Los Angeles Mission College - Home

Educational Master Plan - 2005

Los Angeles Mission College

Submitted to the Academic Senate by theEducational Master Planning Committee

December 2, 2004

2

Table of Contents

Preface Mission / Vision / Values / Theme History of Academic Organization Current Status of Academic Programs Future Assumptions Goals and Objectives and Actions List of Ongoing Actions Timeline of Actions with Deadlines

3

Preface to the 2005 Educational Master Plan

The Educational Master Planning Committee was established in March of 2004 for the purpose of seeking improvement of education at the college; specifically, student learning and student success. The Committee was composed of members from all sectors of the college and the meetings were well attended.

The first task of the Committee was to seek information that would be helpful in the planning process. For this reason, four initial subcommittees were formed. The History of Academic Programs subcommittee researched the history of the academic structure of the college since its inception to ensure its preservation in a written record. The Current Status of Academic Programs subcommittee focused on college-level and unit-level data and the most recent program review performed in 2002 to establish a baseline for analysis. The Future Assumptions subcommittee performed an environmental scan to identify the major forces acting upon educational programs at present and in the near future. Lastly, at the request of the President and with approval of the Academic Senate, the Mission/Vision/Values/Theme subcommittee modified these important expressions of the college.

Upon completion of the work of these subcommittees, the Committee brainstormed freely about the major educational issues facing the college and its students. Using information gathered from these brainstorming sessions, the Committee began to organize a broad set of goals by which solutions to these issues could be developed. The Co-Chairs of the Committee, working with the Dean of Research and Planning, ultimately proposed the establishment of four overarching goals under which most of the concerns and issues could be addressed.

Once again, subcommittees established for each of the four Goals were assigned the task of developing Objectives and Actions that would drive the college in the direction of improving education. In some instances, the subcommittees recommended the modification of the wording of the goal. The Committee as a whole met numerous times to discuss each and every proposed Objective and Action, in some cases making modifications or deleting Objectives or Actions recommended by the subcommittees. Toward the end of the back-and-forth between the subcommittees and Committee as a whole, the revised versions were presented directly for further review and comment to Administrators, Department Chairs, Committee Chairs, representatives in Student Services, and the Associated Student Organization. Every reasonable attempt was made to ensure that voices were heard in the drafting of the document.

At the core of this document are specific actions that the Committee recommends be executed by certain target dates. Improvement of education at the college is the motivation for these and all other actions that members of the college community dutifully perform on a daily basis. We would like to thank all members of the Committee for their hard work and commitment to this arduous project.

Gary Prostak, Co-ChairJ. Michael Reynolds, Co-Chair

December 2, 2004

4

Mission

The mission of Los Angeles Mission College is the success of our students. To facilitate their success, Los Angeles Mission College provides accessible, affordable, high quality learning opportunities in a culturally and intellectually supportive environment by:

Encouraging students to become critical thinkers and lifelong learners; Ensuring that students successfully transfer to four-year institutions, find meaningful employment,

improve their basic skills, and enrich their lives through continuing community education; Providing services and programs that improve the life of its immediate community.

Vision

Los Angeles Mission College will provide high quality learning opportunities in an atmosphere that respects and assists all people in pursuit of their educational goals. Modes of instruction will match the changing needs of students in acquiring knowledge and skills necessary for success in the academic and work place environments. The college will support a strong work ethic, student and staff learning, and personal growth as lifelong endeavors. The college will practice an honest, collegial, and inclusive decision-making process that respects the diversity and interdependence of the college, student body, and the community we are privileged to serve.

Values

1. We value lifelong learning by students and staff in a supportive environment.

2. We value hard work by students and employees.

3. We value excellence in the high standards we set for our students in and out of the classroom and in the high standards we set for the services we provide to enhance student learning.

4. We value diversity in the composition of our work force and student body,in the learning styles and prior experiences our students possess, in the learning experiences we introduce to students, and in the ideas we encourage students and faculty to explore.

5. We value honesty, fairness, collegiality and respect in all our interactions with each other.

6. We value a sense of community and commit ourselves to continual, respectful interaction with the internal and external constituencies we serve.

Theme

Our Mission is Your Success

5

History of Academic Organization at Los Angeles Mission College

Introduction

Los Angeles Mission College, the ninth college established in the Los Angeles Community College District, first opened its doors to the public in February of 1975.1 That Spring, approximately twelve hundred students attended classes at the fledgling institution. The graduating class of 1975 consisted of a single student, who had transferred to the college that semester.2 Within two years, over 3,000 students were taking classes in fifty different disciplines, including Administration of Justice, Business, Chemistry, Chicano Studies, English, Family and Consumer Studies, Geography, Journalism, Microbiology, Real Estate, and Zoology.

An extremely dedicated and visionary group of founding faculty members, worked hard to develop thriving academic and vocational programs under challenging circumstances (see Founding Faculty and History of Active and Inactive Disciplines).

One of the major obstacles the college community faced, was the lack of a permanent campus for sixteen years. Students attended classes in high schools, churches, office buildings, shopping centers, and other locations scattered throughout the cities of San Fernando and Sylmar. Countless community and campus leaders worked arduously for many years to secure a permanent site for the college. In the summer of 1991 the college moved to its permanent campus, built on 22 acres of land in the city of Sylmar. As the college quickly grew to serve over 8,000 students every year, it soon became apparent that the original site was not large enough to accommodate the growing demand for educational services in the community. Many programs including Art, Physical Education, noncredit offerings, and specially funded programs had to be based at satellite locations due to the lack of space or facilities on the main campus. Students unable to park in one of the 400 spaces in the student lot soon overflowed into the surrounding neighborhood.

Recent voter approval of two major bond construction issues, Propositions A and AA, mark the beginning of an exciting new chapter in Los Angeles Mission College history. The influx of bond and state money will allow the college to expand its facilities to serve up to 15,000 students by the year 2015.3 Our current College President, Dr. Adriana Barrera, has been involved in complex negotiations to secure an additional 9 acres of adjacent land to expand the campus. Construction projects planned in the future include a state funded Child Development Center, a Health, Physical Education, and Fitness Center, a Media Arts Building, Student Services Center, a Family and Consumer Studies Building, and two multi-level parking structures. Today, as Los Angeles Mission College approaches its 30th anniversary, it looks forward to growing and continuing to serve a vibrant and diverse population that has embraced its presence and mission.

College Administration

The first college President was Dr. Herbert Ravetch, who served from 1975-1978. Dr. Adriana Barrera is the eighth President to lead the college in thirty years (see Los Angeles Mission College Administrators 1975 - 2004). During the first nine years of its existence, the college administration consisted solely of a President and several Deans. Two Vice President positions, Academic Affairs and Administrative Affairs, were created in 1983. In 1999, a third Vice President position was formed for Student Services. Between 1989 and 1992 instead of a Vice-President of Administrative Affairs, the college had a Business Manager. An Associate Vice President of Administrative Services position was created in 2002.

The college’s longest serving administrator, Carlos Nava worked from 1975 to 2002 in various capacities as Dean, Vice President of Administration, and Vice President of Student Services. Several of the college’s former administrators are currently Presidents of other campuses throughout the state.

6

Founding Faculty Members of Los Angeles Mission College 1974-78

Name Area Name Area

Clela P. Allphin English George Mucherson Sociology

Althea Baker Counseling Allan Mundsack Math

Robert Baker Theater Arts Lee Musgrave Art

Allen Bishop Psychology Carlos Nava Assistant Dean of Community Relations

Armida Bolton Journalism Eliseo Nino Physical Education

Terry Bommer Accounting Frederick P. Obrecht English

Marie E. Brown Counseling Sally O'Krent Family and Consumer Studies

Eloise J. Cantrell Home Economics Phillip M. Padilla Vocational Education

Charles Cook Chemistry Donna Mae Pitluck Library Science

Edward H. Clark Coordinator of Instruction Ronald D. Portillo Counseling

Charles E. Dirks Political Science and History Francisco Quiambo Coordinator of Student Services

Marie Dowd Office Administration Ruth Rada Dean of Student Personnel

Lucille Duffy Psychology Margarita Raigoza Counseling

Helen C. Edwards Assistant Dean of Instruction Edward Raskin Management

Luise Ehrhardt Library Science Herbert Ravetch President

Donald Fellows Geography Phoebe Rivera English

Joseph Flores Bilingual Education Coordinator Febronia R. Ross Spanish

Horacio R. Fonseca History Ronald Rotter Business Administration

Cecile A. Forbes English Karen Roy Physical Education

Ralph D. Forbes Romance Languages Cleveland Rush Management

Dudley E. Foster, Jr. Music Cedric Sampson History, Cluster B Chair

Sherrill Frank Secretarial Science Evangelina Sandoval Child Development Center

William J. Gallager Philosophy Laverne H. Sawyer Cooperative Education

Louis R. Garcia Counseling Gerald Scheib Art

Eunice Goad Math Aaron L. Schrier Counseling

Anabelle P. Goodwin Child Development William B. Scott Psychology

Kenneth Gorham Business / Business Data Processing Patricia Siever History

Mary L. Green Child Development Center Marshall L. Smith Biology

Rayma Greenberg Library Science Richard A. Smith Psychology

James A. Grivich Assistant Dean of Instruction Lloyd Thomas English

James Helder Music Sandy Thomsen Library Science

7

Alice J. Hernandez Child Development Center Director S. Gregory Tiernan English

Penelope Jarecke EOPS Counseling Tutoring Andres Rodriquez Torres Speech

John H. Kearney Cooperative Education Stanley S. Viltz Coordinator of Community Services

Thomas G. Lakin Acting Dean of Instruction Gwen Walker EOPS Counseling & Peer Counseling

Rachel L. Leeds Speech John B. Weidler Real Estate

Benjamin Lopez Spanish and French Irving B. Weinstein Speech and Humanities

Philip V. Lozano PE and Health Robert N. William Dean of Instruction and Student Services

Robert Marek Math David B. Wolf Assistant Dean of College Development

Doris G. Mc Clain Child Development Alex R. Yguado Economics

David L. Moss Sociology

8

History of Currently Active Disciplines at Los Angeles Mission College (1975-2003)

197

5

197

6

197

7

197

8

197

9

198

0

198

1

198

2

198

3

198

4

198

5

198

6

198

7

198

8

198

9

199

0

199

1

199

2

199

3

199

4

199

5

199

6

199

7

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

Discipline Title

ACCOUNTING

ANTHROPOLOGY

ART

BUSINESS

CAOT

COOPERATIVE EDUCATION

ECONOMICS

ENGLISH

HEALTH

HISTORY

HUMANITIES

MANAGEMENT

MATHEMATICS

MUSIC

PHILOSOPHY

PHYSICAL EDUCATION

POLITICAL SCIENCE

PSYCHOLOGY

SOCIOLOGY

SPANISH

SPEECH (Speech Commun. 75-88)

ASTRONOMY

9

BIOLOGY

CHEMISTRY

FRENCH

GEOGRAPHY

CHILD DEVELOPMENT

DEVELOPMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS

CHICANO STUDIES (Mexican-American 75-76)

COMP SCI & INFO TECH

EDUCATION

ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE

PHYSICAL SCIENCE

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT

FAMILY AND CONSUMER STUDIES

ANATOMY

PHYSIOLOGY

PHYSICS

LIBRARY SCIENCE

MARKETING

FINANCE

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE

MICROBIOLOGY

ITALIAN

PHOTOGRAPHY

ADDICTION STUDIES *****

LAW (1975-1984)

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

CITIZENSHIP

10

LEARNING SKILLS

ENGINEERING, GENERAL

SUPERVISED LEARNING ASSISTANCE

ESL (Credit, Lower Level)

DRAFTING

FOOD SERVICE MANAGEMENT

INTERIOR DESIGN (1985-94)

ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL

CINEMA

AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDIES

MULTIMEDIA

FIRE TECHNOLOGY

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS

LINGUISTICS (1995-2004)

11

History of Inactive Disciplines at Los Angeles Mission College (1975-2003)

197

5

197

6

197

7

197

8

197

9

198

0

198

1

198

2

198

3

198

4

198

5

198

6

198

7

198

8

198

9

199

0

199

1

199

2

199

3

199

4

199

5

199

6

199

7

199

8

199

9

200

0

200

1

200

2

200

3

Discipline TitleHOME ECONOMICS

JOURNALISM

PUBLIC SERVICEREAL ESTATE

SECRETARIAL SCIENCESTATISTICS

SUPERVISION

MERCHANDISING

THEATER

ZOOLOGYRECREATION

AUTOMOTIVE MECHANICS TECHNOLOGY

NURSING

AIRCRAFT ELECTRONICS TECHNOLOGY

LIBRARY/MEDIA TECHNOLOGY

OCEANOGRAPHYAUTOMOTIVE ENGINE TECHNOLOGY

ELECTRONICS

HEALTH OCCUPATIONS

SPECIAL EDUCATION

GEOLOGY

AUTOMOTIVE ENGINE TECHNOLOGY

HEALTH AND SAFETY EDUCATION

EDUCATION-SPECIAL

BASIC SKILLS

12

ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (Noncredit)

SUPPLY WATER TECHNOLOGY

VOCATIONAL EDUCATION

AMERICAN SIGN LANGUAGE

JAPANESE

PORTUGUESECHINESE

13

Year College Vice President Vice President Vice President Deans, Associate, and Assistant DeansPresident Academic Affairs Administration Student Services and Other Administrators

