WELCOME President’s Advisory Committee INAM Conference Harper College June, 2014

INAM College Presidents CollegePresident College of DuPageDr. Robert Breuder College of Lake CountyDr. Jerry Weber Daley (City Colleges of Chicago)Dr. Jose Aybar Danville Area Community College Dr. Alice Marie Jacobs Elgin Community College Dr. David Sam Harper College Dr. Ken Ender Illinois Eastern Community College Mr. Terry Bruce Illinois Valley Community College Dr. Jerry Corcoran John Wood Community College Mr. Michael Elbe Joliet Junior College Dr. Debra Daniels Kankakee Community CollegeDr. John Avendano Kishwaukee College Dr. Tom Choice Lincoln Land Community College Dr. Charlotte Warren McHenry County College Dr. Vicky Smith Oakton Community College Dr. Margaret Lee Prairie State College Dr. Terri Winfree Richland Community College Dr. Gayle Saunders South Suburban College Mr. Don Manning Southwestern Illinois College Dr. Georgia Costello Triton College Dr. Patricia Granados Waubonsee Community College Dr. Christine Sobek

Earn & Learn Model

Grant Strategy Flowchart

5 Core Elements for all TAACCCT Projects Use of Evidence in Program Design Stacked and Latticed Credentials Online and Technology-Enabled Learning Transferability and Articulation Strategic Alignment

Consortium Members Roles & Responsibilities Curriculum Development Training Materials Advisory Assistance In-kind Resources Recruitment of Trainees Certification/Degrees/Accreditation Job Placement Assistance

9 Deliverables 1. Total of unique participants served (new students). 2. Total number of participants completing a TAACCCT-funded program of study. 3. Total number of participant still retained in their program of study or other TAACCCT-funded program. 4. Total number of participants completing credit hours. 5. Total number of credentials awarded. 6. Total number of participants enrolled in further education after TAACCCT-funded program of study completion. 7. Total number of participants employed after TAACCCT-funded program of study completion. 8. Total number of participants retained in employment after program of study completion. 9. Total number of those participants employed at enrollment who received a wage increase post- enrollment.

Priorities & Strategies Priority 1.0 Create educational plans that provide a clear pathway and lattice to industry-recognized credentials in advanced manufacturing. Strategy 1.1 Develop educational plans outlining coursework and timelines. Strategy 1.2 Develop a mechanism for awarding academic credit for prior learning. Priority 2.0 Implement programs along the career pathway and lattice that meet advanced manufacturing industry needs and result in industry-recognized credentials and/or associate degrees. Strategy 2.1 Offer bridge programs in technical skills. Strategy 2.2 Offer programming leading to the National Career Readiness Certificate (NCRC). Strategy 2.3 Enhance programming in areas of specialization certificate programs. Strategy 2.4 Offer associate degree completion. Priority 3.0 Develop online and technology-enabled learning by strategically aligning INAM programs with technology purchased by the Illinois Green Economy Network (IGEN), a first-round TAA awardee. Strategy 3.1 Engage in a partnership with IGEN in using National Training Education Resource (NTER) System. Priority 4.0 Develop partnerships with employers that include paid internships and on-the-job training opportunities in advanced manufacturing. Strategy 4.1 Engage employers to secure paid internships and on-the-job training. Strategy 4.2 Conduct regular employer input and feedback sessions. Priority 5.0 Provide placement services that connect students to available jobs in advanced manufacturing. Strategy 5.1Develop a platform that provides job posting capabilities for employers and résumé posting for students. Strategy 5.2 Enhance the image of advanced manufacturing. Priority 6.0 Improve articulation of credit between two-year and four-year colleges to facilitate pursuit of additional education in advanced manufacturing. Strategy 6.1 Develop articulation agreements with four-year colleges and universities.

Continuous Quality Improvement for INAM Strategies

Monthly Activity Report

Where do we get our data?

