earliest days. The design and construction of many of its buildings do not lend themselves to easy reconfiguration. As with many institutions, methods of funding capital renovation and construction have resulted in the accumulation of deferred maintenance projects and the delay in construction of much needed new facilities. EXTERNAL FINANCIAL REVIEW The regular annual audit report is distributed to approximately 25 external organizations, including such entities as the state Department of Education, various area banks and leasing corporations with

Chapter Three: Institutional Resources

21

whom the College conducts business, the Bureau of the Census, the Allegheny County Budget Office, the federal Department of Health and Human Services, Dun and Bradstreet, Moody’s Investors Service, the State Public School Building Authority (SPSBA), etc. Likewise, the annual A-133 audit report is sent to approximately 20 organizations, including such entities as the state Office of Vocational Rehabilitation, the Federal Audit Clearinghouse, the U.S. Department of Education, the federal Bureau of Health Professions, the state Bureau of Workforce Investment, etc.

When the independent auditors are ready to issue their opinion on the annual audited financial statements, they meet with the entire Audit Committee of the Board of Trustees. At this meeting, the independent auditors review a draft of their report page by page, with members of the committee answering any questions they may have. The Audit Committee then puts the report before the entire Board of Trustees at its January meeting, and the Board then votes to accept or reject the report. Only upon acceptance by the Board is the report then issued in its final form.

From year to year, independent auditors identify possible areas of concern for the College. History shows that the College addresses each of these, since a subsequent unqualified audit has been issued to the College for every area of concern identified.

ASSESSMENT ISSUES

The methods by which the College assesses the quality, the adequacy, and the process for renewal of its various types of resources have been set out in the other sections of this report. Evidence concerning the routine assessment of effectiveness of methodologies outlined in those areas is, however, somewhat sparse.

Interviews with key administrators involved in the categorical assessments indicate that they have been initiating new ways of making and documenting these assessments. The facilities area indicates a life-cycle evaluation plan for facilities is under development. The information technology section indicates that a number of new tools and methods have been employed recently in evaluating the condition of resources in that area. The College has not, however, routinely formalized or documented the process of assessment that resulted in the decision to develop and/or employ these new tools and methods.

Recommendations

1. Require the compilation of a comprehensive evaluation of college staff, equipment, facilities, and other resources relative to its M/V/V/G and planning cycles as part of its annual budget process.

2. Give special attention with regard to resource allocation to upgrading the College’s ITS infrastructure so that CCAC remains on the cutting edge of technological advances in educational offerings.

Chapter Four: Leadership and Governance

22

Chapter 4: Leadership and Governance

OVERVIEW CCAC has had a stable form of governance since opening in September 1966. The chief governing body is the Board of Trustees, which has ultimate responsibility for the College, delegating operations to the college president, but approving policies that govern operations. College governance in the form of development of institutional policies and procedures has evolved from recent reorganizations and negotiations between the College and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). The current governance system is now in the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and ensures broad, inclusive participation in major academic decisions. GOVERNING BOARD CCAC is governed by a 15-member Board of Trustees, each of whom is appointed to six-year terms by the Chief County Executive of Allegheny County and confirmed by County Council. Board members are assigned on a rotational basis for consistency in governance; there is never a time when all members are new to their offices, and veteran board members are able to orient new members to their duties. Board responsibilities are detailed in the Community College Act of 1963 and its updates. While there are no specific criteria for nominating Board members, membership has traditionally represented a cross-section of county leaders from business, labor, and community organizations. (See current Board membership, Exhibit 4). The chair, vice chair, secretary, assistant secretary, treasurer, and assistant treasurer of the Board of Trustees are elected by Board members. The officers are elected annually by a majority of the Board membership. Trustees are charged with assuring the College is in compliance with eligibility and accreditation standards established by MSCHE. Board members are not paid for their participation, and are guided by college policy that defines conflict of interest. College Policy II.03 stipulates:

“In dealing with suppliers, contractors, or other organizations and individuals doing, or seeking to do, business with the College, the College requires that Trustees, officers, and all other employees of the College discharge their responsibilities to the College in a manner that avoids any conflict between their personal interest and the interests of the College.”

The Board is responsible for approving college budgets, and is the primary link to Allegheny County, the College's sponsor. CCAC’s Policies and Procedures Manual (Exhibit 19) stipulates that the rules for college operations be guided by the following:

• The Community College Act of 1963, as amended; • Regulations of the State Board of Education; • Rules and regulations for the conduct of business affairs of the Community College of

Allegheny County - agreement approved by the sponsor, County of Allegheny; • Bylaws of the CCAC Board of Trustees; • Financial Control Policies and Procedures as amended; and • Collective Bargaining Agreements with the AFT (representing faculty, counselors, librarians,

and paraprofessionals) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) (representing clerical support and physical plant/custodial employees).

Chapter Four: Leadership and Governance

23

During the tenure of the previous college president, college policies and the role of the Board of Trustees relative to the daily operation of the College were reviewed by the Board. An action agenda was developed for board review, and, short of a significant concern, it is approved with a single vote at the monthly Board meeting. The Board approves only personnel hires at the vice presidential level and above. The work of the Board, including preparation of agendas for public meetings, is accomplished through six Board committees: academic and student policy, finances, plant and site, audit, legislative, and personnel. College Office administrators and the campus VPs serve as staff to these committees. CCAC'S CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER The College's seventh president, Dr. Stewart Sutin, was appointed by the Board of Trustees on July 1, 2003 and formally inaugurated on May 11, 2004. The Board delegates operational responsibility for the College to the president, reserving to itself the following:

• Acquisition or disposition of real property; • Real estate and/or capital equipment leases in excess of $10,000, per year; • Real estate and/or capital equipment leases in excess of one-year duration; • Selection of the demand depository institutions for College funds; • Selection of architects; and • Construction project change orders in excess of $3,000, net cost increase.

Subject to ongoing Board review, the president has delegated specific signature authorities to the Vice President of Administrative Services, the Vice President of Academic and Student Affairs, the Director of Purchasing, and the Dean of Workforce Training and Development. For further discussion of the current focus of the Office of the President, see the discussion in Chapter 5 of this self-study. PRESIDENT’S CABINET AND PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL The president conducts two regular monthly meetings of college staff and faculty. The first, President’s Cabinet, is composed of 17 administrators who report directly to the President. These are listed in Appendix 4.1. Cabinet meetings reflect a shared action-oriented and problem-solving agenda. The cabinet meets approximately every other week. The second, President’s Council, links administrative, faculty, and supportive staff leadership. Council recommends to the president on issues of governance and college operations. Its membership is listed in Appendix 4.1. COLLEGE COUNCIL Much of the information below also appears in the College's Periodic Review Report of 2000; little has changed in CCAC’s governance structure since the writing of that report. The development of institutional policy and academic procedures through College governance reflects the changes in direction brought about by recent reorganizations. As a result of negotiations between the College and the AFT, a pilot governance project centered on College Council was established in 1996 and revised in 1999. The governance system is included in the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA).

Chapter Four: Leadership and Governance

24

In the last full report from MSCHE in 1994, visiting teams were especially concerned that governance reinforces the one-college concept, that the tensions between campus governance and college governance be resolved, and that the duplication and gridlock that characterized curriculum and planning in 1994 be addressed. Campus governance structures along with duplication and gridlock were eliminated. Now the governance vehicle for the College, College Council is responsible for recommendations regarding policy and academic procedure formulation, review and assessment of policy and procedure implementation, and recommendations for policy and academic procedure modifications. College Council accomplishes its charges through four standing sub-committees: 1. Curriculum Committee. Responsible for course and program adoption, curriculum development and change, instructional technology, and supportive educational resources as they relate to curriculum. Responsible for the examination of the relevance and responsiveness of the College's academic programs to community needs and trends and for the transferability of college credit. 2. Academic Standards and Student Affairs Committee. Responsible for academic issues and procedures as they related to admissions, advising and registration, maintenance of academic records, testing, academic standing, grading procedures, academic probation, appeals, degree requirements, and student retention. 3. Academic Planning Committee. Responsible for reviewing current bargaining unit positions that are vacant and for making recommendations for academic staffing. The subcommittee will review the Faculty Load Analysis Report, the ratio of full-time to part-time instructors, enrollment trends, and significant changes in particular disciplines. Responsible for facilitating the planning process within the academic divisions and for analysis of data, as well as for developing the academic calendar. 4. Research and Development Committee. Responsible for providing the College community with access to avenues for the development of creative initiatives. Responsible for providing data to support the initiatives, for removing obstacles for implementation of initiatives, and for guidance in completion of the processes necessary for implementation. Responsible for an annual review of current college practices in Distance Learning and making recommendations for improvements. Responsible for developing procedures and making recommendations to the College for implementation in Distance Learning classes.

College Council voting membership consists of

1. Two teaching faculty representatives from each campus, one from Arts and Sciences, one from Occupational Technologies

2. One Library and Learning Service representative 3. Five administrators appointed by the president 4. One eligible counselor representative The AFT president and the College president are non-voting members; there may be other non-voting members also. The chairperson and secretary of College Council are elected from among the AFT-eligible members of Council. Sub-committee membership consists of four administrators appointed by the president, two or more faculty members from College Council, and six additional faculty. The chair must be an AFT-eligible member from College Council.

Chapter Four: Leadership and Governance

25

During the academic year, College Council and its subcommittees meet on alternating Thursdays and alert the college community of coming meetings, agendas, actions plans, and minutes through the College's email system. Clerical support is provided by the College. AFT members of College Council receive a three-credit reduction per semester. As mentioned above, Council recommendations are brought by the chair to President's Council. This ensures that the work of College Council is linked to the operational arm of the College and that the College Council is aware of all the administrative activities of the College. It is the sense of both college administration and participants on College Council that this structure has improved the timely processing of curriculum motions and other academic proposals and changes. STUDENT GOVERNMENT Student government offices--President, Vice-president, Secretary and Treasurer--are elected at each campus by the student population at that campus. Student government members at each campus are involved with Student Life issues, but have little input into academic matters. There is no College-wide Student Governing body. In the past there was student representation on College Council, but these seats were removed during the last CBA negotiation, since students often did not attend, and thus created quorum issues. ASSESSMENT OF COLLEGE LEADERSHIP AND GOVERNANCE The College has no formal assessment plan for the effectiveness of the Board of Trustees and College Council. However, measures are in place to assure some accountability:

1. College policies and regulations have been reviewed and are available throughout the College and are posted to the College website.

2. Board of Trustee procedures have been simplified with the introduction of an action agenda. Action items are the subject of committee focus and Board discussions.

3. Governance structure has become routine and is proceeding smoothly from academic year to academic year. Committees meet regularly and recommended policies are forwarded through the structure.

4. Minutes of governance committees are available to the community on the college website. 5. Course release of faculty who manage the committees (chair and secretary for each) has

significantly increased faculty commitment to the governance structure. 6. The AFT has a five-year contract through August 2007 that introduces a great deal of stability

into economic projections and the collaboration between faculty and administration.

Despite these constructive accountability measures, there are still some concerns amongst college leadership regarding governance issues. Generally speaking, the number of offices reporting to the president is excessive and thus confusing, encouraging micromanagement rather than efficiency. During the summer of 2004, CCAC brought in a consultant to look at college organization and make recommendations for change. This report is pending. Additionally, leadership agrees that the Board of Trustees meets too often, which allows committee work to become superfluous. Also, the Academic Planning and Research and Development Sub-committees of College Council often struggle for agendas; the College needs to assign more responsibilities to these areas of college governance.

Recommendations

1. Identify assessment tools for measuring the effectiveness of the Board of Trustees. 2. Identify assessment tools for measuring the effectiveness of College Council

Chapter Five: Administration

26

Chapter 5: Administration

OVERVIEW As an institution with multiple campuses and sites, a very diverse student population, and a multitude of both credit and noncredit programming delivered in a variety of ways, CCAC must have an administration that is efficient and effective in its planning, organization, leadership, and management of the College. Through the strategic vision of the Board of Trustees, the careful selection of personnel to fill key positions, continuing professional development to improve management skills, and a sophisticated technological infrastructure to support administrative decision-making, CCAC is generally a well-managed organization that is fulfilling its mission in western Pennsylvania. There has been, historically, a value placed on continuous improvement of organizational structure, and that continues in the present. DESCRIPTION OF CCAC’S ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE AND PROCESSES As articulated in Chapter 4, a fifteen-member Board of Trustees is appointed by the Chief County Executive of Allegheny County. The Board has ultimate responsibility for establishing the long-term strategic direction for the College, including the appointment of the president, who is the chief executive officer of the College. The president, in collaboration with his administrative team, has operational responsibility for the College. Delegation of responsibilities by the president to vice-presidents is subject to ongoing board review (Exhibit 19). From the time of the last self-study till 1990, Dr. Mack Kingsmore served as college president. From 1998 until 2003, Dr. Roy Flores served. In 2003, Dr. Flores resigned, the Board of Trustees began and completed a search for a new president. This resulted in the selection of Dr. Stuart Sutin, who assumed his duties in August 2003. THE CURRENT FOCUS OF THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT The revised Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals of 1998 placed new emphasis on workforce training and the economic development of the community. Also addressed in the PRR was the recommendation by MSCHE after the 1994 self-study that the College pursue alternative funding sources that would provide greater financial stability to the College. These goals were pursued by Dr. Flores during his tenure at CCAC (Exhibit 53; 43-44; 47-48). When the Board of Trustees of CCAC set priorities for the search for presidential candidates, not only were academic credentials specified, but they also sought candidates with experience in cooperating with political and other external constituencies and in garnering external funding sources. The priorities of the Board of Trustees are evidence of a new and innovative direction in college leadership. These priorities ultimately resulted in the selection of Dr. Stuart Sutin. Dr. Sutin earned the classic academic degrees and had experience as a lecturer, advisory board member, and trustee in higher education before becoming CCAC’s seventh president. His professional experience, however, is in the field of international banking and finance. In this role, he developed and expanded a division of international banking for Mellon Financial Corporation. This gave him experience in developing new business, understanding finance, and knowledge of external sources of funding. He is therefore qualified to lead the College in the directions set forth by the Board and the College's Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals.

Chapter Five: Administration

27

Although the Board of Trustees set this innovative direction for the College in the choice of a new president, the presidential search process included input from the College community prior to its initiation. This included public meetings with each of three final candidates and feedback from the broad college community after the candidate meetings. This demonstrated, on the part of the Board of Trustees, a sense of the value of the priorities and views of all College constituents. QUALIFICATIONS OF ADMINISTRATION AND STAFF An administrative position is filled when the person directly responsible for supervising the position submits a request for a posting to the Human Resources Department. Human Resources reviews the posting for consistency with regard to similar job descriptions, and to verify that minimum requirements are listed. These include required educational credentials, work experience, and/or particular skill sets. The Human Resources area regularly reviews and updates job descriptions based on a scan of current employment markets. The key factor in the usefulness of job descriptions is whether they reflect the true nature of the jobs as performed. In a survey of CCAC administrators, a majority of respondents indicated how well their job descriptions reflect their actual duties and responsibilities (Appendix 5.1), a majority of respondents indicated that the bulk of their duties are in alignment with their job descriptions. Although no job description can ever fully describe the many duties of a job, these responses indicate that the job descriptions of CCAC administrators are substantially accurate. When an administrative position needs to be filled, the College forms a search committee consisting of members appropriate for the position being filled. The position is posted on the CCAC Jobs website (www.ccacjobs.com), and is advertised locally in newspapers and nationally in publications such as The Chronicle of Higher Education. The search committee then chooses the most qualified applicants to be interviewed, from which finalists will be recommended to the hiring supervisor. That supervisor then conducts interviews, verifies vitae and references, and makes the final choice. This system ensures that job postings receive an appropriately broad pool of applicants. It also ensures that a variety of college perspectives are represented in the selection process on the search committee, and it is likely that new hires are qualified to carry out their responsibilities. If, in fact, the search process for administrative hiring does serve to provide broad pools of applicants and broad perspectives in selection, the demographic makeup of administration should reflect the demographics of Allegheny County. CCAC’s administrative staff exceeds the county’s percentage of African-Americans, and equals the county’s percentage of females. There are no apparent imbalances in terms of diversity when considered in the context of the county. (Exhibit 15, CCAC Demographics updated 2/12/04.) In recent years, the College has assigned open administrative positions to interim appointees for extended periods of time, sometimes for a year or more. Though often these administrators have performed admirably, this practice has led to occasional instability at campuses or centers that has led to lower morale. Administrative hiring practices have often been inconsistent, though this inconsistency has generally been associated with policies put forth by the different college presidents. The College uses the “Administrative Performance Appraisal” form (Exhibit 8) to conduct annual evaluations of administrators. It is a variation of management by objectives, in which both the employee and the administrator agree on measurable performance objectives for the following year. Additionally, projects and assignments that surface through the planning process are assigned to particular administrators who are held accountable for progress. (See Chapter 2.) Though the

Chapter Five: Administration

28

performance appraisal is a useful tool, there have been occasional concerns on the part of both faculty and administration that administrator accountability measures are not substantially enforced. The College’s Professional Development program is a means of taking well-qualified employees and increasing and enhancing their skills on the job. It is a function to which the leadership of the College is philosophically committed (Professional Development Vision Statement, college website). The program targets all employees in an attempt to provide a creative, nurturing work environment. Administrators have opportunities to attend external conferences and to take advantage of internal seminars and workshops. CCAC’S ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION MAKING Decision-making roles among the College’s top administrators are clearly defined by detailed job descriptions, the organization chart, and the College policy manual. The College has emphasized repeatedly the crafting of an organizational structure that balances the efficiencies of a centralized organization with the flexibility of a decentralized one. To that end, the most recent system-wide reorganization of 1998 delegated operational responsibility to the campuses while maintaining academic leadership at the top of the organization. Fundamental differences in the reorganization of 1998 were indicated in the PRR report of 2000 (Exhibit 53):

1. The five college-wide functional areas were eliminated and matrix management was changed to site-based management. Campus vice presidents would no longer have the title of vice-president and were assigned responsibilities for managing nearly all aspects of their individual campuses and associated College Centers. (Off-campus centers were renamed College Centers.)

2. Only two vice-presidents would exist-Vice-President of Administrative Services and Technologies and Vice-President of Academic and Student Affairs.

3. The eight academic deans primary focuses would be the campus, though they would retain some college-wide responsibilities. Although two academic deans remained assigned to each campus, their titles were changed to Dean of Arts and Humanities and Dean of Occupational Technologies. A ninth academic dean, Dean of Health Professions, was assigned college responsibilities.

4. The Dean of Project Development's responsibilities were expanded and returned to the President's Office, as were the Director of Contracts and Grants, the Director of Planning and Research, the Director of Multicultural Affairs, and the Director of Marketing and Media Relations.

5. Although workforce training and development and lifelong learning would continue to comprise the Continuing Education division, a single Dean of Continuing Education would supervise both functions. This single position replaced two positions: Dean of Lifelong Learning and Dean of Business and Industry Training.

6. The four positions of Assistant to the Vice President (one at each campus), and Assistant to the President were rewritten into public information officer positions and assigned to the Communications and Marketing Department. Each of the public information officers was responsible for marketing and public relations at two of the four campuses.

Along with this organizational makeup, the governance structure, the planning process, and the SEIU and AFT Collective Bargaining Agreements establish extensive checks and balances and parameters for the administrative process. Although the ultimate welfare and direction of the College is the responsibility of the president, many initiatives and strategic decisions are made with input from key constituencies.

Chapter Five: Administration

29

The new President, Dr. Sutin, has brought to the College’s organizational structure the concept of “Institutes” within that structure. These are the Learning Institute, the Health Institute, and the Institute for Corporate and Professional Development. The programs, departments, administrators, and staff related to these particular areas of emphasis are brought together to pursue common goals. The focus of each of these is as follows:

1. The Learning Institute incorporates all of the college resources dedicated to learning

support, including such tactics as college transition, early intervention, learning style accommodation, career planning and job placement, among others.

2. The Health Institute is designed to provide consistent, high quality programs for the health care sector of the region’s economy. It brings together all of the health programs offered by the College, including nursing, nuclear medicine, magnetic resonance imaging technician, respiratory therapy technician, among many others.

3. The Institute for Corporate and Professional Development is created to design and deliver training solutions to businesses and individuals in southwestern Pennsylvania and adjacent states. It contains the Lifelong Learning division and the Workforce Training division.

These institutes are a means to facilitate learning and to foster quality improvement. They also better utilize scarce resources. Synergies are projected to be realized from the sharing of resources, such as secretarial and clerical support, administration, recruiting, and advertising. These institutes are still in their developmental stages and future assessments will determine their success, but administrators involved in the establishment of the institutes are enthusiastic about the prospects. The major reorganizations of the College in 1996 and 1998, the “institutes” initiatives, and some current reworking of the functions of the administration at the Campuses (including the reassignment of the College’s Counseling and Career Services to the newly titled Deans of Student Development offices at their respective campuses), are strong evidence that the leadership of this College is committed to continuously improving and refining the structure of the College in order to better facilitate its management. [Note: since the initial research was completed on this chapter, the College has again been re-organized. Both new and old structures appear in Exhibit 21.] INFORMATION SUPPORT SYSTEMS FOR ADMINISTRATORS CCAC’s strategic plan starts with the goal of making education available to all residents in the county “without regard to the limits of time, place, and distance.” The accessibility referred to in this goal has resulted in four campuses, seven off-campus sites, and several distance learning delivery systems. This diversity in delivery of programs and courses necessitates diversity in the means of administration decision-making. The critical elements in the use of technology for CCAC’s administration are as follows: Colleague This single business enterprise system software, developed by Datatel®, Inc, integrates all CCAC’s business functions. It provides the opportunity to query, review, and update our database. Colleague allows immediate access for administrators to key data for decision-making. Examples are searching to see the number of available spaces in a class section, reviewing a student’s financial history, finding emergency information for a student and creating purchase requisitions. The Information Technology Services (ITS) Office of Training provides extensive training in the use of Colleague in Student Systems, Colleague Financials, and Human Resources.

Chapter Five: Administration

30

The CCAC Website The CCAC Website has taken on increasing importance in a widely decentralized institution. The CCAC Bulletin Board provides general announcements, articulates and extensively details the policies of the College, and describes in detail most of the activities of the College. The website integrates other technologies: the Blackboard system, Outlook-based email, ARC (see below) and Web Advisor, the online portion of Colleague. Administrative Report Center (ARC) Data from Colleague can be used for planning and management if it can be aggregated and described effectively. This is the task of ARC, which allows users to retrieve existing administrative reports and to create queries which generate ad hoc reports. ITS elaborates the following categories: enrollment and retention, registration trends, faculty workload, budget management, and course scheduling. In short, the College has a well-integrated computer network supporting administrative decision-making. This network provides a context for key elements of administration, including email, data collection and retrieval, and report generation. Additionally, the CCAC website has made access to all of the software systems even more accessible. The College's emphasis on technology is evidenced by the resources allotted to it. This includes the departments that manage it, as well as cutting-edge software. EMPLOYEE PERCEPTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE EFFECTIVENESS Despite the many positive characteristics of the administrative environment at the College described above, it must be noted that, in the employee perception survey administered to all employees of the College in the fall of 2003, there are a number of issues attributable to administrative effectiveness and organizational structure that received low ratings. These ratings were considered to be of concern if there was consensus on these issues across 5 of 6 types of positions held by respondents, and across 5 of 6 locations assignments of the employees (Exhibit 34). Of the categories of statements included in the survey, there were five where the College is rated the weakest: 1. Fact-Based problem solving 2. Leadership 3. Rewards systems 4. Teamwork and collaboration 5. Open communication The ten specific statements that had high-consensus low ratings are also, largely, attributable either to administrative effectiveness, organizational structure, or organizational culture. All of these aspects of the College are also under the direct control of administration. The ten statements generally attributable to “administrative effectiveness” are as follows:

1. This college analyzes all relevant information and circumstances before making decisions (2.33 overall). This rating shows strong disagreement with this statement, and suggests that the College community, in all six employment categories, believes that administrative decisions are not data based. (See additional information in Appendix 5.2)

Chapter Five: Administration

31

2. There is a spirit of teamwork and cooperation among campuses of this college (2.39 overall). Because the College’s organizational structure does provide for communication across campuses, this response indicates a problem with the culture and climate of the College. This seems to reveal a failure by administration to overcome the geographic obstacles of a four-campus system; additionally, it indicates a failure to overcome thus far the historically competitive environment among campuses.

