1 / 29

Program Review: History, Progress and the Future

Program Review: History, Progress and the Future. Jim Thomas, Chair Program Review Committee Kristina Kauffman, Associate Vice Chancellor Institutional Effectiveness David Torres, District Dean Institutional Research November 3, 2006. Background of the Process.

pello
Télécharger la présentation

Program Review: History, Progress and the Future

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Program Review:History, Progress and the Future Jim Thomas, Chair Program Review Committee Kristina Kauffman, Associate Vice Chancellor Institutional Effectiveness David Torres, District Dean Institutional Research November 3, 2006

  2. Background of the Process • Began in November 2000 with Faculty and Administration • Five Pilot Disciplines in 2001-2002 • Key Contributors • Joan Wells • Rick Axelson • Susan Mills • Sharon Crasnow • Arend Flick • Kristina Kauffman Elsayed • Self-Study Guidelines

  3. Guiding Principles • Flexibility • Collegiality • Relevance • Practicality • Effectiveness • To facilitate the implementation of plans and the accomplishment of goals, resource needs identified through the self-study process will be linked with budgeting, facilities, and human resource planning • To be institutionalized through the Annual Review

  4. Implementation Concerns • Program Review linked to Accreditation • Program Review linked to Strategic Planning at each college • Program Review linked to resource allocation

  5. Program Review Publications • Instructional Program Review Self-Study Resource Guide (6th and Final version) • Instructional Program Review Comprehensive Background and Guidelines for Round Two, 2007-2010 • Annual Program Review Update • The History of Instructional Program Review • Forthcoming: Guidelines for Non-Instructional Program Review

  6. Program Review First Round • Comprehensive Process • Detailed Report • All Course Outlines of Record Updated • Detailed Assessment Plan • Publication: Instructional Program Review Self-Study Resource Guide

  7. Completion 01 – 0512 Disciplines

  8. Completion to date in 200613 Disciplines

  9. Scheduled to Complete in November • Art* • Community Interpretation • Cosmetology* • Economics* • Nursing* • Photography • Physician Assistant • Physical Sciences • World Languages * * Confirmed for Presentation

  10. Scheduled to Complete • January 25, 2007 • Geography • February 22, 2007 • Public Safety/Administration of Justice • Air Conditioning • Auto Technology • Business Administration (including Accounting or possibly Accounting separately) • Sociology • Engineering, Manufacturing • March 22, 2007 • Culinary • Health and Human Services • Journalism • Medical Assisting • Welding • Dental Assisting

  11. Program Review Round Two • Comprehensive Process • Transition to four year cycle • Focused on Teaching and Learning • COR updates • Publication: Instructional Program Review Comprehensive Background and Guidelines for Round Two, 2007-2010 • Proposed Outline: • Mission and Relationship to the College • History (since last review) • Data and Environmental Scan • Programs and Curriculum • Student Outcomes Assessment • Collaboration with Other Units • Outreach • Summary Analysis

  12. Schedule for Comprehensive Round Two

  13. Annual Program Review Process • Publication: Annual Program Review Update • By discipline on each campus • Focused on resources • Including assessment • Data provided in advance with the forms • Announcement of form availability mid November via e-mail and the web • Will be given to: • Administrators • Strategic Planning Committees • Provide a foundation for: • Planning • Budgeting

  14. Please refer to the Handout

  15. What does the Annual Review mean for you? • Leadership in getting your disciplines to complete the review builds your case for resources • Utilize data • Be specific • Important for Campus Educational Master Plan in preparation this year • Lays the foundation for resource requests in future years

  16. Riverside Community College DistrictFacilities Planning Process Academic Planning Council Presentation By C. Michael Webster, Ed.D. November 2006

  17. Introduction Areas of Review: The District’s Facility Planning and Approval Process The District’s Construction Management Process Organizational Structure and Staffing Relative to Measure C and State Capital Outlay Projects An Evaluation Methodology Regarding Construction Projects

  18. The District’s Facility Planning and Approval Process • Observations: • Very sophisticated planning process developed in 2003 • Learner-Centered Curriculum Framework • Structure: • College/Campus Academic Planning Council • College/Campus Strategic Planning Committee • District Strategic Planning Executive Committee • Board of Trustees • Focus on planning that would help shape the emerging colleges • Capital facility planning driven by availability of State funds based on: • Space Standards • Load Ratios

  19. The District’s Facility Planning and Approval Process Conclusions: • Utilize well designed and thought out planning process • Develop Long Range Capital Plan that reflects facility needs driven by campus/college academic and growth plans considering maximum enrollment and campus/college build out • Develop standardized policies and procedures • Standard RFQ and/or RFP to secure professional services • Standard contracts for services • Standard bidding practices as required • Standard Infrastructure and Design Elements • Design Standards • Landscape Design Standards • Life Safety and Security Standards • Building Infrastructure and Sustainability Standards

  20. The District’s Facility Planning and Approval Process • Recommendations: • 1. Utilize Existing Planning Process • 2. Continue to develop campus/college academic and growth plans considering potential ultimate build out • 3.Utilize academic and growth plans to develop a District Strategic Long Range Capital Plan

  21. The District’s Facility Planning and Approval ProcessRecommendations: Continued • 3. Utilize academic and growth plans to develop a District Strategic Long Range Capital Plan • 3a. District long range plan driven by priorities to meet college/campus academic and growth plans and to develop funding strategies to leverage state funds to maximize impact of Measure C funds • 3b. What will each of the campuses/colleges look like when fully developed? • How many students? • What kind and types of programs? • What facilities will need to be developed? • How to manage the physical development of the colleges/campuses to accommodate maximum enrollment • 3c. Plans to include: potential building sites, building set backs, amount of building space developed per acre developed, pedestrian and vehicle traffic flow, and architectural and landscape principles of design • Plans should include comprehensive review of existing facilities to determine need for rehabilitation, renovation, and removal

  22. The District’s Facility Planning and Approval ProcessRecommendations Continued: • 4. Engage outside design/planning consultants to assist colleges/campuses with academic and growth plan development and identification of facility needs • 5. Develop comprehensive approach to project presentations to the Board • Defined sequence of presentations to the Board • 6. Caution: Make sure the planning process does not become burdensome • Maintain flexibility • Respond to the changing demands of the community

  23. Initiation of the Long Range Planning Process • Based on: • Assessment of Student Learning Outcomes • Program Reviews • External and Internal Environmental Scan

  24. Long Range Planning Outcomes: • Program Definition/Data Collection • Review of existing program documents, data and other applicable sources • Refine that program information into an educational plan • Examine the potential for maximum campus/college enrollment within the context of available buildable space. • The educational plan information and growth capacity information is used to determine the type and amount of building space that would be needed as the campus/college matures to final build out. • The information will translate into: • Space requirements, • Land use, • Adjacencies, • Capacity/massing, • Circulation, • Infrastructure and utility requirements.

  25. Long Range Planning Activities to Date: • Request for Proposal Issued • Received 10 Responses • Responses Reviewed by Campus Committees and Facilities, Planning, Design and Construction Staff • Firms Selected for Interview: • Moreno Valley 5 – November 3 • Norco 4 – October 27 • Riverside 4 – October 27 • Interviews Conducted by Campus Committees • Recommendation to Board in December to engage planning consultants • Tentative Schedule for Plan Presentations to Board in October 2007

  26. Facilities Planning Process • Program Driven • Campus/College Based • Capacity to Leverage Local Funds • Defined Program of Facilities Development for Each Campus/College

More Related