GENERAL STUDIES Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College Program Review and Improvement Plan

(1)

GENERAL STUDIES

Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College

2010-2011

Program Review

and

2011–2013

(2)

(3)

WITC Program Catalog Page……….1

Program Review Team Membership………5

Self-Study Summary Report………..7

WTCS QRP Analysis Report……….……17

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

5

(10)

6

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW PROFILE

Program Name & Number:

General Studies - 80000

Program Academic

Dean

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Laura Jasper

Academic Dean/Rice

Lake

X5226 laura.jasper@witc.edu

Ted May

Academic Dean/ Ashland X3252 ted.may@witc.edu

Team Lead(s)

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Example:

Bill Smith

Welding Faculty Member

New Richmond

X9999

bill.smith@witc.edu

Matt Dietsche

Communications Faculty

Member Superior

X6338

Matt.dietsche@witc.edu

Team Members

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Larry Gee

Divisional Dean/New

Richmond

X4224 larry.gee@witc.edu

Susan Janetski

Counselor/Rice lake

X5258 susan.janetski@witc.edu

Shane Evenson

Registrar/Shell Lake

X2280 shane.evenson@witc.edu

Paul Gordon

Faculty Member/Ashland

X3253 paul.gordon@witc.edu

Mary Goldsmith

Faculty Member/New

Richmond

X4346 mary.goldsmith@witc.edu

Volodymyr Kozubovsky

Faculty Member/New

Richmond

X4326

volodymyr.kozubovsky@witc.edu

Program Information:

Capacity (new students admitted/year):

NA

Number of Faculty:

FT: 27 (801-809)

PT: 24 (801-809)

Statewide Curriculum:

Yes X

No X

Number of Technical Studies Courses in each of the following delivery modes:

(there may be duplication for courses offered in multiple modes)

Classroom:

NA

Online:

NA

ITV/IP:

NA

(11)

7

(12)

8

SELF-STUDY SUMMARY REPORT

Program Information

Program Name: General Studies Team Chair: Matt Dietsche Academic Deans: Laura Gintz Jasper & Ted

May

Divisional Dean: Barb Lundberg

Process Used to Complete the Self-Study

Meeting format (in-person, IP, conference calls

etc.)

Kickoff IP team meeting, Blackboard discussion board, Survey Monkeys, focus groups, email.

Number of meetings One formal IP meeting. All other team communication has been virtual or by teleconference.

How was the self-study handled? (as a group, assigned to individuals to report back to group, etc.)

Group members designed the original structure of the program review and chose communication channels. Some led focus groups. All participated in Blackboard discussions. Faculty members completed two Survey Monkeys .The team chair and academic deans

compiled data and wrote the self-study, and the team reviewed the draft, which an academic dean revised. Additional comments:

Summary of Findings

As you completed this self study section of the

program review, what areas "stand out" in your program? Please explain.

Strengths and best practices are directly attributable to the dedication, self-motivation, and commitment to continuous improvement demonstrated by General Studies faculty.

What has surprised you? Please explain.  Misinformation about the nature of online course quality and consistency is widespread among faculty, staff, and students.

 Each campus experiences similar challenges related to student readiness and internal communication.

List two or three of the items identified through your self-study that you will focus on to make improvements to your program.

 We must learn more about online teaching, learning, and scheduling.

 We must carefully assess course completion by delivery method.

 General Studies recognizes the value of strong internal communication; whether the division as a whole will join individual faculty members and deans to focus in a formal way on such

communication is yet to be determined. When/where in your program will you

implement these improvements?

(13)

9 What methods (direct or indirect) will you use to assess the success of this implementation?

We can use our self-study measures and course statistics as benchmarks, collecting new data and repeating focus groups and Survey Monkeys after improvements have been implemented.

What new outcomes or benchmarks do you hope to achieve through these recommended changes?

Additional comments:

SELF-STUDY CATEGORY RESULTS

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Program Statistics

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements)  Three to four percent more students are earning

a C or higher in the 801 departments since the implementation of Prepared Learner courses.  Although the percentage of students who earn a

C or higher in their General Studies coursework is at least 80%, the rate is 8-9 % higher for students enrolled in science (806) courses.

 There is currently a lack of sophisticated analysis regarding course completion rates by delivery method and discipline. More complete analysis could help identify areas that might need improvement.

Select one PLUS item and explain the root cause:

 High rate of C or higher in science courses – high quality instruction, and strong interest by students in the health sciences programs.

Select one DELTA item and explain the root cause:

 Since General Studies is not an actual program in itself, but rather provides supporting coursework to the programs, there is perhaps less ongoing data analysis.

What items in this category MUST be addressed on our improvement plan?

 One priority is to define data that should be used for benchmarking in General Studies and the development of useful tools, such as Cognos or other reports, to use on a regular basis to identify potential areas of concern to investigate or best practices to share.

What items in this category MIGHT be addressed on the improvement plan?

 Expansion and refinement in Prepared Learner implementation – First-year trends appear to show an improvement in C or higher rates for students in the 801 courses.

What items in this category may be considered a BEST PRACTICE OR INNOVATION?

 Success Strategies – While not directly evaluated in the Program

Statistics, this course has led to broad improvements in student retention and program completion in a number of areas across the college (see Appendices).

 Health Sciences – Preliminary evidence suggests the high rate of C or higher in these courses, complemented by strong continued success in the nursing program suggests there may be best practices in the

(14)

10 instruction for these courses.

Team Rating

Please indicate by an

(X)

the team rating of your program on this category

.

All areas need improvement expectations, but most areas Some areas meet need improvement

All areas meet expectations —few areas need

improvement

Exemplary—all areas exceed expectations—use as a model

for other programs

X

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Curriculum

(fill out a Self-Study Category Sheet for each section of the self-study. (Additional sections may be added if desired)

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements)  The willingness of faculty to work together

to develop consistency and maintain rigor.  Greatly increased consistency across

WTCS, campuses, instructors, and delivery methods.