1975Dr. Herbert Ravetch Nava, Williams, Grivich, Wolf, Padilla, Greenberg1976Dr. Herbert Ravetch Nava, Williams, Grivich, Wolf, Edwards1977Dr. Herbert Ravetch Nava, Williams, Grivich, Edwards1978Dr. Herbert Ravetch Nava, Lakin, Rada, Tayloe, Hernandez 1979Dr. Arthur Hernandez (I) Nava, Lakin, Rada, Cardoza, Tayloe1980Dr. Arthur Hernandez (I) Nava, Lakin, Rada, Cardoza, Tayloe1981Dr. Alfred Fernandez Nava, Rada, Cardoza, Wieder, Weinstein, Urmstrom1982Dr. Alfred Fernandez Nava, Rada, Cardoza, Wieder, Weinstein, Urmstrom1983Lowell Erickson Raul Cardoza Marilyn Urmstom Nava, Wieder, Oliver, Weinstein, Garcia, Follosco1984Lowell Erickson Raul Cardoza Marilyn Urmstom Nava, Wieder, Oliver, Weinstein, Brown1985Lowell Erickson Raul Cardoza Marilyn Urmstom Nava, Wieder, Oliver, Weinstein, Brown1986Lowell Erickson Anatol Mazor Carlos Nava Nava, Wieder, Oliver, Wainwright1987Lowell Erickson Anatol Mazor Carlos Nava Wieder, Oliver, Wainwright1988Lowell Erickson Anatol Mazor Carlos Nava Wieder, Oliver, Wainwright1989Lowell Erickson Anatol Mazor Nava, Wieder, Richart, Lozano, Austin1990Lowell Erickson Anatol Mazor Nava, Wieder, Richart, Lozano, Farren, Austin1991Dr. Jack Fujimoto Anatol Mazor Nava, Cantrell, Richart, Farren, Lozano, Austin1992Dr. Jack Fujimoto Victoria Richart Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Farren, Lozano, Austin1993Dr. Jack Fujimoto Victoria Richart David Ching (I) Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Hunt, Farren, Foster, Austin1994Dr. Jack Fujimoto Victoria Richart David Ching (I) Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Hunt, Farren, Foster1995Dr. Jack Fujimoto/NorlundPaul McKenna David Ching (I) Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Hunt, Farren, Foster1996Dr. William Norlund Thomas Oliver Shari Borchetta Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Hunt, Russell1997Dr. William Norlund Thomas Oliver Shari Borchetta Nava, Cantrell, Tronto, Russell, Scott1998Dr. William Norlund Thomas Oliver Shari Borchetta Nava, Cantrell, Russell, Scott1999Dr. William Norlund Thomas Oliver Shari Borchetta Carlos Nava Nava, Cantrell, Russell, Scott, Zayas2000Dr. Thomas Oliver (I) Daniel Castro Shari Borchetta Carlos Nava Cantrell, Russell, Scott, Zayas, Pearl2001Dr. Adriana Barrera Vacant Shari Borchetta Carlos Nava Cantrell, Scott, Zayas, Pearl, Yguado2002Dr. Adriana Barrera William Farmer Shari Borchetta Carlos Nava Cantrell, Zayas, Pearl, Ramirez, Yguado2003Dr. Adriana Barrera William Farmer Shari Borchetta Jose L. Ramirez Cantrell, Zayas, Pearl, Soto, Arvizu2004Dr. Adriana Barrera William Farmer Karen Hoefel Jose L. Ramirez Zayas, Soto, Pearl, Arvizu, Green

14

Academic Organization

The academic organization of Los Angeles Mission College has evolved significantly since its inception in 1975. The most dramatic changes have occurred in the last twelve years, in which it has progressed from a cluster model to a department model. As such, the college moved from a non-traditional organization to a more traditional one, based on common academic interests and objectives among disciplines. These changes were primarily stimulated by growing enrollments and with subsequent growth in the number of faculty.

Each phase in the change of academic organization was characterized by various levels of coordinationbetween the administration and the faculty, represented by the Academic Senate and the American Federation of Teachers College Guild (AFT). Those transitions in which all of these parties contributed to the reorganization process appear to be the most logical and productive. It is the hope of this Educational Master Plan committee, that the lessons learned from the first thirty years can be used wisely in future college reorganizations and planning.

1. Initial Academic Organization: The Cluster System

Effective Dates: Spring 1975 - Spring 1993Basic Structure: 2 Clusters (classroom) and 2 Departments (non-classroom) Cluster A Cluster B Library Department Counseling Department (beginning in 1985)

For the first 18 years of the College, academic disciplines were organized into two groups called Cluster A and Cluster B. This structure was developed after much deliberation and well-attended workshops among the newly organizing faculty and administration. One description of the cluster concept is revealed in a memo from the chair of one of the clusters to the Dean of Academic Affairs, prior to the first reorganization in 1993:

" In an attempt to fulfill its philosophy and its objectives and its orientation to human values, the College has developed the “Cluster” arrangement of programs and services...

In each of these clusters, the student will find support and assistance not only from his major subject area faculty, but also from the other instructors, the counselors, and the administrators attached to that cluster. At the same time, these interacting “families” of students, faculty, counselors and administrators will encourage innovative and interdisciplinary approaches to student and community needs.

It is the belief of the College that, through removing the traditional divisions of departments and fostering full and open communication within and between the clusters, a broader approach to the understanding of human existence can be developed. The College believes that this understanding is an essential part of the growth of each student and to his ability to take his place as an integral productive part in human society." 4,5

Full-time instructors were divided into two units, with representatives from English, Speech, History and Counseling in each. Since each group included many different programs (and some of the same

15

disciplines), the term “cluster” was chosen instead of department or division. Without a descriptive distinguishing term, the groups were identified as Clusters A and B.

Additional programs were added and subtracted over time. Engineering, Electronics, and the PACE program were eventually added to Cluster B. As the college grew, the number of faculty and students were no longer equally divided. The Library Department was established at the inception of the college and remains a department today. Although at first the Library was called the Learning Resource Center (LRC), it was changed to in 1995. Initially, two counselors were assigned to each Cluster. In 1985, Counseling became an independent department.6 Instructors in Counseling, Library, and Child Development Center selected their own chairs/director and no longer voted in elections of the cluster chairs, although they continued to vote for Academic Senate representatives within a specific cluster.

One of the original goals of the cluster organization was to offer interdisciplinary programs and classes. However, small enrollments, budget restrictions and lack of a centralized campus limited the implementation of this plan. Another goal was to assign students to one cluster based on interest, but scheduling generally required students to enroll in classes offered in both clusters. Space limitations also prevented student identification and interaction within the cluster organization.

It was expected that as new faculty were hired and programs were expanded an additional cluster would be formed. Likewise, "change will be considered by an Academic Senate committee at the request of faculty and administration."4 During the first few years, clusters were administrated and managed by Deans hired through administrative processes and compensated on an A-basis. This changed sometime during the first few years of the college, when the cluster chairs became elected from among the full time faculty in the cluster for a term of three years starting on the first day of July following the election. The two Cluster Chairs were assigned D basis assignments with year round pay. Because of the very large size of the cluster, the Cluster Chairs were also fully released from teaching duties and reassigned 100% (1.0 FTE) to cluster duties.

The original disciplines on campus were organized into the clusters in this fashion:

Cluster A Cluster BAmerican Cultural Studies AccountingArt Biological SciencesChild Development BusinessEducation Aide Business AdministrationHumanities Child Mental HealthJournalism Consumer Education and Home ManagementMusic Environmental SciencePsychology MathematicsPublic Service Physical EducationSocial Sciences Physical ScienceSpanish Secretarial ScienceSpeech SupervisionTheater Arts

Library Department Counseling Department

16

2. First Reorganization: Creation of a Third Cluster

Effective Dates: Spring 1993-Summer 1996Basic Structure: 3 Clusters and 2 Departments Arts and Letters Cluster Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Cluster Math and Science Cluster Library Department Counseling Department

Following Accreditation recommendations to clarify and eliminate the confusion about the Cluster concept, college-wide retreats, numerous committee meetings and discussions provided a consensus that academic reorganization was required.7 The growing size of the college was also a major factor that drove this restructuring. During the fall 1992 semester, a committee of the Academic Senate was charged with this task proposed several descriptive groupings. After general discussions and input from the faculty and the Office of Academic Affairs, three clusters were approved by the Academic Senate, the Council of Instruction, and the College Policy and Advisory Council. The Clusters formed were: Arts and Letters, Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies, and Math and Science, effective on January 11, 1993. This process resulted in three clusters that were very well balanced in terms of full-time and hourly FTE, and contained academically related disciplines.

Cluster Chairs continued to be compensated on a D-basis for cluster duties, but because of the slightly diminished size of the clusters, the reassigned time of the Cluster Chairs was no longer 1.0 FTE. The reassigned time of the Cluster Chairs was calculated according to the formula provided by the Collective Bargaining Agreement then in effect:

1 Full-time faculty counted 1.0 FTE1 Part-time Faculty counted 0.1 FTEOne Classified employee counted 2.0 FTE

The reassigned time for cluster chairs was granted based on the total FTE, as follows:

Department/Cluster FTE Reassigned FTE

3 or less 0.0More than 3 and up to 10 0.2More than 10 and up to 16 0.4More than 16 and up to 24 0.8More than 32 1.0

For example, for coordinating a typical Cluster with 11 full-time faculty, 55 part-time faculty and 4 classified employees (total FTE = 24.5), the Cluster Chair would be reassigned 0.8 FTE.

The Cluster Chairs were elected following the same procedure used today for the election of department chairs. The Cluster/Department Chair election, every 3 years, followed a process described in the AFT contract, virtually unchanged since 1993.8 The Vice-President of Academic Affairs and the AFT Chapter President coordinate the election process. The Cluster/Department Chair position normally starts and terminates his/her term on July 1, with elections take place during the spring semester.

17

The resulting organization of disciplines in the three clusters was as follows: 9

Arts and Letters Cluster Math and Science Cluster Professional/InterdisciplinaryStudies Cluster

Art Anatomy and Physiology AccountingAmerican Sign Language Anthropology Administration of JusticeDevelopmental Communication Astronomy and Physics Business and MarketingDSP&S Biology Chemical DependencyEnglish and Journalism Chemistry Child DevelopmentESL Comp Science / Info Tech Cooperative EducationForeign Languages Engineering and Drafting Economics and FinanceHistory and Chicano Studies Electronics Family and Consumer StudiesLearning Assistance Center Geography LawMusic Mathematics Management and SupervisionPhotography Microbiology Office AdministrationPolitical Science PE and Health PACE and HumanitiesPhilosophy Psychology Real EstateSpeech SociologyTheatre Arts Water Technology


3. Second Reorganization: The Transition from Clusters to Departments

Effective Dates: Summer 1996-Summer 1998Basic Structure: 2 Clusters and 8 Departments Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Cluster Math and Science Cluster Arts and Letters Department Engineering Department Computer Science / Information Technology Department English as a Second Language (ESL) Department Liberal Arts Department Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications Department Library Department Counseling Department

In the summer of 1996, after extensive discussions with faculty and with the encouragement from the Vice-President of Academic Affairs, there was another restructuring. Some faculty requested that their disciplines be separated from the clusters in order to form their own department.10 The Vice-President of Academic Affairs drafted a recommendation that closely resembled the final result.11 Although slightly altered, these recommendations were closely followed and implemented, with the following outcomes:

The Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Cluster remained intact.

Two disciplines (Engineering and Computer Science) separated from the Math and Science Cluster to form their own departments. The remaining disciplines continued to exist as the Math and Science Cluster.

18

Six disciplines (English, History, Philosophy, ESL, Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications) separated from the Arts and Letters Cluster and became departments. The much smaller Arts and Letters Cluster became the Arts and Letters Department.

The ESL discipline became a department. The Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications joined to form another department. English, History, and Philosophy combined to form the Liberal Arts Department. These changes took effect on July 1, 1996. Although the Political Science discipline initially remained with the Arts and Letters Department, it was eventually moved to the Liberal Arts department in early 1998, at the request of the full-time faculty teaching in the discipline.

The Cluster Chairs continued to be compensated on partial D-basis (year-round pay). However, department chairs were compensated on C-basis (10-months pay). The reassigned time for cluster/department duties of the two cluster chairs and of the six department chairs was calculated in the same manner as before and it was proportional to the size of the cluster/department determined mostly by the number of full-time faculty (as illustrated above). This reorganization highlights the second major reorganization trend, other than discipline relatedness -- that of reducing the size of the academic units and subsequently eliminating the partial year-round compensation, for which the cluster chair, but not the department chair, remained entitled.