3. There are effective lines of communication between departments (2.49 overall). The

Organization Chart of the College illustrates that these lines of communication do exist structurally. However, the perception of employees is that it does not function as it is intended. It is a reflection either of administrators’ inability to communicate cross-functionally, or their inability to communicate to college constituencies that they do function in this way.

4. I believe an atmosphere of trust and respect exists at this college (2.56 overall). This response shows that administrators have failed to create a culture and climate where people believe that trust and respect are the foundation.

5. There is a free exchange of ideas at this college; people are not afraid to say what they really think (2.64 overall). This question is closely related to the one above. If people are afraid to speak out, it is because they lack trust or believe that they are not respected for their contributions. This cultural issue, too, is one that can only be addressed strategically by administrators.

6. There are sufficient opportunities for advancement within the college (2.65 overall). It is unclear what the root of this rating is. The College does have a record of longevity amongst employees that results in fewer opportunities for advancement, but further research would have to be pursued to determine whether or not longevity factors heavily in the impression college employees have. Under the new president, a number of employees have been promoted and given raises. These promotions came after the perception survey was administered.

7. Work at this college is guided by clear policies, procedures and standards (2.65 overall). The College has an extensive policy manual available in print and on the web site. Procedures manuals exist for major functions. If employees largely disagree with the statement, it is either that they are not made aware of these policies and procedures, or perhaps that they do not clearly see these standards as a basis for assessing performance.

8. Employees are encouraged to provide suggestions on ways to improve this college. (2.68 overall) The College has never had a formal system for employees to submit suggestions. Employees perceive that this, therefore, is an issue of low priority to the administration.

9. Employees are empowered to resolve problems quickly (2.71 overall). This may indicate that employees perceive that problem-solving is centralized and that there are layers of procedures that prevent quick solutions.

10. Employees are recognized for outstanding job performance (2.75 overall).

The administration of the College has the authority to recognize performance. It is uncertain whether the perceived problem is that there is not sufficient recognition, or whether the recognition that is given is not for outstanding performance. Recognition and reinforcement of excellent performance, is, in any case, a vital duty of any management team.

Chapter Five: Administration

32

ADMINISTRATION AND OUTCOMES ASSESSMENT Administrators are evaluated annually as to their efficiency and effectiveness in the accomplishment of their regular duties and their assigned initiatives. However, based on the results of the employee perception survey, these evaluations may not be taking into account what employees at large perceive about administrative performance. Because employees’ actions are molded as much by perception as by reality, it is important that perception be considered when evaluating administrators. Additionally, because the direction and focus set by the Board of Trustees for the president is new, it is vital that there be ongoing assessment of the effectiveness of these new priorities in fulfilling the mission of CCAC. In conjunction with the hiring of the new president, who has begun to establish institutes within the organization, their assessment is also essential, especially since they involve significant redirection of resources.

Recommendations

1. Research the reasons behind employees' lack of confidence in the abilities of administration to perform key managerial roles.

2. Convene focus groups to discuss the motivation and reasoning behind the responses to the survey questions, and incorporate findings into the College planning as initiatives for improvement.

Chapter Six: Integrity

33

Chapter 6: Integrity

OVERVIEW CCAC strives for integrity in all of its academic and business operations, with the goal of creating a working environment for all students and employees that is inclusive and fair. In each chapter of this self-study, from campus to division to department, Task Force Explorers have articulated policies and processes that have been developed to ensure that integrity and fairness, as described in the College’s Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals, are at the core of every college function. CCAC’s weaknesses in these areas are incumbent where outcomes assessment data is insufficient or unavailable. CCAC STUDENTS AND INTEGRITY Student Grievances and Disciplinary Procedures CCAC regularly benchmarks its disciplinary, complaint, and fairness policies and practices against peer colleges (Exhibit 3) and national organizations, and is in compliance with state and national laws. (See Chapter 9.) These policies are disseminated in student handbooks, faculty handbooks, in the offices of the academic and student development deans, and on the College website. Changes in the Academic complaint and disciplinary policies are made through the governance processes described in Chapter 4. All changes are incorporated into the appropriate publications and website. Student Evaluation The complaint procedures articulated above ensure students have an outlet for concerns regarding fairness of evaluation. Also, faculty members are required to submit to their academic dean the course outlines they distribute to students that state their policies, goals, and grading practices. These must reflect the general objectives that are articulated in Common Course Syllabi that have been developed by all discipline faculty and are available on the College website. In the Fall 2003 Employee Survey (Exhibit 34), in response to the prompt, “The quality of instruction students receive in most classes is excellent,” the overall mean was 3.94 out of 5, the highest mean score in the survey. In response to the prompt, “Most faculty members here are sensitive to student interests, needs, and aspirations,” the overall mean was 3.69, easily in the highest quartile. Finally, in response to the prompt, “If a student seems to be doing poorly, faculty at this college go out of their way to help the student stay in school,” the overall mean was 3.44, scoring in the top third of mean scores in the survey. In the annually administered Student Satisfaction Survey (Exhibit 65), students generally rate faculty instruction and faculty availability quite highly. Student Access to Catalogs The College Catalog is available online, where changes in course numbering, titles, and descriptions are updated routinely once approved through the governance process, and meets all ADA requirements for access. Paper catalogs are also available at First Stop Centers and in all college admissions and registration offices. Versions of the catalog are also available on CD-ROM. The catalog is widely discussed and disseminated to students during registration and orientation. Class schedules for any given term are available online, and changes in the status of these courses, such as available seat numbers, are updated daily electronically. Paper versions of class schedules are available at all campuses and centers at numerous locations. Noncredit course offerings are also

Chapter Six: Integrity

34

posted online, and are available at numerous campus and center offices, as well as mailed to the homes of many Allegheny County citizens. CCAC EMPLOYEES AND INTEGRITY Teamwork, Communication, and Mutual Respect In light of the results of the Fall 2003 Employee Survey, there are reasons to be concerned about the spirit of cooperation and support at the College. (See Chapter 5) Among 10 survey prompts that were identified that the College needs to address, five directly speak to issues of integrity as defined by MSCHE. The five prompts and their overall mean scores are listed below; any score below three is judged as indicating an area of weakness:

• There is a spirit of teamwork and cooperation among campuses at this college: 2.39; • I believe an atmosphere of trust and respect exists at this college: 2.56; • There is a free exchange of ideas at this college; people are not afraid to say what they really

think: 2.64; • Employees are encouraged to provide suggestions on how to improve this college: 2.68; and • Employees are empowered to resolve problems quickly: 2.71.

Hiring, Evaluation, Dismissal, and Grievance Practices CCAC’s hiring practices are discussed in numerous places in this self-study, but most particularly in Chapters 3, 9, and 10. Hiring practices and procedures are published in Hiring Guidelines (Exhibit 42), a publication sponsored by the Human Resources Department, and in the collective bargaining agreements between the College and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU). These publications provide equitable practices across all employee groups, with some variation in specific procedures based upon differences within the contractual agreements. Hiring Guidelines offers the following paragraph:

The Community College of Allegheny County does not discriminate in its employment practices on the basis of sex, age, race, color, religion, sexual orientation, national origin, non-job related handicap/disability, or veteran status. The College is committed to continuing efforts to strengthen and improve its recruitment and selection process to ensure that qualified applicants are not discriminated against and to initiate positive actions to hire and promote members of underrepresented groups.

The College also has a website dedicated to job postings and the application process at www.ccacjobs.com . Visitors can create an application for any of the job postings listed as well as apply for adjunct faculty work. Hiring administrators have password access to the site in order to screen applicants and to make recommendations for hire. The College has numerous policies and procedures, revised through efforts of the office of the Vice President for Administrative Services during the years from 2001 through 2003, which describe the College’s handling of issues such as sexual harassment and conflict of interest. (See Chapter 4 for CCAC’s “Conflict of Interest” policy.) All of these policies are available to students and employees on the College website, though the extent to which they are practiced by employees is unclear. Systematic evaluation procedures are provided within the SEIU and AFT contracts and on the Human Resources web page (see Chapter 10). For administrators, evaluation is described in the Personnel Policies and Procedures publications (Exhibit 19). Further discussion of the evaluation of

Chapter Six: Integrity

35

administrators and leadership issues may be found in Chapters 4 and 5 of this self-study. The Human Resources Department is involved at all levels of personnel administration, with the local campus business office serving as its agent. The collective bargaining agreements provide language and policies for the processes of grievance and dismissal (see Chapter 10). In order to determine whether faculty and academic administrators were knowledgeable about faculty hiring guidelines and their fairness, Task Force Explorers administered a short email survey that received a response rate of 42 %. Seventy-nine percent of all respondents are aware that the College has an established policy or guidelines on hiring; 8% know about policies and guidelines on evaluation; 35% know of policies on tenure of faculty; only 6% say they are aware that the College has a dismissal policy for faculty. Employees were also asked whether the College maintains a fair, impartial practice in hiring, evaluation, and dismissal of employees. Seventy-five percent of respondents stated they think the College’s procedures in these areas were fair and equitable. Of the 25% that dissented, 7% were female faculty, 3% were female staff, and 4% were female administrators. Four percent were African-American males, 4% were African-American females, and 4% were Caucasian females. INTEGRITY AND ACADEMIC INQUIRY Issues of academic inquiry and academic freedom are addressed specifically in Chapter 10 of this self-study, but their implicit principles are threaded throughout CCAC's policies, procedures, practices, and governance system. Article XI of the AFT CBA (page number) is the only College publication that explicitly addresses academic freedom and all of its responsibilities being essential to the fulfillment of the purposes of the College. This article is quoted fully on page 60 of this self-study. Curriculum CCAC's governance processes that assure the integrity and faculty ownership of curricula are discussed throughout this self-study, but most particularly in Chapters 3, 11, and 14. All proposed changes in curriculum generated by faculty through program review and other initiatives are made available to all college employees through the email system. Proposed changes are then studied, rejected, or approved by the committee, and then passed on to College Council and President's Council, where they are again studied, rejected, or approved. Curricular changes, once approved, are announced via email and posted to the college website. Intellectual Property Rights CCAC's mission does not prioritize faculty research as a college initiative. While faculty members do conduct research through college libraries and other college-sponsored electronic sources, particularly in support of their classroom teaching, these do not routinely result in the sorts of publications that present property rights issues in four-year colleges and universities. The only area in which such issues have created concern is in ownership of online materials used in Distance Learning courses. The College has discussed the issue a number of times in a variety of different forums, but has not settled on a clear policy other than what is stated in the AFT CBA (College Policy 15, page 84 of the CBA, Exhibit 2). Generally, the College is perceived to own the courses that are offered in any mode, but the faculty own the materials used for those courses. INTEGRITY AND THE DISSEMINATION OF INSTITUTIONAL POLICIES

Chapter Six: Integrity

36

Honesty and Truthfulness in Public Relations Materials According to staff members of Communications and Marketing, standard journalistic principles, which include approval by the people involved and by the Executive Director of Communications and Marketing, guide issuance of press releases. Practices adhere to the Public Relations Society of America Code of Ethics, and the Code of Ethics for Professional Communicators. In consultation with admissions and recruiting staff members, the Communications and Marketing department produces and distributes the College's admissions and recruiting information. The truthfulness and timeliness of these materials is assured by a process that includes requests from responsible users for creation, updates, and edits of publications. Those who requested the work then review the publications for accuracy. They are subsequently proofread, published, and distributed. Planning and Institutional Research verifies all institutional data. Communication and Marketing provide layout, style, accurate contact lists, and sources of distribution. Communications and Marketing has developed a Branding Style Guide that governs marketing policies. Much of the current advertisements are endorsements or “success stories” expressed by current or recent students. They represent descriptions of student experiences in their own words. Information about people featured in print is checked for accuracy. Students who appear in testimonial ads sign photographic release forms that are filed with the marketing department. Quotes or sound bites attributed to student testimonials are part of release agreements When the College makes an error in press releases, new and corrected releases are issued. Reporters are contacted in order to bring the error and the new press release to their attention. When the media makes a significant error, the executive director of marketing or public information officer requests that corrected information be published. CCAC has demonstrated throughout this self-study its efforts to make valuable and reliable information available to students and the public in general. (See Chapters 8 and 9.) All institutional policies are available in print at each campus and College Office, and are posted on the College website. All past MSCHE self-studies are available at each campus library, as are recent periodic review reports and MSCHE accreditation issues for Distance Learning. All aspects of the current self-study are currently available at the college website, as is the self-study itself, along with the team report, when these are completed. The College recognizes MSCHE as its accrediting agency as part III.02 of its Policy Manual, which is posted to the website. ASSESSMENT OF INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY CCAC recognizes that a comprehensive institutional and student learning outcomes assessment plan would address, almost by default, the assessment of principles of institutional integrity. There is a great deal of anecdotal and systematic assessment conducted by CCAC. But the College can only assure its students and employees that it adheres to the MSCHE's principles of integrity anecdotally, or through those systems for assessment the College has identified.

Recommendations

1. Investigate the reasons for employee perception that certain integrity principles are not practiced at the College and implement a plan for addressing these.

2. Assure that principles of integrity are incorporated into ongoing efforts to develop a comprehensive assessment plan for all college operations.

Chapter Seven: Institutional Assessment

37

Chapter 7: Institutional Assessment OVERVIEW CCAC conducts institutional assessments regularly and consistently, though its application and dissemination are not always efficient. The documentation of data is sophisticated, coming from an experienced planning and institutional research staff, state of the art information technology, and IT personnel. The challenge the College faces is that much of this work is done without the benefit of a written plan and structured processes for the assessment of institutional effectiveness as it is linked to institutional and student learning outcomes. In the absence of a plan, assessment thus appears episodic rather than periodic and systematic. ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE FOR INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT This assessment activity only partially engages the collaboration of faculty and administration. During the spring and summer of 2003, the Planning and Institutional Research Department initiated efforts to develop assessment processes. These efforts were conducted in the interim period between two permanent college presidents. The newly appointed president, Dr. Stuart Sutin, has since reviewed and sanctioned this preliminary work. CCAC has now formalized planning for institutional assessment and works to engage all relevant stakeholders. The College Board of Trustees has expressed its interest in institutional assessment data. The Academic and Student Affairs Sub-committee has taken the lead in collaborating with planning and institutional research staff in the definition and development of institutional assessment indicators. A sub-committee of the College Council, Research and Development, has also become involved in the development of the College’s institutional assessment capabilities. The chart in Appendix 7.1 depicts the institutional assessment planning team. The initiative undertaken by planning and institutional research staff, presidential leadership, board leadership, and college governance creates a foundation for assessment planning and systemization of institutional assessment. EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL ANALYSIS OF INSTITUTIONAL ASSESSMENT METHODS Since the development of a formal written assessment is still in progress, the Middle States Task Force Explorers for this standard took the following actions:

• Examined best practices from other community colleges, including Denver and Portland, Oregon;

• Reviewed assessment planning groundwork established by planning and research staff which included the following CCAC documents:

o Framework for institutional assessment and planning o Effectiveness indicators for institutional assessment;

• Reviewed the College’s Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G) as outlined in the most recent Institutional Plan;

• Read the Final Reports from Employee Perception Surveys that were conducted in 1995 and 1997;

• Reviewed the titles and purposes of the 24 assessment products produced through the Office of Planning and Institutional Research;

• Developed, administered, and tabulated an email survey of administrators and academic department heads to determine their use of various assessment tools;

Chapter Seven: Institutional Assessment

38

• Compiled and analyzed the results of the survey; • Conducted an interview with the College’s Chief Financial Officer to determine the use of

assessment data in the use of financial planning; • Examined documentation that included depictions of recent college planning processes and

assessments of recent college plans to determine how assessment data is used; and • Polled campus units to determine the extent to which assessment data was used for sub-

institutional level planning. Summary of Findings

Since 1998, the Planning and Institutional Research (PIR) department has developed numerous assessment measures in a variety of areas designed to assess the effectiveness of College programs, services, and student outcomes. Though the College is making progress towards formalizing a systematic plan for assessing institutional effectiveness, the plan is as yet incomplete. Task Force Explorers reviewed several best practices from other colleges (Denver, Portland) in order to understand how an institutional assessment plan could be developed for CCAC. These models revealed that an effective assessment plan was based on M/V/V/G and organized with critical success indicators, such as overall graduation rates. The plans then used subordinate measures, such as graduation rates on each campus, which were related to these indicators and implemented them institutionally over time. CCAC has made some strides when benchmarked against these other institutions. The College has a foundation in place for the synthesis of its sometimes parallel planning and assessment efforts and the development of a comprehensive institutional assessment plan. PIR has taken steps to develop a “Framework for Institutional Assessment and Planning” (Appendix 7.2) which relates M/V/V/G statements to the areas of Accessibility, Community Connections, Inclusiveness, Stewardship, Student Success, and Workforce and Economic Development. Further, PIR has begun the work of creating a draft for "Effectiveness Indicators for Institutional Assessment"(Exhibit 33). Task Force Explorers reviewed the periodic assessment procedures that are currently conducted by the PIR and other departments throughout the College. The College is working to develop a comprehensive plan; college leaders should help to move the assessment process from a purely PIR staff-driven process to one with balanced leadership involving all college constituencies. This assessment plan will provide the College and the Board of Trustees with an annual “Effectiveness Report Card” that will be widely disseminated to all college constituencies. The College uses assessment data that is prepared by PIR to analyze different aspects of College operations. A total of 24 research products were identified by the Executive Director of Strategic Planning as pertaining to institutional assessment. Explorers concluded that the College uses both the regularly administered research instruments, as well as ad hoc research instruments, to give a complete picture of the effectiveness of the College in meeting its M/V/V/G. These measurements highlight college effectiveness in accessibility, community connections, inclusiveness, stewardship, student success, and workforce and economic development. Administrative Reporting Center (ARC) The Administrative Reporting Center (ARC), which is a web-based technology solution for distribution of administrative reports, provides an excellent foundation for the communication of assessment. Currently, there are volumes of data posted to ARC, from program enrollment statistics

Chapter Seven: Institutional Assessment

39

to grade distributions, most of which could be used to shape a comprehensive assessment plan. The College should strengthen this project to facilitate the routine reporting of institutional outcomes, including student learning outcomes. Detailed results of any assessment plan should be communicated on ARC, while the general plan should be posted to the College website. Institutional Assessment and Campus Budgets According to the Vice President of Administrative Services and Chief Financial Officer, resource allocation and the budgeting processes incorporate the use of assessment information in some cases formally, and others informally:

1. Assessment data is used in decision-making; however, there are no reports that are used

consistently for allocating resources; at times, decision-making also involves factors that do not take assessment data into account.

2. The College makes two types of allocations and uses different assessment data for each: • Operational decisions, such as building a new budget; and • Strategic decisions, such as opening a center in Braddock Hills.

3. The College has a number of processes that use data in reviewing how resources should be allocated. For example, in identifying the need for faculty, the College studies a recommendation from College Council before allocations are made.

4. The College determines personnel expenditures, operating funds, and capital allocations by looking at historical patterns, legal requirements, program needs, and institutional research data.

The responses to the Task Force survey revealed specific improvements the College made as a result of using various assessment data. Some of these are as follows: 1. Training academic advisors through use of customer service training material; 2. Implementing First Stop Centers to improve services for students;

3. Modifying the schedule of classes by changing class times and instructional formats;

4. Changing the graduation application process in terms of the number of credits students have completed to facilitate formal review; 5. Combining, updating, deleting, and revising academic curricula; and 6. Renting an additional parking lot at Allegheny Campus. CONCLUSIONS Assessment data is an important aspect institutional planning. The College's use of flow charts of planning processes and records of planning meetings demonstrate the use of assessment information for developing plans. To a lesser extent, assessment data is used to measure the results of planning efforts. Currently, the College does not collect assessment data in a consistently systematic and routine manner, particularly with regard to the link between student learning outcomes and resource allocation (see Chapter 14).

Recommendations 1. Review, revise, and adopt a framework for formalized institutional assessment through a

leadership team comprised of all college stakeholders. 2. Improve faculty and staff awareness that data is and must be used in long-term and day-to-

day decision making.

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

40

Chapter 8: Student Admissions OVERVIEW The Community College of Allegheny County has an open admissions policy that allows students to matriculate without entrance examination scores, documented high school grade-point-averages, and class rankings. The college mission has provided the type of flexibility needed to develop and implement admission policies that provide a bridge from secondary education to baccalaureate and further educational study. In support of the mission to make quality education accessible to and affordable for the residents of southwestern Pennsylvania, CCAC has tailored admission policies to meet the specific needs of diverse student populations without charging application or program-specific fees. There are, however, policies which apply to specialized and limited enrollment academic programs. These policies exist within the framework of open admissions.

ADMISSION POLICIES AND CCAC’S MISSION The College has four types of admission practices that are identified, described, and cross-referenced through its Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G). As of January 2003, the practices addressed the following student groupings:

1. First Time Students 2. Students in the College’s Dual Enrollment Program 3. Students in Health Related programs 4. Students in Building and Trades Apprenticeships, Applied Services, and Trades

First-Time Students

CCAC’s students come from all walks of life and all parts of the state and region, as well as other countries. They range from age 18 to beyond retirement, have a wide range of professional and educational levels, and are ethnically and racially diverse. Admissions practices focus on ensuring that newly admitted students select courses appropriate to their educational goals and backgrounds. The College requires placement tests and scores of first-time, full-time students in order to help students and academic advisors choose courses that are within students’ academic skill ranges. (Note that part-time students are not required to take placement tests as long as they do not enroll in courses that require developmental courses as prerequisites.)

Regarding the College’s mission of accessibility, there are several admissions options. First-time students should have a high school diploma or the Pennsylvania General Education Development (GED) certificate (though this is not a requirement), or be over 18 years of age with reasonably equivalent experience. However, if neither of these admission criteria exists, the College offers GED preparatory courses. Applicants who have neither graduated from high school nor received a GED certificate can still be admitted. These students can request a high school equivalency certificate after successfully completing 30 credits of college studies.

Dual Enrollment

Admissions practices that govern the Dual Enrollment Program support the College’s mission of accessibility and affordability by (1) permitting any Allegheny County students to enroll in CCAC courses in order to help them reduce the amount of time it may take to complete their degree programs, and (2) sponsoring the Dual Enrollment Scholarship Program that provides scholarship assistance to students for up to two courses each term. The program operates in collaboration with

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

41

and through the approval of school districts and parents/guardians. Students who take advantage of the CCAC Dual Enrollment Program experience the college environment while earning college credits that may transfer to other colleges and universities upon completion of high school.