 Although consistency across WTCS, campuses, instructors, and delivery methods has greatly increased, it must be maintained and increased.

 WIDS COS need minor updates.

Statewide curriculum and common textbooks support consistency. Select one DELTA item

and explain the root cause:

Instructor teams continue to work together to develop consistency between campuses using one-college model. To do so, instructor teams need larger blocks of in-person collaborative space to enhance overall communication and course quality.

WIDS updates.

Consistent delivery across delivery methods.

Spring 2010 – Collaborative space was offered during January divisional meeting for 80100 colleagues to evaluate AccuPlacer functionality/usability.

Team Rating

(15)

11 All areas need

improvement

Some areas meet expectations, but most areas need improvement

All areas meet expectations —few areas

need improvement

Exemplary—all areas exceed expectations—use

as a model for other programs 22.2 percent

X

77.8 percent Additional Comments: (optional)

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Course Level Assessment

(fill out a Self-Study Category Sheet for each section of the self-study. (Additional sections may be added if desired)

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements) Faculty annually assess one course per

department districtwide using diverse strategies. General Studies faculty partner with Academic Affairs staff to assess collegewide outcomes.

Faculty need to apply assessment feedback on a larger scale and to re-assess after application.

Instructors are highly motivated to implement continuous improvement in course delivery based on course assessment.

It’s a challenge to dedicate time to training, to creating, and to conducting assessments, and especially, to designing and implementing improvements. What items in this

category MUST be addressed on our improvement plan?

None

Creating a longer-term course assessment plan, including strategies to “close the loop.”

Instructor collaboration.

Two instructors with a Learning First Grant have created a video to assist their colleagues with assessing the collegewide outcome of clear oral communication.

Team Rating

(16)

12 All areas need

improvement

need improvement

X

62.5 percent Additional Comments: (optional)

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Equipment & Facilities

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements) Computer labs with up-to-date hardware and

software.

Smart classroom technology.

ITV/IPV technology not functioning consistently. Consistent access to technologically and

functionally well-equipped learning environments (see Appendices).

Classroom noise from portable walls offer poor sound barrier between classrooms; improved room orientation/design could remedy with minimal institutional expense (see Appendices).

WITC has consistently and continuously updated classroom technology. Select one DELTA item

The root cause of unacceptable technology problems associated with some ITV/IPV and Blackboard delivery is outside of Academic Affairs.

See Appendix B, a teacher-generated list of suggested improvements to be shared with Facilities Managers at each campus.

ITV/IPV technology challenges and failures.

Scheduling and classroom assignment procedures to ensure that General Studies sections are scheduled in the best possible learning environments. What items in this

category may be considered a BEST PRACTICE OR INNOVATION?

Updated hardware and software in writing labs supports student learning.

Team Rating

(17)

13 All areas need

improvement

need improvement

as a model for other programs

X

(50 percent) (50 percent) Additional Comments: (optional)

IP/ITV technology and classroom space consistency account for split rating.

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Professional Development and Innovation

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements)  High and consistent credentialing

standards.

 Self-motivated faculty who share freely with students and colleagues.

 Timeframe for planning professional development more intentionally.  Inadequate budget for professional

development.

Accreditation standards for General Studies faculty have been fully implemented in General Studies.

Budget planning timelines and constraints make it difficult for faculty to participate in external opportunities that are not announced at least a year in advance.

What items in this category MUST be addressed on our improvement plan? What items in this category MIGHT be addressed on the improvement plan?

Identify needs that emerge within fiscal year and include them in appropriate planning. With limited resources, available professional development must be targeted to areas of relevant focus.

Self-motivated faculty share what they learn with their colleagues and students.

Discipline teams attend conferences together; this targeted professional development creates a foundation of common knowledge/vocabulary. For example, five Social Sciences instructor and their academic dean

participated in the White Privilege conference in Bloomington, MN, April 2011.

Team Rating

(X)

.

All areas need improvement

need improvement

(18)

14 25 percent

X

25 percent 50 percent

Additional Comments: (optional)

While faculty members remain self-directed and resourceful, concern remains over diminished budget support.

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Collaboration – General Studies and Programs

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements)  Individual initiatives to communicate and

share resources among General Studies and Program faculty.

 General Studies faculty contribute to program review teams, advisory committees, and student and club advising.

 General Studies faculty join programs for field trips.

 General Studies faculty sit in on some program classes and invite program faculty to theirs.  General Studies works with the college at large

via various committees: AQIP, Emerging Issues, Career Day, Foundation events, etc.

 The more that program teachers reinforce the value of General Studies curricula, the better for student learning. The

considerable time and energy that General Studies faculty devote to collaborating with program faculty yield great returns and the opportunities to do so are endless.

 Sometimes there are conflicts with Continuing Education courses for space in the later afternoons and evenings.



There is a need for increased understanding between programs and General Studies regarding scheduling needs. Some program instructors don’t understand how our scheduling works around all the programs.

General Studies faculty understand the value of program collaboration. Select one DELTA item

Some program faculty members view the rigor and curriculum of General Studies courses as obstacles to higher program enrollment and/or completion.

What items MUST be addressed on our improvement plan?

None.

What items MIGHT be addressed on the improvement plan?

Communication and collaboration among General Studies and program faculty has become a priority for many General Studies faculty. Perhaps we should identify, share, or formalize best practices. Another idea is to self-promote the value of General Studies skills to staff and students. What items may be

considered a BEST PRACTICE OR INNOVATION?

General Studies faculty involvement with program review teams, advisory committees, and student and club advising.

(19)

15

Team Rating

(X)

.