The resulting organization of disciplines was: 12

Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Cluster Math and Science ClusterAccounting AnthropologyAddiction Studies GeographyAdministration of Justice MathematicsBusiness, Marketing, Management and Real Estate Health and PEChild Development PsychologyCooperative Education Anatomy and PhysiologyEconomics BiologyFamily and Consumer Studies ChemistryFood Service Management GeographyHumanities AstronomyInterior Design PhysicsLaw Physical ScienceOffice AdministrationSupervision

Arts and Letters Department Liberal Arts DepartmentArt EnglishChicano Studies HistoryForeign Languages PhilosophyMusicPolitical Science Comp Sci Information Technology DepartmentSociology Computer ScienceSpeech

Engineering Department ESL DepartmentEngineering and Drafting ESL

19

Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications DepartmentLearning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications


4. Third Reorganization: Abolishment of Clusters

Effective Dates: Summer 1998-Summer 1999Basic Structure: 11 Departments Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Department Math and Science Department Arts and Letters Department Engineering Department Computer Science / Information Technology Department ESL Department Liberal Arts Department Business Information Department Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications Department Library Department Counseling Department

In 1998, the VP of Academic Affairs was motivated to reorganize disciplines once again. The President sought faculty input and suggested several criteria for the new departments.13 However, the faculty did not develop a comprehensive college-wide proposal. In February 1998, by administrative decision, the two remaining clusters (Math and Science and Professional Studies Interdisciplinary Studies) were renamed departments, effective July 1st 1998.14

The six other departments remained the same: Arts and Letters, Engineering, Computer Science, ESL, Learning Center and Developmental Communications, and Liberal Arts. Accounting, Business, Management and Marketing decided to separate from the Professional and Interdisciplinary Department, and formed the Business Department in the fall of 1998.15

Following the Collective Bargaining Agreement in effect at the time, all department chairs were compensated on a partial C-basis mostly proportional to the number of full-time faculty (see formula above). With the elimination of the clusters, none of the chairs were compensated on a partial D-basis, eliminating summer compensation, but not summer obligations to the college.


Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Department Math and Science DepartmentAccounting AnthropologyAddiction Studies GeographyAdministration of Justice MathematicsChild Development Health and PEEconomics PsychologyFamily and Consumer Studies Anatomy and Physiology

20

Food Service Management Biology and MicrobiologyHumanities ChemistryInterior Design GeographyLaw AstronomyOffice Administration Physics

Physical ScienceBusiness Information Department SpeechBusiness, Marketing, ManagementFinance, Supervision

Engineering Department ESL DepartmentEngineering and Drafting ESLArts and Letters Department Liberal Arts DepartmentArt EnglishAmerican Cultures HistoryCinema PhilosophyChicano Studies Political ScienceForeign LanguagesMusicSociology Computer SciencePhotography Information Tech Department

Computer Science

Learning Assistance Center and Developmental CommunicationsLearning Assistance CenterDevelopmental Communication


5. Fourth Reorganization: Separation of Math and Sciences Department, new DSP&S/CDC

Effective Dates: Summer 1999-Summer 2001Basic Structure: 15 Departments Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Department Arts and Letters Department Engineering Department Computer Science and Information Technology Department ESL Department Liberal Arts Department Business Information Department Natural Sciences Department Math Department Speech Department Health & PE Department Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications Department Library Department Counseling Department Disabled Students Programs and Services / Child Development Center Department

21

In the winter of 1998, prompted by the elimination of the partial D basis assignment for department chairs (with summer compensation), the Chair of the Math and Science Department submitted her resignation, to be effective July 1, 1999.17 At the same time, the science faculty within that department requested the formation of the new Natural Sciences Department that included only some of the disciplines from the former Math and Science Department.18 As this request was in accord with the criteria suggested by the President in a March memo, the administration approved the establishment of the Natural Sciences Department. The remaining disciplines became by default three new departments: Health/PE, Mathematics and Speech. In addition, the Disabled Students Programs and Services / Child Development Center Department was established. The change went into effect July 1, 1999.


ESL Department Engineering DepartmentEnglish as a Second Language Engineering and Drafting

Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Department Natural Science DepartmentPhotography Anthropology/GeographyAddiction Studies Astronomy/PhysicsAdministration of Justice Anatomy and PhysiologyChild Development Biology and MicrobiologyEconomics Environmental ScienceFamily and Consumer Studies ChemistryFood Service Management Physical ScienceHumanitiesInterior Design Health and PE DepartmentLaw Health and PEOffice Administration

Mathematics DepartmentSpeech Department MathematicsSpeech

Arts and Letters Department Computer Science-InformationArt Technology DepartmentAmerican Cultures Computer ScienceCinemaChicano Studies Liberal Arts DepartmentForeign Languages EnglishMusic HistoryMultimedia PhilosophyPsychology Political ScienceSociology

Business Information Department Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Accounting Communications DepartmentBusiness Learning Assistance CenterFinance Developmental CommunicationsManagement and MarketingSupervision CDC / DSP&S Department

22


6. Fifth Reorganization: Separation of Professional and Interdisciplinary Studies Department

Effective Dates: Summer 2001-Summer 2002Basic Structure: 16 Departments Arts and Letters Department Engineering Department Computer Science Information Technology Department ESL Department Liberal Arts Department Business Department Natural Sciences Department Math Department Speech Department Health & PE Department Professional Studies Department Interdisciplinary Studies Department Learning Assistance Center and Developmental Communications Department Library Department Counseling Department Disabled Students Programs and Services / Child Development Center Department

In the spring of 2001, the Chair of the Professional Studies and Interdisciplinary Studies Department became Acting Dean of Academic Affairs. Faculty from this department requested separation into unique departments, resulting in two new departments: the Professional Studies Department and Interdisciplinary Studies Department. This process was facilitated by the Vice President of Administrative Services and the AFT Chapter President in consultation with the faculty, as there was no Vice President of Academic Affairs or Dean of Academic Affairs in place at that time.


Professional Studies Department Natural Science DepartmentChild Development Anthropology/GeographyFamily and Consumer Studies Astronomy/PhysicsFood Service Management Anatomy and PhysiologyInterior Design Biology and Microbiology

Environmental ScienceInterdisciplinary Studies Department ChemistryAdministration of Justice Physical ScienceComputer and Office ApplicationsPhotography Health and PE DepartmentAddiction Studies Health and PEEconomicsLaw

Speech Department Mathematics DepartmentSpeech Mathematics

23

Liberal Arts Department Arts and Letters DepartmentArt EnglishAmerican Cultures HistoryCinema PhilosophyChicano Studies Political ScienceForeign Languages HumanitiesMusicMultimedia Computer Sci - Info Technology DepartmentPsychology Computer ScienceSociology

ESL DepartmentEngineering Department ESLEngineering and Drafting

Learning Assistance Center and DevelopmentalBusiness Information Department Communications DepartmentAccounting Learning Assistance CenterBusiness Developmental CommunicationsFinanceManagement and Marketing CDC / DSP&S DepartmentSupervision


7. Current Academic Organization

Effective Dates: Summer 2001-PresentBasic Structure: 13 Departments Arts, Health and PE Department Business and Law Department Computer Science / Information Technology and Engineering Department English and Foreign Languages Department ESL and Speech Department Mathematics Department Natural Sciences Department Professional Studies Department Social Sciences Department Learning Center and Developmental Communications Department Library Department Counseling Department Disabled Students Programs and Services / Child Development Center Department

In February 2002, a new Vice-President of Academic Affairs was eager to reorganize the academic units based upon more rational criteria. A memo from the Vice-President suggested a new departmental structure, based on four criteria: 21

1. Create departments that have logical connections among disciplines2. Create departments that are roughly of the same size 3. Create departments large enough to warrant at least 40% (0.4) reassigned time for the chair.4. Create departments small enough to allow for future growth in faculty and staff positions.

24

The initial proposal placed the traditional "classroom" disciplines into seven departments. The Vice-President invited faculty to provide responses and alternative proposals that would satisfy the four criteria established. The department chairs developed an alternative proposal that also followed the established criteria, resulting in nine departments rather than seven.22 The differences between the two proposals were mostly in the calculation of department size. The original proposal established department size based on the formula from the Collective Bargaining Agreement about to expire (1999-2002) and was based on the old formula (actual number of full-time and hourly instructors). The alternate proposal used total FTE produced by department (a measure of instructional output) as the criterion for determining size. This alternate proposal was presented to the Vice-President in February and to the full Academic Senate in March. Ultimately, an agreement was reached between the faculty and administration on the reorganization of the traditional "classroom" disciplines into nine departments. Library, Counseling, and the Learning Center and Developmental Communications departments remained as well. Finally, Cooperative Education became part of the new Business and Law Department.

The 2002-2005 AFT contract recognizes that department chairs have obligations during the summer and calculates reassigned time for department duties based on instructional output, measured by total FTE, rather than instructor headcount. The department chairs are compensated on a partial D-basis proportional to the total FTE generated by the department.

This final re-organization solidified two trends established at earlier stages of the process. First, the shift from large clusters to departments resulted in the reduction in size of academic units. Second, disciplines were organized into departments according to common academic and professional objectives.

The current academic organization of disciplines within the departments is as follows: 23

Social Sciences Department Natural Sciences DepartmentAfrican American Studies Anatomy and PhysiologyAsian American Studies AnthropologyChicano Studies Astronomy and PhysicsHistory Biology and MicrobiologyHuman Services ChemistryHumanities Environmental SciencePhilosophy Geography and GeologyPolitical Science Physical SciencesSociology Psychology

ESL and SpeechMathematics ESLMathematics Speech

Arts Health and PE English and Foreign LanguagesArt EnglishCinema ChineseHealth FrenchMultimedia ItalianMusic JapanesePE JournalismTheatre Spanish

25

Professional Studies Business and LawChild Development AccountingFamily and Consumer Studies Administration of JusticeFood Service Management Business, Management, MarketingInterior Design Computer Applications & Office Technologies

Cooperative EducationEngineering and Computer Science EconomicsComputer Science and Information Tech. FinanceDrafting Fire TechnologyEngineering International Business

LawLearning Center and Developmental PhotographyCommunications Department SupervisionLearning CenterDevelopmental Communications CDC / DSP&S Department


Comments

As the college continues to grow, it is likely that additional restructuring of the academic departments will be needed. Departments containing multiple disciplines will probably continue the historical trend to separate and/or reorganize. In November of 2004, the Los Angeles Mission College Academic Senate and AFT leaders developed a policy for the modification of departments and presented it to the Academic Senate. The policy was designed to allow individual disciplines to move from one department to another. It is likely that a policy for the establishment of single discipline department and/or new departments will be necessary in the near future. In the coming years, single discipline departments or departments with a few closely related disciplines, will probably become the norm and not the exception.

References:

1. Los Angeles Mission College Schedule of Classes. Spring, 1977.2. Personal Communication form former Dean of Vocational Education, Dr. Eloise Cantrell, November 2004.3. Los Angeles Mission College Facilities Master Plan Project Newsletter. February, 2004.4. Attachment to memo from Cluster Chair, Carla Bowman, to Dean of Academic Affairs, Carlotta Tronto. May 22, 1992.5. Los Angeles Mission College Catalog 1975-1976.6. Personal communication from Chair of Counseling, Gwen Walker. July, 2004.7. Memo from VP of Academic Affairs, Victoria Richart, December 3, 1992.8. Current Faculty Contract, page 52 and Appendix J, page 181.9. Memo from Chair of Science and Math Cluster, Carla Bowman, November 16, 1992.10. E-mail from Mark Pracher. March 27, 1996.11. Memo from VP of Academic Affairs, Tom Oliver. June 28, 1996.12. Memo from President, Bill Norlund and VP of Academic Affairs, Tom Oliver. April 24, 1996.

26

13. E-mail from the President, Bill Norlund. March 12, 1998.14. Memo from VP of Academic Affairs, Tom Oliver. February 23, 1998.15. Memo from VP of Academic Affairs, Tom Oliver. July 28, 1998.16. Memo from VP of Academic Affairs, Tom Oliver. February 28, 1998.17. Memo from Chair of Math and Science, Maria Fenyes. December 14, 1998.18. Memo from Faculty of Math and Science. December 14, 1998.19. Department Organization Chart, Fall of 1999.20. Departmental Directory compiled by Maria Fenyes for incoming VP of Academic Affairs, Bill Farmer.August 25, 2001.21. Memo from Vice-President of Academic Affairs, Bill Farmer. February 12, 2002.22. Alternate proposal to VP of Academic Affairs from Department Chairs for reorganization. February of 2003.23. Academic Department Structure, Office of VP of Academic Affairs. July 28, 2004.

27

Current Status of Academic Programs

1. Student Demographics

2. Academic Information Tables

AA and AS Degrees Awarded - Totals for all Years 1995/96 - 2002/03

Certificates Awarded - Totals for all Years 1995/96 - 2002/03

English and Mathematics Placement - Average of Fall Semesters 1995 - 2003

Comparison of Average Rate of Retention by Department and Discipline 1994 - 2003

Comparison of Average Rate of Success by Department and Discipline 1994 - 2003

WSCH, FTEF, WSCH/FTEF - Semester Average Based on Fall Semester Data 2001-2003

Section Count and Fill Rate - Semester Average Based on Fall Semester Data 2001-2003

Known Transfers to CSU and UC

Status of Unit Assessment Submission - Spring 2002

28

Student PopulationThe demographic characteristics of the student population of Los Angeles Mission College are unique and have shifted considerably since 1975. Significant changes have occurred in the ethnicity, gender, age, and other demographic characteristics of our students in the last thirty years. Most of the information presented below is based on historical data collected since 1975 and Fall 2003 figures.