Health Programs

Health programs are those dedicated to Allied Health and Nursing careers that lead to an Associate’s Degree in Science or a Certificate or Diploma. Application and acceptance criteria vary by program. These programs prepare students for national or state examinations that lead to certifications, licensures, or registrations in the field. Admission to health-related programs is limited based on the number of available clinical sites, laboratory spaces, and the College’s ongoing assessment of health care job markets. Health programs require additional program-specific applications, even though a student may already have been admitted to the College. These admission policies support the college mission of providing leadership in workforce training and in the economic development of the region. According to the U.S. Department of Education, CCAC graduates more nursing students than any other two-year college in the United States. Building and Trades Apprenticeships, Applied Services and Trades

Admission practices that govern enrollment in CCAC’s Building and Trades Apprenticeship and Applied Service and Trade Programs are developed in cooperation with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW Local #5) through the Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee (JATC), General Motors, Ford Motor Company, DaimlerChrysler Corporation, and the Pennsylvania Department of Labor. Apprenticeship programs include Electrical Construction Technology, Painters and Allied Trades, Carpentry, Ironworker, Plumber, and Sheet Metal Worker. Applied Service and Trade programs include Automotive Service Educational Program (ASEP), Automotive Student Service Educational Training (ASSET), and Chrysler Apprenticeship Program (CAP). Students are admitted to the College after trade unions and motors companies have identified eligible applicants. These admission policies and practices are designed to meet employment needs of local industries. POLICY AVAILABILITY FOR PROSPECTIVE STUDENTS CCAC’s admissions information is generally organized into two broad categories: (1) students are informed about the processes involved in being admitted and registered that include admission and registration processes, residency requirements, entrance and placement exams, academic advisement, tuition, fees and related educational expenses, scholarships, grants and work-study, evaluation and transfer of previously earned college credits, and credit course schedules; (2) the College provides descriptive information that underlies various admission processes about academic programs and requirements, such as developmental course sequences, the Honors College, limited enrollment programs, etc. Both types of information are available in electronic and print formats and are offered at all campuses and centers. The sources of this information are as follows: 1. CCAC Web Site (www.ccac.edu) 2. College Catalog 3. Student Handbook 4. Schedule of Credit Courses 5. CCAC View Book 6. Department-specific brochures and flyers 7. CCAC Application for Admission 8. First Stop Service Centers 9. Admission, Financial Aid, Student Accounts, and Registration Offices

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

42

10. Career Services, Academic Advisement, and Placement Testing Offices 11. Supportive Services, Student Life and Athletics Departments ACCURATE AND COMPREHENSIVE PROGRAM INFORMATION In order to gauge levels of student satisfaction with all levels of academic program information, the College reviewed and analyzed seven semesters of student responses to five items directly related to academic program information (Student Satisfaction Survey, 1999-2002, Exhibit 65). Analyses showed that students expressed satisfaction (3.00 or higher on a 4.00 scale) with the following:

• their academic advisor’s knowledge about their program requirements; • reasonableness and clarity of program requirements; • admissions publications which were provided prior to enrolling; • preparation they were receiving toward achieving their educational goals; and • the overall quality of instruction at the College.

College policies for periodic review of issues and procedures related to admissions is the responsibility of the Academic Standards and Student Affairs (AS/SA), a sub-committee of College Council. Review of the 2002-2004 AS/SA meeting minutes show that the committee has clarified independent study and credit-by-exam policies, refined academic probation and academic suspension policies, and studied and made recommendations concerning placement test cut-off scores. The specific departments that have primary responsibility for regularly communicating academic program and policy information to students are campus registration offices, enrollment and academic management departments, counseling, and advising services. Evidence shows that the departments have used printed and online enrollment information and electronic resources that enable any of these areas to notify and re-distribute updated program information to students with regard to policy changes related to academic programs, registration, tuition, and payment options.

College placement tests cut-off scores for ACT’s (American College Testing) COMPASS tests were a major policy issue addressed by the Research and Development Sub-Committee between November 1, 2001 and April 17, 2002. Of concern were inconsistencies between CCAC’s cut-off scores when measured against national test norms. As a result, cut-off scores for reading were adjusted lower, while scores for English and mathematics were unchanged. Communicating Programmatic Changes The College conducted a survey (Appendix 8.1) of academic department chairs to determine an average length of time for redistribution of updated academic program information. Forty percent of department chairs notified students of changes as the changes were approved through the governance process. The other 60% relied on campus registration, counseling, advising services, enrollment, and academic management to disseminate new information. The results of the survey suggest that the average length of time for redistribution of updated academic program information cannot be accurately determined. Timelines can greatly vary because of the various ways that updated academic information is redistributed and approved through governance. Task Force Explorers investigated the college website as a resource for providing accurate and comprehensive academic program information. The investigation focused on determining if and how information is collected on users who access information about academic programs. There is no

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

43

tracking mechanism to identify and collect information about users who access academic program information on the college website. ACCESS TO INFORMATION ON STUDENT LEARNING OUTCOMES Explorers developed a list of indicators the College has for student learning outcomes, though these proved difficult to define and categorize. For purposes of research, the working definition was that student learning outcomes were verifiable, quantitative measures that indicate mastery of academic skills. These ranged from indicators for individual students to those for student aggregates. The nine indicators are as follows:

1. grades and transcripts 2. placement test scores 3. advanced standing and CLEP tests scores 4. student exit surveys 5. specialized academic program test scores 6. designated ranks for graduating students (honors, high honors, highest honors) 7. institutional data collected and submitted to federal and state agencies 8. testimonials 9. grant-funded learning objectives

These indicators are available to prospective students at the college website, in admission information packets, credit and noncredit magazines, Communications and Marketing publications, email, from college recruiters, community partnerships, and referrals. Though this information is accessible, the review shows that there is no deliberate attempt to make learning outcomes information available to prospective students. FINANCIAL AID AT CCAC Financial Aid departments, Admissions, and the college website are the primary sources for information about financial aid. These departments are responsible for providing accurate and comprehensive financial aid information and advice. Self-study included the review of financial aid policies, which are explained in Section I.14 of the CCAC Policies and Procedures Manual (Exhibit 19). Financial Aid departments are generally responsible for acquisition and dissemination of financial aid, including scholarships, grants, and loans. In order to verify that students were receiving consistent financial aid information, the Admissions and Financial Aid departments were asked to provide samples of financial aid information that each distributes to prospective students. Explorers analyzed each of the eight samples (four from admissions, four from financial aid areas) for evidence of consistency and comprehensiveness with regard to the types of information the College disseminates. The Free Application for Financial Aid (FAFSA), the Financial Aid Scholarship Booklet, and Frequently Asked Questions sheet are provided by all Admissions and Financial Aid departments. Examination of the college website served as a cross-reference for the eight information samples from Admissions and Financial Aid Offices. The college website not only provided the same information found in the sample information packets, but also financial aid related information, including rules and regulations, distance learning financial aid FAQs, academic progress sanctions and consequences, payment options, various loan funds, and links to external financial aid resources.

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

44

Explorers examined the websites of Pennsylvania’s other 13 community colleges in order to determine if they provide financial aid information that differs from that provided by CCAC. Some types of information that other PA community colleges provide varies from CCAC’s primarily with regard to additional information about financial aid processes and timelines. Only one PA community college other than CCAC provides downloadable forms that students may need to complete after FAFSA results are received. Only CCAC provides a list of nine documents that prospective students may need to complete their financial aid files. CCAC, like all community colleges, provides information about FAFSA, grants, scholarships, and loans. All of the websites, including CCAC‘s, need to improve ease of initially accessing financial aid information. Explorers designed a questionnaire distributed to financial aid directors to assess the accuracy and comprehensiveness of information that their departments provide to other enrollment offices (i.e., admissions, registration, and academic advisement, counseling, and student accounts). Included was a question about the process for awarding the Trustee Excellence Scholarship in order to determine that it is administered consistently college-wide. Financial aid directors reported that their departments are responsible and accountable for maintaining current financial aid information that is provided to other enrollment offices, and that they are directly responsible for accurate and comprehensive information provided to prospective students who access financial aid information through the college website, electronic mail, by telephone, though the U.S. Mail, and by visits to their offices. The departments to which they regularly provide information are Admissions, First Stop Centers, College Centers, college recruiters, and the college website. Concerning the Trustee Excellence Scholarship, financial aid directors follow the same procedures: (1) determine if applicants meet program requirements and eligibilities, (2) determine levels of scholarship support, (3) approve or deny scholarship aid, and (4) post aid to students’ accounts. In order to provide a flow chart of financial aid processes, including Student Accounts, Explorers examined instructions by Colleague, its accounting software supplier, that are related to student financial aid in the handbook Using Financial Aid: Awarding and Aid Distribution, Datatel 2003. The examination identified the system of checks and balances that exists between Registration, Financial Aid, Student Accounts, and Bursar departments. Telephone interviews with financial aid officers regarding Datatel procedures revealed that the system automatically provides checks and balances between Registration, Financial Aid, Student Accounts, and Bursar functions. ADVANCED STANDING AND EXTRA-INSTITUTIONAL CREDIT CCAC has implemented policies for students who have successfully completed credit courses at other accredited colleges and universities, and who want to transfer those credits to an associate degree program. These policies determine CCAC's Advanced Standing practices. For any associate’s degree, the College requires that a minimum of 30 credits are taken at CCAC. For a certificate or diploma, the College requires that a minimum of one-half of the credits required for graduation be taken at CCAC. Credits earned through Advanced Standing may apply toward a degree, diploma, or certificate. Students enrolled at CCAC can transfer Commission on Higher Education approved academic credits, credits earned through articulation agreements with 22 Pennsylvania and eight out-of-state colleges and universities (Exhibit 10), credits earned by examinations and the College Level Examination Program (CLEP), credits earned from the United States Armed Forces Institute (USAFI), credits earned through Advanced Placement courses of the College Entrance Examination Board, and through military training approved by the American Council on Education (ACE). Credits from proprietary schools are awarded on a limited basis for equivalent occupational and skills courses. Beginning fall 2004, the College may begin to accept courses for transfer credit from selected

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

45

proprietary and private post-secondary institutions. At this time, the College is reviewing the curricula of those institutions. Students seeking to transfer credits must submit official transcripts and complete an Application for Credit Transfer. Explorers reviewed Advanced Standing policies and procedures in order to identify how and where the information is available to prospective students. The college website is the only electronic source of information about these policies and procedures. Findings show that prospective students also have access to them in the College Catalog, in health career and nursing guides, and through information provided by Admissions, Registration, the Testing Centers, counselors, academic advisors, and academic departments. Interviews with registration officers revealed that all four campuses (1) require students to request evaluation of previously earned credits by completing an Application for Credit Transfer, (2) require official transcripts of previous course work, (3) have Advanced Standing credits posted to CCAC transcripts upon completion of at least one semester at CCAC, (4) notify students of Advanced Standing credit award by providing a copy of the completed Application for Transfer Credit form and a copy of his/her CCAC transcript with posted advanced standing credits, and (5) accept Advanced Standing for course work that is older than 10 years, but with restrictions on ten year time limits for health career and computer information technology courses. Procedures varied between campuses for evaluating and awarding advanced standing credits. Not all campuses award credit based solely on academic major requirements. “D” grades are evaluated differently, depending on whether or not the grade was earned in sequential or non-core courses. One campus does not accept any “D” grades. Some campuses award credit only for occupational and skills courses earned from proprietary institutions. One campus does not award any credit from proprietary institutions. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT SUCCESS The College does not use a formal, comprehensive method to conduct ongoing assessment of student success that evaluates the connection between attributes of admitted students and its M/V/V/G and programs. As stated earlier, CCAC is an open admissions institution where entrance examination scores, high school grade-point-averages, and class ranks are not required for admission. However, the College has a number of separate institutional measures that offer insight into CCAC student success. Task Force Explorers studied the Dean’s List, academic probation, and suspension policies in order to identify practices that include ongoing assessment of student success that evaluate the connection between attributes of admitted students and institutional mission and programs. Implementation of these policies identify and isolate factors that affect student success so that some evaluation occurs, and in turn, provides direction for development and support of learning programs that reflect institutional mission. Some programs that include intervention through use of these policies are the Dual Enrollment program, Carl D. Perkins grant-funded programs, the Act 101 program, the Honors Program, the Tech Prep program, and the Joint Enrollment program. Other areas that take advantage of this information include tutoring and facilitated study, mentoring, early intervention, financial aid appeals, student orientations, support programs for minority students, learning communities, and learning seminars and demonstrations. Additionally, students are required to see academic advisors when they are on probation or suspension. Task Force Explorers also identified four others areas/programs that conduct ongoing assessment of student success in fulfillment of their individual program goals: Disability Services, the Perkins

Chapter Eight: Student Admissions

46

occupational program, the Dual Enrollment program, and the PA Department of Education’s Act 101. Explorers found that (1) grades, grade-point-averages, academic progress, completion, and placement rates, or some combination of these measures are tools used to assess student successes, and (2) each program has specific guidelines and methods for assessing student success. However, those outcomes are not specifically used to evaluate the connection between the attributes of admitted students and the College’s mission and programs, but instead are used to evaluate progress toward meeting individual program goals. Policies that govern the Dean’s List, probation, and suspension also apply to student participants in these four programs. Task Force Explorers identified internal and external educational options when the College determines that there is not a match between attributes of admitted students and college M/V/V/G. Internal options are five CCAC certificate training programs for persons needing learning support (Food Service, Grounds Maintenance, Human Service Aide, Environmental Services/Janitorial, and Nursing Assistance); Lifetime Learning noncredit courses; General Education Development (GED) study and certification; the developmental education program; cross-registration at Pittsburgh Council of Higher Education (PCHE) colleges and universities; and a series of Student Development Services (SDS) courses. External educational options come through referrals to specialized education, skills, and training programs, such as the Greater Pittsburgh Literacy Council, Goodwill Industries, PA Office of Vocational Rehabilitation, Adult Basic Education, disability specific community services, and gifted programs.

Recommendations

1. Develop and standardize measurements and attributes for student learning outcomes in order to make them available to prospective students.

2. Create consistent practices across the College with regard to accepting D grades and credits from proprietary schools in order to assure transfer policies are uniform.

3. Develop assessment practices for all college programs similar to those currently exemplified by Perkins funded programs and others that are monitored by external evaluation measures.

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

47

Chapter 9: Student Support Services OVERVIEW CCAC defines student services in its College Mission, Vision, Values, and Goals (M/V/V/G) statement as any service or organizational unit that allows students to develop their full potential as they work toward their intended goals at the College. CCAC is committed to providing appropriate services to all credit and noncredit students regardless of the time or place the students attend. Services are comprehensive and support the diversity of age, gender, location, and educational experience of the student. PROFILE OF CCAC STUDENTS CCAC services reflect the broad spectrum of credit and noncredit students. According to Bottom Lines (Exhibit 5), in the credit population, male students comprise 39.1% and female students 60.3%. Its non-traditionally-aged students (23 years of age or higher) represent 63.1% of total enrollment. This percentage has decreased by 3% during the last five years, reflecting a growth in the traditionally aged (18 - 22 years of age) student population to 36.9% of enrollment at the time of self-study. Caucasians comprise 82.8% of the population with African Americans representing 12.8% of enrollment. Full-time students, on average, take 13.5 credits per term, while part-time students take 5 to 6 credits per term. The number of students in career programs has increased 8.4 % over the last five years, currently representing 54.8% of the student population, with the remaining 45.2% of students taking programs designed to transfer to four-year institutions. Student enrollment in both day and evening classes has remained consistent during the past five years, with 70.1% of credit enrollment in the daytime, 26.3% in the evening, and 3.6% during the weekend (Bottom Lines, Exhibit 5). In the spring of 2002, of 1,500 surveyed students, 30.8% are working 1-20 hours a week while 58.3% work 21-40 hours a week (Student Satisfaction Survey, Spring 2002, Exhibit 65). Increasingly, students are attending the seven college centers, with most significant growth at the Washington County Center and the “virtual” Internet location that shows 3,642 registrations for Academic Year (AY) 02-03, an increase of 80% over the prior year. The two-year-old Washington County Center also shows significant growth of 388 students in AY01-02 to 761 students in AY 02-03, or 96% growth (Appendix 9.2). In AY 2002 - 2003, 4,545 students took courses in more than a single location, with 34.9% of these students taking one or more distance education courses. Overall credit population has increased by 9.8% during the last five years (Appendix 9.1). Conversely, the noncredit population declined 10.6% from 78,636 unduplicated students in 1997- 1998 to 70,284 unduplicated students in 02-03. The noncredit student profile mirrors the credit population in gender and race with the male/female ratio remaining male 35.9% and female 54.7%, with 9.8% students not responding. (Exhibit 5). DESCRIPTION OF CCAC'S STUDENT SUPPORT SERVICES To serve this large and diverse student population, CCAC offers a comprehensive set of student support services that involve direct enrollment functions and support to academic activities. These services are periodically reviewed to ensure they serve students at the College centers and the growing volume of distance education students. Registration and Student Accounts

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

48

Registration and student accounts services are offered at each of the four campuses and seven college centers. The College Centers collect payment, with most of the centers also setting up payment plans for students while actual cashier functions are brought back to the campuses. Registration is also available by mail. CCAC encourages all eligible students to use the online registration available in the student system. However, despite multiple marketing initiatives, only 6.2 % of students used this option in the Fall 2003 term. CCAC provides registration services for the noncredit students by mail and by a telephone process that uses both CCAC staff and, during seasonal peaks, contracted phone center services from a local vendor. To synthesize these services into a seamless process for students, the College has followed the “best practices” of several large community colleges working toward a one-stop-shop concept for student enrollment services. The North Campus initiated the one-stop-shop in August, 2002 using the name “First Stop.” Extensive training prepared staff from four enrollment offices to support integrated admissions, registration, financial aid, and student account services. Allegheny and South campuses have just opened their “First Stops.” Boyce Campus has no plans for a First Stop center at this time. Each campus operates a college bookstore with extended hours provided at the beginning of each academic term. Each campus bookstore also sells textbooks and materials for the first class meeting of each class offered at its college centers, whether that class meets during the day, evening, or weekend. Students taking distance education courses can order their books and materials by telephone or by mail from the Allegheny Campus bookstore. Students pay the cost of the purchase plus postage and handling charges. Academic Advising Academic Advising services at CCAC are defined by the AFT Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA Exhibit 2). Advising Centers are staffed by full-time AFT faculty members selected by the Directors of Registration from the pool of applicants that fairly represents the academic programs of the College. Academic Advisors attend training sessions to assure they remain current on academic policies and procedures. Although the CBA allows for evaluation of Academic Advisors, no individual advisor evaluation exists. The advising process is evaluated in the Student Satisfaction Survey. Advising is available to all students, and is described in the Student Handbook as follows:

Academic Advisors help students explore various programs of study and clarify educational goals. They assist with course selection and provide information about registration, course electives, schedule of class revisions, changing a major, and graduation requirements.

Advising is mandatory for first time students, students in developmental course work, students changing their program, students on probation, and students applying for graduation. Program check-sheets (see CCAC website for examples) are available to help the Academic Advisors and students follow the academic program requirements. Counseling, Career Services, and Special Programming Counseling Services augment academic advising services by providing transfer counseling and offering a variety of tools for students to assess their academic abilities, personality traits, and career interests. The counselors also meet with suspended students who have appealed for reinstatement to the College. Trained counselors evaluate test results and assist students in determining their academic major and career interests. In Fall 2003, CareerLink established sites at each of the four campus

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

49

Career Services sites to provide convenient locations for local residents to research retraining opportunities, develop job search skills, and connect with employment opportunities across the state. The federally funded Carl D. Perkins grant offers additional supports to students in career programs, preparing students to secure employment quickly after graduation. CCAC provides specialized programming for various populations of students. Categories include academically challenged students, economically disadvantaged students, minority students, students with disabilities, and nontraditional students. Services are often grant funded and reflect student and/or community needs. Internal referrals are handled on an individual basis depending on circumstances and needs. Confidentiality is strictly adhered to according to the “Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act” and “Health Insurance Portability and Accountability." The College's professional staff maintains an active role in local, state, and community agencies. Through both formal and informal relationships, individuals requiring a level of expertise or assistance outside the boundaries of the College receive external referrals. When CCAC staff members determine that a student needs such services, they provide the student with the name and telephone number of the appropriate contact. However, with the written release of the student, the staff member will contact the agency on the student’s behalf. With regard to informing faculty regarding a student's physical or learning disability, staff will only reveal the accommodations needed by the student, but not the disability itself. Library and Tutorial Services Each campus also provides Library and Learning Services (LLS), providing traditional library and in-house tutoring services. A partnership among the LLS departments also provides online tutoring, using live chat room sessions and message boards staffed by tutors from all four campuses. Available to all students, the online tutoring is especially appealing to distance education students and students at the College Centers. Child and Health Care Services Each campus provides a Child Development Center committed to a safe and stimulating environment for children of students and staff. Each is licensed by the state Department of Public Welfare and/or the Department of Education for preschool/kindergarten. Students can purchase limited student accident insurance that covers the major semesters in the academic year, but only one campus provides a health professional on site. International Student Services The International Student Office (ISO) housed at the Allegheny Campus provides verification of student status to the U.S. immigration and Naturalization Service and issues I-20s for students throughout the College. It also provides ESL classes to both visa students and residents whose first language is not English. The ISO served an average of 153 per year students from Fall 2001 through Fall 2003. RETAINING QUALIFIED STUDENT SERVICES PERSONNEL Applicants for positions in the Student Support Services area use the “Jobs at CCAC” college website line (www.ccacjobs.com). This standardized HR process electronically manages all applications for employment at the College from the recruitment stage to recommendation for hire. CCAC complies

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

50

with all federal standards for the hiring of employees (See Human Resources web page on college website). The College also provides all administrators and directors a copy of Search Committees: A Tool Kit for Human Resource Professional, Administrators, and Committee Member (Exhibit 61) by Christopher D. Lee, Ph.D., as a tool to aid in hiring. Although search committees are the vehicle for hiring in the Student Services areas, directors may also conduct a one-on-one interview. Surveyed directors and deans contributed some of their own specific measures for hiring: previous employers’ references, diverse search committees that included students, writing samples, professional appearance, future professional plans, flexibility and creativity in terms of meeting the job’s description, and professional judgment. Additionally, the directors of the various Student Services identified the following as qualities they specifically look for in a candidate: academic credentials, experience in the area, empathy for individuals, interest in students, experience in a multicultural setting, initiative, flexibility, customer service orientation, creativity, honesty, and openness. Some committees have also asked candidates to demonstrate skills by completing sample projects they might encounter on the job. STUDENT ATHLETICS All intercollegiate athletic programs are regulated by the National Junior College Athletic Association (NJCAA), the Pennsylvania Collegiate Athletic Association (PCAA), and the Western Pennsylvania Collegiate Conference (WPCC). In some instances, certain teams are also regulated by the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), the Women’s Intercollegiate Bowling Congress (WIBC), American Bowling Congress (ABC), U.S.A Hockey, and the Western Pennsylvania College Hockey In-Line League (WPCHIL), as well as other organizations. Students who participate in intercollegiate athletics must be full time and maintain a grade point average set forth by the NJCAA. CCAC is required to submit to the NCAA and NJCAA the number of credit hours athletes have earned, their grade point average, any lapses in college enrollment, and their status as transfer or career students. Any student has the opportunity to try out for a team as long as he or she is taking credit classes. Once on the team, students have varying academic requirements as described above. By setting forth these standards for intercollegiate and club sports, the College demonstrates that it is handling students consistently on all four campuses. CCAC is required to submit yearly information regarding the Equity in Athletics Disclosure to the U.S. Department of Education. Based on system-wide gender statistics (male 39.1%, female 60.3%), the male-female participation in athletics approximates that of the general student population. Additionally, students participated in 4,775 intramural sports events during AY 2002 - 2003, demonstrating the diversity of opportunities available to students of all ages and interests (Intramurals Report 2002-2003, Exhibit 45). Each campus’s athletic budget is derived from the student fee, which was set at $50.40 for full-time students ($4.20/credit for part-time students) in 1985. Funding levels are often based on the activity level and need of each team or club, and are approved by a Budget Review Board at each campus made up of administrators, faculty, staff, and students. The approval process encourages all organizations to remain active and helps students achieve social and personal growth. Teams or clubs dissatisfied with their allocation may appeal to the Dean of Student Development. None of the campuses has a recruitment budget. Every student athlete is either voluntarily recruited or is a walk-on participant. Rarely is a participant cut, and all students are urged to participate regardless of their educational program, disability, or difference. The College does not keep retention

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

51

and graduation rates for athletes because of the high turnover in students who compete in our sports programs. Intercollegiate athletes’ academic progress is monitored semester to semester due to eligibility requirements. Student athletes have the same access to academic support as the general student population. STUDENT CONDUCT, COMPLAINTS, GRIEVANCES AND RECORDS The College is committed to the advancement of knowledge and learning and to the development of responsible individuals. In meeting this commitment, the College has an obligation to provide a secure environment. Students are expected to respect the rights and properties of others and to uphold appropriate standards of integrity and behavior. CCAC is concerned about proper student conduct, both on campus and at college-sponsored activities off campus. The College’s responsibility is to provide members of the college community full and equal opportunity to pursue their educational objectives and to maintain acceptable rules for good conduct. However, any student who demonstrates his/her inability to conform to acceptable social conduct by disruptive activities may lose his/her right to enjoy the educational, social, and recreational opportunities of the College. The two broad areas of student complaints or grievances deal with the categories of behavioral expectations and academic complaints. Behavioral expectations are outlined in the Student Code of Conduct (2003-2004 Student Handbook, 18-22, Exhibit 22) and are enforced by the campus Deans of Student Development. The Student Academic Complaint Procedure is also outlined in the Student Handbook (12) and is handled by the Academic dean in the area of the occurrence. Records of student complaints or grievances at CCAC are maintained in files by the office charged with adjudicating the complaint, i.e. the Dean of Student Development office for behavioral complaints and the various academic deans’ offices for academic complaints. The Allegheny County Solicitor said records generally should be kept at least as long as they would be needed by any applicable statute of limitations, which would be four to six years, depending on the issues involved. According to The Administration of Campus Discipline: Student, Organizational, and Community Issues, published by College Administration Publications:

Judicial records on a particular student should be maintained until the student has left the institution for the final time due to graduation, transfer, or permanent academic dismissal. Five years after matriculation is common for many institutions. Exceptions to this policy would include records of those students who are expelled or permanently dismissed from an institution, records of persons who are indefinitely suspended from an institution and must complete some tasks before being reinstated, and those who leave the institution prior to adjudication of serious charges or with uncompleted disciplinary sanctions. In these cases it would appear appropriate to maintain the entire student record permanently.