All areas need

improvement

need improvement

X

50 percent 12.5 percent

Program and Category

Program: General Studies

Category: Collaboration – Student Services and General Studies

PLUSES (Strengths, Best Practices) DELTAS (Areas in Need of Improvements)  Many General Studies and many Student

Services staff members work one-on-one to communicate with each other about curriculum as well as about individual students.

 Common textbook list formed with colleague consensus.

 Both teams see the need for more frequent and more efficient communication.

 Reduce exceptions to common textbook list.

 Prepared Learner cut scores are inconsistent with admission

requirements; clarify program admission versus course placement statuses for students, staff, and faculty (i.e. students may remediate before officially entering a program)

 There are different understandings of student choices and completion rates related to online sections.

Common textbooks: General Studies and Bookstore staff members have devoted substantial time, energy, and collaborative efforts into better serving students by coming to consensus so that each 80100 and 80900 course number shares one ISBN number.

Different understandings of student choices and success related to online sections are attributable to a quickly changing environment, dynamic enrollment patterns, and inconsistent completion rates across courses. What items MUST be

addressed on our improvement plan?

Thorough exploration of the scheduling and completion rates of online sections. After we collect and analyze detailed data from students, teachers, and counselors, we can seek root causes and frame responses.

What MIGHT be addressed on the improvement plan?

Prepared Learner and common textbook exceptions and inconsistencies.

What may be considered a BEST PRACTICE OR INNOVATION?

Common textbooks collaboration created consensus with a challenging issue.

(20)

16

Team Rating

(X)

.

All areas need

improvement

need improvement

25 percent

X

25 percent 50 percent

Additional Comments: (optional)

Rating acknowledges improvements needed in communication/collaboration.

General Studies Self-Study Appendices A Success Strategies Reports

2008-09 2009-10

B Self-Study Category Details: Facilities and Equipment

C Introduction to College Writing 2008-09

2009-10 2010-11

D Course Assessments

Written Communication 2009-10

Race, Ethnic, and Diversity Studies 2009-10 Math

Science

(21)

17

WTCS (Wisconsin Technical College System)

QRP Analysis Report

(22)

18

(23)

(24)

(25)

21

WTCS QRPDS SCORECARD ANALYSIS REPORT

BEST PRACTICES, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Program: General Studies

Indicator Actual Target Threshold What practices might be causing this performance?

CG04 AAS Course Completion -

Mathematics 67.74 72.96 60.90

These numbers show we are significantly above the threshold, suggesting we are doing some things well, but have significant room to improve our completion rates.

CG05 AAS Course Completion -

Communication 67.60 73.11 55.68

These numbers show we are significantly above the threshold, suggesting we are doing some things well, but have significant room to improve our completion rates.

CG06 AAS Course Completion –

Social-Behavioral 78.21 81.25 60.26

These numbers are approaching the target, suggesting we are doing some things well, yet still have an opportunity to improve our completion rates. CG07 AAS Course

Completion –

Natural Sciences 67.07 73.12 61.07

These numbers show we are in the middle between the threshold and target for the state – suggesting we are doing some things well, but have significant room to improve our completion rates.

Best Practice or Innovation Program General Studies

Short Title/Caption Using technology to enhance student learning in mathematics Indicator Number & Name CG04 AAS Course Completion – Mathematics

QRP Scores Actual: 67.74 Target: 72.96 Threshold: 60.90

Select One: Best Practice

What is the Best Practice/Innovation?

 Lecture notes, support materials and assignments are posted for students in Blackboard;

 Students can take lecture notes with Pulse digital recorder, and lectures may be captured on pencasts or as video (Camtasia) and posted online for student access to reinforce learning;

 MyMathLab (Internet-based software from a publisher) provides an interactive homework

management system where students receive immediate feedback and individually diagnosed study plans;

 In sections of College Tech Math 1A, 1B, 1 and 2, plus Introductory Statistics, students are provided with a free copy of Graph.exe software, which is used to construct graphs.

(26)

22

These technologies improve communication and allow instructors to provide more frequent and timely feedback. The technology also increases student access to resources such as lecture documents, PowerPoints, videos, and pencasts. These resources allow students to reinforce their own learning independently, and can be accessed outside of a traditional classroom.

How has this impacted on the high-level results for this program?

Expanded learning opportunities for students that meet the needs of a broader student audience. There is also an increase in timely assistance, feedback and reinforcement to support students through their learning experiences.

Short Title/Caption Pre-college level mathematics instruction

Indicator Number & Name CG04 AAS Course Completion - Mathematics

Select One: Best Practice □ Innovation

Prospective students have been required to take an admissions test that assesses their level of math proficiency. Since 2009, the test is used to place students at the appropriate level so that they are adequately challenged but also have a strong potential for successful course completion.

Why is this considered a Best Practice or Innovation?

The pre-college mathematics course was introduced to address concerns with the failure and

withdrawal rates among students enrolling in their first Associate Degree math course at WITC. Another goal is to increase students’ confidence in their ability to do mathematics and to develop in students the skills and attitudes necessary to be successful in a college mathematics course.

Since 2009, prospective students have been required to take an admissions test that assesses their level of math proficiency. The test is used to place students at the appropriate level so that they are

adequately challenged but also have a strong potential for successful course completion.

Best Practice or Innovation Program General Studies Communication

Short Title/Caption SynchronEyes Software

Indicator Number & Name CG05 AAS Course Completion - Communication

(27)

23

Select One: Innovation

Communication faculty at Rice Lake use SynchronEyes software in writing labs, allowing the instructor to broadcast his or her screen onto all of the monitors in the lab.

Using SynchronEyes gains students’ attention, ensures that they’re on task, and allows clear visuals of the task at hand.

SynchronEyes supports student focus and engagement.

