1. Program Review 2014 Report to College Council, May 2, 2014

2. Pilot Comprehensive Program Review Each program completes this review every three years.

4. Our Fearless Pilots CTE: Vocational Nursing—Jennifer Johnson ADMIN: Technology Support Services, Info and Media Services—Kristin Rabe STUDENT SERVICES: Counseling—Sue Granger-Dickson INSTRUCTION: American Sign Language—Tom Moran

5. Their Timeline January 21-24, 2014 You will receive the revised forms. Friday, March 7 You will submit the completed forms to BC Program Review (bc_programreview@bakersfieldcollege.edu)bc_programreview@bakersfieldcollege.edu Tuesday, March 25 You will receive a checklist with feedback from the Program Review Committee (PRC). You will also be asked to evaluate the process. Friday, March 28 You will turn in your evaluation to BC Program Review. Friday, May 2 PRC will present a summary of the pilot project results to College Council.

6. Focus of Review Program Assessment Technology and Facilities Analysis Trend Data Analysis Progress on Goals Curricular Revisions Faculty and Staff Engagement Program Funding Sources

7. What did we learn?

8. So what did we do? Positives We have some remarkable programs. The process works for all types of programs. To Work On BC is not yet clear on the distinction between Outcomes and Student Achievement Data. As readers, we don’t always look for–or see— the same things.

9. We focused on responding to the pilots. We added specific questions to the Checklist. We held a norming session—applying the questions to two of the pilots.

10. Example 1.Program information A.Does the program mission describe students served and services offered? Is the language specific to that program? B.Are the program learning outcomes listed? C.Is the discussion of how their program supports the college mission clear and complete? D.For academic programs, does it list degrees and certificates offered?

11. What did we learn? The entire form needed revising. Some sections of the form also needed internal revision. Questions within sections did not always lead to organized responses—it was the form’s fault. Some questions were not clear—they did not lead to the responses we had anticipated.

12. What did we do? We knew we needed to revise the forms. We sent sections of the forms to the appropriate committees for review and recommendations. We met with CTE chairs to discuss certificates. We wound up revising both forms: The Annual Update The Comprehensive Program Review

13. What’s next? The Annual Update form and Checklist with questions should be ready for FCDC’s next meeting. The Comprehensive Program Review form and Checklist with questions should also be ready. The Comprehensive PR cycle (one third of programs complete this in the fall) should also be ready. The Handbooks should be ready soon.

14. TRAINING OCCURS FCDC in May—introduced Chair Academy in August Flex Week Sessions

15. Fall 2014: We revise the PRC charge to increase membership to mirror Curriculum and ISIT (one faculty representative for each department). We carry out both the Annual Update and Comprehensive Review processes. We evaluate the work. We present our results to College Council in December.

16. PRC Members INSTRUCTIONAL: Kate Pluta Co-Chair Greg Chamberlain Career & Technical Education (CTE) Billie Jo Rice General Education (GE) Kimberly Nickell Basic Skills Kathy Rosellini Student Services Anna Agenjo Library Jennifer Johnson Faculty Chair & Directors Council (FCDC) John Carpenter Assessment Committee Liaison Lynn Krausse At Large ADMINSTRATIVE: Manny Mourtzanos Co-Chair vacant Student Services Liz Rozell Instructional Laura Lorigo Facilities vacant Information Technology Michael Carley Director of Institutional Research (ex-officio) CLASSIFIED: Kristin Rabe Administrative Meg Stidham CSEA President or designee Bernadette Martinez Student Services vacant Instructional

17. Kate Pluta, PRC faculty co-chair, May 1, 2014