CCAC maintains a student records policy that is in compliance with the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act as defined in the CCAC Catalog. This policy identifies the rights of students to access their official records, provides guidelines for information released to outside agencies, identifies directory information made available upon request, and identifies materials to which students do not have access. The policy also allows students to restrict directory information, and is published on the CCAC website, registration forms, in the College Catalog, and Student Handbook. CCAC maintains a high level of security access to student electronic records. Access is determined by an employee’s classification. An employee’s supervisor and the Registrar (or Bursar or Dean of Enrollment Management) must approve the employee’s level of access to the Colleague system.

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

52

Access to the electronic data is gained through an employee ID and password. The student records policy is conveyed to employees through their supervisors, workshops, and the CCAC website. CCAC periodically offers workshops on the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and student privacy considerations are included in other training for enrollment services staff. ASSESSMENT OF STUDENT SERVICES For purposes of assessment of student services, the College currently uses the Student Satisfaction Survey, the Professional Development Needs Assessment, which trains and assists faculty members in developing stronger skill sets that enhance student support services, and the Distance Learning Student Survey, which is given to students every semester and is designed to measure the effectiveness of the Internet and VCR sections. The College uses these assessments to gather information about student perception and to help the reviewers guide departments to design course improvements and new courses, and/or plan new programming delivery systems. Student responses to their college experiences are also assessed through an exit survey included in the packet of information a student completes when applying for graduation. The survey queries the student’s demographics, primary reason for enrolling, achievement of educational goals, and the need for placement assistance information. Graduate surveys are mailed to the graduates’ homes approximately six months after graduation. These surveys elicit demographics and placement information (whether the student has transferred to a four year institution or found a job, its location, and whether or not it is related to their CCAC program of study). Levels of satisfaction with preparation at CCAC and overall satisfaction with programs and services are elicited. Worthy of highlighting here is the Student Satisfaction Survey (SSS). Each semester from Fall 1999 through Spring 2003, the PIR conducted the survey. CCAC is currently reviewing the results of this national survey and the results are being evaluated against national norms. As can be seen throughout this report, the instrument is used to assess a variety of institutional services, but more particularly in the area of student services. Overall, through its various assessment means, students express satisfaction with the College and in particular with student support services as measured through the Student Satisfaction Survey Report. This satisfaction increased from the Spring 2001 to Spring 2002 in student job searches, tutoring, fairness of billing policies, and the helpfulness of staff in service offices. However, students throughout the College expressed dissatisfaction with three areas: (1) Academic Advising, especially in regard to transfer information (2) with two of the Financial Aid Offices, though these complaints were more associated with personnel than policies (see processes in Chapter 8 of this report), and (3) with channels for expressing student complaints. Response to Assessment of Academic Advising The authors of In Pursuit of Excellence (92, Exhibit 44) and Dr. Vincent Tinto, Distinguished University Professor at the School of Education at Syracuse University, agree that undecided and unprepared students need consistent academic guidance for academic success. Although the CCAC Academic Advisors Survey (Appendix 9.6) indicates that advisors feel well-trained and competent, the SSS conducted in Fall 2002 indicates that students are dissatisfied. CCAC is underperforming in terms of student satisfaction with academic advising services relative to the norm for large (10,000 students or more) two-year public institutions. The goal of the College Plan, Action 1.4, is to revise the registration process by developing an online and telephone advising system. Academic advising currently occurs by appointment or

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

53

during regularly scheduled hours, but is not available via the CCAC website. The need for online and telephone services is substantiated by the rapid growth of Distance Learning and the slowly-increasing use of online services by traditional students. No formal academic advising is available to Continuing Education students. No assessment of the success of this element of the plan is yet available. Response to Assessment of Transfer Services The goal of the College Plan, Action 1.8, is to improve transfer services by providing current transfer information to Advisors. As indicated above, the Student Satisfaction Survey indicates that CCAC is not meeting student expectations of advising, including advisor’s knowledge of transfer requirements to other schools. But both the College Plan and the satisfaction survey fails to take into account that, institutionally, Academic Advisors are expected to have only general knowledge of transfer information; it is the primary function of the Counselors to provide transfer services. The College needs to do a better job communicating the procedures for transfer counseling to its internal and external constituencies. Response to Assessment of Student Complaint Procedures To ensure that disciplinary or complaint policies and practices are current, CCAC’s policies and procedures are regularly benchmarked against appropriate national organizations’ recommendations and quality standards. As articulated earlier, the College tries to maximize the availability of student complaint procedures by distributing the Student Handbook at orientation programs and displaying it at various locations on each campus. The procedures can also be found online through the CCAC website, and are distributed to each faculty and staff member and administrator on each campus. The Academic Complaint process is subject to the College Governance process through which changes can be initiated by the college community. If changes are made, they are updated in handbooks prior to distribution each academic year. Retention of records of academic complaints appears to be inconsistent throughout the College, and surveys show that the academic deans were unaware of any specific written requirements or administrative discussions about such practices. Policies and procedures on FERPA are disseminated to students through publications including the Student Handbook, the College Catalog, the credit magazine and the CCAC web site. These publications are available at the academic deans’ offices, Registrar’s Office, Deans’ of Students Office, First Stop, and new student orientation programs. However, neither the Continuing Education nor the Distance Learning Catalogs currently contain information on CCAC policies and procedures

*****

Results from the Professional Development survey, the Student Satisfaction Survey, and the Distance Learning Survey were the basis for the following changes implemented to improve student services:

• The Office of Human Resources developed and implemented Professional Development training modules based on survey results;

• The Professional Development area conducts training seminars and workshops based upon feedback garnered from the student assessment surveys, professional development needs assessment, and group feedback from Student Life personnel; and

• Professional Development staff plan, coordinate, and implement classes, courses workshops, and training modules that support recommendations for support services. For example,

Chapter Nine: Student Support Services

54

support staff members are trained on computerized registration procedures that directly improve service to students.

Recommendations

1. Review the Academic Advisement Centers, developing a better integration between the

counseling and advising functions while articulating that difference to students. 2. Standardize training materials and programs for Academic Advisors, providing system-

wide training sessions when appropriate. 3. Integrate the current student services assessment instruments and strategies into a

comprehensive assessment plan covering all student support services provided at CCAC.

Chapter Ten: Faculty

55

Chapter 10: Faculty

OVERVIEW CCAC employs highly qualified faculty and administrators to work collaboratively in the development, review, modification, and support of new and existing programs. A shared College Council governance process is used to advance the instructional delivery of academic programs, research, and service programs at the College Campuses and Centers. The College Council governance has subcommittees identified in the American Federations of Teachers (AFT) Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA, Exhibit 2) to foster the work of the Council. College Administrators participate as members of the College Council and all of its subcommittees. Approved recommendations of the College Council are forwarded to the college president for consideration and implementation. FACULTY QUALIFICATIONS The College maintains an approved Minimum Criteria for Full and Adjunct Faculty Hires list (Exhibit 17), which is established and updated regularly in consultation with the related discipline faculty. This list is maintained by the Vice President of Academic and Student Services Office for use by department faculty in the hire of new full-time and adjunct faculty. It is on the college website, and available to all current faculty members, prospective faculty members, and the general public. Also, when an individual applies for any faculty position through the College’s job site (www.ccacjobs.com), the minimum requirements for the position are contained within the job posting information. All full-time position postings contain the approved Minimum Criteria for Hire for the specific position, and are used by the Faculty Search Committee in the search for new faculty. CCAC’s employment application system is designed to screen out applicants who do not meet these criteria. In addition to academic preparation, many of the positions require experience in the field or in teaching. Adjunct faculty applications are reviewed by academic department committees using the Minimum Criteria for Hire, and are placed on an approved list of Adjunct faculty maintained by Human Resources on the job site. The Teaching Faculty Position Description (Exhibit 16) is maintained by Human Resources, and contains relevant elements pertinent to teaching faculty as outlined in the CBA; position postings contain the position requirements, primary function, and duties for each specific job advertised. The College works to achieve a balanced ratio of full-time to part-time faculty. Budgetary restrictions dictate the number of faculty employed. As the minimum criteria for hire of part-time faculty has expanded in specific disciplines, in some instances long-standing faculty have been grandfathered into their teaching discipline. While the College generally uses these criteria consistently, there are rare exceptions when an emergency situation requires an adjunct who may not meet them. The College recognizes the value of part-time faculty who, working in their field of expertise, bring workplace experiences to the classroom. FACULTY AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT In order to study faculty jurisdiction over curriculum development, Task Force Explorers analyzed governance committee operations and conducted a survey of department heads and discipline deans.

Chapter Ten: Faculty

56

The process for curriculum changes is defined by the Curriculum Committee, a sub-committee of the College Council, and is available on the College website (Article XXVIII, CBA, Exhibit 2). Under the Faculty and Staff page is a section called “CCWizard," which stands for Curriculum Committee Wizard, a series of question-driven web pages that explains each step necessary to change a course or program, create a new course or program, or to delete a course or program. All forms necessary for this process are available as downloadable Microsoft Word documents. According to the Curriculum Committee Chair, this has resulted in much clearer and consistent proposals. The majority of decisions to revise or change a program start at the discipline level. This decision is based on both internal and external factors, such as administrative recognition and economic trends. An examination of system syllabi indicates that they are relatively current, though there are exceptions, as noted in Chapter 14. A majority of department heads surveyed report that departments have advisory boards that include employers who provide industry standards, expectations, and future needs that are often incorporated into curricular revisions. Because of rapidly changing technology, most career program faculty meet once or twice a year and discuss changes to curricula. Several departments must also meet state and national accrediting criteria, so their input is mandated. The current process for curriculum revision has evolved over several years. Each year the Curriculum Committee looks at the process and makes changes based on experiences during the year or suggestions from those making proposals. For example, the committee dropped the requirement for individual faculty course descriptions on new proposals, as it became clear these were not helpful in the evaluation process. At the same time, the committee is placing an increased emphasis on the quality of the objectives listed for the course, looking for more detail and measurable outcomes. Deans and department heads report their consistent use and understanding of the curriculum review process, but some consider it cumbersome in meeting the changing needs of industry. In addition, there is some concern that experimental courses are not being adequately reviewed against current curricula, and that discipline deans need to take a more proactive role in initial curriculum development and review. The Curriculum Committee’s work is reviewed and assessed by the College Council. If Council does not accept a curriculum recommendation, it is returned to the Committee to be reworked and resubmitted. This review and feedback mechanism has assisted in strengthening the curriculum process and assures that College Governance Policy and Procedures are adhered to consistently. Once curriculum is approved, a Program Review Process is in place to evaluate academic programs on a five-year cycle or sooner. Influence of Advisory Committees The College maintains advisory committees for all occupational programs and many disciplines. Advisory Committees consist of representatives from local businesses, industry, government, and four-year transfer institutions. In addition, the College has a number of specialized programs that must meet specific accreditation standards. Most advisory committees meet twice a year, and their recommendations are reviewed and appropriately incorporated into the College’s budgeting process and Program Review. EXCELLENCE IN TEACHING AND PROFESSIONAL GROWTH The College lists faculty professional degrees in the College Catalog, and highlights faculty achievements through campus newspapers and internal college communications. Additional

Chapter Ten: Faculty

57

recognition of faculty achievements is listed under "Professional Development and Employee Recognition" in Chapter 1 of this self-study. In addition, per the CBA, faculty prepare an Improvement of Teaching Portfolio each year until tenured, and then every four years. Faculty also submit their portfolio when applying for a promotion. Through the Office of Professional Development, the College is very effective in providing professional development opportunities to the faculty (Exhibit 55). It does so in the following ways:

• The College utilizes the faculty and staff email system to promote workshops ranging from “Using Microsoft Office” to “Dealing with Disruptive Students.”

• The College holds two conferences (in the spring and fall) that are sponsored and planned by the Office of Professional Development. At the conferences, faculty attend workshops and meetings devoted to issues of professional development.

• During the summer, the Office of Professional Development sends out its course listings for the upcoming academic year to all faculty and staff members.

• The Office of Professional Development has its own web page where it lists classes and upcoming events, sends out information through interdepartmental mail, and has conducted surveys of faculty needs.

• Faculty are allocated professional development money for travel, have opportunities for sabbatical leaves, course tuition reimbursement, and may enroll in system-wide and campus-based professional development workshops.

COLLEGE SUPPORT FOR FACULTY DEVELOPMENT Although research is not a primary focus for the mission of faculty at CCAC, the College does provide research resources for its faculty in three distinct ways: through sabbatical leaves granted to full-time tenured faculty, through mini-grants which are awarded by the Educational Foundation, and through the promotional efforts of the Grants Department. Sabbatical leaves are available for faculty to pursue professional development activities. The CBA (Article XXV Exhibit 2) outlines the process used in awarding sabbatical leaves. At the time of application, faculty must have completed six years of full-time service since beginning employment or from their last sabbatical. The College awards sabbaticals that will result in increased individual performance or will produce results valuable to the College. Qualified applicants are granted sabbaticals based on years of service from date of hire or from the date of the last sabbatical. For sabbatical leaves in the years from 2000-2002, faculty filed 99 applications, and 41 were awarded leaves. A second method for faculty to pursue research is through mini-grants awarded by the Educational Foundation. From 1998 through 2002, there were 77 mini-grant proposals submitted and 39 awarded. Since 1991, the College Educational Foundation has awarded nearly $200,000 in mini-grants. These grants provided valuable funding of faculty research to benefit college operations that would not have been funded otherwise. The process for awarding mini-grants is identified on the Educational Foundation link on the CCAC website. Proposals are submitted during the fall term, and awards are announced in December, with reports due to the Foundation at the end of the following September. A third source is the Office of Contracts and Grants, which serves as a liaison to secure external funding from federal, state, and local governments. The primary role of this office is to assist in identifying opportunities for grants and to help assure contract and grant compliance. Explorers found that notice of the availability of grants and the support of them was sometimes insufficient. When

Chapter Ten: Faculty

58

contracts or grants are received from external agencies, on occasion, CCAC will provide support for faculty or staff. For instance, currently three faculty members have been given released time to work on a National Guard Bureau contract. CCAC faculty are working with Carnegie Mellon University faculty to develop an information assurance curriculum that can be made available through community colleges. The released time offered by the College is essential for faculty to work on a project of this caliber. For grants received from external agencies, national and regional benchmark studies reveal that CCAC’s office of Contracts and Grants is one of the most effective in external revenue generation when compared to multi-campus community colleges across the nation. The department continues to receive high ratings due to the innovative nature and volume of grants received. Though faculty research is not part of the College's M/V/V/G, sabbaticals, mini-grants, and revenues generated by the Grants office offer support for research and development.

STANDARDS FOR FORMAL FACULTY ACTIONS

The CBA covers most standards and procedures involving faculty appointment, promotion, tenure, grievance, discipline, and dismissal. The CBA establishes specific steps for individual initiation of each process. In reference to personnel appointments, the College has a policy (IV.02, Exhibit 19) that covers how such appointments shall take place through a search committee, in accordance with nondiscrimination and the College’s affirmative action plan. The policy also establishes that personnel actions are to be reviewed by President’s Council and approved by the college president. This procedure is reflected in Article XVII of the CBA. The CBA provides that tenure is earned after four years of service (Articles X and XIII). Approximately 80% of the CCAC full-time faculty have tenure. This is higher than the national average of 48% reported in the U.S. Department of Education Report of 1999 (). Upon completion of four years of teaching service and the review of the faculty’s Improvement of Teaching Portfolio, tenure is granted. There are no college standards for faculty performance expectation as it relates to the granting of faculty tenure beyond the adherence to the completion of the portfolio. The criteria for faculty promotion in the CBA (Article XIV) requires faculty to have a specific number of years in rank and mandates preparation of their teaching portfolio for review by a peer committee. The College and Faculty working relationships seem to be very good, as exemplified by only seven grievances filed during the past five years (as of December, 2003). They are spread out almost equally among the four campuses: two grievances each at Allegheny, Boyce, and North Campuses, and only one grievance at South Campus. With regard to dismissal at the College, processes specified in the CBA (Article XX) stipulate that dismissal of faculty can only be for cause. The grievance process specifies the specific steps that must be followed with the hopes that a resolution can be reached before going to Arbitration. Discipline of faculty is covered by procedures established by the Human Resources Department, which provides for progressive discipline, then dismissal, which can then be grieved by the faculty member and the AFT. In reference to faculty turnover, according to figures from Human Resources (Exhibit 43), the percentage of faculty leaving on an annual basis averages out to 3.5% as compared to a national average of 6.5% (U.S. Department of Education Report of 1999). Task Force Explorers find this to be

Chapter Ten: Faculty

59

a favorably low turnover rate, showing faculty satisfaction with their jobs, their treatment by the College, and the College in general. Faculty Evaluation According to Explorers’ research, 86 percent of the institutions surveyed in the 1999 National Study of Post-secondary Faculty Survey use at least one student-based measure to evaluate full-time faculty. Student evaluations of instructional quality were the most commonly employed (85%). Most institutions also use administrative-level measures to evaluate full-time faculty. Department chair evaluations (83%) and dean evaluations (77%) were two of the most common administrative-level measures. At CCAC, no student-based evaluation is required for full-time faculty unless they are non-tenured. The College administers an instrument contained in the CBA, the Survey of Student Opinion (SOSO), for non-tenured faculty during both semesters of their first four years of teaching. This instrument is a negotiated list of questions about which students give their opinion, though it is more an evaluation of the course than the faculty who do the teaching. There are also two open-ended questions to which students respond in writing, and these, perhaps, are more telling than the objective questions asked, though responses to these questions are not tabulated. The College also administers the SOSO in all courses taught by adjunct faculty each semester. There is no formal process for academic deans to follow to determine either what standards are acceptable or what to do with the results of these surveys. Nor are there acceptable or unacceptable numerical criteria for administrators or department heads to determine satisfactory performance. The results of the SOSO are seen by administrators, shared with the Department head, and after final grades are submitted, shared with the part-time and non-tenured faculty. Administrators see the results of the student surveys, and, if the composite score is too low, using an arbitrary measure, the department head may be asked to discuss the results with the faculty person to see what reasons they can provide for receiving a low score. For part-time faculty, when scores do not improve the next semester, the academic dean and the department head discuss whether the part-time faculty member could be more effective teaching a different course, or whether the faculty member should be dismissed. In examining a report compiled by CCAC Institutional Research comparing SOSO results of full-time, non-tenured faculty student ratings to part-time faculty, the ratings overall were slightly higher for full-time, non-tenured faculty than part-time faculty, 4.2 to 3.95 (out of a possible high score of 5). However, the report includes more than 52,000 student responses for part-time faculty and only 733 responses for full-time, non-tenured faculty. As noted earlier, every full-time faculty member completes an Improvement of Teaching Portfolio each year until they receive tenure, and then every four years as specified in the CBA. There is a list of required items to be included in the Portfolio that is reviewed by peers and their respective academic dean. The Portfolio is viewed as a formative process versus an evaluative process. Once tenured, faculty are not required to have the SOSO survey administered every semester, but must have a representative sample of student opinion questionnaire surveys in their Portfolio for review as outlined in the CBA. There is a detailed process in the CBA to evaluate Educational Technicians and Counselors, including establishing objectives, specific questions, and an opportunity for discussion between the academic dean and the Educational Technician or Counselor before the evaluation process begins, and again at the conclusion of the academic year.

Chapter Ten: Faculty

60

CCAC AND ACADEMIC FREEDOM In order to ascertain the institution’s level of commitment to academic freedom, Explorers reviewed the following documents: College M/V/V/G Statements, 2001-2003 College Plan, CCAC Student Handbook, CBA, College Catalog, Board Policies, HR Guidelines, and the Faculty Handbook. In addition, Task Force Explorers reviewed CCAC’s grievance history, College committee work, and library archives to determine actions and activity or discussions on academic freedom. Although the concept of academic freedom is implicit in most of these documents, the only document that explicitly addresses the issue of academic freedom is the CBA. Article XI of the CBA is the only College publication that explicitly addresses academic freedom and all of its responsibilities essential to the fulfillment of the purposes of the College. The CBA states the following:

1. Employees shall have the freedom in teaching to utilize such materials and to discuss such topics as are relevant to their subject, appropriate to their teaching methods, and conducive to the attainment of the objectives and goals of the course.

2. It shall be the continuing responsibility of the College libraries to attempt to provide faculty and students with books and other learning materials that represent all points of view.

3. When Employees speak, write, or otherwise express themselves as private citizens, they shall at all times make clear that they are not representing the College.