Best Practice or Innovation Program General Studies Communications

Short Title/Caption Collaboration and Communication with Programs Indicator Number & Name CG05 (Communication)

General Studies faculty who have made it a priority to enhance collaboration and communication with program faculty report improved student engagement. This can be as simple as sharing information and resources across disciplines through informal conversations, emails to other instructors, or at divisional, campus-wide, or college-wide meetings. General Studies faculty sit in on program courses and welcome program faculty to their classrooms, join program field trips, serve on program Advisory Committee and Program Review teams, advise program students, and more.

As an example, New Richmond Psychology, Communications, and Success Strategies instructors have created more dialogue to ensure complementary v. redundant learning activities. Related

communication with program instructors, especially for applied coursework, keeps the curriculum relevant.

This best practice communicates to students – both implicitly and explicitly – that General Studies competencies weave with program competencies to prepare students for meaningful employment.

(28)

24

Program General Studies Social-Behavioral Sciences

Short Title/Caption Collaboration and Communication with Programs Indicator Number & Name CG06 (Social-Behavioral Sciences)

General Studies faculty who have made it a priority to enhance collaboration and communication with program faculty report improved student engagement. This can be as simple as sharing information and resources across disciplines through informal conversations, emails to other instructors, or at divisional, campus-wide, or college-wide meetings. General Studies faculty sit in on program courses and welcome program faculty to their classrooms, join program field trips, serve on program Advisory Committee and Program Review teams, advise program students, and more.

As an example, New Richmond Psychology, Communications, and Success Strategies instructors have created more dialogue to ensure complementary v. redundant learning activities. Related

communication with program instructors, especially for applied coursework, keeps the curriculum relevant.

This best practice communicates to students – both implicitly and explicitly – that General Studies competencies weave with program competencies to prepare students for meaningful employment.

Short Title/Caption Lab idea/practice sharing among faculty

Indicator Number & Name CG07 AAS Course Completion – Natural Sciences

Select One:  Best Practice □ Innovation

Each meeting of the science faculty, they share ideas and best practices among the full team – for enhancing the quality of lab instruction, web-sites to use on Blackboard, etc.

(29)

25

Each faculty works to make their own individual course/instruction the best he/she can provide. At the same time, each brings their own history, experience and perspectives to the classroom. By sharing the “best of each and all” with one another, the opportunity for expanded quality learning experiences by the students is advanced.

This has resulted in improved student learning, complemented by greater confidence and collaboration among the faculty members on the health science team.

Best Practice or Innovation Program General Studies Communications

Short Title/Caption Prepared Learner Writing Course

Select One:  Best Practice What is the Best Practice or Innovation?

At three campuses, it has been possible to schedule a section of Written Communication at the same time as Introduction to College Writing, allowing student movement during the first couple of weeks of the semester.

Rationale for Potential Solution/Action: (Write a few sentences to explain why this action is likely to

improve the situation along with any concerns the team may have about pursuing this action.)

Because course-placement scores are imperfect, writing teachers, both of Introduction to College Writing and of Written Communication, assess student writing as soon as the semester begins so that they can advise students who may have been misplaced. With synchronous sections available, students can move in either direction without upsetting their schedules. Such change is advisory rather than mandatory; more students have chosen to move from Written Communication to Introduction to College Writing than vice versa.

Potential Solution/Action Program General Studies

Short Title/Caption More accurate and consistently-enforced placement of students

Indicator Number & Name CG04 AAS Course Completion - Mathematics

Description for Potential Solution/Action: (Write a few sentences to describe what potential

(30)

26

In our first year with Accuplacer, we still need to affirm the scores we are using with some additional data. We need to help assure accurate placement and maximum success for students in their first math class at the college.

We have discovered the some students are still being placed above the level where they should have been placed based upon their test scores.

Potential Solution/Action Program General Studies Communications

Short Title/Caption Prepared Learner Writing Course

Description for Potential Solution/Action: (Write a few sentences to descripbe what potential

solution/action your team may undertake to improve the performance of this indicator.)

Teachers of Introduction to College Writing at each campus use the same first and last writing prompt each semester, gauging placement as well as allowing comparison over time for individual students. (At three campuses, it has been possible to schedule a section of Written Communication at the same time as Introduction to College Writing, allowing student movement during the first couple of weeks of the semester.) It’s time for the next step: Further formalizing and analyzing shared assessments, student-perceived writing strengths and weaknesses, and subsequent performance in Written Communication.

Early indicators show that students who earn a C or higher in Introduction to College Writing are nearly as likely to earn a C or higher in Written Communication as students who place directly intro Written Communication. Continuing to assess writing-course placement and course completion districtwide, qualitatively and quantitatively, is essential to continuous improvement not only of course placement but also of course delivery.

Potential Solution/Action Program General Studies Social/Behavioral Sciences Short Title/Caption Prepared Learner Reading

Indicator Number & Name CG06 AAS Course Completion – Social-Behavioral

Description for Potential Solution/Action: (Write a few sentences to descripbe what potential

(31)

27

WITC is close to target; perhaps we can reach or exceed target after implementation of Prepared Learner Reading. By collecting and analyzing data related to C or higher completion rates in 80900 courses and reading placement scores, the Social/Behavioral Sciences teaching staff aims to establish a process, advisory or mandatory, to ensure learner readiness for success.

While student unpreparedness to read and/or to understand what is read in Social/Behavioral Sciences curricula occasionally is obvious to teaching staff, more often it is not. Instructors suspect that low reading skills may be a barrier to course completion; they want to contribute to the collegewide initiative that will make possible not only identification of underprepared readers but also referral of those students to Prepared Learner coursework.

Potential Solution/Action Program General Studies

Short Title/Caption Stronger communication with the programs we support

Indicator Number & Name CG07 AAS Course Completion – Natural Sciences

Description for Potential Solution/Action: (Write a few sentences to describe what potential

solution/action your team may undertake to improve the performance of this indicator.)

Develop a strategy for enhancing communication between ADN and health science faculty. We have started this by alerting the health dean, and the science faculty members often speak with the ADN faculty anyhow. It would not require a lot of changes to bring them directly into the conversation – and become engaged in the decision-making process.