Ethnicity:The ethnic composition of Los Angeles Mission College students is distinctive. In the Fall of

2003, LAMC students identified themselves as follows: 70.8% Hispanic, 14.4% White, 7.1% Asian, 5.5% African-American, and 2.2% other (Figure 1). When compared to the LACCD population as a whole, LAMC has a significantly higher percentage of Hispanic students, and lower percentages of students of all other ethnic backgrounds (Tables 1 and 2). Los Angeles Mission College currently has the second highest percentage of Hispanic students in the district, second only to East Los Angeles College with 75.2%.

Figure 1: Ethnicity of LAMC Students (Fall 2003)

Black5.5%

Other2.8%

Asian7.1%

White14.4%

Hispanic70.8%

Hispanic

White

Asian

African-American

Other

The ethnicity of the LAMC student population has changed significantly since the college was founded in 1975, when 53.3% of students were White and only 31.1% were Hispanic. Since then, there have been steady increases in the percentage of Hispanic and Asian students, with concurrent declines in the percentages of White and African-American students (Table 1). During the last 30 years, the ethnic background of the LACCD student population has also changed significantly, with similar, yet less dramatic increases in the number of Hispanic students and decreases in the number of white students (Table 2).

29

Table 1: Ethnicity of Los Angeles Mission College Students (%, 1975-2003)

1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2003Hispanic 31.1 42.1 34.8 51.5 64.9 70.6 70.8White 53.3 39.8 48.1 33.8 20.4 15.3 14.4Asian 1.8 3.5 5.0 5.9 6.9 6.0 7.1Black 11.9 11.2 8.7 7.0 6.4 6.2 5.5Other 1.9 3.4 3.4 1.8 1.4 1.9 2.8

Table 2: Ethnicity of Los Angeles Community College District Students (1975-2003)1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2003

Hispanic 17.8 21.3 24.0 32.6 40.7 47.4 46.0White 50.9 39.1 39.6 31.4 23.1 20.0 19.5Asian 6.7 10.9 14.5 15.5 16.0 13.7 15.0Black 22.1 25.6 18.2 18.1 18.4 16.6 16.7

Other 2.5 3.1 3.7 2.4 1.8 2.3 2.8

GenderThe gender distribution of LAMC students is (and has always been) significantly slanted towards females. In the fall of 2003, 64.4 % of LAMC students were female and 35.6% were male (Figure 2). The percentage of female students was lowest in 1975 (at 58.4%) and peaked in 1985 (at 69.7%) (Table 3).

The gender distribution in the LACCD for the fall of 2003 follows a similar pattern, but is slightly less skewed towards females, with 60.4% females and 39.6% males. Higher female enrollment has also been observed at two- and four-year colleges at the national level (56% female versus 44% male). The reason for the higher college enrollment of females is not clear, but has been attributed to a number of possible factors, including higher academic achievement of female students. Others believe that it is because males are more likely to serve in the military, work full-time, or be incarcerated. Some believe that these factors have more of an effect in lower-income groups.

Figure 2: Gender Distribution of LAMC Students in Fall 2003

Male35.6%

Female64.4%

Female

Male

30

Table 3: Gender Distribution of Los Angeles Mission College Students (%)

LAMC1975

LAMC1985

LAMC1995

LAMC2003

LACCD2003

U.S.A.2003

Female 58.4 69.7 63.9 64.4 60.4 56Male 41.7 30.3 36.1 35.6 39.6 44

Primary LanguageIn 2003, 61.6% of LAMC stated that their primary language was English (Figure 3). Spanish was the second most common primary language of LAMC students (31.3%) and Armenian was a distant third with 2.6%. Compared to LACCD student population, Los Angeles Mission College students are much more likely to have Spanish as a primary language (Table 4). The primary language for LAMC students has not varied significantly since 1993, when this data started being collected.

Figure 3: Primary Language of LAMC Students

Other4.5%

Spanish31.3%

English61.6%

Armenian2.6%

English

Spanish

Armenian

Other

Table 4: Primary Language of LAMC and LACCD Students (%, Fall 2003)

ENGLISH SPANISH ARMENIAN FARSI KOREAN TAGALOG OTHER

L.A.Mission

61.6 31.3 2.6 0.5 0.5 0.5 3.0

L.A.C.C.District

62.8 20.8 3.6 1.5 1.4 1.4 8.5

31

AgeIn the Fall of 2003, most LAMC students (31.6%) were in the 20-24 age group (Figure 4). The percentage of students that are 35 and over is currently 22.5%. The enrollment of students in the 35+ category has been declining steadily since 1985 when it was 45.8%. The current LAMC age distribution is very similar to that of the LACCD (Table 5).

Figure 4: Age Distribution of LAMC Students (Fall 2003)

22.6%22.9%

31.6%

22.9%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Under 20 20-24 25-34 35+

Per

cen

tag

e

Table 5: Age Distribution of LAMC and LACCD Students (%, Fall 2003)UNDER 20 20-24 25-34 OVER 35

L.A. Mission 22.9 31.6 22.9 22.6LACCD 20.7 30.6 24.8 23.8

Enrollment by Time of DayMost LAMC students are “evening only” (40.9%) and this has been true since the college was founded. The second most popular scheduling is “both day and evening” at 31.6%. Since 1976, the percentage of students who are “day only” has dropped from 38.7% to 27.5% (Table 6). Compared to LACCD students, our students are more likely to attend “evening only” and are less likely to attend “day only”.Figure 5: Enrollment of LAMC Students by Time of Day (Fall, 2003)

Day/Eve31.6%

Evening Only

40.9%

Day Only27.5%

Day Only

Day/Evening

Evening Only

32

Table 6: Enrollment by Time of Day for LAMC and LACCD Students (%, Fall 03)

1976 1985 1995 2003 LACCD2003

Day Only 38.7 30.6 29.1 27.5 38.4Day/Evening 16.3 14.5 24.6 31.6 26.3Evening Only

45.0 54.9 46.3 40.9 35.4

Educational Goals of LAMC Students The educational goals of most LAMC students (38.4%) are vocational (Figure 6). The second most common educational goal of our students is to transfer (27.1%). Since 1985, the percentage of LAMC students with transfer goals has increased from 18.8% to 27.1%. The educational goals of LAMC students closely mirror those of LACCD students (Table 7).

Figure 6: Educational Goals of LAMC Students (Fall, 2003)

Undecided17.8%

Transition7.8%

General Ed.

8.9%Transfer

27.1%

Vocational38.4%

Vocational

Transfer

General Ed.

Transition

Undecided

Table 7: Educational Goals of LAMC and LACCD Students (%, Fall 2003)

VOCATIONAL TRANSFER GENERAL EDUCATION

transition UNDECIDED

Los Angeles Mission

38.4 27.1 8.9 7.8 17.8

L.A.C.C.District

35.5 30.8 10.2 6.9 16.6

33

Prior Education of LAMC StudentsLos Angeles Mission College has the highest percentage of students with foreign high school degrees (31.6%) in the district (Figure 7 and Table 8). About 4% of our students already have an Associate degree and another 3.8% have a Bachelor’s degree or higher. Approximately 6.7% of our students are not high school graduates. Finally 6.3% are high school students, concurrently enrolled in the college.

Figure 7: Prior Education of LAMC Students (Fall, 2003)

Other14.5%

No High School

6.7%

A.A.4%

B.A. or +3.8%

Concurrent High School

6.3%

H.S. Equivalent5.6%

U.S. High School

27.5

Foreign High School31.6%

U.S. High School Graduate

Foreign High School

H.S. Equivalent

Concurrent High School

Not High School Graduate

AA Degree

B.A. or +

Other

Table 8: Prior Education of LAMC Students (Fall, 2003)

U.S. HIGH SCHOOL

FOREIGNHIGHSCHOOL

HIGH SCHOOLEQUIV.

CURRENTHIGH SCHOOL

NOT HIGHSCHOOLGRADUATE

A.A. B.A.OR +

L.A.Mission

27.5 31.6 5.6 6.3 6.7 4.0 3.8

L.A.C.C.District

38.4 26.3 6.1 5.0 6.2 4.5 6.7

34

Academic Load of LAMC StudentsOnly 27.6% of LAMC students are full-time or enrolled in 12 or more units (Figure 8). Over three-fourths of LAMC students attend part time, and take between 6 and 11.5 units (38.7%) or less than 6 units per semester (33.6%).

Figure 8: Distribution of Academic Load of LAMC Students (Fall 2003)

33.6

38.7

27.6

05

1015202530354045

L.T. 6 6-11.5 12+

Number of Units/Semester

Per

cen

tag

e

Local Feeder High SchoolsWhile LAMC has a high number of students with foreign high school degrees, several local high schools provide large numbers of incoming students to the college. Most students come from the following schools: San Fernando, Sylmar, Kennedy, Monroe, Francis Polytechnic, Bishop Alemany, Granada Hills, and Van Nuys (Figure 9).

Figure 9: LAMC Enrollment from Local Feeder High Schools (% in Fall, 2000)

19.4

14.1

5.5 5.2 4.32.7 2.7 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.2

0

5

10

15

20

25

Sa

nF

ern

an

do

Sy

lma

r

Ke

nn

ed

y

Mo

nro

e

Fra

nc

isP

oly

Ale

ma

ny

Gra

na

da

Hil

ls

Va

n N

uy

s

Ve

rdu

go

N.

Ho

lly

wo

od

Ch

ats

wo

rth

High School

35

AA and AS Degrees Awarded - Totals for all Years 1995/96 - 2002/03

Program Number Average per yearInterdisciplinary Stud 1613 201.6Child Development 145 18.1Admin of Justice 90 11.3Law 70 8.8Psychology 50 6.3Computer Sci - Info 49 6.1Math 44 5.5Multimedia 30 3.8Food Serv Manag 28 3.5Accounting 16 2.0Addiction Studies 14 1.8Spanish 12 1.5Public Admin 12 1.5Ethnic Studies 11 1.4Business 10 1.3Art 9 1.1Office Admin 9 1.1Sociology 8 1.0Supervision 6 0.8Electronics Tech 6 0.8Political Science 6 0.8Engineering 4 0.5Interior Design 3 0.4Real Estate 2 0.3Biology 2 0.3Environmental Sci 2 0.3Family Cons Stud 2 0.3Finance 1 0.1Marketing 1 0.1College Total 2255 282

(Source of Data: Dean of Research and Planning, 5/7/04)

36

Certificates Awarded - Totals for all Years 1995/96 - 2002/03

Program Number Average per yearChild Development 346 43.3Addiction Studies 152 19.0Law 120 15.0Public Admin 92 11.5Computer Sci - Info 59 7.4Food Serv Manag 45 5.6Office Admin 25 3.1Multimedia 20 2.5Supervision 18 2.3Admin of Justice 12 1.5Family Cons Stud 10 1.3Human Services 8 1.0Electronics Tech 3 0.4Engineering 3 0.4Interior Design 3 0.4Art 2 0.3Industrial Tech 1 0.1Fashion Design 1 0.1Parenting 1 0.1College Total 921 115


37

English Placement - Fall Semesters (1995-2003)

% of students taking the exam placing into each level

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Average

DC 1 or LS 2 26 31 34 34 34 34 30 32 21 31ESL 1 - 6A 19 21 19 16 21 21 23 22 20 20English 21 28 25 28 28 27 27 29 28 27 27English 28 14 12 12 12 10 11 11 12 16 12English 101 12 11 8 8 7 7 6 6 16 9


Math Placement - Fall Semesters (1994-2003)

% of students taking the exam placing into each level

1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Math 105 57 54 52 43 44 43 41 24 10 40Math 112 22 40 19Math 115 30 33 32 40 37 39 37 36 33 24Math 125 11 11 14 15 16 17 20 16 15 17Math 240 1 1 1 1 1Math 260 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0Math 265 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0


38

Comparison of Average Rate of Retention - Years 1994-2003

A. Departments B. Disciplines

Department Retention % Discipline Retention %

PACE 91 Cinema* 95ESL and Speech 89 Physical Education 93Professional Studies 89 Personal Dev 93Non-departmental 88 Admin of Justice 92Arts, Health and PE 85 Spanish 92

Social Sciences 85 Food Serv Manag 92English and Foreign Languages 82 Speech 91Natural Sciences 81 Learning Skills 91Business and Law 80 PACE 91Engineering and Computer Sci 77 Child Development 91Mathematics 73 Health 90

Engineering Elec* 90COLLEGE AVERAGE 84 Psychology 90

Library Science* 89( * = average calculated on fewer years of data) Chicano Studies 89(Source of Data: Dean of Research and Planning, 5/7/04) Sociology 89

ESL Lower 88ESL Upper 88Developmental Com 88Fam and Con Stud 88Interior Design 88Law 87Supervision* 87Anthropology 87Geography 87Physical Science 87Physiology 87Multimedia* 85Photography 85Education 85Addiction Studies* 85Political Science 85Art 84Real Estate* 84

Biology 84Economics 83Engineering Gen 83Afro Am Studies* 83Philosophy 83

39

Humanities 81Anatomy 80Microbiology 80Coop Education 80Computer Sci - Info 79French 79Italian* 79Chemistry 79Accounting 77Marketing* 77Management 76English 76Astronomy 75History 74Math 73Music 71CAOT 70Business 70Electronics* 68Finance* 67Physics 67Drafting 63

COLLEGE AVERAGE 84

40

Comparison of Average Rate of Success - Years 1994-2003

A. Departments B. Disciplines

Department % Success Discipline Success %

PACE 78 Engineering Elec* 88Professional Studies 76 Food Serv Manag 82ESL and Speech 70 Admin of Justice 80Arts, Health and PE 68 Supervision* 80Non-departmental 66 Addiction Studies* 80