What we know about INAM so far… Entering Education Level INAM Student Classification

INAM Consortium Colleges Total 4-Year Grant Award Expended To-Date Balance Remaining % of Goal Achievement College of DuPage $ 520,015 $ 158,172 $ 361, % College of Lake County $ 525,769 $ 227,591 $ 298, % Daley City Colleges of Chicago $ 86,335 $ 6,950 $ 79, % Danville Area Community College $ 525,654 $ 116,133 $ 409, % Elgin Community College $ 525,769 $ 260,237 $ 265, % Harper College $ 515,000 $ 426,396 $ 88, % Illinois Eastern Community College $ 525,769 $ 232,617 $ 293, % Illinois Valley Community College $ 525,769 $ 82,230 $ 443, % John Wood Community College $ 525,769 $ 335,357 $ 190, % Joliet Junior College $ 525,769 $ 247,623 $ 278, % Kankakee Community College $ 525,769 $ 285,807 $ 239, % Kishwaukee College $ 525,616 $ 185,480 $ 340, % Lincoln Land Community College $ 525,769 $ 164,801 $ 360, % McHenry County College $ 525,743 $ 311,792 $ 213, % Oakton Community College $ 525,769 $ 178,447 $ 347, % Prairie State College $ 525,769 $ 275,026 $ 250, % Richland Community College $ 525,755 $ 107,837 $ 417, % South Suburban College $ 525,769 $ 347,268 $ 178, % Southwestern Illinois College $ 525,769 $ 200,951 $ 324, % Triton College $ 522,306 $ 269,357 $ 252, % Waubonsee Community College $ 525,769 $ 397,221 $ 128, % TOTALS: $ 10,581,421 $ 4,817,291 $ 5,764, % Budget Scorecard Snapshot

Projections from Colleges on DOL Deliverables

Consortium MembersStudents Enrolled Projected Students Year1 + Year 2 Difference in Participants College of DuPage College of Lake County Danville Area Comm. College Daley-City Colleges Chicago Elgin Comm. College Illinois Eastern Comm. Colleges Illinois Valley Comm. College John Wood Comm. College Joliet Junior College Kankakee Comm. College Kishwaukee College Lincoln Land Comm. College McHenry County College Oakton Comm. College Prairie State College Richland Comm. College South Suburban College Southwestern Illinois College Triton College Waubonsee Comm. College Wm. Rainey Harper College TOTAL INAM Grant Consortium Unique Participants Year 1 & 2

Certificate Offerings by College Currently on INAM Website

Course Syllabi Criteria 1. Course Details (college, course name / number, credits, pre-requisites) 2. Contact information for faculty or department representative 3. Course Description 4. Textbook(s), required readings, videos, CDs or other teaching materials 5. Student Learning Objectives / Outcomes 6. Course Outline (weekly activities / topics covered) 7. Assessment / Evaluation / Measurement of student learning 8. Required DOL Statement (which was included for faculty)

Presentation by the Evaluator Team Paul T. Bucci, PhD, LLC

JUNE 11, 2014 Paul T. Bucci PhD, LLC; Westat, Inc.; and GEM Software Development, Inc. EVALUATION OF INAM

What We Have Done Collected data on individual students Entrance survey Transcript and other college record data Exit surveys Conducted focus groups and interview In October 2013 iNAM meeting At seven colleges in spring 2014 College of Lake County, Elgin, John Wood, Kishwaukee, Lincoln Land, McHenry, Richland Conducted surveys In October 2013 iNAM meeting Student entrance and exit surveys (as noted above) Wrote first annual report Customized database Provided technical and capacity-building assistance 21

What We Plan Additional data collection Additional rounds of existing data collections Followup surveys of students Wage data from IDES Collection of data on comparison group Additional analyses Review by content experts Program impact analysis Additional reporting Two additional annual formative evaluation reports Final summative evaluation report 22