New ADN (Associate Degree in Nursing) program requirements and expectations have been decided and implemented by the faculty members in that program. However, oftentimes we have found that the decisions have been made without Health Science faculty members being engaged for their perspective and input. By engaging broader input from faculty outside the program, the ADN program could

benefit, and the health science faculty would be more cognizant of the changes, and able to incorporate ideas into their instruction to improve student learning.

Future Trends and External Factors Program General Studies

Future Trends

1 More students seek to take courses in delivery modes other than face-to-face, forcing creative alternate delivery options, including IPV, blended, online and other modes.

(32)

Spin-28

offs from this are still to be determined – but advances in student-learning opportunities are already becoming apparent, and growing.

3

Online science labs reduces the costs involved in face-to-face science labs, provides unique hands on experiences for students without the cost of maintaining 4 separate science labs, while also bringing with it concerns for lack of direct hands-on experience.

4

Text messaging is changing our written language in leaps and bounds. The entry of new words into our lexicon along with a myriad of ways to convey messages also influences how students

view/use appropriate practices/standards of phone etiquette, of netiquette, and in writing. 5 The influx of displaced workers creates challenges in terms of student expectations of curriculum,

experience with technology, and more.

External Factors

1

Budget restrictions may be changing the options and/or forcing delivery options that are not considered to be “best” for the students. This may force creative changes in delivery and educational support for student learning.

2 The cost of textbooks. Publishers issue new editions too frequently, and bundles that include access codes make buyback difficult.

3 4 5

(33)

(34)

(35)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(For implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

PROGRAM: General Studies – Mathematics Defined Outcome:

 At least 75% of students will earn a C or higher in the four initial Associate Degree math courses (804-107, 804-113, 804-115 and 804-123), and the “WTCS Course Completion” indicator will increase to at least 70.

Perkins? no

Responsibility Timeline Resources Action Plan/Action Items:

1. Improve the validity and reliability of course-placement strategies for Pre-Algebra (10-834-109) and the four associate degree math courses.

a. Continue to gather data on student “C or better” rates in relationship to Accuplacer test/placement scores.

b. Evaluate the data and make recommendations to adjust placement scores based upon data gathered.

c. Pursue complementary placement strategies (success strategies, attitude, reading scores or even a self-designed math assessment) to enhance the likelihood of having students accurately placed in the appropriate course.

2. Conduct a Pre-Algebra course assessment

a. Design and conduct the assessment – including data analysis b. Adjust instruction based upon assessment findings

3. Address sound issues in Room 216 & 217 in Superior where there are loud or otherwise distracting noises coming through the classroom walls

a. Contact facility manager on Superior Campus to determine the causes of the sound issues.

1) Investigate whether or not the sound issues can be resolved or whether other rooms might be more appropriate.

2) Depending on results of investigation, include any necessary facility changes in the program planning process or find more appropriate room through the scheduling process

b. Math Faculty will determine if there are other rooms with similar issues at other campuses and notify Academic Dean.

1. Leads: Todd & Ted 1.a. Academic Affairs (AA) Assistant and Math faculty 1.b. Math Faculty –

recommend to Prepared Learner Task Force

1.c. Math faculty and Prepared Learner Task Force

2. Lead: Kevin Salmon 2.a. Math faculty, &

Acad. Aff. Assist. 2.b. Math faculty 3. Leads: Ingrid & Ted 3.a. Math faculty and

Pete Gamache 3.a.1) Pete Gamache

and Math faculty 3.a.2) Pete Gamache,

Math faculty and Ted May

3.b. Math faculty (to ID) and other

1.a. Each semester 1.b. By July/August

of each year, make recommendation for the subsequent year’s catalog 1.c. Ongoing work – with pilots whenever possible 2.a. 2011-12 2012-13 2.b. 2012-13 2013-14 3.a. August 2011 3.a.1) Fall 2011 3.a.2) Fall 2011 3.b. Pursue - as identified 1.a. AA Assistant 1.b. Time & Task Force focus 1.c. Student Services willingness to pursue alternatives 2.a. Time 2.b. Time 3.a. and 3.b. Campus budgets

(36)

1) Above process will be repeated for any additional rooms.

4. Continue to strengthen ties/collaboration with programs and their faculty to improve student interest and engagement in the mathematics courses; and enhance the math faculty insights into appropriate real-world applications.

a. Math faculty discussions at monthly math faculty IPV meetings to strategize how to continue to strengthen these relationships where needed.

5. Move toward having all math courses across the college consistently supported by Blackboard for course-support, gradebook and other tools (if consistently present in all classes, this could work to enhance success rates in classes that were online)

6. Strive for consistency in student “C or higher” rates, and comparability in course outcomes across all delivery modes for the math courses

a. Each semester/year, evaluate success rates across delivery modes b. Strive to enhance C or better rates across all delivery modes

Campus Facility Managers 4. Lead: Todd Hoff

Math and program faculty & deans 4.a. Math faculty and

dean

5. Math faculty and dean (for support)

6. Math faculty and dean

4. Ongoing

4.a. Periodic through 2011-12 and into 2012-13 5. Gradual – to fully implemented by 2012-13 6. Evaluate each semester, implement each year 4. Time 5. Math faculty, Blackboard mentors and WITC Tech Committee 6. Support from Office of Institutional Effectiveness WTCS QRP Indicator Name & Number:

CG04 AAS Course Completion - Mathematics

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) Mid-year Update: December 1, 2011

1. Improve validity/reliability of placement with Accuplacer – At this time, we have plans for the math faculty to use the Elementary Algebra Accuplacer assessment in the first week of spring 2012 semester classes to get a better picture of how these students do in their 10-level courses in the spring semester. Some faculty and the dean will also be taking the Accuplacer several times to fine-tune just where we think it would work best.