Social Sciences 66 PACE 78English and Foreign Languages 65 Physical Education 77Natural Sciences 65 Physiology 77Business and Law 63 Personal Dev 77Engineering and Computer Sci 61 Geography 76Mathematics 50 Child Development 76

Fam and Con Stud 76COLLEGE AVERAGE 66 Sociology 76

Photography 75( * = average calculated on fewer years of data) Real Estate* 75(Source of Data: Dean of Research and Planning, 5/7/04) Law 74

Health 73Engineering Gen 73Spanish 73Political Science 73Economics 72Art 71Cinema* 71ESL Upper 71Coop Education 71Multimedia* 70ESL Lower 70Microbiology 70Chicano Studies 70French 69Italian* 68Speech 68Interior Design 68Physical Science 67Education 67

Philosophy 66Physics 65Biology 64Psychology 63

41

Learning Skills 62Afro Am Studies* 62Anatomy 60Library Science* 60Marketing* 59Anthropology 59Chemistry 59Humanities 57Accounting 57Management 57Computer Sci - Info 56Developmental Com 56Astronomy 55History 54Music 53Finance* 50Math 50English 49Business 46Drafting 44Electronics* 42CAOT 38

COLLEGE AVERAGE 66

42

WSCH, FTEF, WSCH/FTEF - Based on Average of Fall Semesters Data 2001, 2002, 2003

WSCH FTEF WSCH/FTEFMath 8318 Math 14.3 Chicano Stud 733English 4683 English 10.2 Political Sci 726Child Develop 4335 Child Develop 8.3 Cinema 709ESL - lower 4305 ESL - lower 7.3 Sociology 706PACE 3203 Comp Sci 6.8 Psychology 661Comp Sci 2834 PACE 6.6 Health 659FSMGMT 2584 FSMGMT 6.2 Economics 647Chicano Stud 2406 Multimedia 4.7 Anthropology 643Psychology 2302 ESL - upper 4.6 Philosophy 640Fam Con Stud 2289 Art 4.5 Italian 627Biology 2193 Biology 4.1 Linguistics 595Admin Just 2095 CAOT 4.0 Law 591ESL - upper 2010 Spanish 4.0 History 589Political Sci 1903 Admin Just 3.9 ESL - lower 588Health 1796 Psychology 3.5 Math 583Dev Com 1699 Chicano Stud 3.3 Humanities 578Spanish 1696 PE - Activity 3.2 Anatomy 559CAOT 1660 Dev Com 3.2 Dev Com 540PE - Activity 1631 Speech 3.1 Biology 537Sociology 1507 Health 2.7 Admin Just 536

Speech 1448 Political Sci 2.7 Geography 534

Art 1418 Chemistry 2.5 Child Develop 525Multimedia 1381 Accounting 2.4 PE - Activity 518

Philosophy 1367 Geography 2.3 Math-N 497Law 1225 Law 2.1 Physical Sci 491Geography 1204 Philosophy 2.1 Astronomy 489History 996 Sociology 2.1 PACE 482Cinema 929 Engineer Gen 1.8 English 478Accounting 844 Business 1.7 Business 467Chemistry 826 Fam Con Stud 1.7 Speech 466Humanities 820 History 1.7 Physiology 465Business 615 Music 1.5 Fam Con Stud 463Anthropology 582 Humanities 1.5 Learn Skills 462Physical Sci 497 Cinema 1.3 Photography 452Music 485 Interior Design 1.2 Art 450Interior Design 448 Anthropology 1.0 Afro-Amer Stud 448Astronomy 438 Physical Sci 1.0 ESL - upper 440Engineer Gen 400 Management 0.9 French 428Learn Skills 400 Astronomy 0.9 Spanish 422Economics 337 Math-N 0.6 CAOT 420

43

Anatomy 333 Anatomy 0.6 FSMGMT 420Photography 284 Microbiology 0.6 Comp Sci 411Math-N 267 Physiology 0.6 Physics 391Physiology 258 Learn Skills 0.6 Microbiology 367Italian 252 Economics 0.5 Interior Design 362Management 244 Photography 0.5 Accounting 352Microbiology 189 Personal Dev 0.5 Drafting 351Personal Dev 165 Italian 0.4 Personal Dev 344Physics 156 Physics 0.4 Marketing 338French 142 French 0.3 Chemistry 335Linguistics 119 Marketing 0.2 Music 318Afro-Amer Stud 90 Drafting 0.2 Management 283Drafting 70 Linguistics 0.2 Multimedia 281Marketing 67 Afro-Amer Stud 0.2 Engineer Gen 219

average 1384 average 2.7 average 493


44

Section Count and Fill Rate - Semester Average Based on Fall Semester Data 2001, 2002, 2003

Sections % Fill RateMath 53.7 Linguistics 112English 48.3 Anatomy 112Child Develop 38.7 Chicano Stud 107PACE 31.0 Italian 106Comp Sci 29.0 ESL - lower 103Art 28.6 Speech 103CAOT 28.0 French 101FSMGMT 22.7 Biology 101Dev Com 22.6 Cinema 99PE - Activity 20.7 PACE 99Admin Just 20.6 Photography 96ESL - lower 19.7 Personal Dev 96Multimedia 19.0 Child Develop 94Engineer Gen 18.0 ESL - upper 93Psychology 17.3 Anthropology 93Chicano Stud 16.7 History 90Speech 15.7 Health 89Spanish 15.0 Philosophy 89ESL - upper 13.7 English 88Health 13.6 Physical Sci 88

Political Sci 13.3 Math 87Biology 12.3 Chemistry 86Geography 11.3 Physiology 85Philosophy 11.3 Astronomy 84Music 11.0 Economics 82Law 11.0 Geography 82Sociology 10.7 PE - Activity 80Learn Skills 10.0 Humanities 80

Fam Con Stud 8.7 Sociology 80Accounting 8.3 Physics 77Business 8.3 Political Sci 77History 8.3 Psychology 77Humanities 7.3 Math-N 76Interior Design 6.3 Admin Just 73Personal Dev 6.3 Law 73Physical Sci 6.0 Dev Com 73Cinema 5.0 Drafting 72Anthropology 5.0 Microbiology 72Chemistry 5.0 Marketing 69Astronomy 4.7 Spanish 68

45

Management 4.3 Multimedia 67Economics 3.0 Business 67Photography 3.0 Afro-Amer Stud 66Math-N 2.0 Comp Sci 62Physiology 2.0 Art 61Anatomy 1.7 Fam Con Stud 61Microbiology 1.5 FSMGMT 59Italian 1.3 Interior Design 59Marketing 1.0 Accounting 57Drafting 1.0 Management 53French 1.0 Learn Skills 45Linguistics 1.0 Music 43Physics 1.0 CAOT 31Afro-Amer Stud 1.0 Engineer Gen 29

average 13 average 79

(Source Of Data: Dean of Research and Planning, 5/7/04)

46

Known Full-Year Transfers to CSU and UC

Year CSU transfers UC Transfers Total1981-82 591982-83 681983-84 571984-85 601985-86 491986-87 57 5 621987-88 59 2 611988-89 67 3 701989-90 102 4 1061990-91 69 5 741991-92 70 8 781992-93 89 13 1021993-94 121 14 1351994-95 117 13 1301995-96 169 12 1811996-97 140 17 1571997-98 130 9 1391998-99 108 15 1231999-00 165 9 1742000-01 168 11 1792001-02 213 22 2352002-03 201 15 216


47

Status of Unit Assessment Submission - Spring 2002

Discipline Accepted Resubmission NotRequired Submitted

African American Studies XAnatomy XAnthropology XArt XAstronomy XBiology XComputer Applications Office Technology XChild Development XChemistry XComputer Science - Information Technology XEngineering XEnglish XEnglish as a Second Language XFrench XGeography XHistory XItalian XMathematics XMicrobiology XMusic XPhilosophy XPhysical Science XPhysics XPhysiology XPsychology XSociology XSpanish XAdministration of Justice and Fire Technology XChicano Studies XCinema XEconomics XFamily and Consumer Studies XInterior Design XMultimedia XAccounting XAddiction Studies XBusiness XFinance XFood Service Management X

48

Health XHumanities XLaw XMarketing XManagement XPhotography XPhysical Education XPolitical Science XReal Estate XSpeech XSupervision X

Total = 50 27 7 16


49

Future Assumptions

1. The majority of students entering Mission College will continue to require pre-collegiate academic remediation, especially in math and English, in order to be successful in college-level and university-transferable courses.

2. The number of students enrolling to complete lower division requirements, before transferring to a baccalaureate degree granting institution, will increase at a greater rate than general college enrollments.

3. While enrollment in AA/AS Degree, certificate and vocational programs will increase, there will be increasing demand by employers for graduates who possess "employable skills," including: basic competency in reading, writing, and computation; interpersonal communication; problem solving; and creative thinking.

4. Community colleges will be expected to provide more remedial and basic skills instruction for under-prepared high school graduates, reverse university transfers, and the local work force.

5. The demographics of the primary service area will change over the period of 2005-2010, with an increasing Latino population, 18-24 year-old population and 55+ year-old population, and college enrollments will grow modestly.

6. The college will continue to serve a significant number of students who are: economically challenged, first-generation college students, non-native English speakers and working full- or part-time.

7. Job growth in the U.S. through 2012 will not be evenly distributed across occupations and industries, with most created in the next few years in the service-providing area rather than manufacturing.

8. Student learning outcomes assessment, intended to systematically improve student learning at institutions of higher education, will be increasingly emphasized and will be expected by all accrediting bodies.

9. Fiscal constraints will limit access to higher education, as the demand for enrollment in the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) will increase in the next few years.

50

1. The majority of students entering Mission College will continue to require pre-collegiate academic remediation, especially in math and English, in order to be successful in college-level and university-transferable courses.

The Fall 2003 student body reflects the expanded and diverse community we serve. LAMC has the highest percentage of foreign high school graduates (31.6%) and the lowest percentage of US high school graduates (27.5%) in the LACCD. This is a significant change from 1995 when these same numbers mirrored the average in the LACCD.1 The percentage of LAMC students with HS Equivalency/Proficiency Certificates has remained constant during this same period.

San Fernando HS and Sylmar HS are the dominant feeder schools for graduating high school seniors. Both are Title 1 schools and have a statewide rank of 2 on California's Academic Performance Index (the index ranks schools from 1 to 10, with 10 being highest). Both schools have enrollments exceeding 3500 and exceed the district average class size in all subject areas. In fall 2003, San Fernando HS categorizes 32% of its students as English learners; Sylmar HS categorized 26% of its students as English learners. Monroe HS, Francis Polytechnic HS, and Kennedy HS represent the next most significant feeder schools. All are Title 1 schools and have statewide API rankings of 2, 1, and 3, respectively. The schools have enrollments of 4900, 4000, and 2900, respectively and exceed district class size averages in all subject areas except English. Monroe categorizes 42% of its students as English learners, Francis Poly, 36%, and Kennedy, 20%.2

Examination of the English Placement Test results from 1994-2002 reveals that 6-12% of entering students place into first semester college English (English 101). In descending order based on course-level, the range of placements over this interval were: English 28 (10-14%), English 21 (25-29%), ESL and Dev Com combined (45-59%).3 Examination of the Math Placement Test Results from 1994-2002 reveals the following, in descending order based on course level: Math 265, 260, 240 combined (0-1%), Math 125 (11-20%), Math 115 (30-40%), Math 112 (20-40%), Math 105 (24-57%).4 Due to the introduction of new testing methods in 2003, it is difficult to interpret the results. However, normalization of the 2003 math placement scores reveals a similar trend.

2. The number of students enrolling to complete lower division requirements, before transferring to a baccalaureate degree granting institution, will increase at a greater rate than general college enrollments. 5,6,7,16

Substantial tuition and fee increases in the UC and CSU systems, aligned with comparably modest increases at the community colleges, will make the latter an attractive alternative for the first two years of a four-year degree program. One reason cited for the increasing time required to complete the traditional four-year degree is the lack of availability of scheduled classes at the universities. An increase in the number of students entering the UC or CSU system at the junior, rather than freshman, level will translate into a proportional redistribution of class offerings and enable students to complete their degree in a more timely manner. Indeed, the most recent spending plan for higher education in California makes explicit that community colleges must work with the UC’s and CSU's to clearly articulate transfer requirements.13 The increasing number of partnerships between various community colleges and UC and CSU schools further evidences this trend. Some examples of these liaisons are UCI and Glendale Community College; UCLA and all participating community colleges through the

51

TAP program; and IMAPC, a statewide effort between the CSU system and community colleges to better articulate transfer requirements.

3. While enrollment in AA/AS Degree, Certificate and Vocational programs will increase, there will be increasing demand by employers for graduates who possess "employable skills," including: basic competency in reading, writing, and computation; interpersonal communication; problem solving; and creative thinking. 12, 15

There will be continued demand for pre-baccalaureate academic programs, however, the nature of the programs will be forced to change by external forces.12 There will be a continuing demand for specific skills training and degrees or certificates in some areas such as health care and service industries.9 Increased emphasis will be put on producing graduates who possess the basic skills deemed desirable by employers. The rigor of these programs will increase both out of necessity and by design. Continuing enrollment growth, stagnant or reduced funding for community colleges, and increasingly complex job skills will demand strengthened matriculation and attendance requirements. The proportion of AA/AS degrees awarded will increase as these changes to matriculation and attendance reduce the number of casual attendees.12 At the same time, specific job skill training will be done more on a contract basis. There may be increased competition in the vocational arena from private sector post-secondary institutions if community college fees continue to rise significantly and students cannot get courses at public colleges.

