Correction to October 10, 2014 agenda, Item 5.c – “Information Technology Strategy Council” and add “Facilities Planning – C. Carlson” to President and Vice Chancellor Reports.
Approval of minutes for September 12, 2014/MSC/Parnell/Tillquist (4 abstentions)
Chancellor’s Report – No report.
a. Student Success and Support Program
M. Green, VPSS, Norco College gave presentation on upcoming changes:
Honing down matriculation into three core components: (1) orientation (2) assessment, and
(3) counseling. Colleges must provide these three core components and students must take advantage of them.
Colleges are allowed to limit enrollment for students who have not completed these core components and they will lose priority.
Funding is now tied to the services reported and there is a 2-1 match. Funding for next year is determined by what colleges report this year.
In Fall of 2016, the Academic and Progress Standards will be imposed on students who are receiving the Board of Governor Fee Waiver.
When centralized assessment becomes available, colleges will be required to adopt it in order to receive funding.
E. Bush, VPSS, Riverside City College reported on activities RCC is engaged in:
This system allows a student to come into our institution, bring in their outside transcripts, and when evaluated, any outside courses taken at other colleges, will automatically populate the areas where they meet that requirement.
There is a shift in how the college needs to deliver these services and the type of services under these three components.
Need to look at student assessment and placement to help students with successful completion and transfer.
Need college specific online orientations along with face-to-face orientations. Invite parents and students to come out to the orientations. Offer pre-orientation activities while they are still in high school.
Faculty Advisors – need multiple points of contact for students.
E. Vincent, Acting VPSS, Moreno Valley College reported on MVC’s SSSP:
Make partnerships with their high schools to help students place better at the college through the Accuplacer test. Incorporate multiple measures. Increase staffing and scope of the assessment placement.
Seeking to have online orientations and various ways to incorporate multiple types of orientations to give students an opportunity for better success. Invite parents who can also ask questions and meet counselors. Have orientations while students are still in high school so they are better prepared to enter college.
Need more counselors and support staff to meet student’s needs.
Observations and Comments:
There are no specific metrics to measure progress. What is our goal? How do we measure success? Our focus should be on student success and student completion. There has to be a direct relationship with the money we are spending on student support and academic success.
This has to be data driven. Norco data does show that if students are assessed correctly, counseled, and have an SEP, that they save thousands of dollars, are moving forward and take more courses on the pathway to a goal. RCC’s plan for faculty advisement is admirable and a good model because it brings the teaching faculty into conversation with students in very specific ways.
Our plans do not have complete measurable targets. We need to set up our targets and set up a strategy on how to reach that target.
How do our students feel about this? Some students with SEPs are confused as to why they are doing it. We need input and feedback from the students.
We have two higher education systems that are not led by people that are state employees. How do we take the fruits of what we are doing, as well as the challenges, and still be about open access?
We need that direct relationship between integrated academic support and what happens in the classroom. We need to use our resources more effectively.
Norco has effectively changed student behavior, to be more successful, by giving them the opportunity to take specific classes (English and Math) and to be well placed. Now faculty need to follow these students and create more impact. Faculty are able to place these students in a way that is moving them through faster than ever before. Next step is to get incoming/returning students.
We need to change institutional behavior as well. With each revision of the SSSP plan, it’s becoming less about responding to the state mandates and becoming more about responding to our institutional direction.
b. California Community Colleges System Goals and Metrics: Comparative Analyses of RCCD and California First Five Cohorts, 2003-2014– R. Steinback and D. Torres – This presentation was made available from our last meeting and was shared with the Chancellor’s Cabinet. Improvements have been made in regards to what the Cohorts mean. David stated that this information has been made available to the colleges and for further information, to please contact their local people. Comments:
One of the metrics that is required, which is not on this template, is the difference between full and part-time enrollment. This information needs to be disaggregated by college. What about the non-traditional students?
Items for Action – N/A
Subcommittee/Task Force Reports:
a. District Budget Advisory Council – A. Brown
b. District Enrollment Management Committee – R. Steinback