2. Conduct Pre-Algebra course assessment – will begin 2012-13.

3. Address distracting sound issues across the college – The concern over the rooms (the full Appendix B) has been shared with Matt Rosendahl, so he is aware of concerns. For the remaining concerns, these are enumerated in the Appendix document, and these items will be broken down by campus and shared with each Facility Maintenance supervisor at each campus.

4. Strengthen ties/collaboration with programs and their faculty – For the most part, math faculty at WITC have strong ties with programs. This has been accomplished through math faculty participation on advisory committees, daily communication with program instructors concerning students’ success and program needs, and through the vast technical experience of our math faculty being applied in the classroom setting to create meaningful applications for

(37)

students.

The math department continues to have conversations on the appropriateness of current math courses selected by programs and what changes could be made to better serve the students. Talks have taken place about creating new courses to fit needs (as was the case with the Math for Health

Professionals course and was attempted with the Brick and Masonry program) and about eliminating courses that are no longer deemed adequate. In the absence of courses that are a good fit, some math faculty have worked with program faculty in the program classrooms/labs to teach concepts that are needed by the programs but don’t necessarily fit into specific math courses. Math instructors have also worked with program instructors – again drawing upon technical knowledge from previous occupational experience – to create curriculum for programs (metallurgy for Welding and Machine Tool,

structural design for Architectural Design, CAD/CAM in Superior, stairway and roof construction for Wood Technics, decibels and power gains for Telecom, etc.) and even participated in designing new programs (CNC Technician program at RL, Business Management, etc.).

Math faculty members acknowledge that the Math CWO could be an opportunity to either build upon this strong cooperative relationship, or it could be viewed as an inconvenience imposed upon programs by the college and math instructors. The need to proceed with learning and the best interest of our students in mind is universally understood. Working with programs to tweak math courses and instruction is an ongoing or evolving matter that is addressed each year with various programs across the college, always seeking how to better serve WITC students.

5. Move to have all math courses supported by Blackboard – Math faculty members already support many of their courses with information and

communication resources within Blackboard (Bb). With the new version of Bb coming out in 2012, and some uncertainty with regard to the value of Bb for students in some programs, the math team will delay discussion on more standardize uses of Bb until after the upcoming Bb upgrade.

Strive for consistency of student “C or better” rates in math courses – Regardless of the mode of delivery – face-to-face, IPV, Math Lab (flex-math) or online,

all faculty members (and each individual faculty member) strive to maximize the percentage of students who earn a C or better in their course(s). Two critical ingredients for advancing the percentage of students who earn a C or better will be improved placement in courses – as highlighted in the first action plan above -- and implementation of WITC's new online learning orientation and the SmarterMeasure Learning Readiness Indicator. Math faculty will work with the online learning team to interpret the results of the SmarterMeasure Readiness Assessment by completing the SmarterMeasure Faculty Survey.

(38)

(39)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(For implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

PROGRAM: General Studies – Communication Defined Outcome:

At least 75 percent of students who complete Written Communication will earn a final grade of C or higher (this excludes drops and withdrawals) by the end of 2012-13.

Perkins? no

Responsibility Timeline Resources

Action Plan/Action Items:

1. Check the viability and reliability of course-placement strategies for Introduction to College Writing and Written Communication, and adjust as appropriate.

a. Continue to gather data on “C or higher” rates in relationship to Accuplacer placement.

b. Evaluate the data and make adjustment recommendations as appropriate.

c. Explore complementary placement strategies (Success Strategies, reading scores, and more).

2. Share best practices and resources. a. Build LRC course pages.

b. Participate in the implementation and the refinement of The Learning Commons at each campus.

c. Contribute to departmental/divisional resources on The Connection. 3. Check course completion and “C or higher” rates across delivery methods,

and respond as appropriate.

a. Analyze comparative data at Divisional Days. b. Design responses.

1.a. Academic Affairs Assistant and

Communication faculty 1.b. Communication faculty, Prepared Learner Task Force 1.c. Communication faculty and Prepared Learner Task Force 2.a. Communication faculty

2.b. Communication faculty and dean 2.c. Communication faculty

3. Communication faculty and dean

1. a. Each semester 1. b. By July/August 2012 and 2013 1.c. Ongoing 2. Ongoing 3. Each semester 1.a. Academic Affairs Assistant 1.b. Time and Task Force focus 2. Time 3. Time

WTCS QRP Indicator Name & Number: (from those potential solutions selected from the

WTCS QRPDS Analysis)

(40)

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) First Mid-year Update: December 1, 2011

1. The Communications Faculty Team and Dean will meet with Research and Planning Coordinator Jennifer Kunselman during the Assessment Day on January 6, 2012, to define data collection and to establish a timeline for action items.

2. a. The Communications Faculty Team has collaborated with LRC Director Matt Rosendahl, who has created a pilot LRC course page. The team will establish a detailed action plan for this item by June 2012.

b. The Communications Faculty Team will establish a detailed action plan for this item by June 2012.

c. The Communications Faculty Team and Dean have collaborated with Academic Affairs Assistant Trixie Lawver to import documents to The Connection. They will establish a detailed action plan for this item by June 2012.

3. The Communications Faculty Team and Dean will meet with Research and Planning Coordinator Jennifer Kunselman during the Assessment Day on January 6, 2012, to define data collection and to establish a timeline for action items.

(41)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(for implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

-complete one form for each outcome- PROGRAM: General Studies – Social/Behavioral Sciences

Defined Outcome:

Course completion (with a C or higher) by students in online sections will increase by 5 percent (excluding drops and withdrawals) by the end of 2012-13.