4. Community colleges will be expected to provide more remedial and basic skills instruction for under-prepared high school graduates, university to community college transfers, and the local work force. 8,10

A sizable investment in remedial and basic skills instruction will remain a necessity in areas with large concentrations of functionally illiterate and/or non-native English-speaking populations.11,12

In the near term, recent decisions to eliminate remedial courses in the UC and CSU system will force some students at these schools to address these deficiencies at the community colleges. The impact of these near-term effects will depend largely on the demographics of the student population and whether or not current reforms in local school districts prove to be effective. Transfer curriculum at community colleges will broaden, be more complete, and become more rigorous in response to increased student demand and better coordination between the community colleges and state colleges and universities.8,10,12,13

5. The demographics of the primary service area will change over the period of 2005-20010, with an increasing Latino population, 18-24 year-old population and 55+ year-old population, and college enrollments will grow modestly.

Part of the difficulty in predicting enrollment based on demographic data is the challenge of defining with certainty the "service area" of the college.17 The college has continued to attract students from outside its immediate service area, including other parts of the San Fernando Valley, Santa Clarita, and Antelope Valley.

52

Between 2005-10 the population in the primary service area is expected to grow by 2.7%.17

(see report for definition of primary service area and limitations of these projections). The percentage of Latinos is expected to increase to 63.0% in 2010 from 56.6% in 2000. During this same ten-year period, the age structure will change with 18-24 year olds increasing 35.5%, while 25-34 year olds decrease 19.1%. The 55+ age is expected to increase 17.7% between 2005-10.5 The college is expected to serve 28% more students from local high schools over the five-year period, as LAUSD K-12 enrollment continues to grow substantially. The college serves some of the fastest growing areas in Los Angeles County. Growth rates between 1990-1999 were 27.3% in Mission Hills, 17.8% in Sylmar, and 15.5% in Pacoima.18

Although it is difficult to predict the exact number of enrollments to be expected each year, a conservative estimate of an annual growth rate of 3.9% would project enrollments to be approximately: 8,312 ('05), 8,636 ('06), 8,973 ('07), 9,322 ('08), 9,686 ('09), and 10,064 ('10) assuming a 2004 enrollment of 8,000.

6. The college will continue to serve a significant number of students who are: economically challenged, first-generation college students, non-native English speakers and working full- or part-time.

Most of the data gathered over the years supports the proposition that the college will continue to serve students with great social and economic challenges in pursuing higher education.19 Data collected through different surveys and studies over the past ten years reveals that at some point during this period the LAMC student body demonstrated:

6% are single parents40% have a primary language other than English40% have household income below $20,000 per year58% have reported working 30 or more hours per week.77% have been independent students who were not claimed by a parent as a dependent

7. Job growth in the U.S. through 2012 will not be evenly distributed across occupations and industries, with most created in the next few years in the service-providing area rather than manufacturing.

The U.S. Department of Labor projects that 21.6 million new jobs will be created between 2002 and 2012.19 Approximately 20.8 million of these jobs will be in the service providing industries, the rest will be in the goods-producing industries (construction, manufacturing, farming, mining, etc.).

The greatest growth is expected in education and health services; 1 out of every 4 new jobs created will be in healthcare and social assistance (4.4 million) or private educational services (759,000). Other areas of rapid growth will include professional services (5 million jobs), leisure and hospitality (2.1 million), information (632,000), and government, including public education and hospitals (2.5 million).

The following occupations have been identified as those with the greatest projected numerical increases in employment between 2002 and 2012: registered nurses, postsecondary teachers, retail salespersons, customer service representatives, food preparation and serving, cashiers, janitors and

53

cleaners, general and operations managers, waiters and waitresses, nursing aides, orderlies and attendants, truck drivers, receptionists and information clerks, security guards, office clerks, teacher assistants, and health, personal, and home care aides.

The occupations with the greatest projected numerical declines in employment between 2002-2012 include: farmers, sewing machine operators, word processors and typists, stock clerks, secretaries, electrical equipment assemblers, computer and telephone operators, postal mail sorters and operators, loan clerks, data entry keyers, telemarketers, textile workers, team assemblers, order clerks, travel agents, and brokerage clerks.

8. Student learning outcomes assessment, intended to systematically improve student learning at institutions of higher education, will be increasingly emphasized and will be expected by all accrediting bodies.

The new Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior College (ACCJC) standards for accreditation, to become effective in the fall of 2004, reflect this emphasis. As with most other national accrediting agencies, the intent of the commission is to move instruction in the institutions it accredits from teacher-centered to learner-centered. There will be a serious corresponding demand from legislators, governing boards, accrediting bodies, employers, and students and their families for accountability, requiring public disclosure of the results of outcomes assessment at the college. This increased emphasis on improving institutional effectiveness through planning based on measuring outcomes is obvious in excerpts from the new standards: 20

________________________________________________________________________

Standard I: Institutional Mission and Effectiveness

The institution demonstrates strong commitment to a mission that emphasizes achievement of student learning and to communicating the mission internally and externally. The institution uses analyses of quantitative and qualitative data and analysis in an ongoing and systematic cycle of evaluation, integrated planning, implementation, and re-evaluation to verify and improve the effectiveness by which the mission is accomplished.

A. Mission

The institution has a statement of mission that defines the institution’s broad educational purposes, its intended student population, and its commitment to achieving student learning.

1. The institution establishes student learning programs and services aligned with its purposes, its character, and its student population.

2. …

3. …

54

4. The institution’s mission is central to institutional planning and decision making.

B. Improving Institutional Effectiveness

The institution demonstrates a conscious effort to produce and support student learning, measures that learning, assesses how well learning is occurring, and makes changes to improve student learning. The institution also organizes its key processes and allocates its resources to effectively support student learning. The institution demonstrates its effectiveness by providing 1) evidence of the achievement of student learning outcomes and 2) evidence of institution and program performance. The institution uses ongoing and systematic evaluation and planning to refine its key processes and improve student learning.

Standard II: Student Learning Programs and Services

A. Instructional Programs

The institution offers high-quality instructional programs in recognized and emerging fields of study that culminate in identified student outcomes leading to degrees, certificates, employment, or transfer to other higher education institutions or programs consistent with its mission. Instructional programs are systematically assessed in order to assure currency, improve teaching and learning strategies, and achieve stated student learning outcomes. The provisions of this standard are broadly applicable to all instructional activities offered in the name of the institution.

1. The institution demonstrates that all instructional programs, regardless of location or means of delivery, address and meet the mission of the institution and uphold its integrity.

a. The institution identifies and seeks to meet the varied educational needs of its students through programs consistent with their educational preparation and the diversity, demographics, and economy of its communities. The institution relies upon research and analysis to identify student learning needs and to assess progress toward achieving stated learning outcomes.

________________________________________________________________________

Other than the direct motivation of the accreditation process, educational trends throughout the state and the nation reflect the need to improve educational programs through the establishment of learning outcomes, assessment, and subsequent refinement of the educational approach. Many sources point to this trend.

The CSU Institute for teaching and learning explains, “…most (reasons for doing assessment) revolve around one central question: “Did students learn what faculty believe they’re teaching?” Clear statements of objectives are defined, and outcomes data are collected empirically to verify that objectives have been met. Assessment provides feedback to faculty, staff, program coordinators,

55

academic administrators, and other stakeholders about what is being accomplished and is integrated into a feedback loop in which changes are made and evaluated. Assessment has both practical and political implications. Feedback allows faculty to refine and develop their pedagogy and curricula...”21

In defining outcomes assessment, Tom Angelo writes, “Assessment is an on-going process aimed at understanding and improving student learning. It involves making our expectations explicit and public; setting appropriate criteria and high standards for learning quality; systematically gathering, analyzing, and interpreting evidence to determine how well performance matches those expectations and standards; and using the resulting information to document, explain, and improve performance. When it is embedded effectively within larger institutional systems, assessment can help us focus our collective attention, examine our assumption, and create a shared academic culture dedicated to assuring and improving the quality of higher education.”22

Among the nine principles of good practice for outcomes assessment developed by the American Association of Higher Education (AAHE) are four that specifically pertain to educational master planning. “1. The assessment of student learning begins with educational values…3. Assessment works best when the programs it seeks to improve have clear, explicitly stated purposes…7. Assessment makes a difference when it begins with issues of use and illuminates questions that people really care about…9. Through assessment, educators meet responsibilities to students and to the public.”23

Among the many reasons for faculty to do assessment, Mary Allen in the Outcomes Assessment Handbook, gives several that have a bearing on educational master planning. She states, “Collecting assessment data allows faculty to verify their assumptions and to identify discrepancies about what students learn. They can use this feedback to make informed decisions about pedagogical or curricular changes.” About the assessment process she states, “The process results in a framework for current decision making and for guiding long-term planning.” 21

The national and statewide movement toward outcomes assessment has significant implications for educational master planning. Experts report that planning without assessment, without hard evidence supporting specific plans for improvement, may lack the inducement for change that is vital in any planning process.

9. Fiscal constraints will limit access to higher education, as the demand for enrollment in the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) will increase in the next few years.

According to a recent study published by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, in the next six years over 714,000 additional students will seek to enter California’s system of higher education. 24 This large influx of students, referred to as “Tidal Wave II," will not be spread evenly through the three systems of higher education (CCC, UC, and CSU). Most of the growth (almost 75%) will occur in the community college system. Furthermore, the growth in the community college system will be primarily in districts in five Southern California counties (Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, San Bernardino, and Riverside). Unfortunately, California’s current budget crisis will limit the ability of these colleges to respond to the increased demand. Several factors will converge to restrict student access to a community college education at Los Angeles Mission College (LAMC) and surrounding colleges:

56

Factors driving increases in the local student population

High School Graduates in Los Angeles County: The annual number of public high school graduates in the county are projected to increase by 29.5% or 23,097 between 2001 and 2011 (from 78,334/year in 2001 to 101,431/year in 2011).

Change in the 18- to 19-Year-Old Population: The number of people in this age category living in Los Angeles County is projected to increase by 53.9 % or 134,291 individuals between 2000 and 2010 (from 249,049 in 2001 to 383,340 in 2010). A significant percentage (about 30%) of these individuals will not have high school degrees. Over three quarters of the population growth in this age category will be of Hispanic ethnicity (75.9% or 101,878).

Enrollment Projections for LACCD: Enrollment in the district is expected to increase by 27.2% or 40,200 students between 2001 and 2010 (from 147,962 in 2001 to 188,168 in 2010).

Fiscal constraints facing the college in the years ahead

Limits on funding in enrollment growth: The current state budget shortfall has significantly limited the amount of funds available for growth. Enrollment caps are negotiated annually during the state budget process and during times of fiscal crisis may be lowered midyear. In the current political climate, any additional funding to the system will probably favor equalization at the expense of growth. These factors make long-term financial planning very difficult for the college.

The State Allocation Formula: State funding for community college students is significantly lower than that of the other higher education systems (UC and CSU). Furthermore, the community college system competes directly with the K-12 system for funding, placing it at a significant disadvantage.

Un-funded students: The state does not reimburse districts for students once they reach their enrollment caps; as a result, Los Angeles Mission College and the district have a significant number of un-funded FTES (full-time equivalent students).

High percentage of non-credit FTE's: LAMC has a relatively high proportion of noncredit offerings. Since the state funding level for noncredit FTES is significantly lower than that of credit FTES, our allocation per student is lower than that of most other colleges in the district.

The District Allocation Model: LAMC is part of a large multi-campus district. The district’s fiscal allocation model has generated a system in which smaller campuses with large numbers of noncredit instruction are at a disadvantage. Unless the district allocation formula is revised, it is unlikely that the financial situation of the college will improve significantly.

