Services Improvement Process (SIP) Ed Thursday, February 28, 2013 Whatcom Community College

2011 Accreditation Recommendation #1 “…the evaluation committee recommends that the college take immediate steps to implement a regular, comprehensive, data-driven system of assessment of achievements of its programs and services.” Ed

SIP Overview systematic, streamlined, meaningful data-driven informed by student, staff, faculty feedback replaces the work planning process aligned with the strategic plan Ed Are individual service area work plans that support the annual unit workplans

Alignment with Strategic Plan College work plans Administrative Services Advancement and Foundation Educational Services Instruction Presidential Services Are individual service area work plans that support the annual unit workplans SIP reports

Purpose of SIP To provide a meaningful college system for assessing and improving the effectiveness of our services. SIP supports the following objectives and standards: WCC strategic plan objective 5.4: Continuous institutional improvement NWCCU accreditation standards: 4.A.2: Services evaluation 4.B.1: Use of data for improvement and planning Perkins Act of 2006 SEC. 113(b): Accountability and data use Ed

Definition of Program WCC defines a program as all or substantially all of a body of coursework leading to a degree or certificate. AM

Definition of Services Definition of Program WCC defines a program as all or substantially all of a body of coursework leading to a degree or certificate. Definition of Services AM WCC defines its services as activities that support programs.

List of Services Advancement and Foundation Administrative Services Communications and Marketing Foundation   Administrative Services Bookstore Business and Financial Conference, Events and Van Copying and Mail Facilities and Operations Information Technology Print, Copy, Mail, and Delivery Educational Services Access & Disability Support Admissions Outreach Athletics Career Center Counseling Entry & Advising Financial Aid Judicial Affairs Registration Running Start Student Life Testing Services Veterans Affairs WorkFirst  Instruction eLearning Grant Development International Programs Learning Center Library Multi-Cultural Academic Support Center Science Prep Lab Service-Learning Presidential Services Assessment and Institutional Research Human Resources and Payroll AM

Last Year’s Progress defined the service area, mission statement, organization existing data and usage future data needs next steps AM Thank services who were pilots and contributed to the direction of this new SIP Org chart

New SIP report = work plan + assessment of work plan goals Ed

Content of new SIP report general service information list of services and users list of staff 1-3 goals progress on each goal summary (strengths/challenges, next steps) administrative comments and recommendations Ed

General Information Date 05/31/2013 Service name Assessment and Institutional Research Mission statement The Office of Assessment and Institutional Research (OAIR) supports the College’s efforts for accountability and continuous improvement. Completed by Anne Marie Karlberg, Tresha Dutton, and Kim Struiksma Ed – include as many people as you can in writing up and at least reviewing this report.

Services/Users Service: What major services does your service area provide? Users: Who uses these services (e.g., students, employees, departments)? Coordinate outcomes assessment Faculty, staff, administrators, students Coordinate surveys and focus groups Generate and disseminate institutional data Facilitate accreditation processes Faculty, staff, administrators, students, accreditation evaluators, community members, Board of Trustees Facilitate strategic planning processes Ed

Staff Position Names Director of Assessment and Institutional Research Anne Marie Karlberg Outcomes Assessment Coordinator Tresha Dutton (part-time) Research Analyst Kim Struiksma Ed

Goals Goals for 2013-14 Is the goal a direct indicator, indirect indicator, or institutional data? Select up to 3 strategic plan objectives to which each goal is connected (use the drop-down list(s) below) Resource implications Staff and faculty will be able to use data to inform decision-making processes. Direct indicators (staff/faculty/student learning outcomes)   5.4. Foster an evidence-based culture of continuous improvement 2.3. Improve student learning 2.2. Improve instructional delivery Maintain level of staff. Faculty will revise course outcomes for courses representing 50% of course enrollments. Institutional data (numbers, rates, etc.) Maintain level of staff. Consider software for managing curriculum and outcomes process. WCC staff are satisfied with the quality of services provided. Indirect indicators (from surveys, focus groups, interviews) AM—1-3 goals; stretch; 1 goal that’s a year to year measure; direct, indirect, institutional data Resource implications: Any additional financial, technological (software), human, or capital resources needed to meet this goal. Connect institutional planning to budget development process. As if we made this a year ago, we’ve already gone through the assessment part of the process