Perkins? no

1. Identify faculty lead to collaborate with the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and with faculty team to:

a. Define course completion for online courses to better differentiate between actual non-completion and those who simply stop attending.

b. Assess completion rates by such variables as the number of courses each instructor is teaching online during that semester and/or student

characteristics (Accuplacer reading score?).

c. Determine whether the completion rate trends are statistically significant from semester to semester, course load, and other variables.

d. Design responses to data. e. Create implementation plan.

2. Request that at least one beginning computer course of opportunity for individual learning (credit, The Learning Commons, Con. Ed.) be available to students every semester and Summer Session.

3. Implement mandatory student Blackboard orientation.

4. Ensure that all online teachers participate in external training and bring back best practices.

a. Identify appropriate external training. b. Attend training.

c. Share best practices.

1a-c. Faculty team, faculty lead, dean, & Office of Institutional Effectiveness.

1d. Faculty team and dean.

2. Faculty via divisional dean.

3. Online Task Force. 4a. Online Task Force, Blackboard mentors, Human Resources, faculty dean. 4b & c. Faculty.

1a-c. Fall and Spring 2011-12 1d. 2012-13 2. Fall 2011 3.2011-12 4.Continous, starting Fall 2011 1a-c.Support for lead faculty member, support from the Office of Institutional Effectiveness. 1d. Time 3.Faculty on Online Task Force/Blackboard mentors. 4.Professional development and travel budgets. WTCS QRP Indicator Name & Number: (from those potential solutions selected from the

(42)

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) First Mid-Year Update, December 1, 2011

1. The Social/Behavioral Sciences Faculty Team and Dean will meet with Research and Planning Coordinator Jennifer Kunselman during the Assessment Day on January 6, 2012, to define data collection and to establish a timeline for action items.

2.-4. The Online Orientation Group is implementing a Blackboard training module that will be uploaded into online courses. Each student will be required to complete this training module before access is given to course assignments. The Social/Behavioral Sciences Faculty Team will revisit whether this module, SmarterMeasure, Quality Matters, Blackboard Version 9, Student Services Online, The Learning Commons, and other internal initiatives support an increase in course completion rates with a C or higher in online sections of Social/Behavioral Sciences courses.

End-Year Update, May 14th, 2012

1. Non-completers will be defined as students who quit submitting assignments prior to the final withdraw date. Social/Behavioral Sciences Faculty Team will request statistical data of completion rates for each academic term to determine statistical significance. Action item 1.b. has been deleted. Action item 1.c. has been amended to remove course load and other variables. Social/Behavioral Science Faculty Team will issue student referrals at midterm for all students earning a C- or lower.

2. Academic Dean of Social/Behavioral Sciences requested at least one beginning computer course of opportunity for individual learning (credit, The Learning Commons, Con. Ed.) be available to students every semester and Summer Session.

3. Social/Behavioral Sciences Faculty Team requested the creation of Blackboard 9 instructional videos from the Senior Director of Teaching and Learning.

(43)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(For implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

PROGRAM: General Studies – Science Defined Outcome:

 At least 80% of students will earn a B- or better in the two Anatomy & Physiology courses (806-177 and 806-179), and therefore the “WTCS Course Completion” indicator will increase to at least 70.

Perkins? no

1. Move toward having all science courses across the college consistently supported by Blackboard for course-support, grade-book and other tools (if consistently present in all classes, this could work to enhance success rates in classes that were online).

2. Strive for consistency in student “C or better” rates, and comparability in course outcomes across all delivery modes for the science courses

a. Each semester/year, evaluate success rates across delivery modes b. Strive to enhance C or better rates across all delivery modes

3. Implement instructional or other changes in the delivery of the General Anatomy & Physiology course – based upon the recommendations that are derived from the course assessment that was conducted in the 2010-11 year.

4. Conduct course assessment for Advanced A&P a. Assessment conducted

b. Implement improvements in course design/delivery

5. Initiate some form of mid-term warning for students on the edge – and encourage them to avail themselves of the additional support services across the college.

(Dropped 9/20/2011 – agreed by faculty to not be necessary)

6. Strengthen communication and involvement with the ADN program faculty to enhance connections with the students, and allow stronger alliance and collaboration (mutual insights/benefits) among program faculty and science faculty members.

1. Lead: Jodie Karr

All health science faculty members 2. Lead: Lori Cypher Health Science faculty and dean 3. Lead: Mary Goldsmith Health science faculty and dean 4. Lead: Dave

Stanley Health science faculty and dean 5. Health science

faculty and dean 6. Lead: Ted May

Science and ADN faculty and deans 1. 2011-12 2. 2011-12 – and on through 2012-13 3. 2011-12 for Gen A&P; progress from there 4. 2011-12 assess; 2012-13 improvements

5. Science faculty and Student Services 6. 2011-12, then assessed and further in 2012-13 1. Blackboard mentors 2. Academic Affairs Assist. 3. Time 4. WITC Assessment Committee 5. Student services 6. ADN dean and

(44)

CG07 AAS Course Completion – Natural Sciences

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) First Mid-Year Update, December 1, 2011

 Reduced the Action Items to 5– the others are seen as already being implemented satisfactorily among faculty.

1) Blackboard support – Four of five science instructors routinely use Bb to support their classroom and/or online coursework. The one instructor not currently utilizing Bb is teaching courses in the traditional classroom setting and is learning how to use Bb to post materials. It has been decided that all science courses should have a minimum basic Bb component. A checklist of items that should be consistently posted for all science courses to Bb is being developed and will be shared with the Science Team for approval and modification by the end of the academic calendar year.

2) Improved C or better across delivery modes – Faculty evaluated the success rates by delivery method for Spring 2011 and will evaluate the rates for fall 2011 this coming spring.

3) Instructional changes in General A&P (GAP) - All General A & P instructors are making changes in their instruction to ensure coverage of all learning objectives as stated in WIDS. Instructors are also making adjustments to the pace of materials covered. All learning objectives are of equal importance; therefore those covered at the end of the term/text require equal time and emphasis, and should not be rushed by time constraints. Instructors are to be cautious about using “common” terms not necessarily used on all campuses. These terms are to be removed from written materials that are for student use, and replaced with the appropriate scientific/medical term(s).