57

References:

1. LACCD Research Website. http://research.laccd.edu/research, information acquired in May, 2004.2. Educational Data Partnership: Fiscal, Demographic and Performance Data on California's K-12 Schools. www.ed-data.k12.ca.us, information acquired in May, 20043. English Placement Distribution, Fall 1994-2003, Maury Pearl, Institutional Research and Planning, LAMC, generated May, 2004.4. Math Placement Distribution, Fall 1994-2003, Maury Pearl, Institutional Research and Planning, LAMC, generated May, 2004.5. Proceedings of a Beyond 2000 Pre-conference Workshop. Beyond 2000: Visioning the Future of Community Colleges, The 1995 Inaugural Futures Assembly. Orlando, FL. February 26-28, 1995.6. Enrollment Trends in Community Colleges. Andrews, Hans A. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.7. Current Population Survey, October 1988, 1989, 1990, 1998, 1999, 2000 Supplements. U.S. Bureau of the Census, state-level data provided by Pinkerton Computer Consultants, 2002.8. Reverse Transfers in the Community Colleges. Lebard, Christine. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.9. The Role of Community College in Economic and Workforce Development. Hirshberg, Diane. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.10. A Review of Community College Curriculum Trends. Striplin, Jenny Castruita. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.11. Community College Adult Literacy Programs: Moving Toward Collaboration. Gomez, Gigi. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.12. Projecting the Future of Community Colleges. Cohen, Arthur M. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.13. Improving Articulation Policies. Tobolowsky, Barbara. ERIC Clearinghouse for Community Colleges, Los Angeles, CA.14. Remediation: Back to the Basics. Kongas, Jon and Budros, Kathleen. Strategic Planning Trends, San Jose Community College District.15. The Changing Scene for American Workers. Kongas, Jon and Budros, Kathleen. Strategic Planning Trends, San Jose Community College District.16. California Master Plan for Higher Education. Kongas, Jon and Budros, Kathleen. Strategic Planning Trends, San Jose Community College District.17. Draft Report: Population Projections for the Los Angeles Mission College Primary Service Area: 2000-2010, Maury Pearl, Institutional Research and Planning, LAMC.18. Draft Report: Outline for Need of Expansion at LAMC, Maury Pearl, Institutional Research and Planning, LAMC.19. Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2004-05 Edition. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 2540.20. ACCJC (2002) Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, Western Association of Schools and Colleges, Accrediting Standards. Approved, June 2002.21. Allen, M. J., & Noel, R. C., (2002). Outcomes Assessment Handbook (May, 2002 ed.). CSU Institute for Teaching and Learning.22. Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers (2nd Ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

58

23. AAHE (1997). Learning Through Assessment: A Resource Guide for Higher Education. Washington, DC: American Association for Higher Learning.24. Hayward, G.C., Jones, D.P., McGuiness, A.C, and A. Timar. 2004. Ensuring Access with Quality to California’s Community Colleges. Prepared by the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.

59

Goals / Objectives / Actions

Goal 1 The College will provide the support necessary to ensure student recruitment, retention and success.

1.1 Improve the coordination of student outreach and recruitment.

� Action 1.1 A - The Vice President of Student Services, in conjunction with the Counseling Department, will assess the current status of all college outreach and recruitment activities by October 1, 2005.

� Action 1.1 B - Based upon the assessment results, the Vice President of Student Services, in conjunction with the Counseling Department, will reorganize outreach and recruitment efforts by May 1, 2006.

� Action 1.1 C - The College Advancement Committee, with the participation of Public Relations, will create an advisory task force to develop an effective marketing strategy for the college by June 1, 2005.

� Action 1.1 D - The Counseling Department will increase group counseling activities in Career Planning, College Survival Skills, and Transfer.

1.2 Improve the utilization and effectiveness of all student support units.

� Action 1.2 A - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee, Vice Presidents, and Deans will work together with individual units within Student Services, Academic Affairs, and all other student support units to develop plans for assessment and to perform those assessments by October 1, 2006.

� Action 1.2 B - As part of the assessment of all student support units, the Dean of Research and Planning will work closely with Institutional Effectiveness and the units to coordinate a single, simple, comprehensive student survey to assist in assessment by May 1, 2006.

� Action 1.2 C - The Vice Presidents and Deans will work together with individual units within Student Services, Academic Affairs, and all other student support units to use the unit assessments and the survey results to develop specific actions for improvement by November 1, 2006.

1.3 Increase the number and percentage of students with Student Educational Plans.

� Action 1.3 A - The Vice President of Student Services, working closely with Counseling, EOP&S, DSP&S, Specially Funded Programs and Financial Aid, will initiate a centralized system to consolidate Student Educational Plans by July 1, 2006.

� Action 1.3 B - The Vice President of Student Services, working closely with Counseling, EOP&S, DSP&S, Specially Funded Programs and Financial Aid will develop specific actions to increase the percentage of students with Student Educational Plans by July 1, 2006.

60

1.4 Enhance the co-curricular environment of the college in order to attract students and to promote interpersonal development, leadership skills, and community service.

� Action 1.4 A - The Director of Student Activities, working with the ASO, Diversity Committee, and VP of Student Services, will plan events and speakers to promote a better understanding and appreciation of cultural and ethnic diversity.

� Action 1.4 B - The Director of Student Activities, working with the ASO and VP of Student Services, will provide opportunities to the general student population to develop and improve leadership skills.

Goal 2 The College will efficiently allocate its resources to provide quality instructional programs and courses to meet student needs.

2.1 Improve the offerings of the college in response to student and community needs.

� Action 2.1 A - The Academic Senate will develop and adopt a Program Viability Review process by December 15, 2005, in order to recommend one or more of the following actions:

1. The institution or adoption of a new program/discipline/department

2. A plan of action to improve the performance of an existing program/discipline/department

3. The restructuring of an existing program/discipline/department

4. The discontinuance of an existing program/discipline/department

� Action 2.1 B - The Assessment and Planning Committee, with the assistance of the Dean of Research and Planning, will conduct a biannual environmental scan of businesses, the community, and similar-sized colleges as well as neighboring colleges to determine if there are reasonable opportunities to develop new academic and vocational programs. The first scan will be completed and submitted to the Academic Senate by December 15, 2005.

2.2 Improve the management and coordination of course scheduling to increase the number andpercentage of students completing certificates, degrees and transfer requirements in a timely manner.

� Action 2.2 A - Department Chairs, with assistance from Academic Affairs, will develop working academic schedules on an annual basis so that more effective schedule planning can take place. This will begin with schedule development for the 2005/2006 academic year.

� Action 2.2 B - The Dean of Academic Affairs will establish class schedule and catalog submission and publication deadlines by February 1 for the following academic year.

� Action 2.2 C - Department Chairs will strive to abide by established blocks of time for classes to be offered so that conflicts in student schedules are minimized. This will commence with the development of the Fall 2005 schedule.

61

� Action 2.2 D - Department Chairs, with assistance from Academic Affairs, will coordinate the scheduling of classes across disciplines so that students will not have significant time conflicts in courses needed to earn a degree or certificate. Examination of possible cross-discipline conflicts will begin to be examined in the Fall 2005 schedule.

2.3 Increase instructional efficiency.

� Action 2.3 A - Academic Affairs, the Dean of Research and Planning and Department Chairs will analyze demand data more carefully, including waiting lists, number of closed sections, and previous semesters data. All will work toward improving college classroom enrollment averages so that they more nearly approximate the LACCD average of 31 students per section. Academic Affairs and the Dean of Research and Planning will provide these numbers by discipline, course, and department every semester for the Chairs at the Council of Instruction. This will begin by March 1, 2005.

� Action 2.3 B - The Department Chairs, Academic Senate, and Academic Affairs will establish improvement targets for instructional efficiency for the Departments based on percentage of seats occupied (fill-rate) at census. This will occur by December 1, 2005. The Department Chairs will be empowered to allocate their FTE while planning their course offerings to achieve these targets, with future FTE allocation based on fill-rate in the department as a whole.

2.4 Optimize use of classroom and laboratory space.

� Action 2.4 A - Academic Affairs will publish the room usage grids online so that Department Chairs and faculty can plan for their optimal use. This will commence with the Fall 2006 schedule of classes.

� Action 2.4 B - Department Chairs or their designees, together with the Academic Senate and Academic Affairs, will attend Prop A and AA planning meetings to organize the reallocation/remodeling of existing space and the campus expansion.

� Action 2.4 C - A regular report from the outside planners will be given at least at every other Council of Instruction and Academic Senate meeting, beginning by February 15, 2005.

� Action 2.4 D - The College will abide by state and federal laws regarding universal access for individuals with disabilities by developing procedures and campus guidelines ensuring appropriate access to websites, instructional equipment, materials and software to all students with disabilities by December 15, 2005.

2.5 Develop an effective institutional strategy for establishing, enforcing, and reviewing prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories focused on increasing student success.

� Action 2.5 A - The Curriculum Committee, working with the Staff Development Committee, will conduct at least 3 workshops on the LACCD policy and Title 5 regulations regarding the establishment, validation, renewal, and enforcement of prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories by June 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 B - In order to maintain prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories, the Dean of Academic Affairs will annually compile a list of all course prerequisites and relevant expiration dates. This list will be sent to all Department Chairs and faculty members who will be instructed to review/renew

62

prerequisites before they expire (i.e. at least every six years) if the faculty judge them to be necessary, reasonable and appropriate to ensure student success. This will begin by January 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 C - The Dean of Academic Affairs, with the assistance of Department Chairs and Curriculum Committee and the Matriculation Coordinator, will remove from the college and district databases, and the Schedule of Classes, all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have never been validated. This will occur no later than January 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 D - The Dean of Academic Affairs, with the assistance of Department Chairs and Curriculum Committee, will remove from the upcoming 2005/2006 College Catalog, all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have never been validated. This will occur by June 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 E - The Office of Academic Affairs will remove from the college and district databases all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have been validated in the past, but have not been reviewed in the past six years, before the publication of the 2005/2006 Catalog and the Fall 2005 Schedule of Classes. Thus, Department Chairs will have until March 31, 2005 to review and/or reinstate prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that were established in course outlines before June 30, 1999.

� Action 2.5 F - By the Fall of 2010, English 21 or equivalent placement on the English Placement Exam will be a minimum prerequisite for all UC/CSU-transferable liberal arts and science courses that require students to write an essay of 300 words or more. This is conditional upon those courses meeting the minimum state, district, and college regulations for prerequisite validation.

2.6 Ensure that all course outlines have been updated every six years in accordance with good practices among community colleges.

� Action 2.6 A - Department Chairs and faculty in the Department will provide the Office of Academic Affairs with an annual report on the status of all course outlines, with plans to update course outlines. The first report on the status of course outlines will be no later than July 1, 2005.

� Action 2.6 B - The full-time faculty in each discipline, working with Department Chairs, will update course outlines at least every six years.

� Action 2.6 C - For disciplines with no full-time faculty, the Academic Senate will develop a policy for updating course outlines by November 1, 2005.

2.7 Coordinate resource acquisition and allocation more closely with academic planning.

� Action 2.7 A - The College Council and Academic Senate will review the current shared-governance structure and charters for standing committees to improve the manner in which resources are allocated for instructional programs and student support services. This review will be completed by December 15, 2005.

� Action 2.7 B - The Vice President of Academic Affairs, together with each of the supporting units within Academic Affairs, will use unit surveys and assessments, including enrollment and growth projections, for the development and expansion of the Library, Counseling and tutoring services by October 1, 2006.

63

Goal 3 The College will assess and modify educational programs, disciplines and courses to validate student learning and maintain appropriate academic standards.

3.1 Promote awareness of the College General Education/Learning Outcomes and their incorporation into the curriculum.

� Action 3.1 A - Pending reevaluation by the Academic Senate, the College General Education/Learning Outcomes will be posted by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee on the college website by March 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 B - The Staff Development Committee, in conjunction with the Academic Senate, will conduct at least two workshops on the College General Education/Learning Outcomes by June 1, 2006.

� Action 3.1 C - The Curriculum Committee will establish procedures by which the faculty can integrate College General Education/Learning Outcomes in the development and revision of course outlines by November 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 D - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will distribute model discipline-specific student learning outcomes and assessment plans created by the Art and Philosophy disciplines to all disciplines having at least one full time faculty member by May 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 E - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will distribute model discipline-specific student learning outcomes and assessment plans created by Child Development to all vocational disciplines on campus having at least one full time faculty member by November 1, 2005.

3.2 Assess College General Education/Learning Outcomes at the course, discipline and program levels.

� Action 3.2 A - The Child Development Program, the Art Discipline and the Philosophy Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by June 1, 2005. These will serve as models for programs and disciplines that follow.

� Action 3.2 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will assist math and English, one natural science discipline, and one vocational program in developing and approving discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by November 1, 2006.

� Action 3.2 C - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will establish a schedule by which all disciplines will develop and approve discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by November 1, 2006.

3.3 Define, approve, and assess course-level student-learning outcomes.

� Action 3.3 A - The Art Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve student learning outcomes and conduct its assessment for the Art 103 course by June 1, 2005.

64

� Action 3.3 B - The Philosophy Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve student-learning outcomes and conduct its assessment for the Philosophy 6 course by June 1, 2005.

� Action 3.3 C - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will establish a schedule for all disciplines and programs to approve course-specific student-learning outcomes and conduct an assessment for at least one course by December 1, 2005.

3.4 Improve courses, disciplines and programs based on assessments.

� Action 3.4 A - The Art Discipline will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline for Art 103 based on the results of the course assessment by February 1, 2006.

� Action 3.4 B - The Philosophy discipline will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline for Philosophy 6 based on the results of the course assessment by February 1, 2006.

� Action 3.4 C - All disciplines and programs will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline within one year of the assessment of that course being completed.

Goal 4 The College will improve student success in earning certificates and degrees, continuing their education, seeking employment and attaining personal goals.

4.1 Increase the percentage of students making the successful transition from basic skills courses to college level courses.

� Action 4.1 A - The disciplines of English, ESL, Developmental Communications and Math will propose specific actions to the Academic Senate and Academic Affairs to increase the number and percentage of students who successfully transition from basic skills courses to college-level courses by December 1, 2005.

� Action 4.1 B - The library will collaborate with ESL, Developmental Communications and English to develop effective library workshops, orientations, tutorials or assignments for students in basic skills courses by March 15, 2006.