Progress on Goals Goal 2: Faculty will revise course outcomes for courses representing 50% of course enrollments. Evaluators Tresha Dutton and Anne Marie Karlberg Source(s) of data (Evidence) Course forms reviewed by curriculum committee and the Excel spreadsheet titled “V:\Outcomes Assessment\MASTER 2011-12-Course And CLA-WorkPlan-041912.xlsx”. Baseline information (2012-13) Course “objectives” were identified on course summary forms. These course objectives had not been updated for years and the outcomes were not written in measureable terms. AM

Progress on Goals (continued) Goal 2: Faculty will revise course outcomes for courses representing 50% of course enrollments. Summary of assessment evidence (findings) During the fall and winter quarters, the outcomes assessment coordinator and the director of AIR facilitated several faculty workshops – called “Writing Effective Course Outcomes: No ‘Understanding,’ ‘Appreciating,’ or ‘Learning’ Allowed!” – about how to write effective course outcomes. Fifty-eight full-time faculty and 12 adjunct faculty / prof-tech coordinators attended these sessions.   During 2011-12, faculty articulated course outcomes for courses representing 68% (31,509 / 46,364) of course enrollments. 57% (26,595/46,364) were formally approved through curriculum committee by June 30, 2012. 29% (201/694) of all courses offered at WCC have submitted course outcomes. Am

Progress on Goals (continued) Goal 2: Faculty will revise course outcomes for courses representing 50% of course enrollments. Potential causes for significant changes Faculty were provided an increase in pay for participating in the “Writing Effective Course Outcomes workshop”. Curriculum committee and outcomes assessment committee members joined forces to form sub-committees that processed the high volume of submitted course forms. Past use of results for improvement NA Next steps for improvement In 2012-13, the outcomes assessment coordinator and the director of AIR will conduct faculty workshops to train faculty to create rubrics (with a goal of 1% of courses will have a rubric developed). Faculty will revise outcomes for courses representing 75% of WCC’s enrollment or 35% of all courses offered and will include course outcomes on syllabi (75%). Status Completed or met/exceeded expectations Am

Summary: Strengths and Challenges Summarize service strengths (in bullets or narrative) Faculty and staff identified the following strengths: staff provide good directions, communication, leadership, problem-solving, resourcefulness, clear explanations, and encouragement staff are professional, knowledgeable, and patient staff provide user-friendly web resources, thorough data, and useful information staff provide several professional development opportunities for faculty and staff staff provide necessary materials for accreditation reports, grant applications, and College documents Summarize service challenges difficult for faculty and staff to ask for data because of so many requests and limitations of technology data presentation and resources still in the developmental stage Ed

Summary: Next steps Summarize next steps for 2013-14 (in bullets or narrative) Accessing data: OAIR will… use the ODBC connection to update all baseline data create “a portal where faculty can go in and enter courses, terms, topics, and query the data base based on their questions” create a data request form to support the development of high quality data requests and the prioritization process   SIP/PIP/DIP: OAIR will… create a standard set of data for DIP and PIP reports refine the PIP/DIP processes based on feedback from faculty and staff create a 5 year PIP cycle where 9 programs/disciplines are reviewed each year Outcomes assessment: OAIR will… At the college level, create an AAS curriculum map and pilot the information literacy CLA. At the program level, refine prof-tech program outcomes and curriculum maps; include outcomes on syllabi. For health professions programs, develop rubrics and assess one outcome. Ed

Summary: Administrative Comments/Recommendations Administrative comments: The AIR office provides consistent and high levels of support for College faculty and staff in retrieving information, writing College reports, and providing valuable training for outcomes assessment, data analysis, and program and services improvement. The AIR staff has developed an annual assessment plan, which outlines current status and future plans in a comprehensive format. The office’s  institutional research capacity has increased with the research analyst, and this has greatly increased the number of data requests that can be addressed.   Recommendations: The AIR office should continue its work in automating the data reports that need to be generated on a regular basis. Excellent progress has been made in this work, and the office should continue to work toward a long-term dashboard system that will allow access to relevant student summary data for users across campus. Ed

Due May 31, 2013 complete the white sections of your 2013-14 electronic SIP report email it to your respective VP or President Ed- budget requests need to be earlier

SIP report (white sections) general information list of services and users list of staff 1-3 goals progress on each goal (evaluators, sources of data, baseline info) summary (strengths/challenges, next steps) administrative comments and recommendations Ed

Services Learning Outcomes Training Dates Attend one of the following dates: Monday March 18, 11 am, in CAS 121 Friday April 26, 2 pm in CAS 121 Am

Website Resources Am – look at the last draft SIP document you have posted on your webpage and might be able to use info in report.

Questions?