4) Assessment for Advanced A&P (AAP) – The science faculty have the test document assembled for AAP, and will be implementing it all together this

semester for the first time. As with the General A&P (GAP) assessment, they will (after this first run) work out any "glitches" for subsequent work. This will give them the base to determine additions or changes they need we need to discuss for improvements. The GAP document will be used for the second time this year, so it will be of interest to see what, if anything, is different, or needs further changes.

5) Strengthened communication with ADN faculty - All science faculty find communication sufficient with ADN such that all changes are collaboratively

implemented and conflicts resolved. This has been a tremendous help. The science faculty members have been receiving agendas and minutes for all the ADN faculty monthly meetings – which has worked very well. They are able to attend these meetings when it seems to be of value.

(45)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(For implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

PROGRAM: General Studies – All Departments Defined Outcome:

All Course Outcome Summaries are up to date.

Perkins? no

Update in WIDS: Applied Communication 1 Applied Communication 2 Oral/Interpersonal Communication Speech Technical Reporting Written Communication Math 355 Math 364 Math 365 Math 372 Math 373 Math 383 Chemistry General Physics 1 Patho physiology

Applied Material Science Science for Cosmetology Applied Science

Applied Physical Science Applied Human Relations Developmental Psychology Ingrid Evavold Ingrid Evavold Dennis Early Todd Hoff Kevin Salmon Dennis Early Lori Cypher Kelli Johnson Wendy Dusek Todd Hoff Lori Cypher/Dave S. Pat Kinney Todd Hoff Julie Shaefer Katrice Shuler Fall Semester 2011 COS on W: drive Andrea Schullo, Curriculum Design Specialist

WTCS QRPDS Analysis) Not applicable.

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) November 22, 2011 – All 80100, 80400, 80600 and 80900 curricula are up to date.

(46)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(for implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

-complete one form for each outcome- PROGRAM: General Studies: Equipment & Facilities (All Departments)

Defined Outcome:

Learning environments support General Studies competency achievement.

Perkins? no

Design action plan to address ITV/IPV challenges and to share Appendix B with Facilities Managers.

Lead: Ted May to share with facilities managers and CFO

ASAP to address sound issues as budget allows Financial investments to make improvements

Not applicable

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.)

 October, 2011 – Laura shared Appendix B with Matt Rosendahl, LRC, and he made note of the many concerns, and recognized them as opportunities

to be addressed as time and budget allowed.

 November 1, 2011 – Ted split Appendix B into campus-specific sections, plus sections for LRC and Keith Hasart. After an extended discussion with

Steve Decker, this revised document is shared with the campus Facilities Maintenance Supervisors and the college CFO. Responding to the areas of concern highlighted in Appendix B will lead to an improved learning environment at each campus. The information was shared directly with those who were most capable of making the improvements over time. At the same time, we understand some of the areas of concern will take significant funding at this budget-short time; and so we may need to be patient before all of these areas of concern are addressed.

(47)

ACADEMIC PROGRAM IMPROVEMENT PLAN

(for implementation in years 2011-12 & 2012-13)

-complete one form for each outcome- PROGRAM: General Studies: Collaboration with Student Services (All Departments) Defined Outcome:

Student Services staff, especially counselors, at each campus report a more thorough understanding of such academic policies, practices, and procedures as scheduling and registration, instructional delivery methods, credit for prior learning, Prepared Learner course placement, and final grade appeals.

Perkins? no

Design an action plan that formalizes communication channels between General Studies and Student Services.

Lead: Barb Lundberg Begin gathering input spring 2012 Develop plan fall 2012

Time

Not applicable.

Update: (A mid-year and year-end update will be required each year during implementation.) First mid-year update December 1, 2011

GENERAL STUDIES Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College Program Review and Improvement Plan

GENERAL STUDIES

Wisconsin Indianhead Technical College

2010-2011

Program Review

and

2011–2013

CONTENTS

WITC Program Catalog Page……….1

Program Review Team Membership………5

Self-Study Summary Report………..7

WTCS QRP Analysis Report……….……17

ACADEMIC PROGRAM REVIEW PROFILE

Program Name & Number:

General Studies - 80000

Program Academic

Dean

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Laura Jasper

Academic Dean/Rice

Lake

X5226 laura.jasper@witc.edu

Ted May

Academic Dean/ Ashland X3252 ted.may@witc.edu

Team Lead(s)

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Example:

Bill Smith

Welding Faculty Member

New Richmond

X9999

bill.smith@witc.edu

Matt Dietsche

Communications Faculty

Member Superior

X6338

Matt.dietsche@witc.edu

Team Members

Title/Location

Phone and e-mail

Larry Gee

Divisional Dean/New

Richmond

X4224 larry.gee@witc.edu

Susan Janetski

Counselor/Rice lake

X5258 susan.janetski@witc.edu

Shane Evenson

Registrar/Shell Lake

X2280 shane.evenson@witc.edu

Paul Gordon

Faculty Member/Ashland

X3253 paul.gordon@witc.edu

Mary Goldsmith

Faculty Member/New

Richmond

X4346 mary.goldsmith@witc.edu

Volodymyr Kozubovsky

Faculty Member/New

Richmond

X4326

volodymyr.kozubovsky@witc.edu

Program Information:

Capacity (new students admitted/year):

NA

Number of Faculty:

FT: 27 (801-809)

PT: 24 (801-809)

Statewide Curriculum:

Yes X

No X

Number of Technical Studies Courses in each of the following delivery modes:

(there may be duplication for courses offered in multiple modes)

Classroom:

Online:

ITV/IP:

SELF-STUDY SUMMARY REPORT

Program Information