4. Subject to the performance of their academic duties, Employees are entitled to freedom in research and in publication of the results.

With regard to academic freedom and student expectations, of CCAC’s 2003-2004 Student Handbook (18) states that students should expect instruction to begin promptly, that instruction is presented in a clear and concise manner, and that classroom instruction provides relevant, structured activities consistent with the course requirements. This publication guarantees students the right to expect classroom instruction, assignments, and evaluations that are consistent with the College Catalog, the course description, and the specifications listed in the course outline. Assessment of Principles of Academic Freedom The College is assessed through a number of tools that generally reflect its commitment to academic freedom. These include the SOSO, the Student Satisfaction Survey, the Graduate Exit Survey, graduate follow-up study, program and discipline advisory committees, program specific accreditation visits, discipline and program reviews, and several internal administrative reports available through the Administrative Report Center (ARC). These instruments are used by departments and administrative units to identify issues across the College and to develop appropriate strategies to address identified weaknesses, new approaches, changes, and budgetary resources when needed to implement recommendations. Explorers also note that, through random faculty interviews, CCAC promotes freedom of thought and expression by faculty and students.

Recommendations

1. Strengthen the criteria for promotion and tenure. 2. Consider a faculty evaluation system that would fairly measure the quality of the faculty’s

teaching presentation from the perspective of students. An option would be to require full-time tenured faculty to be involved in the SOSO process.

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

61

Chapter 11: Educational Offerings

OVERVIEW CCAC provides academic and career oriented programming relevant to the mission of the College to offer both general and specialized educational and training opportunities while also providing for students’ personal development through a full range of extracurricular and co-curricular programming. Placement testing is required to identify under-prepared students needing developmental education courses in reading, mathematics, and English. Additionally, to ensure student success and to develop information literacy skills, the College provides students with access to relevant learning and library resources. Courses, programs, certificates, and degrees are characterized by appropriate levels of rigor, depth, sequencing, and sensitivity to the needs of both adult and traditional-aged learners. The College uses available outcomes assessment data when planning course and program offerings and for validating student achievement. Moreover, articulation agreements negotiated with transfer institutions validate the coherence and rigor of curricular offerings. To accommodate requests of specific employers for worker training, the College developed Fastrack courses, non-traditional scheduling, multiple instructional delivery modes, and customized training and certificate programs. CCAC also provides prerequisite general education courses (see Chapter 12) as preparation for entering various career oriented programs such as LPN nursing. In Allegheny County, CCAC is recognized as a provider of quality workforce development and employee training. COURSES AND PROGRAMS Accessibility The breadth, depth, and accessibility of both credit and noncredit course offerings is evidence that the College is achieving its mission. More than 170 credit programs provide student access to a wide variety of occupational and career options, as well as to university-parallel and transfer programs. Noncredit programming ranges from personal enrichment courses such as knitting, yoga, and cooking, to job skills training and upgrading. In addition to being offered at the four campuses and at seven College Centers, classes occur at a wide variety of community locations or through one of the rapidly expanding Distance Learning (DL) options. For example, in 2002-2003, off-campus credit and noncredit classes included general education (nursing prerequisites) courses taught at a long-term care facility, general education courses taught to electrical workers in their own union hall, and general education courses and pre-health career courses taught at work-sites. All of these options (both credit and noncredit) grew from partnerships developed with employers needing to train or upgrade their work force. Additionally, increased numbers of students registered for credit courses by using one of many DL delivery options, such as the Internet, VCR courses, videoconferencing (increased student accessibility and convenience of location), and web-enhanced courses (a combination of traditional classroom instruction with online instruction). In a recent semester, DL course options included 78 Internet courses, 24 telecourses, 14 videoconference courses, and 12 web-enhanced courses (Credit Catalog). Currently, three academic programs can be completed entirely online. They include two certificate programs (Dietary Manager, Web Designer) and a degree program (General Studies). Additionally, there are 26 degree programs and 14 certificate programs for which more than 50% of the course work can be completed using a DL option.

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

62

Articulation Currently, CCAC maintains articulation agreements with more than thirty institutions of higher education, and runs joint academic degree programs with four area colleges. In 2001-2002, 35% of all graduates continued their education, 4% less than in 2000-2001 (Exhibit 10). In the Student Handbook and during registration periods, students are encouraged to meet with a transfer counselor or an advisor before selecting courses. Thus, transfer information is available to students both in print and electronic formats. Historically, individual academic departments made or changed articulation or collaboration agreements. Now, the Office of Assistant Dean of Academic Management is piloting a structured, consistent process for initiating articulation agreements and for reviewing existing agreements on a regular cycle or when significant curricular changes are made at the College. From 1997 to 2002, an average of 44% of CCAC associate degree graduates had completed a university parallel or transfer program (Exit Survey and Graduate Survey Reports, Exhibit 37). When Task Force Explorers analyzed earned degrees from departments whose registrations comprised more than half of all registrations for the College, the data shows that, of the students choosing to transfer to a four-year school, an average of 58.6 credits transferred toward their next degree. Moreover, for the past five years, the University of Pittsburgh, Robert Morris University, and Point Park University have been the receiving schools for more than 50% of the College’s transfer students. Formal agreements with these schools were implemented in the late 1980s and mid-1990s and have been regularly monitored and updated. Standardization The College maintains system-wide, Common Course Syllabi (CCS). These assist individual faculty with preparation of a course outline that contains the departmentally approved learning objectives and topics. Additional curricular standardization is achieved through the regularly scheduled Program Reviews. To test the influence that CCS’s have on course content system-wide, the Task Force selected 209 Faculty Course Outlines (FCO) for review and comparison with the CCS for the same course. Those selected were from programs representing the majority of the College’s registrations. While discrepancies were found, no single department or faculty type seemed to contribute to these discrepancies. Most of the FCOs reviewed (95%) evidenced the common learning objectives found in the corresponding CCS. Additional standardization was achieved in 2003, when the College adopted the Faculty Course Outline Form. Curriculum As part of College governance, the College Council Curriculum Committee is charged with reviewing requests for additions, deletions, or changes to course and program content. During the academic year, they meet bi-monthly to review curriculum change proposals. In the past five years, 59 new programs have been added (Curriculum Committee Records, Exhibit 12). Thirty-seven credit programs were deleted. Since 1998, 310 new credit courses have been added, 141 were deleted, and 241 were changed. Frequently, these curricular changes were energized by the marketplace through employer demands for workers with new skills, competencies, and technological know-how. To ensure timely student graduation, the College has established procedures for course substitutions. For example, if the program curriculum changes before a student finishes or if courses needed for program completion are canceled, an academic dean approves appropriate substitutions. With some exception, these occur within the same discipline.

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

63

Community Involvement and Oversight To facilitate the open exchange of information between local employers, the College encourages the formation of Career Advisory Boards. As specified in The CCAC Advisory Committee Handbook (Exhibit 67), the boards are chaired by individuals working in a particular field that corresponds to a credit program at the College; the membership usually includes representatives from the College administration, program students, program faculty, and local employers. Although the frequency of meetings is determined by each board’s membership, most meet annually, quarterly, or bi-monthly. Functionally, these boards are tools for program development and improvement and a means of validating whether programs meet workforce needs. For example, recently the Workforce Development Division, in concert with an advisory committee, initiated planning to realign noncredit and credit courses, training, and services to better meet the needs of local employers. Faculty Assignments Off-campus credit courses are staffed in the same manner as campus courses. The standard hiring practices defined in the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) mandate that the department head assign faculty for courses within their discipline. Specifically, adjuncts are selected from an online pool of approved candidates. (See Chapter 10 for further details.) As with traditionally-scheduled courses, all offsite and off-campus courses are expected to meet the requirements of the departmentally approved common course syllabi, and individual adjuncts must submit a course outline for each course taught. Generally, adjuncts are required to have the same credentials as full-time instructors. For noncredit training and education, Business and Industry administrators hire “subject matter experts” as instructors. Because educational credentials may be less important when selecting noncredit instructors, often the instructor’s experiences frequently receive greater consideration. CO-CURRICULAR AND STUDENT LIFE PROGRAMMING Student Life departments systematically collect data on programs and services offered at each campus. Their records list the events, locations, sponsors, and the number of participants. Individual Campus athletic records are also maintained for intercollegiate team sports, athletic participants, ratios of male to female participants, budgets, recreational and intramural sports, fitness centers, and weight rooms. These data show that many students do participate, that similar opportunities are offered system-wide, and that students generally give high satisfaction rating to these activities. Because it is the working document that directs the activities and is used to allocate funding at campuses and centers, Explorers reviewed the Student Development Plan (Exhibit 64). This Plan includes five major areas of programming: cultural events, student organizations, Fitness for Health and Fun, intercollegiate sports and Media and Journalism (campus, student newspapers). The data collected on these activities suggests that although campuses may implement program elements in unique ways, there is a high level of system-wide similarity in programming, i.e., equivalent opportunities are being provided for students wherever they attend. On the Student Satisfaction Survey (Exhibit 65) the College has administered system-wide over the last three years, for the questions pertaining to Student Life activities, all student rankings fell within the range of 3.00-3.10 (on a scale of 0 to 5). These ratings are well within national norms benchmarking CCAC with other community colleges. Additionally, the Student Life Directors Monthly Reports clearly show that the campuses used a variety of measures to determine students’ interests. Finally, levying of the “College Fee” which is added to student tuition assures a predictable income flow for Student Life funding.

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

64

LEARNING RESOURCES AND INFORMATION LITERACY Library Services: A Learning Resource Although delivered at each campus, many library services such as some book and periodical selection and delivery of services to DL students are system-wide. At all campuses, there are similar processes for involving faculty in the selection of library materials. Campus librarians annually solicit full- and part-time faculty requests and work with department chairpersons to increase faculty involvement in collection development. System holdings are also considered by individual libraries when they order new materials for their own campus. When collections are weeded (eliminating outdated materials, irrelevant materials, or materials in physically poor shape), librarians seek faculty input. To assist faculty requests, librarians distribute book reviews and video catalogs. To avoid duplication of titles and to control costs, in 2002 a Library and Learning Services (LLS) Task-Group of librarians reviewed periodical holdings and recommended which campus should continue to receive particular periodical titles and which should now be funded from a system-wide rather than a campus budget. Also, across the system, the campuses honor patron requests for periodical articles they hold by sending them either online or via fax. Other system-wide services include customized services for DL students that are outlined in the DL Handbook. Moreover, students with a CCAC user name and password can access the online catalog, put a hold on materials, and pick them up at a designated campus, access the online periodical databases from home or from community/public libraries, and access telephone reference services at all campuses. These strategies help to ensure uniformity of services to all students. Finally, when recommendations for curriculum change are made, “reference, resource, or learning materials to be used by students” are to be identified on the change proposal Form. However, a review of Curriculum Subcommittee Proposal Forms, College Council meeting minutes, and interviews with previous chairs of both the Subcommittee and the Council revealed little evidence that learning resources received attention throughout the process from proposal to Council action. The American Library Association (ALA) and the American College and Research Libraries (ACRL) publish standards for learning resources centers’ (LRC) programs. Benchmarked against these national standards, all four campus libraries offer services comparable to similar college libraries, but they fall short on library staffing, print collection size and budget allocations. An analysis of current library staffing shows that while administrative staffing is adequate, professional and clerical staffing are well below the minimum recommended. For example, the number of CCAC librarians is 40-50% below the minimum recommended. When measured by the dollars per fte recommended by ACRL Standard Four (Appendix 11.1), campus library budgets fall short. In the case of the number of print volumes purchased, the budget is less than 50% of the per fte amount recommended. A similar situation exists for periodicals and AV materials. ACRL Standard Five specifies Standards for measuring the quality of LRC programs that provide instructional and support services to patrons. Appendix A of the Standard is a checklist of Basic LRC Services. Since CCAC offers most of the services listed and often exceeds those listed as technology-based user services, CCAC libraries meet this standard. The standard specifies five elements characteristic of quality LRC user services: (1) a variety of services to support and expand instructional capability, use technology, share resources, and expand access; (2) services that meet the instructional, informational, and off-campus access needs of patrons; (3) necessary equipment to access information and assist instruction; (4) instructional support production services; and (5) an information literacy program. Although CCAC libraries generally meet all of these criteria, a weakness exists when it comes to services provided to off-campus centers and the implementation of a college-wide information literacy program.

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

65

When measured against ACRL Standard 6 (Appendix 11.2), all four campus library collection sizes (by volume count) are deficient, except for Boyce Campus, which is close to the 60,000 volumes recommended for their FTE enrollment. Using these standards as a benchmark, all libraries fall short. (South holds 34% of the recommended volumes; North, 21%; Allegheny, 42%; and Boyce, 67%). Since 2000, and prior to completion of an extensive system-wide library resources inventorying project, all campus libraries did significant weeding, thus causing the collection count to decrease. Although important, the size of the collection is only one measure of the quality of a library collection. For example, at South, collection weeding accounted for a 10 to 20 percent reduction in the collection. Analysis of periodical collections shows that all campuses fall short of the number of subscriptions recommended by the ACRL Standards (Appendix 11.2). To meet recommended minimums, campuses would need to double subscriptions. In fact, Allegheny would have to triple theirs. When comparing the number of electronic databases CCAC has with those at other multi-campus colleges (Exhibit 3) the College compares favorably. Also, some of these subscription shortfalls are offset by system-wide library subscriptions to electronic, full-text data bases. The College ITS division has partnered with LLS to provide and maintain the computer hardware and software required to support system-wide goals. Finally, AV collections, video, and film collections seem adequate. For “Other Items,” which includes microform reels, audio materials, cartographic, etc., all the libraries fall short of the recommended minimums. In fact, most hold only 5-30% of the recommended minimums.

With reference to physical space and other library resources, ACRL standards state that an LRC should provide adequate space for a variety of materials formats, study and research, public service activities, library materials processing and production, and staff offices. Since physical facilities have not changed much since the previous reaccredidation 10 years ago and because space was not cited as a problem then, it is assumed that, for the most part, library facilities are adequate to achieve LLS goals within national standards for excellence. Bibliographic Instruction: A Learning Resource Each campus library provides bibliographic instruction (BI) to students. To increase contextual relevance, librarians generally provide customized BI in conjunction with a course assignment. Typically, librarians and faculty collaborate to determine the objectives of this instruction. Instructional sessions may include learning to use various reference resources to complete an assignment or learning how to access material through databases and the Internet. Instruction generally includes elements of critical thinking, help with identifying appropriate and valid sources of information, and practice distinguishing scholarly and reputable sources form unreliable ones. Most requests for BI are initiated by faculty, although several times a year all teaching faculty receive invitations to collaborate with librarians to customize library instructional sessions for their classes. The majority of BI is connected to English, Speech and Developmental Studies courses, with additional connections to courses in Sociology, Psychology and History. There has been some discussion in the LLS, Bibliographic Task Group regarding the value of tutorials and especially for posting them online. Online posting seems especially valuable for students whose instructors do not arrange for BI, for off-campus students and for DL students. Moreover, reference librarians are always available to help individual students with BI questions and skills. Information Literacy The Explorers assessed information literacy indirectly by reviewing approximately 50% of the course outlines on file. Ninety were reviewed. Of those reviewed in Natural Sciences, many courses, especially those in Biology (76% reviewed) and Biotechnology (71% reviewed) mention objectives such as: “the student will become an independent learner…observe, classify, interpret, and analyze

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

66

data and information…be a problem solver, and will employ logical thinking and the scientific method in decision making…understand, analyze, and synthesize information contained in medical records…become aware of modern problems in their field…articulate a viewpoint on an issue in a scientific field and to present this in an oral or written presentation, and …use the literature in the field of study and other resources for problem solving.” When designating the resources to be used in courses, few course syllabi mentioned use of the library, the use of journals in the field, and Internet searching. None specifically mentioned any version of library instruction as part of the course. Within the Humanities and Social Sciences, Explorers examined more than 100 course outlines. Although some encourage outside reading and library research, fewer than 20% included information literacy elements. ACCESS FOR ADULT LEARNERS In support of the College’s M/V/V/G, college policies, practices, and procedures are fashioned to provide access for adult learners. In direct support of instruction when classes are in session, all academic, technical, career and scientific labs, libraries, bookstores, computer facilities, registration, and financial aid and placement testing offices/services are regularly scheduled throughout both daytime and evening hours as well as on weekends. For some of these services such as registration and placement testing, additional hours are scheduled during peak service times such as immediately before the beginning of an academic term. The College Catalog lists additional college services and facilities available to both traditional and adult learners. Some of the state-of-the-art facilities which are particularly responsive to adults are: natural and physical sciences laboratories and the nursing, allied health, and food sciences instructional laboratories; theater and recreational facilities including gymnasiums, health/fitness centers, aerobics, and weight areas at each campus; even an Olympic sized swimming pool at Allegheny. Moreover, since all academic programs are designed to prepare students to either continue with their education or to seek immediate employment, life-long learning is the focus. Thus, because the College has developed articulation agreements with many four-year colleges, it offers transfer programs (i.e., University Parallel Programs) which are enhanced by the services of a transfer counselor and which guarantee CCAC students admission and transfer preferences at the receiving schools both in PA and out-of-state. For those planning for immediate employment after graduation, CCAC’s career programs provide clinical, cooperative education, and apprenticeship experiences, as well as both theoretical and practical classroom instruction from qualified field practitioners. Most courses required for program completion are scheduled at a variety of times and days during both day, evening, and weekend hours. For an example of how the College experiments with alternative scheduling, see the case-study presented below. Because adults are particularly successful using Distance Learning (DL) options, during the last several years, DL has become an increasingly popular choice with adult students. At CCAC, DL refers to the delivery of instruction using nontraditional formats and methods allowing students the flexibility to craft schedules to fit their lives on-the-job or with their families. Instruction is provided through courses on the Internet, telecourses, videoconferencing, and blended course delivery modes. These credit courses meet all degree requirements at CCAC and transfer to four-year schools. To further accommodate adult learners taking DL courses, seven proctored testing sites are now available throughout the county, and more DL course testing is being done via the Internet. Other credit program options available to adult learners include special programming targeting particular segments of the adult population. One such option is the Honors Program which is designed to unite academically outstanding students and faculty in the pursuit of academic excellence and to foster scholarship, excellence, and communication and leadership skills in these students. Honors students must design and execute a unique enrichment project while being closely mentored by their instructor. Another example of how the College responds to adult learners: CCAC has also

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

67

been approved by the Commonwealth as a provider of Act 48 courses which meet the continuing education and certification requirements for public school teachers in PA. Finally, because the College developed a collaborative degree program with Indiana University of Pennsylvania, students can earn a four-year degree in either Elementary Education or Business Management while remaining at CCAC. In addition to the credit course options discussed above, at more than 400 Allegheny County locations, the College also offers a variety of continuing education programming (credit and noncredit) providing for personal enrichment and problem-solving at home and at work. Adults may enroll either as individuals or through businesses, community groups, professional organizations, and governmental agencies. Although adult students expect a full range of academic programming from the College, they are also consumers who now come to the College with a Wal-Mart mentality. They want to find all of the goods and services bundled together in one convenient place. The College has responded to their needs by providing multiple services to facilitate, augment, and enrich their classroom experiences. Some of the services attractive to adult learners are listed in Appendix 11.3. A Case Study in Alternative Scheduling for Adult Learners This case study is presented here as an example of how the College continues to assess the effectiveness of particular alternative strategies for attracting and accommodating adult learners. To accommodate adults the College provides Fastrack and accelerated courses. A comparison of the outcomes achieved by students in both Fastrack and traditionally scheduled courses (Appendix 11.4) reveals higher completion rates and grade point averages and lower class sizes. Additionally, data from a Fastrack student survey documents strong student support for these courses. Of the 85 Fastrack students surveyed, 83 indicated that the courses were scheduled conveniently and that these courses provided knowledge and skills valued at work. There was less unanimity concerning the pace of Fastrack courses. While almost 79% of the students felt the instructional pace was “just right,” 12% stated that it was too fast. Instructors interviewed for this report said that teaching and learning in this format had both advantages and disadvantages. Some of the advantages listed were as follows: (1) since course content is covered quickly, there is a reduced need to review material as frequently; (2) students are able to focus more on the content because they are concentrating on only one course; and (3) Fastrack schedules were less disruptive to student employment schedules. For the most part, instructors preferred the 8-week vs. the 4-week schedule and didn’t like the eight-hour classes on Saturdays. In conclusion, Fastrack faculty agreed that the benefits of immersion in the subject matter outweighed any disadvantages. The occupational and academic deans and other administrators interviewed all believed that CCAC schedules sufficient courses to accommodate the needs of adult learners. However, only a fourth of those interviewed believed that the Fastrack programs encourage the development of cohort groups among adult learners because these students do not normally move through an entire certificate or degree program together. In terms of achievement of learning outcomes, one fourth of the administrators interviewed do not think that adult learners in Fastrack programs achieve the same quality or quantity of outcomes as traditionally scheduled students. This perception is not supported by an examination of the (departmentally approved) common course syllabi. The outcomes listed in these courses do not differ from traditionally scheduled classes. Moreover, because CCAC Fastrack students have the same access to college resources and services, such as tutoring, science and technical labs, libraries, computer labs, registration, and placement testing, course quality need not be

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

68

compromised when schedules are shortened. The perception of one half of the deans and administrators interviewed is that the number of Fastrack courses and programs offered is limited and could be expanded. PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT WITH REGARD TO EDUCATIONAL OFFERINGS Planning

The use of various means of assessment of educational offerings contributes to an environment of continuous improvement at the College. Regular feedback on the value of programs offered to students (credit and noncredit) is vital to the academic planning process. The College Vision Statement affirms that CCAC “will be the college of choice for the community and an exemplary learning community.…” To achieve this goal, planning must include enhanced data collection enabling the College to anticipate responses to technological changes and to labor market needs, while sustaining academic excellence and credibility. The institutional goals specified in the College Plan provide the framework required for program development and assessment.