� Action 4.1 C - The Counseling Department will develop a plan to increase the number of students enrolling in Personal Development classes and to increase group workshops in Career Planning, Transfer and College Survival Skills by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.1 D - The ESL Department will establish an ESL Learning Center on campus. This center will be equipped with computers, ESL support materials, a writing center, and listening stations. Ideally this center will have lab assistants. This center will be used for classroom instruction, supplementary instruction and tutoring, and for independent study by students.

65

4.2 Increase the number and percentage of students earning certificates.

� Action 4.2 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students earning certificates by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.2 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments and disciplines that offer certificates to establish targets and actions for improvement by June 1, 2006.

� Action 4.2 C - Each department/discipline/program will develop a strategy to inform students of the courses required to earn a certificate by March 15, 2006.

4.3 Increase the percentage of students earning degrees and the variety of degrees earned.

� Action 4.3 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students earning various degrees by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.3 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments and disciplines that offer degrees to establish targets and actions for improvement by June 1, 2006.

� Action 4.3 C - Each department/discipline/program will develop a strategy to inform students of the courses required to earn a degree by March 15, 2006.

4.4 Increase the percentage of students transferring to universities.

� Action 4.4 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students transferring by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.4 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments/disciplines/programs, the Transfer Center and Counseling to establish targets and actions to improve transfer rates by June 1, 2006.

� Action 4.4 C - The Articulation Officer, with the Curriculum Committee, will conduct at least one workshop each year for Department Chairs and faculty to explain the articulation process and use of ASSIST. The first workshop will be conducted by June 1, 2005.

66

Ongoing Actions

� Action 2.2 A - Department Chairs, with assistance from Academic Affairs, will develop working academic schedules on an annual basis so that more effective schedule planning can take place. This will begin with schedule development for the 2005/2006 academic year.

� Action 2.2 B - The Dean of Academic Affairs will establish class schedule and catalog submission and publication deadlines by February 1 for the following academic year.

� Action 2.2 C - Department Chairs will strive to abide by established blocks of time for classes to be offered so that conflicts in student schedules are minimized. This will commence with the development of the Fall 2005 schedule.

� Action 2.2 D - Department Chairs, with assistance from Academic Affairs, will coordinate the scheduling of classes across disciplines so that students will not have significant time conflicts in courses needed to earn a degree or certificate. Examination of possible cross-discipline conflicts will begin to be examined in the Fall 2005 schedule.

� Action 2.3 B - The Department Chairs, Academic Senate, and Academic Affairs will establish improvement targets for instructional efficiency for the Departments based on percentage of seats occupied (fill-rate) at census. This will occur by December 1, 2005. The Department Chairs will be empowered to allocate their FTE while planning their course offerings to achieve these targets, with future FTE allocation based on fill-rate in the department as a whole.

� Action 2.4 A - Academic Affairs will publish the room usage grids online so that Department Chairs and faculty can plan for their optimal use. This will commence with the Fall 2006 schedule of classes.

� Action 2.4 B - Department Chairs or their designees, together with the Academic Senate and Academic Affairs, will attend Prop A and AA planning meetings to organize the reallocation/remodeling of existing space and the campus expansion.

� Action 2.5 F - By the Fall of 2010, English 21 or equivalent placement on the English Placement Exam will be a minimum prerequisite for all UC/CSU-transferable liberal arts and science courses that require students to write an essay of 300 words or more. This is conditional upon those courses meeting the minimum state, district, and college regulations for prerequisite validation.

� Action 2.6 B - The full-time faculty in each discipline, working with Department Chairs, will update course outlines at least every six years.

� Action 3.4 C - All disciplines and programs will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline within one year of the assessment of that course being completed.

� Action 4.1 D - The ESL Department will establish an ESL Learning Center on campus. This center will be equipped with computers, ESL support materials, a writing center, and listening stations. Ideally this center will have lab assistants. This center will be used for classroom instruction, supplementary instruction and tutoring, and for independent study by students.

67

Timeline of Actions with Deadlines

Deadline Action

January 1, 2005 � Action 2.5 B - In order to maintain prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories, the Dean ofAcademic Affairs will annually compile a list of all course prerequisites and relevant expiration dates. This list will be sent to all Department Chairs and faculty members who will be instructed to review/renew prerequisites before they expire (i.e. at least every six years) if the faculty judge them to be necessary, reasonable and appropriate to ensure student success. This will begin by January 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 C - The Dean of Academic Affairs, with the assistance of Department Chairs and Curriculum Committee and the Matriculation Coordinator, will remove from the college and district databases, and the Schedule of Classes, all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have never been validated. This will occur no later than January 1, 2005.

February 15, 2005 � Action 2.4 C - A regular report from the outside planners will be given at least at every other Council of Instruction and Academic Senate meeting, beginning in February 15, 2005.

March 1, 2005 � Action 2.3 A - Academic Affairs, the Dean of Research and Planning and Department Chairs will analyze demand data more carefully, including waiting lists, number of closed sections, and previous semesters data. All will work toward improving college classroom enrollment averages so that they more nearly approximate the LACCD average of 31 students per section. Academic Affairs and the Dean of Research and Planning will provide these numbers by discipline, course, and department every semester for the Chairs at the Council of Instruction. This will begin by March 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 A - Pending reevaluation by the Academic Senate, the College General Education/Learning Outcomes will be posted by the Institutional Effectiveness Committee on the college website by March 1, 2005.

March 31, 2005 � Action 2.5 E - The Office of Academic Affairs will remove from the college and district databases all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have been validated in the past, but have not been reviewed in the past six years, before the publication of the 2005/2006 Catalog and the Fall 2005 Schedule of Classes. Thus, Department Chairs will have until March 31, 2005 to review and/or reinstate prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that were established in course outlines before June 30, 1999.

May 1, 2005 � Action 3.1 D - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will distribute model discipline-specific student learning outcomes and assessment plans created by the Art and Philosophy disciplines to all disciplines having at least one full time faculty member by May 1, 2005.

68

June 1, 2005 � Action 3.2 A - The Child Development Program, the Art Discipline and the Philosophy Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by June 1, 2005. These will serve as models for programs and disciplines that follow.

� Action 3.3 A - The Art Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve student learning outcomes and conduct its assessment for the Art 103 course by June 1, 2005.

� Action 3.3 B - The Philosophy Discipline, working with the Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate, will approve student-learning outcomes and conduct its assessment for the Philosophy 6 course by June 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 A - The Curriculum Committee, working with the Staff Development Committee, will conduct at least 3 workshops on the LACCD policy and Title 5 regulations regarding the establishment, validation, renewal, and enforcement of prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories by June 1, 2005.

� Action 2.5 D - The Dean of Academic Affairs, with the assistance of Department Chairs and Curriculum Committee, will remove from the upcoming 2005/2006 College Catalog, all prerequisites/co-requisites/advisories that have never been validated. This will occur by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.2 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students earning certificates by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.3 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students earning various degrees by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.4 A - The Dean of Planning and Research will determine the current status of the number and percentage of students transferring by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.4 C - The Articulation Officer, with the Curriculum Committee, will conduct at least one workshop each year for Department Chairs and faculty to explain the articulation process and use of ASSIST. The first workshop will be conducted by June 1, 2005.

� Action 1.1 C - The College Advancement Committee, with the participation of Public Relations, will create an advisory task force to develop an effective marketing strategy for the college by June 1, 2005.

� Action 4.1 C - The Counseling Department will develop a plan to increase the number of students enrolling in Personal Development classes and to increase group workshops in Career Planning, Transfer and College Survival Skills by June 1, 2005.

69

July 1, 2005. � Action 2.6 A - Department Chairs and faculty in the Department will provide the Office of Academic Affairs with an annual report on the status of all course outlines, with plans to update course outlines. The first report on the status of course outlines will be no later than July 1, 2005.

October 1, 2005. � Action 1.1 A - The Vice President of Student Services, in conjunction with the Counseling Department, will assess the current status of all college outreach and recruitment activities by October 1, 2005.

November 1, 2005 � Action 2.6 C - For disciplines with no full-time faculty, the Academic Senate will develop a policy for updating course outlines by November 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 C - The Curriculum Committee will establish procedures by which the faculty can integrate College General Education/Learning Outcomes in the development and revision of course outlines by November 1, 2005.

� Action 3.1 E - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will distribute model discipline-specific student learning outcomes and assessment plans created by Child Development to all vocational disciplines on campus having at least one full time faculty member by November 1, 2005.

December 1, 2005 � Action 3.3 C - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will establish a schedule for all disciplines and programs to approve course-specific student-learning outcomes and conduct an assessment for at least one course by December 1, 2005.

� Action 4.1 A - The disciplines of English, ESL, Developmental Communications and Math will propose specific actions to the Academic Senate and Academic Affairs to increase the number and percentage of students who successfully transition from basic skills courses to college-level courses by December 1, 2005.

December 15, 2005 � Action 2.1 A - The Academic Senate will develop and adopt a Program Viability Review process by December 15, 2005, in order to recommend one or more of the following actions:

1. The institution or adoption of a new program/discipline/department

2. A plan of action to improve the performance of an existing program/discipline/department

3. The restructuring of an existing program/discipline/department

4. The discontinuance of an existing program/discipline/department

70

� Action 2.1 B - The Assessment and Planning Committee, with the assistance of the Dean of Research and Planning, will conduct a biannual environmental scan of businesses, the community, and similar-sized colleges as well as neighboring colleges to determine if there are reasonable opportunities to develop new academic and vocational programs. The first scan will be completed and submitted to the Academic Senate by December 15, 2005.

� Action 2.7 A - The College Council and Academic Senate will review the current shared-governance structure and charters for standing committees to improve the manner in which resources are allocated for instructional programs and student support services. This review will be completed by December 15, 2005.

� Action 2.4 D - The College will abide by state and federal laws regarding universal access for individuals with disabilities by developing procedures and campus guidelines ensuring appropriate access to websites, instructional equipment, materials and software to all students with disabilities by December 15, 2005.

February 1, 2006. � Action 3.4 A - The Art Discipline will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline for Art 103 based on the results of the course assessment by February 1, 2006.

� Action 3.4 B - The Philosophy discipline will review, and revise if necessary, the course outline for Philosophy 6 based on the results of the course assessment by February 1, 2006.

March 15, 2006 � Action 4.2 C - Each department/discipline/program will develop a strategy to inform students of the courses required to earn a certificate by February 15, 2006.

� Action 4.3 C - Each department/discipline/program will develop a strategy to inform students of the courses required to earn a degree by March 15, 2006.

� Action 4.1 B - The library will collaborate with ESL, Developmental Communications and English to develop effective library workshops, orientations, tutorials or assignments for students in basic skills courses by March 15, 2006.

� Action 1.1 D - The Counseling Department will increase group counseling activities and workshops in Career Planning, College Survival Skills, and Transfer by March 15, 2006.

May 1, 2006 � Action 1.1 B - Based upon the assessment results, the Vice President of Student Services, in conjunction with the Counseling Department, will reorganize outreach and recruitment efforts by May 1, 2006.

� Action 1.2 B - As part of the assessment of all student support units, the Dean of Research and Planning will work closely with Institutional Effectiveness and the units to coordinate a single, simple, comprehensive student survey to assist in assessment by May 1, 2006.

71

June 1, 2006 � Action 4.2 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments and disciplines that offer certificates to establish targets and actions for improvement by June 1, 2006.

� Action 4.3 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments and disciplines that offer degrees to establish targets and actions for improvement by June 1, 2006.

� Action 4.4 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee will work with departments/disciplines/programs, the Transfer Center and Counseling to establish targets and actions to improve transfer rates by June 1, 2006.

� Action 3.1 B - The Staff Development Committee, in conjunction with the Academic Senate, will conduct at least two workshops on the College General Education/Learning Outcomes by June 1, 2006.

July 1, 2006 � Action 1.3 A - The Vice President of Student Services, working closely with Counseling, EOP&S, DSP&S, Specially Funded Programs and Financial Aid, will initiate a centralized system to consolidate Student Educational Plans by July 1, 2006.

� Action 1.3 B - The Vice President of Student Services, working closely with Counseling, EOP&S, DSP&S, Specially Funded Programs and Financial Aid will develop specific actions to increase the percentage of students with Student Educational Plans by July 1, 2006.

October 1, 2006 � Action 1.2 A - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee, Vice Presidents, and Deans will work together with individual units within Student Services, Academic Affairs, and all other student support units to develop plans for assessment and to perform those assessments by October 1, 2006.

� Action 2.7 B - The Vice President of Academic Affairs, together with each of the supporting units within Academic Affairs, will use unit surveys and assessments, including enrollment and growth projections, for the development and expansion of the Library, Counseling and tutoring services by October 1, 2006.

November 1, 2006. � Action 3.2 B - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will assist math and English, one natural science discipline, and one vocational program in developing and approving discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by November 1, 2006.

� Action 3.2 C - The Institutional Effectiveness Committee and Academic Senate will establish a schedule by which all disciplines will develop and approve discipline-level and course-level General Education/Learning Outcomes assessment plans by November 1, 2006.

� Action 1.2 C - The Vice Presidents and Deans will work together with individual units within Student Services, Academic Affairs, and all other student support units to use the unit assessments and the survey results to develop specific actions for improvement by November 1, 2006.

Los Angeles Mission College - Home

Documents

Transcript of Los Angeles Mission College - Home