What We Can Tell You It’s premature to look at outcome data. We can report on the process What has been done How it is perceived What obstacles have been encountered What remains to be done 23

Enrollment Targets and Achievements Indicator Year 1*Year 2Four-year total TargetActualTargetActualTarget Actual (to date) Total Unique Participants Served , Total Number of Participants Completing a TAACCCT-Funded Program of Study , *At DOL’s recommendation, iNAM devoted year 1 to program design. Source: iNAM database 24

Findings There is neither a uniform iNAM experience nor a uniform program impact. Some institutions have changed much more than others Particularly those with new or initially small programs versus larger and established programs In recent site visits to 7 colleges, 5 reported no changes in the characteristics of their student populations, while 2 colleges reported change (the changes included getting more high-risk students and getting older students). Source: Site visits 25

Buy-in There is tremendous variation in the amount of buy- in. Students often are unaware of iNAM. Students seem to care because of the in-district tuition feature (and possibly for additional course-taking options). Awareness of the consortium increases the credibility of the program, and makes it easier to recruit them to it. Faculty vary in awareness It may be the weakest programs that see the greatest value in collaboration. Source: Site visits 26

Targeting and Recruitment The average age may be slightly higher than normal (31 vs. 29). Few (3 percent) are TAA eligible. Few (4 percent) are eligible Veterans. Source: iNAM database; N=899 27

Educational Plans Both faculty and students are often unaware they exist. Note: students’ course-taking patterns could be affected by the educational plans even if students are not aware they are getting something new. Project directors had mixed views of ed plans 4 saw benefits from counseling students 1 saw little change from what the college was already doing 1 felt the plan most helped students in multiple semesters 1 described the plan as a tool to help students get out quickly Educational Plan as a requirement to participate in iNAM programs Source: Site visits 28

Purchasing Many view equipment as a primary benefit of grant Some were disappointed they couldn’t buy more because of confusion over the rules Comprise close to half (47%) of iNAM expenditures overall as of March 17, For 4 colleges, equipment is more than 75% of expenditures For another 5 colleges, it is more than 60% of expenditures For 6 colleges, it is less than 30% Source: Budget data; focus groups 29

Curriculum There is a potential disconnect between for-credit and noncredit courses. “Tweaking of courses” varies substantially in meaning. Some report making no important changes to courses. At the other extreme, it may include entirely new courses. Project directors tended to have a more positive view than faculty did, particularly commenting on the value of new courses, the ability to earn certificates meeting national standards, and the advantages of students of getting more lab time Source: Site visits 30

Reasons Why Students Came to iNAM Source: iNAM database; N=890 31

Reasons Why Students Came to iNAM ReasonPercentMean age I had a specific career goal that requires more training 37%25.9 I wanted to change from my existing job to a higher paying job 35%28.3 I lost my job and wanted to start working in a new area 13%38.5 I lost my job and decided I needed more training 7%39.1 Other 8%32.0 Source: iNAM database; N=890; Data as of

Reasons Why Students Left iNAM ReasonNumberPercentMean age Completed certificate or degree 11755%30.1 Personal reasons 94%32.1 Financial reasons 115%30.0 Work requirements 157%30.0 Poor academic performance 21%25.0 New job 21%23.5 Other 5827%30.1 Source: iNAM database; N=214; Data as of

Student Course-Taking MeasureMeanMinimumMaximum Number of courses per student Total credits attempted Total credits earned Of credits attempted, mean percentage earned Grade point average3.204 Source: iNAM database; Data as of

Student Activities and Supports Participated in internship: 7 of 96 (7%) Joint projects with businesses as classwork: 13 of 95 (14%) Received financial aid: 54 of 89 (61%) Received educational counseling: 47 of 84 (56%) Received job placement: 23 of 79 (29%) Received tutoring: 32 of 83 (39%) Source: Exit surveys; Data as of

Your Time to Ask Questions

Questions & Answers