The 1991 Student Development Plan guides programming and funding for Student Life services and programs. The five major program areas specified by this document are apparent in the programmatic decisions being implemented. The activities planned for the next year are based on the successes and shortfalls of similar activities as measured by attendance data and student perceptions as measured on student surveys. The mission of student development services is “…to provide students with comprehensive experiences contributing to their academic, physical, personal, social, and professional success.” For the services provided by the Library and Learning Services Department, planning seems problematic. For the period from 1999 - 2001, LLS Task groups functioned as LLS planning groups. The task groups included groups for College Centers, Bibliographic Instruction, Circulation Consistency, Serials Collection Development, and the CCAC Library website. Each group, consisting of library staff and chaired by a Librarian, reported their findings to the LLS Directors. The groups were charged with analyzing data associated with their annual assignment, then making recommendations to the directors. While the task groups were instrumental in accomplishing certain LLS tasks such as organizing the appearance, delivery, and content of the library’s website, uniform circulation practices, and a consolidation of the periodical holdings, there remains some sentiment among librarians that LLS needs to follow through on some additional recommendations. The current Fastrack or accelerated programs at CCAC appear to facilitate student success. For example, a certificate program in Surgical Technology graduates approximately 30 students annually who get jobs as surgical technicians. Accelerated programs tend to attract highly motivated, career oriented students. The College Planning Committee needs to explore expanding Fastrack courses and programs as a means for demonstrating the College’s role in workforce and economic development. Data on fast track classes suggests that eight-week course schedules are preferred vs. four-week courses, and that the College needs to be open seven days a week in order to offer students a variety of start dates and class hours. Additionally, there needs to be a renewed effort to apply for grant funding to support additional College and employer partnerships. Task analysis, occupational inventories, employer satisfaction surveys, and graduate follow-up studies are important tools and data sources for College planning. Outcomes Assessment

Chapter Eleven: Educational Offerings

69

Ongoing assessment of the College’s course and program quality is achieved by multiple approaches that include institutional data collection and assessment, the establishment of liaisons with local and regional employers, maintenance of career advisory boards that that oversee programs, surveys of current students and graduates, and partnering with similar institutions to benchmark best practices. Although all of these assessment strategies occur, the College implements no comprehensive assessment plan. For Student Life programming, outcomes assessment is dependent upon data from the SSS and data from informal interest surveys. These data guide the ways campus programming meets the development needs of students. However, there is no comprehensive, college-wide assessment plan being implemented. For several years the College has collected data on student perceptions of library services from the Student Satisfaction Survey (Exhibit 65). This survey measures student satisfaction with the hours of service, the library facilities, and helpfulness of staff. On a five-point rating scale, for 1992, the libraries were rated at 4.11 against the national norm of 4.15; for 2002, they were rated at 4.15 against the national norm of 4.16. In addition, the libraries collect outcomes indicators on various services. For both information and research statistics, the number and nature of questions asked by students are indicators of ability to access, retrieve, and use information. These statistics include questions on the library’s electronic resources, online catalog, print materials, and general information queries. For circulation statistics, the numbers indicate the extent of the use of library materials for information and research. For printed resources and the library system web page, data is gathered on the use of handouts and other study aids in both printed and electronic formats that library staff members use during library content and information literacy instruction. For classroom and library assignments, outcomes are indicated by the students’ ability to apply the skills taught in library instructional sessions. Finally, in order to determine the effectiveness of library instruction in meeting student needs in information literacy, the librarian and instructor collaborate on a plan to customize and evaluate outcomes both during and following instructional sessions. However, there is no college-wide assessment plan being implemented. The primary method of assessing Fastrack program outcomes is by monitoring the completion rates and grade point averages achieved by these accelerated students. As a rubric of this self-study, two assessment instruments were developed, one for students and another for administrators. Summaries of the findings from this research can be found in Exhibit 39. In the absence of more formal assessment data, measurement of Fastrack program outcomes is often anecdotal, in the form of students’ promotions in their careers, employer communications, students’ continuing education, referrals to the accelerated programs by graduates, and faculty satisfaction with teaching experiences.

Recommendations

1. Implement a systematic process for reviewing Faculty Course Outlines to ensure their congruence with the departmentally approved Common Course Syllabi.

2. Collect and store all noncredit program/course evaluations and student outcomes data in a single place to allow for system-wide analyses.

3. Design a strategy, within College governance processes, to get teaching faculty and LLS professionals to partner to make information literacy an integral part of all new courses and programs.

4. Institute an annual assessment of the outcomes of Fastrack programs and courses and use these data for planning, program assessment, and student recruitment.

Chapter Twelve: General Education

70

Chapter 12: General Education

OVERVIEW From its inception, the Community College of Allegheny County has included general education courses as part of the Associates Degree Program requirements. Although CCAC does not explicitly define general education nor its goals or outcomes, the College believes that “college graduates should have an awareness of the world around them, as well as general knowledge and skills in specific areas” (College Catalog, Exhibit 11). Recently, there has been a dialogue within the college community as to the appropriate general education course requirements and their level of rigor in various programs, such as the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW)’s Associate’s Degree Program in Electrical Construction and the Associate’s of Applied Science Degree program. Task Force Explorers expect that the interest in these discussions, along with the findings of this report, will lead CCAC to a well-defined concept of general education, along with clear goals, measurable student learning outcomes, and the integration of these into planning. But, at present, with this work yet to be completed, Explorers were unable to find meaningful reference to an institutional set of educational goals that details the competencies students should have at the completion of a degree. Method of Analysis Explorers for this chapter focused only on the College’s current general education requirements in the Associate’s Degree programs. Explorers evaluated CCAC’s general education requirements, using as a standard the fundamental elements defined in “Characteristics of Excellence.” In this framework, Explorers examined the College’s general education requirements to ascertain if they were clearly and accurately described in official publications, evidenced in the degree programs, aligned with the institutional mission, demonstrated by students’ oral and written proficiency, and assessed in students’ learning. Explorers then researched the use of assessment outcomes in the college planning process and investigated whether the curricula are designed in ways that students acquire and demonstrate essential skills, including communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning; critical analysis and reasoning; technological competency; and information literacy. GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS IN OFFICIAL PUBLICATIONS

Catalog and Website In terms of general education requirements, a review of the College Catalog (2003 edition) revealed no specific segment dedicated to direct definition of general education requirements. Few specifics were given with regard to General Education (GE) courses as they apply to a variety of programs (9) and Explorers had trouble finding a chart that would have helped students determine General Education Distribution Requirements for the AS and AA degrees. CCAC does disseminate descriptions of its GE requirements through its website, where they mirror the course distributions posted in the catalog. GE is one of three topics under “Degree Components.” Program Flowcharts Program flowcharts are available in the registration/advisement areas of each campus (Exhibit 58). The purpose of these flowcharts is to enable students to see, at a glance, which courses they have completed and which courses they still need to take in order to graduate. The flowcharts are updated

Chapter Twelve: General Education

71

as programs change, but the latest versions include the course title, code, and credit value. With the development of these flowcharts, students and advisors are able to track progress toward program completion. GENERAL EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS IN DEGREE PROGRAMS Explorers examined associate degree programs to see if the general education courses were of sufficient scope to enhance students’ intellectual growth and whether or not the College required at least 15 semester hours of GE for graduation; both the AS and AA degrees meet this standard. At CCAC, General Education is synonymous with Distribution Requirements, and these constitute a common core of knowledge obtained by taking a number of specific courses. These requirements are further divided into required courses, restricted electives, and general electives. No general distribution requirements are listed for the Associate’s in Applied Science degree. Ninety-eight percent of the programs meet the standards listed. The College uses its advising offices to ensure that students meet the GE requirements in their degree programs. Also, when students apply for graduation, their courses are reviewed by an academic advisor through the use of Graduation Check Sheets that are also posted on the website; these courses are then certified by the registration coordinator, thus providing another opportunity to assess the completion of the GE requirements. Task Force Explorers found that requirements for general education were left undistinguished from other degree requirements The table in Appendix 12.1, reformatted from the College Catalog (28), reveals the general education requirements all students seeking Associate’s degrees in Arts and Sciences must complete before moving into the workplace or to a transfer institution. GENERAL EDUCATION AND INSTITUTIONAL MISSION Explorers examined the College’s catalog in order to clarify the College’s promotion of general education requirements in light of the Middle States definition as offered in Characteristics of Excellence. Task Force Explorers found two sections that seemed to reflect slightly different philosophies on the part of the College: “critical areas of knowledge,” which lists nine different competencies/subjects/divisions under the title of "What to Expect From Your Educational Plan," (9) and the aforementioned “distribution requirements” (27). The links between these two areas of the catalog are implicit in some ways, but unclear in others, and their presentation would be made clearer if one were offered in the context of the other. A general review of four specific programs, Business (program code 004), Liberal Arts and Sciences (002), Nursing (575), and Automotive Technology (349), indicated that general education requirements are evidenced in the following ways:

• Oral and written communication skills are developed by all four programs requiring ENG101 and 102 in the first and second semester except NRN, where these may be developed before entering the program or taken no later than the 2nd and 3rd semester;

• Speech is required or recommended as a humanities course in all programs; • Nursing requires technological competency and information literacy as a pre-requisite to

the program; • Liberal Arts and Sciences and Business require a computer elective in the first semester; • Automotive Technology does not identify a specific computer course but the ATE

courses all include a computer component;

Chapter Twelve: General Education

72

• Scientific and quantitative reasoning can be accomplished in the math and science classes required in all four programs; and

• Critical analysis and reasoning can be accomplished through the variety of classes required in all four programs.

Explorers assessed the minutes of the Curriculum Subcommittee of College Council to determine whether the inclusion of general education requirements in both transfer and technical/career programs is an adequate part of the curriculum process (Exhibit 12). Although concern regarding general education requirements in both career and transfer programs is evidenced throughout the reviewed minutes, their application is not consistent. While it is clear that General Education is meaningful in almost all programs of study at CCAC, and does indeed help shape the curriculum of these programs, its definition by the College needs to be further detailed and its relevance to program review and curriculum change further explored. GENERAL EDUCATION AND FACULTY COURSE DESCRIPTIONS Explorers analyzed some of the common course syllabi as they compared to campus faculty course descriptions to ascertain the level of inclusion and application of general education requirements and essential skills. Team Explorers looked at eight courses:

• BIO151 General Biology 1 • CIT115 Information Technology: Hardware and Software • ENG102 English Composition 2 • MAT108 Intermediate Algebra • NRN101 Introduction to Nursing • SPH101 Oral Communication • PHL155 Ethics • SOC101 Introduction to Sociology

Each Explorer examined and analyzed a total of four faculty course descriptions for each course at each campus and compared them to the CCAC common course syllabi. Explorers found that the course descriptions’ general education requirements and essential skills were similar to those in common course syllabi. GENERAL EDUCATION, ETHICS, VALUES, AND DIVERSITY To ascertain the degree to which CCAC incorporates ethics, values, and diversity into General Education courses consistent with the College’s mission, explorers posed the following research questions:

1. How does the College assure that its career and transfer programs include general education course work that studies values, ethics and diverse perspectives?

2. Which courses embrace these studies, and how do their teachers demonstrate that students are learning from them?

3. Does the College include as part of its curriculum development general education courses that incorporate the study of values, ethics, and diverse perspectives?

Explorers researched common course syllabi, program reviews, and college sponsored grants, and conducted a college-wide survey to determine whether or not the study of values, ethics and diverse perspectives is included in individual courses.

Chapter Twelve: General Education

73

In the review of every available common course syllabus, 78 courses in 39 disciplines included ethics/values in either the course topics and/or descriptions, or these were listed in the learning objectives themselves. Explorers reviewed a random sample of 10 common course syllabi to determine how they addressed diversity, and found no references to diversity as it relates to learning environments, student-learning outcomes, impact on faculty teaching, institutional commitment, classrooms, and discussion and issues of academic quality. Program Reviews

Of the 17 program reviews done from March 1, 2001 through May 2, 2003, 13 specifically mention the recognition of diversity, three mention values, and five mention ethics (Exhibit 20). The two areas that specifically addressed diversity, ethics, and values were psychology and education in the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Faculty Survey Explorers sent an email survey to all faculty members, full-time and part-time, that included the following questions:

1. Course taught? 2. Do the courses you teach incorporate the study of values, ethics, and diverse perspectives? 3. How do you know if students enrolled in your courses have gained a better understanding of

diversity, ethics, and values? 4. Comments?

Twenty-seven faculty members teaching general education courses responded, 17 of whom teach career specific courses and10 of whom teach math. General education responses included those from anthropology, biology, developmental studies, English, history, philosophy, political sciences, psychology, sociology, oral communications, and student development services. All faculty teaching general education courses responded that the study of values, ethics, and diverse perspectives is part of their courses. Some cited specific topics covered such as textbook excerpts, authors of ethnic and social perspectives, assigned readings, ethics and morals discussions, choices of media, and group work. Some courses have whole sections devoted to the study of these areas. Others are more general with these topics threaded throughout the course. Some instructors evaluated whether or not students had a better understanding of diversity, ethics, and values through very specific means, such as essay questions, class discussions, term papers, writing assignments, and argumentative or analytical compositions. Other evaluation was less formal, such as students' comments and questions after class and unsolicited notes from students. In the area of mathematics, two instructors responded that they incorporate values and ethics into their classroom teaching. Interestingly, in the responses from the occupational areas, such as business and computer science, instructors commented that even though the focus of their courses was career or skill training, they discussed and often tested for the ethical use of the computer, ethical questions relating to accounting and ethical issues in business. In the areas of hotel management and business management, diversity was a focus. Social work emphasizes all three areas and evaluates the students’ learning through reflective essays, testing, and observation in practicum.

Chapter Twelve: General Education

74

In conclusion, instructors teaching general education courses and some career courses report that they address the study of values, ethics, and diverse perspectives, though these principles aren't consistently reflected in program reviews and common course syllabi.

ASSESSMENT OF PROFICIENCY IN GENERAL EDUCATION STUDIES

A major goal of General Education is to unify the educational experience of all students by providing them with curricula that will serve as a foundation of knowledge, competencies, and skills essential for success in academia, as well as the workplace. The degree to which a student masters course content and/or performance skills is determined by assessment. The three key questions that the College must ask in order to assess learning outcomes are what do students learn, how well are they learning, and how does the institution know what they are learning. Explorers used these three key questions in examining whether CCAC’s General Education Requirements assure that upon degree completion, students are proficient in oral and written communication, scientific and quantitative reasoning, technological capabilities, and information literacy What Do Students Learn?

In determining the extent to which CCAC’s General Education requirements assure that students learn skills as defined by Middle States, Task Force Explorers examined the general education requirements of the Associate’s in Arts and Associate’s in Science Programs. In 1999, the college-wide English Discipline, as part of program review, conducted a survey of 12 institutions to which CCAC students frequently transfer to benchmark basic course information, syllabus information, course assignments, and exit criteria. The results were used to update and revise the syllabi, objectives, and learning outcomes for core courses. The study determined that, largely, students in CCAC courses are learning competencies equivalent to their peers in most other institutions. The study is an example of how CCAC uses benchmarks set by transfer institutions to validate the learning outcomes in core courses of the General Education Requirements (Exhibit 35). Moreover, the review of common course syllabi revealed that performance indicators of information literacy-critical thinking and reading skills, research skills and problem solving skills- are embedded within the courses that satisfy CCAC’s General Education Requirements. Thus, once again, these general education skills are part of many CCAC courses, though, beyond the posting of grades, their remains no reliable means of assessing what students learned in many such courses. One example of how learning is sometimes undercut by an incomplete description of requirements in general education is in student acquisition of computer skills. While CCAC does not require a computer information technology course in all programs, the College Catalog strongly recommends “that students complete a three-credit computer skills course so that all graduates become computer literate in their field of study" (28). To ensure students have the basic technological skills to move forward in their education, a computer information technology course is an essential part of the core curriculum. However, 23 out of the CCAC’s 140 programs do not require a computer literacy course. How Well Are Students Learning? How Does the Institution Know?

Assessment of the learning outcomes of General Education Requirements is a multi-faceted task, including the measurement of direct and indirect performance indicators. Course content mastery and assignment of grades are classified as direct performance indicators, whereas student satisfaction,

Chapter Twelve: General Education

75

employee surveys, and application of core learning outcomes to higher level courses are considered indirect indicators. Although CCAC provides internships, cooperative education placements, and work study experiences that give enrolled students opportunities to practice skill sets learned in classes identified by the Explorers as General Education courses, there are no standard exit exams administered to measure general education proficiency levels. Instead, A-F or Audit grades are given upon the completion of classes. GE courses provide practical application skill practices to students during class enrollment via in-class oral participation, oral presentations, panel presentations, chapter summary presentations, and written work. In a college-wide survey conducted in Fall 2003, Department Chairpersons in English, mathematics, oral communication and science were asked if common final assessments were used to evaluate students’ mastery of course objectives. Respondents indicated that final assessments are based only upon the judgment of the instructor One general indication of student success in all courses is the College's Grade Distribution Report. It indicates the success rate of all students registered for the course using a “D” or better as a success indicator (see Exhibit 5). Another source of indirect assessment of CCAC’s General Education Program is through the articulation agreements CCAC has with transfer institutions. This is an indirect measurement that the objectives and learning outcomes of CCAC courses are acceptable to other institutions. In 10 of the 12 institutions identified by the English discipline in their 1999 study, CCAC has a core to core articulation agreement. Moreover, the University of Pittsburgh, the institution to which more CCAC students transfer than any other at 24%(CCAC Graduate Survey, Exhibit 37), has a core-to-core agreement with CCAC in the College of Arts and Sciences, the College of Business Administration, and the School of Health and Rehabilitation Science. Students’ assessment of their learning experience is yet another measure of learning outcomes. In The Planning and Institutional Graduate Survey Report, students indicated that the quality of preparation in CCAC’s largest program areas (University Parallel Transfer, Business, Health, and Social Service) was in the “good” to “very good” categories in the range of 77.2% to 75.6% respectively. The same group responded either “satisfied” or “very satisfied” in a range of 88% to 84.4% to the prompt, “Level of Satisfaction by Program Area.” While the report indicates their employment status, title, and salary, the report does not survey their success at transfer institutions. The graduate follow-up data gathered by Institutional Research is intended to provide information as to whether or not CCAC graduates possess sufficient training and knowledge to perform their professional responsibilities. However, as has been noted in every College Program Review that has been completed, the response rates have been very low to this survey, so available data is not consistently reliable. Although the College has a Graduate Guarantee Program that provides employers with the right to have any of CCAC's graduates return to CCAC free of charge if they do not have the expected and appropriate skills, the College does not promote this initiative. Deficiencies in Student Learning Outcomes Assessment in General Education The initial step the Explorers took to determine whether or not CCAC effectively studies and assesses student learning outcomes was to identify the tools that are currently used to measure them. Explorers found that while various instruments and processes are in place, many of these don’t measure student learning.

Chapter Twelve: General Education

76

In the Explorers's search of institutional measurement of student learning outcomes, Explorers found that while student exit and Graduate Survey information exists, the surveys are not designed to assess student learning; instead, the student survey solicits information and opinion regarding student environment and culture (Exhibit 37). The graduate survey gathers information regarding the success of students in obtaining employment or transfer experiences to a four-year school, and the exit surveys summarize only cursory information. Therefore, the surveys are designed to capture general opinions of and satisfaction with CCAC programs in terms of preparation and opportunity, but the instruments solicit very broad responses to programs and are not tailored to students’ specific curriculum. The ineffectiveness of these instruments can be seen in curriculum proposals. In its review of 14 randomly selected college programs, Explorers looked at each change in curriculum proposal submitted to the College's Curriculum Committee to determine the degree to which institutional measures of student learning assessment were used for curricular change. Of the programs studied, Explorers found the results of the student, graduate, and exit surveys did not play a role in providing outcomes assessment measures that led to curricular improvement.

Recommendations

1. Develop a clear and concise statement of CCAC's philosophy of general education in the College's M/V/V/G and print it in the College Catalog and other appropriate publications.

2. Consolidate information in the College Catalog into a clearly defined section that covers all aspects of the general education/distribution requirements.

3. Locate General Education Requirements on one of the first pages of the college website, and establish a keyword link to these requirements to enhance student accessibility.

4. Clearly define the core of General Education courses to ensure rigorous general education requirements in CCAC’s transfer and career programs.

5. Establish clear criteria for the measurement and application of essential General Education skills.

6. Include references to the study of values, ethics, and diverse perspectives in all programs of study and use Program Review to assure that these will be incorporated.

7. Require--rather than recommend--that all students take a computer information technology course or otherwise demonstrate basic competency.

8. Develop college-wide exit criteria and common assessment indicators for each general education course, and revise curricula in light of these measures.

9. Develop performance indicators for information literacy.

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

77

Chapter 13: Related Educational Activities OVERVIEW With four campuses, seven centers, a thriving Distance Learning program, a multi-faceted noncredit program, numerous certificate programs, and many flexible contractual relationships with affiliated providers, CCAC offers educational opportunities in every area of Allegheny County and increasingly beyond county, state, and even national borders. CCAC works to maintain educational standards through every method of delivery and at every site, and the response from students and county citizens has been positive. Still, there are areas in each program that could be further strengthened. BASIC SKILLS Developmental education is crucial to CCAC's mission, particularly in credit programs. “More than 50% of all first time students in community colleges need …developmental work in one or more basic skill areas…” (Roueche, Ely, and Roueche 5, Exhibit 44). At CCAC, there are two levels of developmental education in math, writing, and reading (Developmental Studies, as it is defined by the College). Students studying at the College may be required to take courses in one or both levels of developmental education in each of these disciplines in order to prepare them for the rigors of credit, college-level course work. Placement Testing Placement testing determines whether students need developmental course work and to which level they are assigned. First time, full-time students are required to take placement tests primarily through the computerized COMPASS tests, sponsored by American College Testing (ACT). Some students with disabilities and at College Centers are tested through the Test for Standard Written English for writing, the MATH for math, and the DTLS for reading. Campus testing is offered frequently and at various times; testing at most Centers is more limited due to space and staffing. The College derived its placement test cutoff scores from national norms. A review of the cut scores in Spring 2002 resulted in lowering the reading cut scores. This proved to be a more accurate measure of students’ skill level because in 2003, for example, Allegheny Campus in-class assessments vertically changed 40 reading students, down from sixty in 2001. (Vertical change permits a student to move to a higher or lower course based on first week assessments designed to verify placement test scores.) While placement test scores are also verified in writing courses by first week assessments, it is difficult to ascertain the accuracy of the math tests because the Math Department does not do in-class pretests for purposes of vertical change. Because academic advisor training is not consistent across the College (see discussion in Chapter 9), there is only limited training in advising students based on their placement scores. For example, if there is a pattern of low scores that indicate the need for a student to seek additional help elsewhere, faculty advisors may refer students with a history of academic difficulty to support systems such as the Learning Center, ACT 101, Supportive Services, or the Perkins Vocational Program. Also, advisors may recommend students with borderline scores to re-test so they may advance to the higher level course. In the past, to respond to the needs of significantly under-prepared students, scores below a certain level across the board were used to identify those whose abilities were significantly below those expected at the college-level. These students were referred to an Adult Basic Education program

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

78

called BASAL, where they were reevaluated, or they were referred to an Assessment Specialist for reevaluation and referral to appropriate programs at CCAC or in the community. Funding cuts eliminated both programs. With COMPASS, there is not yet a formal method of identifying students whose skills are significantly below college-level. There is an adult basic education program at the Homewood Brushton Center, and its merits should be studied by the College to ascertain whether or not similar programs should be instituted at other campuses and sites. Understanding the Need for Developmental Course Work Other than the catalog and tabloid course descriptions, CCAC provides little information for advisors, non-developmental faculty or students on the need for developmental course work. The Admissions/Recruitment Counselors and Academic Advisors may discuss these issues with students at interviews on an individual basis. The College informs students about developmental courses by listing them in the catalog. The catalog and course tabloids also contain information on prerequisite skills for taking college-level courses such as eligibility for ENG101; however, there is no formal list of recommended courses in which students should enroll when they are under-prepared. Learning Supports for Developmental Education The major learning supports for developmental students include the Library and Learning Centers with in-house and online tutoring and Supportive Services for Students with Disabilities. On Allegheny Campus, the ACT101 program and the Perkins Vocational Education staff work with under-prepared vocational students via early warning programs, facilitated study, and various workshops. At Allegheny Campus, the Reading lab is a support, as is the African American Male Learning Community. Students are referred by advisors, faculty, tutors, outside agencies, and word-of-mouth. In his book In Pursuit of Excellence, John Roueche states, “A lack of data on learning outcomes and effectiveness of programs has left the colleges vulnerable to poor public policy decisions” (Roueche, Ely, Roueche, viii, Exhibit 44). While CCAC makes scattered efforts to look at outcomes for these learning supports, other than anecdotal information, there is little evidence to measure effectiveness. The Office of Supportive Services at Allegheny Campus collects data on student approval ratings and retention for LD Block and PAS Pre-college participants. The Vocational Supportive Specialists compare grades and retention for participants versus nonparticipants of their Facilitated Study Program. Assessment of the Success of CCAC’s Developmental Education Program Student success rates in CCAC’s developmental education courses vary according to the level into which students test. At CCAC, 14 percent of students initially enrolled in the lowest level of developmental math who go on to attempt college-level math are successful, while 30 percent of students enrolled in the lowest levels of developmental reading and writing courses who attempt college-level English earn a successful grade. This relatively low rate of success, while generally consistent with national levels, reveals the struggle under-prepared students often face in academic courses. The data that is available and that has been analyzed suggests that developmental course work completed successfully contributes to a student’s retention rate and academic progress. Students who began at the upper level of developmental education, once in a college-level writing course, perform

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

79

comparably to students who tested out of developmental courses in English; eighty-six percent of upper level developmental students earn a successful grade at the college-level compared with 87 percent of students who are initially placed in a college-level English course. In math, 71 percent of upper level developmental students succeed once they get to college-level math, compared with 80 percent of students who are initially placed in a college-level math course. A look at a four-year study of Developmental Studies course enrollment by campus reveals that Allegheny and South Campuses had the highest numbers, while Boyce and North Campuses numbers were significantly lower. A Planning and Institutional Research study in 2000 (Exhibit 30) comparing CCAC’s developmental course enrollment with enrollment nationwide showed that overall, CCAC’s developmental enrollment is 38 percent compared to 41 percent for U.S. two-year public colleges. However, CCAC’s reading enrollment was slightly above the national average. John Roueche says, "…an institution’s periodic evaluation of its developmental program is essential to determining effectiveness. The most effective and consistently timely evaluation of the developmental experience lies in data reporting the status of past and present developmental students” (116, Exhibit 44). CCAC has the infrastructure for an excellent developmental program but it lacks a systematic method of assessment and evaluation. CERTIFICATE PROGRAMS CCAC offers numerous certificate programs, most of which are founded in course work affiliated with Associate’s in Arts or Associate’s in Science programs, that are designed for students with more immediate need of employment. Throughout the College Catalog, career or occupational Associate and Certificate programs are described under their general career headings ("Health-Related Career Programs," "Careers in the Technologies: Applied Arts," etc.). These general career headings are then divided into two distinct areas that are listed separately, Associate’s Programs and Certificate/Diploma programs. Each introduction to a career area in a certificate/diploma program states these programs are

taken by students whose goal is to qualify for job placement as soon as possible. The courses that students take in these programs serve to help them develop the skills and knowledge they will need to prepare for entry-level positions in the specific field. Graduates of certificate programs who wish to continue their education may do so by applying to and completing the additional courses required by the associate degree program of their choice. (College Catalog, numerous places.)

Thus, almost all certificate programs offered at CCAC are developed within the context of full Associate's programs, and are introduced, reviewed, assessed, and changed within the framework of Program Review and governance processes described in many places in this report. (See, in particular, Chapter 4.)

Industry or National Review of Certificate Programs Many programs in Health-related, Technology, and Applied Service, Trade, and Apprenticeship programs have national, state, or industry standards that students graduating in certificate programs must meet in order to be properly certified for employment. These are probably the most effective means by which CCAC certificate programs are assessed, since students must meet standardized thresholds of competency. (This form of assessment is described in some detail in Chapter 14.) Furthermore, outside agencies that govern these certificate programs periodically must accredit them so that they continue to meet industry standards; when these agencies identify areas of concern,

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

80

certificate program coordinators must make changes in curricula that are then sent through governance. Thus, certificate programs affiliated with outside agencies remain on the cutting edge in their respective disciplines. A possible means by which certificate programs that are not accredited through outside agencies may be more effectively assessed and improved is through the study of those that are. By mirroring in general some of the program requirements in health-related and technical fields, all certificate programs may be similarly scrutinized, assessed, updated, and made more vital. Additional CCAC Certificate Programs CCAC has several certificate programs that are not affiliated with Associate’s Degree equivalents. Most of these are offered under the catalog title "Vocational Programs," and are run out of the College's North Campus for students with disabilities and/or special needs. These certificates all have the heading "Training for Persons Needing Learning Support," and are subdivided into specific certificates for environmental and janitorial services, food service, etc. All grades for these certificate programs are pass/fail, and success in a course is based on acceptable levels of competency for each skill or course. EXPERIENTIAL LEARNING CCAC offers no credit for experiential learning that isn't awarded through formally recognized tests described in Chapter 8. NONCREDIT OFFERINGS CCAC's noncredit courses are offered at literally hundreds of sites to tens of thousands of students each year; while these courses vary widely based on market analysis, student need, and student interest, the offerings are divided fundamentally into two categories: Lifelong Learning, which include skill-building and avocational courses, and Workforce Development, which trains and retrains workers in various career areas in southwestern Pennsylvania. In developing these lifelong and workforce noncredit offerings, directors adhere to the College’s M/V/V/G closely; in fact, directors address eight of the nine institutional goals. Program designers ensure the validity of the content of noncredit programs by a series of checks and balances developed by CCAC’s audit team, who monitor and maintain quality control. Directors work closely with business and industry to incorporate industry standards into curricula to enhance the quality of the content. Designing CCAC's Noncredit Offerings For Lifelong Learning, the process to design noncredit offerings is as follows: (1) Directors of each program collaborate with instructors, community organizations, the general public, local school districts, and businesses in order to develop the needs and interests of their constituents; (2) Directors address topical interests and current trends through market analysis, review competitor’s non-schedule publications, reschedule past successful noncredit offerings, replace unsuccessful offerings, and aim to develop and offer 15-20% new classes; and (3) Directors and secretarial support schedule classes into the Colleague system, which is used to produce the brochure mailed to the general public. The process used to design CCAC’s workforce noncredit offerings is as follows: (1) the director of the program collaborates with businesses, advisory boards, program sponsors, political and civic leaders, state and local government, foundations, non-profits, CBOs, unions, and active members in national, state, and local trade and professional organizations in order to identify and address

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

81

workforce training and development needs and to ensure that industry standards are being met; (2) after needs are identified, Directors and community partners schedule classes, write grants to support these areas of need, or meet with CCAC Foundation or local businesses in order to underwrite the costs of these identified needs; and (3) Directors and secretarial support then schedule classes into the Colleague system, which is again used to generate a brochure that is mailed to the target market. Administrative procedures for both courses are as follows: (1) create noncredit course syllabi; (2) seek appropriate approval; (3) enter course into the College’s electronic management system; and (4) offer the course at various locations. Qualifications of Noncredit Employees To maintain the high standard of excellence, instructors in the noncredit division are interviewed based on educational and experiential qualifications and content knowledge. Administrators in the noncredit division are hired based on policies and procedures of CCAC, which include a minimum of a master’s degree. Administrators are held accountable for their responsibilities through annual evaluations, review of monthly and semester reports, participation at division and department meetings, and analysis of financial and program success. Evaluation of Noncredit Offerings Noncredit course offerings are evaluated through course and instructor evaluations that are completed near the end of each course (Exhibit 50 ). CCAC’s evaluation process demonstrates that students have the knowledge, skills, or competencies upon completion of the program through employer and industry standardized testing, state educational gain results, and results of certification exam pass rates. Administrators assess the impact of these offerings on sources and uses of college resources through budget records and accounting statements of revenues and expenses for these programs and facility management analysis.

COLLEGE CENTERS, ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS, AND OTHER INSTRUCTIONAL SITES

CCAC's College Centers and instructional sites operate as de facto mini-campuses, offering similar programming and services as are found on the main college campuses. Though the centers do not have the level of physical plant or staffing that support the four campuses, the quality of teaching and learning at the centers remains as strong. The charge of this Task Force was to investigate the education-related activities at both branch campuses (a.k.a. “Centers”) and satellite facilities where the College delivers credit-level course work, and compare these to the standards at the College’s main campuses. Specifically, we were to compare the offerings by the Centers and satellite sites to those of rest of the College for “quality of instruction, academic rigor, and educational effectiveness….” In order to measure the educational effectiveness of course and program offerings at the centers and satellite sites, Explorers prepared a comprehensive survey that was administered to the deans responsible for each center and satellite. This survey sought to determine, for the four semesters from Fall, 2002 through 2nd Summer, 2003:

1. Student head counts 2. Full-time and adjunct faculty counts 3. Credit versus noncredit courses

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

82

4. Programs offered 5. Staff and administrative counts 6. Classroom and support facilities available

This survey was not administered to the four main college campuses. Student Enrollment and Faculty/Staff Ratios Student head counts are based upon the sum of the enrolled students for all class sections. If any one student was enrolled in three different classes, he/she were counted as three students. If he/she took one course at each of two campuses and one center, he/she was counted as 1 student in each of the locations. Explorers chose to use this method of counting students because numbering fte's by campus or center would have been difficult, since many students take courses at various sites. Further, use of the physical plant associated with campuses and sites is more accurately measured by actual student numbers than full-time equivalents. Students at the centers and satellite facilities make up 28% of the College’s total student count. Eighteen percent of the College’s students are taking classes at the centers during the evenings and weekends, which is equal to the total of the evening and weekend students at all of the campuses combined.

Student Enrollment: When and Where Day Evening Weekend & Other All Campuses: 66,309

(54%) 19,831 (16%)

2,568 (2%)

Centers and Satellites:

11,978 (10%)

11,227 (9%) 11,219 (9%)

The student-to-faculty ratios at the campuses and the centers are relatively similar. College-wide, there are 16.9 students per class (assuming 1 instructor per class). At the campuses, that ratio was 16.8 students per instructor, and at the centers the ratio was 17.1 students per instructor.

Enrollment: Where and When (by percent)

9%

2%

10%

9%

16%

54%

Campuses: Day (54%) Campuses: Evening (16%) Campuses: Other (2%)Ctrs & Satellites: Day (10%) Ctrs & Satellites: Evenings (9%) Ctrs & Satellites: Other (9%)

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

83

Student:Faculty Ratio

16.9 16.8 17.117.3 17.3 17.416.1

15.5

17.3

12.8

18.8

15.9

All Locations Campuses Ctrs & Satellites

Stud

ents

:Fac

ulty

All Classes Day Evening Weekend/Other While college-wide the number of sections taught by full-time versus adjunct faculty is relatively even (49% full-time versus 51% adjunct), the minor imbalance occurs mostly due to the classes taught at the centers and satellites (34% full-time versus 66% adjunct). There is no evidence, however, that the quality of instruction at centers and satellites suffers from the difference in numbers of full-time and adjunct faculty.

Educational Offerings Curricula and courses offered at the centers and satellites are identical, in terms of content and design, to those offered at the campuses. College center deans work in conjunction with campus academic deans and department heads in the scheduling, staffing, delivery, and evaluation of courses, coursework and instructors. A center's size and enrollment determines whether or not complete degrees and/or certificates can be offered on site. Staffing While 28% of all students are in classes at the centers and satellites, centers have less than 3% of all of the College’s employees to provide equivalent campus services (academic, business, and other). Most of the College Centers offer both credit and noncredit courses and programs, and must work with campus academic areas as well as with CCAC’s Division of Continuing Education. Center and satellite staff members also support facilities management, class and facility scheduling, and faculty scheduling and recruitment. Center staff members also provide services affiliated with the bursar, the bookstore, registration, purchasing, and communications and marketing. Facilities

Percent Students Taught by: Full-time: Adjunct Faculty

49%54%

36%

51% 46%

64%

All Locations Campuses Centers & Satellites

Taught by Full Time Faculty Taught by Adjunct Faculty

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

84

The ratio of students enrolled (i.e., seat count) to the number of physical seats in classrooms at the campuses and at the centers is relatively similar, and does not warrant further discussion. The same is true for student enrollment as compared to the number of seats/computers per student enrolled. Allegheny

Campus Boyce Campus

North Campus

South Campus

All Centers

Number of enrolled students per computer-lab seat

92 76 98 77 74

The physical facilities available to the students, and the support and maintenance of those facilities, are very different between the campuses and the centers. Several examples are: 1. Centers have no library facilities. 2. The centers, on the whole, do not have any bookstores on site. Books may be purchased on-site

for the first week or two of classes when arrangements are made by the center’s administrative staff.

3. The centers have fewer housekeeping staff. 4. Dining and vending facilities at the centers are inferior to those of the campuses.

Support Services While 28% of the College’s enrollment occurs at the centers, the staffing for academic support services of the centers and satellite facilities is inferior to that of the campuses. While hard data on the ratio of staff members to students dedicated to campus and centers is unavailable, certain services offered to students on campuses are rarely offered at centers. Evening and weekend students who require academic counseling most often are told to go the campuses during the daytime. Students also are less likely to use tutoring services at the site where they take classes, especially during the evening and weekend hours when students are present and tutors are not. Computer and audio-visual support is sporadic, and occasionally, problems with accessibility make movement of audio-visual equipment difficult, particularly when such equipment is needed for the instruction of students with disabilities. While the computer labs are adequate, there are rarely staffed with a knowledgeable lab-tech. For example, the Downtown Center only has open lab hours one day per week (9 a.m. to 9 p.m.), because of budget restrictions and a policy that states all labs must be monitored. Overall, while there are differences in services available to students at centers and satellites versus campuses, the quality of teaching and learning compares favorably to the campuses. Middle College The Boyce Campus Middle College Program was founded in 1996 for area high school students through a collaborative agreement between Boyce Campus and four eastern suburban school districts for the purpose of providing an alternative setting, environment, and expanded programming for 180 at-risk students. Students are taught high school courses by Pennsylvania certified teachers, though they may enroll in some college courses through the dual enrollment program. The Middle College initiative has been highly successful in achieving all of its goals as measured by a consultant group from Duquesne University in December of 2003. The college plans on implementing a second middle

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

85

college on the Allegheny Campus in partnership with Pittsburgh Public Schools some time in 2005, or when the public schools receive necessary funding.

DISTANCE LEARNING

CCAC offers four types of distance learning courses: Internet courses, tele-courses (VCR), web-enhanced courses, and videoconferencing courses. Each mode and course supports the College’s mission and goals by making quality education affordable and accessible to the community without the limits of time, place, and distance. Distance learning offerings also support the College’s mission and values by providing leadership in workforce training, support for the economic development of the region, and choices that meet the changing needs of the community.

CCAC has experienced significant growth in distance learning offerings in the last three years while continuing to support faculty and staff efforts to provide a high quality distance learning experience for students. The number of distance learning courses and programs has increased dramatically, and a limited number of degrees and certificates are now available entirely via distance learning options. In support of this growth and to ensure the quality of distance learning, the College has continued to fund and staff the Distance Learning & Instructional Technology (DLIT) Division and other departments.

CCAC uses established institution-wide quality measures for its DL offerings, along with those developed specifically for distance learning. DL faculty selection, training, and instructional support, combined with DL student support activities, form the basis for distance learning quality assurance. The Research and Development Sub-committee of College Council serves as a governing body for DL programs and initiatives while grant activities focus resources towards quality assurance efforts.

DL offerings are directly aligned with the College's M/V/V/G , and planning for distance learning offerings is guided by Middle States, CHEA, NEA, as well as state and federal departments of education. Program coherence and academic rigor are guided by an established program and curriculum review process, a distance learning course approval process, and review of American Federation of Teachers (AFT) guidelines.

DLIT works with most student and faculty support organizations throughout the College, including registration, advisement, counseling, Information Technology Services (ITS), and Library and Learning Services, to make all possible resources available to faculty, staff, and students. Distance learning faculty development, support, and resources have been expanded as the College recognizes problems and the need for growth. As faculty become competent with basic distance learning technologies, more sophisticated training and support is developed by DLIT staff.

Through DLIT and the ITS department, the College has provided computer and network infrastructure for all DL faculty, student computer labs, library, learning and testing centers, and staff office computers.

Consistency of Instruction in DL Offerings Distance learning faculty selection, training, and instructional support, combined with DL student support activities, form the basis for distance learning quality assurance at CCAC. DL faculty are selected under the same criteria used to select traditional faculty (see Chapter 10 of this report). All DL faculty also have post-secondary teaching experience, work experience in the discipline to be taught, and knowledge of industry-related software and systems, including certifications, where

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

86

appropriate. Institutional reports covering grade distribution, attrition rates, and Student Satisfaction Surveys are also used in course assessment.

Faculty development and support have become increasingly comprehensive and focused, as the College recognizes problems and the need for growth. As faculty become competent with basic distance learning technologies, more sophisticated training and support is developed by DLIT staff. Faculty are assisted by the Distance Learning Support team that trains new DL instructors on an individual and group basis and supports all DL faculty throughout their teaching and course development activities. The individual training sessions follow specific procedures and checklists. The workshops are usually more than one day, broken into several sessions covering various topics.

The Instructional Technology Staff assesses each faculty member’s progress in technical skills, and additional sessions are scheduled with the faculty member as needed. Faculty are strongly encouraged to take refresher courses to sharpen their skills. Training has evolved over time and is frequently evaluated and enhanced to meet specific needs. Blackboard training and support is offered in three categories designed to meet the changing needs of faculty at the beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels.

The introductory session for distance learning instructors assures each new instructor meets with a DLIT Instructional Technology Staff for a personalized introduction to teaching and learning via one of CCAC’s four distance learning modes. The instructor and the Institutional Technologist discuss pedagogical aspects of distance learning and agree on an individualized plan for ongoing instructor and course development.

Documents, job aides, and checklists included in the introductory session:

• Faculty Introduction Session Checklist outlines the critical points and resources to be discussed and demonstrated during the introduction session;

• Faculty Introduction Session Packet offers a comprehensive set of instructions, job aides, articles, and templates for faculty in support of their skill development and course design and creation efforts;

• Faculty Development Checklist outlines each phase of the instructor development process and is used to track the progress made by each instructor;

• Technology Skills Assessment is a comprehensive questionnaire completed by each instructor that results in a detailed assessment of their competence with the technical skills required for teaching distance learning courses. The Technology Skills Assessment measures each instructor’s skill level and comfort with email, online communication, file transfer, and other various computer software applications. The completed assessment is used to guide further instructor development activities in order to ensure each faculty member possesses the required skills; and

• Instructor Development Plan (IDP) outlines the instructor’s development needs and makes suggestions regarding how the instructor should proceed with their skill and course development activities.

The Research and Development Sub-Committee of College Council serves as a governance and guidance body for DL programs and initiatives at CCAC. Committee members review and implement DL policy as needed. The DLIT develops and maintains resources and support resources specifically for DL faculty and students. The Distance Learning Faculty Handbook, Distance Learning Student Guide, and distance learning Websites provide details of policies and procedures. These are related to instructor and course development, contact information, definitions of distance

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

87

learning course types, faculty responsibilities and expectations, CCAC testing center and proctoring information, and answers to frequently asked questions for faculty and students.

Grant activities implemented by DLIT have also contributed to course quality and academic rigor. These activities have included creation and implementation of an Internet course design process, faculty professional development activities, assessment software purchases, creation of online assessment tools, and an advisory service for DL students.

Regulation of Distance Learning Offerings

Research determined that distance learning offerings are guided by Middle States, CHEA, NEA, state DOE, and U.S.D.O.E. standards and recommendations. These guidelines are reviewed regularly. Any changes in course offerings are made in collaboration with the appropriate department chairs and deans and in accordance with the governance process. In addition to College Council governance described earlier, the College convened the Web-enhanced Course Committee to develop a definition and parameters for CCAC courses that combine the teaching and learning components of traditional classroom course work with online course activities. Committee members consisted of the DLIT dean (chairperson) and academic deans representing each campus.

Distance Learning Program Coherence and Stated Learning Outcomes

Program coherence and academic rigor are guided by an established program and curriculum review process, a DL course approval process, and review of AFT guidelines. Continuation of distance learning offerings is guided by department and program requirements. Course listings are updated regularly on the Distance Learning Website.

A January 2002 review of the 2002-2003 CCAC course catalog revealed that distance learning options could substitute for more than half of the traditional courses in 26 degrees and 14 certificates. To ensure program coherence, CCAC employs common course syllabi and specific program and degree expectations that include all distance learning courses. Each course syllabus contains specific and standard elements including a course description, learning outcomes, course topics, and reference, resource, or learning material to be used by each student. (See Chapters 11 and 12.)

A course or program offered with a DL matriculation option must go through the same rigorous process as traditional delivery. The syllabi are the same for DL and traditional programs. The Distance Learning website has a statement guaranteeing the same content and integrity for distance learning as traditional delivery. Distance learning courses go through a departmental approval process and instructors request permission to teach a course through their department head and academic dean. If the discipline dean gives approval he or she forwards the course request form to the Vice President of Instructional Technology for approval as appropriate.

The CCAC College Plan also dictates that program cohesion and appropriate distance learning outcomes will be achieved through assessment of all aspects of teaching and learning at CCAC; however, as established frequently in this report, the College has not yet implemented a comprehensive assessment plan that measures student learning, and the institutional weakness in this area is incumbent in distance learning offerings as well.

Partnerships and Distance Learning Offerings

The College maintains licensing agreements and memberships with consortia partners and contractors recognized as leaders in distance learning. These include Blackboard, the Instructional Technology

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

88

Council (ITC), A Community of Agile Partners in Education (CAPE), the Pennsylvania Virtual Community College (PAVCC), Consortium on Distance Education (CODE) and the College’s Information Technology Services department. The College has been using the Blackboard course management system for five years and the scope of the license has been expanded with the growth of DL offerings. The ITS department has made a similar commitment to provide infrastructure that will expand as requirements for distance learning have increased. The College has also recently reengineered the CCAC website to accommodate the current needs of DL students, staff and faculty. The most recent website project proposals depict the distance learning initiative as one of the College’s highest priorities. There are focus groups organized by the college president which are investigating changes to the basic business functions in the College to accommodate the needs of an online community of students.

Learning Resources and Distance Learning

Through the funding and staffing of DLIT, the College has dramatically increased and upgraded distance learning resources and made them widely available to all students and instructors. DLIT works with most student and faculty support organizations throughout the College, including registration, advisement, counseling, tutoring, information technology services, and library and learning services, to make all possible resources available to those who need them.

DL instructors are the first line of support for students having technical problems. If the faculty member cannot help, the student may contact DLIT. DLIT staff also work with the campus Supportive Services area when a student has special learning requirements. Links to library resources and other student services are present on or accessible from the Distance Learning website.

Online Tutoring provides help from tutors from all four campuses through the use of live chat room sessions and message boards. This service supplements the in-house services in that students can access tutoring most often at times when in-house tutoring services are closed. Students can access online tutoring services through any computer with an Internet service provider.

The website and DLIT publications list resources and information specifically for distance learning students, including staff contact information, definitions of DL course types, CCAC testing center and proctoring information, and answers to frequently asked questions. A distance learning student advisory service is also maintained by DLIT to provide comprehensive assistance for all current and future DL students.

CCAC Library and Learning Services (LLS) maintain online resources in support of DL students that include research tools, online catalogs, and services for students, faculty, and the community. The LLS Website combines the efforts of the four campuses and assists with research by simplifying connections to both the online catalog and online databases, in addition to providing links to Internet search engines and selected websites. CCAC students have access to all the electronic resources available at CCAC from one website, complete with full explanations and simple-to-use help guides.

Technical and Physical Plant Support for Distance Learning

Through the DLIT and ITS departments, CCAC has provided computer and network infrastructure and computer hardware and software. This supports faculty office computers for all DL faculty, in student computer labs available at all CCAC facilities, in library learning and testing centers, and for all DLIT and ITS staff office computers.

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

89

DLIT staff members dedicated to distance learning include the VP of Instructional Technology, Assistance Dean of Instructional Technology, Distance Learning Technology Specialist, Graphic Designer, Blackboard System Administrators, Senior Secretary, and Secretary Typist. ITS also provides staff to support DL as needed, including system support through Blackboard helpdesk assistance.

CCAC is using a product called WebAdvisor to enable online access to student, faculty, and employee information. Distance learning students may browse the list of open courses, register and pay for classes, view midterm and final grades, check schedules, view an unofficial transcript, check financial aid status, and search for open classes. Distance learning faculty may check class schedules, view and print rosters instantly, post midterm and final grades, and see stipend information.

DLIT updates and distributes a distance learning advisors handbook each semester to all Registration Directors and Advisors. They are encouraged to refer to it when meeting with students who are interested in taking DL courses.

Additional technical support and test proctoring staff are essential to address needs of a growing DL population. More testing sites with expanded hours and staff should be added to assist with distance learning test proctoring of students.

Online registration, online orientation, desktop advising, and online book order processing should be implemented to support students at a distance. Currently, students who wish to register for distance learning courses for the first time must meet with an advisor, and CCAC offers no means by which DL students can do this without visiting a campus. This limits enrollment of new students to those who are able to visit the campuses and centers.

CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIPS AND AFFILIATED PROVIDERS CCAC currently has a wide range of contractual relationships with external agencies or organizations that facilitate the educational experience of CCAC students (Appendix 3.2). Students enrolled in certain Nursing, Allied Health, Public Safety (EMS), Applied Services and Trades, and Social Science programs at CCAC are required, as a component of their curriculum, to participate in varying degrees of practical work experience in the form of a practicum, internship, or apprenticeship, with one or more external agencies. These experiences require CCAC’s students to be involved in the educational process off campus, yet still be under the supervision of the College. CCAC must provide appropriate oversight of these experiences to ensure that students in these experiential “classrooms” receive the same standards of quality of content, academic rigor, and educational effectiveness, as if in a classroom on campus. The College has more than 350 clinical affiliation agreements that include Allegheny County medical facilities, such as UPMC and West Penn Allegheny General, as well as affiliations outside of the county and a few outside the state. These agreements provide for partnerships with acute and chronic care facilities, medical centers, rehabilitation centers, and private practice clinics which collaborate with CCAC in the provision of clinical educational experiences for students enrolled in CCAC’s Nursing and Allied Health programs. Many of the sites additionally provide practicum experiences to students in certain continuing education courses such as public safety and other certification programs. CCAC also has a number of non-clinical partnerships (Appendix 3.2). Within these are five building trade apprenticeships, one of which is an internationally recognized program with the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). The College also has automotive apprenticeship

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

90

agreements with Ford ASSET, General Motors/ASEP, and Daimler Chrysler Corporation, in which at least 55 car dealerships serve as student training sites. A trade partnership with Duquesne Light provides an Associate’s Degree in Electrical Distribution Technology for those students who are interested in working on power lines. In addition, CCAC affiliates with 61 various community-based organizations, such as day care centers and school systems to provide practicums to students, enrolled in Social Science majors such as Child and Family Studies. Explorers wish to note that identifying the College’s external partners was a cumbersome process, especially in knowing what non-clinical affiliated relationships actually exist and who is responsible at the College for many of the programs. Since the Explorers could only identify the relationships based on survey responses and general knowledge, it is possible that contract relationships exist that were missed through the survey process. Foundations for Contractual Agreements Most of the College’s clinical affiliation agreements are supported by boilerplate language that defines the Nursing, Allied Health and EMS related partnerships. A review of the CCAC boilerplate affiliation agreement shows that it does contain important oversight provisions that:

• allow for the College to monitor the instruction provided by the external provider; • provide for the College to meet annually with the provider regarding program planning and

evaluation; and • provide protection to enrolled students in the event the contract is terminated.

If an agency will not accept the College’s contract language, the College then considers the agency’s contract language for terms of the agreement; approximately 10 percent of CCAC’s clinical contracts with outside agencies are in their language. The College has a position dedicated to the contracts function (Assistant Director of Contracts) that provides for the necessary administrative oversight as to the final content and execution of these external agencies’ non-standard clinical agreements. For non-clinical affiliation agreements, the College’s various union and trade partnerships use boilerplate language adapted to the apprenticeship programs. These agreements contain provisions similar to those of the clinical agreements which provide for program/curriculum review, etc. External partners for the various social sciences do not sign an affiliation agreement, but instead are provided a practicum handbook outlining the roles and responsibilities of the practicum instructor, site supervisor, and student. Explorers found weaknesses in oversight processes in the reevaluation of the contracts themselves and in processes that determine whether or not an agency still exists. This creates inefficiencies in the management of general contractual relationships and creates the perception that the College has partnerships that in reality have changed or are now defunct. A tracking and reporting tool that would ask program coordinators to identify and report on those sites that are used each semester would eliminate these weaknesses. Oversight of the External Agencies/Contracted Partners Surveys of internal constituents provide overall convincing evidence that CCAC maintains an active role in the oversight of educational activities provided by its external partners. Findings from the surveys include the following:

Chapter Thirteen: Related Educational Activities

91

• CCAC regularly conducts reviews of the training provided by the external partners with regard to any given program’s curriculum and standards. The intervals of the reviews vary by type of program.

• While CCAC deans, faculty, or staff members are always involved in the review process, the external agency may not always be involved, depending on the partnership. Further, if a program depends on national certification, the certifying agency is typically part of the review process;

• For the clinical and apprenticeship agreements, written reports or evaluations are generally on file that evidence CCAC’s oversight activities of the services provided by the external partners in the functional areas of instructional support resources, and in evaluation of the student’s work/performance. Most of these partners are also involved with outcomes assessment of the participating students;

• Written evidence attests to the College’s review process of the Social Sciences sites’ evaluation of student work/performance within those practicums;

• With regard to the apprenticeship programs, except in the case of Chrysler and General Motors, the affiliated trade agencies frequently perform outcomes assessment and cooperate with the College in assessing the student’s performance within the apprenticeship site. Also, the students frequently have the opportunity to evaluate the trade agency as to their perception of the quality of training.

Recommendations

1. Establish a more formal, consistent training process for advisors, and develop a handbook to

provide uniformity in the advising process that describes the developmental sequence and establishes appropriate courses for students.

2. Develop materials that describe the importance of developmental education, and distribute these to faculty and new students at the time they register.

3. Establish a bottom score for the COMPASS and any other placement measure to identify students who are significantly under-prepared.

4. Develop a formal program of support for significantly under-prepared students. 5. Develop a college-wide strategy to assess developmental student’s academic skills, their

content knowledge, and their performance in credit level courses taken later in their college careers. Identify quality indicators for developmental education courses and associated learning support service providers, and benchmark their performance on a regular basis.

6. Assess in measurable terms the availability of staffing and services at the College's centers and satellites, and dedicate resources to each when deficiencies threaten student learning or student enrollment.

7. In order to facilitate continued growth of DL enrollment, establish processes for online advising so first time students can register for classes at a distance.

8. Develop a centralized log and repository of all academic partnerships and preferably have the data posted and maintained within a webpage environment.

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

92

Chapter 14: Assessment of Student Learning

OVERVIEW CCAC offers 170 credit degree and certificate programs as well as a vast number of noncredit courses and programs, including workforce development and lifelong learning courses. The M/V/V/G provide affordable and accessible education, including workforce training, that meets student and employer needs that ultimately aids in the economic development of the region and provides quality transfer programs for those students who plan to obtain a four-year degree. Each year, the Curriculum Committee, a sub-committee of College Council, reviews all new, revised, or deleted courses and programs following established procedure described frequently in this report. While the genesis of program information comes from the faculty and governance process, once a program has been accepted by College Council and is given to President’s Council for final approval, the information is put into the Colleague system and appears in the annual College Catalog. Additionally, each course offered by CCAC has a common course syllabus with learning objectives detailed. This syllabus is to be reflected in the individual instructor course outline. CCAC students experience different types of student learning assessment on an individual course or program basis. As has been discussed earlier, CCAC has no instituted, official, or comprehensive plan that describes student learning assessment activities at the College. CCAC'S DIRECT METHODS OF ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING Concrete and summative methods of assessing student learning occur at a degree, program, department, and course level. Degree Level: CCAC offers three degrees: Associate’s in Arts (A.A.), Associate’s in Science (A.S.) and Associate’s in Applied Science (A.A.S). Student learning at the degree level is assessed by successful completion of at least 60 credit hours distributed between program and elective courses with a cumulative G.P.A. of 2.00 or higher. Program Level: Students’ successful completion of certification exams are among goals in some career and professional programs. In some cases, advisory committee oversight includes review of pass/fail rates and performance on certification exams. In addition, program reviews may include examinations of pass/fail rates and feedback from employers and transfer institutions regarding the preparedness of graduates. Department Level: Academic and occupational departments in some cases mandate exit testing for certain courses. During fall and spring semesters, midterm and final grades are required in each credit course in all disciplines/departments. Departments are required to participate in program reviews, which sometimes involve a review of graduate performance and preparedness to enter the workforce or transfer institutions. Course level: Each discipline has a master syllabus for each credit course that is offered that lists specific learning objectives for students. Individual faculty course outlines use the master syllabi as guidelines. In addition, faculty outlines include a host of direct measures in both quantitative and qualitative assessment tools: multiple choice, true/false and completion exams, essay examinations, compositions, oral presentations, book reviews, trade performance competencies, clinical evaluations, research papers, lab performances, grade analysis, and online testing of various types. Frequency of

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

93

assessment is determined in most cases by individual instructors. Furthermore, thanks to the Perkins Grant (designed to assist vocational-technical students) there are support specialists at each campus who institute an Early Warning System that instructors may use to identify students in career programs whose performances are assessed as persistently weak. IMPROVING TEACHING THROUGH STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT Evidence that student learning assessment information is used to improve teaching and learning happens at a college level in various forms and on an individual faculty basis. CCAC shares the following information about student learning with faculty in order to help them improve their teaching and student learning: (a) Student Satisfaction Survey results and student opinion of faculty survey results; (b) faculty portfolios; (c) final grades; (d) standardized tests and exit final results; (e) graduation rates, and (f) results of an “exit” survey (completed at the time of graduation) and graduate survey (completed six months after graduation). Each campus has its own method of sharing results. In some instances, this information is distributed to faculty by academic deans and department heads; in other instances, it is simply made available online, for example in the Administrative Report Center (ARC) and in printed reports. Some academic programs, such as Nursing and Allied Health, have separate accreditations. Also, programs such as Welding, Automotive, and Heating and Air Conditioning have their own assessment measures in place. For example, independent industry certification examination and licensing results are given directly to the student, and in some instances, also to the instructor. The Nursing program has licensing exam rates for first-time passage that act as benchmarks for CCAC’s system-wide nursing evaluation plan, and are sent to program directors/deans and shared routinely with faculty. ATI (Assessment Technology Inc.) scores are reviewed by NCLEX (National Council of Licensure Examination) on a semester basis. CCAC health programs have graduate and employer survey follow-up reports for 6 months to a year post-graduation. Though Lifelong Learning distributes a sheet to evaluate student satisfaction with its courses (Exhibit 50), its impact on meaningful assessment of student learning outcomes is unclear, particularly because course objectives are not listed for these offerings. Workforce training is requested or needed by the local economic and workforce development organizations and players in the region. Businesses work closely with CCAC workforce training instructors to develop a consistent evaluation plan. In addition, upon course completion, evaluation sheets are administered to participants. Results are forwarded to the Supervisors of the department and shared with local business. Within the Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA), the Improvement of Teaching Portfolio process (Article X) requires faculty to develop a portfolio that includes course outlines, sample assignments and examinations, evidence of professional growth, a critical reflective essay that addresses, in part, how student learning assessment is used to revise their courses, and a written summary assessment of student surveys. Tenured faculty must complete the portfolio process every fourth year. Non-tenured faculty are reviewed annually, and new faculty must have a peer visitation in their first semester. A faculty member’s portfolio is reviewed by two peers and by the academic dean. At the present time, CCAC has not instituted a comprehensive assessment plan or process that measures student learning. Because of this, no learning assessment data is included as a part of the planning process. This situation exists in both the credit and noncredit areas. However, isolated planning initiatives that make use of student learning assessment information do exist. There has been some good information collected that could have an impact at the institutional level, but its use stops at the campus or program level.

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

94

ARTICULATED EXPECTATIONS OF STUDENT LEARNING As far as can be determined, the M/V/V/G of the College only implicitly enters into the curriculum process. The process for this includes gathering course or program information, determining other courses or programs affected by the proposed change, notifying the college community of the proposed change, holding a hearing at which the initiator of the proposal or his or her designee must be present to answer questions concerning the proposal, and submitting the approved proposal for consideration by President’s Council. The success of this process depends on the accurate completion of a series of forms that list information relevant to proposal approval. The process solicits feedback from administrators and faculty at three different points. The first is the invitation, open to all, to propose new programs and courses and to suggest changes to existing programs and courses. The second is the period after the proposal has been submitted to the committee and before the committee meets to consider the proposal. At this point, the proposal is distributed via email to the college community. The third is at the committee meeting, during which anyone can voice concerns about the proposal. Of the 16 administrators who responded to a survey question about the communication of program and course change information (Appendix 14.1), 13 indicated that they received information about course and program reviews while one indicated that he or she did not. Of the 33 faculty who responded, 13 indicated that they received information about course and program reviews. Although there is a system in place, many faculty indicate that they are not well informed in a timely manner about the workings of and the decisions made during the governance process. Edited course descriptions, learning objectives, etc., are processed through the governance system and then put into the online catalog as well as the published catalog. These have been scanned into electronic format and are available on the CCAC website. These active common course syllabi are available on the network drive and contain learning objectives and listed topics for courses listed in the published or online catalogs. A comparison of 20 common course syllabi with actual course outlines collected from instructors indicated some discrepancies between the active syllabi and the course outlines, but in general the individual course outlines did not contain adequate information to make a determination concerning alignment. The catalogs list course requirements and course descriptions, but no learning objectives. The course descriptions in these catalogs are consistent with those listed in the active syllabi on the network drive. Ultimately, it is the student who is the participant in a given program or course and who, through his/her participation, must meet program and course requirements. However, these may or may not include informing the student of the actual learning objectives. In following the process of a student gaining admission to the College through the enrollment process, program learning objectives are rarely discussed except in instances where there are outside monitoring or accrediting bodies that oversee specific programs. Such programs include nursing, some allied health programs, and workforce development programs that provide the student with an opportunity to qualify to sit for some professional certification exam, most often in a technical area. Even the system whereby students are informed of program requirements has multiple layers of access, and after meeting with an advisor upon initial enrollment, students may successfully complete many credits before consulting an advisor again. SHARING AND USING STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT INFORMATION Currently, CCAC does not have an official definition of assessment of student learning. The following list details the ways assessment of learning is perceived by different college constituencies:

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

95

1. There are two student surveys: Survey of Student Opinion (SOSO-the evaluation of adjunct

faculty and non-tenured full-time faculty), and the Student Satisfaction Survey. SOSO results are shared with academic deans. Department heads receive SOSO results at the end of the semester, and are in charge of returning results to the faculty members who were evaluated. Results of the Student Satisfaction Survey are given to the Dean of Student Development, and results are shared with the Campus Council (comprised of the Vice President and all deans).

2. Final grades are mailed to the student, submitted to the academic dean’s office and forwarded to the registrar’s office. Final grade reports are available through ARC.

3. Standardized tests and exit final results are kept departmentally, and results are not shared. Only a few departments, such as the South Campus Math and the Allegheny Campus Developmental Studies Departments, administer standardized tests.

4. Graduation rates are available in a report generated by Institutional Research and made available through ARC. The results are shared once a year, and divided into the various periods for graduation: May, August, and December.

5. Post-graduate survey results are generated by Institutional Research and made available via ARC. 6. There is no organized and systematic way in which the above results are used to improve teaching

and learning. Individual faculty are encouraged and expected to review their evaluations, and make improvements. There appears to be no follow-up done by a department head or academic dean to evaluate if improvement has occurred. If results are specific to programs, changes may be made as a result of the program review process.

7. Placement test scores are given to students, and are available to academic advisors and developmental faculty. While some faculty receive academic rosters with test scores and grades for prerequisite courses, this practice is not uniform across the college. Test scores are available to non-developmental faculty only by request.

8. Exit survey (given to students at the time of graduation) and graduate survey (given six months after graduation) results are available online, but have been based on small samples, thereby making conclusions unreliable. Only 25% of exit surveys are completed by students who intend to graduate. There are two follow-up mailings requesting graduate survey data, but the response rate is low.

ASSESSING STUDENT LEARNING IN THE CLASSROOM Current processes of assessing student learning are largely focused in the classroom. Some campus departments have exit exams. Each discipline has a master syllabus that both full-time and part-time faculty are expected to follow when they create their individual course outlines. Task Force Explorers reviewed approximately 100 course outlines (4 campuses and Distance Learning) and 30 common course syllabi in terms of clarity of learning objectives, valid assessment tools, and consistency between Common Course Syllabi and individual course. Although there are instances of some valid and clear learning objectives listed on some common course syllabi and some individual course outlines, the majority of objectives as listed are not measurable or are vague or missing. Furthermore, many of the common course syllabi are outdated and have not been updated since the 1980s. Math and English faculty report that they updated their syllabi in the late 90s, but those updates do not appear on the U-drive, a separate drive listing all CCAC program and course syllabi. Specifically, in numerous instances individual course outlines provide a list of topics but no objectives. In addition, most assessments are direct (concrete, formative) measures, in particular examinations. Skills classes such as English, Mathematics, and DVS, do provide instances of formative assessment and often include indirect (perception, summative) methods of assessment. However, on the whole, few course outlines mention specific indirect methods of measurements or formative assessments (student feedback and revision based on it) that will occur in the course. Many

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

96

faculty members list topics of study but no learning objectives. Because of Distance Learning (DL) departmental requirements, DL course outlines listed more specific and valid methods of both direct and indirect assessment of student learning. In order to discover specifics regarding faculty use of student learning assessment, sixty faculty members (including adjunct) from four campuses as well as Distance Learning and a variety of disciplines were sent an email survey about student learning assessment (See Appendix 14.1). Findings include the following:

1. Faculty members do not share a consistent definition of student learning assessment. Definitions include measuring student performance through examinations; specific knowledge in content areas; collecting and analyzing data; determining what degree students demonstrate mastering course objectives.

2. Faculty members do use student learning assessment to revise teaching and learning. However, most of the assessment information is summative and gathered through direct methods of measurement and is applied in a subsequent semester. Numerous faculty in skills courses (welding, nursing, etc.) do use formative assessment and employ numerous indirect methods of measurement to revise during their current semester. These include but are not limited to a host of active learning strategies, such as one-minute learning assessments, group work, conferences, discussions, surveys, and service learning experiences.

3. Sixty percent of the faculty report that they do not meet with their departments to discuss student learning assessment. Sixty percent also said they do not meet with their disciplines to discuss student learning assessment.

4. Only a handful of faculty state that useful/meaningful discussions of student learning assessment were occurring. Many state that even if there is discussion at the system-level, there is little or no follow-up or plan of action or implementation of ideas. Further, not all campuses are represented at system-wide meetings. Finally, exit exams are the most common method of measuring student learning assessment discussed at meetings.

5. Only two out of 10 faculty report that they are satisfied with current processes. Most say that there is no uniformity in syllabi nor assessment from campus to campus or faculty member to faculty member. Several mention that data collected by the College is useless. All agree that student learning assessment is the most important element of our work and that it “should drive the whole institution.”

Although there is no formally coordinated effort to provide faculty with professional development activities on the issue of student learning assessment, individual instances of professional activities have occurred over the last decade (Exhibit 55). South Campus’ Let’s Talk Learning workshops established in the early 1990s and North Campus’ recently established Teachers Talking Teaching workshops provide excellent professional development models to use in providing faculty with information on the assessment of student learning. STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT AND COLLEGE PLANNING There are two instances in which student learning assessment information was used in College planning and governance. These were not part of a coordinated use of assessment information at the institutional level. They were isolated instances in which assessment data happened to be a factor. COMPASS Study: The College decided to phase in online placement testing (the COMPASS test). To assure consistency with past practices, it was necessary to define cut-off scores that determine the placement level. The study was conducted in two stages. For stage one a sample of students took both the written and online placement tests. American College Testing (ACT) used the resulting data to

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

97

recommend cutoff scores. For stage two, the Department of Planning and Research assessed the academic achievement of students placed according to the ACT scores to help determine whether cutoff scores should be adjusted. Program Reviews: The second instance was the creation and implementation of the program review cycle. Ideally, Program Review Reports should have an impact on institutional assessment and planning. However, an interview with the Vice President of Academic and Student Affairs confirmed impressions that program review data is not used for institutional assessment. In addition, interviews with participants and College Council subcommittee minutes showed that no action was taken on the recommendations that resulted from the review process. Many recommendations from the program review process have never been implemented. At the current time, a committee is redesigning the program review process in order to ensure consistency and accountability. STUDENT LEARNING ASSESSMENT AT THE CAMPUS AND PROGRAM LEVEL Several instances of qualitative student learning assessment occur at the program, campus, or center level that have potential use for student learning assessment at the institutional level. These included initiatives to survey students, student evaluations of Workforce Training and Life Long Learning programs, and data on the pass rates for industry certification. Student Surveys: The 2001-2003 College Plan includes a strategy to “Increase channels for students to provide feedback on college programs and services” (College Plan, 2001-2003, 22, Exhibit 13). The first year assessment of the plan indicated that three campuses conducted student surveys (First Year Assessment, College Plan 2001-2003, 28, Exhibit 40). Follow-up questions revealed that campuses now use a uniform survey, the Student Opinion Survey, administered by campus Dean of Student Development offices. A query on students’ “Purpose for Entering This College” has potential value in assessing learning goals. However, at the present time the data from the survey are used only at the campus level.

Workforce Training and Lifetime Learning: A planning initiative in the 2001-2003 plan related to workforce training included a strategy to “Conduct focus groups or surveys to gather information on the training needs of regional employers and workers” (College Plan, 2001-2003, 31). Actions did take place, including the examination of “Pass rates of industry certification exams” (First Year Assessment, College Plan 2001-2003, 52-53, 55). Workforce training assessment of student learning and, consequently, the institutional process of assessment appear to be mainly market driven by business and the contracts won by the department to deliver training requested or needed by the local economic and workforce development organizations and players in the region. However, some data could be used at the institutional level for student learning assessment. At the present time, it is used only at the program level. For each continuing education course offered (Lifelong Learning or Workforce Training), an evaluation sheet is administered to the participants of the course. However, data from these sheets are not used at the institutional level.

Recommendations

1. Establish an official college definition of assessment of student learning. 2. Train faculty and administrators in the latest methodologies of establishing both direct and

indirect measures of student learning assessment.

Chapter Fourteen: Assessment of Student Learning

98

3. Revise all Common Course Syllabi in credit and noncredit areas to include clear and specific learning objectives, and have faculty include these objectives in their own course outlines.

2. Implement and distribute the new Program Review Process that is currently being developed by the ad hoc Program Review Committee.

3. Ensure that assessment information is collected and distributed to the appropriate constituencies by reviewing the information distribution processes regarding assessment of student learning.

4. Assure that Institutional Research tracks student learning goals and make this information available to all appropriate college constituencies, especially faculty.

5. Develop a student learning assessment plan by further pursuing planning initiatives currently underway.

5. Review qualitative student learning assessment information collected at the campus and program levels and coordinate this activity across the system for use in institutional assessment.

6. Develop an efficient process to ensure that this data enter the governance process. 7. Study successful student learning assessment models at appropriately benchmarked

community colleges.